Search results

Russia was drawn from the same pot as England, Germany and Italy so I think just luck of the draw.

There are conflicting accounts of what happened. Originally it was thought Skripal's bodyguard (DS Nick Bailey) was overpowered while trying to thwart the nerve agent attack. There is now speculation that Bailey was contaminated after trying to resuscitate Skripal and his daughter. It gets more...

Do you mean Euro 2012? Ukraine had a pro-Russian government back then but all of Russia's games were played in Poland anyway. They failed to progress beyond the first round so did not get the opportunity to play in the Ukraine.

Perhaps not but I'm pretty sure Ukrainian nationalists (for example) do.

I would have thought that revealing he had an armed guard who did his best to thwart the attack would increase the chances of recruiting spies in the future rather than diminish them. It is going to be revealed soon anyway.

But why would they do it on the eve of a major football tournament during which they hope to improve their world image?

Is there a D-Notice on this because it's extremely rare for one to be issued? And if there's not a D-Notice on it there's no law against reporting what happened.

No it hasn't but it doesn't take a genius to piece it together from what little has been reported.

So you're admitting that the law is preventing journalists from revealing what they know?

There was only one armed guard and he did his best to thwart the attack but was unsuccessful.

What is? That he had an armed guard, that every journalist knows this or that it's their job to report the news?

Well that would depend on who they were working for.

Why not? Every journalist knows it and its their job to report the facts. It's going to come out eventually so they may as well admit it now.

He wasn't a 'policeman' as such, he was acting as Skripal's personal bodyguard.

Why hide basic facts from the public such as that Skripal was under armed guard at the time of the attack, unless they have something to hide?

Actually, that sounds like a very good idea. And if they are all convicted of war crimes and sentenced to death I would be only too happy to place the noose around their necks and pull the lever to the trap door myself.

NATO, the US and the EU are more concerned with increasing their control over former Soviet states in eastern europe (in violation of all peace agreements) than with what happens to Britain. Russia has received no formal request from Britain to help investigate what really happened in...

I remember in the 1970s being told that Britain had enough coal reserves to be self-sufficient for the next 100 years!

My point Nick is that the version of events we've been told so far is a total croc. I expect the offical version to be 'revised' several times before we hear what really happened, if we ever do.

I suspect it has more to do with rising prices and falling incomes.