Jump to content

Absolute shocker


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

It's a black and white law, it's not open to interpretation. Who has been assassinated merely for badmouthing the Queen or Prime Minister in the last hundred years?

Professor David Kelly?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

Eh?

 

 

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/

 

The UK is required by treaty to supply Russia with a sample of the material it has collected in order to make these accusations.  It has refused to do so.  You won't hear that on the BBC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Similar to Afghanistan.  You won't have heard this on the BBC either.  In 2001 the USA with our backing made an ultimatum to the Taliban (who George Bush himself had hosted as guests of honour in Texas very recently, and who we armed and trained) to hand over bin Laden or face invasion.

Their reaction was the same as any states would have been.  They said okay show us some proof he's responsible for 9-11 and you can have him.  We refused to do so.  Didn't give them anything at all.  Bin Laden was never indicted for 9-11 btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said:

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/

 

The UK is required by treaty to supply Russia with a sample of the material it has collected in order to make these accusations.  It has refused to do so.  You won't hear that on the BBC.

Posting random stuff by Craig Murray does not really help your argument. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has also refused to hand the main suspect a sample, I wonder why. Meanwhile the Russian media is chundering out different conspiracy theories every day. It's MH17 all over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Posting random stuff by Craig Murray does not really help your argument. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has also refused to hand the main suspect a sample, I woander why. Meanwhile the Russian media is chundering out different conspiracy theories every day. It's MH17 all over again.

And you don't think our media has been doing the same?  Really?

Tell us why they would refuse then.  I would say that they're under enormous pressure from us and the USA not to.  Give me your theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it's a nerve agent that 

We don't even know exists

If it does is very easy to make

To identify it you have to be able to synthesise it (ergo we can make it)

We, along with Israel and France and the USA, are the world leaders in this field with the largest stockpiles

 

Therefore when they say 'of a type developed by Russia' the bit they leave out is it's not only developed by Russia (and we're not even sure it's that particular type) it's also developed by us too.

 

And it was found eight miles from where we develop it, and we have so far given five different sources for it to the media, you'd think that might be slightly suspicious no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Similar to Afghanistan.  You won't have heard this on the BBC either.  In 2001 the USA with our backing made an ultimatum to the Taliban (who George Bush himself had hosted as guests of honour in Texas very recently, and who we armed and trained) to hand over bin Laden or face invasion.
Their reaction was the same as any states would have been.  They said okay show us some proof he's responsible for 9-11 and you can have him.  We refused to do so.  Didn't give them anything at all.  Bin Laden was never indicted for 9-11 btw.


Bush knew Bin Laden wasn't involved in 9/11, as their families had been close friends for many years before hand.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said:

And you don't think our media has been doing the same?  Really?

Tell us why they would refuse then.  I would say that they're under enormous pressure from us and the USA not to.  Give me your theory.

Corrupting the evidence? From their track record of denial, deflection, different explanation of what happened every day, then eventual admission years later, that's exactly what they'd do. Big press conference saying the best Russian scientists have got together and proved a big boy did it and ran away.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/17/vladimir-putin-admits-russian-military-presence-ukraine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Corrupting the evidence? From their track record of denial, deflection, different explanation of what happened every day, then eventual admission years later, that's exactly what they'd do. Big press conference saying the best Russian scientists have got together and proved a big boy did it and ran away.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/17/vladimir-putin-admits-russian-military-presence-ukraine

What do you mean?  They can't corrupt our samples.  They are simply entitled to see why we blame them, just as a defendant in a criminal trial is entitled to see the evidence against them.

You don't think we have a similar track record?  Come on man open your eyes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said:

What do you mean?  They can't corrupt our samples.  They are simply entitled to see why we blame them, just as a defendant in a criminal trial is entitled to see the evidence against them.

You don't think we have a similar track record?  Come on man open your eyes

If we or the OPCW gave them a sample, assuming they are responsible they would adjust it to point at someone else, and just stand on it's our word or theirs, combined with a big bot and media campaign. It's an old tactic when they're caught out, never admit anything and keep chundering out conspiracy theories until soft folk can't tell between made up nonsense and what they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

If we or the OPCW gave them a sample, assuming they are responsible they would adjust it to point at someone else, and just stand on it's our word or theirs, combined with a big bot and media campaign. It's an old tactic when they're caught out, never admit anything and keep chundering out conspiracy theories until soft folk can't tell between made up nonsense and what they did.

FFS man this is pish.  The they are entitled to see all evidence against them.  I give up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said:

FFS man this is pish.  The they are entitled to see all evidence against them.  I give up.

I'm pretty sure even in a criminal trial the prosecution don't have to hand the murder weapon over to the accused for examination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

I'm pretty sure even in a criminal trial the prosecution don't have to hand the murder weapon over to the accused for examination.

They do to his fkn lawyer though don't they, and they don't get to decide that's the murder weapon they need to prove it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...