PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Russia Watch
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 33, 34, 35, 36  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
stumuz1



Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 74
Location: Anglesey

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Automaton wrote:
Of course the truth is


Well i will leave the truth to you and other higher deities, i prefer forming an opinion on weighted evidence.


Automaton wrote:
the US is almost certainly behind it, and the UK just follows along as usual, and blamed Russia. Just like with Brexit.


So, a refined thrust of this thread is ' The British at the behest of the US poisoned their own people to make Russia look bad'.

Now England are in the semi finals, will the US order their British supplicants in Porton Down to activate the assassins and attempt to murder more British people to make Russia look bad?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Automaton



Joined: 22 Jan 2016
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vtsnowedin wrote:
Automaton wrote:
Of course the truth is that the US is almost certainly behind it, and the UK just follows along as usual, and blamed Russia. Just like with Brexit.

Home team bias of course but I fail to see a plausible motive for the US to do that at that time or place against those targets. The Liberals being out of power in the US dose not lead to every bad event in the world automatically becoming the USA's fault.


Not 'home team bias' at all my friend; my comment would probably be read here as an insult to the UK! But no plausible motive? It's so easy: encouraging anti-Russian sentiment through a proxy country (utterly in the US's pocket), with the added benefit of also creating fear in the Eurozone (anything that destabilises trust in the euro is good for the US dollar). Which particular brand of liar is in power makes little difference to that.
_________________
Humans are a natural disaster, tidying the world to destruction and death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Automaton



Joined: 22 Jan 2016
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Automaton wrote:
the US is almost certainly behind it, and the UK just follows along as usual, and blamed Russia. Just like with Brexit.


stumuz wrote:
So, a refined thrust of this thread is ' The British at the behest of the US poisoned their own people to make Russia look bad'.


Sorry, but why are you assuming the British would have to have poisoned their own people? The US could easily have done it, and without much risk since no one ever questions their interference in things here. Maybe they didn't even bother to let the UK know they did it until afterwards; that'd be the best way to get a suitably outraged reaction. Hell, maybe they still haven't told them.
_________________
Humans are a natural disaster, tidying the world to destruction and death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mr. Fox



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 653
Location: In the Dark - looking for my socks

PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm just going to post this here without comment, as I think it speaks for itself:

Quote:
Remarks by President Trump and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at Bilateral Breakfast - July 11, 2018

Chief of Mission Residence
Brussels, Belgium

9:13 A.M. CEST

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Good morning, everybody. Good morning to the media — the legitimate media and the fake-news media. Good morning to them. A lot of good people here. Surprising.

Q Mr. President, which countries did you want to spend more on NATO in particular?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Just look at the chart. Take a look at the chart. It’s public. And many countries are not paying what they should. And, frankly, many countries owe us a tremendous amount of money for many years back, where they’re delinquent, as far as I’m concerned, because the United States has had to pay for them. So if you go back 10 or 20 years, you’ll just add it all up. It’s massive amounts of money is owed. The United States has paid and stepped up like nobody. This has gone on for decades, by the way. This has gone on for many Presidents. But no other President brought it up like I bring it up. So something has to be done, and the Secretary General has been working on it very hard.

This year, since our last meeting, commitments have been made for over $40 billion more money spent by other countries. So that’s a step, but it’s a very small step. It sounds like a lot of money, and it is. But it’s a very small amount of money relative to what they owe and to what they should be paying. And it’s an unfair burden on the United States.

So we’re here to talk about that, and I’m sure it will be resolved. I have great confidence in the Secretary General. He’s worked very, very hard on this, and he knows it’s a fact. But I have great confidence in him and his representatives.

You going to say something?

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG: First of all, it’s great to see you again, Mr. President. And good to have you here for a summit. And we are going to discuss many important issues at the summit. Among them is defense spending. And we all agree that we have to do more. I agree with you that we have to do make sure that our allies are investing more. The good news is that allies have started to invest more in defense.

After years of cutting defense budgets, they have started to add billions to their defense budgets. And last year was the biggest increase in defense spending across Europe and Canada in that generation.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Why was that last year?

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG: It’s also because of your leadership, because of your carried message. And —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: They won’t write that, but that’s okay.

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG: No, I have said it before, but the thing is that it really has. And your message is having an impact, and we are going to build on that to make sure that we have further increases. You initiated last year that all allies are going to develop national plans on how to spend more on defense. And based on these national plans, we now estimate that European allies and Canada will add 266 extra U.S. dollars for defense from now until — billion U.S. dollars — until 2024.

So this is really adding some extra momentum. It helps and we are moving in the right direction. But we still have to do more, and that is what we’re going to address after the summit later on today.

Let me also add that a strong NATO is good for Europe and it’s also good for the United States. The U.S. (inaudible) presence in Europe helps to protect Europe, but it also helps the United States project power to the Middle East, to Africa. And I think also that clout — the military clout of Europe, economic clout, the political clout — also is helpful dealing with Russia. And we look forward to the meeting you’re going to have with President Putin. And I think that leaders are also looking forward to your thoughts about the meeting with President Putin later on.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I have to say, I think it’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia, where you’re supposed to be guarding against Russia, and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia. So we’re protecting Germany. We’re protecting France. We’re protecting all of these countries. And then numerous of the countries go out and make a pipeline deal with Russia, where they’re paying billions of dollars into the coffers of Russia.

So we’re protect you against Russia, but they’re paying billions of dollars to Russia, and I think that’s very inappropriate. And the former Chancellor of Germany is the head of the pipeline company that’s supplying the gas. Ultimately, Germany will have almost 70 percent of their country controlled by Russia with natural gas.

So you tell me, is that appropriate? I mean, I’ve been complaining about this from the time I got in. It should have never been allowed to have happened. But Germany is totally controlled by Russia, because they will be getting from 60 to 70 percent of their energy from Russia and a new pipeline. And you tell me if that’s appropriate, because I think it’s not, and I think it’s a very bad thing for NATO and I don’t think it should have happened. And I think we have to talk to Germany about it.

On top of that, Germany is just paying a little bit over 1 percent, whereas the United States, in actual numbers, is paying 4.2 percent of a much larger GDP. So I think that’s inappropriate also. You know, we’re protecting Germany, we’re protecting France. We’re protecting everybody. And yet we’re paying a lot of money to protect.

Now, this has been going on for decades. This has been brought up by other presidents. But other presidents never did anything about it because I don’t think they understood it or they just didn’t want to get involved.

But I have to bring it up, because I think it’s very unfair to our country. It’s very unfair to our taxpayer. And I think that these countries have to step it up not over a 10-year period; they have to step it up immediately. Germany is a rich country. They talk about they’re going to increase it a tiny bit by 2030. Well, they could increase it immediately tomorrow and have no problem. I don’t think it’s fair to the United States.

So we’re going to have to do something because we’re not going to put up with it. We can’t put up with it. And it’s inappropriate.

So we have to talk about the billions and billions of dollars that’s being paid to the country that we’re supposed to be protecting you against. You know, everybody is talking about it all over the world. They’ll say, well, wait a minute, we’re supposed to be protecting you from Russia, but why are you paying billions of dollars to Russia for energy? Why are countries in NATO, namely Germany, having a large percentage of their energy needs paid to Russia and taken care of by Russia?

Now, if you look at it, Germany is a captive of Russia because they supply. They got rid of their coal plants. They got rid of their nuclear. They’re getting so much of the oil and gas from Russia. I think it’s something that NATO has to look at. I think it’s very inappropriate. You and I agree that it’s inappropriate. I don’t know what you can do about it now, but it certainly doesn’t seem to make sense that they paid billions of dollars to Russia and now we have to defend them against Russia.

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG: You know, NATO is an alliance of 29 nations, and there are sometimes differences and different views, and also some disagreements. And the gas pipeline from Russia to Germany is one issue where allies disagree. But the strength of NATO is that despite these differences, we have always been able to unite around our core task, to protect and defend each other, because we understand that we are stronger together than apart.

I think that two World Wars and the Cold War taught us that we are stronger together than apart.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: But how can you be together when a country is getting its energy from the person you want protection against or from the group that you want protection?

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG: Because we understand that when we stand together, also in dealing with Russia, we are stronger. I think what we have seen is that —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, you’re just making Russia richer. You’re not dealing with Russia. You’re making Russia richer.

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG: Well, I think that even during the Cold War, NATO Allies were trading with Russia, and then there have been disagreements about what kind of trade arrangements we should (inaudible).

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think trade is wonderful. I think energy is a whole different story. I think energy is a much different story than normal trade. And you have a country like Poland that won’t accept the gas. You take a look at some of the countries — they won’t accept it, because they don’t want to be captive to Russia. But Germany, as far as I’m concerned, is captive to Russia, because it’s getting so much of its energy from Russia. So we’re supposed to protect Germany, but they’re getting their energy from Russia. Explain that. And it can’t be explained — you know that.

Thank you.

Q What are the consequences if they don’t spend more, Mr. President?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: They will spend more. I have great confidence that they’ll spend more. I have great confidence.

Q Mr. President, does something have to change on trade for you to keep your troop levels in Europe?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I have great confidence that they will be spending more money, as they should be.

Q Mr. President, why is it (inaudible) spend 10 times more than Russia for defense? Why is it necessary to spend 10 times more money on defense (inaudible)? You are a businessman.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It’s a shame they made that deal. Too bad. It’s too bad. Thank you.

END

9:24 A.M. CEST


Whitehouse.gov
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stumuz1



Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 74
Location: Anglesey

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What are the forums views on the two Russian 'tourists'?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 6691
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not believe the Russian Government.
I consider it likely that agents of that government poisoned their enemies with a nerve agent.

I consider it likely that the two alleged tourists carried out this attack. The persons recently exhibited on Russian state TV MAY have been the alleged tourists, or they might simply have been actors selected for being of similar appearance.

I appreciate that such views place me in a minority on this forum, where there seems to be a general trust of the Russian government and general distrust of the UK government.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 14159
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

adam2 wrote:
I appreciate that such views place me in a minority on this forum, where there seems to be a general trust of the Russian government and general distrust of the UK government.


I don't trust governments full stop. Laughing
_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 10395
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm with you, Adam. The bits of the interview that I saw were a farce.
_________________
As Steve Keen puts it: “Capital without energy is a statue; labour without energy is a corpse.” Economics ignores this which is why economics is broken.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6011
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 3:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is not and never has been a single shred of evidence connecting the Russian state to whatever the hell happened in Salisbury. You don't need to "trust" the Russians or the Yanks or the Brits to know this. You just have to not be a credulous moron.

What the hell is wrong with you people?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 10395
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perhaps we don't have the same imagination that you do!
_________________
As Steve Keen puts it: “Capital without energy is a statue; labour without energy is a corpse.” Economics ignores this which is why economics is broken.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6011
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No imagination required. Just evidence. You should try it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
stumuz1



Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 74
Location: Anglesey

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't confuse evidence with fact, or even more nebulous, truth.

In a court, evidence is merely weighted (think lady justice on the top of the old bailey, with the sword and scales)

For evidence to be accepted it should be weighted towards the alleged utterance, event or proposition.

The evidence clearly is weighted in favour of the proposition that the Russian state performed an extra judicial murder in Salisbury.

When people disagree with the evidence, they usually pray in aid of 'the' facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raspberry-blower



Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 1610

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The two Russian tourist story is a complete red herring. Craig Murray has made some very pertinent observations.

Craig Murray: The Strange Russian Alibi

Craig Murray wrote:
Those mocking the idea that the pair were blocked by snow from visiting Stonehenge have pointed to the CCTV footage of central Salisbury not showing snow on the afternoon of 4 March. Well, that is central Salisbury, it had of course been salted and cleared. Outside there were drifts.

So that part of their story in fact turns out not to be implausible as social media is making out; in fact it fits precisely with the actual facts.

The second part of their story that has brought ridicule is the notion that two Russians would fly to the UK for the weekend and try to visit Salisbury. This ridicule has been very strange to me. Weekend breaks – arrive on Friday and return on Sunday – are a standard part of the holiday industry. Why is it apparently unthinkable that Russians fly on weekend breaks as well as British people?


Their heavily CCTV recorded travels around Salisbury tallies with their story.
More from Craig Murray: Lynch Mob Mentality

Craig Murray wrote:
As for me, when I see a howling mob rushing to judgement and making at least some claims which are utterly unfounded, and when I see that mob fueled and egged on by information from the security services propagated by exactly the same mainstream media journalists who propagandised the lies about Iraqi WMD, I see it as my job to stand in the way of the mob and to ask cool questions. If that makes them hate me, then I must be having some impact.

So I ask this question again – and nobody so far has attempted to give me an answer. At what time did the Skripals touch their doorknob? Boshirov and Petrov arrived in Salisbury at 11.48 and could not have painted the doorknob before noon. The Skripals had left their house at 09.15, with their mobile phones switched off so they could not be geo-located. Their car was caught on CCTV on three cameras heading out of Salisbury to the North East. At 13.15 it was again caught on camera heading back in to the town centre from the North West.

How had the Skripals managed to get back to their home, and touch the door handle, in the hour between noon and 1pm, without being caught on any of the CCTV cameras that caught them going out and caught the Russian visitors so extensively? After this remarkably invisible journey, what time did they touch the door handle?

I am not going to begin to accept the guilt of Boshirov and Petrov until somebody answers that question. Dan Hodges? David Aaronovitch? Theresa May? Anybody?


The doorknob theory is totally implausible and totally discredited. Along with all those who still go along with all this nonsense
_________________
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools - Douglas Adams.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stumuz1



Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 74
Location: Anglesey

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

raspberry-blower said,

" never mind the evidence lets look at 'the' facts".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 6011
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 12:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stumuz1 wrote:
Don't confuse evidence with fact, or even more nebulous, truth.

In a court, evidence is merely weighted (think lady justice on the top of the old bailey, with the sword and scales)

For evidence to be accepted it should be weighted towards the alleged utterance, event or proposition.

The evidence clearly is weighted in favour of the proposition that the Russian state performed an extra judicial murder in Salisbury.

When people disagree with the evidence, they usually pray in aid of 'the' facts.
What evidence would that be then?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 33, 34, 35, 36  Next
Page 34 of 36

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group