Two days ago, before May's government's ultimatum to Russia, I asked for this message to be posted on the 'Letters To The Editor' page of the i newspaper:
As I believe something like 16 countries have a supply of the nerve agent apparently used in the attack on Skripal and his daughter, how is it that May seems convinced that Russia is the culprit?
It does seem to me that attacks on Russia are often created against them even though the evidence is weak.
There is also the related attack on RT, which (in my opinion) provides one of the best news outlets around. Interestingly the Mail ran an editorial on Saturday about how wonderful BBC News is (I don't rate it!) just before May's speech yesterday. Are we observing a carefully contrived smeer attack?
Though Russia's ways are different to ours, and sometimes questionnable by our standards, it does not make sense to me that the World Cup finals are to be held there this year and that Russia would risk its status just prior to that event.
There's more going on here than meets the eye in my opinion.
John LerwillThis letter has hitherto not been published, nor has any letter been published in the i that follows my train of thought.
Although I've previously run into an argument with them over a letter I sent, and which they eventually published in edited form, I've generally thought well of this newspaper, thinking that they were maintaining an independent view as a result of their ownership by the Independent newspaper. The i has since separated itself, of course, and it now seems to me that it's losing its bravery and not holding a middle ground.
This morning, the Foreign Secretary (Boris Johnson) waffled on TV about Russia having done this and done that, but when asked for evidence by the interviewer, he could provide no substantive evidence at all.
The general diplomatic attitude towards Russia does worry me, and I am wondering whether this is the Prime Minister seeking to deflect attention from the poor progress being made on Brexit, and the trade deals that might be made with the US that would not be in the UK's interests.
Somone today asked whether our gas supplies from Russia might be affected. I would say 'most probably', but who is waiting for that trade but the US, using tankers to ship it across and causing even more pollution in the process. Either that or it will be said that there's no option but to go with fracking, the argument for which has been waining lately.
I smell something unsavoury in the air...