Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It doesn't matter how much time you have you say we know Putin does a lot of poisoning, actually we know no such thing, what we do know there have been many accusations of poisoning usually by the West,
Actually, they proved nothing. The facts are simple - two Russian citizens were missed in the UK and instead to do what is necessary to do according international treaties (like informing Russian representatives) , the British officials started to talk obviously stupid filthy fantasies about secret agents and super-duper poisons. And as British officials are obviously hiding the truth, it seems to me, that they just murdered Skripals by themselves for the stupid show.Yes, yes, if you can't prove it 100%, then it didn't happen.
What we can prove is that he lies a lot. We know this because of what happened with Malaysian Airlines flight that got shot down.
Putin's media came out with a picture, a google maps picture, showing the point at which a Ukrainian military jet shot a missile towards the airliner.
Only the Dutch then found out that it came from a SAM, not from an air based missile.
MH17 photo of fighter jet released in Russia slammed
A photo published on Russian television that appeared to show MH17 being shot out of the sky by a Ukrainian fighter jet has been vigorously refuted by citizen sleuths across the world.www.smh.com.au
This shows us how Putin operates. He's not going to do things so obvious. He does things, then he puts doubt out there. Like with the Novichok case. He said Porton Down also has Novichok. Like the UK govt wanted to get rid of a Russian FSB agent living away his life is Salisbury.
But the British called him out on it, and basically proved it was done by Russia, especially with the evidence of the two agents.
If you look at how Putin operates, based on the information we have, it's pretty obvious that all these poisonings with plutonium etc were done by Putin.
But it takes a lot of research in order to put it all together.
Actually, they proved nothing. The facts are simple - two Russian citizens were missed in the UK and instead to do what is necessary to do according international treaties (like informing Russian representatives) , the British officials started to talk obviously stupid filthy fantasies about secret agents and super-duper poisons. And as British officials are obviously hiding the truth, it seems to me, that they just murdered Skripals by themselves for the stupid show.
When we actually poison somebody (as it was in the case of Hattab), the target (as well as seventeen his associates) is dead.
www.bbc.com
www.bbc.com
englandexplore.com
www.booking.com
www.bbc.com
we will never learn the lesson of Viet Nam, 58,000 americans died for nothing and under senile Joe we are about to repeat that idiotic mistake.Have you ever thought of why we support Ukraine? Why do the US spend billions of dollars every year on this country? Maybe you would want to raise an objection saying that Ukraine is an important partner for both us and all Western states. However, it doesn’t seem true to me. The American Conservative has just published an analytic paper (Why Does American Folly March on in Ukraine?) where it discusses in detail why such actions don’t pay off for the US at all.
The paper says that all Western politicians keep insisting that the US could lose a lot if they stop providing military support for Ukraine. The problem is that these are lies and illusions which have no evidence whatsoever. In fact, Ukraine has no strategic value for the United States.
We did the same thing with Vietnam in 1965, although we had no need for war. The only difference is that in Vietnam we faced a much weaker state but now are at risk of the direct confrontation against a nuclear armed state. I think such actions can be necessary in only one case and that is if it directly concerns the US national interests. Since when has a small, hopeless Ukraine whom we don’t benefit from at all become so near and dear? Clearly, Ukrainian support is not worth a global catastrophe for the American nation.
But what do you think: is Ukraine which now has nothing of substance to offer worth the risk of waging a war against Russia? This will be a full-scale disaster for the whole world, not just a bunch of people. And we could definitely avoid this scenario. All it takes is just for us to stop sending weapons to Zelensky.
View attachment 963204
funny and true, the US and UK are presently governed by vegetablesPutin, Biden and Charles III enter a restaurant. The waiter asks:
Mister Putin, what will you have?
Meat.
And vegetables?
Meat for them, too.
Really? Being "suspicious foreigners" (may be even a "gay couple" or "sportive doping dealers") is enough for a convincion for a murder attempt in a "fair court"? Man, I have bad news for you - you don't have a slightest idea what the words "fair court" means.They proved enough.
The first thing that's hilarious is that of the two agents.
Salisbury Novichok poisoning: Russian nationals named as suspects
Two men accused of the Salisbury poisonings are believed to be from Russia's military intelligence service.Skripal suspects: 'We were just tourists in Salisbury'
The UK says the interview, on Russian state TV, is full of "lies and blatant fabrications".
The two agents took a plane to London from Moscow. They claimed they were there to visit Salisbury. On March 3rd they went to Salisbury, then went back to London after one hour because of the snowy weather.
If you're afraid of a little snow, you wouldn't go home, you'd go to the cathedral. The city of Salisbury had a population of 42,000 people. It's SMALL.
The things to do in Salisbury are... go to the cathedral, go to the museum and a few old houses. Everything you can do there is basically indoors aside from walking around the streets of Salisbury. Though the center of Salisbury isn't that impressive, if you wanted old buildings then Oxford or other places would be better. It's not even the most impressive cathedral in the country.
English Cathedrals: The 20 Best Cathedrals In England
England is home to a splendid collection of religious buildings, but none are more impressive than its famous cathedrals, one of the largest draws for visitors. Here then are the best cathedrals in England for you to enjoy and, if you are lucky, visit...
Canterbury is number two on this list, and is 2 hours or less from London. Oxford, two hours from London is also there at number 4, St Paul's is in London at number 6, Salisbury Cathedral comes in at number 8.
Why would you go to the UK, flying direct from Moscow, to see a random cathedral in a random city in England? Why not stay in London, people do London and Oxford first, as a general rule, when in southern England. I doubt many people have flown to the UK to just go sightseeing only in Salisbury.
Then after one hour in Salisbury they went back to London. Then the next day they went back to Salisbury which just happened to coincide with the novichok poisoning of a former FSB agent.
Then they went back to London, and took a flight from a DIFFERENT AIRPORT (flew into Gatwick, flew out of Heathrow) and flew to a DIFFERENT AIRPORT in Moscow. What are the chances?
And the two men, traveling together, didn't go through passport control together. They did it separately. So they might also have flown separately on the same flight.
Not only that they used false names.
Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov were the names they used to get into the UK.
""Our friends had been suggesting for a long time that we visit this wonderful town," Mr Petrov said.
They said they only stayed an hour in Salisbury on Saturday 3 March because of the snowy weather conditions, but returned on Sunday 4 March to visit the sights."
They didn't go to Stonehenge.
"The two men admitted they may have passed Mr Skripal's house by chance "but we don't know where it is located," Mr Petrov said."
What are the chances that they'd pass the house of a former FSB agent on the day he got poisoned?
And I can't imagine that it'd be anywhere on the route they'd take. And they probably passed it twice in two days. Funny that.
They stayed at the City Stay Hotel in Bow
★★ Hotel Citystay, London, UK
Hotel Citystay provides free Wi-Fi and free local calls.
It's in the east of London. Salisbury is to the west of London. St. Paul's in within 5KM of there. St Paul's is SUPER FAMOUS and they didn't go there.
In fact for transportation to Salisbury it's not too convenient, you'd have to get to train station or a bus station, it's $84 a night, which isn't that good. Two places on booking.com that are cheaper than that. Both of which have better scores too. Why not stay in Salisbury? That's what they wanted to see. They took the train from Waterloo Station. Waterloo Station is on the Baker Line and Jubilee line and Northern Line and Waterloo and City line. They stayed near Bow Road station which is on District Line and Hammersmith and City line.
So why take a hotel that's not even on the same underground line as the train station they're taking?
It costs £32 at the moment for a return, but they only stayed for one hour, which means they'd go back on a ticket that was probably way more expensive. I don't know much about train tickets in the UK other than they're expensive if you don't know in advance when you're traveling. So they paid and extra $40 each why not get a hotel in Salisbury then? It's have been cheaper to not go back after an hour. Who travels on a $40 ticket to somewhere and leaves after an hour?
There were traces of Novichok in their hotel room. They were seen near the house of the Skripals. The bottle used was one which you'd be able to take onto the plane, under 100ml. Disguised as perfume.
The Skripals lived somewhere around India Avenue in Salisbury, based on the map given by the BBC below.
Russian spy: What happened to Sergei and Yulia Skripal?
Timeline of events surrounding the poisoning of Russian spy Sergei Skripal, his daughter and a couple in Amesbury.
From the train station the cathedral is in totally the opposite direction. You would not end up there if you had two days to visit the sights of Salisbury. And yet they were seen on Wilton Road, why? There's NOTHING THERE. It's as drab English as you can get.
The simple fact is they put so much effort into being invisible, that's it's OBVIOUS they were there to do the act. Their flights were weird, people buy return flights that go to the same airports, usually, to make it to four different airports on such a journey is difficult. To be at a hotel that is disconnected directly from the train station. To end up in a part of Salisbury that is random. To be in Salisbury which is equally random.
Too many coincidences... and then they used fake names. And these are butch fitness dudes. They're not travelers. And then later the BBC went to track them down in Russia, and everyone was afraid of talking.
It's more than enough proof for a conviction in any fair court.
Really? Being "suspicious foreigners" (may be even a "gay couple" or "sportive doping dealers") is enough for a convincion for a murder attempt in a "fair court"? Man, I have bad news for you - you don't have a slightest idea what the words "fair court" means.
All what actually was demonstrated by the Brits - it was a set of pure nonsense and open lie, empty words of the British officials.
I did read what you wrote, and I didn't read what you didn't write. And you didn't write two things: 1) that Russian citizens in trouble were allowed a meeting with a Russian representative. 2) there where any actual evidence of murder attempt of Petrov and Boshirov.You clearly didn't read what I wrote.
I did read what you wrote, and I didn't read what you didn't write. And you didn't write two things: 1) that Russian citizens in trouble were allowed a meeting with a Russian representative. 2) there where any actual evidence of murder attempt of Petrov and Boshirov.
You know why? Because they actually didn't allowed that meeting, and they do not have any actual evidence of Petrov's and Boshirov's guilty. That's why. It is British officials who violated the international treaties, it is British officials who are obviously lying about what happened. That's why I think, that it's quite possible that it were British officials who actually killed Skripals.
Have you ever thought of why we support Ukraine? Why do the US spend billions of dollars every year on this country? Maybe you would want to raise an objection saying that Ukraine is an important partner for both us and all Western states. However, it doesn’t seem true to me. The American Conservative has just published an analytic paper (Why Does American Folly March on in Ukraine?) where it discusses in detail why such actions don’t pay off for the US at all.
The paper says that all Western politicians keep insisting that the US could lose a lot if they stop providing military support for Ukraine. The problem is that these are lies and illusions which have no evidence whatsoever. In fact, Ukraine has no strategic value for the United States.
We did the same thing with Vietnam in 1965, although we had no need for war. The only difference is that in Vietnam we faced a much weaker state but now are at risk of the direct confrontation against a nuclear armed state. I think such actions can be necessary in only one case and that is if it directly concerns the US national interests. Since when has a small, hopeless Ukraine whom we don’t benefit from at all become so near and dear? Clearly, Ukrainian support is not worth a global catastrophe for the American nation.
But what do you think: is Ukraine which now has nothing of substance to offer worth the risk of waging a war against Russia? This will be a full-scale disaster for the whole world, not just a bunch of people. And we could definitely avoid this scenario. All it takes is just for us to stop sending weapons to Zelensky.
View attachment 963204
I'm talking about a meeting between Russian citizens in trouble (Skripals) and official representative of the Russian Federation. It was not allowed by the British officials.You're going to need to be clearer. What meeting are you talking about?
I'm talking about meeting between Russian citizens in trouble (Skripals) and official representative of the Russian Federation.
Are you banned in Google?Go on then, provide a source for it so I know what you're talking about. This isn't rocket science. It's easy to provide a source.
www.standard.co.uk
Are you banned in Google?
Russia demands to know why UK has 'denied consular' access to poisoned spy Sergei Skripal and daughter Yulia
Russia has demanded to know why it has been "denied consular access" to the Skripals in a fresh list of questions for British authorities.
One more time. There was no consular access to the Russian citizens got themselves in troubles on the British soil. This is my statement. You asked for the prove, that there was no such access. I gave you the prove. Isn't enough?Dude, it's YOUR argument. So YOU make it. Why would I go and do your work for you?
You've posted an article about 14 questions Putin to May. Which one are you talking about?
Or do I have to treat you like a child and ask you questions for every step of the way?
One more time. There was no consular access to the Russian citizens got themselves in troubles on the British soil. This is my statement. You asked for the prove, that there was no such access. I gave you the prove. Isn't enough?
I don't believe that you really can be that stupid, and what I failed to realize, is why you are playing as if you are. This is a simple fact - British government refused counciliar access to Scripals (either direct or via neutral country embassy).No, it's not enough. I literally told you what you need to do. It's so fucking easy.
Get a source, quote the source, explain why it's a part of your argument.
If you can't do that simple thing, this conversation is over. I do NOT have the patience for your inability to make your own argument.
I don't believe that you really can be that stupid, and what I failed to realize, is why you are playing as if you are. This is a simple fact - British government refused counciliar access to Scripals (either direct or via neutral country embassy).
Anyone, who read anything about this case, knows it. No one deny it, even the Brits.
What kind of additional information do you want?
