More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
Less than half the male population and no women could vote when Palmerston was on the floor of the Commons, never mind no twitter parliamentary politics then was largely aristocratic and middle class men talking to aristocratic and middle class men
I thought Corbyn was impressive on this on R4 today.
The nub of the issue for me is simply this. Either Russia did this and wants everyone to know they did it (Russian-developed nerve agent in a public place is hardly subtle). Or someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it.
I truly believe that The Kremlin would have no compunction in doing this if they stood to gain. I just don't think they really do gain anything. Even as revenge on a double agent, this spy was part of an exchange, so it doesn't work as a motive for me. Putin is happy to get his hands very dirty, but never for no reason.
Not plausible at all. If the Russian government knew they didn't do it, they should be pulling out all the stops to show the world that is the case and to find out who did it and is trying to frame them Instead they are indulging in snide twattery on Twitter and Putin is giving menacing interviews on TV rather than phoning up May to pledge his cooperation.
Corbyn is either idiotic or actively malign in his approach to international affairs.
I only have some snippets on Radio 4 to go on, but is asking for a sample that they can examine not what the Russians are doing?
If Russia was serious about resolving this matter, Putin would have phoned May, offered his cooperation and then asked for a sample. Russia would have had the high ground and the UK couldn't have said no.
The response doesn't make any sense at all. Perhaps the motive is to just create confusion.
Russian expert on Sky says that a law was passed in the Russian Parliament in 2006 that allows anyone who misbehaves, defects or is a traitor to be assassinated abroad only with the permission of the President of Russia. He has no doubt that it was directed by Putin
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
It being effective is a council area which the Tories could lose.
Russian expert on Sky says that a law was passed in the Russian Parliament in 2006 that allows anyone who misbehaves, defects or is a traitor to be assassinated abroad only with the permission of the President of Russia. He has no doubt that it was directed by Putin
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
Yeah, it explains the lack of interviews/photos with the victims. I think they are having slow agonising deaths, which seems to fit the modus operandi of Moscow.
I really hope that the poor policeman survives.
I thought he had been discharged. The limiting factor for the other two would be whether they were asphyxiated before the ambulance arrived. After that they would be artificially ventilated. It is possible that they are "locked in"; a state of being conscious but paralysed.
Some reports they are not in Salisbury hospital now. Do you think it is likely they have been quarantined
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
It being effective is a council area which the Tories could lose.
I thought Corbyn was impressive on this on R4 today.
The nub of the issue for me is simply this. Either Russia did this and wants everyone to know they did it (Russian-developed nerve agent in a public place is hardly subtle). Or someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it.
I truly believe that The Kremlin would have no compunction in doing this if they stood to gain. I just don't think they really do gain anything. Even as revenge on a double agent, this spy was part of an exchange, so it doesn't work as a motive for me. Putin is happy to get his hands very dirty, but never for no reason.
The motive would be "pour encourager les autres" ie don't step out of line because we know you know we can get you, even if you are abroad. Otherwise you'd surely just bump them off with a bash on the head or a standard 9mm pistol which could be anyone (so to speak).
However, as the unfortunate victims are not actually dead and are seemingly hanging on by a thread, it would seem something went "wrong" with the administration of the nerve agent.
If they’d just wanted him dead, they’d have bashed him in the back of the head with a baseball bat, and the Salisbury Journal would be the only publication looking for the killer. The Russian reaction makes it quite clear that this is another Litvinenko, it was done as it was pour encourager les autres.
Yeah, it explains the lack of interviews/photos with the victims. I think they are having slow agonising deaths, which seems to fit the modus operandi of Moscow.
I really hope that the poor policeman survives.
I thought he had been discharged. The limiting factor for the other two would be whether they were asphyxiated before the ambulance arrived. After that they would be artificially ventilated. It is possible that they are "locked in"; a state of being conscious but paralysed.
Some reports they are not in Salisbury hospital now. Do you think it is likely they have been quarantined
I think it likely that they have been transferred for security as well as for expertise, though Salisbury has a decent set up.
I thought Corbyn was impressive on this on R4 today.
The nub of the issue for me is simply this. Either Russia did this and wants everyone to know they did it (Russian-developed nerve agent in a public place is hardly subtle). Or someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it.
I truly believe that The Kremlin would have no compunction in doing this if they stood to gain. I just don't think they really do gain anything. Even as revenge on a double agent, this spy was part of an exchange, so it doesn't work as a motive for me. Putin is happy to get his hands very dirty, but never for no reason.
I think you are mirror imaging here a bit. Because you can't imagine a motive that is rational to you does not mean that there are not motives that are rational to Putin.
To me, in addition to the 'pour encourager les autres' point already made by others, there are at least two things at play: 1. Putin speaking to the Russian populace for whom Russia's standing in the world is important. To them, Putin blatantly and brazenly showing the West to be paper tigers against Putin's (read Russia's) will is a winner. Doing it to traitors - what's not to be liked? 2. Putin's ego. Must feel good to stick it to everyone and no-one has the will to react effectively. How he must have contempt for the weaklings that are the current leaders of Western democracy.
Yeah, it explains the lack of interviews/photos with the victims. I think they are having slow agonising deaths, which seems to fit the modus operandi of Moscow.
I really hope that the poor policeman survives.
I thought he had been discharged. The limiting factor for the other two would be whether they were asphyxiated before the ambulance arrived. After that they would be artificially ventilated. It is possible that they are "locked in"; a state of being conscious but paralysed.
Some reports they are not in Salisbury hospital now. Do you think it is likely they have been quarantined
I think it likely that they have been transferred for security as well as for expertise, though Salisbury has a decent set up.
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Yeah, it explains the lack of interviews/photos with the victims. I think they are having slow agonising deaths, which seems to fit the modus operandi of Moscow.
I really hope that the poor policeman survives.
I thought he had been discharged. The limiting factor for the other two would be whether they were asphyxiated before the ambulance arrived. After that they would be artificially ventilated. It is possible that they are "locked in"; a state of being conscious but paralysed.
Some reports they are not in Salisbury hospital now. Do you think it is likely they have been quarantined
It is a chemical agent, not a biological one. They needed decontamination, not quarantine. If there is a worry about the efficacy of the decontamination process, then they will be cared for in a containment room (which could just be a tent over their beds), with nursing staff wearing appropriate PPE (personal protection equipment) and following procedures to ensure no tracking of contamination.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
I don’t think any but the BBC purport to be neutral.
I thought Corbyn was impressive on this on R4 today.
The nub of the issue for me is simply this. Either Russia did this and wants everyone to know they did it (Russian-developed nerve agent in a public place is hardly subtle). Or someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it.
I truly believe that The Kremlin would have no compunction in doing this if they stood to gain. I just don't think they really do gain anything. Even as revenge on a double agent, this spy was part of an exchange, so it doesn't work as a motive for me. Putin is happy to get his hands very dirty, but never for no reason.
If someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it, then Putin would almost certainly be at war with whoever it was by now.
So Russia did it.
Russia did it. And Russia wants everyone to know they did it.
Well that is the alternative. And if I was convinced they did, I'd be more than happy to believe they were responsible. However, I think the general lie of the land at the moment is that Russia wants to advance its geopolitical interests and is prepared to break the rules to do so, but doesn't gratuitously seek ostracism, sanctions and the march to war for no reason.
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
I thought Corbyn was impressive on this on R4 today.
The nub of the issue for me is simply this. Either Russia did this and wants everyone to know they did it (Russian-developed nerve agent in a public place is hardly subtle). Or someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it.
I truly believe that The Kremlin would have no compunction in doing this if they stood to gain. I just don't think they really do gain anything. Even as revenge on a double agent, this spy was part of an exchange, so it doesn't work as a motive for me. Putin is happy to get his hands very dirty, but never for no reason.
If you kill double agents it discourages people from being double agents. Which is a plausible motive.
It also scares his internal opponents
“If I can do this in the U.K., what can I do to you?”
I thought Corbyn was impressive on this on R4 today.
The nub of the issue for me is simply this. Either Russia did this and wants everyone to know they did it (Russian-developed nerve agent in a public place is hardly subtle). Or someone else did it and wants everyone to think Russia did it.
I truly believe that The Kremlin would have no compunction in doing this if they stood to gain. I just don't think they really do gain anything. Even as revenge on a double agent, this spy was part of an exchange, so it doesn't work as a motive for me. Putin is happy to get his hands very dirty, but never for no reason.
If you kill double agents it discourages people from being double agents. Which is a plausible motive.
Report today that if the OPCW confirm the UK's idenification that it is a military grade nerve agent the matter will immediately become an issue for the United Nations
I wonder what a non military grade nerve agent is.
Social grade, play grade, terrorist grade, freshers' week grade?
I guess some insecticides work by effecting the nervous system, so Agricultural / Horticultural may be a possibility.
Anyone know the right answer?
Regulators are trying to phase out organophosphates, like Novichok, from use in animal health
Wow, fair play for that comment and good to see there’s at least one adult in Brussels. Junker’s response was dispicable given the circumstances, even though these things are routinely written by civil servants and diplomats.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
Edit: Might be worth asking why a lot on the right talk a good game about opposing Putin but when tougher sanctions are proposed by the apparent Putin apologist they go quiet...
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
And May etc. are pro-Bin Salman cheerleaders, whitewashing a regime that is by several degrees more brutal, less democratic and more backward than the Russian one. Not to mention a far bigger sponsor of terror. (and I'm not saying they are entirely wrong to do so) Dirty foreign connections are par for the course, there are just approved dirty ones and non-approved.
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Only the BBC are required to be impartial
Quite. Yet Guido and a number of PB Tories are asking the Lib Dems to be totally impartial - ie not to expose the wrongdoing of current administrations.
The Lib Dems have an agenda, which is to expose the errors, omissions, blunders and incompetence in Conservative and Labour administrations. This is very helpful to those of us who like to live in a democratic society. It helps us to choose the next administration.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Do you approve of these LibDem "newspapers"? They seem to be aimed at the easily duped....
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
And May etc. are pro-Bin Salman cheerleaders, whitewashing a regime that is by several degrees more brutal, less democratic and more backward than the Russian one. Not to mention a far bigger sponsor of terror. (and I'm not saying they are entirely wrong to do so) Dirty foreign connections are par for the course, there are just approved dirty ones and non-approved.
You do appear somewhat upset by the clear perception Corbyn loves all things Russian and hates the UK and the West
That leaves me entirely in the dark as to which wing of the party is complaining about which other wing.
I think he's from the Dugdale wing - their most recent initiative is - http://scottishlabour4singlemarket.org/news/ - we also have the Leonard wing which has recently launched - https://www.theredrobin.scot - then we have the Hothersall wing https://labourhame.com - there's even some Tony Blair acolytes in the mix - to add to all of this around 30% of SLAB supporters favour independence !!
The more I think about it, the more sick and outraged I feel about the Salisbury attack.
The UK has been violated and assaulted in one of the most despicable ways possible. All things being equal, it’s an act of war. He must be made to feel real pain for this, or it will happen again and again. There will be no end to it. And none of us is safe. Any one of us could be collateral in Putin’s wars, and he has no respect for us.
The UK should make the ending of Putin’s regime a foreign policy objective from now on, IMHO, and the emergence of a democratic Russia.
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
They are dealing with these matters but that does not fit your agenda
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
They are dealing with these matters but that does not fit your agenda
That may be good enough for you but not for those of us that have a problem with a pro Putin party leading the country.
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
And May etc. are pro-Bin Salman cheerleaders, whitewashing a regime that is by several degrees more brutal, less democratic and more backward than the Russian one. Not to mention a far bigger sponsor of terror. (and I'm not saying they are entirely wrong to do so) Dirty foreign connections are par for the course, there are just approved dirty ones and non-approved.
Saudis buy our weapons. They don't use them on us. Some difference....
The more I think about it, the more sick and outraged I feel about the Salisbury attack.
The UK has been violated and assaulted in one of the most despicable ways possible. All things being equal, it’s an act of war. He must be made to feel real pain for this, or it will happen again and again. There will be no end to it. And none of us is safe. Any one of us could be collateral in Putin’s wars, and he has no respect for us.
The UK should make the ending of Putin’s regime a foreign policy objective from now on, IMHO, and the emergence of a democratic Russia.
Personally, I'd say the Litvinenko attack was worse, with the botched attempt and the trail or radioactivity left across London. But IANAE, and I'd leave it to someone like TimT to say which was worse, if it is possible to make such a distinction.
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
And May etc. are pro-Bin Salman cheerleaders, whitewashing a regime that is by several degrees more brutal, less democratic and more backward than the Russian one. Not to mention a far bigger sponsor of terror. (and I'm not saying they are entirely wrong to do so) Dirty foreign connections are par for the course, there are just approved dirty ones and non-approved.
You do appear somewhat upset by the clear perception Corbyn loves all things Russian and hates the UK and the West
I do?
I'm not upset in the least. I'm not a Corbyn supporter - if I'm anything I'm a 'Ukippy' (not these days) Tory.
I would agree Corbyn's bunch have a deep seated loathing of the UK, which is bad. Doesn't mean that they never get it right, stopped clock style, or that they're incapable of being principled on some issues.
Con lead in three polls in a row with three different pollsters:
Opinium: Con +2 (42/40) YouGov: Con +3 (42/39) ICM: Con +3 (44/41)
Separate YouGov Wales also shows 1% swing from Lab to Con since GE.
Has to be considered encouraging for Con though if it is due to Salisbury the question has to be to what extent it will persist or will memories fade.
Why would memories fade of how bad Corbyn is at this sort of politics. You;ll just have another story come around the corner.
I guess the point is that Corbyn's past support for IRA / Hamas etc didn't appear to do him any damage during the GE campaign.
So I think it's reasonable to now question what impact Salisbury will have going forward.
It could be argued that Salisbury is different in the sense that it is happening now and it's something everyone can easily relate to - whether or not they follow politics closely.
Whereas at the GE, talking about the IRA didn't resonate because for 50% of the population it was an issue that they had never personally experienced.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Only the BBC are required to be impartial
Quite. Yet Guido and a number of PB Tories are asking the Lib Dems to be totally impartial - ie not to expose the wrongdoing of current administrations.
The Lib Dems have an agenda, which is to expose the errors, omissions, blunders and incompetence in Conservative and Labour administrations. This is very helpful to those of us who like to live in a democratic society. It helps us to choose the next administration.
No just be honest. If your title is Lib Dem Campaign Manager then why call yourself "Europe Correspondent" instead?
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
They are dealing with these matters but that does not fit your agenda
That may be good enough for you but not for those of us that have a problem with a pro Putin party leading the country.
The one potential positive I saw coming from Brexit was that there might develop a new realism about the limitations Britain now operated under in the modern world, given its new isolation and relatively modest heft. Sadly, the Brexiters seem to becoming steadily more delusional. Any day now they're going to declare a resurrection of Pax Britannica.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
And May etc. are pro-Bin Salman cheerleaders, whitewashing a regime that is by several degrees more brutal, less democratic and more backward than the Russian one. Not to mention a far bigger sponsor of terror. (and I'm not saying they are entirely wrong to do so) Dirty foreign connections are par for the course, there are just approved dirty ones and non-approved.
You do appear somewhat upset by the clear perception Corbyn loves all things Russian and hates the UK and the West
I do?
I'm not upset in the least. I'm not a Corbyn supporter - if I'm anything I'm a 'Ukippy' (not these days) Tory.
I would agree Corbyn's bunch have a deep seated loathing of the UK, which is bad. Doesn't mean that they never get it right, stopped clock style, or that they're incapable of being principled on some issues.
Now you could perhaps answer my point?
I don't think you understand how it works, if you say things people decide are pro Putin you must be a fan of Corbyn and that way look Corbyn and lots of his supporters are Putin fans.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British state hasn't done terrible things.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
They are dealing with these matters but that does not fit your agenda
That may be good enough for you but not for those of us that have a problem with a pro Putin party leading the country.
What are you on about
Your constant accusations of Pro Putin at Corbyn and Labour are all very good but Corbyn is the one backing tougher action against dirty Russian money and the Tories are reluctant to do anything about it...
Ohh and the Tories are the ones up to their eyeballs in it, not a good look.
I have been to Russian three times and it is a fascinating Country with a chequered history.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
And May etc. are pro-Bin Salman cheerleaders, whitewashing a regime that is by several degrees more brutal, less democratic and more backward than the Russian one. Not to mention a far bigger sponsor of terror. (and I'm not saying they are entirely wrong to do so) Dirty foreign connections are par for the course, there are just approved dirty ones and non-approved.
Saudis buy our weapons. They don't use them on us. Some difference....
I am not insensible to the commercial argument, but it is hardly an excuse. How many attacks have been caused by Saudi sponsorship of the Wahhabist creed? How many jihadists have they armed? By any measure they are a more real and present danger than Reds under the bed.
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
They are dealing with these matters but that does not fit your agenda
That may be good enough for you but not for those of us that have a problem with a pro Putin party leading the country.
What are you on about
Your constant accusations of Pro Putin at Corbyn and Labour are all very good but Corbyn is the one backing tougher action against dirty Russian money and the Tories are reluctant to do anything about it...
Ohh and the Tories are the ones up to their eyeballs in it, not a good look.
Now ask yourself which one looks Pro Putin?
The government is taking action over Russian money and the act is going through Parliament
The one potential positive I saw coming from Brexit was that there might develop a new realism about the limitations Britain now operated under in the modern world, given its new isolation and relatively modest heft. Sadly, the Brexiters seem to becoming steadily more delusional. Any day now they're going to declare a resurrection of Pax Britannica.
Despite the sneery overtone, you're accidentally right! A small, well-defended, non-interfering and non-interfered with Britain on the model of a bigger Switzerland would be ideal. It's EU fans who think we need to club together as part of a big bloc to tell other people what to do. And they accuse us of being nostalgic for the days of Empire.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
The more I think about it, the more sick and outraged I feel about the Salisbury attack.
The UK has been violated and assaulted in one of the most despicable ways possible. All things being equal, it’s an act of war. He must be made to feel real pain for this, or it will happen again and again. There will be no end to it. And none of us is safe. Any one of us could be collateral in Putin’s wars, and he has no respect for us.
The UK should make the ending of Putin’s regime a foreign policy objective from now on, IMHO, and the emergence of a democratic Russia.
Personally, I'd say the Litvinenko attack was worse, with the botched attempt and the trail or radioactivity left across London. But IANAE, and I'd leave it to someone like TimT to say which was worse, if it is possible to make such a distinction.
I don’t know. There’s something about the reckless use of a chemical weapon on the streets of Salisbury that makes me extremely angry, and if the poor policeman dies it’s in a different league.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
Nah. Just Juncker thinking about his pension when he retires
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Only the BBC are required to be impartial
Quite. Yet Guido and a number of PB Tories are asking the Lib Dems to be totally impartial - ie not to expose the wrongdoing of current administrations.
The Lib Dems have an agenda, which is to expose the errors, omissions, blunders and incompetence in Conservative and Labour administrations. This is very helpful to those of us who like to live in a democratic society. It helps us to choose the next administration.
No just be honest. If your title is Lib Dem Campaign Manager then why call yourself "Europe Correspondent" instead?
You can be more than one thing at any one time, Mr Thompson. At least, I can.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
Your welcome.
The idea that Putin's Russia could ever be involved in any pan-European defence initiative is repulsive. The last pan-European security order was probably the USSR. Not exactly something anyone should strive to emulate. As someone pointed out before, Russia's view wrt it's neighbours is "you're in our circle of influence or you are our enemy". A few bootlicking words from Junker won't change that.
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
Not obvious on the front page though. Does seem somewhat underhand.
I've seen Labour/Tory equivalents and you can tell from the front page what they are (at least at 2nd glance).
Amateurs copying the LibDems.
Most political literature lasts about 10-15 seconds as it is collected from behind the front door and taken to the rubbish bin. If you are lucky, the recipient might read the headline as they dispose of it. A "newspaper" might last a little longer before it ends up in the bin.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Do you approve of these LibDem "newspapers"? They seem to be aimed at the easily duped....
Far better, Mr Mark, for the Lib Dems to get in first and expose the truth about these incompetent Conservative-run councils, than wait for the Conservative machine to come up with its usual spin and lies.
Are you suggesting that the reporting of Conservative inadequacy is anything less than the burnished truth?
More on topic, I think that is a pretty dreadful piece of media to come from the Foreign Office. Palmerston famously held the floor of the Commons for 3 hours. Now we bitch at our opponents on Twitter. Sadly we live in a diminished age.
The video is excellent but maybe not if you are pro Russia or Corbyn
I am pro-Russia - I think it's an amazing country with an amazing history. I am also pro lots of other countries - primarily of course, our own. Doesn't mean the Russian state or indeed the British
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
Given that they want to cut funding to Putin's rich mates I can't imagine why'd you have a problem with that...
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
I have a problem with this Country being run by a Putin loving anti West Communist
Well I wouldn't call May a communist but I do agree some of the Tories actions do bring into question their feelings about Putin.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
They are dealing with these matters but that does not fit your agenda
That may be good enough for you but not for those of us that have a problem with a pro Putin party leading the country.
What are you on about
Your constant accusations of Pro Putin at Corbyn and Labour are all very good but Corbyn is the one backing tougher action against dirty Russian money and the Tories are reluctant to do anything about it...
Ohh and the Tories are the ones up to their eyeballs in it, not a good look.
Now ask yourself which one looks Pro Putin?
The government is taking action over Russian money and the act is going through Parliament
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
Your welcome.
The idea that Putin's Russia could ever be involved in any pan-European defence initiative is repulsive. The last pan-European security order was probably the USSR. Not exactly something anyone should strive to emulate. As someone pointed out before, Russia's view wrt it's neighbours is "you're in our circle of influence or you are our enemy". A few bootlicking words from Junker won't change that.
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
Blimey and I'm supposed to be the one with an addled brain?
The more I think about it, the more sick and outraged I feel about the Salisbury attack.
The UK has been violated and assaulted in one of the most despicable ways possible. All things being equal, it’s an act of war. He must be made to feel real pain for this, or it will happen again and again. There will be no end to it. And none of us is safe. Any one of us could be collateral in Putin’s wars, and he has no respect for us.
The UK should make the ending of Putin’s regime a foreign policy objective from now on, IMHO, and the emergence of a democratic Russia.
This would be a disproportionate response, and totally beyond the ability of the U.K. to deliver.
Uptick in sanctions, greater scrutiny of oligarch wealth, solid commitment to NATO in Eastern Europe are appropriate responses.
... and there seems to be a large orange LibDem panel on it.
This Lib Dem newspaper seems to be much more objective than the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Even the Guido Fawkes internet pages.
What is Guido complaining about?
To be fair a declaration of interest might be appropriate
Certainly, Mr Wales, a declaration of interest might be most appropriate in the case of the Express, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC..... Yet these publications usually purport to be neutral, don`t they? Some even call themselves newspapers.
Do you approve of these LibDem "newspapers"? They seem to be aimed at the easily duped....
Far better, Mr Mark, for the Lib Dems to get in first and expose the truth about these incompetent Conservative-run councils, than wait for the Conservative machine to come up with its usual spin and lies.
Are you suggesting that the reporting of Conservative inadequacy is anything less than the burnished truth?
I just find it amusing that the LibDems follow the mantra of the despised George W Bush:
"You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
Your welcome.
The idea that Putin's Russia could ever be involved in any pan-European defence initiative is repulsive. The last pan-European security order was probably the USSR. Not exactly something anyone should strive to emulate. As someone pointed out before, Russia's view wrt it's neighbours is "you're in our circle of influence or you are our enemy". A few bootlicking words from Junker won't change that.
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
A truly inane and ignorant comment. Security in the context Juncker is using it means having accepted norms of behaviour and a balance of power, such as existed even at the height of the cold war. Russia is currently starting a new cold war but not playing by the old rules.
The infantile responses to Juncker's diplomatese show the UK to be decadent and unserious.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
Your welcome.
The idea that Putin's Russia could ever be involved in any pan-European defence initiative is repulsive. The last pan-European security order was probably the USSR. Not exactly something anyone should strive to emulate. As someone pointed out before, Russia's view wrt it's neighbours is "you're in our circle of influence or you are our enemy". A few bootlicking words from Junker won't change that.
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
I think the chance of Russia joining the EU is about the same as you taking Juncker's job.
The one potential positive I saw coming from Brexit was that there might develop a new realism about the limitations Britain now operated under in the modern world, given its new isolation and relatively modest heft. Sadly, the Brexiters seem to becoming steadily more delusional. Any day now they're going to declare a resurrection of Pax Britannica.
Despite the sneery overtone, you're accidentally right! A small, well-defended, non-interfering and non-interfered with Britain on the model of a bigger Switzerland would be ideal. It's EU fans who think we need to club together as part of a big bloc to tell other people what to do. And they accuse us of being nostalgic for the days of Empire.
As Trotsky said, "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you." I'm afraid the greater Switzerland option simply isn't available to the UK, or England, because of its role in the balance of power in Europe.
I never expect anything to stick to Corbyn. Some big outrage at a comment he made or a stance he has on an issue, nothing sticks or really hurts him. The IRA sympathizing, Jezbollah stuff didn't make a dent in his public image at the GE and neither will this pathetically soft stance on Russia and state sponsored attempted murders on our soil.
Forget Teflon Tony it's Jammy Git Jeremy, he's so lucky.
The one potential positive I saw coming from Brexit was that there might develop a new realism about the limitations Britain now operated under in the modern world, given its new isolation and relatively modest heft. Sadly, the Brexiters seem to becoming steadily more delusional. Any day now they're going to declare a resurrection of Pax Britannica.
Despite the sneery overtone, you're accidentally right! A small, well-defended, non-interfering and non-interfered with Britain on the model of a bigger Switzerland would be ideal. It's EU fans who think we need to club together as part of a big bloc to tell other people what to do. And they accuse us of being nostalgic for the days of Empire.
As Trotsky said, "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you." I'm afraid the greater Switzerland option simply isn't available to the UK, or England, because of its role in the balance of power in Europe.
The one potential positive I saw coming from Brexit was that there might develop a new realism about the limitations Britain now operated under in the modern world, given its new isolation and relatively modest heft. Sadly, the Brexiters seem to becoming steadily more delusional. Any day now they're going to declare a resurrection of Pax Britannica.
Despite the sneery overtone, you're accidentally right! A small, well-defended, non-interfering and non-interfered with Britain on the model of a bigger Switzerland would be ideal. It's EU fans who think we need to club together as part of a big bloc to tell other people what to do. And they accuse us of being nostalgic for the days of Empire.
As Trotsky said, "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you." I'm afraid the greater Switzerland option simply isn't available to the UK, or England, because of its role in the balance of power in Europe.
there is no balance of power in Europe, just Germany versus the awkward squad
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
Your welcome.
The idea that Putin's Russia could ever be involved in any pan-European defence initiative is repulsive. The last pan-European security order was probably the USSR. Not exactly something anyone should strive to emulate. As someone pointed out before, Russia's view wrt it's neighbours is "you're in our circle of influence or you are our enemy". A few bootlicking words from Junker won't change that.
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
Personally, I would be delighted if Russia joined the EU, because in order to do so it would have to free itself from all of the worst trappings of Putinism. It would have to deal with corruption, stop interfereing with freedom of speech and press, would become a capitalist liberal democracy, abide by the rule of law and entrench human rights. It would have to respect international borders and norms.
Clearly at present, Russia is moving away from all of these, as indeed is Turkey, so any accession of Russia is decades away, however welcome.
That snivelling congratulation letter to Putin from Junker is exactly why he shouldn't be anywhere near the role he holds.
And your post is exactly why you shouldn't be anywhere near politics or diplomacy.
Still as bitter as ever, eh TOPPING.
Not bitter at all. But evidently the nuances of interaction between world leaders are way beyond your comprehension.
There were no nuances in that letter, it was a boot licking, snivelling attempt at trying to get Russia into the EU club, despite the EU leaders uniting to condemn Putin's actions.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
As I said - not one for nuance or diplomatic speak are you?
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
So please, if you are so well versed, point out Junker's nuance other than "please don't turn off our gas Mr Putin, pleeeeaaaase".
Juncker wants a cooperative pan-European security order. We don't currently have a cooperative pan-European security order mainly on account of President Putin's actions. So subtly, Juncker is asking for Putin to work towards re-establishing a cooperative pan-European security order, in so doing, criticising him for there not being a cooperative pan-European security order.
Your welcome.
The idea that Putin's Russia could ever be involved in any pan-European defence initiative is repulsive. The last pan-European security order was probably the USSR. Not exactly something anyone should strive to emulate. As someone pointed out before, Russia's view wrt it's neighbours is "you're in our circle of influence or you are our enemy". A few bootlicking words from Junker won't change that.
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
A truly inane and ignorant comment. Security in the context Juncker is using it means having accepted norms of behaviour and a balance of power, such as existed even at the height of the cold war. Russia is currently starting a new cold war but not playing by the old rules.
The infantile responses to Juncker's diplomatese show the UK to be decadent and unserious.
What a silly comment - plenty inside the EU are attacking Juncker tonight over his letter
The more I think about it, the more sick and outraged I feel about the Salisbury attack.
The UK has been violated and assaulted in one of the most despicable ways possible. All things being equal, it’s an act of war. He must be made to feel real pain for this, or it will happen again and again. There will be no end to it. And none of us is safe. Any one of us could be collateral in Putin’s wars, and he has no respect for us.
The UK should make the ending of Putin’s regime a foreign policy objective from now on, IMHO, and the emergence of a democratic Russia.
This would be a disproportionate response, and totally beyond the ability of the U.K. to deliver.
Uptick in sanctions, greater scrutiny of oligarch wealth, solid commitment to NATO in Eastern Europe are appropriate responses.
Nah. I want the bastard gone, and consigned to the dustbin of history.
Comments
Russian expert on Sky says that a law was passed in the Russian Parliament in 2006 that allows anyone who misbehaves, defects or is a traitor to be assassinated abroad only with the permission of the President of Russia. He has no doubt that it was directed by Putin
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/976138954306093062
To me, in addition to the 'pour encourager les autres' point already made by others, there are at least two things at play:
1. Putin speaking to the Russian populace for whom Russia's standing in the world is important. To them, Putin blatantly and brazenly showing the West to be paper tigers against Putin's (read Russia's) will is a winner. Doing it to traitors - what's not to be liked?
2. Putin's ego. Must feel good to stick it to everyone and no-one has the will to react effectively. How he must have contempt for the weaklings that are the current leaders of Western democracy.
I'm not 'pro Corbyn'; I think he clings to a failed and damaging socialist dogma, but of all the things I can criticise him for, sticking to his guns against widespread media and political outcry is not one of them.
As for the video, it could be the word of God made flesh - it still wouldn't have a place coming out of the Foreign Office. I'm sure that Russia is engaging in similar stupidity, but we are discussing the FCO video.
However, I am implacably opposed to Putin and his cohorts.
Corbyn, Milne and his Office are acting as pro Putin cheer leaders and for the first time in my life I see a marxist pro Russian anti West leader of the labour party wanting to launch communism on the UK.
Can anyone really imagine Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott running this country with all that would mean to national security, and state, with union backed control of every aspect of our lives.
That is the present labour offer to the UK, sadly
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/976142381350256645
“If I can do this in the U.K., what can I do to you?”
https://twitter.com/AndrewSparrow/status/976139971508817920
Unless you are worried some of the Conservatives funds from 'games of tennis' and 'for a meal' drying up?
Edit: Might be worth asking why a lot on the right talk a good game about opposing Putin but when tougher sanctions are proposed by the apparent Putin apologist they go quiet...
Opinium: Con +2 (42/40)
YouGov: Con +3 (42/39)
ICM: Con +3 (44/41)
Separate YouGov Wales also shows 1% swing from Lab to Con since GE.
Has to be considered encouraging for Con though if it is due to Salisbury the question has to be to what extent it will persist or will memories fade.
Why do you think they rejected Labours call for tougher moves to cut down on Putin's rich friends, because they are Tory backers?
The Lib Dems have an agenda, which is to expose the errors, omissions, blunders and incompetence in Conservative and Labour administrations. This is very helpful to those of us who like to live in a democratic society. It helps us to choose the next administration.
The UK has been violated and assaulted in one of the most despicable ways possible. All things being equal, it’s an act of war. He must be made to feel real pain for this, or it will happen again and again. There will be no end to it. And none of us is safe. Any one of us could be collateral in Putin’s wars, and he has no respect for us.
The UK should make the ending of Putin’s regime a foreign policy objective from now on, IMHO, and the emergence of a democratic Russia.
I'm not upset in the least. I'm not a Corbyn supporter - if I'm anything I'm a 'Ukippy' (not these days) Tory.
I would agree Corbyn's bunch have a deep seated loathing of the UK, which is bad. Doesn't mean that they never get it right, stopped clock style, or that they're incapable of being principled on some issues.
Now you could perhaps answer my point?
So I think it's reasonable to now question what impact Salisbury will have going forward.
It could be argued that Salisbury is different in the sense that it is happening now and it's something everyone can easily relate to - whether or not they follow politics closely.
Whereas at the GE, talking about the IRA didn't resonate because for 50% of the population it was an issue that they had never personally experienced.
But we'll have to wait and see.
The elected leaders say one thing and the unelected bureaucrat contradicts them in the next breath.
It is a twist on the old no true Scotsman...
I might have to put you on remedial Yes Minister watching until you are up to speed.
Ohh and the Tories are the ones up to their eyeballs in it, not a good look.
Now ask yourself which one looks Pro Putin?
Guy V was right
Your welcome.
He won’t stop. Not unless he is forced to stop.
https://www.theredrobin.scot/tories_ge2017_spending_lynton
What Junker was really saying was "the door is still open for Russia to join the EU". No more, no less.
Most political literature lasts about 10-15 seconds as it is collected from behind the front door and taken to the rubbish bin. If you are lucky, the recipient might read the headline as they dispose of it. A "newspaper" might last a little longer before it ends up in the bin.
Are you suggesting that the reporting of Conservative inadequacy is anything less than the burnished truth?
Uptick in sanctions, greater scrutiny of oligarch wealth, solid commitment to NATO in Eastern Europe are appropriate responses.
"You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
The infantile responses to Juncker's diplomatese show the UK to be decadent and unserious.
Forget Teflon Tony it's Jammy Git Jeremy, he's so lucky.
Clearly at present, Russia is moving away from all of these, as indeed is Turkey, so any accession of Russia is decades away, however welcome.