Russian spy attempted murder - what should the UK do?

the clue, of course, being in the word Labour.

The tory party isn't called the 'protecting your ill gotten gains' party.

I don't think that Russian oligarchs founded the tory party.

Whereas unions were always at the heart of the LP which was founded to promote the interests of the workers.

What do the unions get out of their massive donations to the LP?
I expect the Russians feel they have to be ‘in’ with the ruling government, being used to that in their own country.They don’t have to do it here, but I expect old habits die hard.

Drinks with Davis? Shoe shopping with Theresa?

And maybe he is young enough to retrain. Boris is a lost cause.

Are those the only choices, mostlyharmless?
I suppose it's easier to shut Williamson up.

Tennis with Boris or dinner with Williamson? Which would be more fun?

No he still has school dinners as he hasn’t left school yet

Better than £30,000 to have dinner with Gavin Williamson?
Probably had pizza.

A good time with Johnson??

Why would a Russian minister’s wife pay £160,000 to Conservative party funds, to play tennis with Boris Johnson? What would she hope to get out of it?

It’s a difficult one isn’t it Gerispringer,doing nothing doesn’t seem right, but boycotting the World Cup doesn’t appear to be the right response at this stage. We can only wait & see how the situation progresses & have faith in our Government & advisors,who hopefully are far more informed than we are or permitted to be at the present moment.

I am not surprised there are posters who believe in conspiracy theories ...

Personally I am neither interested in "conspiracy theories" nor am I interested in the mud slinging about conspiracy theories. I am interested in evidence and so will other countries be. If we want to take the organisations we belong to, and other countries, with us on this we will have to supply that evidence so why not have a realistic attitude to it in this country.

What we have been told is that the Russian's originally made this - and that no one else did. It is reasonable, therefore, to believe that, either the Russian state attacked a British citizen on British territory with this or they allowed it to get into the hands of someone else who did. Whatever we may think, feel or wish to be true we do not know more than that. We do not know it was government sponsored. We do not know if it was a rogue group. It could still, on the evidence we have, have been either. We have, so far responded appropriately to that knowledge and that response has had the full and complete backing of both sides of the government.

To be honest that leaves me with only one question. What is your problem?

I think I read yesterday that there are more people who go on political blogs than read MSM newspapers now.
About time, too.
Probably another sign of us oldies dying off.

I am not surprised there are posters who believe in conspiracy theories and promote anti government bloggers /sites in their links

I hope you are not conflating the two, POGS. Believing in conspiracy theories and opposing the government are two very different things.

"The government’s National Security Coouncil will meet this week to consider further measures. But the foreign secretary confirmed there will be a new clause, giving the government powers similar to those the Magnitsky Act gives US authorities, in the sanctions bill when it comes back to the Commons after Easter. It will allow those who have been responsible for a gross violation of human rights to be prosecuted."

This is interesting as well. Corbyn has asked for that for a long time, even before the use of chemicals in Salisbury.

I hope it includes the DWP, who have been told they have committed grave violations of human rights.

So it's relevant today, but hasn't been for the past fortnight?
It's relevant for Boris to say so on national television, but not for May to have said so in parliament?

Because it was relevant?
In any case what do you suppose the government should have done durhamjen with their knowledge? It would simply be denied by Russia anyway.

"Boris Johnson has said the government has evidence that Russia has been creating and stockpiling the deadly nerve agent novichok within the last decade.

In remarks on Sunday morning that significantly escalated the row over the use of a lethal nerve agent in Salisbury two weeks ago, the foreign secretary said: “We actually have evidence within the last 10 years that Russia has not only been investigating the delivery of nerve agents for the purpose of assassination, but has also been creating and stockpiling novichok.” "

Why do you think Boris said this on the Marr programme this morning?

I am not surprised there are posters who believe in conspiracy theories and promote anti government bloggers /sites in their links but I don't know what the difference is between May or Corbyns 'latest' opinions.

Theresa May said 'It was highly likely' Russia is behind the attempted murders .

Jeremy Corbyn has now said “The evidence points towards Russia on this, therefore responsibility must be borne by those that made the weapon, those that brought the weapon into the country and those that used the weapon".

Whichever 'side' we wish to take the over riding fact remains nerve agents were used in the UK against all protocols and whether in government or in opposition the duty of any party is to the defence of the realm and protection of it's citizens . Taking out individual politicians I for one was pleased to see and hear the response from the majority of our Parliamentary MP's grasped this point from the SNP, DUP, Tory, Labour etc. they knew this was not a time for anything other than a show of unanimity and sober reflection.

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/18/russia-response-to-ex-spy-poisoning-row-futile-says-boris-johnson

If Boris was right this morning on Marr's programme, that Russia has been stockpiling for ten years, why was nothing done about it before?
Does that mean that the Tories didn't mind about it providing they didn't use it on us?

I think Hitchens is right, but for the wrong reasons.

I do prefer Martin Odoni's analysis (dj's last link) to Hitchen's though.

durhamjen
i agree with you and him
I thought that all columnist who write for the Mail spouted right wing propaganda. So when do you believe them? obviously only when they support your view.

I actually do feel sorry for May that the people she has speaking for her are Johnson and Williamson.
Are they really the best she could have chosen?