Verbal

Yes, but if you do away with experts the deficit disappears.

You should know when to stop digging.

"Some". As we all know, the Beast from the East somehow landed on Britain alone, leaping clean over Holland, Germany and France, all of which did far better than us for the last quarter, as they have done for the last five quarters. While the EU powers ahead, we're 0.1% off of a recession.

It's not my cup of tea either, but Jesus the bullying on here.

Reading this drivel-filled thread, I have to ask - are there any women at all left on Saintsweb?

Sometimes, even though you're the walking definition of a Berkshire hunt, you accidentally hit the nail on the head. You're right - this government equates immigrants with criminals. Hence the cretinous targeting of the Windrush children - all perfectly legitimate British citizens whose only offence years ago was to fail to apply for a British passport.

After Corbynista indulgences in Jew-hating (including threats to MPs complaining about threats) and as outsourcers of Putin's propaganda machine, we have the spectacle of Corbyn himself falling flat on his face in front of an open goal over Windrush. His befuddled failure to respond to May’s statement that the decision to destroy the registration cards was taken under a Labour government in 2009 allowed the most incompetent PM of recent times off the hook. Fixating on the cards was beyond stupid. The real issue was that the ‘hostile environment’ toward immigrants and their paperwork (TM Theresa May) was ruining lives of British citizens. Corbyn’s rabbit-in-the-headlights act showed he’s incapable of understanding this. As it was, May left her seat in the chamber with a smirk on her face. Fortunately, journalists from the hated MSM, like Amelia Gentleman, have done the hard work of exposing this scandal and keeping the pressure on the government in a way that Corbyn simply can’t do.

A professor of economics and public policy at King's London, and former senior civil servant. Good luck with that amateur brain surgeon.

Yes.

Radio rental.

The Swiss lab does scientific analysis for OPCW, and confirmed the Porton Down analysis. You'll notice in that article that there's not a single quote from the lab themselves - only Lavrov's allegations, which of course were designed to be picked up by conspiracy loons in the West. And that's exactly what's happened. Once the lab actually did get asked for a comment, it was to flat-out reject Lavrov's charge. So two conclusions. One, don't put so much faith into the truthfulness of a key representative of a brutal rogue state. And two, conspiracy theories exist to allow idiots the illusion of intelligence.

So bull**** then. You can't provide a single link to a remoaner claiming that all the losses would be the UK's. I'll make it easier for you. Find any such statement on this thread.

I look forward to seeing any link to remoaner quotes supporting that piece of nonsense.

I know the conspiracy cretins won't get this, but the dodgy dossier suffered from at least two problems that are not present in the nerve agent investigation. One is that the dossier was compiled directly under political direction from No10 (alongside 'C' from the SIS), and safeguards have been put in place since to prevent this after the Chilcot inquiry. The other, actually more significant factor was that the conviction that Saddam had huge stockpiles of WMDs came almost entirely from the 'human intelligence' of a single informant known as Curveball, who turned out to be a wild fantasist. His descriptions of the physical appearance of Saddam's WMDs were so lurid - and so strikingly similar to the green blobs in the Nicholas Cage/Sean Connery movie The Rock - that a number in MI6 were deeply sceptical long before the dossier became a public issue. And, once again, the Chilcot inquiry put safeguards in place to mitigate against any repeat of this ludicrous over-reliance on a single humint source. With the Salisbury attack, there is no dodgy dossier because the attack has already happened, and no Curveball because it's pretty clear the intelligence community have been building a picture of what happened in Salisbury based on a wide range of intelligence sources (including eavesdropping of various kinds). Whether they can pin down the attack to Putin himself, or the gang around him or rogue FSB, is still open to question. But the conspiracy loons can weave their webs of coloured string to a wall-full of photos all they like, in order to reach laughable conclusions about food poisoning, etc., but such theories only work inside their own simplistic heads.

The OPCW constitutionally cannot say who delivered a chemical weapons attack, even though they may know exactly who did it. They may only confirm the chemical makeup of the substance used in an attack. Until recently, a joint UN-OPCW panel was empowered to make judgments on who the culprit was - until the Russians vetoed the panel's reconfirmation after a number of decisions ascribing chemical attacks in Syria to - guess who? - Assad. Funny, that.

What have you got against the Jewish woman Maureen Lipman? Your 'senile old grandma' comment seems especially spiteful, and it's pretty plain you really feel the hatred towards her. You should get that seen to.

It's neither dead nor alive. Undead is more accurate - a zombie party. Led by Corbyn, it can never win an election nor offer leadership on anything remotely important. Its electoral losses will be trumpeted as successes, while those who suffer the direct effects of Tory rule remain fully exposed to the worst of them.

Just give it time. Won't be long before the blunt tools on here will be saying some version of that. Apply the following logic - "I don't understand, but I don't trust the government so the thing I imagine must be the truth, regardless of facts" - and you get somewhere close to this weird mindset. So what's the news on my bet? Has he run away again?

The same old conspiro-loon guff, which shows you up as a gullible fool. Did nothing in the following give you any pause for thought? And then the kicker about the author' qualifications: Oh and - just curious - what about the cop? Can you point to the bit in that link where we get to know how he was poisoned by the crab? Strangely, there's no mention of him. Which all means you're right and I'm wrong because another keyboard warrior says so. No question about it. So let's alter the bet. My £500 (for the nerve agent) against your £250 (for the Russian state-TV originated claim that it was food poisoning). It's easy money for you, surely. When the OPCW rules, it'll be settled. Deal?

Or dumbass money, as it turns out.

False flag conspiracy theories are for simpletons. Such 'ideas' convince those who repeat them that their self-esteem can be restored by claiming they see something that's invisible to all the 'sheeple'.

That's hardly all he said though, is it. There's also this: "I asked the Russians be given a sample so that they can say categorically one way or the other." There's every chance Corbyn is actually as dim as some of his fans on here.

Millbrook is perfectly correct, fanboy. The government shared secret information with Corbyn. This is information he's entitled to as a privy councillor. What they didn't do is share top secret information with him, which they did with foreign leaders. This was in part to lure him into the mess he got himself into in the Commons recently, and which his loyal lemmings still happily repeat. We're here for your education.

Ok, so [deep breath] your contention is that the 'false flag' this 'more and more looks like' involves the British deep state intentionally launching a chemical weapons attack on its own soil. Those damned Brits then stupidly nurse one of the victims back to health. The British deep state also proves so omnipotent as to fool all of their allies into believing that this this was a Russian attack, and yet so incompetent that it lets Porton Down issue a 'we only do the science not lay blame' statement. So your turn - lay out the 'false flag operation'. Tell us what do you think happened. And please do it with pictures that have lots of pointy arrows, like all the other false flag geniuses. We love those.

How do you know that the government 'presumed Russian guilt first'? The 'presumption', as you call it, would have been made on a combination of evidence from Porton Down, the police investigation, electronic and human surveillance from the intelligence community, mixed in with Putin's and others' own direct threats prior to the attack. And as for compiling a 'list of suspects', how's that going, exactly? Who do you have in the frame for this? You know full well that's not true. The 'government' isn't BoJo. Many others have had their say about this. It's just that BoJo seems to have caught your attention because for some reason you've been taken by surprise that he's capable of saying utterly stupid things. It is perfectly possible, you know, for Russia to have committed the attack and for BoJo to be talking ********. The two are not mutually exclusive. Again, tell us what this evidence is that points to non-Russian chemical attackers. No one's asking you to throw your support 'blindly' anywhere, just to reflect on what is becoming a bit preposterous. If you're like this with Salisbury, are you still open to the idea that the polonium attack on Litvinenko was carried out by anyone other than the Russians? Are you still open to the idea that the attack on Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was carried out by anyone other than Russian separatist militias armed with Russian missiles? The evidence is overwhelming that Putin's Russia is responsible for both. No one but conspiro-loons thinks otherwise. Yet Putin and his apparatchiks continue to pump out the nonsense that in both cases they're victims of Western black ops. My guess is that so long as Putin et al continue to try the muddy the waters, there'll be a willing pool of useful idiots prepared to dive in and swallow whole anything a rogue regime says that conflicts with the hated West. That's not 'skepticism'. Nor is it about keeping an open mind. It's about an adolescent desire - dressed up with fancy words like 'cui bono' - to revolt against the late-capitalist neo-liberal new world order from behind the safety barrier of the computer keyboard.