Quote: bren2k "Where did I say that they all were? I very specifically referred to a small cadre of gangsters who surround Putin - and made a clear distinction between them, and ordinary Russian people. I couldn't have been clearer about that.'"
Hang on, either London is 'awash' with dirty Russian money or it isn't? You talk about Putin's gang and Russian money in London. You do realise many Russians who live in London and have invested massive sums are far from popular in Moscow? Are they all corrupt? Some? Who exactly? You're going in circles.
Magnitsky is in place and investigations are underway. Perhaps we should just let the police do their job.
Quote: bren2k "And as I said before, that's a mealy-mouthed Boris Johnson defence, which holds no water; if there was a genuine desire to be tough on dirty Russian money, the Tories would be hell-bent on removing any whiff of corruption - but they're not. And it goes deeper than that, since the money that comes here to be laundered and spent has created a small industry for property developers, fund managers and wealth management types, many of whom are natural Tory supporters and its most generous donors.'"
What are you talking about? Rules on donations are clear. Furthermore, each party appoints a legally liable treasurer to assess and judge on donations - do you think they're likely to accept dodgy donations? If any are found to have slipped the net, they will be returned.
Unless you automatically assume all Russian money is dirty of course?
Quote: bren2k "Your party has actively opposed full Magnitsky powers though - which the US introduced in 2012; you will of course recall Hugh Powell entering no 10 with a list of responses to the invasion of Ukraine, specifically ruling out trade sanctions or denying access to London's financial system; I wonder why?'"
A Tory MP tabled the Magnitsky amendment, which was voted in unanimously. It has sufficient powers. More noise about nothing.
Quote: bren2k "That being the case, why the rush to judgement? You're all over the place on this one - you tried (unsuccessfully) to label me as xenophobic a couple of days ago - and now you're displaying exactly that kind of behaviour yourself; remember, this is not about 'Russians' - this is about *some* Russians - primarily state actors and those close to them - and the best way to deal with them, surely, is to follow the due process of international protocols, provide proof that is beyond reasonable doubt, and then use all the powers we have that will hurt Putin and his people (i.e proper Magnitsky powers, instead of the Tory Magnitsky-Lite version) - I don't see what's difficult or controversial about that, and it makes much more sense, as it removes the ability for the Kremlin to spin this as further evidence of the West demonising Russia, which will galvanise support for Putin and further embolden him.'"
What are these 'international protocols' you keep banging on about? Bringing the OPCW in to investigate? Check. Done. Unless, of course, you actually listen to the twaddle coming out of Moscow, that is?
A lot of noise about nothing again. The UK authorities have carried out an initial investigation, which is ongoing. The OPCW is carrying out its own investigation. Russia will see the results of the OPCW report. They are not entitled to receive a sample from the UK - what would be the point, they would absolutely deny it was theirs anyway. Let them wait.
Quote: bren2k "The last time we allowed parliament to drag us into a conflict based on less then complete information, things didn't turn out so well - so yes, I'm completely lock-step with Corbyn on this one; he was right the last time.'"
Ah yes, another glorious achievement of Mr Blair and New Labour.
You think this will lead to conflict? Don't be ridiculous.
