He's complaining that the government has been accurate?
Its a chemical compound of course you can't tell where its been manufactured.....not like a radioisotope where there's a good chance you can narrow down its source..ly?
Skepticism of government is all very well and good, essential even, but there's a definite pattern to conspiracy theorists, and the russians, when it comes to these matters, which ties into what the BBC referred to as their 'implausible deniability' strategy: that of requiring a level of proof so severe before you even dare to suggest it might be them, that it is unprovable without a signed letter from Vlad himself. No one will ever 'prove' such a thing to the russian's satisfaction even if it is them, they can cast doubt on the tests, the collection of samples, they'll say even if you can track it to a known russian agent using a russian developed chemical that it was someone gone rogue. States cannot wait to act on the basis of proving something in a court of law beyond reasonable doubt, which is presumably why we demanded answers once the prima facie evidence pointed in a certain direction, as it would seem use of such a chemical, the target, and previous actions by the russians do.
He's complaining that the government has been accurate?
Its a chemical compound of course you can't tell where its been manufactured.....
Not necessarily true (few chemical products are 100% what they are supposed to be), but given we have no access to the manufacturing facilities, and likely few or no samples of the product, that is likely to be the case here.
Which is why Europe needs to get fracking. Starting yesterday.
Leaving aside the politics, Russian gas is the cheapest and most consistent supply of gas to Europe. Russia nowadays will undercut any competitive price. The infrastructure was paid for long ago, it's simply the extraction and a minimal transportation cost now. There are alternatives to Russian gas, mainly as LPG, but they are less abundant and more expensive. Doing without Russian gas entirely is difficult for the EU. Nevertheless sanctions force Russia to reduce its prices, so there is a significant cost to those sanctions.
Why not just slap a 100% tax on Russian gas? It'd enable it to keep flowing while encouraging users to source alternative supplies. Of course, Russia might respond by turning the taps off but that would hardly help their reputation for being the reliable supplier that W Europe is looking for.
Instead of relying on Russian gas we can buy more LNG from Qatar. Can't see any problems there.
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
You know its not true do you?
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
Never actually heard of this chap but i see he describes himself as a Historian and human rights activist. Former British Ambassador.
How do you know he as a nutter please?
It is well know about Murray, go do your research.
As for order order, right wing spin sure, below the line is cesspit but he is read across the political spectrum in westminster because his is scoops are overwhelming true.
Murray is a well known nutter!!
Was he a nutter when he was British Ambassador or just developed nuttiness
Go and find out why he is a former British ambassador...he is a well known Julian Assange lacky conspiracy theory nutter.
At the same time, she's a pretty useless campaigner, who often gets the tone wrong and who has made a series of unforced political errors, including the humdinger of GE2017. So a better PM than she is public-facing politician or manager of her party.
Whereas Corbyn is a much better campaigner than manager (either of his party, or, presumably, anything else...)
So May as PM for 4 years with no further general election campaign and Corbyn as leader of the opposition without yet having any actual power and responsibility over the country hsving secured his position in the last campaign suits them both quite well
He's complaining that the government has been accurate?
Its a chemical compound of course you can't tell where its been manufactured.....not like a radioisotope where there's a good chance you can narrow down its source......but why not throw in the Jews Israel for good measure.....they've got previous for murdering former Russian spies, surely?
I don't think that's entirely correct. It's unlikely to be 100% pure, so you might find traces of precursors that give a clue as to how it was produced, which would indicate that certain facilities with known equipments and supplies are more likely than others.
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
And you know the stuff it spouts is not true because?
I'm not about to trust Order Order as gospel, but there is a marked difference between partisan spin and conspiracy theory nonsense. Assessing source to a degree is reasonable, it is the height of absurdity to pluck any random purported fact and go 'well, you don't know that isn't true, do you?'
The first I have ever heard of Murray is today, so I go in with no preconceptions, and he seems to be focusing on a single set of words which may or may not be particularly significant, but even if it is he has extrapolated it out to a massive conspiracy (he at points seems to want us to trust toe OPCW as having seen Russian facilities, but later suggests they are untrustworthy as we are seeking to get them to pre agree a line, with the implication they will do so - therefore he has already decided to dismiss what they announce, if it is not what he likes) as well as what appears to be inconsequential details about Israel. Relying on forumulating such a conspiratorial conclusion mostly off the back of interpreting a few words strikes me as putting a lot of eggs in that basket. It is also funny how he presents his position as until this week near universal among experts, and yet apparently most of them have fallen prey to the propaganda I guess.
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
You know its not true do you?
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
Never actually heard of this chap but i see he describes himself as a Historian and human rights activist. Former British Ambassador.
How do you know he as a nutter please?
It is well know about Murray, go do your research.
As for order order, right wing spin sure, below the line is cesspit but he is read across the political spectrum in westminster because his is scoops are overwhelming true.
Murray is a well known nutter!!
Was he a nutter when he was British Ambassador or just developed nuttiness
Well it is worth wondering if he went over to the dark side before or after he left the FCO. His actions while in post were...interesting!
I see the Arsenal are off to CSKA Moscow. Should be entertaining. Perhaps Jezza may like to go and support his team, either of them
I note LCFC loanee Ahmed Musa scored to get CSKA Moscow through.
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
And you know the stuff it spouts is not true because?
I'm not about to trust Order Order as gospel, but there is a marked difference between partisan spin and conspiracy theory nonsense. Assessing source to a degree is reasonable, it is the height of absurdity to pluck any random purported fact and go 'well, you don't know that isn't true, do you?'
The first I have ever heard of Murray is today, so I go in with no preconceptions, and he seems to be focusing on a single set of words which may or may not be particularly significant, but even if it is he has extrapolated it out to a massive conspiracy (he at points seems to want us to trust toe OPCW as having seen Russian facilities, but later suggests they are untrustworthy as we are seeking to get them to pre agree a line, with the implication they will do so - therefore he has already decided to dismiss what they announce, if it is not what he likes) as well as what appears to be inconsequential details about Israel. Relying on forumulating such a conspiratorial conclusion mostly off the back of interpreting a few words strikes me as putting a lot of eggs in that basket. It is also funny how he presents his position as until this week near universal among experts, and yet apparently most of them have fallen prey to the propaganda I guess.
Have to love the way he chucks in Israel halfway down the page.
(I haven't lowered myself to buy it, so this is just hearsay, but one of the comments to Mance's twitter notes that the DM still has "Newspaper of the Year" in it's masthead. Not that they're sore or anything.)
Latest circulation figures show the Mail has lost its crown to...the Metro!
Interesting to see that the FT outsells the Guardian. And the Evening Standard is 6th most widely read in the country.
All papers continue to lose (physical) circulation numbers, although the free ones are broadly static.
The Mail is now available on line at £9.99 per month with copy released nightly at 11.00pm. My newsagent said he was seeing a large number of cancellations of deliveries when I cancelled mine and went on line. By the way I would not be too fussed to continue with it but my wife loves the puzzles
You can get The Guardian on-line for free - just saying.
Mail is still free on-line - I use it mainly to keep up with the kardashians
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
You know its not true do you?
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
Never actually heard of this chap but i see he describes himself as a Historian and human rights activist. Former British Ambassador.
How do you know he as a nutter please?
It is well know about Murray, go do your research.
As for order order, right wing spin sure, below the line is cesspit but he is read across the political spectrum in westminster because his scoops are overwhelming true. I also post links from guardian etc ie reputable sources
Overwhelmingly true made me chuckle. Guido is read because his scoops are damaging and often hard to disprove.
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
And you know the stuff it spouts is not true because?
I'm not about to trust Order Order as gospel, but there is a marked difference between partisan spin and conspiracy theory nonsense. Assessing source to a degree is reasonable, it is the height of absurdity to pluck any random purported fact and go 'well, you don't know that isn't true, do you?'
The first I have ever heard of Murray is today, so I go in with no preconceptions, and he seems to be focusing on a single set of words which may or may not be particularly significant, but even if it is he has extrapolated it out to a massive conspiracy (he at points seems to want us to trust toe OPCW as having seen Russian facilities, but later suggests they are untrustworthy as we are seeking to get them to pre agree a line, with the implication they will do so - therefore he has already decided to dismiss what they announce, if it is not what he likes) as well as what appears to be inconsequential details about Israel. Relying on forumulating such a conspiratorial conclusion mostly off the back of interpreting a few words strikes me as putting a lot of eggs in that basket. It is also funny how he presents his position as until this week near universal among experts, and yet apparently most of them have fallen prey to the propaganda I guess.
Have to love the way he chucks in Israel halfway down the page.
Yes indeed. Ok, let's say they can manufacture this stuff too - what possible reason would they have for being behind it? Not everyone believes the Russian state would want to do it, but it is at least somewhat plausible to suspect them (former traitor, they don't care if people know they did it so long as it cannot be proven 100%, they have done it before) even if it turns out it was somebody rogue or something. (Murray apparently argues that if it looks like Russians, it's because Israel wants to damage Russia)
Theresa May's ratings and image as PM have been a roller-coaster ride. She went from being absurdly over-praised in late 2016 and early 2017, to being unfairly vilified during and after the GE2017 campaign. What we are seeing now is a reversion to something like a sensible mean: clearly she's a decent woman working very hard for Britain in the extremely difficult circumstances of Brexit, and someone whom you can rely on in crises like the current one. At the same time, she's a pretty useless campaigner, who often gets the tone wrong and who has made a series of unforced political errors, including the humdinger of GE2017. So a better PM than she is public-facing politician or manager of her party.
Although one hesitates to make any firm predictions in the current environment, I think Tory MPs broadly accept this analysis, and I continue to think that by far the most likely outcome is that she will retire with honour before the next election, having done her duty (very important to her) by delivering Brexit and stepping in to fill the post-Cameron void. The party will be able to thank her for her good work, and move on to someone younger and better at actually winning elections.
For that matter, would she really want to put herself through the ordeal of any election campaign, knowing how disastrously she performed last time and having no-one to blame but herself? Obviously we can't look into her mind, and my only personal knowledge of her is one conversation with her, but I'd think not.
Which is why Europe needs to get fracking. Starting yesterday.
Leaving aside the politics, Russian gas is the cheapest and most consistent supply of gas to Europe. Russia nowadays will undercut any competitive price. The infrastructure was paid for long ago, it's simply the extraction and a minimal transportation cost now. There are alternatives to Russian gas, mainly as LPG, but they are less abundant and more expensive. Doing without Russian gas entirely is difficult for the EU. Nevertheless sanctions force Russia to reduce its prices, so there is a significant cost to those sanctions.
Why not just slap a 100% tax on Russian gas? It'd enable it to keep flowing while encouraging users to source alternative supplies. Of course, Russia might respond by turning the taps off but that would hardly help their reputation for being the reliable supplier that W Europe is looking for.
Instead of relying on Russian gas we can buy more LNG from Qatar. Can't see any problems there.
We would be competing with Asian countries on the spot markets for that LNG. I think spot prices for LNG is four times higher currently than that of piped Russian gas, which is available in effectively unlimited quantities.
(I haven't lowered myself to buy it, so this is just hearsay, but one of the comments to Mance's twitter notes that the DM still has "Newspaper of the Year" in it's masthead. Not that they're sore or anything.)
Latest circulation figures show the Mail has lost its crown to...the Metro!
Interesting to see that the FT outsells the Guardian. And the Evening Standard is 6th most widely read in the country.
All papers continue to lose (physical) circulation numbers, although the free ones are broadly static.
The Mail is now available on line at £9.99 per month with copy released nightly at 11.00pm. My newsagent said he was seeing a large number of cancellations of deliveries when I cancelled mine and went on line. By the way I would not be too fussed to continue with it but my wife loves the puzzles
You can get The Guardian on-line for free - just saying.
Mail is still free on-line - I use it mainly to keep up with the kardashians
Yes it is - it is the newspaper itself that is also on line at £9.99 per month released at 11.00 pm each night
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
They retained their other two seats last night
Very safe wards though.
Interesting that the kippers are not moving exclusively to Con:
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
They retained their other two seats last night
Very safe wards though.
Interesting that the kippers are not moving exclusively to Con:
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
You know its not true do you?
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
Never actually heard of this chap but i see he describes himself as a Historian and human rights activist. Former British Ambassador.
How do you know he as a nutter please?
It is well know about Murray, go do your research.
As for order order, right wing spin sure, below the line is cesspit but he is read across the political spectrum in westminster because his scoops are overwhelming true. I also post links from guardian etc ie reputable sources
Overwhelmingly true made me chuckle. Guido is read because his scoops are damaging and often hard to disprove.
I take a lot of the tittle tattle with a pinch of salt and obviously he is right wing leave supporting, but when he goes for somebody it isn’t just hard to disprove, he normally has them done up like a kipper. Mcbride, huhne, antisemitic twattering etc.
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
They retained their other two seats last night
Thought they gained the Redcar ward? Was it not Independent?
Which is why Europe needs to get fracking. Starting yesterday.
Leaving aside the politics, Russian gas is the cheapest and most consistent supply of gas to Europe. Russia nowadays will undercut any competitive price. The infrastructure was paid for long ago, it's simply the extraction and a minimal transportation cost now. There are alternatives to Russian gas, mainly as LPG, but they are less abundant and more expensive. Doing without Russian gas entirely is difficult for the EU. Nevertheless sanctions force Russia to reduce its prices, so there is a significant cost to those sanctions.
Why not just slap a 100% tax on Russian gas? It'd enable it to keep flowing while encouraging users to source alternative supplies. Of course, Russia might respond by turning the taps off but that would hardly help their reputation for being the reliable supplier that W Europe is looking for.
Instead of relying on Russian gas we can buy more LNG from Qatar. Can't see any problems there.
We would be competing with Asian countries on the spot markets for that LNG. I think spot prices for LNG is four times higher currently than that of piped Russian gas, which is available in effectively unlimited quantities.
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
They retained their other two seats last night
Thought they gained the Redcar ward? Was it not Independent?
(I haven't lowered myself to buy it, so this is just hearsay, but one of the comments to Mance's twitter notes that the DM still has "Newspaper of the Year" in it's masthead. Not that they're sore or anything.)
Latest circulation figures show the Mail has lost its crown to...the Metro!
Interesting to see that the FT outsells the Guardian. And the Evening Standard is 6th most widely read in the country.
All papers continue to lose (physical) circulation numbers, although the free ones are broadly static.
The Mail is now available on line at £9.99 per month with copy released nightly at 11.00pm. My newsagent said he was seeing a large number of cancellations of deliveries when I cancelled mine and went on line. By the way I would not be too fussed to continue with it but my wife loves the puzzles
You can get The Guardian on-line for free - just saying.
Mail is still free on-line - I use it mainly to keep up with the kardashians
Yes it is - it is the newspaper itself that is also on line at £9.99 per month released at 11.00 pm each night
Why pay £120 a year for something that is already free?
Boris on the bbc - “We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his (Putin) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK.”
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
They retained their other two seats last night
Very safe wards though.
Interesting that the kippers are not moving exclusively to Con:
Notwithstanding last week, the Conservatives have had quite a good run in local by-elections, this year, for a government. They've won 29 out of 59, a net loss of two.
They retained their other two seats last night
Very safe wards though.
Interesting that the kippers are not moving exclusively to Con:
If the bit in the brackets is the change since last time, how was IND in the lead previously? Am I having a special moment here? I get CON on 25% and the IND in the low 20%s.
It also looks like UKIP broke for LDEM, which is a bit mental.
(I haven't lowered myself to buy it, so this is just hearsay, but one of the comments to Mance's twitter notes that the DM still has "Newspaper of the Year" in it's masthead. Not that they're sore or anything.)
Latest circulation figures show the Mail has lost its crown to...the Metro!
Interesting to see that the FT outsells the Guardian. And the Evening Standard is 6th most widely read in the country.
All papers continue to lose (physical) circulation numbers, although the free ones are broadly static.
The Mail is now available on line at £9.99 per month with copy released nightly at 11.00pm. My newsagent said he was seeing a large number of cancellations of deliveries when I cancelled mine and went on line. By the way I would not be too fussed to continue with it but my wife loves the puzzles
You can get The Guardian on-line for free - just saying.
Mail is still free on-line - I use it mainly to keep up with the kardashians
Yes it is - it is the newspaper itself that is also on line at £9.99 per month released at 11.00 pm each night
Why pay £120 a year for something that is already free?
You are confusing mail on line with the actual newspaper. They are not the same and it is half the cost of receiving it through the letter box each day.
This recent move to the newspaper itself on line must account for a drop in circulation of the hard copies
Thinking about it a bit more, it does seem quite likely that after the Litvinenko murder the goverment would develop a nuclear and chemical tracing programme just in case Russia tried it again. Perhaps Russia didn't consider the Dstl having the ability to make a fast determination as to the source of radiological and chemical attacks.
Boris on the bbc - “We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his (Putin) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK.”
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
I'm fairly sure I heard him say something much like that on Wednesday morning.
Boris on the bbc - “We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his (Putin) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK.”
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
@samanthaTVnews: #Breaking the #Kremlin says @BorisJohnson allegation that #Putin was involved in the nerve agent attack on #Skripal is "shocking and unforgiveable"
Mr. B, it's not that fast. Not a Monaco by a long shot, either.
I think, if you check the average lap speed, you'll find it's top quartile. (Of course, that's not the only determining factor, but it's a useful metric.)
Which among other things suggests Israel, the USA or we ourselves are responsible for this through losing control of the agent, all of which relies on ignoring who the target was, and Russian culpability in another high profile assassination using complex materials in the UK (which it says Murray actually accepts).
It is surely the culmination of various factors, including the nature of the chemical, which has led to Russia being a subject, you cannot just say 'Oh america has the chemical too, maybe they lost control of it to...somebody...who would attack the guyfor...reasons'. The preponderance of the evidence (inasmuch as we are told about it), potential motivations and the method, do not make it unreasonable to suspect Russia, and simply pointing the finger at anyone else who may have chemical weapons is not exactly compelling argument against such weight. I for one do not rule out anything, but focusing on one (albeit important) reasons suspicion has fallen on Russia and ignoring the other reason it makes sense, well, doesn't make much sense to me.
And in any case we have not overreacted despite our belief in what we think Russia has done, so the defence of mealy louthed statements warning us not to overreact are in themselves premature and silly.
Oh god, you are now on an even nuttier site than squawkbox....
Still you post loads of stuff from Order Order which is king of nuttiness.
And you know the stuff it spouts is not true because?
I'm not about to trust Order Order as gospel, but there is a marked difference between partisan spin and conspiracy theory nonsense. Assessing source to a degree is reasonable, it is the height of absurdity to pluck any random purported fact and go 'well, you don't know that isn't true, do you?'
The first I have ever heard of Murray is today, so I go in with no preconceptions, and he seems to be focusing on a single set of words which may or may not be particularly significant, but even if it is he has extrapolated it out to a massive conspiracy (he at points seems to want us to trust toe OPCW as having seen Russian facilities, but later suggests they are untrustworthy as we are seeking to get them to pre agree a line, with the implication they will do so - therefore he has already decided to dismiss what they announce, if it is not what he likes) as well as what appears to be inconsequential details about Israel. Relying on forumulating such a conspiratorial conclusion mostly off the back of interpreting a few words strikes me as putting a lot of eggs in that basket. It is also funny how he presents his position as until this week near universal among experts, and yet apparently most of them have fallen prey to the propaganda I guess.
Have to love the way he chucks in Israel halfway down the page.
Yes indeed. Ok, let's say they can manufacture this stuff too - what possible reason would they have for being behind it? Not everyone believes the Russian state would want to do it, but it is at least somewhat plausible to suspect them (former traitor, they don't care if people know they did it so long as it cannot be proven 100%, they have done it before) even if it turns out it was somebody rogue or something. (Murray apparently argues that if it looks like Russians, it's because Israel wants to damage Russia)
The only other rational explanation for me is that it was instigated by a faction in the Kremlin without Putin's approval, or even prior knowledge - which is slightly unlikely, but by no means inconceivable. That would still be effectively state action, though.
The only other rational explanation for me is that it was instigated by a faction in the Kremlin without Putin's approval, or even prior knowledge - which is slightly unlikely, but by no means inconceivable. That would still be effectively state action, though.
The behaviour of the Russian government since the attack proves beyond almost any reasonable doubt that it was done with Putin's knowledge and approval.
Of course that hasn't stopped Seumas Milne going back to his old job of writing Guardian articles in support of Russian dictators, even though the most recent one is written under Corbyn's name.
Boris on the bbc - “We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his (Putin) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK.”
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
@samanthaTVnews: #Breaking the #Kremlin says @BorisJohnson allegation that #Putin was involved in the nerve agent attack on #Skripal is "shocking and unforgiveable"
Oh they'll have loved it. He loves when the West accuses him of things, and he can posture back at them.
The only other rational explanation for me is that it was instigated by a faction in the Kremlin without Putin's approval, or even prior knowledge - which is slightly unlikely, but by no means inconceivable. That would still be effectively state action, though.
The behaviour of the Russian government since the attack proves beyond almost any reasonable doubt that it was done with Putin's knowledge and approval.
If true, rather than putin say asking for security services to find and neutralise “traitors” to send a message. I wonder why this particular guy.
Boris on the bbc - “We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his (Putin) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK.”
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
@samanthaTVnews: #Breaking the #Kremlin says @BorisJohnson allegation that #Putin was involved in the nerve agent attack on #Skripal is "shocking and unforgiveable"
'Cos they've never done anything remotely like that before ...? Shocking.
Boris on the bbc - “We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his (Putin) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK.”
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
@samanthaTVnews: #Breaking the #Kremlin says @BorisJohnson allegation that #Putin was involved in the nerve agent attack on #Skripal is "shocking and unforgiveable"
You post so much fake news on here these days somebody has to provide checks and balances.
Didn’t this guy get sacked by the guardian?
Its great to have my own "overwhelmingly likely" fact checker though.
When is a fact not a fact when its overwhelmingly likely or are you the overwhelmingly true chap I get a bit mixed up.
Anyway I fancy our duke if going is heavy.
You are being caught time and time again posting fake news and links to articles to extremely dubious individuals. Perhaps try sourcing from reputable outlets and staying off the conspiracy / fake news sites.
You have turned into the left wing version of Plato.
Which is why Europe needs to get fracking. Starting yesterday.
Leaving aside the politics, Russian gas is the cheapest and most consistent supply of gas to Europe. Russia nowadays will undercut any competitive price. The infrastructure was paid for long ago, it's simply the extraction and a minimal transportation cost now. There are alternatives to Russian gas, mainly as LPG, but they are less abundant and more expensive. Doing without Russian gas entirely is difficult for the EU. Nevertheless sanctions force Russia to reduce its prices, so there is a significant cost to those sanctions.
Why not just slap a 100% tax on Russian gas? It'd enable it to keep flowing while encouraging users to source alternative supplies. Of course, Russia might respond by turning the taps off but that would hardly help their reputation for being the reliable supplier that W Europe is looking for.
Instead of relying on Russian gas we can buy more LNG from Qatar. Can't see any problems there.
Fewer problems. Qatar is not destabilising Eastern Europe and has no interest in doing so.
The only other rational explanation for me is that it was instigated by a faction in the Kremlin without Putin's approval, or even prior knowledge - which is slightly unlikely, but by no means inconceivable. That would still be effectively state action, though.
The behaviour of the Russian government since the attack proves beyond almost any reasonable doubt that it was done with Putin's knowledge and approval. .
Well I could believe it wasn't but that they'd react similarly on the basis of the accusations would still be against the russian state in effect. But be it official or unofficial we'll never know unfortunately. What is vital is that just because multiple theories exist, not all are as plausible as one another, particularly when considering who was attacked, and it is unreasonable to expect beyond reasonable doubt proof, but that does not mean we take as gospel all statements we ever hear, those are not the only two options here.
I take a lot of the tittle tattle with a pinch of salt and obviously he is right wing leave supporting, but when he goes for somebody it isn’t just hard to disprove, he normally has them done up like a kipper. Mcbride, huhne, antisemitic twattering etc.
Did he have anything to do with Huhne? I thought that was Mail on Sunday.
I take a lot of the tittle tattle with a pinch of salt and obviously he is right wing leave supporting, but when he goes for somebody it isn’t just hard to disprove, he normally has them done up like a kipper. Mcbride, huhne, antisemitic twattering etc.
Did he have anything to do with Huhne? I thought that was Mail on Sunday.
Yes he did. He chased a number of leads that showed huhne had to be lying. Also remember he makes most of his money from selling stuff to the likes of the mail.
Which is why Europe needs to get fracking. Starting yesterday.
Leaving aside the politics, Russian gas is the cheapest and most consistent supply of gas to Europe. Russia nowadays will undercut any competitive price. The infrastructure was paid for long ago, it's simply the extraction and a minimal transportation cost now. There are alternatives to Russian gas, mainly as LPG, but they are less abundant and more expensive. Doing without Russian gas entirely is difficult for the EU. Nevertheless sanctions force Russia to reduce its prices, so there is a significant cost to those sanctions.
Why not just slap a 100% tax on Russian gas? It'd enable it to keep flowing while encouraging users to source alternative supplies. Of course, Russia might respond by turning the taps off but that would hardly help their reputation for being the reliable supplier that W Europe is looking for.
Instead of relying on Russian gas we can buy more LNG from Qatar. Can't see any problems there.
The US is bringing several more LNG terminals on stream over the next couple of years. I'm sure Robert will know more.
Rees-Mogg needs to issue a statement saying he regrets his meeting with Bannon and that a research lapse meant he wasn't aware of his true views. Rees-Mogg got into trouble before when he addressed that dinner of a pro-apartheid group. Fraternizing with a Mussolini worshipper will cause people to ask further questions.
Mr. Herdson, isn't Qatar still being largely cut off by its immediate neighbours?
Last I saw, yes, there was a little local difficulty there. to be honest, I'm not particularly fussed which Gulf state we buy LPG from other than Iran. They're all happy enough to sell oil. Obviously, we shouldn't get too dependent there either - governments can change. Iran was a good friend to the West once.
Gas pipeline economics are that you have a big supply of gas at one end and a big demand at the other. Suppliers push as much gas as possible into the pipeline and can offer a relatively good price per MMBtu because they are interested in the total revenue. The customer has little interest in sourcing gas elsewhere because that becomes an additional cost.
The only real alternatives to Russian sourced gas for Europe in terms of quantity and price is gas piped in from the shared Iran/Qatar gas field, Azerbaijan or Algeria. The first has to be piped via Iran and Turkey and the second via Turkey if it's to avoid Russia, which wants to stymie all alternatives to its supply. Azerbaijan, Algeria and to some extent Turkey and Iran are unreliable partners.
If we want to isolate Russia we need to pick our enemies as that means doing a deal with Iran. It also means a marriage of interests with a very autocratic Turkey. Signing up both Algeria and Iran as alternatives to Russian gas does make strategic sense.
The intelligence services must have evidence of this, otherwise boris doing a boris will be a step too far in such a serious situation.
Post-Iraq, who trusts a word that politicians say, especially the Blond Buffoon? Given a history of lies to the UK population, and concealment of chemical weapons tests by Porton Down, I'm not very surprised that even some PB users turn to Murray's blog as an antidote.
I don't have access behind the FT paywall, but the coverage of the Washington Post and NY Times has been far closer to Corbyn's scepticism than to May's 'certainty'. Some PB fools confuse the words 'not proven', which is what I'd use, with 'innocent'.
The intelligence services must have evidence of this, otherwise boris doing a boris will be a step too far in such a serious situation.
Post-Iraq, who trusts a word that politicians say, especially the Blond Buffoon? Given a history of lies to the UK population, and concealment of chemical weapons tests by Porton Down, I'm not very surprised that even some PB users turn to Murray's blog as an antidote.
I don't have access behind the FT paywall, but the coverage of the Washington Post and NY Times has been far closer to Corbyn's scepticism than to May's 'certainty'. Some PB fools confuse the words 'not proven', which is what I'd use, with 'innocent'.
I read the Washington Post and the New York Times every day and this isn't true at all. The demands of journalistic standards require them to caveat everything, but they do the same for Russian interference in Trump's election. Nothing like the shameless equivocation of Corbyn and Milne. The fact Corbyn overruled his deputy on appearing on the Kremlin's foreign propaganda arm says it all.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Murray
His past is certainly 'colourful'.....
http://hurryupharry.org/2018/03/15/craig-murray-goes-conspiracy-theory-again
[left leaning??]
If that breakdown is accurate then Red Bull will do well in Australia. Especially if the early forecast comes true and it's wet.
I'm not about to trust Order Order as gospel, but there is a marked difference between partisan spin and conspiracy theory nonsense. Assessing source to a degree is reasonable, it is the height of absurdity to pluck any random purported fact and go 'well, you don't know that isn't true, do you?'
The first I have ever heard of Murray is today, so I go in with no preconceptions, and he seems to be focusing on a single set of words which may or may not be particularly significant, but even if it is he has extrapolated it out to a massive conspiracy (he at points seems to want us to trust toe OPCW as having seen Russian facilities, but later suggests they are untrustworthy as we are seeking to get them to pre agree a line, with the implication they will do so - therefore he has already decided to dismiss what they announce, if it is not what he likes) as well as what appears to be inconsequential details about Israel. Relying on forumulating such a conspiratorial conclusion mostly off the back of interpreting a few words strikes me as putting a lot of eggs in that basket. It is also funny how he presents his position as until this week near universal among experts, and yet apparently most of them have fallen prey to the propaganda I guess.
I see the Arsenal are off to CSKA Moscow. Should be entertaining. Perhaps Jezza may like to go and support his team, either of them
I note LCFC loanee Ahmed Musa scored to get CSKA Moscow through.
If Chandhok's observations are accurate, the Mercedes is both nimble and fast.
Australia tends to be a speed track, so I'm not sure how it favours Red Bull over Ferrari.
(Rain, of course, would be an equaliser.)
https://slate.com/technology/2018/03/in-defense-of-twitter-backlashes-against-culinary-appropriation.html?
Guido is read because his scoops are damaging and often hard to disprove.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-lng/asia-spot-prices-climb-to-three-year-high-on-winter-demand-idUSKBN1F825V
I dont recall doing that I liked Ms Plato
Interesting that the kippers are not moving exclusively to Con:
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/974621936419573761?s=19
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/oct/06/australia-gas-exports-surge-new-projects-on-tap
That is a very big claim. I am surprised they have made such a direct claim as it is a bigger than the Russian state had him polished off, where that still slows for an agent overstepping the mark etc.
It being boris I wonder if he was supposed to say that? Or if he has done a boris
The May Locals will be interesting in such volatile times.
It also looks like UKIP broke for LDEM, which is a bit mental.
Good job we have our very own FU on nutter watch
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/the-british-governments-russia-nerve-agent-claims-are-bullshit-a69b4ee484ce
This recent move to the newspaper itself on line must account for a drop in circulation of the hard copies
Didn’t this guy get sacked by the guardian?
https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/974620852099665920
https://www.insurgeintelligence.com/deep-state/2017/12/23/facebook-a-danger-to-democracy
Also "Brace for the oil, food and financial crash of 2018. 80% of the world’s oil has peaked, and the resulting oil crunch will flatten the economy"
https://www.insurgeintelligence.com/energy/2017/12/02/brace-for-the-oil-food-and-financial-crash-of-2018
Either mad or a clickbait artist.
(Of course, that's not the only determining factor, but it's a useful metric.)
Day 1 +£160
Day 2 +£477
Day 3 +187
Day 4 ???? being conservative
With a small C of course
See you later
It is surely the culmination of various factors, including the nature of the chemical, which has led to Russia being a subject, you cannot just say 'Oh america has the chemical too, maybe they lost control of it to...somebody...who would attack the guyfor...reasons'. The preponderance of the evidence (inasmuch as we are told about it), potential motivations and the method, do not make it unreasonable to suspect Russia, and simply pointing the finger at anyone else who may have chemical weapons is not exactly compelling argument against such weight. I for one do not rule out anything, but focusing on one (albeit important) reasons suspicion has fallen on Russia and ignoring the other reason it makes sense, well, doesn't make much sense to me.
And in any case we have not overreacted despite our belief in what we think Russia has done, so the defence of mealy louthed statements warning us not to overreact are in themselves premature and silly.
That would still be effectively state action, though.
Mr. P, cheers for that.
Of course that hasn't stopped Seumas Milne going back to his old job of writing Guardian articles in support of Russian dictators, even though the most recent one is written under Corbyn's name.
When is a fact not a fact when its overwhelmingly likely or are you the overwhelmingly true chap I get a bit mixed up.
Anyway I fancy our duke if going is heavy.
CON: 32.7% (+7.1)
LDEM: 26.3% (+12.3)
LAB: 22.3% (+4.0)
IND: 18.7% (-3.6)
Conservative GAIN from Independent.
No UKIP (-19.8) as prev.
Shocking.
You have turned into the left wing version of Plato.
https://twitter.com/Joannechocolat/status/974592396926312448
How well I remember those halcyon days when various PBers were arguing Bannon wasn't a Fascist or racist.
https://twitter.com/redlightvoices/status/974591211775373312
https://www.axios.com/trumps-cabinet-of-peers-1521195768-fd995175-1c10-4911-9998-df4c32365247.html
Get to your shelters...
The only real alternatives to Russian sourced gas for Europe in terms of quantity and price is gas piped in from the shared Iran/Qatar gas field, Azerbaijan or Algeria. The first has to be piped via Iran and Turkey and the second via Turkey if it's to avoid Russia, which wants to stymie all alternatives to its supply. Azerbaijan, Algeria and to some extent Turkey and Iran are unreliable partners.
If we want to isolate Russia we need to pick our enemies as that means doing a deal with Iran. It also means a marriage of interests with a very autocratic Turkey. Signing up both Algeria and Iran as alternatives to Russian gas does make strategic sense.
https://twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/974637769594228736
Breitbart London was launched in February 2014
Cameron's Bloomberg Speech, promising an In-Out referendum was given on 23 January 2013.
I don't have access behind the FT paywall, but the coverage of the Washington Post and NY Times has been far closer to Corbyn's scepticism than to May's 'certainty'. Some PB fools confuse the words 'not proven', which is what I'd use, with 'innocent'.