Boris Johnson banned from Russia !

The Russian foreign ministry has said that Boris Johnson and 11 members of the British government are banned from entering Russia, the ban is in response to sanctions and bad things they've said against St Vlad , no doubt Boris is shocked and saddened by the decision.

Oh yeah , they also banned Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon but that's understandable , I'd argue we should follow suit.

At present also includes ministers Dominic Raab, Grant Shapps, Priti Patel, Rishi Sunak, Kwasi Kwarteng, Nadine Dorries, James Heappey, Suella Braverman, former PM Theresa May and Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

Responding to Saturday's announcement by the Russian foreign ministry, Scotland's First Minister said: "Putin is a war criminal and I will not shy away from condemning him and his regime."
news.sky.com... 324

I see this as an escalation and an indication that Russia may well be about to declare war on Ukraine as they recently threatened.

originally posted by: gortex

I see this as an escalation and an indication that Russia

I see this as a response to the actions of the UK.

In connection with the unprecedented hostile actions of the British government, expressed, in particular, in the imposition of sanctions against top officials of the Russian Federation, a decision was made to include key members of the British government and a number of political figures in the Russian "stop list".

This step was taken as a response to London's unbridled information and political campaign aimed at isolating Russia internationally, creating conditions for containing our country and strangling the domestic economy.

www.mid.ru...

a reply to: gortex

Wish he could be banned from Scotland

a reply to: turretless

This step was taken as a response to London's unbridled information and political campaign aimed at isolating Russia internationally,

Which is exactly what Putin has done , perhaps he too should be banned from Russia.

I think it must be said the actions of the UK pale into insignificance when compared to the actions of Russia.

originally posted by: gortex

I think it must be said the actions of the UK pale into insignificance when compared to the actions of Russia.

You underestimate yourself.

Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, April 13, 2022

13 April 2022 20:14

40th anniversary of the Argentine-British conflict over the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands

It is 40 years since the start of an armed conflict between Argentina and the UK over the dispute concerning the sovereignty of the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands. Even though the case in point is long past events on a faraway archipelago in the southern Atlantic Ocean, this topic is being actively discussed internationally and remains relevant, including from the standpoint that it is highly important to take into account each other’s interests in the course of talks on difficult international problems.

Despite numerous UN resolutions urging the parties to the dispute to enter into negotiations without delay in order to settle the Malvinas issue by peaceful means, the UK government continues to demonstrate its obstinate unwillingness to start a direct dialogue on this matter with Argentina. This clear disdain for the opinion of the international community does no credit to a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Moreover, not only does London refuse to talk to Buenos Aires, but the British are actually making attempts to change the archipelago’s status by launching business operations and militarising the islands and the adjacent territorial waters.

I would like to remind the parties about their obligations under the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (Tlatelolco Treaty) and the Additional Protocols to the treaty. Some recently revealed archive facts testify to the deployment of nuclear antisubmarine munitions on board British ships that were involved in the hostilities in the area of the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands. We support Argentina’s demand that the UK provide guarantees that there are no such arms on ships that were sunk in the southern Atlantic Ocean.

We also notice the double standards in the UK’s approaches to the archipelago. London is alleging that the status of these islands was finally determined by the referendum in March 2013. But it is not disconcerted by the fact that the voters in the referendum were mostly UK nationals living on the Malvinas, who voted overwhelmingly (99.3%) that the islands should retain their status of a British overseas territory.
....................

mid.ru...

Britain’s colonial and neocolonial practices

......................
In modern times, when the plaintiffs were collecting and requesting evidence to substantiate their lawsuits, Her Majesty’s Government admitted that it had removed substantial colonial archives from Kenya and 36 other former territories. They hid the documents in a secret warehouse in Hanslope Park, which the Foreign Office shared with British secret services. Developed democracies always behave like this.

What was concealed in these archives, and why did it become necessary to hide them so securely? Most importantly, it appears that they conceal the not-so-liberal toolkit of the imperial administration. Paramilitary methods and armoured vehicles were used in Ireland. Villages were bombed and shelled in Mesopotamia. Doberman Pinscher dogs tracked down and attacked suspects in South Africa. Colonial authorities in India employed interrogation methods and systematic solitary confinement. Human shields were used in the North-West Frontier Province, Pakistan. British instructors are now teaching similar tactics to Ukrainian Neo-Nazis. They have rich experience, they practiced these tactics on people whom they considered inferior in various parts of the world. They can now pass on the fallen banner of terror. Well, this is exactly what they have been doing all these years in Ukraine.

One British soldier recalled how Arab prisoners were used. If high-explosive landmines were found, it was the prisoners who would detonate them; this method was rather mean, but we liked it, the soldier recalled. We can now see the same situation. It is rather mean to supply weapons to Ukraine. They are now using these weapons to kill people in a particularly vicious manner. We can see what has happened to the Azov battalion and other units over the years. These people have only strengthened their ideology of hate. It is rather mean for the United Kingdom to allocate money and weapons and to exhort others. However, they like it, as the British soldier who watched high-explosive devices blow Arab prisoners to smithereens recalled. They inherit this age-old brutality which is simply glossed over and concealed under the guise of a developed democracy, liberalism and freedoms.

It appears that the British military authorities invented some other methods in Palestine, including night-time raids on suspicious communities, stuffing oil-soaked sand down the throats of local residents, keeping village residents in outdoor cages, and the large-scale demolition of homes. By streamlining this tactic on the Palestinians, British officers acquired skills that they later used in Aden, now southern Yemen, on the Golden Coast (Ghana), in North Rhodesia (Zambia), Kenya and Cyprus. Palestine became a “training camp” for the British Empire’s punitive forces, and the Ukrainian bridgehead served the same purpose for them. They practised various methods in Palestine and eventually intended to use them on our own territory.

Why are we now recalling the gloomy colonial past of the United Kingdom and the entire world? They are the ones who are reminding us about this. We would like to forget about it, it is disgusting to even touch upon this matter, but we need to know about it. London’s methods are still here. They successfully export and use these methods. We have seen this in Ukraine. Obviously, methods aimed at suppressing Donbass were taught by British instructors and political mentors. Their style is absolutely recognisable.
...........................

mid.ru...

a reply to: turretless

The Falkland Islands became a British Territory in 1765.

Argentina was founded in 1816.

Now please tell me how Argentina can stake a claim for The Falkland Islands ?

Nvm

originally posted by: alldaylong

The Falkland Islands became a British Territory in 1765.

Argentina was founded in 1816.

Now please tell me how Argentina can stake a claim for The Falkland Islands ?

En un primer lugar están los argumentos de índole histórica, en un segundo los de índole jurídico política y por último los de índole geográfica. ///// In the first place are the arguments of a historical nature, in a second those of a legal-political nature and finally those of a geographical nature.
...........
Again the Spanish anger would arise before what they considered as a British advance in their territory, and it is thus that a Spanish force would expel the intruders; however, they would return in 1771 to definitively withdraw about three years later in 1774. From that particular date the British would never settle in the islands again until 1833.
...........
During this act (in 1820 when Argentina took effective possession of the islands) the United Kingdom did not present any kind of disagreement about the territorial integrity of Argentina, nor even about its effective possession of the Malvinas Islands inherited from Spain by the principle of Uti possidetis jure.

www.irizar.org...

Aww, and he was so looking forward to going.

a reply to: turretless

Complete nonssense.

Britain had a settlement in The Falklands before Spain. Fact.

By your logic Mexico should own Texas, as it was Spanish Territory before Mexico became independent.

originally posted by: alldaylong

Complete nonssense.

Britain had a settlement in The Falklands before Spain. Fact.

By your logic Mexico should own Texas, as it was Spanish Territory before Mexico became independent.

I just showed you that there are other points of view on the Internet on this issue.

I am not going to argue with you about these islands. Let the Argentines do it here.


If the author of the topic behaved honestly, then I would not write anything here at all.

But he did not have the honesty to write: "first we (the British) imposed sanctions against the Russians and now the Russians imposed retaliatory sanctions against the British."

He presented the case as if the escalation was being whipped up by Russia.

a reply to: turretless

But he did not have the honesty to write: "first we (the British) imposed sanctions against the Russians and now the Russians imposed retaliatory sanctions against the British."

He presented the case as if the escalation was being whipped up by Russia.

Actually my claim that "I see this as an escalation" was made in mockery of the decision , the sanctions levied at Russia are a result of the actions of Russia in support of the innocent people being slaughtered by Russaia.

By banning Johnson and other members of the British government Putin has given them a badge of Honor for standing up to his despotic action in Ukraine , no doubt they will wear it with pride.

originally posted by: gortex

Actually my claim that "I see this as an escalation" was made in mockery of the decision , the sanctions levied at Russia are a result of the actions of Russia in support of the innocent people being slaughtered by Russaia.

So I misunderstood you.

a reply to: gortex
So which holiday in Russia is Boris having to cancel? Does he get his money back?

a reply to: turretless

So I misunderstood you.

You did indeed , the decision by the Kremlin is little more than tokenism.