BS: Syria: the new nightmare?

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 09:45 AM

"You should be charged with massacring the English language - your at the stage of almost needing an interpreter."

Oh, how delicious is that! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 10:06 AM

" your at the stage of almost needing an interpreter."
Didn't notice that Steve - thanks
You couldn't make it up!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 12:28 PM

Of course Shaw - "your" instead of "you're" - truly worthy of comment.

Now in your socks and open-toed sandal wearing teacher mode Shaw what do you make of this:

"Even if I id get the denialo of the license being issued - which I didn't, there are half a dozen more excuses you have offered and have been admitted to by your silence on them." - Jim Carroll

It appears our paragon of the UK's educational system simply gave that a pass.

Guess I'll just have to start correcting Jim's papers whenever he posts eh Shaw? He has never liked me doing that in the past and accused me of talking down to him.

Now Jim asks me "Will this do?" - Do for what?

Now the Homs Thread where you started out by stating that the United Kingdom {As in the UK Government} had supplied Assad with weapons.

This was a gross misrepresentation, or in other words a lie, that Keith A of Hertford, 999 and myself pulled Jim up on.

So as the thread progressed Jim changed his story - He then changed it to the United Kingdom {As in the UK Government} had supplied Assad with ammunition - ANOTHER LIE that he was pulled up on by Keith A and myself.

Finally towards the end of the thread we get the admission from Jim:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 07:18 AM

"The total of my evidence is that Britain licensed an order of small arms ammunition.......

Now that is one hell of a change of story from the UK Government supplying Assad with weapons being used to kill Syrian civilians in Homs in 2012 to the British Department of Trade granting an export licence to a private individual for £30,000 worth of small arms ammunition in 2009 without one shred of evidence that the order ever went through or that the goods were ever delivered. Only took a thread of about 750 posts to convince the gormless lying prat to tell the truth, but he still keeps trying to resurrect his myths and lies.

Carroll is not very good at arguing against hard fact, but there again neither are you Shaw, in Jim Carroll's own words {paraphrased} your argument is so poor you have to resort to picking up typo's.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 12:42 PM

"where you started out by stating that the United Kingdom {As in the UK Government} had supplied Assad with weapons."
I posted a piece of information about ammunition - Keith chipped in with "all you could come up with was a few sniper rifles".
I also pointed out the supplying of armoured cars, water cannon and other riot control equipment - you can pedantically claim they are not weapons if you wish - ask the people they were used on what they were.
"Now Jim asks me "Will this do?" - Do for what?"
You lied when you said you had not denied that a licence had been issued - that's what
Want it again?
THere you go!

"Except the documented small arms ammunition"
Documented where?? A news paper?? The Daily Mail eh? Are you serious?"
That'll do for another verbatim example of your having lied that you requested elsewhere.
To repeat now piss off
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Nov 16 - 07:31 PM

Jaysus. I can't resist.

"Carroll is not very good at arguing against hard fact, but there again neither are you Shaw, in Jim Carroll's own words {paraphrased} your argument is so poor you have to resort to picking up typo's."

Well, Bill, there should be a full stop after "Shaw" and a capital letter to start the next sentence. And where did that apostrophe in "typo's" come from?! 😂

It pays to ignore punctuation and spelling glitches as long as they don't cloud the meaning. If you choose to pick them up, be prepared to have your own mistakes highlighted. You make plenty, and, generally, no-one bothers to pick you up. Do feel free to highlight mine. I'm not bothered.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Nov 16 - 02:26 AM

"Except the documented small arms ammunition"
Documented where?? A news paper?? The Daily Mail eh? Are you serious?"

That was when you were still insisting that the ammunition in question had been delivered and was being used to kill civilians in Homs. Your story in the Homs thread changed as I have stated below from British Weapons sent by the British Government to Assad to finally you stating that all that had happened was that a licence had been issued. You have yet to prove that a single round was ever sent to Syria.

But just for the record and to put things in context here is the full exchange:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Teribus - PM
Date: 20 Mar 12 - 07:06 PM

Ah, so in short, you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria. It was just something you read in a newspaper, and having read the passage you misunderstood it and got it all wrong - something that I bet is not too unusual for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 07:14 AM

"WHO HAS SUPPLIED NOTHING TO SYRIA!" Teribus from a previous post
Except the documented small arms ammunition - as you say, sniper bullets
Nothing else new then?

What you are arguing there Jim Carroll is that the ammunition was supplied by the British Government and sent to Syria and that Carroll is a barefaced lie. One that you were pulled up on.

Still waiting for the post of mine where I deny that any export licence was ever granted.

Thanks Steve, I'll try harder next time.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Nov 16 - 07:55 AM

"That was when you were still insisting that the ammunition in question had been delivered and was being used to kill civilians in Homs"
No it wasn't - you denied there was any record of the sale and then you lied about having ever said such a thing - you lied
"Ah, so in short, you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria."
And there it is again - double proof of your lying
Checkmate
"Your story in the Homs thread changed"
On;ly in the sense that my information was addes to while I searched for more information.
As you provided none, none came from you.
You changed your argument at least half a dozen times - you have a list.
"Still waiting for the post of mine where I deny that any export licence was ever granted."
You've just had it (again) this time you supplied it yourself.
Own goal and checkmate.
Maybe we'll get a response to the list of the other half-dozen occasions you have lie4d - why quit when you're on a roll?
Come back when the pubs close (but I suggest you sleep it off this time)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 03:07 AM

"No it wasn't - you denied there was any record of the sale and then you lied about having ever said such a thing - you lied"

Really Carroll? Is this another stick that you have grabbed the wrong end of? By the way, as you seem to be losing the place yet again, the "lie" you originally accused me of was denying that an export licence was issued - now apparently I am being accused of lying by stating the truth.

The undeniable fact is that there are no records of any sale, otherwise you would have produced them and quoted them over 4 years ago to substantiate your claim - you failed to do so then because they don't exist. The only thing that your Daily Mail article mentioned was that an export licence had been granted, no mention of any sale, only one of the things you got wrong and totally misunderstood when you read the article. Your contention was that the British Government had sold weapons to the Assad regime - that Carroll was a deliberate misrepresentation, in short a lie.

Jim Carroll - 26 Nov 16 - 07:55 AM - No reference in this post to any post of mine where it can be shown that I have lied. Tell me Jim why is it that you cannot back up your statements?

Keep floundering about Carroll

Example of quoting something that I have posted:

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 - The Truth

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 - According to Carroll this is me denying that any export licence was ever issued

3: There are no records of sale or delivery of the ammunition mentioned in your Daily Mail article - The Truth


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.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 05:00 AM

A reminder
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled.""
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: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 10:22 AM

Only person with their foot in their mouth in this discussion Carroll is you.

You are at the stage now where you cannot even fix it in your own mind what it is I was supposed to have lied about. First it's this and then it's that - you're making a complete and utter fool of yourself throwing accusations about like confetti based upon your own misinterpretation and misunderstanding of an newspaper article which explains why, when asked to give the reference to the post of mine where I lied you are unable to do so.

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 - The Truth

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 - According to Carroll this is me denying that any export licence was ever issued

3: There are no records of sale or delivery of the ammunition mentioned in your Daily Mail article - The Truth

Now then Jim which of those three points is incorrect and where is your proof that confirms any of being incorrect?
Where and when have I ever denied that an export licence was issued?

The Daily Mail Article

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 10:33 AM

A reminder
"every time you mention the name Woodcock I know I've got through to you and you are getting rattled.""
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: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 11:17 AM

Needle stuck Jim?

I suppose that you do have nothing left to say, having proved on this thread that you are a fool and a liar. Same could be said of your efforts on the "No poppies" thread as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 01:23 PM

A powerful piece on the fall of Aleppo by Canadian author and journalist Terry Glavin:


The fall of Aleppo shows us exactly what we have become
Published on: December 14, 2016 | Last Updated: December 14, 2016 12:54 PM EST

Aleppo has fallen. The last and sturdiest bastion of the Syrian uprising is gone. The Battle of Aleppo is over, the revolution is finished, and the Syrian mass murderer Bashar Assad has won. Russia has won. Iran has won. Hezbollah has won. The United States has lost. The United Nations has lost, and the bloody war in Syria, already having taken nearly half a million lives, goes on.

Aleppo mattered, it should go without saying, but it's worthwhile enumerating what did not matter. You can start with Aleppo's 31,000 dead and proceed from there through each and every statutory war crime codified by the International Criminal Court.

Mass murder by chlorine gas. Massacres of innocents. Bombardments by Russian jet fighters. The deliberate targeting of hospitals and clinics. The firing of mortar rounds into crowded neighbourhoods. The terror of barrel bombs dropped from Syrian army helicopters. The starvation siege that followed the city's encirclement by Shia death squads and Assadist militias on Sept. 8.

None of that mattered, not the hourly imagery on Instagram and Youtube and Twitter of corpse-strewn streets and decapitated infants, and not the gut-wrenching final goodbyes uploaded to mobile phones or sent by text from the survivors in the rebel-held ruins of the Old City, the al-Shaar district, and the backstreets of Sheikh Saeed.

Leaning against a wall, his tattered Adidas hoodie drawn against the rain, the young English teacher, reporter and activist Abdulkafi Al-Hamdo managed to use his cellphone camera to upload his goodbye to the video-streaming service Periscope on Monday night.

"What I want to say is, don't believe anymore in the United Nations. Don't believe anymore in the international community. Don't think that they are not satisfied with what's going on. They are satisfied that we are being killed, that we are facing one of the most difficult, or the most serious, or the most horrible massacres that is in our history.

"Russia doesn't want us to go out alive. They want us dead. Assad is the same … but at least we know that we were a free people. We wanted freedom. We didn't want anything else but freedom. You know, this world doesn't like freedom, it seems."

There is no plausible defence any of us can mount against Al-Hambdo's plain-spoken indictment. In the world's citadels of democracy, there are no popular constituencies sufficient to the task of commanding our elected leaders to put their backs into the emancipation of the Syrian people from their tormentors. After all, you know, quagmire and all that. Broach the subject of NATO enforcing a modicum of order in the Syrian abattoir by means of, say, a no-fly zone, and you'll be denounced as a warmonger in the mould of the arch-villains George W. Bush and Tony Blair.
Related

The truth of it is we'd just rather not take the trouble. We aren't prepared to suffer the sacrifices demanded of the commitments to universal rights we profess, so we absolve ourselves by talking about "the Muslim world" as though it were a distant planet. We talk about Arabs as though they were a different species. It's easier on the conscience that way.

Between the drooling bigotries of the isolationist Right and the clever platitudes of the "anti-imperialist" Left, the only place left to address the solemn obligations we owe one another as human beings is in negotiations over the codicils of international trade agreements, or in the rituals of deliberately unenforceable resolutions entertained by the United Nations General Assembly.

Just last Friday, Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion and his diplomats conducted just such a ceremony in sponsoring a non-binding General Assembly resolution demanding an immediate cessation of hostilities in Syria, humanitarian aid access throughout the country, and an end to the siege of Aleppo. It passed, 122 to 13. This is what counts these days as a diplomatic coup.

Canadian Ambassador to the UN Marc-André Blanchard was pleased to claim that the resolution was already having an effect even before it was voted on, because the day before, Russia announced it was temporarily halting its bombing of Aleppo and had even offered to open corridors to allow civilians to flee. This is what counts these days as a diplomatic triumph.

The UN human rights office later announced that it had received credible reports that hundreds of men who crossed into Aleppo's regime-controlled districts had gone missing. Young men were being pulled out of the line at the corridor checkpoints. The Consultative Council in the Levant Front, one of Aleppo's main rebel groups, reported that the men had been taken to "warehouses that look more like internment camps."

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reckons that 60,000 Syrians have been starved to death, tortured to death or executed in Assad's prisons since the non-violent democratic uprising began in February, 2011. Relying on regime defectors and insiders, the Observatory has verified 14,446 deaths at a single facility, Sednaya prison, near Damascus.

And now Aleppo is undergoing what UN humanitarians spokesman Jens Laerke calls "a complete meltdown of humanity." The still-living lie with the dead in the rubble of bombed-out buildings. You can hear them screaming. Regime militias are carrying out mass executions of civilians. In one case, 11 women and 13 children were shot "on the spot." Women are committing suicide rather than face the prospect of rape and murder.

A planned evacuation of perhaps 100,000 civilians and rebel fighters from East Aleppo was heralded as a diplomatic breakthrough on Tuesday, following the abject surrender by all of Aleppo's remaining rebels – hardline Islamists and democratic patriots alike. By Wednesday morning, the Russian-Turkish understanding had fallen through, the glimmer of hope had flickered out, the barrel bombs and mortar shells were raining down on Aleppo again, and from the people, those gut-wrenching final goodbyes – "Pray for us," "I hope you can remember us" – were going out to the world again.

"Save us, people. Save us, people, world, anyone who has even a bit of humanity. We beg you, we beg you," a doctor pleaded, "the dead and wounded are in the streets and people's homes have collapsed on top of them. Save us. Save us."

But that young English teacher, Abdulkafi Al-Hamdo, knows better. He doesn't believe anymore in the United Nations. He doesn't believe anymore in the international community.

Perhaps Allah will look down in his mercy upon Aleppo, because no help is coming from us. None. This is what we have become. This is the depravity to which we have all sunk.

Aleppo has fallen.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 02:41 PM

Time Period         Pro-government forces         Anti-government forces         Civilians         Grand Total (inc.unidentified)
2011
2012
2013         52,290 killed[25]
(2013: 30,239)[26]         29,083 killed[25]
(2013: 18,812)[26]         46,266 killed[27]
(2013: 22,436)[28]         2011: 7,841 killed[29]
2012: 49,294 killed[29]
2013: 73,447 killed[29]
2014         25,160 killed         32,726 killed         17,790 killed         76,021 killed[30]
2015         17,686 killed         24,010 killed         13,249 killed         55,219 killed[31]
January 2016         1,599 killed         1,687 killed         1,345 killed         4,680 killed[32]
February 2016         1,442 killed         2,209 killed         1,109 killed         4,802 killed[33]
March 2016         827 killed         1,232 killed         588 killed         2,658 killed[34]
April 2016         990 killed         1,263 killed         859 killed         3,116 killed[35]
May 2016         1,318 killed         2,669 killed         917 killed         4,927 killed[36]
June 2016         1,435 killed         2,139 killed         1,208 killed         4,823 killed[37]
July 2016         1,291 killed         1,882 killed         1,590 killed         4,794 killed[38]
August 2016         1,311 killed         1,845 killed         1,289 killed         4,475 killed[39]
September 2016         987 killed         1,302 killed         1,228 killed         3,686 killed[40]
October 2016         970 killed         1,720 killed         1,343 killed         4,527 killed[41]
November 2016         1,006 killed         1,656 killed         1,279 killed         3,954 killed[42]
Cumulative 2016 13,176 killed         19,604 killed         12,755 killed         46,442 killed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 02:46 PM

Greg F, if you had any sympathy for the "Palestinians" you would be condemning those that put them in harms way and not use their plight as a platform for your Jew hatred.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 02:52 PM

If only, Bubo, you could spare the same sympathy for the Palestinians as you do for the Syrians.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 02:55 PM

"you would be condemning those that put them in harms way "
The people who put them in harms way in the first place are those who appeared Assad's torture, did nothing to stop his atrocities when he was filling his torture chambers with opponents and cutting down the people of Homs, sold him chemicals that enabled him to make weapons, sniper ammunition and riot control equipment to quash the protests.
Britain was asked to use their influence to stop him and seize his London property.
I have little doubt that this thread has been reopened to show what a bad lot Muslims are - judging by the inhuman and unfeeling individual who reopened it
Jim Carroll
.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 03:00 PM

I have little doubt that this thread has been reopened to show what a bad lot Muslims are

You would because you are a sick fuck too just like your friend Greg F.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 03:18 PM

That's right, Robo- and according to your boy Trump they were celebrating in New Jersey too!

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Thompson
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 03:30 PM

Wouldn't it be possible to make a UN treaty that no country is allowed to sell arms to foreign nationals, with economy-busting fines to be paid into the UN's central fund by any country discovered doing so?

And that no country can produce more arms than it logically needs for self-defence against a credible threat.

And that no country could use arms to suppress dissent.

If countries couldn't buy arms, and could only use what they produced themselves, surely all these wars would stop?

As for the various dictators, aren't they all out for the money? Couldn't they just be put on islands full of luxuries and given lots of money to spend where they couldn't harm others?

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 03:33 PM

GreKKK, you are the one using Trump tactics, not I. Those photos and celebrations were photographed at the time and place indicated, and so reported.
The Palestinians, many of whom are unhappy and miserable, would be more unhappy and more miserable almost anywhere else in the Mideast, and themselves are often dedicated to making those around them not happier, but as miserable as they are.

Bad thought patterns lead to bad actions and bad goals.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 04:20 PM

The Palestinians, many of whom are unhappy and miserable, would be more unhappy and more miserable almost anywhere else in the Mideast

So therefore its OK then that the government of Israel makes them plenty unhappy and miserable where they currently are?

Jesus (or Allah - or Yahweh) wept.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 04:36 PM

So, nobody gives a shit about the tragedy in Syria? No condemnation of the civilian slaughter by the butcher Assad and his Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah allies? Just another thread hijack to bash Jews. Why am I not surprised?

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 05:21 PM

The dead elephant in the room that nobody's talking about is the horror show in Yemen.

Yemen's been the Mideast's punching bag for generations. Back in the 60s there were stories of poison gas being used.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Dec 16 - 07:15 PM

"So, nobody gives a shit about the tragedy in Syria? "
We've been giving a shit about Syria since Homs - one of the longest threads on one political subject
Where were you pair when your two mates were saying it was ok to sell Assad sniper ammunition, or riot control equipment or chemicals for weapons?
Have you two ever complained the subject of selling arms to these monsters has been argued ?- have you ****
How about when Cameron was paying homage to the father of the Saudi regime while that regime was administering 10000 strokes for speaking out of turn.
Have you pair even acknowledged the silence of Britain and America when Assad was filling his torture chambers with victims and then disappearing them ? - you have not.
We've said our bit - silence from you.
Now there's a chance to make some Islamophobic mileage - here you are with your crocodile tears.
Care to comment on the deafening silence from the West while Assad and Russia are slaughtering fleeing refugees?
Care to comment on the fact that this conflict turned into a civil war because the west fif nothing - nope?
Didn't think so.
You haven't commented on any of these things before - you won't know - that sums up your humanitarian approach to Syria
You people are so obvious
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 02:05 AM

Here is an example of a Jim Carroll lie and a total misrepresentation of fact:

"Where were you pair when your two mates were saying it was ok to sell Assad sniper ammunition, or riot control equipment or chemicals for weapons?"

The "two mates" he is referring to are myself and Keith A.

The lie is the statement where Csrroll says that I stated that "it was OK to sell Assad sniper ammunition, or riot control equipment or chemicals for weapons?"

Carroll will not come up with one whit of evidence in the shape of a direct verbatim quote of mine that says anything even remotely like that.

The misrepresentations:

1: No evidence at all that any ammunition was ever supplied by or from the UK that could have been used in Syria in the period March 2011 to the present day.

2: No recorded or reported instances have ever been put forward that any riot control equipment supplied by any UK company has ever killed anybody in Syria.

3: Definite evidence does exist in the form of the BIS investigation that shows no chemicals sold to Syria between 2004 and 2010 were ever used to manufacture chemical weapons

Most of Jim Carroll's posts are fiction based, biased, bigoted, racist drivel the content of which does not even stand up to even cursory common sense or logical scrutiny let alone detailed critical examination.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 08:10 AM

What an imposing list of distortions and dishonesty
1   You have deined the existence of the shipment - have said it was not licenced, have said the licence was rescinded, have said that it was never sent, have said that it was sent too early to have been used, have said it was the wrong size to be used by the army   
2   "No recorded or reported instances have ever been put forward that any riot control equipment supplied by any UK company has ever killed anybody in Syria."
No claim has ever been put forward that they have ever killed anybody
The fact that they were sent to suppress opposition makes them evils shipments
3 Cemichals were sold to Syria that were capable of being used in weapons manufacture
"The Government was accused of "breathtaking laxity" in its arms controls last night after it emerged that officials authorised the export to Syria of two chemicals capable of being used to make a nerve agent such as sarin a year ago.
The Business Secretary, Vince Cable, will today be asked by MPs to explain why a British company was granted export licences for the dual-use substances for six months in 2012 while Syria's civil war was raging and concern was rife that the regime could use chemical weapons on its own people. The disclosure of the licences for potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride, which can both be used as precursor chemicals in the manufacture of nerve gas, came as the US Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States had evidence that sarin gas was used in last month's atrocity in Damascus."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-uk-government-let-british-company-export-nerve-gas-chemicals-to-syria-8793642.html
All this can be confirmed on the Homs Horror thread - lesson - never say in public what you are going to deny later
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 08:37 AM

All that can clearly be learned from the Homs Horror thread is that you are a lying.

Contained in this thread:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Teribus - PM
Date: 20 Mar 12 - 07:06 PM

Ah, so in short, you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria. It was just something you read in a newspaper, and having read the passage you misunderstood it and got it all wrong - something that I bet is not too unusual for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 07:14 AM

"WHO HAS SUPPLIED NOTHING TO SYRIA!" (Teribus from a previous post)
Except the documented small arms ammunition - as you say, sniper bullets
Nothing else new then?

Finally towards the end of the thread we get the admission from Jim:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 07:18 AM

"The total of my evidence is that Britain licensed an order of small arms ammunition.......

"never say in public what you are going to deny later Jim Carroll".

What you were originally arguing there Jim Carroll was that the ammunition was supplied by the British Government and sent to Syria and that is a barefaced lie. One that you were pulled up on.

Still waiting for the post of mine where I deny that any export licence was ever granted - But like all your idiotic ill-informed assertions you aren't going to find any such post to back them up.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 08:50 AM

It defies belief the way Carroll distorts reality by attempting to make it look like the UK is somehow responsible for the genocide being perpetrated by the butcher Assad and his henchmen Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. When facts don't support your ideology use lies and distortion. We're on to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 08:56 AM

Working from the bottom of your 80-odd postings defending the British sales of ammunition and equipment, this is a selection of around a dozen
By this time you had returned to there being no proof of a licence for ammunition being issued, having gone through all sorts of excuses
The confusion of whether the shipment was ammunition or sniper rifles arose from Keith's:

"11 Feb 12 - 09:21 AM
But why do you ONLY criticise Britain?
Not Russia.
Not China.
Not Syria.
Britain is hardly in the same league.
You have clearly been searching vigorously, but all you have come up with is some sniper rifles.

His mistake, not mine, though you were more than happy to claim it was my suggestion.
I'll take this as far as I have with your abusive postings, if that is what you wish – that seems to have done the trick – you made plenty more arrogant postings on that thread and there are several more you contributed to with your appeasement of sales of chemicals and equipment to this monster.
I do like your suggestion that Assad will be defeated – he's on our side now!!
Jim Carroll

21 Feb 12 - 11:59 AM
18: In mid-December Der Spiegel crew managed to smuggle themself inside the city of Homs where they witnesses Baba Amr district being completely under control of FSA soldiers with checkpoints erected at the edge of the district. According to local FSA commander Shabeeha and army snipers were positioned in approximately 200 places in Homs and were shooting on everything that moved in designated zones like Cairo street which runs through the center of the city.
There ya go "Christmas" - First mention of snipers shooting at people around the 18th December 2011 a good two years after some private individual received a licence to sell 7.62 NATO ammo to Syria. Now all you have to do is provide evidence that people shot by these snipers were armed with Austrian Steyr SSG69 rifles firing ammunition (Oh sorry, that should be "firing arms") supplied two years previously by an arms dealer based in Britain (i.e. NOT the British Government).

19: 24th to 27th December 61 people killed by artillery and tank fire - not by snipers - now tell us Jim-Lad who sold Assad the tanks and the artillery because so far they seem to have done the most damage.

20: Same old same old throughout January and February with tanks and artillery doing their worst. Assad's boys killing journalists did not help.

21 Feb 12 - 12:13 PM
Here's one for you "Christmas"
Place: Homs
Date 27th December, 2011
"Some 70,000 protests gathered in central Homs during the official visit of Arab League observer mission and were later dispersed by tear gas."
Number of demonstrators killed = ZERO"

21 Feb 12 - 04:30 PM
"You have proposed sending riot weapons to a murderous dictator,"
No I do not think anyone has done that. They have merely pointed out that it is better to confront a demonstration with non-lethal means than with tanks and artillery as Assad has done. But just to get things perfectly clear here, the murderous dictator we are talking about is Bashar al Assad of Syria, the same man and regime that supplies and supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza
"You have consistently denied documented evidence of weapons supplied by Britain"
Documented "evidence"?? What documented "evidence"? Newspaper articles that when you actually read them show nothing of the kind.
Don't ever sit on a jury "Christmas" whoever the accused was would be well and truly stuffed - you would not know "evidence" if it jumped up and bit you.

24 Feb 12 - 01:17 PM
So Jim-Lad,
As far as your original contention that Syrian civilians were being "slaughtered" by British weapons in Homs, what we have so far is this:
1: Britain has sold no weapons to Syria
2: The licence issued to a private arms dealer in 2009 to sell small arms ammunition (or small arms "arms", as you prefer it) was revoked in good time and there is no evidence that ANY ammunition was ever delivered at all.
3: The vast bulk of those killed in Syria since 6th May 2011 have been killed by shells fired from tanks, artillery, mortar rounds, RPG-7s and small arms predominantly AK-47 Assault Rifles. Most of which are supplied by Russia or China.
As to why the UN is reluctant to act? There can be no UN Security Council Resolution to mandate action as happened in the case of Libya due to Russian and Chinese use of their veto powers.
End result Assad and his regime will collapse, but it will be a long and bloody struggle to finally get what the Syrian people want.

25 Feb 12 - 11:18 AM
Ammunition, Christmas, small arms ammunition.
The "sniper" bullets were your spin not mine, because they are not "sniper" rounds at all just standard rifle ammunition. So if they are in your eyes classified as "sniper" bullets then ALL bullets are "sniper" bullets - fits in nicely with your equally ludicrous "small arms arms" thing.
"White Phosphorus"?? According to the Convention on certain Conventional Weapons and the Chemical Weapons Convention - neither list White Phosphorus as a Chemical Weapon - I will take their word for it (After all just who the fuck is Jim Carroll to tell the world anything)
"Agent Orange" - classified as a defoliant not a Chemical Weapon.
"they are not even being "slaughtered" by British ammunition."
Where is your proof that they are being slaughtered by British ammunition - you have offered nothing apart from newspaper articles referring to the fact that a licence had been granted, not that anything had actually been sold, or delivered.

25 Feb 12 - 01:35 PM
"It really doesnt matter how long the ammunition sold to Syria lasted"
F''kin well does if you are trying to tell us that a small amount of ammunition that might have been "bought" two years ago is currently being used to kill people today when it was sold to a country whose army is 220,000 strong.
So hidden in amongst all that froth:
NO WEAPONS SOLD TO SYRIA BY BRITAIN
NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT BULLETS REPORTEDLY SOLD SUBJECT TO A BRITISH EXPORT LICENCE WERE EVER DELIVERED
NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT THAT AMMUNITION IS CURRENTLY BEING USED TO KILL ANYONE IN HOMS

18 Mar 12 - 04:10 AM
Beyond mentioning and quoting a newspaper article you have produced no "evidence" whatsoever.
Do you faithfully believe everything you read in the Daily Mail Christmas - or just the bits you can use to feed your bias and bigotry?
Please quote where I have stated they were "sniper bullets/sniper rounds" - I think I can go back through my posts to this thread and find that I stated the exact opposite - i.e. stating that the 7.62 x 51mm is standard NATO ammunition that can be fired by the Steyr, but the Russian 7.62 x 54mm is a round specifically loaded for use in their sniper rifles.
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
4: It was pointed out that the only type of ammunition that Syria could use fitted one type of rifle and the sale (If it ever took place) was for a tiny amount of ammunition and it pre-dated the Arab Spring type demonstrations in Syria by two years.



20 Mar 12 - 12:05 PM
Not a fact at all Christmas, my little plumb pudding. I can certainly find no record of any sales or arms or ammunition by the British Government to the Assad Regime in Syria.

20 Mar 12 - 07:06 PM
Ah, so in short, you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria. It was just something you read in a newspaper, and having read the passage you misunderstood it and got it all wrong - something that I bet is not too unusual for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 10:05 AM

"It defies belief the way Carroll distorts reality by attempting to make it look like the UK is somehow responsible for the genocide "
The World -- not just Britain - the world just stood by and watches while the citizens of Homs were being slaughtered on a daily basis - just as they are doing while the fleeing citizens of Aleppo are being used for target practice by our allies, Russia and Assad's troops.
Britain sold equipment that that was used to suppress Arab Spring protests - not just to Syria, but to whoever wished to but it
WE sold chemicals which could be used to make chemical weapons - and was reprimanded for it by the world
There is no doubt that these sales took place any more than there is any doubt that such sales assist despots to suppress their subjects.
Ther is no reason that they should not have taken place; Export Minister freely admitted that Britain will sell arms and equipment to whoever will buy them, no matter what their human rights record.
On the eve of the Arab Spring Protests, David Cameron launched a massive arms sale aimed at countries like Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.
The British Army trained Gaddafi's son to take over when his father died, despite naming Libya a despotic state.
This shitty policy kills and suppresses poor people - it is evil and those who support it are evil
To whoever it may concern - please feel free recognise yourself in this description
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 12:12 PM

Read your post Jim Carroll - 16 Dec 16 - 08:56 AM


Then read this:

Jim Carroll - 25 Nov 16 - 12:42 PM

You lied when you said you had not denied that a licence had been issued

Now does the following read as if I am denying that an export licence had been issued:

21 Feb 12 - 11:59 AM
18: First mention of snipers shooting at people around the 18th December 2011 a good two years after some private individual received a licence to sell 7.62 NATO ammo to Syria.

How about this "example" put up by yourself:

24 Feb 12 - 01:17 PM
So Jim-Lad,
As far as your original contention that Syrian civilians were being "slaughtered" by British weapons in Homs, what we have so far is this:
1: Britain has sold no weapons to Syria
2: The licence issued to a private arms dealer in 2009 to sell small arms ammunition (or small arms "arms", as you prefer it) was revoked in good time and there is no evidence that ANY ammunition was ever delivered at all.

Sound like a denial that any licence had been issued to you.

AND AGAIN Jim:

25 Feb 12 - 11:18 AM

Where is your proof that they are being slaughtered by British ammunition - you have offered nothing apart from newspaper articles referring to the fact that a licence had been granted, not that anything had actually been sold, or delivered.

WHOOPS and again Jim:
25 Feb 12 - 01:35 PM

So hidden in amongst all that froth:
NO WEAPONS SOLD TO SYRIA BY BRITAIN
NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT BULLETS REPORTEDLY SOLD SUBJECT TO A BRITISH EXPORT LICENCE WERE EVER DELIVERED

AND THIS:

18 Mar 12 - 04:10 AM

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

Thank you very much indeed Jim for proving so conclusively that at no time at all have I ever denied that an export licence was issued - counter to your claim that I had.

Tell me do you ever actually read what you post, the links you provide or the articles you refer to? Certainly doesn't look like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 12:47 PM

I started from the bottom of the thread (more convenient
Your first reaction was to deny the licence had been issued - which you returned to aon the last posting "Ah, so in short, you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria. It was just something you read in a newspaper, and having read the passage you misunderstood it and got it all wrong - something that I bet is not too unusual for you.
And again:
NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT BULLETS REPORTEDLY SOLD SUBJECT TO A BRITISH EXPORT LICENCE WERE EVER DELIVERED
Having denied the licence, you said they were never delivered, you then invented a private dealer (no proof provided) The licence issued to a private arms dealer in 2009 to sell small arms ammunition (or small arms "arms", as you prefer it) was revoked in good time and there is no evidence that ANY ammunition was ever delivered at all.
No proof of next - doesn't mention ammo , so not sure whether you are talking about no licence, a revoked licence, no delivery, a private buyer   putting up a smokescreen - as you often do
hat the 154 export licences issued by the British Government for anything being exported to Syria were all revoked in line with EU rules
Now - do we have a licence - do we have a private buyer or is your denial that there is no proof of a licence the one you are sticking with?
This is from a handful of your last postings on thes subject - it gets murkier as it goes on - only four contradictions so far.
Havent got to "the shipment was delivered far too early to make a difference" or they were the wrog size (no mention on the size of ammunition in the newspaper information (which you have dismissed as lies)
By then, you had appeared to have accepted that a delivery was made, but to a rivate buyer and the ammo sent was useless.
Any chance of providing an encrypted guide to your arguments - it was impenitrable then, and it is no clearer now?
For fucks sake - the statements you have just put up contradict yourself - and I haven't started on the rest of them yet.
Dig away!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 01:20 PM

Summing up - we have a licence that was invented by the press and later rescinded, but was issued but the order was never fulfilled but was for ammunition that was sent to a private buyer too early to be used on the streets of Homs
The unspecified ammunition that was/wasn't ordered and sent/not sent was the wrong size to be used by the Syrian army snipers anyway
Have I missed anything?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 01:23 PM

Isn't the title of this thread a wonderful description of this argument?
PERHAPS WE CAN USE THIS TO ENCRYPT IT!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 03:01 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/middleeast/syria-aleppo-war-crimes-claim/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 06:05 PM

Nothing of the kind forthcoming from your boy Trump and his Cabinet of deplorables, Bubo

What about your boy David Duke Smeg, what's his stand does he blame it on the Jews?

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 07:32 PM

Ah, ha, ha Smeg, total bullshit - something you are intimately familiar with as it is your stock-in-trade.

Here's a link to your hero David Duke's web site - we see from it where you get your information about Jews: David Duke.com For Human Freedom and Diversity.....lol!

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 16 Dec 16 - 08:15 PM

I can dissemble as well as you can Smeg - you keep it up and I will match you and go you one better.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 02:14 AM

Jim Carroll - 16 Dec 16 - 12:47 PM

"I started from the bottom of the thread (more convenient
Your first reaction was to deny the licence had been issued"

Really?? Aw shucks Jim, pity you just couldn't find any post of mine where I actually say that. But to the "example you shove to the fore:

"Ah, so in short, you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria. It was just something you read in a newspaper, and having read the passage you misunderstood it and got it all wrong - something that I bet is not too unusual for you." - Teribus

Now where in that quoted passage of mine do I mention the word "licence" let alone state that no licence was ever issued? Tell me Jim because I've looked and I've looked but I just cannot find it. Maybe what I said towards the end of that quote is perfectly correct - i.e. having read the passage you misunderstood it and got it all wrong.

What I did say from the outset was to counter your baseless and ridiculous claim that British weapons, supplied by the British Government were killing Syrian civilians in Homs - in the passage quoted above I clearly state that "you have no proof at all that the British Government sold anything to the Assad regime in Syria". That statement of mine in relation to weapons and ammunition is perfectly true. The only thing the British Government did do was issue an export licence to a private enterprise sometime in 2009 for a minute quantity of 7.62x51mm Standard NATO ammunition. There has never been any proof at all that this sale went through, or that the ammunition was delivered - if there had been any proof you would have come up with it - this you have singularly failed to do. By 2010 ALL export licences covering exports to Syria had been revoked (Simple matter of documented record). The unrest started in Syria in March 2011 and the killings in Homs referred to in the thread began with the Syrian Army's assault on Homs in February 2012.

Finally when pressed you come out with:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 07:18 AM

"The total of my evidence is that Britain licensed an order of small arms ammunition"

So you lied and deliberately sought to misrepresent on the Homs Horror thread when you claimed that British weapons were killing Syrian civilians - something which by your own admission was untrue.

And you lied again when you claimed that I had denied that an export licence had been granted. That lie you have clearly exposed yourself by quoting a number of my own posts to that thread in the period February and March 2012 where I clearly acknowledge and refer to the export licence(s) granted.

You have clearly and conclusively been caught out in two lies, gross misrepresentation and an untrue and baseless accusation. You are in a hole my advice would be stop digging and refrain from mentioning the topic ever again.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 02:35 AM

Jim Carroll - 16 Dec 16 - 01:20 PM

"Summing up - we have a licence that was invented by the press and later rescinded, but was issued but the order was never fulfilled but was for ammunition that was sent to a private buyer too early to be used on the streets of Homs"

"Licence invented by the press" - Where have I stated that, or is that just more of YOUR "made-up-shit"? - Another Jim Carroll baseless accusation.

All export licences issued by the Department for International Trade covering ALL exports to Syria were revoked in October 2010 - FACT.

There is no proof or evidence that any ammunition was ever sent to Syria.

Intrigued by this bit though Jim - as it conclusively does prove that you do not really understand anything that is clearly written - "ammunition that was sent to a private buyer too early to be used on the streets of Homs"

Points related to the above:
1: A private individual who deals in arms and ammunition applied to the British Government for an export licence to SELL £30,000 worth of standard NATO 7.62x51mm ammunition to the Syrian Government.

2: I doubt very much if Bashar al-Assad and the Ba'ath regime in Syria would allow any private citizen in Syria to buy £30,000 worth of small arms ammunition.

You really do not have a clue do you? Stick to the 1954 definition of what is a "Folk Song", hero worship of Ewan MacColl and the songs of Walter Pardon - you're on safe ground there.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 04:45 AM

If you think I'm going to reopen the Homs horror debate again – think again – I've bought all my Christmas presents this year
You've made your case - and it's shown itself not to hold water.
Out of 12 of your postings you've established that a licence that was invented by the press and later rescinded, but was issued but the order was never fulfilled but was for ammunition that was sent to a private buyer too early to be used on the streets of Homs
The unspecified ammunition that was/wasn't ordered and sent/not sent was the wrong size to be used by the Syrian army snipers anyway
That was out of only twelve of your postings – you made around four times more on "Horror", and continued inventing excuses on a couple more threads, trying to recoup your losses.
If it's OK with you, we'll leave it there – that fits under the tree nicely without overcrowding it.
Have a good one – d'you hear
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 05:14 AM

I knew I'd forgotten something - this gem as an excuse for selling Assad equipment - they didn't know he was a baddie:
"Tell me Jim where was this Government crystal ball with it's two year look-ahead in 2006? Must have been in for a service eh? "
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 05:56 AM

"Out of 12 of your postings you've established that a licence that was invented by the press and later rescinded, but was issued but the order was never fulfilled but was for ammunition that was sent to a private buyer too early to be used on the streets of Homs" - Jim Carroll's delusional "take on things"

Now then show me where I have stated any of that.

This part of your delusional wittering is a bit of a contradiction isn't it:

If I had said that the export licence was an "invention of the press" how could it ever be "rescinded"

By the way Jim it is the person selling the goods that requires an export licence NOT the Government, Organisation, Company or person abroad purchasing the goods, the latter three would have to apply to their own Government for an Import Licence. I would have thought that that have been blatantly obvious to a sophisticated man of the world such as yourself, but possibly not to someone who is completely clueless.

£30,000 buys roughly 110,000 rounds and at the time we are talking about, 2009, the Syrian Army numbered ~220,000. Accepting the impossible that Standard NATO 7.62x51mm rounds could be of any use in Russian weapons firing 7.62x39mm ammunition that would mean there would be one bullet between every two soldiers in the Syrian Army wouldn't it Jim? Now one bullet between every two soldiers in the Syrian Army would last them how long Jim - You obviously seem to think three years - as stated delusional, illogical nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 06:54 AM

"Now then show me where I have stated any of that."
Just have - they are exactly what you said inthe postings I found and you drew attention to.
"If I had said that the export licence was an "invention of the press" how could it ever be "rescinded""
Beyond me, but you did - you offered all these excuses throughout the Homs Horror thread, abandoning one, going on to another and then going back to the ones you left
That is the point - you put up over half a dozen contradictory excuses.
Go tell us which of thiose dated ones I put up you didn't post

on second thoughts - don't bother - now your just a bore
And your back to weapon size - where the *** has anybody stated the size of the licenced ammunition apart from you?
You really are amess
Jim Carroll
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Dec 16 - 11:24 AM

Only thing is Jim I have never denied that an export licence for £30,000 worth of small arms ammunition was issued - you said that I had - Jim Carroll "made-up-shit" lie #2 - Jim Carroll "made-up-shit" lie #1 being that Syrian civilians in Homs were being killed by weapons supplied to the Assad regime by the British Government. Then you changed your story to that I had said that the licence was "invented" by the press - only thing wrong with that is that I never said anything of the sort - Jim Carroll "made-up-shit" lie #3.

Right then Jim with your vast experience and knowledge of small arms and ammunition could you tell us what ammunition subject to British export licence could possibly have been offered for sale to Bashir al-Assad's regime? I'm all ears, after all you do not only believe that the ammunition was sold, you also believe that it was despatched, received and used by snipers in Homs to kill Syrian civilians - NOW where is your evidence to support your claim that any of that actually happened.

I for one am not holding my breath, because you have absolutely nothing to substantiate your claims, which is par for the course for you as always.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: robomatic
Date: 19 Dec 16 - 03:57 PM

Properly speaking, Mosul is in Iraq but I didn't want to start a new thread

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Dec 16 - 10:53 AM

Aleppo the 5,000 year old biblical city is where Abraham grazed sheep, where Alexander the Great built monuments and where Shakespeare made mention of Aleppo twice.

Its history makes its genocide all the worse. Because the US was so deceived and war weary the King and mercenaries were left alone to wage war upon this country driven to the cities due to constant drought and crop failure.

In this age it is the first of many such tragedies.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 03:14 PM

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/12/21/israel-to-expand-medical-assistance-for-syrian-refugees/

Israel has been treating and helping Syrian refugees since 2011.
Sponsored

"We're prepared to take in wounded women and children, and also men if they are not combatants ... bring them to Israel, take care of them in our hospitals, as we've done with thousands of Syrian civilians," Netanyahu said at a meeting with foreign reporters in Jerusalem."

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 05:54 PM

And then there's the Palestinian civilians, who Bibi cheerfully consigns to oblivion.