Corbyn criticised by his own mps about Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lower said:
Do you seriously think that we would have actual samples of another countries top secret nerve agent that they officially deny that they ever made?
Click to expand...
Dr Lewis said that under chemical weapons convention and international law, it would be legal for countries to develop small amounts of Novichoks in order to build defences against them.

“I would be extremely surprised if since 1992 the chemical weapons experts in a serious number of countries which had chemical weapons capabilities have not sought to make small amounts to defend against it,” she added.

“It would be legitimate, legal and one would say they have a duty to do so.”

Dr Lewis said the fact Porton Down scientists identified the substance known as Novichok suggested they had information on its chemical structure.
Click to expand...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ccusations-evidence-explanation-a8258911.html
 
Sponsored Links
Lower said:
Are you taking that article as fact? One of the finest examples of fake news and propaganda as i've ever read.
Click to expand...
A list of John Pilger's awards:
  • 1966: Descriptive Writer of the Year
  • 1967: Journalist of the Year
  • 1970: International Reporter of the Year
  • 1974: News Reporter of the Year
  • 1978: Campaigning Journalist of the Year
  • 1978: Journalist of the Year
  • 1990: Richard Dimbleby Award for factual reporting, BAFTA Awards[6]
  • 2011: Grierson Trust Award, UK[100]
  • 2017: Order of Timor-Leste[101]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pilger

Also check out his reporting of Cambodia, Iraq war and WMD, etc.
Then try to suggest it was all fake news. :rolleyes:
 
wannabeDIY said:
Also check out his reporting of Cambodia, Iraq war and WMD, etc
Click to expand...

John Pilger: about as biased and anti West as you can find :)

Everything the Left loves about this moral cretin is based upon a misunderstanding. Pilger is invariably praised for being anti-war, but he is about as vicious a warmonger as one could find: he simply favours the side opposed to the West. It is alleged that he is a fearless journalist, but his aversion to self-evident truths and record of genocide denial should bring his job title into question.
Click to expand...

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/06/john-pilger-keeps-faith/

John Pilger and the lie
Beyond the sheer weirdness of it all, there's the obscenity of it all. Pilger is so desperate to blame the West for the death toll in Iraq that he effectively absolves the groups and people responsible for 95 percent of the killing

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4707/john_pilger_and_the_lie
 
Sponsored Links
People keep quoting the 10 day time limit for a request, but if you read it - you can see its scope https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/CWC/CWC_en.pdf
ARTICLE IX p44, isn't about being held to account for the use of a bio/chem weapon, but specifically about the development, stockpiling or destruction of such. The government's demand to account has nothing to do with article IX, para 2, its about accounting to the attempted murder of a person using a very rare military grade weapon that is only known to have been developed in Russia. Its irrelevant that its a bio/chem weapon.

Without prejudice to the right of any State Party to request a challenge inspection, States Parties should, whenever possible, first make every effort to clarify and resolve, through exchange of information and consultations among themselves, any matter which may cause doubt about compliance with this Convention, or which gives rise to concerns about a related matter which may be considered ambiguous. A State Party which receives a request from another State Party for clarification of any matter which the requesting State Party believes causes such a doubt or concern shall provide the requesting State Party as soon as possible, but in any case not later than 10 days after the request, with information sufficient to answer the doubt or concern raised along with an explanation of how the information provided resolves the matter. Nothing in this Convention shall affect the right of any two or more States Parties to arrange by mutual consent for inspections or any other procedures among themselves to clarify and resolve any matter which may cause doubt about compliance or gives rise to a concern about a related matter which may be considered ambiguous. Such arrangements shall not affect the rights and obligations of any State Party under otherprovisions of this Convention.
Click to expand...

This is not 10 days to account for a crime, but up to 10 days (and as soon as possible) to answer information requested regarding the destruction, stockpiling, development etc.
 
motorbiking said:
People keep quoting the 10 day time limit for a request, but if you read it - you can see its scope https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/CWC/CWC_en.pdf
ARTICLE IX p44, isn't about being held to account for the use of a bio/chem weapon, but specifically about the development, stockpiling or destruction of such. The government's demand to account has nothing to do with article IX, para 2, its about accounting to the attempted murder of a person using a very rare military grade weapon that is only known to have been developed in Russia. Its irrelevant that its a bio/chem weapon.



This is not 10 days to account for a crime, but up to 10 days (and as soon as possible) to answer information requested regarding the destruction, stockpiling, development etc.
Click to expand...
I must congratulate you on your research. Well done.
However, form your link:
"the right of any State Party to request a challenge inspection"
I read that as the right of the Russians to a challenge inspection of the UK's evidence.

It goes on to say:
"States Parties should, whenever possible, first make every effort to clarify and resolve, through exchange of information and consultations among themselves,"

Did any of that occur?

Nuff said?
 
transam said:
Yep Corbyns finest hour :LOL:

some

Labour MP's have signed a petition supporting the government ;)

typical corbyn trying to make political capital out of deaths or potential deaths ;)

still putin will be pleased :)

If Corbyn was the PM he would have been to Moscow by now , grovelling to putin ,offering to lick his boots :LOL:
Click to expand...
but isnt it the Tories who are taking the back handers from the Russians, ooops, i mean donations lol
 
Notch7 said:
John Pilger: about as biased and anti West as you can find :)
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/06/john-pilger-keeps-faith/
Click to expand...
The Quadrant? FFS
The magazine holds a conservative stance on political and social issues.[3]

In March 2008, the magazine was describing itself as sceptical of "unthinking Leftism, or political correctness, and its 'smelly little orthodoxies'
Referring to the Manchester bombing and Monday night's Q&A television program, the article said, "Had there been a shred of justice, that blast would have detonated in an Ultimo TV studio" (it was later amended to, "What if that blast had detonated in an Ultimo TV studio?") and then continued, "Unlike those young girls in Manchester, their lives snuffed out before they could begin, none of the panel’s likely casualties would have represented the slightest reduction in humanity’s intelligence, decency, empathy or honesty."[9][10]

The Q&A panel included guests Niki Savva, Lawrence Krauss, Mikhail Zygar, Mona Chalabi, and Paul Beatty. The show was moderated by regular host Tony Jones and there was a live studio audience.[11] The article incorrectly referred to Lawrence Krauss as Richard Krauss, stating that, "as Krauss felt his body being penetrated by the Prophet’s shrapnel of nuts, bolts and nails, those goitered eyes might in their last glimmering have caught a glimpse of vindication."
Click to expand...
The Quadrant is described as: " a vicious and offensive attack". The federal Minister for Communication, Senator Mitch Fifield, called the article "sick and unhinged" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrant_(magazine)
But I can understand why you would believe its articles.
 
Is it just me that finds it really funny that Theresa May is trying to come across as really strong and stable, whilst in reality looking quite pathetic, the rest of Europe must be laughing at her, whilst Putin must be grinning like a Cheshire Cat, There is nothing she can do, she is scared to death to upset the rich Oligarchs who own most of London, she cant say too much or the Russian donor money that the Tory Party take will dry up, we dont have much of an army now its been cut to the bone, and to top it off Putin could turn our gas tap off, lol.....lets not get fooled here folks, all this nonesense is just a show, the Tories need to look strong to do well in the local elections, and all this huffing and puffing......is well, just huffing and puffing
 
banjodeano said:
but isnt it the Tories who are taking the back handers from the Russians, ooops, i mean donations lol
Click to expand...

If thats the case, its ironic the the conservatives have been robust in condemning the actions, whilst Corbyn has been almost on his own in not doing so.
 
wannabeDIY said:
Still sniffing my shoite like a dog? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

try to keep the abuse down way r bee , we do like to maintain certain standards in here way r bee ;)

perhaps u would be best advised to take this type of behaviour else where ???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links

Similar threads

B
MPs criticise expenses watchdog.... what a surprise!
Replies
11
Views
1K
geraint
G
B
And it was going 'oh so well...'
Replies
10
Views
920
Blasphemous
B
Back
Top