BS: uk politics

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 05:04 AM

Surely the backyard should be cleaned up first or is PC the dominant factor?"

Why wait?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 05:21 AM

I'll try again.

"Surely the backyard should be cleaned up first or is PC the dominant factor?"

Why wait?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 05:58 AM

"Now what was that about the Rooney clan of travellers and slaves in Lincolnshire recently?"
Now there's a good point for examining the state of Britain's politics today
Around a month ago the police made a massive sweep on suspected 'slavers' and found a huge network of gangs and individuals involved in sex trafficking, domestic servant slavery, pimping and prostitution.......
What did the press focus on - the criminal behaviour of eight individuals who happened to be Travellers
Nothing was taken up about the hundreds of other non- Travellers who were uncovered in these raids.
Who does our right winger here hone in on, totally ignoring the fact that our economy is becoming reliant on goods produced under slave conditions, the pimps and traffickers, the domestic slave holders.....?
Eight individuals who were Travellers.
A survey a few years ago indicated that around a quarter of Britain's population held and have expressed racist views.
This little sect of Mudcat members appear to be a microcosm of what his happening in Britain today
What's's your point Iains - that only Travellers are involved in modern slavery?
If not - that is what your question indicates
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:12 AM

I'll keep taking the red pills, you continue with the blue!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:22 AM

"I'll keep taking the red pills, you continue with the blue!"
Do that - perhaps you need to up your dose!
My pills are white, by the way - for high blood pressure
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:40 AM

Keith A of Hertford - 04 Sep 17 - 04:46 AM

"Jim, what have you gained by resurrecting a thread from five years ago?
Nothing except to be ridiculed, yet you keep doing it.

This thread is about current UK politics.
Please stop dredging up these old disputes when they have no relevance to the subject under discussion."

HEAR, HEAR, Keith A very well said - unfortunately he will not take the least notice.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:52 AM

"arms sales to a mass murderer"

What arms sale to which mass murderer?

"the pair who defended this sale"

What sale? I believe that "the pair" you are referring to have "defended" NOTHING, they have (Shock and utmost horror

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 07:48 AM

"This thread is about current UK politics."
You mean the British Government has stopped selling arms to despots and no longer allows the import of goods from firms employing slave labour?
Damn missed that particular U-turn in British policy
"unfortunately he will not take the least notice."
Do I detect desperation creeping in to all this?
Britain not only sells arms and the wherewithal to manufacture them (such as chemical weapons) to mass murderers and torturers, but one of our Prime Ministers personally befriended one and was part of his never being brought to trail, but she describes as attempts to bring him to justice as "running a police state" and described his mass murder as "democracy"
Our last Prime Minister paid respects his to the head of the Saudi Dynasty while his family's regime was administering 10000 lashes to a journalist who had spoken out-of-turn
Our current Prime Minister has just bunged £billion of taxpayers money to a Party with terrorist connections
Nothing has changed in right wing politics - we still support despots, we involve ourselves in wars of self interest and we kiss the arses of warmongerers like Trump
Nothing has changed - if anything, things are getting worse
Will you pair of bullies and manipulators please lay off
What with blustering, cowardly arrogance and attempts to manipulate discussions to deal only with what you both wish to be discussed, this forum is beginning to feel like part of the Murdoch Empire   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 07:51 AM

Before one of you clowns decides a typo is a convenient way out of a hole - that should read 1,000 lashes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:14 AM

Proof that a single penny has been "bunged" to anyone please Jom.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:16 AM

"Nothing has changed in right wing politics - we still support despots"

Are they the same despots that Labour supported Jom?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:18 AM

Don't know what happened to my earlier post - it seems to have been truncated:

"arms sales to a mass murderer"

What arms sale to which mass murderer?

"the pair who defended this sale"

What sale? I believe that "the pair" you are referring to have "defended" NOTHING, they have (Shock and utmost horror) merely had the temerity to tell you that you have provided no proof at all that any sale ever occurred in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:19 AM

Five
Four
Three...

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:33 AM

Five-Four-Three...
Don't know if you are referring to me Baccy
I have no intention of turning this into a triolgue with this pair
Everything here has been dealt with dozens of times - the persistent demands that we cover old ground over and over again is a sure sign of dementia, I've been told
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 08:41 AM

No, not you specifically Jim, just counting down to the point at which the usual fuckwit suspects get yet another thread closed.

I wonder why you don't all meet up in a quiet pub car park somewhere and slug it out.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:25 AM

Jim:
Our last Prime Minister paid respects his to the head of the Saudi Dynasty while his family's regime was administering 10000 lashes to a journalist who had spoken out-of-turn
What should he have done? Refused to deal with Saudi Arabia, possibly refused to deal with any of the Oil states, after all, who needs oil?
The journalist (as with any traveller) should be aware of the laws & restrictions in any country they visit. If they are not prepared to live within those laws (no matter how harsh)then they can choose not to visit.
We expect visitors to our country to abide by our laws, can we do less when we are the visitors?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:49 AM

Are you justifying the use of the lash?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:51 AM

"Why Wait?" Because the world has gone barking mad!

Simple example The Sure Start center in Oxfordshire insists the nursery rhyme Baa Baa Black sheep is sung Baa Baa Rainbow sheep.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/499/Political-correctness-gone-mad

http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/10/political-correctness-islam-made-britain-vulnerable-chemical-terrorism/

http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11391314/Rotherham-child-sex-abuse-scandal-council-not-fit-for-purpose.html

This thesis could be developed ad nauseum, but I am sure most will get the point, although I can predict those that will make it an issue not to!

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:56 AM

Backwoodsman as Keith A said to the fuckwit:

"Please stop dredging up these old disputes when they have no relevance to the subject under discussion."

If that request was observed then these "trialogues" on off topic subjects would not occur

Very surprised to see the "fuckwit" come out with this:

"Everything here has been dealt with dozens of times - the persistent demands that we cover old ground over and over again is a sure sign of dementia, I've been told"

When it is he himself who is most guilty of doing precisely what he is complaining of.

Read Jim Carroll - 01 Sep 17 - 09:05 AM - this was the "fuckwit's" 12th or 13th post to the thread, at this stage I had posted 2 times, Keith A 5 times, Iains 6 times, just go back through his posts to discover the number of people he has had a pop at. When it comes to throwing out baseless accusations and allegation the "fuckwit" is a high-level "ranter" par excellence.

The threads that are normally dug up are ones that the "usual suspects" got absolutely slaughtered on prior to them driving those threads to closure and in some cases total deletion.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:01 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 09:49 AM

Are you justifying the use of the lash?

No.
But it is not my place to try to impose "Western" Laws and values on other states. If I want to avoid the risk I avoid the country, or abide by their laws if I travel.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: MikeL2
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:05 AM

Hi B W M

I wonder why you don't all meet up in a quiet pub car park somewhere and slug it out. "

I agree to this give us a rest for ***** sake. Some people need to grow up.

cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:12 AM

So you think it would be OK, for example, for Saudi Arabia to behead a UK citizen in a public square, then, Nigel? Just shrug and say, well, he shouldn't have been such a naughty boy then? This is not a question of imposing western laws on anybody. It's a question of opposing barbaric and brutal punishments that go way beyond fitting the crime. Whaddya think, Nigel?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:32 AM

"But it is not my place to try to impose "Western" Laws and values on other states."
Nor is it the place of out politicians to support such behavior, particularly when it comes to selling arms to them
It seems to me that the refusal to attend a funeral at a time when a regime was showing itss savegry would have been an ideal gesture for a responsible head of state to make
Since the funeral, Saudi Arabia has sentenced a man to 10 years in prison and 2,000 lashes for expressing his atheism on Twitter - Saudi is still one of our main customers for weapons
A great deal of posturing was done by Trump in castigating Muslim Countries with supposed links to terrorism _ Saudi Arabia was not one of them
Oil will get you anywhere, it seems

"as Keith A said to the fuckwit:"
"Very surprised to see the "fuckwit" come out with this:"
Will continue to put these up until you stop or are stopped - it's as permanent as it ever was
You can never find a moderator when you need one - what happened to the condition of membership that said we need to show respect for other members
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:38 AM

Better still Shaw why don't you go to Saudi Arabia and tell them all in your "Union Activist - Whaddya think" manner in Mecca exactly what you thing of religion and belief in religion. Then we can all sit back and watch from the comfort of our armchairs your subsequent trial and punishment. It will no doubt commence with the instruction "Wheel the guilty bastard in" (In Arabic of course) as with your views on religion there will be absolutely no question of your "Innocence". Penalty for "Blasphemy" uttered by an infidel under various Sharia Codes of Law is Death, which you may dodge Shaw by adopting the Muslim faith and becoming a devout follower of the religion - A win-win situation for all interested spectators I'd say.

As Nigel Parsons has clearly stated:

1: "The journalist (as with any traveller) should be aware of the laws & restrictions in any country they visit. If they are not prepared to live within those laws (no matter how harsh)then they can choose not to visit.
We expect visitors to our country to abide by our laws, can we do less when we are the visitors?

2: "If I want to avoid the risk I avoid the country, or abide by their laws if I travel."

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:38 AM

"Oil will get you anywhere, it seems"
Finally comprehension dawns.
Welcome to the real world

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:42 AM

What do I think?
It would depend on the circumstances.
Beheading for theft would not seem a suitable response, but for murder would be both a punishment and a deterrent.

But their social mores and religious background are different from ours. I would not wish to see Sharia Law imposed in the UK, what right have I to insist that they follow our ways?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 10:49 AM

I think that it is the responsibility of British politicians, particularly those in government of looking to the national interest of the country and its citizens. Concerns relating to employment and foreign trade and earnings take precedence over futile and empty gestures. On the subject oof funerals Jom. Tell us all again how good ol' Dev addressed Hitler's death in 1945, tell us all how he registered his objections to the dictator and despot who had been the root cause of roughly 72 million deaths - Correct me if I am in error here but wasn't he the first person to sign the book of condolence at the Nazi Embassy in Dublin?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:06 AM

"I am in error here but wasn't he the first person to sign the book of condolence at the Nazi Embassy in Dublin?"
Is anybody defending Dev or his politics here?
Missed that one!
It seems if political leaders do things it is the people who are responsible for it
Paerhaps the anarchists are right - we don't need them
If we trade with people who behave like Assad and the Saudis - particularly if we prop up their regimes with weapons, we are no better than they are
Blair was accused of war criminality for his behaviour over WMD - perhaps he should have been offered a knighthood - after all, it was all for the sake of keeping our cars on the road.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Stu
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:18 AM

"but for murder would be both a punishment and a deterrent"

It's not a deterrent though, is it? Also, in the case of the death penalty it's the innocents who really suffer. Better to keep the buggers alive and let them stew over their mistakes for the rest of their days.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:29 AM

Both Teribus and Nigel have demonstrated that they don't know the difference between laws and punishments. I don't agree that I shouldn't be able to declare my atheism anywhere on earth, but I wouldn't be stupid enough, believe it or not, to shout it from a Saudi rooftop. A further point there is that wild horses wouldn't get me to a rooftop or to anywhere else in that country. Yes if I knowingly break even a stupid law I can expect to be punished. When Isis beheaded its captives on camera we were all justifiably outraged and horrified. But Saudi Arabia does that in public around 300 times a year, not to speak of its public floggings, and you hardly hear a whisper raised against it. You wouldn't for one second say that it would be fine to do that here, but, instead of condemning the regime, you are putting the blame on the victims for the predicaments they find themselves in. Well I don't think you're blaming the right people. And I don't see what trade union activism has to do with it. That's just a small-minded, gratuitous insult, frankly, totally uncalled for.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 11:38 AM

"Jom. "
Whoops - missed another piece of insecurity
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:06 PM

Jim,
"This thread is about current UK politics."
You mean the British Government has stopped selling arms to despots and no longer allows the import of goods from firms employing slave labour?

Jim there is currently much turmoil in UK politics, but those things are not an issue at present.

Can we be allowed to discuss things that are?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:09 PM

Those things most certainly are an issue. When did they cease, in your view, to be an issue? Unless you have evidence, not yet seen by the rest of us, that they have stopped doing those things.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:16 PM

Ah so in short Shaw you subscribe to 2: "If I want to avoid the risk I avoid the country"

With you however it is not merely a case of you proclaiming your atheism is it? It is of you decrying, mocking and belittling the beliefs of others - Whaddya think, Shaw?

"You wouldn't for one second say that it would be fine to do that here" - Yet there are people in the UK who are pressing for Sharia Law to be recognised and practiced in the UK. My feelings on that are that our forefathers fought and campaigned for the legal system and rights we currently enjoy - they are not up for negotiation.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:24 PM

Those things most certainly are an issue.

The papers and news reports are full of political stories at the moment, but not those ones.
Until Jim dredged up the old dispute no-one thought of mentioning it.

Which party has recently issued a statement about it?
Is any party split over it?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:47 PM

"Until Jim dredged up the old dispute no-one thought of mentioning it."
Will you stop attemting to control what people discuss on this forum - you have no authority to do so, yet you do it persistently when it becomes embarrassing your particular brand of politics
All I wrote was
"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."
Britain's involvement in the arms trade is extremely relevant to this discussion which you chose as "uk politics"
WE are up to our arses in fighting off terrorist attacks because we have alienated young Muslim people by selling their former persecutors arms
Neither you or Teribus had any problem joining in a discussion by defending sales of ammunition or riot control equipment to Assad - as you have always done
It was you, not me, who extended this subject into a loing argument - I was quite happy to leave it with my original statement - we've covered this over and over again
Britain sells arms to repressive states - former business secretary admitted as much
"Vince Cable, the business secretary, has admitted as much. "We do trade with governments that are not democratic and have bad human rights records", he told a crossparty group of senior MPs. "We do business with repressive governments and there's no denying that"."
VINCE CABLE
The Arms trade is inghuman, immoral and it is part of the cause of the rise in terrorism
How dare you attempt to prevent people expressing an opinion
This has become a regular to the point of predictability part of the way you operate on this forum - if a subject slips out of your comfort zone - cry "thread drift"
If you wish to curtail argument - open a thread and stipulate that yours is the only opinion acceptable for discussion
Have you ever thought about setting up a dictatorship of your own?
It really is about time you pair cleaned up your act
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 12:52 PM

Who says the question of arms sale is not a current issue
YEMEN
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 01:13 PM

So Keith, you are saying that because newspapers are ignoring something it isn't an issue? Sorry, I am not going to let what I think is an issue and what I will be expressing opinions on be dictated by the sewer press. And parties are not split on it? I don't think thats true, I think that Labour are very much split on whether the UK should be involved in arms sales. Tories, probably only on the subsidiary issue of who those arms sales should be to. And who should rake in the profits.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: peteglasgow
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 01:33 PM

i don't see the need for any country to sell arms to another (don't really see the need for borders but that's another story) i don't see why countries are allowed to take arms abroad or why the americans (and others to a much lesser extent) are allowed to have military bases in dozens of countries around the world (and particularly russia) the anti-nuclear debate gets the occasional airing but the fact that we sell arms to any dodgy regime that wants them has never been seriously considered since robin cook died.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 01:46 PM

"(don't really see the need for borders but that's another story"
I'll drink to that one too Peter
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 02:24 PM

"WE are up to our arses in fighting off terrorist attacks because we have alienated young Muslim people by selling their former persecutors arms"

The world according to Jimmy. Irrational, ludicrous and just plain wrong.
Is that every Moslem between the ages of say 12 and 25 Jimmy. Are you simply exaggerating or just spouting nonsense as usual. In the western world the casualty rate from car wrecks is far higher than that from terrorism and their numbers are in thousands, not millions.

   Are not the vast majority of these terrorist organizations an artificial construct engendered by western political affiliations.
(All denied of course-but who equips, trains, and transports them?)

Perhaps you should have a pop at Toyota for providing all the machine gun mounted "technicals"

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:03 PM

"The world according to Jimmy. Irrational, ludicrous and just plain wrong.2
you and your4 mates are totally incapable pf posting without hrling personal insults aren't you?   
It might worry me if it didn't come from a supporter of a mass murderer
Make a note to yourself - never try to talk down to people when you're standing in a hole
"Are you simply exaggerating or just spouting nonsense
Then how about substantiating it with a few facts
Terrorism is in the INCREASE throughout the world - I'n not interested in the few nutters at the top, they could be from any religion.
I'm talking about those who went out to fight your friend Assad and came back radicalised
I could have added the younger generation, no longer prepared the Paki-Bashing culture that their parents withstood with such stoicism
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-eu-a7580516.html
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Iains
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 03:30 PM

Jim if you want to state that terrorism is increasing in the world that is a statement that can be accepted, denied, or discussed.
To make the statement" we have alienated young Muslim people by selling their former persecutors arms" is obviously a gross simplification, an exaggeration and simply not true. There are many 2nd and 3rd generation Moslems in the UK-when were they persecuted?
To state "those who went out to fight your friend Assad and came back radicalised" is a bit cart before the horse. It would be easier to accept they were radicalised and then went to Syria otherwise why travel? It is hardlt a tourist destination any more.
Don't know about Assad being a friend- the only time he came visiting I was out in the field so never met the guy.
You are just throwing out unsubstantiated facts to support a feeble argument.

You would be taken far more seriously if you used facts instead of bluster to support your stance on various subjects.

When it comes to insults do you regard yourself as the pot or kettle?

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 04:24 PM

Jim still inhabits the sixties and seventies when politics were more simple.
The working class were an organised political faction, the good guys wore bunnets and scarfs...the baddies ties and Trilbies.

The Tories were the enemy and striking was the MO......We would show the bastards how to shoot ourselves in the foot! Everybody Out!!

Jim is a hopeless ranter, to paraphrase a famous US commentator
"If Jim were prevented from ever again calling other Members dumb, he would be robbed of half his arguments. To be sure, he would still have "racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple him."

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: bobad
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:11 PM

What are the root causes of Islamic terrorism? Is it misguided to focus exclusively on religion or politics? Is it wrong to describe the current conflict as a "clash of civilizations"?

The latter part of your question is yes. The truth is that it's not a clash of civilizations. It never was. [Samuel] Huntington's theory has been critiqued to death on that. Rather, what we're seeing is a clash between those who believe in democratic values, like human rights and secularism, and those who believe in totalitarianism. But of those who believe in totalitarianism and have dictatorships, some will use jihadist tactics to further their ends, and others will use other forms of undemocratic phenomena.

But essentially, it's a struggle between democrats and non-democrats, secularists and non-secularists. In those dividing lines there are Muslims and non-Muslims on both sides. For example, there are non-Muslim voices out there that excuse and obfuscate the phenomenon of jihadist terrorism, focusing primarily on the U.S. being the enemy while making every excuse under the sun for theocrats. Likewise there are Muslims on the other side who will struggle against theocracy — Islamist theocracy in particular — while defending democratic values.

So it's not really a struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims. That's a complete and total misdiagnosis of the problem. Assuming it's a struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims is as shallow and lacking in nuance as assuming that all Christians in the world subscribe to the same political beliefs. They simply don't. … Political beliefs, though associated to or perhaps influenced by one's religious beliefs, aren't in fact determined by one's religious beliefs, and this applies to Judaism, Christianity, Islam or any other religion in the world.

Former Islamist radical Maajid Nawaz: Salon

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Sep 17 - 06:58 PM

That's just very shallow and superficial. Gibberish, frankly.

As was your last post directed at me, Teribus. Take a deep breath and try again.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 02:07 AM

All I wrote was
"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."

No Jom that is what you wrote to dredge up this subject on this thread, and what you wrote is a gross misrepresentation based on an assumption on your part that you have never been able to verify as being true. NO evidence has ever existed, or been presented by anyone that any actual sale, or delivery of ammunition has ever taken place. If it had THAT is what your newspaper article would have reported, NOT simply that an export licence had been issued.

This is YOUR claim as posted on the "Homs Horror" Thread:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 05:39 AM

"So you intend to continue to ignore the horrors of Homs brought about by sniper rifles sold by Britain - specifically for use on the civilian population"

The above is a downright lie Here is another Jim Carroll lie:

"Neither you or Teribus had any problem joining in a discussion by defending sales of ammunition or riot control equipment to Assad - as you have always done"

I do not think that I have EVER defended anything of the sort - the above is typical Carroll "Made-Up-Shit" - as can be seen above the only comments I have made have been to challenge YOUR lies and misrepresentations - So I will say it again just to make it perfectly clear to YOU - No evidence exists that there was EVER any sale of ammunition from from the private individual who was granted an export licence to Syria, and secondly Britain, as in the British Government has sold neither weapons OR ammunition to Syria - FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 02:07 AM

All I wrote was
"evidence emerged that Britain had sold sniper ammunition to Syria."

No Jom that is what you wrote to dredge up this subject on this thread, and what you wrote is a gross misrepresentation based on an assumption on your part that you have never been able to verify as being true. NO evidence has ever existed, or been presented by anyone that any actual sale, or delivery of ammunition has ever taken place. If it had THAT is what your newspaper article would have reported, NOT simply that an export licence had been issued.

This is YOUR claim as posted on the "Homs Horror" Thread:

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 14 Feb 12 - 05:39 AM

"So you intend to continue to ignore the horrors of Homs brought about by sniper rifles sold by Britain - specifically for use on the civilian population"

The above is a downright lie Here is another Jim Carroll lie:

"Neither you or Teribus had any problem joining in a discussion by defending sales of ammunition or riot control equipment to Assad - as you have always done"

I do not think that I have EVER defended anything of the sort - the above is typical Carroll "Made-Up-Shit" - as can be seen above the only comments I have made have been to challenge YOUR lies and misrepresentations - So I will say it again just to make it perfectly clear to YOU - No evidence exists that there was EVER any sale of ammunition from from the private individual who was granted an export licence to Syria, and secondly Britain, as in the British Government has sold neither weapons OR ammunition to Syria - FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 02:22 AM

Steve Shaw - 04 Sep 17 - 06:58 PM

"That's just very shallow and superficial. Gibberish, frankly."

Only thing wrong with that of course Shaw is that you cannot challenge or refute in detail anything I have stated. For confirmation of what I have said about you and your attitude to religion and the religious beliefs of others we could ask Joe Offer, mg, or peteofthesevenstars.

Subject: RE: BS: uk politics
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Sep 17 - 03:03 AM

Enough here Teribus
Keith stated the confusion about whether the order was for whether the shipment was for rifles or ammunition - I orignally put up the information that Britain had shipped military equipment to Syria - you pair denied that fact like headless chickens
This is what I put up
Syria 2,676,460 30,000        1 Small arms ammunition
Which I linked to this
who do we sell to, how much is military and how much just 'controlled'?
My point was then and remains that Britain sold weapons and equipment to repressive states, including Syria
Now we have the full team mob-handed - including Ake, defending the fact that Britain sells arms to repressive states - not did - "DOES"
AND AGAIN
ONE MORE TIME
And more still
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/yemen-multibillion-dollar-arms-sales-by-usa-and-uk-reveal-shameful-contradiction-with-aid-efforts/
You can nit-pick over whether I got the details of a sale of sniper ammunition as long as you like - my point was and remains that our politicians have steeped the British people in the blood of poorer nations for the profit of the few and was last year reckoned to be the second largest arms dealer in the world
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-is-now-the-second-biggest-arms-dealer-in-the-world-a7225351.html
That is how much my arguments are "in the sixties and seventies"
If I needed any more confirmation - this full gathering of the extreme right wolf-pack is sufficient
That is the face of UK politics today - profiting from death of the poorest people on the planet
Jim Carroll