What is really happening in the Ukraine Conflict?

[papasmurf]

No won't as odds on it'll be just another made up story.

I wish it were made up it is just one of many suspicious "suicides," there was one such suicide cluster at a government research establishment I am surprised there were any scientists left to run it. 

[Unlucky4Sum]

 . . (Don't bother to ask.)

No won't as odds on it'll be just another made up story.

[BeElBeeBub]

I am responding to the myth that British governments do not assassinate "thorns in their side."

There is historical evidence they might have helped some Irish republicans be found by loyalist parmilitaries or being too trigger happy when confronting them. 

But those were involved in armed conflicts themselves. 

Do you have any actual political figures who were assassinated in moderately recent history? Any MPs or similar? 

Heads of NGOs maybe? We offed any Amnesty International people? Maybe greenpeace? 

I'll grant the state probably has failed (spectacularly) in it's duty of care to some figures involved in opposition type. Activities (I'm. Thinking David Kelly) 

But I don't think we are on polonium or nerve agent territory here. 


For all the covid protesters complain, let's not forget that several Russian doctors literally fell out of windows during the pandemic after exposing how badly the Russian state was handling things. 

[BeElBeeBub]

Jesus, you come up with some garbage.  Just remind me, was Poland able to defend itself from the Nazis?  So, tell me again, did the US take sides with Nazis when they invaded Poland?

Okay, so you think the US took sides with Nazis from September 1939 to late 1940, for a year?  🤡

Taking time to come to aid is different to not coming at all (or withdrawing aid to allow the aggressor to win). 

Need I remind you the NAZI invasion of Poland was surprise attack (in which the Nazis were aidied by Russi, those eternal and staunch enemies of all Nazis, where ever they may be).  The western powers declared war but did little physically. There was civilian aid provided by American agencies..

"yeah the fire brigade are pro fire because they took 10 minutes to arrive" 


Regardless of you trying to twist around, advocating for the US to remain neutral advances Russia's position. 


Russia were literally paying influencers to argue that the US should remain neutral.  What does that tell you about what Russia thinks would aid it? 

(BTW did you answer if you were aware of any of the influencers implicated?) 

[BeElBeeBub]

Assange was in fear of being imprisoned and tortured by the US, so he was a refugee, if you like.  Oh that's right, it was his own fault for being in mortal fear.  Ok then, all the Russians who disappear, it's their own fault for undermining Russia.  You see, we can both play games.  🤣

JA only stated to claim this fear of being tortured by the US when Sweden wanted to extradite him. To charge him with sexual offenses.

Now he may well have had a well. Founded fear of US torture and that would be relevant if he was being extradited to the US. 

But he was being extradited to Sweden. 

His argument was that the Swedish case was merely a pretext to get him out of the UK to Sweden so the US could then extradited him from Sweden. 

This falls down on several points. 
1) the US could extradited him directly from the Uk.
2)such an extradition would probably be easier
3)sweden has similar if not stronger safeguards against extradition when facing torture
4) those safeguards would be backed up by both the EU and ECHR
5) any onward extradition from. Sweden would require UK consent

Again I don't think he should be extradited to the US. But does the fact someone migbt be wanted on the US form a defence against extradition to any other country? 

His arguments were all heard in court, and through several appeals. And all the while he was free on bail. 
He chose to evade the courts before his final appeal hearing. Which then set the stage for him being arrested and facing contempt of court (and jail) regardless of the outcome of the appeal. 

[Scott777]

No being neutral when one side cannot defend itself without help is taking the side of the aggressor.

Jesus, you come up with some garbage.  Just remind me, was Poland able to defend itself from the Nazis?  So, tell me again, did the US take sides with Nazis when they invaded Poland?

And whilst America didn't officially enter WW2 until. 1942 it provided assistance to the UK from late 1940 and significant assistance in the form of lend lease from early 1941. There was significant technical collaboration as well.

Okay, so you think the US took sides with Nazis from September 1939 to late 1940, for a year?  🤡

[BeElBeeBub]

I don't know why you are telling me this.  What's your point? What does it prove?

My point is he has a long history of being jailed for various activities that predates his cali to being a political figure. 

Suddenly he starts claiming his legal. Troubles are due to being an opposition figure.

What's more likely, that TR is a blameless defender of the truth who the British government have been fabricating cases against for decades.

Or he's a. Serial offender and grifger who has worked out that some people will believe him. If he just claims he's a persecuted political prisoner?

[BeElBeeBub]

No, not a big difference.  TR was not ONLY jailed for breaking the law.  Mainstream media also breached reporting restrictions, and were not jailed.  TR was jailed because he is opposition.  And how do you know Russian opposition did not break the law?  Give an example.

TR"s. Rap sheet includes several counts if assault, fraud and drug use. 

But his recent sentences have been for contempt of court - mainstream media did not break the reporting restrictions or any breaches were deemed inadvertent and quickly deletes.

TR broke the reporting restrictions serioisly and deliberately having been warned beforehand.  He nearly collapsed the trial of the defendants. His actions. could have led to them walking away free. 

How is that for supporting the victims? "sorry. Luv, I know the men who abused you got away with it but I did get. 10k retweets!"

You're right, it is hard to know if Navalny did break the law.... Mainly because his trials were held in secret.
Note one of the charges was breaking his parole conditions by leaving the country. Of course the reason he left Russia was for emergency treatment in Germany after being poisoned by nerve agents.  Which country do we know has a track record of using nerve agents on it's opposition? Or do you think the two Russian tourists were in Salisbury to look at the famous church spire? 

[Scott777]

Ah, "tommy robinson" political martyr, truly the British Navalny. Imprisoned for his political activities.

Like in 2005, for assault (girlfriend) - oddly before he was a political figure.

Or 2011 - for football violence.

Or. 2012, hilariously for an immigration offense (false passport)

Or again for. Mortgage fraud.

All before he was. a political figure. Very far sighted of the deep state.

I don't know why you are telling me this.  What's your point? What does it prove?

Julian Assange:
He then imprisoned himself by jumping bail.

Assange was in fear of being imprisoned and tortured by the US, so he was a refugee, if you like.  Oh that's right, it was his own fault for being in mortal fear.  Ok then, all the Russians who disappear, it's their own fault for undermining Russia.  You see, we can both play games.  🤣

[BeElBeeBub]

Seriously, what a donut.  The police took orders from the government to arrest protesters during Covid.  And this:

"Djanogly praised staff across the justice system who are working around the clock to fast-track hearings of people charged over the riots."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/riots-minister-praises-work-to-fast-track-court-cases

I mean yes, the police do take their orders from the government. They are an arm of the state. But crucially, they do so via the route of following legislation. The government can direct the police to a.degree but the police are at arms.length.

A minister cannot (and do not) direct the police to arrest or even investigate an individual.  They.might request a review or refer a case but the decision to investigate, arrest or charge an individual is always up to the police. The courts are also independent of both the police and government. 

This is in contrast with an actual police.stage where the police and courts are directly controlled by the government or sometimes even just the party.


And yes, cases can be fast tracked, that is the usual very long wait between the stages of the justice process are shortened. But the steps and safeguards are all still followed. Defendants are allowed legal counsel and a trail. I would actually argue that all cases should be fast tracked. It shouldn't take years for a case to come court. If you punch someone on A Friday night, the process should be over within a week, unless there are waits for medical. Reports, maybe cctv. Etc, even then the. Process should proceed at a good pace. Drawing the process out is unjust on the defendant and the victim and can leave the public exposed to danger for longer.

It also dilutes the impact of harsher sentencing as a deterrent. If someone knows there is a good chance they will be starting a 12minth jail term next week if they punch someone it's more of a deterrent than they might face. 24 months in 5years time. 

[papasmurf]

So why did you bring it up?

You implied someone in opposition to the government was killed and their death made to look like a particularly discrediting suicide.

Why would the government want to do this to a non-entity?

I am responding to the myth that British governments do not assassinate "thorns in their side." 

[Scott777]

Lennon has been jailed for breaking the law, as was Assange. Opposition in Russia disappear because they are opposition to Putin, a big difference.

No, not a big difference.  TR was not ONLY jailed for breaking the law.  Mainstream media also breached reporting restrictions, and were not jailed.  TR was jailed because he is opposition.  And how do you know Russian opposition did not break the law?  Give an example.

[BeElBeeBub]

Not politician, private individual. (Don't bother asking.)

So why did you bring it up? 

You implied someone in opposition to the government was killed and their death made to look like a particularly discrediting suicide. 

Why would the government want to do this to a non-entity? 

[BeElBeeBub]

No, you donut, funding and arming Russia would be taking Russia's side.  The US was officially neutral for 2 years in WWII.  So, did they takes sides with the Nazis?  Duh, FFS.

No being neutral when one side cannot defend itself without help is taking the side of the aggressor. 

"Sorry mate,. I'm neutral" as man beats his wife in the beer garden is not neutral is it? 

And whilst America didn't officially enter WW2 until. 1942 it provided assistance to the UK from late 1940 and significant assistance in the form of lend lease from early 1941. There was significant technical collaboration as well. 

There was a significant faction of US politics that was very strongly for absolute neutrality and not providing any assistance the British. Here's a picture of one of their rallies. 

[papasmurf]

I am genuinely intrigued as to which opposition politician you are talking about here.

Not politician, private individual. (Don't bother asking.)