Russian Influence within our Security Services

Discussion in 'Politics' started by @julesmckenzie, Jun 19, 2017.

  1. @julesmckenzie

    @julesmckenzie Academy Graduate

  2. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    Hardly surprising. Greedy criminal swims with sharks and gets eaten. I can't imagine any tears are being shed for him by anyone outside of his immediate family. I certainly wouldn't expect nor demand the state to go to bat for him.

    Anyway, this is the bit of the article which says it all:

    I agree with that approach.
     
  3. @julesmckenzie

    @julesmckenzie Academy Graduate

    So as long as the dirty Russian cash keeps flowing into Britain, you are Ok with the government covering up state sponsored assassination of criminals?

    Why then should we pay for a security service to look after us? If we are getting free Russian Mafia money that should be enough, yeah?

    You can investigate a situation without causing diplomatic tension, or public alarm. Thats why there are "Secret" services...
     
  4. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    I'm much less bothered about the lives of criminals than ordinary people, it's true. Nor am I bothered about where they deposit their money - although inevitably London is going to be involved somewhere as we are the financial capital of the world. I doubt we get a lot of benefit from it.

    The security services don't exist to look after us. That's a fundamental misunderstanding on your part I feel. They're there to protect the state. Of course in doing that they look after us but as a group not as individuals. The police do exist to look after us but don't have parity with the security services and are drip fed whatever information is convenient for them to know.

    I'm not sure I understand your final paragraph. I'm sure the deaths have been investigated thoroughly in 'secret'. What is then made public and what measures are taken to prevent the hoi polloi getting wind of the real version of events is a totally different matter.
     
  5. @julesmckenzie

    @julesmckenzie Academy Graduate

    Your first paragraph is an alternative opinion, and I respect that.

    The second paragraph - Who is the state?
    Is it the Queen?
    Is it the government?
    Is it the people?
    Or is it just vested financial and corporate interests?

    Your reply will be all of the above, but are the priorities not skewed toward the vested financial interests? That being the case the security services are far less interested in the "State" and far more interested in keeping the "Status Quo". I am uncomfortable with that.

    I also understand the need to avoid alarm. So why are we constantly kept in an alarmed state? eg: TERROR! YOUR JOB IS AT RISK! WORK HARDER STAY QUIETER!

    If we are emotionally mature enough to deal with that kind of alarmist Psy-Ops surely we can handle the truth about our "National Interest" when it becomes public knowledge anyway?
     

Share This Page