the memory of when call and powell representing united states in dressed that very body the u.n. security council holding the vials of powder that he said were chemical weapons from iraq he reminded the council and pointed out that it at this point now we have the united kingdom coming was simply a letter and that that there seems to be a history of rather unsubstantiated allegations against different countries regarding chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction from the united states and the u.k. this is the russian representative responding to the words from the u.s. and the u.k. was even when we were living in a very special time in front of our eyes incredible things are happening the process of replacing the presumption of innocence with the presumption of guilt is taking place this criminal law principle is being transferred into international relations envoy halley as an experienced chemist has talked about crimes committed by russia we've known for years that for you in order to determine the guilty party

no investigation is needed today the best kind of proof is suspicion that it is no longer necessary to show to the council why to us with an unknown white substance in it it's enough to send a letter displaying an egregious attitude towards a sovereign state from there the russian ambassador went on to call for a thorough investigation of the incident and determine exactly who is to blame of what happened and he called for this to be done through the existing international mechanisms to find out who is absolutely responsible and he reassured the security council that russia was more than happy to cooperate with this proper investigation to determine who is responsible for the attack however he was very clear that he did not approve of the heated words and allegations from the u.k. and the united states before the council and that russia just like other countries wants to get to the bottom of what exactly happened in salisbury. to discuss this

further let's cross live now to our been involved vice chair of the libertarian national committee thank you very much for being with us here on our team international. so. let's get right to this the u.n. security council only two states among fifteen supported the accusations against russia why such a lack of support. what we're seeing over here is a repetition of behavior from unfortunately united states in the west that i think people are getting tired of the united states is suspended due process in dealing with its own citizens the united states has maintained its you know prisoner of war camps in guantanamo in which people are not getting the right to a fair trial so it's hard to even be surprised when the united states and in this case also great britain are finding people guilty without a fair trial or actually without any trial at all and what we're seeing over here

is the united states falling into its own stereotype of just looking for an excuse to cause a fight that the people are going to hire you now you bring up a good point about that presumption of innocence replaced by that presumption of guilt. now the substance used in the attack part of the no child family of nerve agents could in theory be produced by anyone the recipe is out there why do you think the fact it was soviet made is being presented as such a strong evidence of russian culpability. i mean i think they're looking for whatever evidence fits and here we have this very bizarre interpretation of you know when people talk about chemical weapons they're talking about not using a weapon of mass destruction here we're talking about an individual poisoning basically happening it's calling this a chemical weapons attack is just grossly overstating the situation not to say that it's a good situation but let's keep it in perspective what we're seeing over here is

that there are looking for any excuse at all and if you're just looking for an excuse then obviously the evidence you get no matter how slim or how not existing is going to end up fitting what you've already decided is true so arbonne i'm going to ask you to go down the rabbit hole just a little bit if you don't mind this thought experiment with me. who could benefit from these sort of accusations towards russia i mean is there anything for anyone or any particular party to gain politically from this. yes yes because you have right now in america two parties that are very in favor of a huge expensive foreign policy that's a very heavily militaristic policy rather than one that's based on free trade us a democrat or republican parties you know the libertarian party that is trying to shrink that down now here's the thing you have defense contractors you have all these people who benefit from a warmongering foreign policy and they want to see not just the democrats

republican stay in power in the libertarian stay out of power they actually want to see that expand as much as possible in terms of the of a militaristic foreign policy so there are people that have a lot of money to gave in the united states taking more fights with the libertarian party wants of the opposite obviously we want to shut down foreign big military bases bring the troops home stop being involved other countries civil wars but that's obviously some that's going to make some very moneyed interests in the united states very nervous so let's look at some of the circumstances outside of the u.s. right now russia is preparing for a presidential election this weekend the world cup rapidly approaching we are under one hundred days from that big huge event do you think that it makes sense that moscow would want to provoke the west's fury at such a time. when pretty much right now all eyes and recently all hatred is pointed towards russia. i mean governments in general do things that i tend not to

understand or agree with so i've no idea what their motivation might be but again to me the critical point is this why would you possibly make such a huge international incident without a trial without evidence without knowing what's actually going on and it doesn't make any sense when you see people who are that quick to jump to war to a very you know aggressive foreign policy when you see people with that quick to overreact see it means that they're looking for something to react to it's not a normal skill reaction to the given circumstances all right very interesting to hear your thoughts. it's going to be interesting to see of common sense prevails in this case are involved vice chair of the libertarian national committee thanks for being with us here on our international force can you get the. base out of me on. all right now earlier u.k. prime minister theresa may announce that britain would expel twenty three russian

diplomats and suspend all scheduled by a lot of meetings with russia he's an associate you're going to has the details from london. well the british prime minister has said that russia is culpable of attempted murder and among the measures that the u.k. is now taking is the expulsion of twenty three russian diplomats they are suspending high level contacts between the two countries the russian foreign minister's visit to the u.k. has been cancelled and no british officials including members of the world family will be present at the world cup in russia taking place this summer may has said that russia's response to the deadline that was given by midnight last night was a distain given the gravity of that unraveled mr speaker it was right to offer russia the opportunity to provide an explanation but their response has demonstrated complete disdain for the gravity of these events. they have provided

no credible explanation that they could suggest they don't control within her agent no explanation as to how this agent came to be used in the united kingdom no explanation as to why russia has an undeclared chemical weapons program in contravention of international law. the leader of the opposition jeremy corbyn had to ask the british prime minister whether or not any official requests were sent to russia whether any evidence was provided to russia or any of the boxes and said that the response was a bit unsubstantial as the prime minister taken the necessary steps under the chemical weapons convention to make a formal request for evidence from the russian government how has she responded to the russian government's request for a sample of the agent used in the souls return to run its own terms as my resolution trace analysis been run on

a sample of the nerve agents and has that revealed any evidence as to the location or which production. all the identity of its perpetrators we case the russian government the opportunity of the through the day march that maharaj on befriend the phone secretary to the russian ambassador here in london earlier this week to do just that they have not done so if there is a consensus across the but benches of this house. i am only sorry that the consensus does not go as far as the right honorable gentleman. could have taken the opportunity as the u.k. government has done to condemn the culprits in the seat of the russian. russian embassy here in london has said that the steps taken by the british government are unjustified unacceptable and shortsighted also saying that the dude deterioration of ties between russian and the u.k.

lies on the british government and that ultimatums don't work with russia everything but if. you accept the way we perceive it to provoke each. we believe that the you know i do keep the full big international none of them under this obligations to him. if you give me the weapons we have to present the request to the organisation and we're happy to consider this within a few days this is the international law and of course we're not ready to. to talk you know we will be ultimately the actions taken by the british government became really a crescendo of over a week of the spy saga in raveling where we saw what could have been a potential local incident unravel into a huge international diplomatic standoff. the white house has reacted to britain's

have punitive measures saying it supports the decision to expel the russian diplomat argues daniel hawkins earlier joined my colleague kevin owen in the studio to discuss the diplomatic spat. will be too long before the result of official response with exact matches from moscow of course from the u.k. government side as we heard there from prime minister to reason may it appears to be an open and shut case there is no other. possibilities other than the hand of the kremlin being culpable in this attempted murder case now the russian foreign ministry as they initially said a few days back have no knowledge of this they've denied a woman in this tragic incident they have made it clear they view this as an act of provocation and that measures will be quick to be taken let's take a listen to what they had to say earlier thread of completing its investigation using established international formats and instruments including those in the framework of the a.p.c. w.

which we were expecting the british government chose confrontation with russia is obviously by opting for unilateral nontransparent methods of investigating this incident the british authorities have once again tried to unleash an indiscriminate and the russian campaign what they're referring to there was a statement by a foreign minister sergei lavrov as well who called on the u.k. to launch a joint investigation into this incident to provide any details to russia so they could have a joint investigation here through the o.p.c. w that international organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons he said that no such request officially had been received by the russian side from the u.k. counterparts this what he had to say just earlier today. we haven't received any official request from london based on its own obligations in accordance with the chemical weapons convention we've told britain and we're ready to respond if they file the request instead of filing the official request the u.k. continues to pull political stunts for britain suspicion they are. to be

comprehended by the international community as universal truth without presenting concrete facts they would pay for a blatant attempt to dilute the international community to its import to bear in mind just how quickly events have moved this incident happened on the fourth of march in just under ten days later we're seeing the biggest diplomatic row between russia and the u.k. on thirty years twenty three diplomats expelled is the worst point in three decades for u.k. russia relations as we said earlier there's no official comment as to what exact measures would be taken but this statement from the foreign ministry they have made clear that countermeasures will be coming soon whether that's the day tomorrow we don't know but certainly this isn't the last we're going to hear of fear at some of the start of what is a very serious diplomatic incident. now let's take a look back at how this all developed in the first place on sunday march fourth a couple of found slumped on a bench and saw reporters arrive at the scene for what was thought to be

a local incident but soon after a global media frenzy unravels exposure to an unknown substance enter comparisons to the two thousand and six death of alexander litvinenko march sixth the u.k.'s counter-terrorism police take control of the investigation the u.k. foreign secretary boris johnson has this to say it would be wrong to prejudge the investigation i can reassure the house that should evidence emerged that implies state responsibility then your majesty's government will respond appropriately robustly russia says it has no information and offers to help in any way it can downing street remains cautious in finger pointing it being too early to explain what actually unraveled but that approach will soon make a swift exit british prime minister to resume aid is expected to provide clarity the government has concluded that it is highly likely that russia was responsible

for the act against. the script how this highly likely comes with a pre-determined conclusion and the deadline set for russia to explain itself is wednesday. while here's the u.k. police course getting many questions regarding. this actually. i can't comment on that this is. not declaring a person of interest i suspect that. in a court of law this would at least mean a time outs in the world of political game play apparently it means very little. in the wake of donald trump's firing of the two top officials in his administration there is backlash over his suggested replacements the details out short break stay with us.