vvaannmmaann
LE
You mean from Russia obviously.So many confusing narratives and different, fabricated stories.
You mean from Russia obviously.So many confusing narratives and different, fabricated stories.
And what do those DSMAs say? Don’t name current / former intelligence agents/assetsHow would you actually know what's relevant or not?
There's a gag order on a whole angle.
.......
There is no 'D Notice' on the Amesbury angle btw.
........
If the Government had evidence vs Ru they would have presented it by now, esp after 6mths.
So many confusing narratives and different, fabricated stories.
You cannot trust the news media on this case as they did not even tell us there was a gag order in place thus were deliberately deceiving from the start.
.......
How would you actually know what's relevant or not?
There's a gag order on a whole angle.
If none of this were highly embarrassing, probably highly damaging and need-to-know it wouldn't be classified.
Thus it is relevant as it sticks out.
Blair used DA like they were going out of fashion, hence why they were renamed as DSMA,,,
Makes it all sound nice and friendly...
It sounds fluffy, optional and transparent, doesn't it?
They're all just D- (Deny) Notices.
Firstly, 99% of the Orbis/Skripal/Steele/Miller/DNC information broadcast was from just before the 2xDSMA were issued in March, a couple of non-UK based outlets still printed information in violation of the UK DSMA up to the end of March but there has been nothing since.
Nothing.
There is no 'D Notice' on the Amesbury angle btw.
The simple fact that a gag order was placed on a particular angle of this case should have alarm bells ringing for you.
Really, you still choose not to hear them?
If the Government had evidence vs Ru they would have presented it by now, esp after 6mths.
So many confusing narratives and different, fabricated stories.
You cannot trust the news media on this case as they did not even tell us there was a gag order in place thus were deliberately deceiving from the start.
As with Skripal, why does ukgov get very cold feet when it comes to information on Russians recruited by Box500/SIS?
Alexander Perepilichnyy: MI5 and MI6 files to stay secret, coroner rules
@18446118446
I see that you stated the UK would have released its evidence by now if it had any.
That's leads to one VERY IMPORTANT question that you haven't covered in any of your posts so far.
The question you need to answer (unless you are simply an idiot, or telling lies) is when did the UK change the rules on releasing evidence before a court case in England.
You only need to give the date of the change and the section of Hansard that contains the bill.
Of course, you may want to admit you are either an idiot or a liar and not post the details of the change, but here is your chance for glory as no other posters here are aware of the landmark change of U.K. law that would have been needed for you to be correct.
Over to you.
184461
I see that you stated the UK would have released its evidence by now if it had any.
That's leads to one VERY IMPORTANT question that you haven't covered in any of your posts so far.
The question you need to answer (unless you are simply an idiot, or telling lies) is when did the UK change the rules on releasing evidence before a court case in England.
You only need to give the date of the change and the section of Hansard that contains the bill.
Of course, you may want to admit you are either an idiot or a liar and not post the details of the change, but here is your chance for glory as no other posters here are aware of the landmark change of U.K. law that would have been needed for you to be correct.
Over to you.
The relevance of all this is that while he calls others gullible etc it's actually 118 who is always just about the last to find things out
The problem is there is no humility whatsoever. A simple acceptance of error would be nice. The trouble is, I think, that he believes everything is a conspiracy and everyone is in on it, the government, the chemical watchdogs, the camera operators, the medics etc etc. To admit this would show he was indeed unhinged, so he won't.
The other alternative is that he is paid to do this. I believe the latter as no one person could be so arrogant and ignorant without access to several carers.
184461
I see that you stated the UK would have released its evidence by now if it had any.
That's leads to one VERY IMPORTANT question that you haven't covered in any of your posts so far.
The question you need to answer (unless you are simply an idiot, or telling lies) is when did the UK change the rules on releasing evidence before a court case in England.
You only need to give the date of the change and the section of Hansard that contains the bill.
Of course, you may want to admit you are either an idiot or a liar and not post the details of the change, but here is your chance for glory as no other posters here are aware of the landmark change of U.K. law that would have been needed for you to be correct.
Over to you.
Was there a bomb in your opinion, just a yes or no will do, no need for a long post or any cut and paste items.
I don't believe he agrees with what he posts either, and that he is simply following an agenda.
If, for example the government would have to show all their evidence outside of any court case there are more than enough people rich enough to employ barristers to get them to tell all, the same goes for the MSM.
The reality is that 118 is just telling lies.
The reality is that 118 is just telling lies.