The Russian Report

Also Alexander Litvinenko was killed in London in 2006

I don't think the Tories were in power when Roman Abramovich became one of the first Russian oligarchs to funnel money through London; he bought Chelsea in 2003, and Russian money continued under both Blair and Brown.

Was that Grant Shapps or Michael Green?

He's no stranger to a bit of undercover work and dodgy financial dealings.

Shapps voted to remain too.

varian

Grant Shapps seeks to discredit the Russia Report

www.itv.com/news/2020-07-22/grant-shapps-seeks-to-discredit-russia-report-because-it-was-written-by-remainer-dominic-grieve

??? they are so stupid

Grant Shapps seeks to discredit the Russia Report

www.itv.com/news/2020-07-22/grant-shapps-seeks-to-discredit-russia-report-because-it-was-written-by-remainer-dominic-grieve

The authorities in this country can only do as much as their resources allow, even though they suspect a major issue.

The government controls the authorities resources.

So if say you are dealing in drugs as well as having a legitimate business. You will have money sloshing around that you can’t explain about its source.

It is dirty money. Money not declared for tax purposes is also a headache for those without a crooked accountant.

This can cover all sorts of clandestine income.

You need to make it “clean” by say purchasing property, or some other commodity that you can sell on and thereby apparently receiving income that appears legitimate.

That is a very simple explanation, but it does get very complicated following the money.

Grannysue asked this question yesterday

Can anyone please explain to me the process of "dirty money"
But surely when the payment for these commodities arrives here it has to be "clean" money....checked etc.

There is one rule for us and another for international “investors”. A corrupt company that has both legal and illegal operations make it impossible to trace exactly which part of an investment is illegal. By the time it has passed through several companies finances, where it originated is lost. Think of it as a Mafia operation where the front people look legitimate but in reality are corrupt to varying degrees, some just turn a blind eye, some don’t ask questions, all the way down the line to serious criminals willing to kill to order.

You might think it is exaggeration, it’s not, there are many parts of the world where its everyday life. Much of it is fueled by the drugs trade, when you go on holiday to the Caribbean ask yourself where the money came from to build all those luxury resorts.

If the UK government is going to accept foreign investment part of that is going to be illegal, everyone knows that, they go through the motions of checking. That’s the London Laundromat, it’s very difficult to “prove” illegal activity because much of it is just turning a blind eye and any inducements are discrete.

Through the decades the U.K.’s security system has been the model for all other countries to follow. It was considered one most independent least politicised systems and the envy of the world.

That is until the past few years.

We now have a government who is ignoring the urgent and existential warnings given to them by the security services, resulting in the type of headlines we have seen over the past few days.

The government is now beginning to try to politicise the security service by interference from Cummings.

This will be one if the most damaging consequences that the U.K. will have ever suffered and put us on a par with Russia.

Johnson has be warned by all sides in the commons that this action must not be pursued. There has been no response from No 10, in fact I suspect that Cummings is ignoring the warnings.

Today’s headlines are shocking

Russia obvs.

Starmer would not have ignored the threat from russia, neither is his nose in the trough.

“I spent five years as Director of Public Prosecutions working on live operations with the security intelligence services.

I'm not going to take lectures from a Prime Minister, who sat on an Intelligence and Security Committee report for ten months, on national security.“

I suspect it was an effort to be fair minded.

But Corbyn did support Russia's request for samples of the poison, which does seem disingenuous.

Even as late as the Salisbury poisonings, he still seemed reluctant to point the finger at Russia.

Hansard 26 March 2018

Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Lab)

We must start with the events in Salisbury. What happened to Sergei and Yulia Skripal on 4 March was an outrageous act committed with callous indifference towards the wider community in Salisbury, including those brave police officers who had to respond to and investigate the incident. Our first thoughts must remain with Mr Skripal and his daughter as they continue to fight for their lives in an NHS hospital, and with Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey as he continues his recovery.

Based on the analysis conducted by Government scientists, there can be little doubt that the nerve agent used in this attack was military-grade Novichok of a type manufactured by Russia. Since that analysis was revealed by the Prime Minister two weeks ago, the Russian ​state has had every opportunity to offer a plausible explanation as to how a nerve agent stock of this type came to be used in this attack. It has offered nothing concrete in response except denials and diversion. Indeed, the only solid assertion that it has offered so far in its defence was that all stocks of nerve agents were destroyed many years ago—an assertion that has been contradicted by intelligence reports. That suggests that just over a decade ago Russia invested in the use of nerve agents and developed new stockpiles of Novichok to that end. There is clear evidence that the Russian state has a case to answer, and it has failed to do so. We can therefore draw no other conclusion than that Russia has a direct or indirect responsibility for this.

We have supported actions taken. We have also condemned the Russian Government for including in their tit-for-tat retaliation a totally unnecessary and counterproductive decision to close the British Council offices in Russia which have done so much to promote better understanding and closer relationships between our two countries. It is a matter of deep regret to all of us that on issue after issue, and not of our making, UK-Russian relations now stand at such a low ebb.

hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-03-26/debates/B5EF4CEE-D0E9-4613-81C4-DDD9F03015EE/NationalSecurityAndRussia?highlight=skripal#contribution-95D7F1BD-2FCD-4BF4-90DF-8A49EE6BBFA6

Curlywhirly posted "Doubt Corbyn could have been bought so easily, you may not like him, but there is no doubt the man is principled."

I agree that is probably true but nevertheless Corbyn did play apart in getting us all in the mess we are in.

From an early age he admired the USSR. He wasn't called "comrade Corbyn" for nothing. Somehow, he never seemed to notice that the USSR fell apart in the early 1990s and does not seem to understand that Russia has moved to the exteme right and is, under Putin, no longer a communist country, but a de-facto dictatorship.

He was a big fan of Russia Today and often appeared as a guest and apparently was paid for doing so. Russia's aim was to de-stabilise the West and hence its attack on the EU and support for brexit, which Corbyn could not bring himself to condemn. Even as late as the Salisbury poisonings, he still seemed reluctant to point the finger at Russia.

If I was being charitable I might excuse this on the basis that Corbyn never seemed very bright, his ingrained admiration of all things Russian just got in the way of his understanding how much had changed. If I was being uncharitable I mught suspect more sinister motives. Either way he has done a lot of harm to the Labour Party and the country.

It must be an interesting conversation around the dining table when the Johnson family get together.

Johnson’s brother resigned from the government because he disagrees profoundly with Boris Johnson.

Rachel Johnson also thinks Johnson is profoundly wrong.

And now Johnson Snr.

I see Johnson Snr wants a brexit re-run because of “the obvious Russian meddling”

Speaking as someone with inside knowledge I assume.

Lemongrove hmm, yes, maybe the words and ideology; not so sure about the donation though. There's no such thing as a free lunch, and I am sure he knows that!

He would have been bought with words and ideology I expect rather than money, although who knows.....if the Russians had wanted to donate to the Labour Party he wouldn’t have objected I bet.

Harry Ferguson, former MI6 spy on Sky News - In the 60s, 70s, 80s the Russians tried to gain a way in to the UK through the left wing and the unions. However in recent years the way into the UK is through money, (of which they have a lot) and oddly enough that gets them into the right wing of the UK political spectrum.

Doubt Corbyn could have been bought so easily, you may not like him, but there is no doubt the man is principled.

If you say so Whitewave ?

lemongrove

I expect there are intelligence reports ( dossier) on Corbyn, and have been for years, in MI5 headquarters.?

Definitely MI6 and MI5 dossiers about the colluding Tories

I expect there are intelligence reports ( dossier) on Corbyn, and have been for years, in MI5 headquarters.?

One of the Tories many Russian friends