Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just under nine months to go for Toby Young to win his £15,000

SystemSystem Posts: 6,199
edited April 4 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just under nine months to go for Toby Young to win his £15,000 “Boris will be CON leader by 2018” wager

Fifteen years ago Toby Young had a bet of £15,000 with Nigella Lawson that Boris Johnson would become Tory leader by 2018.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,597
    His tagline should definitely be "pro-cake and pro-eating it"!!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,679
    edited April 4
    Toby Young is stung for 15 grand and Boris Johnson doesn't become PM?

    Sounds almost perfect.

    Edit - arguably if those are the exact terms of the bet he lost it at midnight on the 31st December 2017.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    edited April 4
    You can’t go wrong laying Boris.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    Plus Boris hasn’t had a good 24 hours over Salisbury.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    What odds did the odious Young secure with Nigella?

    Most likely the Domestic Goddess used her womanly wiles to extract even money from the hapless dingo.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,977

    Plus Boris hasn’t had a good 24 hours over Salisbury.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,114
    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    ydoethur said:

    Toby Young is stung for 15 grand and Boris Johnson doesn't become PM?

    Sounds almost perfect.

    Edit - arguably if those are the exact terms of the bet he lost it at midnight on the 31st December 2017.

    Nigella could throw a hell of a party with the cash.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,114
    Anazina said:

    What odds did the odious Young secure with Nigella?

    Most likely the Domestic Goddess used her womanly wiles to extract even money from the hapless dingo.

    These sorts of bets are normally implied Even money ?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,153
    edited April 4
    FPT then lost in Vanilla

    Barnesian said:

    Expert on Sky says that it is possible that the CEO confided in Boris that the origin was Russia hence the tweet but he could not state it officially. He went on to say that other governments know the UK is correct through various intelligent agency clubs and multi lateral intelligence cooperation. He went on to say on the balance of probabiliies Russia is responsible

    It is more than "the balance of probabilities".

    The probability that it was the Russian State is opportunity x motive x track-record.

    On the day after, my estimate was 99.9% probability that it was the Russian State i.e. way beyond reasonable doubt.

    Since then more information has emerged about opportunity and motive.

    Opportunity: The nerve agent may have come from Syria or been stolen and didn't need an expert to apply. So others could possibly have had the capability to do it.

    Motive: Other motives such as his alleged knowledge of a chemical weapon operation in Syria and peculiar background with money involving Yulia's relations. So others could have had a motive to do it.

    So my current estimate is that there is a 90% probability that the Russian State is responsible. It is not a balance of probabilities but it might not be quite beyond reasonable doubt. I'd still bet on it at say 8/1 on it being Russia. (I'm not taking bets).
    Sorry, but that's bat-shit crazy. How on earth does your bonkers theory explain the Russian government's behaviour immediately after the attack, and indeed subsequently? Do you seriously think they'd regard it as a joke if rogue Syrian elements had access to Novichok, let alone were using it on Russian citizens and incidentally triggering worldwide diplomatic and probably economic measures against Russia?
    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    What would be the cash out value of this bet right now ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,151
    Barnesian said:

    FPT then lost in Vanilla

    Barnesian said:

    Expert on Sky says that it is possible that the CEO confided in Boris that the origin was Russia hence the tweet but he could not state it officially. He went on to say that other governments know the UK is correct through various intelligent agency clubs and multi lateral intelligence cooperation. He went on to say on the balance of probabiliies Russia is responsible

    It is more than "the balance of probabilities".

    The probability that it was the Russian State is opportunity x motive x track-record.

    On the day after, my estimate was 99.9% probability that it was the Russian State i.e. way beyond reasonable doubt.

    Since then more information has emerged about opportunity and motive.

    Opportunity: The nerve agent may have come from Syria or been stolen and didn't need an expert to apply. So others could possibly have had the capability to do it.

    Motive: Other motives such as his alleged knowledge of a chemical weapon operation in Syria and peculiar background with money involving Yulia's relations. So others could have had a motive to do it.

    So my current estimate is that there is a 90% probability that the Russian State is responsible. It is not a balance of probabilities but it might not be quite beyond reasonable doubt. I'd still bet on it at say 8/1 on it being Russia. (I'm not taking bets).
    Sorry, but that's bat-shit crazy. How on earth does your bonkers theory explain the Russian government's behaviour immediately after the attack, and indeed subsequently? Do you seriously think they'd regard it as a joke if rogue Syrian elements had access to Novichok, let alone were using it on Russian citizens and incidentally triggering worldwide diplomatic and probably economic measures against Russia?
    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

    Or that the alternative theories are indeed "bat-shit crazy". The sort of bat-shit crazy that gives conspiracy theories a bad name....
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,837
    Anazina said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
    Someone on here told me her Dad is a xenophobe. Would she be welcome under those circumstances?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    philiph said:

    Anazina said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
    Someone on here told me her Dad is a xenophobe. Would she be welcome under those circumstances?
    Nah. He’s a lovely Jewish bloke.

    Victim of some shocking anti Semitism from Harold MacMillan.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827
    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,385
    So Nigella is set to make £15k by laying Boris.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,679
    Barnesian said:

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    There I disagree. They would be considerably more likely, faced with such a calamity of a murder they were blamed for but innocent of, to suggest a fully joint investigation to find the perpetrators. Joint forensic teams, joint investigation units, joint access to sites and laboratories and records - and a joint report at the end of it.

    The reason I say that is because if this *isn't* the Russian state, then it is somebody who has access to their technology and hostile intent towards its citizens and security services. It would be very much in their interests to find out who such a person was as they would be a menace to national security.

    In practice however they have more or less admitted it and are basically trolling now. Why they think that makes them look clever or strong I don't know.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,455
    philiph said:

    Anazina said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
    Someone on here told me her Dad is a xenophobe. Would she be welcome under those circumstances?
    Do you judge people on the views of their parents?
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,489
    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,636
    The memes in the replies are quite unhinged.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,743
    £15,000? He could have sent one of his children to public school for six months instead.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,824
    Boris won't be leader by the end of this year, by the end of 2020 maybe
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,636
    edited April 4
    ydoethur said:

    In practice however they have more or less admitted it and are basically trolling now. Why they think that makes them look clever or strong I don't know.

    They are using our strengths - freedom of speech, political plurality - against us. We shouldn't be surprised, and we shouldn't compromise on those strengths. But more fool those who are dancing to the Russian tune.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,426
    edited April 4
    Barnesian said:

    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

    My only 'insecurity' is that I don't like apologists for Putin, such as Corbyn and George Galloway, making it easier for him to cause trouble and sow division, and that I kinda take the view that spraying one of the most deadly substances known to mankind around a small English town is completely beyond the pale, even more so since they shouldn't have had the programme in the first place under the treaties they have signed. The nerve agent could easily have hit children in Zizzis. Perhaps you're cool with it?

    As for your second paragraph, if Russia were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed their complete horror; instead they treated it as a joke. If they were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed full solidarity with the UK and offered every assistance; instead they treated it as a joke. That puts it beyond reasonable doubt, even for those of us who don't have access to the intelligence information. If you're still engaged with bonkers conspiracy theories, listen to Vince Cable, or the Australian, Canadian, French, German, Swedish, and all the other independent governments who have been given more information.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,426
    Here you go:



    And of course Corbyn, Diane Abbott, George Galloway, Ken Livingstone - notice a pattern here?

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,870
    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    There I disagree. They would be considerably more likely, faced with such a calamity of a murder they were blamed for but innocent of, to suggest a fully joint investigation to find the perpetrators. Joint forensic teams, joint investigation units, joint access to sites and laboratories and records - and a joint report at the end of it.

    The reason I say that is because if this *isn't* the Russian state, then it is somebody who has access to their technology and hostile intent towards its citizens and security services. It would be very much in their interests to find out who such a person was as they would be a menace to national security.

    In practice however they have more or less admitted it and are basically trolling now. Why they think that makes them look clever or strong I don't know.
    I think it's possible that whoever poisoned the Skripals was acting without the authority of Putin or the Russian government. An example of this is Malaysian Airlines flight 17 that was shot down by accident by Russian associates in the Ukraine. The Russian Government decided it was better to deny everything and blame Ukraine for the atrocity. That is preferable to Russian authorities' agenda than to admit they lack control or are incompetent.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,837
    Anazina said:

    philiph said:

    Anazina said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
    Someone on here told me her Dad is a xenophobe. Would she be welcome under those circumstances?
    Do you judge people on the views of their parents?
    No, I use them to illustrate how fatuous it is to say how all voters for leave are xenophodes.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,426
    Anazina said:

    A period of silence from this blithering clown would be welcome.

    True, but as Leader of the Opposition I suppose Corbyn has to say something.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,977
    So the second largest Commonwealth country sides with Russia?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,743
    edited April 4
    Interesting calculator

    Interesting also to note that there is no gender pay gap at the Premier League Football clubs indeed many report that their women employees get paid more than their male ones.

    *cough cough*

    bbc.co.uk/news/business-43632763
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,426

    So the second largest Commonwealth country sides with Russia?
    So it seems.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,591
    Anazina said:
    I am not impressed with Boris but he has the right to go on the attack and defend his position
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827

    The memes in the replies are quite unhinged.

    Completely.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,151

    So the second largest Commonwealth country sides with Russia?
    Maybe Pakistan are looking to get some Novichoks for themselves?

    That might just worry the largest Commonwealth country....
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 876
    Anazina said:
    the blithering clown here is Jeremy Corbyn. I cannot believe such a clown leads the British Labour party, with aspiration to become Prime Minister of Great Britain & Northern Ireland, a terrorist sympathising, Russian Supporting, Anti Capitialist, Pro Communist, Anti Semite, traitor to the nation, who hates all this country and all the west stands for, freedom, democracy, a free press, private land ownership, Opportunity to create wealth, its Corbyn who is the clown, not Boris
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827
    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,153
    edited April 4

    Barnesian said:

    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

    My only 'insecurity' is that I don't like apologists for Putin, such as Corbyn and George Galloway, making it easier for him to cause trouble and sow division, and that I kinda take the view that spraying one of the most deadly substances known to mankind around a small English town is completely beyond the pale, even more so since they shouldn't have had the programme in the first place under the treaties they have signed. The nerve agent could easily have hit children in Zizzis. Perhaps you're cool with it?

    As for your second paragraph, if Russia were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed their complete horror; instead they treated it as a joke. If they were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed full solidarity with the UK and offered every assistance; instead they treated it as a joke. That puts it beyond reasonable doubt, even for those of us who don't have access to the intelligence information. If you're still engaged with bonkers conspiracy theories, listen to Vince Cable, or the Australian, Canadian, French, German, Swedish, and all the other independent governments who have been given more information.
    Of course I'm not cool with it!

    And I agree that the Russian responses, particularly Lavrov's recent claims that it was done by the UK Government as a distraction from Brexit, are utterly ridiculous. I assume it was a joke or a dig rather than a serious accusation.

    And, I repeat, that I am fairly sure (90%) that Russia did it.

    But I'm reminded of Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.



  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,870
    DavidL said:

    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.

    I don't know if this is the latest info but it doesn't look Johnson is particularly popular amongst Conservative voters let alone the general public. I think people forgive a lot of people who amuse them, but they become tiresome when no longer funny. Dunno. Maybe confirmation bias as Johnson's charm has never worked for me.

    Unpopular Boris Johnson

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/11/14/boris-johnsons-favourability-takes-big-hit-among-c/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,039
    Anazina said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
    LOL, He must be pretty thick , it was a chance in a million he would win. It was a loaded bet she was unlikely to lose.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,400
    If one's Foreign Secretary is known to be a a proven liar it's hardly surprising that the slightest deviation from the truth is going to force the UK onto the back foot. I would be surprised if a majority of the British now believes the government's explanation for the poisoning let alone the rest of the world.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,943

    Here you go:



    And of course Corbyn, Diane Abbott, George Galloway, Ken Livingstone - notice a pattern here?

    You have excelled yourself Richard. Well Done

    14 at 4.19pm down to 6 at 4.43pm.

    Russia must be all alone by now surely

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827
    A reasonable doubt is defined in law as one that might make you pause in the conduct of your own affairs. It is a doubt based on substance, not fanciful.

    Russia's guilt would be established beyond a reasonable doubt here on their subsequent conduct alone but the means was intended to draw attention to their role and emphasise it, not hide it. I simply cannot understand the mentality of anyone who has any doubt about this at all and I have nothing but contempt for those in positions of authority who seem willing to play the Russian's game for them.

    Yes Corbyn, that would be you.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,191
    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,591

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    Who were the 6 countries voting in support of Russia - did Parkistan vote for Russia
  • PaganPagan Posts: 246
    FPT



    In an ideal world, I'd have individual rates of national insurance linked to people's lifestyle and designed to fund the NHS. But as that's not politically viable, income tax should be incrementally increased and NI reduced in line.

    You are proposing that people who lead healthy life styles pay more then I take it as studies have shown total life health care costs for health conscious people exceed that of those that drink a lot/smoke/ are obese. Even before you factor in pension costs of the life time extension they gain
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,039
    DavidL said:

    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.

    I normally like your posts David, but those two turkeys are beyond the pale. Hard to see either of the snakeoil salesmen making it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.

    I normally like your posts David, but those two turkeys are beyond the pale. Hard to see either of the snakeoil salesmen making it.
    The selection is not open ended Malcolm. Who's next for the SNP after Nicola? She was an easy replacement for Salmond but I am not seeing the next generation yet.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,400
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.

    I normally like your posts David, but those two turkeys are beyond the pale. Hard to see either of the snakeoil salesmen making it.
    I think it's a case of those furthest away from London believing his PR that he was a good Mayor. What exactly did he do?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,151

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    Who were the 6 countries voting in support of Russia - did Parkistan vote for Russia
    Time to summon the Pakistan Ambassador methinks....
  • glwglw Posts: 4,316
    Roger said:

    If one's Foreign Secretary is known to be a a proven liar it's hardly surprising that the slightest deviation from the truth is going to force the UK onto the back foot. I would be surprised if a majority of the British now believes the government's explanation for the poisoning let alone the rest of the world.

    Well we know that there are hell of a lot of idiots in Britain judging by the contiuing high support for the Labour Party, so you may well be correct.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827
    edited April 4

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for? Edit that was the increase and in 2015 it was £375m so probably around half a billion now.
    Gah.


  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,039
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.

    I normally like your posts David, but those two turkeys are beyond the pale. Hard to see either of the snakeoil salesmen making it.
    The selection is not open ended Malcolm. Who's next for the SNP after Nicola? She was an easy replacement for Salmond but I am not seeing the next generation yet.
    I do not see many obvious ones either David. Humza seems to be very articulate , he could have a chance. I would have gone for Angus Robertson myself but not sure if he will be back.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,191
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    Do we know Russia's aid to Pakistan ?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,943
    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

    My only 'insecurity' is that I don't like apologists for Putin, such as Corbyn and George Galloway, making it easier for him to cause trouble and sow division, and that I kinda take the view that spraying one of the most deadly substances known to mankind around a small English town is completely beyond the pale, even more so since they shouldn't have had the programme in the first place under the treaties they have signed. The nerve agent could easily have hit children in Zizzis. Perhaps you're cool with it?

    As for your second paragraph, if Russia were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed their complete horror; instead they treated it as a joke. If they were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed full solidarity with the UK and offered every assistance; instead they treated it as a joke. That puts it beyond reasonable doubt, even for those of us who don't have access to the intelligence information. If you're still engaged with bonkers conspiracy theories, listen to Vince Cable, or the Australian, Canadian, French, German, Swedish, and all the other independent governments who have been given more information.
    Of course I'm not cool with it!

    And I agree that the Russian responses, particularly Lavrov's recent claims that it was done by the UK Government as a distraction from Brexit, are utterly ridiculous. I assume it was a joke or a dig rather than a serious accusation.

    And, I repeat, that I am fairly sure (90%) that Russia did it.

    But I'm reminded of Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.



    12 Angry men Jezza is Henry Fonda

    BoJo is the bloke who breaks down at the end.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,870
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    China is spending $55 billion on Pakistan infrastructure projects as part of its One belt one road initiative. Puts our £100 million into perspective
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    Do we know Russia's aid to Pakistan ?
    I think that this may be relevant: https://www.ft.com/content/81aea830-0238-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    Do we know Russia's aid to Pakistan ?
    China's aid to Pakistan is $55 billion

    https://www.ft.com/content/81aea830-0238-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5

    Russia's aid is reported to be $ 2 billion a year, replacing the American aid.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    edited April 4

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    Who were the 6 countries voting in support of Russia - did Parkistan vote for Russia
    Time to summon the Pakistan Ambassador methinks....
    No such thing, as a Commonwealth Country there's no Ambassador, there's a High Commissioner though.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,316

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    Do we know Russia's aid to Pakistan ?
    Pakistan has been shifting allegiance towards Russia since the US cut military assistance. Pakistan and Russia have also got some big energy deals (which means there is major graft to be had).

    I'm certain that Pakistan doesn't believe Russia's innocence, but that's not why they would vote with them.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,555
    Anazina said:

    philiph said:

    Anazina said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A stunning bet by Nigella. If Toby wants to top up I'll gladly lay another 15 grand on the same terms ;)

    Agreed. Does Nigella post on here? She has some serious acumen laying that bet. A goddess in the kitchen, a party animal in the living room, a betting legend in the study.
    Someone on here told me her Dad is a xenophobe. Would she be welcome under those circumstances?
    Do you judge people on the views of their parents?
    Even better, on what some random internetter tells you are the views of their parents? But perhaps he's a shy labour boy, and understandably reticent about his real reasons to be wary of the Lawson family...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    Anyhoo, allez, allez, allez
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,824
    edited April 4
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    FWIW I can easily imagine Boris as PM. He is by far the best campaigner that the Tories have. He detoxifies the brand with his humour and wit. His track record speaks for itself.

    What sort of PM would he be? Hopefully like he was as Mayor with a good team around him doing all the heavy lifting for him whilst he did the PR. Sort of like Blair before he got all messianic. Getting a good enough team from the current front bench is a bit of an ask but there is lots of younger talent coming through as we were discussing on the last thread.

    For me Gove remains the brains of the operation, in the absence of Osborne. He has ideas and ambitions that go well beyond being a competent manager, perhaps the lofty peak of May's ambition. But I fully accept that this is a minority view and unlikely to happen.

    I don't know if this is the latest info but it doesn't look Johnson is particularly popular amongst Conservative voters let alone the general public. I think people forgive a lot of people who amuse them, but they become tiresome when no longer funny. Dunno. Maybe confirmation bias as Johnson's charm has never worked for me.

    Unpopular Boris Johnson

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/11/14/boris-johnsons-favourability-takes-big-hit-among-c/
    So Boris has a clear positive net approval rating with Tory voters then.

    Boris was also the public's clear favourite to succeed May in a February poll with Rees Mogg second and Davidson and Hammond joint third

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jacob-rees-mogg-best-prime-minister-second-favourite-best-prime-minister-exclusive-new-poll-the-a8205521.html?amp
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827

    Anyhoo, allez, allez, allez

    1-3 is my guess for tonight.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,238
    I love the comment from @tyson on the previous thread about wealthy liberals supporting Corbyn being willing to pay more tax for a fairer society.

    Would they be the same wealthy liberals who were outraged at the prospect of being asked to use the wealth tied up in their houses to pay for their own care in old age? So outraged in fact that they voted for the party which promised them that they could keep their wealth.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,827
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    China is spending $55 billion on Pakistan infrastructure projects as part of its One belt one road initiative. Puts our £100 million into perspective
    Its actually more like £0.5bn but yes. Still can think of a lot of better uses for it though.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923
    DavidL said:

    Anyhoo, allez, allez, allez

    1-3 is my guess for tonight.
    It’s like Chelsea 2005 all over again.

    Anfield Road is rammed two hours before kick off.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,191
    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    China is spending $55 billion on Pakistan infrastructure projects as part of its One belt one road initiative. Puts our £100 million into perspective
    Its actually more like £0.5bn but yes. Still can think of a lot of better uses for it though.
    It's not just the money to me,it's the human ties we have and history.

    Fu*k em.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,186
    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    With Trump cosying up to Modi one imagines that Pakistan will have to deal with Russia.
  • roserees64roserees64 Posts: 193
    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,014

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

    My only 'insecurity' is that I don't like apologists for Putin, such as Corbyn and George Galloway, making it easier for him to cause trouble and sow division, and that I kinda take the view that spraying one of the most deadly substances known to mankind around a small English town is completely beyond the pale, even more so since they shouldn't have had the programme in the first place under the treaties they have signed. The nerve agent could easily have hit children in Zizzis. Perhaps you're cool with it?

    As for your second paragraph, if Russia were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed their complete horror; instead they treated it as a joke. If they were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed full solidarity with the UK and offered every assistance; instead they treated it as a joke. That puts it beyond reasonable doubt, even for those of us who don't have access to the intelligence information. If you're still engaged with bonkers conspiracy theories, listen to Vince Cable, or the Australian, Canadian, French, German, Swedish, and all the other independent governments who have been given more information.
    Of course I'm not cool with it!

    And I agree that the Russian responses, particularly Lavrov's recent claims that it was done by the UK Government as a distraction from Brexit, are utterly ridiculous. I assume it was a joke or a dig rather than a serious accusation.

    And, I repeat, that I am fairly sure (90%) that Russia did it.

    But I'm reminded of Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.



    12 Angry men Jezza is Henry Fonda

    BoJo is the bloke who breaks down at the end.
    How would you have preferred we respond to an attack on our soil?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,426
    edited April 4
    From the Guardian live blog:

    An unnamed diplomatic source told the agency that the vote was lost by 15-6 with 17 OPCW member states abstaining. Russia gained support from China, Azerbaijan, Sudan, Algeria and Iran, Reuters said.

    So it doesn't look as though Pakistan voted on the Russian side, although they were quoted earlier as supporting the Russian position.

    To be fair, not many of the OPCW states would have had much information on the issue.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,191

    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?

    Who do you think did it ? Britain ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,919

    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?

    Sorry, Corbyn has been vindicated? What planet are you living on?

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923

    DavidL said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Elliot said:

    One of the countries that backed Russia over the chemical attack on the UK was Pakistan. It really is about time we cut off aid.

    Agreed. Enough.
    This could make the story to certain newspapers and it should,thinking about it,bloody disgraceful from the government of Pakistan.
    We are currently giving them £105m a year in aid. I mean, WTF for?
    China is spending $55 billion on Pakistan infrastructure projects as part of its One belt one road initiative. Puts our £100 million into perspective
    Its actually more like £0.5bn but yes. Still can think of a lot of better uses for it though.
    It's not just the money to me,it's the human ties we have and history.

    Fu*k em.
    History like the hundreds of thousands that died because of partition?

    This is all about realpolitik, or The Great Game redux.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,591

    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?

    It was Russia - also OPCM voted 41 - 6 in UK favour.

    Corbyn is coming under attack now for siding with Russia.

    Boris is unreliable but the International coalition is holding and the EU endorses the UK
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,422
    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,919

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    On a completely unrelated topic: haven’t seen you on here in ages scrapheap! :D
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,422
    RobD said:

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    On a completely unrelated topic: haven’t seen you on here in ages scrapheap! :D
    There's only SO many times you can watch MOTD2 and listen to a Radio 5 commentary on a single match....
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,943
    RobD said:

    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?

    Sorry, Corbyn has been vindicated? What planet are you living on?

    Only in so much as he said we should have evidence first before knee Jerking.

    I think in all likelihood it was Russia still but like someone said earlier i am at 90% not the 101% stated by Boris.

    WMD 2??? Maybe not but the OPCW report will be interesting.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,919

    RobD said:

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    On a completely unrelated topic: haven’t seen you on here in ages scrapheap! :D
    There's only SO many times you can watch MOTD2 and listen to a Radio 5 commentary on a single match....
    Same can’t be said for re-runs of the 2015 election... BONG!
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,422
    RobD said:

    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?

    Sorry, Corbyn has been vindicated? What planet are you living on?

    Is this SeanT's leftie spoof ID?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,923

    RobD said:

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    On a completely unrelated topic: haven’t seen you on here in ages scrapheap! :D
    There's only SO many times you can watch MOTD2 and listen to a Radio 5 commentary on a single match....
    It's on YouTube now

    https://bit.ly/2GXhgDI
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 20,290
    FF43 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    There I disagree. They would be considerably more likely, faced with such a calamity of a murder they were blamed for but innocent of, to suggest a fully joint investigation to find the perpetrators. Joint forensic teams, joint investigation units, joint access to sites and laboratories and records - and a joint report at the end of it.

    The reason I say that is because if this *isn't* the Russian state, then it is somebody who has access to their technology and hostile intent towards its citizens and security services. It would be very much in their interests to find out who such a person was as they would be a menace to national security.

    In practice however they have more or less admitted it and are basically trolling now. Why they think that makes them look clever or strong I don't know.
    I think it's possible that whoever poisoned the Skripals was acting without the authority of Putin or the Russian government. An example of this is Malaysian Airlines flight 17 that was shot down by accident by Russian associates in the Ukraine. The Russian Government decided it was better to deny everything and blame Ukraine for the atrocity. That is preferable to Russian authorities' agenda than to admit they lack control or are incompetent.
    Yes, I think MH17 was an accident by Russian 'associates', which the Russian government then covered up. Interestingly, the way they tried to do that was by spreading a series of ludicrous and incompatible stories and explanations. They're doing the same now, and the same idiots are lapping it up.

    But we should also remember Litvinenko. They've done it before; therefore it's reasonable to use that as part of the evidence that they've done it again, especially after the then-government's limp-wristed reaction to that murder.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,943
    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    My "bonkers theory" is the same as the PM's and my conclusion is that the Russian State is most probably responsible.

    But just assume for a moment that the Russian State is not responsible. Immediately after the attack they wouldn't know who was responsible. They would vehemently reject the accusation and ask for evidence and samples.

    I'm trying to be objective and have still come to the conclusion that it was the Russian State. But your emotional reaction "Bat-shit crazy" "Bonkers theory" suggests a hidden insecurity on your part about the affair and how it might pan out. Yes?

    My only 'insecurity' is that I don't like apologists for Putin, such as Corbyn and George Galloway, making it easier for him to cause trouble and sow division, and that I kinda take the view that spraying one of the most deadly substances known to mankind around a small English town is completely beyond the pale, even more so since they shouldn't have had the programme in the first place under the treaties they have signed. The nerve agent could easily have hit children in Zizzis. Perhaps you're cool with it?

    As for your second paragraph, if Russia were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed their complete horror; instead they treated it as a joke. If they were not responsible, then in the immediate aftermath of the attack they would have expressed full solidarity with the UK and offered every assistance; instead they treated it as a joke. That puts it beyond reasonable doubt, even for those of us who don't have access to the intelligence information. If you're still engaged with bonkers conspiracy theories, listen to Vince Cable, or the Australian, Canadian, French, German, Swedish, and all the other independent governments who have been given more information.
    Of course I'm not cool with it!

    And I agree that the Russian responses, particularly Lavrov's recent claims that it was done by the UK Government as a distraction from Brexit, are utterly ridiculous. I assume it was a joke or a dig rather than a serious accusation.

    And, I repeat, that I am fairly sure (90%) that Russia did it.

    But I'm reminded of Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.



    12 Angry men Jezza is Henry Fonda

    BoJo is the bloke who breaks down at the end.
    How would you have preferred we respond to an attack on our soil?
    Wait for independent report from OPCW then act if necessary.

    As suggested by Jezza
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,191

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    You can't mean me ;-) I post nearly every week ;-)
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,422
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    On a completely unrelated topic: haven’t seen you on here in ages scrapheap! :D
    There's only SO many times you can watch MOTD2 and listen to a Radio 5 commentary on a single match....
    Same can’t be said for re-runs of the 2015 election... BONG!
    TMay's fiasco last year has rather tainted it for me with the counter-shock BONG .... BUT still a very special night.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 20,290

    Wait for independent report from OPCW then act if necessary.

    As suggested by Jezza

    That will take too long, and in meantime the Russians will not wait, and they'll be spreading their FUD sh*t over the story. FUD which the useful idiots will lap up.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,837

    Wait for independent report from OPCW then act if necessary.

    As suggested by Jezza

    That will take too long, and in meantime the Russians will not wait, and they'll be spreading their FUD sh*t over the story. FUD which the useful idiots will lap up.
    +1
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,870
    edited April 4

    From the Guardian live blog:

    An unnamed diplomatic source told the agency that the vote was lost by 15-6 with 17 OPCW member states abstaining. Russia gained support from China, Azerbaijan, Sudan, Algeria and Iran, Reuters said.

    So it doesn't look as though Pakistan voted on the Russian side, although they were quoted earlier as supporting the Russian position.

    To be fair, not many of the OPCW states would have had much information on the issue.

    The vote was on a Russian motion that it should take part in the investigation, not whether Russia was complicit in the attacks. Presumably an easier motion for third countries to vote for.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,426

    Wait for independent report from OPCW then act if necessary.

    As suggested by Jezza

    That will take too long, and in meantime the Russians will not wait, and they'll be spreading their FUD sh*t over the story. FUD which the useful idiots will lap up.
    Plus the OPCW will have much less information than the UK government and its allies.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,422

    RobD said:

    I see some familiar wing-nuts are back today after a period on the sidelines....

    On a completely unrelated topic: haven’t seen you on here in ages scrapheap! :D
    There's only SO many times you can watch MOTD2 and listen to a Radio 5 commentary on a single match....
    It's on YouTube now

    https://bit.ly/2GXhgDI
    Hmm.... I think I might refrain from clicking on that... not that I don't trust you implicitly...

    did Liverpool sign that Woking defender yet btw?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,943

    Today's news about Boris and his mendacious comments should come as no surprise as he was very economical with the truth during the EU referendum campaign.

    I find it strange how Jeremy Corbyn seems to always end up being vindicated.

    The question now is if it wasn't Russia then who did plan the Salisbury nerve agent dispersal?

    It was Russia - also OPCM voted 41 - 6 in UK favour.

    Corbyn is coming under attack now for siding with Russia.

    Boris is unreliable but the International coalition is holding and the EU endorses the UK
    Was it 41-6?


    What was this then?

    Genuine question

    An unnamed diplomatic source told the agency that the vote was lost by 15-6 with 17 OPCW member states abstaining. Russia gained support from China, Azerbaijan, Sudan, Algeria and Iran, Reuters said.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,919
    edited April 4


    Wait for independent report from OPCW then act if necessary.

    As suggested by Jezza

    So after a chemical agent was used, the UK has to sit and twiddle its thumbs while waiting months for an independent report? That’s one way to run things...

    In any case, hasn’t the OPCW just voted in the UK’s favour?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,413

    Only in so much as he said we should have evidence first before knee Jerking.

    I think in all likelihood it was Russia still but like someone said earlier i am at 90% not the 101% stated by Boris.

    WMD 2??? Maybe not but the OPCW report will be interesting.

    Who gets the other 10% .... Elvis on the B52 from the moon, Lord Lucan or the Loch Ness Monster ?
This discussion has been closed.