BS: No poppies for me

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 01:13 PM

So -

No example of me forthcoming then.

No list of lies.

Thank you for proving everything I have said about you.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 01:01 PM

Probably because Carroll
A reminder
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled.""
Probably because Carroll
Really Carroll
Keep floundering about Carroll
So all in all Christmas
For JOM:
Christmas
No need for reminders JOM I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you and everything you stand for. Not many humans wander this planet without one single redeeming feature - you seem to have managed that without even trying.
The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it
I will repeat IT YET AGAIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE AMONG US WHO ARE TOO BLOODY THICK TO UNDERSTAND PLAIN ENGLISH (i.e. YOU RAGGY)
"complete and utter buffoon"
"That by the way THICKO "
"clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree"
"Carroll"
"Have you found an echo JOM?"
Or have you always wandered through life making a complete and utter JOM-like CUNT of yourself?
Carroll
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"
You really should read our own posts sometime - it would help avoid the foot-in-mouths - the "Rattle of an Simple Man", as the screenplay writer described it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 11:35 AM

"You lie consistently" - So you claim but somehow, when challenged, you seem unable to produce a single post of mine demonstrating that.

"you have been given a list of your lies" - Not by you or anyone else on this forum.

"You have been given examples of your lies," - Really? Where and when?

"When have you ever offered an apology when you have accused me of "made up Carroll shit" - both before and after I have accompanied my opinion with linked evidence?
NEVER!!"

Probably because Carroll it WAS all "made up Carroll shit" and because what you think of as linked "evidence" is nothing of the sort.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 09:59 AM

"That being so it is hardly surprising then that there has not been so much as a hint of an apology from you."
Do yuou really believe that anybody who behave as manically arrogant and insulting as you is due an apology for anything - let alone going to get one.
Dream on!!
You seem totally oblivious to your own manic behaviour on this forum.
You lie consistently - you have been given a list of your lies
You have been given examples of your lies, which you eithr ignore or deny, even when they are put in front of you.
While you continue to behave like this and you continue to add to your personal abuse of anybody who disagrees with you, you w=ill certainly never get an apology from me for anything and you are totally insane to expect one.
When have you ever offered an apology when you have accused me of "made up Carroll shit" - both before and after I have accompanied my opinion with linked evidence?
NEVER!!
As far as I am concerned, you need to be treated as a social pariah to force you to behave like a rational human being
Please go away
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 09:43 AM

"I withdrew it, explaining that I was mixing the two Croziers up"

You withdrew what Jim? That nobody had stated that Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier had been court martialled? In which case if you did that then I could not possibly have been a liar for stating that he had been court martialled. In which case you owe me an apology for falsely accusing me of lying. Any decent, honest human being with a shred of integrity would do that - That being so it is hardly surprising then that there has not been so much as a hint of an apology from you.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 06:30 AM

"In this thread you called me a liar for stating that Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier had been court martialled "
And then I withdrew it, explaining that I was mixing the two Croziers up - it's a long-dead issue, just as your arguments are.
I will not discuss Syria here, and as there is a perfectly serviceable thread on that subject, it is mindlessly stupid for you continuing to attempt to.
Where are the adjudicators when you need them?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 06:07 AM

"i put your lies in front of you and you continue to lie."

DID you? Where?

Over on the Syrian thread you have so tied yourself up that you now no longer have the foggiest notion what you are rambling on about.

IF I have lied then cut and paste the post in which I lied.

In this thread you called me a liar for stating that Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier had been court martialled - something of course that I had never claimed at all - Jim Carroll "made-up-shit" - that is the mistake you acknowledged, but were too coy to retract your accusation that I had lied about it and certainly too proud, arrogant and ignorant to offer an apology.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 04:56 AM

" because you have been proved a liar"
Where - I made a mistake and acknowledged it - as predicted, you are now milking that for all it is worth
It is you who have been proved a liar - i put your lies in front of you and you continue to lie.
"It is very much what this forum is about when it suits you."
Poppies are the name of the game - Syria is an attempt for you to attempt to save face.
Co away and clean up your act before you come back
I am truely appalled that the overseers of this site allow the level of abuse that you seem incapable of suppressing.
You must have a guadian demon out there lookin after you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 03:14 AM

Oh Jim!!! It is very much what this forum is about when it suits you. You are only complaining about it here because you have been proved a liar in this thread and you have been proved a liar in the "Syria the new nightmare" thread. So the common links between the two threads are your baseless accusations and your lies.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Nov 16 - 07:59 AM

"Where is the post of mine where I deny that an export licence was issued Jim - "
You are now making this a cross-thread personal battle - this is not what this forum is about.

"Christmas"
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled.""
For JOM:
No need for reminders JOM I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you and everything you stand for. Not many humans wander this planet without one single redeeming feature - you seem to have managed that without even trying.
The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it
I will repeat IT YET AGAIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE AMONG US WHO ARE TOO BLOODY THICK TO UNDERSTAND PLAIN ENGLISH (i.e. YOU RAGGY)
"complete and utter buffoon"
"That by the way THICKO "
"clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree"
"Carroll"
"Have you found an echo JOM?"
Or have you always wandered through life making a complete and utter JOM-like CUNT of yourself?
Carroll
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Nov 16 - 02:04 AM

Where is the post of mine where I deny that an export licence was issued Jim - so far you haven't posted anything of the sort, on this thread or on any other.

Here's the sort of thing I would expect to see Jim, in the example below of course it proves conclusively that I have NEVER denied the existence of an export licence:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: GUEST,Teribus - PM
Date: 18 Mar 12 - 04:10 AM

Your contention was that British supplied weapons were slaughtering civilians in Homs - The inference you were hoping to get across was that the British Government had supplied weapons that the Assad regime was using on its own people and that the British Government were fully aware of this.

After digging around it has been shown quite conclusively that:

1: The British Government has sold no weapons to Syria
2: That the 154 export licences issued by the British Government for anything being exported to Syria were all revoked in line with EU rules
3: There are no records of sale or delivery of the ammunition mentioned in your Daily Mail article

So all in all Christmas your deliberate falsehood was examined and found wanting on just about every level going. Rather than admitting to making a mistake, an act which appears to be beyond your integrity, and clarifying your position, you dug your heels in attempted to defend the impossible (in which exercise you failed) and started throwing insults about and then complained when they were hurled back at you.

That was posted over 4 years ago Jim and guess what not a thing has changed particularly with regard to your lack of integrity or honesty.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 02:49 PM

"Can't be bothered reposting the same thing here."
Now - there's a surprise!!
"Still cannot provide a reference to any of my posts where I have lied Jim?"
Just have - regarding your denying having claimed that no licence was issued for Syrian sniper ammunition - accompanied by the posting where you denied that a licence was issued for Syrian sniper ammunition.
You are still ignoring the list of your lies on the antisemitism thread.
You're a joke, albeit a sick one.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 12:35 PM

Ah the Syrian thread - you'd better pop over and take a look at that - your attempted lies from four years ago on the Homs thread have been laid bare. Can't be bothered reposting the same thing here.

Still cannot provide a reference to any of my posts where I have lied Jim? What on earth is taking you so long if what you say is true.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 12:17 PM

"C'mon Jim you're good at cut'n'pastes so give us a direct example of either one of my lies or one of Keith A's lies verbatim"
You ignored them last time, you'll ignore tham again.
Want a good example of yours - take a look at your Syrian offering - your multiple contradictory claims of licences for ammunition sales will do for starters.
Keith's are too legendary to bother with - he distorts historians he hasn't read (or used to) - nowadays he just calls evidence "lies" and provides nothing but uncorroborated denials - that is lying.
You want him at his best - try the "What is antisemitism" thread that has recently crumbled to dust in both your hands.
We really have been here before
Whilie your behaviour remains as it is, neither of you are worth taking seriously - long may that be the case.
" but squeal like stuck pigs when you get a dose of your own medicine."
The nature and extent of your abusive behaviour is, as far as I am concerned, is a sign of mental deficiency
The only other poster to have ever come near it is Muskett - and he comes a very poor second.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 11:26 AM

"You were presented with a list of your lies" - Jim Carroll

Certainly not by you or any of your pals Jim.

But we'll be polite and give you one last shot at it shall we?

C'mon Jim you're good at cut'n'pastes so give us a direct example of either one of my lies or one of Keith A's lies verbatim from one of our own posts. Betcha you cannot do it and all we'll get will be a load of more bluster and waffle.

Your last post demonstrates clearly that you and your pals are bloody good at dishing it out but squeal like stuck pigs when you get a dose of your own medicine.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 06:43 AM

You are a joke - you really are!
There are two people who I regularly refer tto as liars - you and Keith - because you both lie and you are both evasively dishonest.
You were presented with a list of your lies - you denied them rather than apologising - where is your apology
Yo have introduced a level of boorish thuggery to these discussion which is more typical to the jackboot ed kicking in of doors rather than decent argument.
This is a sample of yesterday's offering:

No need for reminders JOM I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you and everything you stand for. Not many humans wander this planet without one single redeeming feature - you seem to have managed that without even trying.
The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it
I will repeat IT YET AGAIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE AMONG US WHO ARE TOO BLOODY THICK TO UNDERSTAND PLAIN ENGLISH (i.e. YOU RAGGY)
"complete and utter buffoon"
"That by the way THICKO "
"clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree"
"Carroll"
"Have you found an echo JOM?"
Or have you always wandered through life making a complete and utter JOM-like CUNT of yourself?
Carroll
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"

What mindless moron behaves like that unless there is something wrong with them
I suggest you go away, read a few books and come back when you can control yourself
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 06:42 AM

I've pointed out that you are a liar and that has been proven.

Your accusation was groundless.

But have no fear Jim - I don't expect any sort of decent, or honest behaviour from the likes of you. Just live with the fact that you will be reminded of it every time you throw out your usual ill-informed groundless accusations.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 06:20 AM

"Still no apology for calling me a liar then Carroll"
You first
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 04:33 AM

Still no apology for calling me a liar then Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 04:30 AM

"Here is Carroll's post where I am accused of lying about the Court Martial:"
A mistake on my part - fully explained but milked for all it is worth.
That's how snall mindede you are

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 02:14 AM

"Your temper and mode of address to other posters is getting worse by the day" - Steve Shaw

Not too other posters as such Shaw, it is reserved solely for the likes of Jim Carroll and Raggy.

Raggytash - 24 Nov 16 - 05:36 PM

"Perspective be buggered."

Precisely why discussing anything with you or your equally gormless mate is pointless.

By the way where and when did I ever say that soldiers in the British Army never mutinied? I do believe that if you search back I did make a qualified statement about the British Army and mutiny during the First World War.

By the way here is a bit of Jim Carroll classic misrepresentation.

What was posted by Carroll:

Jim Carroll - 22 Nov 16 - 07:35 AM

"Another prime example of your lying behaviour on this forum
Crozier was never court martialed - he was forced to resign over "dishonoured cheques"

He blurted this out when he thought I had stated that Lt-Col Frank Percy Crozier had been court martialled, when in fact I had been referring to Private James Crozier. Needless to say Jim Carroll as usual was in error - his error was pointed out to him by myself and by his pal Raggy. No admission of error, or apology from Carroll though as such an admission would require honesty, integrity and decency characteristics that are totally alien to our little biased, racist, bigoted resident Anglophobe.

His original then as we see above becomes:

Jim Carroll - 24 Nov 16 - 08:23 PM

"The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it"
"Crozier was never court martialed - he was forced to resign over "dishonoured cheques"
DISHONOURED CHEQUES
"However, in 1908, he was forced to resign due to repeated dishonored cheques[2] and became bankrupt.[1]"
Wiki
Jim Carroll

As though the dispute was about "dishonoured cheques". Here is Carroll's post where I am accused of lying about the Court Martial:

Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 07:35 AM

By the way
"The Court Martial papers relating to the case against Private James Crozier exist and are available"

Another prime example of your lying behaviour on this forum
Crozier was never court martialed - he was forced to resign over "dishonoured cheques"
You are as insane as your mad mate in lying about something that is easily provable with a little effort (that you obviously are not prepared to put in)
Jim Carroll

Things instantly and patently evident from that:

1: "The Court Martial papers relating to the case against Private James Crozier exist and are available" as a statement made by me is true and factually correct.

2: Jim Carroll then having mistaken Lt-Col Frank Percy Crozier for Private James Crozier goes off into a rant about lying.

You and your pal Raggy deserve nothing but contempt Carroll.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 08:23 PM

"The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it"
"Crozier was never court martialed - he was forced to resign over "dishonoured cheques"
DISHONOURED CHEQUES
"However, in 1908, he was forced to resign due to repeated dishonored cheques[2] and became bankrupt.[1]"
Wiki
Jim Carroll

Your "frothing-at-the-mouth behaviour is a little beyond a joke now, are you an alcoholic?

A reminder

"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled.""
For JOM:
No need for reminders JOM I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you and everything you stand for. Not many humans wander this planet without one single redeeming feature - you seem to have managed that without even trying.
The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it
I will repeat IT YET AGAIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE AMONG US WHO ARE TOO BLOODY THICK TO UNDERSTAND PLAIN ENGLISH (i.e. YOU RAGGY)
"complete and utter buffoon"
"That by the way THICKO "
"clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree"
"Carroll"
"Have you found an echo JOM?"
Or have you always wandered through life making a complete and utter JOM-like CUNT of yourself?
Carroll
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"

You really should read our own posts sometime - it would help avoid the foot-in-mouths - the "Rattle of an Simple Man", as the screenplay writer described it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 05:36 PM

Perspective be buggered.

Either troops mutiny or troops do not mutiny.

I put foward that troops DID mutiny, however the hieracy chose not to call it mutiny.

Various attempts have been made to suggest that the attempts were "not in the field of battle" I would suggest that in the "field of battle" its nigh on impossible to organise anything.

You Teri and your flag waving companions do not want to believe anything that the Bwitish hieracy could be aanything less than perfect.

Over the course of the last few years many instances showing the hieracy in a less than favourable light have been discussed. Not once have you or your compatriot conceded that perhaps the leadeership has been at fault.

It is this atitude, more than any other, that has led to the ridicule which you and you cohorts suffer.

A stage has now been reached where people expect to laugh at everything you post and sadly you don't realise it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 05:26 PM

"No need for reminders JOM I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you and everything you stand for. Not many humans wander this planet without one single redeeming feature - you seem to have managed that without even trying."

You know, we have our share of virtual fisticuffs here and we may not all be innocent (to say the least), but this is bloody ridiculous. Take a step back, Teribus. This forum is not the real world, you don't know Jim any more than he knows you. Your temper and mode of address to other posters is getting worse by the day. You may well know a lot of stuff but you need to stop demonstrating that knowledge does not equate to intellect. Over and out.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 05:18 PM

Not addressed to any one person or group of people - Honest!

Does anyone else see the irony of using a thread started about a remembrance symbol to propagate a war of words? No? Must just be me then :-)

Come on, chaps. Give it a rest. All this rancour is unhealthy and, as I am sure you are all aware, will only end up getting the thread closed. Remember that it is not the one who started it that matters but the one sensible enough to finish it.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 04:14 PM

For Raggy.

The German Navy refused to put to sea and fight the Royal Navy - THAT you TC is a mutiny in time of war

After the Chemins Des Dames fiasco in 1917 the French Army refused to mount any offensive actions against the German Army - That you TC is a mutiny in time of war

Since the end of the First World War and the present day the two commonest factors for mutiny aboard HM Ships have evolved around lack of chips in the galley and painting the ship's side, i.e. inconsequential irritations signifying S.F.A.

Now then TC tell me where and when during the course of the First World War that British troops ever refused to engage the enemy, for the actual figures 0.04% of your troops over 1561 days spitting the dummy out doesn't really amount to much.

Now then TC go and arm yourself with a dictionary and acquaint yourself with the meaning of perspective.

For JOM:

No need for reminders JOM I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you and everything you stand for. Not many humans wander this planet without one single redeeming feature - you seem to have managed that without even trying.

By all means keep posting the rubbish that you come out with and I will keeping knocking all your dearly held myths flat.

Jim Carroll - 22 Nov 16 - 07:35 AM

"Another prime example of your lying behaviour on this forum
Crozier was never court martialed - he was forced to resign over "dishonoured cheques""

The Truth according to JOM - thick as shit and proud of it

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 03:13 PM

Oh dear Mr Woodcock, are the tablets not working again.

The difference is that in order to claim that mutiny never happened "in the field" the Bwitish army were force to make nebulous statements like "attempted mutiny" and occurances of actual mutiny were "down graded".

The FACT is it was still mutiny but the Bwitish army would never accept,like you,that such a thing could happen.

It is you who are living in cloud cuckcoo land, the mere fact that you are resorting to abusive language (something you wouldn't have done a year or to back) tells me you have lost the plot.

Perhaps it's time to make another appointment.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 02:49 PM

"Have you found an echo JOM? (JOM is a word that you invented and that I have adopted."
You are the one who has forgotten - I made a typo,, I pointed it out, you with your feeble minded lack of imagination, decided you adopt it as you were unable to think of one of your own.
No matter - another opportunity to add another two and fulfill my intention with the appropriate additions
Can see myself running out of room by the end of the week if you keep this up.
Schoolyard insulting taunting without responding to what is being said
"yet another attempt to try and catch ol' Teribus out"
Jaysus - You really are up your own arse a long way, aren't you - threw you out ofthe pub early, did they?
Jim Carroll

"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled.""
A reminder
I will repeat IT YET AGAIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE AMONG US WHO ARE TOO BLOODY THICK TO UNDERSTAND PLAIN ENGLISH (i.e. YOU RAGGY)
"complete and utter buffoon"
"That by the way THICKO "
"clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree"
"Carroll"
"Have you found an echo JOM?"
Or have you always wandered through life making a complete and utter JOM-like CUNT of yourself?
Carroll
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"

You really should read our own posts sometime - it would help avoid the foot-in-mouths - the "Rattle of an Simple Man", as the screenplay writer described it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 12:48 PM

Have you found an echo JOM? (JOM is a word that you invented and that I have adopted. It means a clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree - in other words Carroll - you in a nutshell.)

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 12:45 PM

I will repeat IT YET AGAIN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE AMONG US WHO ARE TOO BLOODY THICK TO UNDERSTAND PLAIN ENGLISH (i.e. YOU RAGGY)

The only Army of any of the 1914 combatant powers that did not mutiny in the field was that of the British, Commonwealth & Empire.

That by the way THICKO does not mean that there were no mutinies out of the line in various small units in fact in the entire course of the First World War some 2,000 British, Commonwealth & Empire soldiers mutinied - that is 2,000 out of a force of some 5,300,000 {That represents less than 0.04% over the entire course of a war that lasted 4 years, 3 months 1 week} At great risk, and against my better judgement, I will leave you to work out whether or not that represented a significant number and in no situation whatsoever did any of those troops mutiny when facing any enemy threat, neither did they ever refuse to attack the enemy at any time.

Hells teeth Raggy yet another attempt to try and catch ol' Teribus out where you end up looking like a complete and utter buffoon - don't you ever get tired of it? Or have you always wandered through life making a complete and utter JOM-like CUNT of yourself?

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 10:02 AM

Yet another mention of Mutiny in the papers relating to Jesse Short, of course muting NEVER occured in the Bwitish forces eh.

As to Crozier that will have to wait until I return to the UK and am not distracted by the rather good Guinness here.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 06:58 AM

"The noise of exploding myths is deafening ain't it."
Nothing to do with me - that was a quote from HISTORY LEARNING SITE
No harm done, another opporuninty to put this up again with the appropriate addition:
Jim Carroll

"A reminder
"Ehmmm No JOM"
"Carroll"
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled."
You really should read our own posts sometime - it would help avoid the foot-in-mouths - the "Rattle of an Simple Man", as the screenplay writer described it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 06:54 AM

Keith has never admitted to that error, Teribus, and your description of it here is inaccurate. At our age, old chap, we really ought to stop relying on memory alone. Go back to where it first popped up and take another look. Though I really wouldn't bother if I were you. Have you decided yet that I've never taken you on over "summary executions," by the way?

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 06:26 AM

"James Crozier from Belfast was shot at dawn for desertion – he was just sixteen."

Ehmmm No JOM - "When researching James Crozier's age I found conflicting records. The West Belfast Volunteers website states eighteen and his War Graves Commission grave states unknown.  However, I found his birth record which gives his date of birth to be: 6 August 1894.  This made him just twenty when he joined-up and twenty-one when he died." - Karen Ette

The noise of exploding myths is deafening ain't it.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 06:25 AM

"You said that none of these papers exist didn't you?"
I said that an account of the Court Martial wasn't accessible.
I know nothing whatever about "Wheatcroft and have never posted on it.
Take your smokescreens elsewhere and answer the points - with documented evidence.
"Too big to admit you were in the wrong to the person you called a liar?"#
You are forever calling me a liar
you deny telling lies and when you were presented with a list of your lying statements and dishonest behaviour yo denied them outright.
And you think I should apologise to you!!!!
You are out of your mind.
You have apologised one and drawn attention to that apology several times
You are one of the most ill-mannered and arrogant individuals I have ever come across
With yourt behaviour, it is a mystery to me that you are allowed to continue on this forum
"Carroll"
As promised
"A reminder
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled."
You really should read our own posts sometime - it would help avoid the foot-in-mouths - the "Rattle of an Simple Man", as the screenplay writer described it."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 06:00 AM

"The proceedings would be what actually went on, what the charges where, what the defence was - if that is what happened it was, as I belive all of these 'mock trials' to be, a kangaroo court.
I came across these when I checked your claim - that is all any of these "proceedings" consist of - not a detail of the trial among any of them - a confirmation that these executions were little more than institutional murder."

You said that none of these papers exist didn't you? - yer tis - "none of these MURDERS are available in detail" - yelled the indignant JOM - pity you didn't actually open the link as on the first page (actually page 2 of the proceedings) the First Column gives the name and Regiment of the accused, the Second Column details the Charge. On average these bundles normally consist of between 20 and 25 pages mostly forms but in the example I supplied these were omitted but one page giving the witness testimony was given. But there again Carroll anything supplied would never be enough would it? Walter Pardon and the Rolling Stones. Still you have been told where to look the rest is up to you.

"Sebastopol - I meant Gallipoli, of course, a point I have made in the past - but I'm sure it is a slip you will use as a lifeline for your total failure to make a point here."

Ah you mean much the same as you and your pals have done to Keith A with regard to a certain article that appeared in the Guardian written by Geoffrey Wheatcroft something to do with the use of the words "Vulgar" and "Fraudulent". Mind you in his case he did quote the passage referring to Wheatcroft's opinions of both AJP Taylor's work and Alan Clark's work accurately enough initially he only slipped up by omitting the word "vulgar" once and admitted that error about six times immediately after - yet Shaw is still dredging it up two years later - is that the sort of thing you expect JOM - by the way JOM is a word that you invented and that I have adopted. It means a clueless ignoramus of truly astounding degree - in other words Carroll - you in a nutshell.

By the way Carroll where is your apology for calling me a liar for saying that Frank Percy Crozier had been Court Martialled? Waz a matter Carroll too big to apologise? Too big to admit you were in the wrong to the person you called a liar? You are fairly unique though - you are the only person that I know who could with ease walk under an earthworm wearing a top hat.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 04:34 AM

A reminder
"Here is a link for you Jom:"
"By the way JOM"
"how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?"
"Don't worry JOM"
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled."
You really should read our own posts sometime - it would help avoid the foot-in-mouths - the "Rattle of an Simple Man", as the screenplay writer described it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 04:00 AM

"Something Jim Says Doesn't Exist"
That is not the "proceedings of a court martial" -it is, as I said, an acknowledgement of what happened.
The proceedings would be what actually went on, what the charges where, what the defence was - if that is what happened it was, as I belive all of these 'mock trials' to be, a kangaroo court.
I came across these when I checked your claim - that is all any of these "proceedings" consist of - not a detail of the trial among any of them - a confirmation that these executions were little more than institutional murder.
Nothing you put up about Crozierr alters his statement that he boasted about executiing sentries or the fact that nobody has contradicted that boast other than you.
Sebastopol - I meant Gallipoli, of course, a point I have made in the past - but I'm sure it is a slip you will use as a lifeline for your total failure to make a point here.
Your War was one of Gallant Generals and lying, subservient soldiers - a long exploded myth, even in the works of patriots like Max Hastings, who was scathingly critical of how the war was conducted.
You and your dim mate are a pair of dinosaurs.
If you were in anyway justified in your support of this bloodbath, surely somebody else here would have come to your defence - or are wel all subservient, ignorant liars?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 03:23 AM

By the way JOM, to put it in terms you might understand. When I refer to your boundless ignorance, yours is of such a scale that it would be like me starting a thread above the line banging on endlessly about how great Walter Pardon, or Ewan MacColl, were as lead singers for the Rolling Stones then point blank refusing to accept any evidence at all that they were never part of the group.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 03:18 AM

of course more civilians than soldiers were killed in WW2.

i don't really do anti war songs, unless i'm requested to do it. though tobe honest - my way into folk music was The Kingston Trio singing Where have all the flowers gone.

the only spontaneous anti war statement i make is to do the isle of capri/love is the sweetest thing. i do this in remembrance of al bowlly who copped one of Goerings bombs - after doing a gig one night. i can sort of relate to another guitarist.

never buy poppies - but i always put something in the can - more out of respect for the people who give up their time to collect money for a good cause.
sport has always been a political sort of thing - Hitlers Berlin Olympics, Black September in Munich, the black power salutes by American sprinters in '68....
nationalism...puts you off a bit, doesn't it ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOVbB_rEar8

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 03:15 AM

"You lied by claiming that the details of James Crozier's court martial was available - it isn't - none of these MURDERS are available in detail - they are referred to as having happened - that's all." - Jim Carroll {aka: The Voice of the People}

Here is a link for you Jom:

Something Jim Says Doesn't Exist

ALL records and Court Martial documents of those executed during the First World War are held in the National Archives/Public Records Office. The records relating to Rifleman 14218 James Crozier, 9th Bn. Royal Irish Rifles can be found under the reference WO71/450 {That specific enough for you Raggy?}.

"Crozier boasted of summary executions and wrote at length justifying the killing of British soldiers who had had enough or who had been driven insane by what was happening to them" - The Voice of the People

Here is an example of Brigadier- General Frank Percy Crozier boasting about Private James Crozier, the only man he saw, or had dealings with an execution during the First World War -

"Death, despite all the precautions, was not instantaneous owing to nervousness, the firing party fired wide."  The officer commanding the firing party had to use his revolver and shoot James Crozier in the head.

He was no rotter deserving to die like that. He was merely fragile.  He had volunteered to fight for his country ... at the dictates of his own young heart. He failed. And for that failure he was condemned to die - and he did at the hands of his friends, his brothers, with the approval of his church'.

The above shows you just how boastful a man can get doesn't it JOM?

Some Court Martial Records are sealed covering periods of 30 to 100 years.

Back to Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier:

"nobody hads ever contradidicted his claim to have summerally executed men who fell asleep on duty - only you have done that." - yet another pearl from the Voice of the People

Yet another appallingly crafted ill-informed and totally untrue statement Jom. Consult Army records only two men were ever executed for falling asleep on duty, according to those records this occurred in 1917 in Mesopotamia so could therefore have had nothing whatsoever to do with Frank Percy Crozier who never served there.

"You have defended every single aspect of the shitty war - the 'good leaders' who sent the wrong shells, who sacrificed men like so many cattle, Sebastapol, The Somme, Passchendaele, the Loos cock-up"

SEBASTAPOL??? Do tell what fighting was done at Sebastopol during the First World War? Wasn't that fought over during the Crimean War 1854? - Don't worry JOM keep spluttering, your boundless ignorance can be quite entertaining.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 01:13 PM

Yesteray I asked if Teri would provide a link to his information regarding the court martial of Private Crozier, needless to say it has not materialised.

Par for the course with statements made by this poster.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 01:03 PM

""pro-Israel lobby" controls our governments"
The facts implicate the lobby - you've had a list of the actions of the Pro Israel group - you've dismissed them as propaganda
These are some of the propagandists you have accused of lying
Can't be arsed blue-clickying them - you won't respond to theh manyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald    Glen Greenwald
ISRAELI SOLDIERS' TESTIMONIES of WAR CRIMINALITY

CRIMINALISING CRITICISM of ISRAEL in CANADA   Michael Keefer

Michael Keefer is Professor Emeritus in the School of English and Theatre Studies of the University of Guelph. A graduate of the Royal Military College of Canada, the University of Toronto, and Sussex University, he is a former president of the Association of Canadian College and University Teachers of English, a member of the Seriously Free Speech Committee, and an associate member of Independent Jewish Voices Canada.

UPDATE on SETTLER VIOLENCE U.N.
United Nations Human Rights

SETTLER VIOLENCE - LACK of ACCOUNTABILITY   B'Tselmem

http://www.btselem.org/topic/settler_violence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_for_Children_International Defense for Children (Palestine)
SETTLER VIOLENCE - LACK of ACCOUNTABILITY


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Monitor Media Monitor Network
ISRAEL'S CRIMES AGAINST PALESTINIANS

ISRAEL'S CRIMES AGAINST PALESTINIANS
REPORT BY ANTISEMITIC AMNESTY

Department of Politics and International Studies (POLIS)
ZIONISM, RACISM and the PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 11:27 AM

No Keith. I never walk away. I just ignore your stupid games. And I'm ignoring them again now. As a matter of fact, you've been resoundingly answered already by Jim. Now move along, please.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 11:21 AM

"being shot by his own men"
What a pleasant thought to finish the day on.
On second thoughts - would they do that - who would cook their greasy fry-ups?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 11:16 AM

Steve,
You say stuff that you can't corroborate, then, when confronted, you just try to walk away from it

You do that all the time Steve!!
Most recently you claimed that the "pro-Israel lobby" controls our governments, especially the US government, but when asked how you just walked away.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 11:16 AM

Actually.. what's all the fuss about...???

when you think about it...
is there really that much difference between summary executions and ordering men into no man's land towards certain death...???

The end result for the hapless low rank soldier would be exactly the same.... 😬


... and you may also wonder, if teribus had been an officer in command in the trenches..
how long he'd have lasted before being shot by his own men.....??????? 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 03:57 AM

" I have never claimed that Frank Percy Crozier was ever Court Martialled "
I know that now - it was pointed out to me by someone far more polite and knowledgeable than you
Took a bit of time to get my head around my mistake, but I finally got there
It was a red-herring anyway - nobody ever disputed that the official murder of James Crozier wasn't done 'by the book'.
You lied by claiming that the details of James Crozier's court martial was available - it isn't - none of these MURDERS are available in detail - they are referred to as having happened - that's all.
Truth ?
A century later we still don't know the truth.
Vast numbers of the unnoficial diaries and journals (only officers were officially allowed to keep them) that were kept are still unavailable and many of those available are censored.
You talk about "names of those summarily executed" - you know damn well that it is impossible to provide them because we have no proof of how many who went 'missing in action' actually did
Crozier boasted of summary executions and wrote at length justifying the killing of British soldiers who had had enough or who had been driven insane by what was happening to them
There is evidence of an attempt to cover up some of his executions by passing them off as 'missing in action'.
You say Crozier was 'mad' and a 'liar' - maybe he was, but he was a high ranking officer, extensively decorated (yes - I know he lied about some of his medals), and nobody hads ever contradidicted his claim to have summerally executed men who fell asleep on duty - only you have done that.
There is every reason to believe, from the oral evidence of soldiers - whoops sorry "liars" that this happened with Crozier and elsewhere.
Of course you are a jingoist - an extremist right-wing one.
You have defended every single aspect of the shitty war - the 'good leaders' who sent the wrong shells, who sacrificed men like so many cattle, Sebastapol, The Somme, Passchendaele, the Loos cock-up..... all "well-led glorious" fights for 'freedom.
Your world is of heroic, skillful officers and lying soldiers - your own archaic establishment arse-licking stupidity mirrors the stupidity that decimated a generation - how archaically jingoistic is that?
I used to put your refusal to provide a scrap of back-up evidence to anything you claim down to laziness and lack of imagination - I've come to realise that it is because there is no evidence to back up anything you say so you make it up as you go along - your little effort into linking to prove a handful of looters set fire to Sackville Street, rather than the British artillery that actually did the major damage, proves that beyond a shred of doubt.
Even Keith, who isn't the brightest button in the sewing box, used to provide 'evidence' of his outrageous claims, misinterpreted and distorted as it usually was.
You are either too lazy or too stupid to even do that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 01:55 AM

"He wasn't court martialled you lied."

Ehmmm Jom, I have never claimed that Frank Percy Crozier was ever Court Martialled - the fact that you apparently think I did is merely another demonstration of your appallingly poor comprehension of the English language.

Private James Crozier - you know the guy you would like to have us believe Frank Percy Crozier has summarily executed - James Crozier was arrested some twenty miles behind the British lines, charged with desertion, Court Martialled, found GUILTY as charged and sentenced to death. The death sentence was signed and confirmed by Sir Douglas Haig some five days later. Frank Percy Crozier was involved in this process due to the fact that he was Private James Crozier's Commanding Officer - there you have it Jom, is that clear enough for you? Do you understand that? Are you clear that I have not changed a thing and that this is what I stated before? That the above is all clear from the link that you yourself provided.

By the way there is absolutely nothing "Jingoistic" about writing down the truth to counter the complete and utter load of biased, Anglophobic, bigoted, lying bullshit that you constantly come out with.

Subject: RE: BS: No poppies for me
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 03:08 PM

"Claims of summary executions made by whom?"

Certainly not by me, that's for sure, despite what you alleged.