Jump to content
  • Sign Up
Kegsy

Russian Spy

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Spain pete said:

Apparently there has been 15 other cases that have never been reported c/u's.

Where do you hear this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spain pete said:

Apparently there has been 15 other cases that have never been reported c/u's.

Apparently the Russian guys Wife. Brother. Son and other members of his family have died  recently in suspicious circumstances 

Steve 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JNixon said:

Could just as easily be us doing it. 

And why exactly did we negotiate his release from a Russian prison after 4 years, bring him the UK, set him up and live freely for years, then kill him ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His career choice in the last few years seems very risky to me.  Lecturing on russian spys.

 

not sure why he chose to do that.  It may have played no part in what happened to him but even so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dylan said:

His career choice in the last few years seems very risky to me.  Lecturing on russian spys.

 

not sure why he chose to do that.  It may have played no part in what happened to him but even so.

As Putin said this week...and I paraphrase...he's not one of the forgive and forget types, and traitors will be hunted down wherever they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Andy Mac said:

As Putin said this week...and I paraphrase...he's not one of the forgive and forget types, and traitors will be hunted down wherever they are.

There is a documentary on putin coming soon.  Could be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Andy Mac said:

And why exactly did we negotiate his release from a Russian prison after 4 years, bring him the UK, set him up and live freely for years, then kill him ?

 

You never know when an incident like this can be useful to spark a desired situation.  

I’ll ask you a question - do you really think our government would give a fig about any family ( well maybe excluding our and Saudis royals ) if it went against our and our partner’s national objectives? 

It’s just a thought. 

Edited by JNixon
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Immediately the story was  reported, that Buffon Boris Johnson said england might pull out of the world cup , failed to tell the public that he had been paid for giving speeches to russian oligarchs, double standard barstad,who the FCK does he think he is ,meddling with what used to be the working mans game ,.🙅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chris L said:

Any evidence of that ?

No evidence of either so far, just knee jerk politics not being conducted properly by inept fools. Putin is far more intelligent bojo, May and the increasingly tired and shabby Rudd. 

So, a HS with a history of bankrupt businesses behind her, a blustery baffoon of a FS and an inept PM with no real majority vs the richest self made individual on the planet. I wonder who will “win”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the crap spiuted by some is frankly ridiculiys, some baying fir Russia’s blood.  Ffs they’d wipe us off the earth in minutes. 

Whilst the so called evidence (something no one has seen) points to Russia, all that is clear is that assumptions are being made.  There is the rule of law and many in this case don’t want to follow it. They can’t even tell Russia what has been used orvgive them a sample. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Winsford Soul said:

There's no evidence of anything apart from what the government are prepared to tell us. The truth is that we will never know the truth . 

Steve 

Exactly. All you can do is either look at all angles and make a judgement or take what gets thrown out by the media and believe it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chalky said:

All this has come at a good time for the government, Brexit, what’s that? School meals for kids, the subsidays in the bars and restaurants of aprliament hardly get a mention by the tory rags. 

Almost too good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2018 at 17:23, Spain pete said:

Immediately the story was  reported, that Buffon Boris Johnson said england might pull out of the world cup , failed to tell the public that he had been paid for giving speeches to russian oligarchs, double standard barstad,who the FCK does he think he is ,meddling with what used to be the working mans game ,.🙅

Johnsons not only dangerous, but a complete embarrassment. Either hes got something on mother Teresa to still be foreign secretary after all his gaffes and insults or the Tories have finally sunk to beneath gutter level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As an addition to this discussion, it may be interesting for a few of you to track down and watch, on YouTube, a lecture given by Peter Hitchens at Keele university some years ago. In which, after living for many years in Moscow as a newspaper correspondent, he gives an extremely interesting insight into the Russian psyche. Given, his residency there was during the Soviet era, and regardless of whether they are or are not to blame for this latest incident, it still illustrates why they behave the way they sometimes do. Blew a few of my own preconceptions out of the water.

 

Edited by Joey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Joey said:

As an addition to this discussion, it may be interesting for a few of you to track down and watch, on YouTube, a lecture given by Peter Hitchens at Keele university some years ago. In which, after living for many years in Moscow as a newspaper correspondent, he gives an extremely interesting insight into the Russian psyche. Given, his residency there was during the Soviet era, and regardless of whether they are or are not to blame for this latest incident, it still illustrates why they behave the way they sometimes do. Blew a few of my own preconceptions out of the water.

What were the reasons/basis for your preconceptions ?.

Were you unaware Crimea was the subject of a referendum or did you think the Russians "annexed it" via military might ? etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JNixon said:

No evidence of either so far, just knee jerk politics not being conducted properly by inept fools. Putin is far more intelligent bojo, May and the increasingly tired and shabby Rudd. 

So, a HS with a history of bankrupt businesses behind her, a blustery baffoon of a FS and an inept PM with no real majority vs the richest self made individual on the planet. I wonder who will “win”. 

OK so there's no evidence of the UK government having done it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Chris L said:

OK so there's no evidence of the UK government having done it.

But is there any evidence the the Russian Government were involved, even the joint U.S., German and French statement was ambiguous about it. It said the substance used was a nerve agent of "a type" developed by the Russians, as opposed to a Russian (made) nerve agent.

Edited by Kegsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi,

You'll see that the lecture was from two years ago, long before the Crimean annexation. I don't see how you come to an assumption regarding what my views on the Crimea may or may not be. My preconceptions regarding Soviet/Russian intentions and activities were borne out of my military experiences of forty plus years ago, followed by many years spent "contracting" in the Middle East. During the latter years of what became known as the "cold war", Russia's sticky fingers, as well as those of our colonial cousins across the pond, were everywhere, and in everything. Still are to this day.

As for the Crimean issue, I believe it was inevitable, once the EU, (backed, some say by the CIA), increased its expansionist agenda into what Russia believed was its own traditional territory, the Ukraine. Crimea was always ethnically Russian. Again, watch and listen to the lecture as it really does give a different view as to why they sometimes carry out certain actions, thus precipitating reactions from the west.

To follow up, on the nerve agent. I have extensive experience of certain types of noxious substances, or at least the defences used against them. There are only three or four countries in the entire world who can safely manufacture the "type" of substance used, (This is NOT something relatively simple to manufacture in a kitchen, such as Ricin) and then to administer it selectively, rather than in an en masse attack. Even though many in this country have fevered imaginations about "evil" Tories, I just cannot see Theresa may ordering this action, nor rogue elements of the secret services doing so. That leaves either the Yanks or Putin. My money, for what its worth, and even without 100% concrete evidence, is on Putin. However, I rather think that the attack was botched. Soviet agents wouldn't have been so sloppy.

Edited by Joey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Joey said:

As an addition to this discussion, it may be interesting for a few of you to track down and watch, on YouTube, a lecture given by Peter Hitchens at Keele university some years ago. In which, after living for many years in Moscow as a newspaper correspondent, he gives an extremely interesting insight into the Russian psyche. Given, his residency there was during the Soviet era, and regardless of whether they are or are not to blame for this latest incident, it still illustrates why they behave the way they sometimes do. Blew a few of my own preconceptions out of the water.

 

I wish his brother was still around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Joey said:

Hi,

You'll see that the lecture was from two years ago, long before the Crimean annexation. I don't see how you come to an assumption regarding what my views on the Crimea may or may not be. My preconceptions regarding Soviet/Russian intentions and activities were borne out of my military experiences of forty plus years ago, followed by many years spent "contracting" in the Middle East. During the latter years of what became known as the "cold war", Russia's sticky fingers, as well as those of our colonial cousins across the pond, were everywhere, and in everything.

As for the Crimean issue, I believe it was inevitable, once the EU, (backed, some say by the CIA), increased its expansionist agenda into what Russia believed was its own traditional territory. Crimea was always ethnically Russian. Again, watch and listen to the lecture as it really does give a different view as to why they sometimes carry out certain actions, thus precipitating reactions from the west.

I can't find the Keele video, I watched one he did about Russia at Cambridge, as I thought it might have been the same lecture, where he did comment on the Crimea issue. 

I didn't assume anything, I asked a question ?.

By the way it's 4 years since the Crimea "annexation".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kegsy said:

I can't find the Keele video, I watched one he did about Russia at Cambridge, as I thought it might have been the same lecture, where he did comment on the Crimea issue. 

I didn't assume anything, I asked a question ?.

By the way it's 4 years since the Crimea "annexation".

Sorry, I'm feeling tetchy this morning. Age you know. The link for the Keele lecture is now embedded in my reply. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Chris L said:

OK so there's no evidence of the UK government having done it.

If you are wanting evidence you will have a pretty long wait Chris. 

There will be no evidence and as such I feel it’s sensible to look at all options is all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kegsy said:

Thanks for the link. Here's something else by him which is more recent.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5486149/PETER-HITCHENS-goading-Russia-dirty-war-win.html

I think he has a point.

Excellent article once again by one of this country's few remaining quality journalists/commentators. His points are extremely valid. Especially with regard to why we should feel the need to still poke the Russian bear so frequently, given we really have no need to. Nor do we now have the resources or wherewithal to actually "win" any of these spats. This type of behaviour has been going on since the beginning of time though, and I see no end in sight to it unfortunately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russian exile and critic of the Kremlin, Nikolai Glushkov, was found dead in his London home on Monday.  Post mortem results reveal he died from compression to the neck.  Open season on Putin's critics on the run up to the elections?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steve S 60 said:

Russian exile and critic of the Kremlin, Nikolai Glushkov, was found dead in his London home on Monday.  Post mortem results reveal he died from compression to the neck.  Open season on Putin's critics on the run up to the elections?

Isn't he the one who got done for fraud and money laundering in Russia and then was given political asylum in the UK (the money laundering capital of the world).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well I've just seen the BBC's Jane Hill interview with Labour MP Chris Leslie. One observer called it "astonishing". Putting it mildly. It's one of the most disgraceful political interviews I've seen for along time. She actually encourages him to underttake another coup against Corbyn. Following on from last night's Newsnight which showed a backdrop of a photoshoped image of Corbyn against Red Square it tells me the BBC is in panic mode. Why should that be? There is no integrity in anything they're commenting on about what Corbyn has actually said.  The BBC are acting as the Tory state propaganda channel. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Edited by maslar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kegsy said:

Isn't he the one who got done for fraud and money laundering in Russia and then was given political asylum in the UK (the money laundering capital of the world).

Aeroflot claim he and Boris Berezovsky (deceased) embezzled £87 million out of the airline.  The debt has been passed on to his heirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Steve S 60 said:

Aeroflot claim he and Boris Berezovsky (deceased) embezzled £87 million out of the airline.  The debt has been passed on to his heirs.

As far as I can see the aeroflot thing was only on of his transgressionso. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Steve S 60 said:

Aeroflot claim he and Boris Berezovsky (deceased) embezzled £87 million out of the airline.  The debt has been passed on to his heirs.

His only crime being not kicking some of the proceeds upstairs. 

Edited by JNixon
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternative news site Skwawkbox reporting that May's claims that there were only two scenarios regarding Novichok is false. According to them Uzbeckistan also had it after the fall of the USSR and this information was freely available to anyone who cared to research. Meanwhile the BBC continue to state that direct Russsian (Putin) involvement is the only plausible explanation. Strange days indeed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, maslar said:

Well I've just seen the BBC's Jane Hill interview with Labour MP Chris Leslie. One observer called it "astonishing". Putting it mildly. It's one of the most disgraceful political interviews I've seen for along time. She actually encourages him to underttake another coup against Corbyn. Following on from last night's Newsnight which showed a backdrop of a photoshoped image of Corbyn against Red Square it tells me the BBC is in panic mode. Why should that be? There is no integrity in anything they're commenting on about what Corbyn has actually said.  The BBC are acting as the Tory state propaganda channel. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Tory propagandists? I think not. That organisation, or at least 99% of its employees, is firmly in the Islington / Blairite camp. As such, they all hate Corbyn with a passion, even more than the Tories, and would like nothing more than to see him consigned back to backbench obscurity, along with Abbott et al. Pretty much the same as the majority of his MPs. But, I will agree with your assessment of Jane Hills interview. I remember a time when both BBC and ITV had competent, trustworthy, and impartial journalists working for them. Not so nowadays. Mere talking heads with an agenda and an overinflated view of their own abilities and importance. Just don't get me started on the muppets working for Channel 4 and Sky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, maslar said:

Alternative news site Skwawkbox reporting that May's claims that there were only two scenarios regarding Novichok is false. According to them Uzbeckistan also had it after the fall of the USSR and this information was freely available to anyone who cared to research. Meanwhile the BBC continue to state that direct Russsian (Putin) involvement is the only plausible explanation. Strange days indeed.

 

When the Soviet Union disintegrated, the political establishment was indeed a shambolic mess in the various outlying republics. However, the military was most certainly not. If, (and it's a big if), nerve agents were routinely stored in Uzbek facilities, they would have been guarded incredibly well. And I very much doubt that anything such as that would have been left behind when independence came around.  However, wheels within wheels and all that, who is to know what happened. Even if this can indeed be traced back to Uzbekistan, it doesn't mean it wasn't Putins old KGB chums, does it? Bottom line is that it's extremely doubtful that we will never know the complete truth of the matter. Therefore, and if we have to prioritise motive due to lack of hard evidence, then all roads probably lead back to that place with a very pretty onion domed cathedral dedicated to a certain Mr. Fawlty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF the russians did this how did the nerve agent get into the uk without being detected ? also is porton down not far from salisbury ? and another angle and could be way off mossad ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jimmy mack said:

IF the russians did this how did the nerve agent get into the uk without being detected ? also is porton down not far from salisbury ? and another angle and could be way off mossad ?

Easy. If the Russians were indeed behind it, the agent would have probably come in via the embassy. Portion Down? Forget it. Nothing can even get in there, much less get out! Mossad? No chance. They wouldn't have been so ham fisted, trust me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jimmy mack said:

IF the russians did this how did the nerve agent get into the uk without being detected ? also is porton down not far from salisbury ? and another angle and could be way off mossad ?

The nerve agent could have come in as seperate compounds and then its mixed when its here ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dylan said:

The nerve agent could have come in as seperate compounds and then its mixed when its here ? 

Possible,  but not probable. Unless they had accesss to a fairly sophisticated lab set-up. Too many variables, including the inherent dangers of putting if all together. Bear in mind this stuff is deadly in microscopic amounts. A pin head sized amount would easily be enough, although reading between the lines in most of the news reports, a fair amount more than that was used. To me, it kinda smacks of unprofessionaiism. Possibly done this way in order to send a message though, as a car accident would have been far easier to arrange! Next question would be, who's the message for? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comment now!

Comments are members only

Sign Up

Join Soul Source - Free & easy!

Sign up now!

Sign in

Sign in here.

Sign in now!

Related Soul Music Links

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.