Maybes?
A bit like yours then?
Lets do probability, thats all Iâve been saying in all of this and I am still going with that.
You?
Have you read it? Itâs ridiculous, constantly using terms like.
*On the assumption"
âteam hypothesisedâ
And my personal favourite
âshared the convictionâ
Now doesnât it bother you that 100% of our press are quoting this as fact without a single question?
Thatâs propaganda, pure and simple.
A bit like your RT quotes, strange how you agree with them as they fit in with your agenda.
Probability.
Thought you objected to whataboutery?
Whats good for the goose.
I have quoted rt once, in reply to you going on about them. I donât read rt, as there is the worry that theyâll turn out as bad as the BBC.
So youâre making shit up again.
That the bellendcat story is bullshit.
Very high.
Dude, whattaboutery is your modus operandi.
As soon as you canât answer, you jump onto something else.
One other point. What you know about probability I could write on my cock. And I canât even write the word âprobabilityâ on my cock.
My advice to you is to think more and type less. It has about a 0.1% probability of happening, and thatâs me being optimistic.
Probability of the Russians being involved?
Higher.
Far far higher.
Its just the tin foilers, major nations seem to agree, or the ones Russia canât buy with cheap fuel exports.
Are you the guy that lives in Edinburgh?
Can you explain the basis of probability please?
I genuinely donât think you have a clue what it is, despite it being a core component of the GCSE maths syllabus.
The probability of Russians being involved in this is high due to what has been shown to the public.
On that basis its highly likely the was Russian involvement.
Its rather simple.
What do you believe Pap?
Give me you explanation as opposed to tin foiler denials.
And donât forget itâs very likely that the Government has not released more details about this case as it would eventually make it harder to prosecute.
The government have had the opportunity to interview these suspects for about a month now. It has not taken Moscow up on the offer. If theyâre not interested in interviewing the suspects, theyâre not looking to prosecute.
I thought the point was they would consider it, in accordance with their own laws, in their own country, and would need all evidence to be handed over as it would be a joint investigation?
If the Russians were sure of their innocence, they would send them over.
You honestly think there will be some sort of trial?
Why would a Russian be scared of slushy snow?
No, absolutely not - the reason the UK are keeping the evidence back is to allow Russia to stitch itself up. The amazing inconsistencies with their story in relation to the weather, where they went, the Wikipedia definition of Salisbury has already made the Russianâs look guilty to most. We are yet to hear yet from the Russians on Bellingcatâs findings. If they are wrong, the Russianâs will come out and prove theyâre wrong as they are going to get hit by hard sanctions over this.
Have you seen what the girls were wearing??
1 Like
And the inconsistencies on our side? Howâs the myth busting going? Still a problem with the door knob timeline. What is the probability that the Skripalâs would recover from such a deadly nerve agent? In fact, to look healthier than they did before? Have we heard from them since March?
What about the senior consultant from Salisbury hospital who stated that no patients had been treated for nerve agent poisoning?
I have no doubt that Russia was involved in some way. Quite possibly meeting with skripal. But do I believe that these senior intelligence officerâs and heroes of Russia went twice to Salisbury, on the train in broad daylight, smeared novichok on a door handle in the hope that it wouldnât wash off and would kill the right bloke? Then werenât bothered about cctv, traceable passports and dumping nerve agent in a skip?
Who is set to gain from all of this?
Fishy I tell thee.
1 Like
Thats good enough for me.