BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: bobad
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 09:00 AM

"Not a high level of expertise to produce Sarin so could have been produced by either side."

From Reuters:

"Mr Sellstrom confirmed that the quality of the sarin was superior both to that used in the Tokyo subway but also to that used by Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war," he told reporters.

"This does not point to a cottage industry chemical," said Lyall Grant, taking a swipe at earlier comments by Churkin. Churkin said in July that a Moscow analysis found "cottage industry" quality sarin gas was used in an alleged March 19 attack, which he blamed on the rebels."

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 09:24 AM

GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 08:16 AM

Incident 1: Tokyo subway attack at the height of the Tokyo rush hour where five separate trains were attacked some extremely well educated and intelligent "nutters" who manufactured their own Sarin managed to kill 13 people

Incident 2: The attacks in Damascus on the 21st August 2013 killed 1429

Incident 3: In Iraq Saddam Hussein killed over 5,000 in one single attack in 1988

The difference? In Tokyo the agent was home made, in Syria and in Iraq the agent was professionally manufactured, weaponised and delivered by a dedicated means purposely designed to cause the maximum amount of death and incapacity.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 09:32 AM

By the way unnamed Guest:

"Special Forces from US and UK must have been on the ground from an early stage, who must be closely involved with the action."

Why must US or UK Special Forces have been on the ground in Syria?
Why from an early stage?
Why must they have been closely involved in the action?

Utterly ridiculous - absolutely no requirement whatsoever for them to be there.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 10:41 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 11:13 AM

"Where did Assad get all the rest of his weapons from?
Russia and China."
Assad has being purchasing the wherewithal to make chemical weapons from britain for six years - they started to purchase it at the time they began to establish their chemical industry - a documented fact.
They now have a massive arsenal of chemical weapons which will tale a decade to dismantle - they say it will tae a decade to decommission it a a horrendous cost and have suggested that the West pays the billion or so it will cost to remove.
Your feeble little arm-wavings about China and Russia only goes to show that the British Government has made Britain as culpable as the rest of them in regard to Chemical use against civilians - as you indicate - they are all a shower of mercenary bastards - you couldn't sqeeze acredit card between their morals THEY HAVE ALL ACTED AS ASSAD'S ARMOURERS
It was pointed out by a defecting Syrian official last year that Assad placed great value on his relationship with Britain - he advised that this should be used as leverage to stp the Homs Killing - NOTHING WHATEVER HAS BEEN DONE IN THIS RESPECT - ON THE CONTRARY, DESPITE HOMS AND DESPITE THE CHEMICAL ATTACKS BRITAIN - CAMERON AND AT LEAST TWO OF HIS MINISTERS HAVE STATED PUBLICLY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THAT "WHATEVER THE OUTCOME BRITISH TRADE WITH SYRIA MUST NOT BE AFFECTED"

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 11:36 AM

DESPITE HOMS AND DESPITE THE CHEMICAL ATTACKS BRITAIN - CAMERON AND AT LEAST TWO OF HIS MINISTERS HAVE STATED PUBLICLY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THAT "WHATEVER THE OUTCOME BRITISH TRADE WITH SYRIA MUST NOT BE AFFECTED"

Complete fabrication.
A made up quote that no-one ever said.
A desperate lie from a floundering fart.

Nice colours though Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 12:56 PM

"Complete fabrication"
"Are we still going to feel big and important? Will our exports be affected?"
David Cameron - you have the link to the New Statesman article above
Similar statements have been made by Cable - who has admitted in the past that they trade with states that have abominable human rights records - and a further statement by yet another minister is also linked in connection with trying to explain away the sale of sarin producing chemicals - to be reasonably exact "Britain's trade with Syria must not be affected".
Do you get turned on by defending war crimes and human rights atrocities - do you stand in front of a mirror while you do it?
Perv!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 01:21 PM

Sorry - not exactly the same - here Cameron has added the need for Britain to "feel big and important" - even more disgusting!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 01:31 PM

Those are not the words of Cameron or any other politician.
None of them have said that or anything like it.
Those are the words of Laurie Penny, who writes for NS on pop culture, politics and feminism.

Read your own shit Jim dear and stop wasting everyone's time.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 01:40 PM

yet another minister is also linked in connection with trying to explain away the sale of sarin producing chemicals - to be reasonably exact "Britain's trade with Syria must not be affected

Bollocks.
Another Jim Carrol fabrication - to be completely exact.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 03:58 PM

bobad: ""Mr Sellstrom confirmed that the quality of the sarin was superior both to that used in the Tokyo subway but also to that used by Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war," he told reporters."

Well, there are TWO more possibilities...'Iraq-Iran'. I already posted about the high ranking officer with the Iraqis, who said he oversaw the transfer...and then there is Iran....and of course, others, as well.
I don't think it is a foregone conclusion, as of yet..not matter what the speculation is, or who is doing the 'speculations'...bottom line, somebody is playing it close to the chest....and that could be ANYBODY!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 03:58 PM

You have been given the links along with the quotes - you obviously have no intention of attempting to defending he murderously predatory behaviour of Britain's arms industry in its continual dealings with Assad and others like him
Would lie to say David Irving would be proud of you, bu you can't even be bothered to make an effort - just denial - any moron.....
The only reason it is worthwhile even to keep posting as far as you are concerned is to allow you to dg yourself even deeper into the slime-pit which you apparently are happy to call home
Sweet dreams
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 04:08 PM

A little bedtime reading to pass away the waking hours - sorry it's so lomng and "boring" but it's an indication of just how long Britain has been selling chemical weapons to monsters, wnd to which particular breed of them
Jim Carroll

BRITAIN'S CHEMICAL BAZAAR: THE UK SELLS THE COMPONENTS OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS TO SOME OF THE WORST REGIMES IN THE WORLD

9 June 2002
On August 20 1998 American missiles blew the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant on the outskirts of the Sudanese capital Khartoum to bits. The Clinton administration claimed the factory was making VX nerve gas - a lethal chemical weapon banned under international law.
Britain, in the form of Labour's then defense secretary George Robertson, supported the strikes, claiming there was 'compelling evidence' that the factory was producing chemical weapons.
Yet a Sunday Herald investigation has revealed that Britain is now selling chemicals to Sudan - and others among the most dangerous regimes on earth - which give them the capability to make weapons of mass destruction.
Among the countries to which Britain is selling chemical warfare technology is Iran - a regime labeled as part of the 'axis of evil' by President Bush.
Others include Libya - long seen by the west as a state sponsor of international terrorism; Israel - which is involved in one of the bloodiest conflicts in recent times; and Taiwan - a nation which has been on the brink of war with China for decades.
The sale of these chemicals is strictly controlled by the international chemical weapons convention, to which Britain is a signatory, and any sale to nations that may use them as a weapon of war is illegal. Libya, Israel and Taiwan are not signatories to the convention. Nor are Thailand and Syria, yet Britain sells them the technology.
Another customer is Jordan. Like Sudan, Jordan has signed the convention but not ratified it, making the treaty effectively meaningless for both governments. The other nations to which the UK deals chemicals are Cyprus, India, Kenya, Kuwait, Malaysia, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Turkey, Uganda and Yemen.
The products that Britain is selling to these nations are known as toxic chemical precursors (TCPs), a variety of chemicals which when combined with other compounds create weapons such as sarin - the nerve agent used in the 1995 Aum Shinrikyo cult's attacks on the Tokyo subway which killed 12 people - and mustard gas. These TCPs are known to chemists as dual-use chemicals. This means they can be used in harmless industries like agriculture or turned into weapons of mass destruction when mixed with other chemicals.
The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), which controls strategic exports, including all forms of armaments and components of chemical weapons, admitted that Britain was selling TCPs to 26 countries. It also admitted that there was no way they could be sure that the chemicals would not be used to manufacture weapons once they arrived at their destination.
Holland considers the sale of TCPs to countries like Sudan so dangerous that it has banned the trade in dual-use chemicals for both civilian and military application. Sudan has tried to buy TCPs from Dutch companies for use in fertilizer, but the Dutch ministry of economic affairs outlawed the transactions, saying it had 'indications that [the chemicals] might be used for other ends', including the manufacture of nerve gas.
A DTI spokesman said the chemicals were sold overseas 'under the belief' that they would be used 'benignly' for agricultural purposes or for use in detergents. 'If there are concerns about the end use of such chemicals we will closely look at export applications under the consolidated EU national arms export licensing criteria,' a spokesman said.
He added that the risk of recipient countries diverting TCPs into chemical weapons was closely assessed. The DTI said the main assurance it relied upon to trust foreign governments that they would not use TCPs bought from Britain for chemical weapons programs was 'an end user undertaking' -- amounting to a promise that the chemicals would be used for non-military means.
'We aim to minimize risk,' the DTI spokesman added, 'but obviously it is very difficult to say what happens to these things once they get to their final destination. It is impossible to clamp down 100%. It is impossible to know what happens to them in the stages that come after they leave Britain.'
Labour MP Ann Clywd, who sits on the commons international development select committee, the backbench human rights committee and the quadripartite committee on arms exports, said she will now press the Prime Minister in parliament to explain the government's policy on sales of chemical weapon technology to 'dubious regimes'.
'If chemicals are being sold to such regimes, questions need to be asked,' she said. 'The DTI's claims that it monitors such exports do not stand up to scrutiny. It is a myth that this takes place. Frankly, we have no idea what happens with these chemicals when they get to their final destination.
'If we are going to sell these things we have to be 100% sure what happens to them when they are sold. If we can't be sure, we shouldn't sell them.'
Clywd said the revelations about TCP sales meant that parliament should be given the power of scrutiny over arms exports. Members of the quadripartite committee on arms exports have recommended that MPs be allowed to scrutinize such sales, but the government has refused to grant these powers in the arms export bill now going through parliament.
'Without prior scrutiny there is no accountability,' she said. 'What we have now is a system operating on a very confused and skewed morality. The US gives elected representatives the power of scrutiny and Britain should move immediately in that direction.
'We don't know if we are aiding and abetting supposedly dodgy regimes in the development of weapons of mass destruction. At the moment that suspicion hangs over these sales. There are a lot of anomalies in our foreign policy and I, like many members of the public, am confused over what our government is doing.'
Professor Julian Perry Robinson, a chemist at the Science and Technology Policy Research Unit at Sussex University, said TCPs were the main constituent of chemical weapons. Robinson, who helped draft the chemical weapons convention and who is a member of its UK National Authority Advisory Committee, said: 'These findings ought to worry people, especially given the rather weak assurances from the DTI'.
Robinson explained that one TCP, thiodiglycol, could be turned into mustard gas by adding hydrochloric acid or ordinary household drain cleaner. He described another TCP, dimethyl methylphosphonate, as 'the perfect dual-use chemical'. By itself it can be used as a flame retardant, but if mixed with other chemicals it becomes the main ingredient of sarin nerve gas.
'Once you have your hands on dimethyl methylphosphonate you are well on the way to making sarin,' he said. 'Every single chemical warfare agent can be made from toxic chemical precursors.
'We need mechanisms in place to ensure these chemicals are not misused. Currently we rely on end-user certificates from the country concerned . But it is obvious that these countries can lie. It is impossible to say whether the current safeguards work.'
Robinson backed Clywd's call for parliament's right to scrutinize such export licenses, saying: 'We need more transparency in the present system'. He said the morality of the British government was now in question, given its rhetoric against repressive regimes, its claims to be running an ethical foreign policy and its support of the US in bombing Sudan's alleged chemical weapons compound. 'The ethics are twisted,' Robinson added. 'In the end, it seems that capital counts.'
Dr Mark Phythian, principal lecturer in politics at Wolverhampton University and the author of The Politics Of British Arms Sales, said: 'Such chemicals are sold with political approval. Any government would be hard pushed to say it didn't know the consequences of such sales, although it is hard to make sense of that policy in the present climate of concerns about terrorism and war.
'It appears this is an extension of our policy on the sale of conventional weapons. That is a policy of sustaining the UK's industrial base, protecting jobs in the weapons industry and maintaining our image as a global player in arms. The government's desire to maximize trade seems to be at odds with its rhetoric about security. History would suggest that to err on the side of trade over security is a very short-sighted policy.'
Alastair Hay, a professor of environmental toxicology at Leeds University's school of medicine and the biochemist who carried out the forensic tests that proved Saddam Hussein had used poison gas against Kurds in northern Iraq, said: 'It is a matter of real concern that we are selling these chemicals to countries which are not signatories to the Chemical Weapons Convention.
'These nations are looking towards Britain as a supplier because they know we have a substantial pharmaceutical industry, there is a guaranteed supply, and the goods will be cheap and of good quality.
'Many TCPs have no other purpose other than the making of chemical weapons. It has to be considered as a real possibility that a country is buying these chemicals for allegedly innocuous reasons but planning to use them for lethal purposes.'
Richard Bingley, of Campaign Against the Arms Trade, said the sale of TCPs made it imperative that the end use of the chemicals be closely monitored to ensure they were not being used to create weapons of mass destruction. 'We don't even know that, if we sell these chemicals to a seemingly decent regime, they won't sell them on to a repressive and dangerous nation,' he said. 'Yet we've taken that a step further by actually selling these chemicals direct to repressive systems and nations which one day could use the chemical capabilities we gave them against Britain or our allies.'
Neil Mackay
Published in the Sunday Herald (Scotland) © 2002 SMG Sunday Newspapers Ltd

http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/cra0505.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 05:02 PM

Jim, here is your New Statesman link.
You and anyone else can see that Laurie Penny, "pop culture, politics and feminism" is speaking for herself and not quoting anyone.
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2013/08/there-are-too-many-bodies-buried-britains-moral-high-ground

yet another minister is also linked in connection with trying to explain away the sale of sarin producing chemicals - to be reasonably exact "Britain's trade with Syria must not be affected

If that is not made up, produce some evidence or stop wasting everyone's time you silly obsessed buffoon.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Sep 13 - 12:54 PM

Keith
It was never more than a summing up of the government position.
You have had Cameron, Cable (and another minister - in connection with his excuse for selling chemical weapons - go look them up, you obviously haven't rqd them
Fact - the government places trade above human rights,
Fact - The government has traded with terrorist states for decades - Sri Lanka, Libya, Syria.... it even launched an arms fair when the Arab Spring demonstrations were into their first month.
You have been given this information over and over again - you attempted to claim the chemicals which we now to assisted Syria to build up its chemical weapons supply (sold to them for 6 years) as "harmless".
You made the same claim on another thread when you had been given a link to scientific journal describing these as "the main constituent of sarin weapons.
You have refused to respond to one single factual report you have been given.
Me obsessedd - yeah, right.   
Fact - the British Government has dragged the name of Britain into the shit by consistently selling weapons to some of the worst regimes on this planet - It is among the top five Countries in the world to do so.
Unless you have not read a single newspaper or journal, watched any television report or listened to them on the radio or read any of the links put in front of you (more than likely) you are well aware of this yet you are still describing revulsion at this policy as "obsessive", "anti-British", "thread-drift" or irrelevant to a discussion on Syria - are you really out of your mind?
In the past he value of even bothering with you and your rantings has been to allow you to expose yourself for the fanatical pratt you are; now it has become the mdern equivalent of going along to Moorfields to goad the patients
The fact that you seem to have not an iota of shame in your behaviour is pitiful - go away - you shame yourself and are an embarrassment.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Sep 13 - 01:23 PM

Despite the horrific behaviour of the Assad regime, and despite it being suggested by a defecting high official as long ago as during the Homs massacres that Britain should use the value Assad places on his relations with Britain the government was insisting that normal trading relations should continue with the regime.
As the article accurately points out, Britain places a higher value on Syria/British trade than it does on the lives of those being massacred.
Jim Carroll
   
"2nd September 2013
Hammond: Normal trade with Syria must continue
Normal trade with Syria must be allowed to continue, the Defence Secretary suggested today, as he defended the licensing of chemical exports to Syria.
Philip Hammond told MPs that chemical licenses sold to the Syrian regime before they were subsequently revoked in June 2012 were intended for use in "metal finishing activities"."

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-09-02/mps-to-question-why-uk-government-allowed-syria-chemical-deal-vince-cable/

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Stringsinger
Date: 21 Sep 13 - 07:36 PM

"Did those here who oppose Obama's proposed intervention, object to him promising to act against the use of chemical weapons at the time?
Did they post here describing it as warmongering?
Stringsinger?"

Keith, no one here condones the use of chemical weapons. The issue is that the way to achieve success is not through warmongering but diplomacy. This is Obama's best action.

Now the question here is often referred to as a "conspiracy theory", a term that originated with the CIA to discredit anyone who questions the validity of some news reports.
Usually, the conspiracy theorist is not dogmatic as suggested but is merely asking for a reasonable conclusion that makes more sense such as why did Number 7 Tower come down on 911.

Is it possible that the CIA did plant sarin to achieve a political objective? Given the history of the CIA and MI6 it is a reasonable question to be asked.

" - 08:16 AM

"Incident 1: Tokyo subway attack at the height of the Tokyo rush hour where five separate trains were attacked some extremely well educated and intelligent "nutters" who manufactured their own Sarin managed to kill 13 people."

This may or may not be associated with attacks on Damascus.

"Incident 2: The attacks in Damascus on the 21st August 2013 killed 1429"

This figure has never been established to be accurate. Some say more, some less.

"Incident 3: In Iraq Saddam Hussein killed over 5,000 in one single attack in 1988"

Yes but was it sarin gas? Again a different incident and not related necessarily.

"The difference? In Tokyo the agent was home made, in Syria and in Iraq the agent was professionally manufactured, weaponised and delivered by a dedicated means purposely designed to cause the maximum amount of death and incapacity."

And what major countries in the world would be capable of this manufacture and its delivery? And how do you know which one?

To announce such an authoritative description and analysis would mean that the person in-the-know would have to be connected to an undercover agency such as the CIA otherwise this is just conjecture not based on known evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 01:45 AM

We do not supply weapons or any war materials.
The ordinary people of Syria trying to survive and make a living are not helped by stopping all trade.

Save your anger for those who provide the means of killing.

String, why does the exact death toll in Damascus matter?
It was a devastating attack resulting in many deaths including kids.
In Iraq we do know that sarin and mustard were used.
Why not check these things before pontificating?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 03:36 AM

Keith, no one here condones the use of chemical weapons. The issue is that the way to achieve success is not through warmongering but diplomacy. This is Obama's best action.

I have no enthusiasm for a military strike, but as a lesser of evils it is better than the use of chemical weapons becoming acceptable.
I am prepared to trust the judgement of Obama and Hollande over that of the Tea Party and UKIP.
Do you really believe he would not give diplomacy another go if there was any hope of it achieving anything?

You all should have objected when he gave it as a red line, not waited for it to be crossed.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 03:43 AM

You have the detailed facts of chemicals essential for the making of Sarin weapons sold by Britain over six years - during the time that Assad began to establish his massive chemical weapons arsenal - of course, we can accept his word that he "only used it to produce to produce toothpaste, and, just like the Israeli regime, his word is his bond.
You also have the fact that Britain sold armoured cars, gas and other items of riot control gear to Assad at the beginning of the protests - you even gave your blessing on that one, suggesting that those sales should continue.
During your 'Homs Horror' weeping and wailing you identified the small arms ammunition which was licensed and sold by Britain to a customer in Syria as not just acceptable, but harmless ("only a few sniper rifles" were your exact words) - at a time when Assad's snipers were cutting down men, women and children on the streets of Homs.
It doesn't particularly matter whether your and your Chocolate Soldier friend were right in your estimation of exactly what was sold, as far as you were concerned they were sold and you had no problems with it.
God only knows what else Britain has sold to this long-known murderer and torturer down the years - we know we have promoted and supplied heavy and light weaponry to some of the most oppressive and undemocratic regimes on this planet and, while is has the active support of people like you, that will continue to be the case.
As the Defence Secretary said, and you have just ignored "Normal trade with Syria must be allowed to continue" - how d'ya like them pretty colours?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 05:42 AM

God only knows what else Britain has sold
Yes, and so does anyone else who wants to know.
It is all open and above board.
A peaceful end use had to be proved.

You have made it very clear once again that you hate Britain.
You use every thread as a platform to attack us.

Britain does not supply war material to Syria, but others do.
Have a go at them for a change.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 06:24 AM

I do not believe anything unless I see it with my own eyes.
however my local paper The Southern Star which would appear to be independent as regards Jewish/ Arab conflict printed an article that suggested that the Israeli government were spending 778.000, as a propoganda campaign, the money was to be paid to impecunious student,they have to rewrite Iraeli government propoganda in a trendy accessible way and post it as letters to various papers.
Why would a southern irish newspaper be biased against the Israeli state?does anyone know the truth of this suggestion?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 06:33 AM

I believe it.
Most countries have a budget for presenting themselves in a positive light.
Anti-Israel propaganda is rife.
This seems a harmless way to slightly redress the balance.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 07:13 AM

Britain has and continued to do so until the UN put a ban on it.
You have had the information - you have had the opportunity to disprove it - you choose not to - speaks for itself.
"Have a go at them for a change."
I have and I do - the US is the second greatest arms trader in the world
Israel has sold chemical weapons to Iran
Whatever we might condemn we are answerable only to what our own governments do in our name.
The suggestion that trade boycotts would only harm the Syrian people is a mealy-mouthed excuse to go on trading with human rights abusers - far older than having been used to continuing to trade with the South African apartheid regime following the Sharpville and Soweto massacres.
It is merely an excuse not to use the only influence we have over monsters, yet Britain chooses to profit from them by trade - even to the extent of ignoring long term torture and murder - this is what the British government does in the name of the British people
It has been suggested by a defecting official that this is Assad'd Achilles heel - Britain has ignored it and you have chosen neither to defend or excuse their behaviour - you refuse even to comment on it
To suggest this us "anti British" is to allign the British people with the slimeball activities ofit's politicians, just as to describe criticism of Israel as "Anti Semitic" is to implicate all Jews with Israeli war crimes.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 07:23 AM


Britain has and continued to do so until the UN put a ban on it.

UN ban?
What UN ban Jim.
Please give details and explain why it does not apply to China and Russia.

There is an EU ban on supplying war materials.
UK was instrumental in getting it in place.
Good show, what?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 09:08 AM

You continue to ignore every point made and hide behind the behavior of others
BRITAIN IS THIRD IN THE LEAGUE OF ARMS SUPPLIERS IN THE WORLD TODAY. RUSSIA, WHO HAS NOW "SHAKEN OFF THE CHAINS OF COMMUNISM", TOOK OVER AS THE LEADING ARMS TRADING NATION. BRITAIN'S CUSTOMERS INCLUDE SOME OF THE MOST UNDEMOCRATIC REGIMES AND OPPRESSIVE REGIMES IN THE WORLD; DESPITE EFFORTS TO REMOVE THOSE REGIMES BRITAIN HAS CONTINUED TO SELL THESE THUGS ARMS AND HAS CONTINUED TO HOLD ARMS FAIRS TO ATTRACT EVEN MORE OF THEM.
TRADE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF BRITISH POLITICS, FAR MORE SO THAN HUMAN LIFE - LIVE WITH IT AS YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT OTHER THAT BLINDLY SUPPORT IT
Selling arms is a despicable trade whoever participates - as a British citizen it outrages ME that it is carried out in my and every other Britons name - you seem happy to accept that, but that's you, isn't it?
Good show. what?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 09:20 AM

I think you should start a thread about the international trade in arms.
You clearly have strong views on that subject, and I am sympathetic to them myself.
This thread is about Syria, who is armed by Russia and China.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 09:26 AM

From last week'sTimes
Jim Carroll

NO DOUNTS, BUT ASSAD CAN CARRY ON KILLING
Anthony Lord
Commentary


The Syrian war's mid-term future and the survival of the Assad regime has been decided as much by the timing of yesterday's UN report into the chemical attack in Damascus as by its contents.
Though stopping short of decisively laying blame for the attack on the regime, in its every detail the report suggests beyond reasonable doubt that sarin nerve agent was used and that the regime was responsible. Yet had the finding been released in time to influence parliamentary debate on Britain's intervention — itself a fulcrum event that shaped President Obama's hesitation in launching strikes— punitive military action might have already occurred.
The report's timing has instead dealt a new hand to every player at the diplomatic table, though at the expense of Syrian civilians.
President Assad's survival has been guaranteed, for the while at least, and he can continue to wage war using the same conventional weapons that have killed the vast majority of the 100,000 dead so far.
Russia, Iran and China can feel relief that their ally—whose continued tenure of power is now a default necessity by which to implement the Geneva deal—has bounced back in strength.
In the meantime, Israel, America and Europe, deeply worried as much by the possibility that Syrian chemical weapons might fall into the hands of Islamic radicals as that they may be used again by the regime, may now address those concerns.
The strength of wording in the Security Council resolution being drafted to back the Geneva plan will decide the strategies of each of these players. What it will not influence, though, is the emerging strategic threat posed by thousands of al-Qaeda-linked militants in the country, possibly the greatest conglomeration of radical militants since Afghanistan in the Taleban era.
Nor is it likely to affect the fate of Syria's population, who will continue to face the ravages of war, the rockets, missiles and bullets that allow them to be killed each day in the conventional way.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 09:30 AM

"This thread is about Syria, who is armed by Russia and China."
Pissw off with your thread drift - this is entirely about arms - including Britain and her chemical weapons components
And stop telling people what and what we shouldn't be discussing when you run out of answers
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 11:19 AM

This thread is about Syria, armed by Russia and China, and not about the global arms trade.
You are such a fascist Jim.
By what right do you decide that it has to be yet another thread about how much Jim hates Britain?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 02:32 PM

""Don...That is disgraceful conduct.""

In your opinion Ake, as one wo has expressed some pretty unpleasant opinions!

Given a close acquaintance with the despicable prejudices of the man, from his posts about Northern Ireland, British Pakistanis (or BPs, as he would prefer to dehumanise them), Muslims in general and Palestinians in particular, combined with his syophantic obsession with all things Israeli, and his gung ho attitude to military interference in soveeign states, I think the comment I made was both justified and over lenient.

I stand by what I said.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Stringsinger
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 02:48 PM

"String, why does the exact death toll in Damascus matter?
It was a devastating attack resulting in many deaths including kids.
In Iraq we do know that sarin and mustard were used.
Why not check these things before pontificating?"

The answer of course is that I don't trust your sources. Who is this "we" that knows so much?

"I think you should start a thread about the international trade in arms."

It's common knowledge that the US and Israel are trading in arms internationally. This is a chief export of both countries.

Who originally armed Assad Sr. before Assad Jr. took over? Why the sudden turn of interest now after both Assads have been committing atrocities for years? Sarin gas is just one of the terrible weapons that have been used in Syria. US drones are equally as harmful used in other countries. The US, India, Israel, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia all have nuclear weapons far more capable of lethal destruction of many human lives more than sarin. Why have they decided that these weapons should be kept? If anyone attacks the US with nuclear weapons, there is no defense that makes any sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 08:02 PM

"This thread is about Syria, armed by Russia and China, and not about the global arms trade."
This thread is about whatever any contribution any member of this forum chooses to believe relevant to wwhat is happening in Syria - hardly any of your senile contributions have mentioned the CIA so how ******* dare you tell us to restrict our input to what you have virtually ignored throughout this thread when you are at a loss for a response to facts, you dictatorial little shit.This thread is perfectly within the bounds of discussing a chemical attack by Assad using materials supplied by Britain as well as any other nation who chooses to wallow in the arms trade.
BRITAIN HAS BEEN SELLING CHEMICALS ESSENTIAL FOR MANUFACTURING SARIN WEAPONS FOR SIX YEARS
STOP MANIPULATING THREADS AND ATTEMPTING TO DEPRIVE THE REST OF US OF OUR SAY
Fascist - I couldn't begin to match your behaviour on this forum, you little jackbooter you!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 02:04 AM

Don, I have no prejudices and have never expressed any.
You can accuse but never produce.
I did support Obama's limited action to deter more gassings.
That does not make me gung ho.
Jim wants intervention on the ground!
This is the post you really can not forgive me for Don.

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 03:00 AM

"The figures regarding blame in London are suspect, to say the least, given that any cyclist causing a collision and lucky enough to avoid injury"

The figures are accepted as reliable except only by you Don.
No-one else has ever heard of a collision caused by but not involving cyclists.
You claim to personally know of five.
That is because you are a liar and make stories up to make your case.

You tell a ludicrous story of sending a cyclist to hospital with your stick.
You claim he was fined for "furious riding"
Such a charge is extremely rare and always reported on.
The last one in Kent was in 19th Century.
Furious Riding has to involve injury to a pedestrian.
You forgot to make up the injured pedestrian Don.

You foolish, foolish man.
You make a liar of yourself to make a pathetic point on a miniscule Mudcat spat.
Twat.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 02:13 AM

Jim, since those outdated accusations were made, it is now known that a peaceful end use had to be proved for any import.
Also sodium flouride is a very low value commodity.

String, Assad senior was also armed by Russia, like all the states at war with Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 03:21 AM

String, NYT 1993.
Scientists working with human rights groups said that, using advanced chemical analysis, they had found residues of mustard and nerve gases used against a Kurdish village in northern Iraq in 1988, an action the Iraqi Government continues to deny.

Eric Stover, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights, a Boston-based group that investigates human rights violations, and others said at a news briefing here that poison gases do not survive long in the environment and that physical evidence of their use is often gone within weeks. A Search for Byproducts

However, by using advanced analytical techniques that looked for minute byproducts of the chemical weapons in soil, scientists said they were able to find conclusive evidence that the chemicals were used. They said their tests confirmed the use of mustard gas, a blistering agent that burns the skin and mucous membranes, and a nerve gas called sarin, which can cause convulsions and death by suffocation.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 03:40 AM

"im, since those outdated accusations were made, it is now known that a peaceful end use had to be proved for any import."
Absolute nonsense
Britain has been exporting Chemicals for weapons for six years
That fact has been reported throughout the world
Sodium fluoride is an essential component of sarin weapons that is what Britain has sent to Syria - the regime has just gassed its people with sarin and hopefully will be tried and convicted od that war crime
Britain was thier accomplice by selling the shit
How out-of-date can that possibly be?
Make an effort to make your case if you are going to support these atrocities
And stop debasing this forum with your lies - you have my and Don's position on this matter - give your own honestly rather than "Britain is innocent" - she isn't and the world knows that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 03:44 AM

No Jim.
The accusation was made, but it was comprehensively rubbished and the story died weeks ago.
Except in your mad head Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 04:32 AM

No it was not - the report that Britain has been selling sarin chemicals to Syria appeared in the Daily Mail a fewwdays ago - you have it on this tread
What particularly is the line you are peddling
Britain did not sell chemicals to Syria?
Those chemicals are not essential to the production of sarin?
It is ok to sell chemical weapon producing to monsters like Assad
All have been dealt with - all have been established beyond doubt
All have been accepted worldwide
What's your point - are you claining that we should ignore Britain's part in arming the Syrian regime and pretend it was all down to Russia and China - what????
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 05:19 AM

Since September 7th, Vince Cable rubbished all those claims and the story is dead.

Final sentence of Jim's old Daily Mail piece.
7th September.

"Last night a BIS spokesman said: 'The five licences were granted to two UK exporters. We cannot publish their names for reasons of commercial confidentiality. The end users were two Syrian commercial companies.
'The quantities of sodium fluoride involved were commensurate with the stated end use in the production of cosmetics and there was no reason to link them with Syria's chemical weapons programme. This remains the case.'

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 06:31 AM

"Since September 7th, Vince Cable rubbished all those claims and the story is dead."
Vince Cable said the latest sale was for non-military purposes only - we all know tat the Syrians would bend over backwards to make sure that was the case
I assume you shows that Cable "rubbished" the reports - a politician who has consistently admitted selling arms to despots DENIED hat he had sold chemical components.
You are as moronic as Cable thinks we are to suggest this is "proof" of anything for Christr's sake - what king of eejits do you take us for?
Since that first DENIAL the fact that Britain has been selling this shit to Syria for six years, from the time she began developing her massive chemical weapons industry - THIS IS A FULLY ACCEPTED FACT AND HAS NOT EVEN BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT - IT IS NEW NEWS AND IS NOT OUT OF DATE

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 07:55 AM

Find a recent report about it then Jim.
There is no story.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 08:10 AM

And that's it - Vince said he didn't do it - "and Vincent is an honourable man"
No Keith you have last week's "updated" Mail On Line report which says Britain has been selling chemicals to Syria for six years - you find a more recent report than that.
BRITAIN HAS BEEN SELLING SYRIA THE WHEREWITHAL TO MAKE CHEMICAL WEAPONS FOR SIX YEARS - NO news TO YOU OBVIOUSLY, BUT THAT IS THE STORY TO DATE. WE HAVE YET TO LEARN EXACTLY WHAT ELSE BRITAIN HAS SOLD THIS MURDEROUS BASTARD OVER THE DECADES WE HAVE BEEN TRADING WITH HIM - WATCH THIS SPACE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 08:18 AM

7th September is not last week.
The claims have all been refuted and no-one has been able to refute the refutation so that is it.
There is no story and never was.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 08:24 AM

"Since that first DENIAL the fact that Britain has been selling this shit to Syria for six years, from the time she began developing her massive chemical weapons industry - THIS IS A FULLY ACCEPTED FACT AND HAS NOT EVEN BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT - IT IS NEW NEWS AND IS NOT OUT OF DATE"

Jom you wouldn't recognise a fact if it jumped up and bit you.

Where on earth did you get this fact that Syria only got into chemical weapons six years ago? Or is that just something that you decided to make up?

Under the CWC there is nothing to prevent any country carrying out research and development in the field of chemical research provided that it is for peaceful purposes. There is nothing under the terms of the CWC to prevent countries manufacturing chemical warfare agents and biological cultures in order to carryout research into defensive measures to counter weaponised versions of those agents and cultures

An NGO has published a report detailing the 12 greatest "killers" in terms of weapons in Assad's inventory in Syria - Responsible for killing ~72,000 of the estimated 180,000 killed so far (Iraq over 8 years killed ~150,000 - 78% of those killed by fellow Iraqis) - Of the 12 types of weapon identified TEN of them were supplied by Russia and as for the remaining 2 (one Egyptian and one Chinese) both were copies of Russian systems.

The CWC was created in 1993 and the Syrian Government did not sign it so we know with a high degree of certainty that Syria has possessed chemical weapons since that date.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 08:46 AM

"Where on earth did you get this fact that Syria only got into chemical
weapons six years ago?"
That is the date given if previous links for the "establishment" of the present stockpiles of chemical weapons 'Colonel Sir' - no argument that they had them before but the present stocks were built up around the time Britain was caught red handed flogging them
Doesn't matter really - we sold them, Assad bought them end of story.
It is on this basis that Assad has suggested that the west pay for the removal of the stuff - "he who hides it, finds it"
Stick to light opera
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: bobad
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 08:53 AM

Few thought that the Syrian regime's promise to destroy its chemical weapons would be the end of the story. Brigadier-General Zaher al-Saket, a former chemical weapons chief in President Bashar al-Assad's own army, certainly did not.

Brig Gen Saket says he was ordered three times to use chemical weapons against his own people, but could not. He insists that all such orders had to come from the top — President Assad himself — despite insistent denials by the regime that it has never used chemical weapons. He also claims to have his own intelligence that the Syrian president is evading the terms of a Russian-brokered deal to destroy the chemical weapons by transferring some of the stocks to his allies; Hezbollah, in Lebanon, and Iran.

Brig Gen Saket spoke to The Sunday Telegraph, his first interview with a Western newspaper, as Mr Assad confirmed for the first time what he, and much of the rest of the world already knew, that the regime has a huge arsenal of chemical weapons, and the delivery systems to go with them.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 09:01 AM

Britain caught red-handed NOT flogging them, or any other weapons.
You saying it over and over does not make it true Jim.
There was no basis to the story, and it is dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 09:36 AM

"You saying it over and over does not make it true Jim."
No, but all the reports that they have does make it true, and your continuing to junk those reports makes you a fanatical moron - Britain has been supplying chemicals that are essential to the manufacture of chemical weapons for at least six years if you, or that nice Mr Cable says it is not so, disprove the evidence that has provoked all the accusations that they have - easy as that
Denials by politicians are more likely to confirm that they have
I totally agree with Bobad's posting -= what the **** is Britain doing dealing with these animals in the first place - they knew what a monster he was - and they still want to continue exporting to Syria whan this is all over?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Sep 13 - 09:41 AM

The claims have all been refuted and no-one has been able to refute the refutation so that is it.
There is no story and never was.

(or have you found a recent report Jim?)