Assassination attempt on former Russian spy in the UK , The Cold War Returns

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: spy66

Nothing has been provided yet by the British government......

What do you want them to provide you with???

Well the British government have said that they have evidence that the suspects were exposed to a nerve agent that pionts to Russia.
To make such a claime the UK would have to put up their evidence for the Russians to see. The Russians did ask for the physical evidence that it was theri nerve agent that was responsible for the two suspects Deaths.

That would be fair would it not. Russia should be shown the evidence that proves that it was their nerve agent that was responsible..... right?

You cant make a accusation unless you are willing to show the evidence....right?

I think Angela Merkel did it.

I really do.

a reply to: spy66

Yes but what I am asking you is what evidence the UK should provide to you.

Now the UK cannot just say this is exactly how we know that this was Russian because that would most probably compromise intelligence techniques/sources. All the UK has to do is say our intelligence says this was Russia.

Not only that all of this is part of a on going investigation for that reason they cannot divulge all the intelligence and evidence at this state.

They don't have to say exactly how they know this.

I mean even Trump has said that he also thinks this was probably Russia, everyone seems to be agreed that it was most probably the Russian state and so far you have failed time and time again to explain why you believe differently.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: spy66

You need evidence and facts to support Your presadent.....would you not?

Agreed.

Now care to tell us why you believe that the Russians were not behind this and what evidence you have to support this claim.

I have no evidence, but i would like to see if the British government fallows up on Russias request to have their nerve agent evidence released.

If the British government can provide Russia With evidence i will rest my case.

What sort of evidence would suffice? Russian trolls have already suggested that the toxin was stolen by SAS in Syria.

I didn’t hear that BS story but apparently the nerve agent in question came from a Russian satellite state, which they lost control of during the break up of the USSR. Like much other USSR weaponry it could of ended up in the hands of any terrorist or mafia network going with the right contacts and cash.

What I find most curious about this case is the fact that his Daughter flew in from Russia just a few days before to visit, could she have unknowingly been the poisoner? Perhaps a gift she bought for him had been dosed?

It could very well be someone trying to set Vlad up. But when it comes to spook stuff we mortals will never get the truth anyway so who knows. Someone does though...

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Yes but what I am asking you is what evidence the UK should provide to you.

Well since the british government have gone publick about their claim. I think they should publickly provide the evidence they claime to have, and not hide behind some secresy claim. Dont you agree.....

Is it not important to you what Our governments claime? It sure is for me. My elected government should not be allowed to claime something to us without evidence.... Man that would be just wrong.....

a reply to: spy66

I think they should publickly provide the evidence they claime to have, and not hide behind some secresy claim.

But its a ongoing investigation relying on classified intelligence not only that I doubt that you or anyone else on this thread is qualified to interpret the raw data provided by Porton Down. So what form do you think that evidence should take?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: spy66

I think they should publickly provide the evidence they claime to have, and not hide behind some secresy claim.

But its a ongoing investigation relying on classified intelligence not only that I doubt that you or anyone else on this thread is qualified to interpret the raw data provided by Porton Down. So what form do you think that evidence should take?

Well since i am not qualified to interpret the evidence i would exspect my government to make it Clear to us.

Why should Our government make claimes to us that they will not back up so that we would understand and support them?

How can we trust what they state if we are not informed properly?

Since you are so keen on evidence why wont you demand that from Your own government?

Why should Russia be exspected to prove their innocents With evidence when the British government dont present their own evidence?

Does the brits have some moral high ground here compared to the Russians when it comes to claimes?

a reply to: surfer_soul

In Soviet times, assassins were sometimes told that they would be able to escape, but the weapon was designed to kill the assassin as well as the target. In one case the assassin was given two hand grenades. After liquidating the target with the first, the Bulgarian assassin was told to pull the pin on the second, which would release a smoke screen so he could escape. He decided it would be safer to activate the smoke screen first... and wound up blowing himself up instead of the target.

a reply to: spy66

Well since i am not qualified to interpret the evidence i would exspect my government to make it Clear to us.

They have; you simply refuse to believe it.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: spy66

Well since i am not qualified to interpret the evidence i would exspect my government to make it Clear to us.[/quote
They have; you simply refuse to believe it.

No they have not shown any evidence, they have just made a accusation withuout evidence.

What evidence have you been shown DJW001? Lets see them......

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: spy66

Expert testimony. Do you believe it or not?

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Yes but what I am asking you is what evidence the UK should provide to you.

Well since the british government have gone publick about their claim. I think they should publickly provide the evidence they claime to have, and not hide behind some secresy claim. Dont you agree.....

Is it not important to you what Our governments claime? It sure is for me. My elected government should not be allowed to claime something to us without evidence.... Man that would be just wrong.....

This is where UK law stands apart from US laws - in the UK the evidence isn't made public until it's in a court of law to ensure that a fair trial can happen, it's to stop rumor and hearsay corrupting the jury and judicial process; or May can over rule this and lay out the claims in PMQs but I doubt they'd go into full details for months. In the US they prefer a more open system which has it's positives and negatives.

For any real action to occur there would have to be a parliamentary debate where the case would be made and voted on in public, though we're a long way from that yet. Most of it won't be released for 50 years as the full details of how it was tested/traced would comprimise national security defences against an NBC attack. Until that happens we don't really have any real insight into what has happened, though such claims aren't made lightly.

a reply to: bastion

Sometimes I take it for granted that not everyone is aware of how our legal system works.

Thank you for that wonderful explanation I hope it has cleared a few things up for spy66.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: spy66

Expert testimony. Do you believe it or not?

Should we take some experts testimony without evidence...... as evidence?

Being an expert is a paid occupation these days. Its like a pre-paid for narrative......

No i dont beleive some random expert based on their testimony unless it is backed up by evidence. It is a serious accusation to accuse Russia without evidence. So i think evidence should be presented. No questions asked.

Some how it seams like you want Russia to be accused.... anyway possible. Do you hate them that much?

a reply to: spy66

Ok let me try this again.....

Why do you believe that the Russians were not behind this and what evidence do you have to back it up?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: spy66

Ok let me try this again.....

Why do you believe that the Russians were not behind this and what evidence do you have to back it up?

There are no evidence presented to us from Our own government that Russia did this. So why do i have to prove their innocence?

Can you prove that the British government dident do this? It is the same question.......... What evidence do you have?

a reply to: spy66

There are no evidence presented to us from Our own government that Russia did this. So why do i have to prove their innocence?

Porton Down, SO15, SIS and Mi5 along with the government are saying they all strongly believe that this was Russia. Russia have pervious for doing this, they have the means of doing this and they have a motive for doing this. So far everything points to Russia.

Now if you don't believe them that is fine.

My question then is this:

Why do you not believe them?

What do you think has really happened and why do you believe that?

Can you prove that the British government dident do this?

The proof is in the very fact that there is zero evidence that has been presented to suggest this has been part of a plot by the UK government. Now could it have been part of a plot by the UK government, its possible but there is zero evidence to back it up.

All I am asking you is why you don't believe this was Russia and why you believe that yet you cannot provide me with that it makes your argument laughable.

originally posted by: spy66
No i dont beleive some random expert based on their testimony unless it is backed up by evidence. It is a serious accusation to accuse Russia without evidence. So i think evidence should be presented. No questions asked.

What evidence do you want? I could show you some plain flour and claim it was the nerve agent. An "expert" could show you a chemical formula and claim it represented the nerve agent. Which would you believe? How would you know?

It seems to me that you are saying you would only believe it if you saw with your own eyes someone being killed with the nerve agent. Or maybe you would say it was actually cyanide.

What you are asking for is impossible, because you seem determined not to believe anything.

a reply to: woodward2

Dude I have been through all of this with him as well and so far he has refused to provide any answer other than repeating that he wants evidence but can't tell us what evidence he wants or how he would be able to asses the validity of that evidence for himself.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Simple, the rule of law and due process. Get the murderous scumbag and provide evidence for his connections to Vlad the Impaler.

Until then, the "CIAsis did it" working hypothesis works fine for me. Some people are eager to wage war on the Ostfront again. It's clear as day by now. And everyone jumping to the Russian conclusion at this moment is helping to achieve this goal.

Perception Management is a serious problem.