BS: Cameron defeat in parliament

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 03:32 PM

So too much is harmful.
The same as with sodium chloride, common salt.
Also sugar.
Also water.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 03:39 PM

I wonder if anybody here finds it as disturbing as I do that someone here chooses to lie about the effects of the chemicals sold to Assad by Britain.
Keith is more than aware of the properties of fluoride and their possible use in the production of chemical weapons – he has responded to the horrific fact on the Chemical Weapons" thread by suggesting that it is wrong to criticise "poor old Britain" for selling this shit to a murderous regime because "others do it".
I'm tempted to believe his support for this trade is down to his fanatical nationalism and is not in any way connected to the fact that throughout three threads – including the epic "Homs Horror" one, he has vociferously opposed military intervention in Assad's genocide – I don't reee...ly believe we have a Syrian 'Lord Haw-Haw in our midst, but dismissing chemicals as "harmless as toothpaste" amounts to the same thing.
The arms trade has had a major influence in the Arab Spring protests, leading, in some cases to opposing sides fighting each other using British arms – good for the Arms Industry, not so good for those struggling for democracy.
It was suggested that the small arms ammunition (sniper bullets) were used to shoot down some of the women and children in Homs – it would be devastating to find that the chemicals sold to Assad were used to produce the weapons used against the Syrians in their recent gas attacks.
It seems to me particularly despicable to pass off the major elements in the production of rat poison and Sarin gas, and a mind control agent used by the Nazis as "harmless" so that Britain can keep its head held high – a flag too far, so to speak .      
I have pasted the posting I made to the other thread this morning.
The blue-clickie links may not survive the transfer, but they are intact on the "chemical weapons in Syria" thread
Now, once again where DID I put my Imodium?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: chemical weapons in Syria
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:05 AM

Incidentally, this is the "toothpaste" that Britain sold Assad
Jim Carroll

Fluoride is THE main ingredient in rat poison.
Fluoride is THE main ingredient in Sarin nerve gas.
Fluoride is THE main ingredient in Prozac.
Fluoride destroys the brain (accumulates the pineal gland), the bones, the organs and causes cancer.
Hitler and Stalin used it in concentration camps and gulags as mass control instrument to make the prisoners docile.
http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2010/10/31/

FLUORIDE, HYDROGEN FLUORIDE, AND FLUORINE
What are fluoride, hydrogen fluoride, and fluorine?
Fluorine, hydrogen fluoride, and fluorides are chemically related. Fluorine is a naturally occurring, pale yellow-green gas with a sharp odor. Il combines with hydrogen to make hydrogen fluoride, a colorless gas. Hydrogen fluoride dissolves in waier to form hydrofluoric acid.
Fluorine also combines with metals to make fluorides such as sodium fluoride and calcium fluoride, both while solids. Sodium fluoride dissolves easily in water, hut calcium fluoride does not.
Fluorine and hydrogen fluoride are used to make certain chemical compounds. Hydrofluoric acid is used for etching glass. Fluorides are used in making steel, chemicals, ceramics, lubricants, dyes, plastics and pesticides (for ants and roaches). Fluorides are often added to drinking water supplies and to a variety of dental products, including toothpaste and mouth rinses, to prevent dental cavities.

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW. A CITIZENS GUID TO BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL AND NUCLEAR AGENTS & WEAPONS
What happens to fluoride, hydrogen fluoride, and fluorine when they enter the environment?
• Fluorine can not be destroyed in the environment, it can only change its form. Fluorine forms salts with minerals in soil, and doesn't evaporate back into air as a gas.
• Hydrogen fluoride gas will be absorbed by rain and into clouds and fog to form hydrofluoric acid, which will fall to the ground.
• Fluorides if released to the air from volcanoes and industry are carried by wind and rain to nearby water, soil, and food sources.
• Fluorides in water and soil will form strong associations with sediment or soil particles.
• Fluorides will accumulate in plants and animals. In animals, the fluoride accumulates primarily in the bones or shell rather than in edible meat.
http://books.google.ie/books?id=q6arweDfwjUC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=Weapons+sodium+fluoride&source=bl&ots=PZkKfXNEaf&sig=3MEi49Yq

FLUORIDE: A KNOWN CHEMICAL WEAPON
February 19,1999. ALCOA Fined $750,000 by Commerce Department For Illegal Chemical Shipments.
Potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride are controlled because they can be used to make chemical weapons. These chemicals were added to the Department's control list in March 1991, but ALCOA's export compliance program failed to recognize and incorporate the change. There was no indication that in this case the chemicals were used for weapons purposes.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/effects.chem.weapon.precurs.htm

Also:
http://havacuppahemlock1.blogspot.ie/2013/01/fluoride-known-chemical-weapon.html

http://rense.com/general79/hd3.htm

http://www.quintessentialpublications.com/tracyrtwyman/?p=2271

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:12 PM

http://www.icnr.com/articles/fluoride-deposition.html

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:32 PM

when there's a three for the price of two offer on toothpaste - its easy to get carried away. This is obviously what has happened in this case.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 08:05 PM

"This is obviously what has happened in this case"
Right on Al - we've all known Assad was very concerned about the state of the nation's teeth - after all, he has to have something to pull out during his torture sessions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Sep 13 - 10:03 PM

It's too bad so few people believe what the US has to say about it all. Yes, really too bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Stu
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 04:58 AM

"Did you not know that Stu?
I am ingesting some as I type.
Truth not streuth."

You really don't make a good smartarse Keith.

Did you pay much for your education? Ask for your money back. If the taxpayer paid for it, we've been robbed.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 08:24 AM

Jim, none was delivered anyway.
Independent today.
"The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills insisted that although the licences were granted to an unnamed UK chemical company in January 2012, the substances were not sent to Syria before the permits were eventually revoked last July in response to tightened European Union sanctions.

In a previously unpublicised letter to MPs last year, Mr Cable acknowledged that his officials had authorised the export of an unspecified quantity of the chemicals in the knowledge that they were listed on an international schedule of chemical weapon precursors.

Downing Street insisted today that Britain's system for approving arms exports to Syria is working even though licences for two chemicals capable of being used in making nerve gas were approved by the Government and blocked only by EU sanctions.

The Prime Minister's official spokesman said: "You see the system working, with materials not exported. The facts are that the licences were revoked and the exports did not take place. The Prime Minister's view is that that demonstrates that the system is working. There is a sanctions regime, which is a very active part." "

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 08:36 AM

I could have sworn I saw Jim and Keith agreeing for a moment there about the need for some sort of intervention.

Real mixed feelings about this one. On the one hand Assad is clearly a monster but can we really keep on expecting the USA and Western Europe to be the world's policemen while the Arab world seems content to let him get on with it? Who should really be dealing with this man?

Since 2001, Western forces have been sent to Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Plus Mali in the last 12 months. Another war in the developing world? Really?

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 08:41 AM

For the intellectually challenged: A harmless constituent of toothpaste

A qote from the above link

""Emergency Overview
--------------------------
DANGER! MAY BE FATAL IF SWALLOWED OR INHALED. AFFECTS RESPIRATORY SYSTEM, HEART, SKELETON, CIRCULATORY SYSTEM, CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM AND KIDNEYS. CAUSES IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. IRRITATION EFFECTS MAY BE DELAYED.

J.T. Baker SAF-T-DATA(tm) Ratings (Provided here for your convenience)""

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 08:53 AM

You swallow some every day Don.
Its in your tap water.
And, tea adds even more.

Look at your list and try and find a chemical with no hazards.
This is an every day chemical that Britain never sent to Syria.
What is the issue?

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 08:57 AM

"The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills insisted that although the licences were granted to an unnamed UK chemical company in January 2012, the substances were not sent to Syria before the permits were eventually revoked last July in response to tightened European Union sanctions"
They would say that, wouldn't they, but this in no way excuses your revolting attempts to disguise the fact that you had the information about the materials and attempted to claim it as "harmless as toothpaste and only dangerous if you dropped it on your foot" - incredible!
Nor does it excuse your old usuaal "poor old Britain" response to our dealing in chemical weapons material - we shouldn't have sold him toothbrushes, never mind fluoride.
"agreeing for a moment there about the need for some sort of intervention"
If you trace through Keith's offerings on intervention, as far back as 'Homs Horror' you will find he has strongly opposed any form of intervention (unless you include supplying riot control equipment) and has sneered at anybody who has disagreed with him
This has stretched as far as this thread, where he seems to have had a change of heart (become a born-again interventionist perhaps)
His opposition has spread even to this thread 30 Aug 13 - 07:08 PM ) which I don't fully understand, but then again, psychiatry was never my strong point
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 09:01 AM

Do you enjoy a drink Don?
Read this.

SAFETY DATA SHEET Ethanol Page 2 of 13
2 / 13
May cause drowsiness or dizziness. Extreme exposure such as intentional
inhalation may cause unconsciousness, asphyxiation and death.
Precautionary statements
Prevention Obtain special instructions before use.
Do not handle until all safety precautions have been read and understood.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 10:10 AM

Arsenic and striychnine are quite good for you too, in the right quantity. Too much water and it will kill you.

Get the quantity wrong and you're dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 10:31 AM

Jim, what I opposed on the Homs thread was an invasion of Syria by Western troops.
I still think that would be madness.
Are you still in favour?

The intervention I am suggesting, for any tyrant who uses chemical weapons on civilians, is to have his palaces knocked down and his means of delivery targeted.

I don't do sneering Jim, and the quote you attributed to me is a fake.

You have to make up stuff about me because my posts are all honest and good natured.
You can and probably will sneer, but you will not produce any that are not.

Now, this thread is about Syria, not me.
Keep the personal stuff to pms.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Stringsinger
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 11:35 AM

There are no consequences to punish those using chemical weapons. They have been
used for years. Napalm, Agent Orange, White Phosphorous, Depleted Uranium.

Obama's "slap on the wrist" will not deter maniacs like Assad one bit and will probably strengthen his hand. Cameron is a stooge of the U.S. Pentagon.

Why is it that these insane leaders think they can bomb their way out of a complex
matter? Could it be that they have something to gain politically and financially?
(Rhetorical question).

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 11:36 AM

Still being an apologist for selling chemicals for selling chemicals to Assad I see - see below.
Personally Keith, I don't give a toss what you believe and don't believe - what you have said is open to view on all the threads you have contributed to should anybody have the stomach to revisit them.
Assad should have been stopped by one means or another during Homs - that was when his intentions to commit war crimes became obvious.
Your suggestion that it was o.k. for him to have been sold the "riot control equipment he already had been sold, including 'non-armed' whatever that means armoured vehicles sums up you feeling towards those who were being massacred daily - "good natured" or what?
Had intervention taken place then there would have been no gas attacks, no civil war and he would have been banged up where he could do no more harm - can't thing of any less "madness" than that.
Do I believe in military intervention - I believe it to be inevitable - Cameron and the British Government have abandoned it on British constitutional grounds but they apparently were prepared to give it a go until they were voted down- they even considered over-riding the vote with a constitutional prerogative - I wonder if you consider them sabre-rattling gung-hoers that you the rest of us of being - doubt it somehow.
If one thing has to come out of all this as far as Britain (or any of our allies) is concerned, is a reversal of the present policy of arms sales, Britain being a major indulger in this filthy trade.
I notice you still attempt to forget your revolting attempts to persuade us that selling chemicals to Assad was acceptable, just as you are now attempting to suggest that voluntarily abandoned those sales (also see below)
Regardng your snide reference to PMs - I have received several extremely abusive ones from you of late - the last one this morning - I have once again felt it necessary to warn you not to stalk me - don't push it or I will put them up for all to see; if that fails I will see if something can't be done to block your unwelcome and uncalled for abusive posts
The only reason these disagreements are vaguely "about you" is that you have made yourself an aneurysm to the process of honest, interesting and intelligent discussion.
See below for the facts 'withdrawal' of chemical sales.
Jim Carroll

Britain sold Syria raw materials for chemical weapons, months after war began
by NEWS SOURCES on SEPTEMBER 1, 2013
The Sunday Mail reports: Britain allowed firms to sell chemicals to Syria capable of being used to make nerve gas, the Sunday Mail can reveal today.
Export licences for potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride were granted months after the bloody civil war in the Middle East began.
The chemical is capable of being used to make weapons such as sarin, thought to be the nerve gas used in the attack on a rebel-held Damascus suburb which killed nearly 1500 people, including 426 children, 10 days ago.
President Bashar Assad's forces have been blamed for the attack, leading to calls for an armed response from the West.
British MPs voted against joining America in a strike. But last night, President Barack Obama said he will seek the approval of Congress to take military action.
The chemical export licences were granted by Business Secretary Vince Cable's Department for Business, Innovation and Skills last January – 10 months after the Syrian uprising began.
They were only revoked six months later, when the European Union imposed tough sanctions on Assad's regime

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 11:38 AM

Sorry:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/revealed-britain-sold-nerve-gas-2242520
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 12:27 PM

Jim dear, I do not know or understand your need to tell lies about me.
I do not send send anyone abusive pms, especially not you.
Some here will remember you told that one before and looked silly when I posted the actual text.
I would be happy to again.

Never mind if you think it inevitable, do you still advocate a Western invasion of Syria?

Your links are out of date.
The licences were revoked and no flouride was sold.

Someone has and been selling actual serious hard weapons of serious hard death.
It is not Britain though is it.

BTW unarmed means no weapons.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Sep 13 - 04:03 PM

It seems that you have moved on from defending the sale of chemicals to making this about you
Happy to put up the couple of abusive posts you have sent recently - or perhaps you would like to pip me at the post and save me the trouble?
Unless yo have evidence that no chemicals were sold - or intended for sale I don't think there is anything more to be said, so far we have only your uncorroborated denials
The fact - if it is a fact than no sale was made it totally immaterial - Britain was fully prepared to licence the sale of chemicals until it was ordered not to by the UN that is all that matters Britain is prepared to sel Weopns of Mass Destruction to monsters, whether the sales went through or no and it is this you have tried to hide by lying and it is this you are now distorting the facts to deny
"do you still advocate a Western invasion of Syria?"
Why to you keep repeating this so moronically - I have made it clear that I believe it to be inevitable - Cameron tried to, the US as far as I can see still intends to - ARE THEY SABRE RATTLING GONG HOERS - they both want to?
Game over, for me at least
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 01:46 AM

Happy to put up the couple of abusive posts you have sent recently

Yes please!
The most abusive you can find.

Jim, you are probably our most prolific authority on Mid East matters.
Many will want to know your view on this.

I thought it madness to launch another Western invasion of another Muslim land, while you advocated or even demanded it.

Inevitable or not, what do you think now?

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 02:32 AM

Britain was fully prepared to licence the sale of chemicals until it was ordered not to by the UN

Don't be silly.
There are no UN sanctions because Russia and China need to send Assad a vast and continuous torrent of weaponry.

It was EU sanctions that got the licence revoked.
The driving force in getting those EU sanctions in place was Britain.
Remember now?

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 02:33 AM

You seem determined to make this another of your one-to-ones and destroy yet another thread for others
You have the details of Britain's involvement in the arms trade and the supplying their intended supplying of materials vital to the manufactute of Sarin weapons.
Whether the shipment was made is neither here nor there - the fact that they agreed to such a shipment to the Assad regime and they only withdrew the license when the U.N. made it illegal to ship such good is enough to show that the various British governments are prepared to implicate the rest of us in war crimes says what has to be said.
Regarding your abusive postings (I still have a dozen of them archived, including some of the most Islamophobic and racist statements I have ever come across) - I have no intention of being party to your nausing up yet another thread by allowing you to create a diversion from yet another corner you have painted yourself into with your nauseating behaviour.
You already have my views on intervention - it coincides (surprisingly) with that o David Cameron, William Hague and the U.S. president - who we have to presume, you equally must regard as "sabre-rattling gung hoers"
I do not claim to be a foremost expert on anything - I am nothing other than a humanitarian who abhors he slaughter of innocent civilians and despises those who support them with lies and distortions
I will certainly comply with your request to post them up- all of them, but I will choose my own time to do so.
Now jusify your appalling behaviour and let others make their contributions without being interrupted by out bickering - stop wrecking threads - please
Also, leave me alone and stop stalking me - I have nothing to say to you - you are an apalling apologist shit - go away.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 02:38 AM

Apologies for typos - must sort out this sticky keyboard
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 02:47 AM

Regarding your abusive postings (I still have a dozen of them archived, including some of the most Islamophobic and racist statements I have ever come across)

Lies Jim.
Anyone who doubts it can have my password and see for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 06:11 AM

All who know you Jim will also know that you would NEVER sit on ANYTHING that revealed me to be a racist or an Islamophobe.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 06:32 AM

BBC, 1st Sept.
A government spokesman said the UK operates "one of the most rigorous arms export control regimes in the world, and has been at the forefront of implementing an international sanctions regime on Syria".

'Licences revoked'
He added: "In January 2012, we issued licences for sodium fluoride and potassium fluoride. The exporter and recipient company demonstrated that the chemicals were for a legitimate civilian end use - which was for metal finishing of aluminium profiles used in making aluminium showers and aluminium window frames.

"Before any of the chemicals were exported, the licences were revoked following a revision to the sanctions regime which came into force on 17 June 2012."

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 07:34 AM

You carefully did not link your quote, which was an explanation by (the no doubt very unbiased and honest!!) Trade Minister Vince Cable of why the exports were licensed in the first place
What kind of bastard politician licences material which is known essential to the manufacture of Sarin to a dictator six months into the process of slaughtering his own people/
How can you get firm assurances from such a dictator as to what those chemicals will be used for?
What kind of monster, in order to justify such murderous exports, disguises the source of his quote to hide the fact that it comes from a politician hastily attempting to cover his arse following his licensing of such material?
The full article can be found here
"http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/09/02/syria-exports-cable_n_3854912.html
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 07:43 AM

I stated it was from BBC and gave the date.
The linkmaker, like the rest of Mudcat is grinding very slowly and sometimes fails completely, but here you are.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-23924259

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 07:48 AM

Your link is back to this thread!

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 08:42 AM

This argument between Jim and Keith is quite remarkably pointless. You both think that military action against Assad is appropriate, and that it can be relied m on to improve things rather than make things worse. At present that is the relevant issue, and the stuff you are arguing about is currently irrelevant recent history.

And yet you are both going at it hammer and tongs...

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 08:59 AM

I wish I were certain that an intervention would not make things worse, especially now it seems a much bigger intervention is being planned than we thought.

The chemicals thing was a bit of nonsense, but it was not just Jim who took it up.
A reality check was needed.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 09:49 AM

"but here you are."
As I - and the Huffington link said - a "not us guv" denial by a "British spokeseman" who "would say that, wouldn't he" and not a word of explanation on the morality of selling material to a murderous despot three months into his murder fest.
And how do you reckon they acquired a promise that it wouldn't used for weapons - over a pint in The Duck and Squirrel, do you reckon?
Selling weapon making material is making Britain complicit to horrendous war crimes whatever colour apologists tend to paint it.
And nowhere have you dealt with the outcry in the British Parliament over the licensing of the sale - though you are fully aware of it - what kind of....?
You deliberately selected a piece which deals only with government denials - your support for Israeli terrorism all over again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 10:04 AM

The Huff Post piece which you failed to provide a link for, is outdated because Vince Cable's response is not covered.
The story is dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Stringsinger
Date: 03 Sep 13 - 10:08 AM

There are no authorities here on Mudcat on the Mid-East issue. The authorities that
one cites differ greatly on what approach should be taken in regards to Syria.

I will cite one that I trust, Fawaz Gerges of the London School of Economics who I
say is a sane voice amongst the saber-rattling babble.

It's not so easy to say if you take out Assad all will be well. His government has allies
that must be considered to avoid another world war.

Again, the reason Russia is obstinate in wanting to censure Assad is that it is afraid
of U.S. military hegemony. Putin and Obama have to get together and have trust for
one another, not an escalation of the Cold War.

In the meantime, a curbing of the weapons making industry would help go a long way
toward avoiding a crisis.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 04:18 AM

"which you failed to provide a link for"
The link was provided, read other peoples posts properly Keith (03 Sep 13 - 07:43 AM)
You are the one who consistently and deliberately fails to provide links.
It is only dead to your dead brain, unless you mean "the story is "death" to your arguments.
The fact remains that Cable licensed and was prepared to allow a shipment of chemicals which were essential to the manufacture of Sarin weapons, and would have let it go through had he not been prevented from doing so by the U.N.
That fact will never go away - but there again, you may have meant to write, "the story is death" - to the Syrian slaughtered
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 04:23 AM

Your link did not work.
The article was pre Cable's response anyway.
My BBC piece told the whole story.
There is no story.

BBC, 1st Sept.
A government spokesman said the UK operates "one of the most rigorous arms export control regimes in the world, and has been at the forefront of implementing an international sanctions regime on Syria".

'Licences revoked'
He added: "In January 2012, we issued licences for sodium fluoride and potassium fluoride. The exporter and recipient company demonstrated that the chemicals were for a legitimate civilian end use - which was for metal finishing of aluminium profiles used in making aluminium showers and aluminium window frames.

"Before any of the chemicals were exported, the licences were revoked following a revision to the sanctions regime which came into force on 17 June 2012."

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 06:23 AM

My BBC piece told the whole story." nobody is that naive surely.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 06:39 AM

OK, the BBC, which has a reputation for honesty and impartiality, told more of the story than the Huf Post piece because it included the response from government.
Thank you for you interest.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: selby
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 06:55 AM

Just under 50% of the posts on this thread are two people not agreeing with each other Democracy in action, Syrians want democracy we have a democracy and our democratic process has said we do not bomb Syria. We cannot dictate to the world about democracy if we then ignore the process. Far from upsetting our standing in the world I believe we have strengthened it Our politicians have shown Democracy in action.
Just my view.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 04:16 PM

" nobody is that naive surely."
Surely the point of this is not that that the licence was revoked, but that it was ever issued in the first place, especially as it had been issued six months into the fighting.
The fact that it was withdrawn only after the U.N. declared it not acceptable only underlines that dealing with terrorist states in the act of committing terrorist acts is not on.
Selling arms to Governments whose records on human rights are known to be appalling is bad enough, selling them while their people are protesting human rights abuses can only lead to those governments using them against their people them to maintain their positions of power.
Britain's Arms Fair, aimed specifically at Middle Eastern countries, including Bahrain a month or so after the Arab Spring protests had started was totally unacceptable.
This is not to single Britain out especially, we may disapprove of any power acting similarly, but it is only our own governments who are supposed to be answerable to us and who rely on our votes to keep them in office, that's the theory anyway - they are acting with our electoral blessing - Russia and China are not.
Selling components that are essential to the manufacture of chemical weapons to a government that was always likely to use them against their opponents if necessary makes us all accomplices to war crimes - in never gets more straightforward than that.
Whatever the outcome of the Syrian conflict, surely one thing that must come out of it is that those countries involved in the arms trade must clean up their acts otherwise they implicate us all in war crimes, as has happened here.
Stricter arms sales control enforceable by the United Nations is, as far s I'm concerned, as inevitable as intevention in Syria.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 05:27 PM

The fact that it was withdrawn only after the U.N. declared it not acceptable

As I told you before, there are no UN sanctions because Russia would not allow it.
They have been and are supplying weapons to Assadl the whole time.

The sanctions are EU sanctions, instigated mainly by Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Stringsinger
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 05:54 PM

"As I told you before, there are no UN sanctions because Russia would not allow it."

Ban Ki Moon has expressed his views that military options will not solve anything.
Russia is scared of U.S. hegemony which well they might be. Putin has no reason to trust Obama. When you set military standards to solve a problem, those who have misgivings
that these standards will break out of control will protest as well they should. We'll see how effective the meeting between Putin and Obama will be.

EU sanctions are based on a rational approach to this issue. Europe has seen the devastation of war on its continent whereas the U.S., not having this experience,
is in a bubble of propaganda.

"Selling components that are essential to the manufacture of chemical weapons to a government..........." Jim has pointed out the pattern that American arms manufacturers have followed for decades. Sell weapons to dictators only to cry foul later when they are used. If sarin is used, where do you think Assad got it? When Hussein gassed the Kurds,
who supported him up to that point? This pattern of supporting dictators when it's politically advantageous to munitions corporations and the Pentagon has got to stop.

Obama and Cameron deserve to be defeated.

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 13 - 07:38 PM

"Obama and Cameron deserve to be defeated."
Then the world has to come up with an alternative.
The Arab Spring offered a challenge to many of the despots that have ruled the Middle Eastern countries and caused much of the trouble there.
The West has gone along with many of these despots because it was in their interests to do so, oil being the main attraction; it was largely this that forced a degree of support for the Arab Spring protests, a hope to maintain their oil supplies whoever took over.
Whatever oil Syria has will run dry within the next fourteen years and Syria will become an oil dependent country, so she is of no real interest as a trading partner to the West.
Past tolerance of Syrian human rights abuses has led to the present situation in Syria; up to now the world has given the Assad family a free hand and allowed him to use whatever methods he chose to subdue his people, he has even been sold arms to maintain his grip on the country, before and after the revolts began.
Western inaction has led to the protests in Syria turning into a civil war, largely using the Russian/Chinese vetoes as an excuse to do nothing; David Steele put it in a nutshell at the time the people of Homs were being slaughtered, "it is not in Britain's interest to get involved".
If Assad gets away with what he is doing, the Middle East will remain    a series of feudalistic states run by despots, and whatever progress has been made through the revolts stand a fair chance of being lost.
The West cannot stand by and let that happen; morally we are obligated to make up for our various governments' past mercenary policy in supporting the human-rights monsters and allowing them to indulge in their monstrous behavior, even by supplying them with the wherewithal to do so.
Politically it is in our interest to bring Assad down and see that his behaviour is not repeated elsewhere.   
To do nothing is only a continuation of the West's policy of turning a blind eye and selling despots weapons to establish a degree of stability within their realms - 'let the Arms Trade Fairs continue'.
It is interesting to remember that in January 1980, around the time fifty-two Americans had been held hostage in Iran for 444 days, Time Magazine named Ayatollah Khomeini 'Man of the Year' - Western predatory cynicism at its best.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 03:39 AM

External military overthrow of dictators has in many respects made matters worse in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, precisely because there was no internal tradition for the rule of law.

Something similar but different can be said of Iran and Egypt - where revolutions were internal but successful, and at best one dictator was in fact replaced by another.

I am reasonably confident that parallels can be found throughout Africa, and the Indian subcontinent gives little ground for confidence in the democratic model.

Is there a fully functioning democracy in any jurisdiction in what used to be called "the East Indies"?

There are many problem jurisdictions in the West Indies, and South America too.

Is the answer to be drawn that democratic capitalism is collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions? Is this linked to the fact that nobody at all (except me) seems to care that one of the first things our present UK government did on coming to power was to make it more difficult for that government to be removed via a vote of confidence or tantamount to a vote of confidence?

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 08:31 AM

Can't really disagree with that Richard.
I'm staggered at finding myself agreeing with Cameron and the US on this - my old man must be spinning in his urn.
It's hard to believe that they are acting on conscience instead of political expediency for a change, but everything else seems to be just self-interest, which got us to where we now (or Syria now is) in the first place.
I really can't see any alternative other than to let Assad continue with the slaughter, anything else would be sheer copping out of a mess we are partially responsible for.
Any ides hwere we should go from here - and please don't tell me what 'should' have happened.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 08:46 AM

I agree, except on us being partly to blame.
We did not start the Arab Spring uprisings that triggered this uprising.
We did not put the Assads in place.
We have had no opportunity to remove them.
What did we do?

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 11:06 AM

Wasn't addressing you Keith - not while the adults are talking if you don't mind
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 11:52 AM

Any ides hwere we should go from here - and please don't tell me what 'should' have happened.
Jim Carroll

Should/can we do anything anyway.Their change has to come from within their own society, nothing can be imposed on them that fails we know this fro history.We can't arm the organ eating General and his ilk either.The US and the west have blown it, any outside intervention has to be peaceful and from another source..not us.We have no credibility bar more death and military force.(And as for evil growing because good men do nothing..show me the selflessly intention-ed good men from the western powers)

Subject: RE: BS: Cameron defeat in parliament
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 12:29 PM

"Their change has to come from within their own society"
Tell that to the woman photographed in Homs carrying a dead child who had just had half of its head blown away by a (possibly British) sniper bullet
Jim Carroll