BS: Homs horror (Syria, 2012)

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Mar 12 - 04:42 PM

'Or perhaps it's the right-wing tossers bit you take offence to.'
,..,

Well,not the most subtle of comments, was it?

But must confess that I haven't been following this thread with the greatest of attention: it has become too repetitive, and a bit too two-way 'yah-sucks-boo', to have held my full interest. And must confess that insult to your mother, to which you might indeed well take the utmost exception, had passed me by.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 03:42 AM

I do not find your abuse "subdued" Jim.
It did not start with the thing about your mother, and you have not been lied about.
Your copious postings on the Middle East have given a clear impression of bias against Israel and in favour of the surrounding regimes.

I have been called racist, as usual.
I am not.
Right Wing Nationalist.
No. My politics are Centre Right on a UK scale, so well to the left of most Americans.
Stupid-stupid, imbecile, brain dead and fick (sic).
Hardly objective dismantling of my arguments.
Why do you do it?

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 04:55 AM

"But must confess that I haven't been following this thread"
Which is possibly why you missed:
"Except our most maniacal Marxist."
or:
"A Marxist monster"
And where were you when I was being told "And Jim HAS in the past supported the military actions of those supporting Assad: "Hezbollah; Hamas; Iran"
Maybe I was being unfair when I wrote "right wing tossers" - perhaps it should have been "ultra-right wing tossers" - my apologies.
Subtlty hasn't rated very highly in this discussion - particularly in the persistant efforts to apply censorship in order not to discuss Britain's role in supplying weapons and equipment to 'Arab Spring' states, but I did expect a little even handedness from someone I once respected and whose contributions I once looked forward to.
"and you have not been lied about."
Then you have managed to find evidence of my support for "Assad, Hezbollah; Hamas; Iran" - I look forward to seeing it.
And you continue with your support for sending riot control equipment to a regime that is quite likely to torture and murder any protestors immobilised and captured via the use of such equipment!
Please don't tell me I don't care about what is happening to the Syrian people after your having made such an obscene suggestion.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 05:03 AM

Your copious postings on the Middle East have given a clear impression of bias against Israel and in favour of the surrounding regimes.
I do not regard it as obscene to suggest replacing lethal with non-lethal equipment, especially in a hypothetical context as Assad is not remotely interested in switching.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 05:06 AM

And, are your politics that distinct from Marxism?

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 05:30 AM

"Your copious postings on the Middle East have given a clear impression of bias against Israel and in favour of the surrounding regimes."
So you are saying that everybody who is appalled at Israeli behaviour in Gaza automatically supports Hamas..... Did you ever serve on a British jury?
"And, are your politics that distinct from Marxism? "
You gave no idea what, if any political creed I follow, if any therefore you have invented one to cover your own lack of argument - there fore you have lied
And you continue with your riot exuipment suggestion - it doesn't matter what Assad's wants and needs are
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 05:36 AM

I told you my politics.
I have speculated on yours.
How far off was I?

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 06:49 AM

"I have speculated on yours."
You have not "speculated" on mine, you have openly and unequivically accused me of supporting these people - where is your evidence - you searched and failed to find it last time BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE.
The very least you can do is admit that FACT and withdraw the accusation - it is, of course, having tried - see above - I know it is too much to expect an apology.
I have drawn my speculation of your politics directly from what you have written on this forum - "all male Pakistanis have a cultural implant" which makes them prone to pedophelia... and more recently "I think it OK to offer an alternative to lethal weapons."
Where is there any indication whatever that I am a Marxist? I won't hold my breath.
My stance on every issue we have clashed on is one of humanitarianism - my revulsion at the taking of life of innocent civilians: persucution, torture, murder, massacres, eviction, humiliation by powers that have committed what amounts to war crimes and would have been prosecuted as such if the perpetrators hadn't commanded the ifluence and support that they have.
Are you describing this revulsion as Marxism - I hadn't realised that Marx had such a huge following - there are an awful lot of people, including many members of this forum, who share that revulsion - "enemys of Israel" no doubt!
AND NOW-YOUR PROOF - without which you are proved a liar
My political views are my own business, to be shared with those I choose to share them with - your analysis of your own views certainly don't match up with some of your horrific pronouncements - want me to dig them up so we can test them one by one in the light of day?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 06:55 AM

I just remind you that you constantly pronounce on what you wrongly believe my views to be.
I doubt yours are very far from Marx, but I am only speculating.
Not accusing, as you do.
And, I do not lie Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 07:06 AM

You make no secret, Jim, of the fact that your views are left-wing, to the extent of denouncing those whose inclination lies in the other direction, most charmingly, as 'tossers'. Whether you incline to the teachings of Marx, Engels, Trotsky, Martov, Kollontai, Stalin, Tito, Mao, Pol Pot, or merely such as Burns & Ramsey Macdonald & Wilson & Kinnock, is somewhat beside the point. I wonder you don't think shame to deny your leftish credentials by evasively declaring them merely as a negative ~ 'not Marxist'. So that's all right then, eh?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 08:59 AM

Mike
My views on the individual subjects we have discussed on this forum are argued by me as I judge them - I hadn't realised it was necessary to declare an allegience to a political philosophy in order to do so.
Left, as you rightly point out, is a wide spectrum; can think of a dozen or so more you might have added - why on earth should I or anybody need to specify which particular one mine is - or even if I have one?
I can't recall your having done so, nor anybody else for that matter.
It seems mine is being sought here in order to provide Keith and his cohorts with another stone to throw at me rather than to answer the opposition I have offered to his obnoxious statements - "Except our most maniacal Marxist" or "A Marxist monster" beats honest argument hands down every time!!!.
Rather than indulge in one of Keith's "thread drifts" why not open a new one to discuss the rights and wrongs of Marxism and see if I bite - can't guarantee I will though.
It belittles you even further in my opinion for your McCarthyist witch-hunting - are you raelly unaware of how reminiscent of the House UnAmerican Activities Trials this is becoming? - "I declare that I am not, nor ever have been a member of the - what - Ovaltinies Club.
I incorrectly described Keith and his two abominable mates as "a full house", forgetting a full house was 4 - I now appear to have that full house.
"And, I do not lie"
"He could not allow it to expose those culpable because they are old Marxists or old Marxist mates."
A fairly specific accusation - no proof - you have lied and you continue to lie.
Jim Carroll
PS If I were a Marxist I would have no problem declaring so if I judged it relevant. I can't recall holding any views I am ashamed of and, unlike others here, I am happy to take responsibility for any contraversial ones I do hold, and not go scurrying by a politician's (non-existent) outpouring to defend them.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 11:56 AM

He could not allow it to expose those culpable because they are old Marxists or old Marxist mates."
A fairly specific accusation - no proof - you have lied and you continue to lie.

I expressed an opinion about your motivation.
It may be right or wrong, but it is not a lie.
If I claimed to have found something on the Internet which was in fact original to you, that would be a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 02:13 PM

You have produced no evidence whatever of my "Marxism", my support for "Hamas... etc" - I could throw in your anti Semitism snideswipes from earlier threads
Without a scrap of evidence for any of these, they have to be your own inventions - out of your own head - therefore lies, plain and simple.
They would be easy enough to prove - show me the basis for you claims from what I have written.
I have said that all my contributions to this thread and similar are based on humanitarianism - show that I am lying - otherwise you are.
I do not object to your calling me a "Marxist" as such, but I do object to your using something you have no grounds for claiming as a diversion from your own viciousness (here towards the Syrian people) and to undermine my own opinions by distorting them.
I have more to say about your dishonesty on this thread, but I know you can't manage too many words at a time, so I'll leave it till later.
And now - PROOF PLEASE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 03:37 PM

I remember a thread where you claimed that I was motivated by racism.
You were wrong and I told you so, but it is not lying.
You claimed it and I refuted it.
That is an exchange of views.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 12 - 04:06 PM

Do you want me to ut up your 'Pakistani Perverts' statement again Keith? Stop trying to change the subject
You made at least two statements that were not true - whether you believed them to be true when you made them is immaterial - when you were challenged you desperately searched for evidence that would prove them to be true (you even lied about that - "don't worry Jim"...).
There is no evidence for those statements, yet just by refusing to withdraw them, you continue to lie which makes you a liar.
Since you have learned that they are not true you have repeated them, which makes you a serial liar.
Throughout this thread you have crudely attempted to manipulate the discussion away from the fact that Britain has sold and continues to sell weapons and equipment to similar regimes to Assad's - an attempt to stifle open discussion for your own political agenda.
I doubt if even your Fairy Godmother would attempt to defend your persistant claim that Britain's selling arms and equipment to Gadaffi is "thread drift" on a thread concerned with similar events in another 'Arab Spring' state.
All of which makes you an extremely dishonest individual.
You have compounded this by attempting to divert the thread to Palestine - not an 'Arab Spring' state, but a country at war with an extremely violent and aggressive neighbour over territory.
Which means you are attempting to prevent me from expressing my point of view by accusing me of something you are doing yourself - deliberately drifting the thread because it conflicts with your ultra-nationalistic agenda.
All of which makes you not only a liar and a bully, but also incredibly stupid for carrying out your lying and bullying on an open forum.
Sleep well!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 03:38 AM

Jim dear, you are well known here to be very Left, very anti-West and very anti-Britain.
Sure enough, on joining this thread you start diverting it away from Syria, Russia and China, to an attack on Britain.

Point out the politics and you shriek "liar."
Object to the strategy and you shriek "censorship."

And of course, whenever you are losing an argument, you shriek racist.
No matter that I have never been racist or that it is irrelevant anyway.
You have done it on a dozen threads now.
Give it up.

Now, what do you think are the chances of a Security Council resolution this time?

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 04:03 AM

Today (bbc).
In a statement, UN humanitarian chief Valerie Amos stressed the importance of "unhindered access to identify urgent needs and provide emergency care and basic supplies".

"There is no time to waste," she said.

The UN's announcement came after a coalition of 200 aid and rights groups called on Russia and China to support United Nations' attempts to end the violence in Syria.

At the political level, Russia and China have both blocked UN Security Council resolutions on Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 04:23 AM

This thread should have been about what should be done to help the people of Syria get rid of a murderous dictator - not the breast-eating vacuuous ullagoaning you have made it.
From the outset The British Government made it clear that they had no intention whatever taking any action to stop the Assad regime - the message from the Question Time panel was clear "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't".
The ambivilent attitude of the west towards the Middle East has always been with one eye on the oil and trade interests and it has only been when the people there decided they had had enough that any changes have been made.
Britain has sold and continues to sell weapons to the despotic regimes in the past Egypt and Libya (not forgetting the sniper bullets to Syria). A month into the Arab Spring demonstrations David Cameron hosted an arms fair aimed at selling more weapons to more dictators, declaring it was "racist" to single these Middle East dictators out as despots.
You have desperately attempted to steer this discussion away from Britain's mercenary support of these scum.
Russia and China have propped up the Syrian regime with their weapons sales but the British Government have undermined our being able to condemn those sales with their own mercenary arms sales - Saudi Arabia - Bahrain and the rest - all present customers and potential ones.
Instead of trying to fathom out my politics to use as a diversion away from our governments behaviour in all this, I suggest you come up with some of your own ideas of how to resolve what is going on all over the Middle East - so far, all you have suggested is to provide them with equipment to help keep the dictators in power and the people in their place.
The Syrian people do not want nor need our/your crocodile tears - they have said so; they have pointed out that the world has left them to fend for themselves.
Come out from behind your bloody flag, stop telling us what we can't do and say what you think should be done.
We obviously aren't going to get an answer to your lies and distortions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 04:37 AM

From the outset The British Government made it clear that they had no intention whatever taking any action to stop the Assad regime

05 Mar 2012
Mr Cameron continued to condemn the Syrian regime's on going violence saying,"the history of Homs is being written in the blood of its citizens."

He made three key pledges to help Syrian citizens, promising more humanitarian assistance, to hold the those responsible for "slaughter" to account and to bring about the political transition that would put a stop to the killing.

The Prime Minister said Britain was playing a leading role and had already provided an extra £2 million to aid agencies operating on the ground to help deliver emergency medical supplies and food rations for 20,000 people.

He added that Britain would this week, continue to secure a United Nations Security Council resolution demanding an end to the violence and immediate humanitarian access.

"The longer access is denied, the more the world will believe that the Syrian regime is detemined to cover up the extent of the horror brought to bear on Baba Amr," he said.


"We are working to make sure those responsible for crimes are being held to account. The European Council agreed that there must be 'a day of reckoning' for those who are responsible," he added.

Mr Cameron said and he would use "every tool we can, sanctions, aid, the pressure of diplomacy, reaching out to the oposition in Syria and beyond."

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 05:21 AM

"This thread should have been about what should be done to help the people of Syria get rid of a murderous dictator"

.,.,.

As Keith originated this thread, Jim, is it not arguably a trifle impertinent of you to take it on yourself to lay down the law to him as to what it "should have been about"?

This is not any sort of 'Fairy Godmother', post btw - haven't followed the thread, as said before, closely enough to take any sort of sides - but merely an observation regarding seemliness, equity, a possible breach of etiquette...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 05:31 AM

I tried to make it about that anyway, but Jim insisted on talking about all the Arab Spring countries, even though there were threads already, and about the international arms trade with particular (VERY particular!) reference to Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 05:45 AM

""should have been about"?
Keith has made it about hand wringing sympathy for the Syrians and has bdeliberately attempted to block and practical discussion on what should be done with a constant cry of "thread drift"
Whatever reason he had for starting it, his ovivious attempts of manipulation away from Britain's rose and responsibility have been amongs the most undemocratic agenda serving I have ever witnessed on a public forum.
Once a thread it started it becomes public property t be taken wherever the participants take it providing it does not drift too far from the main subject - in this case, to suggest that the Arab Spring revolts are "off topic" is so obviously manipulative as to be te stuff of satire.
Both you and he have indulged in political witch hunting in order to mask Britain's role this affair.
I expected this from Keith, it's the way he works.
I once put you at a higher level - naive of me.
Are you seriously suggesting that the Arab Spring revolts are out-of-bounds 0- an answer would be appreciated.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 06:03 AM

Sorry about the typos - both angry and in a hurry
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 06:06 AM

I 'suggest' nothing, Jim. Please read my last post ~~ & the previous one about political witch hunts: a point on which you might as well be speaking Martian for all the heads-or-tails I can make of what you are on about.

"Carroll must try harder for clarity in expression"

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 06:19 AM

Smugness - the weapon of the educated

Another practical; suggestion - the sezure of all property of supporters of the Syrain regime - as long as it does not conflict with British business interests too much of course.
Completely in line with a letter from a Syrian posted earlier, which points out the importance Assad puts on his links with Britain.
Jim

From this morning's Times
PROPAGANDA, PROPERTY AND PRIVILEGE - THE LONDON LIFE OF ASSAD'S FIXER
President's man is free from sanctions despite allegations of arms deals,   

The publication of private e-mails from President Assad and his wife Asma has exposed the key role of a pro-regime fixer living in London.
Soulieman Marouf, a Syrian busi¬nessman with British citizenship, is a loyal supporter of the President and his brutal campaign to suppress the upris¬ing in the country, which has already claimed more than 8,000 lives. Despite his well-known links to the Assad regime, he remains immune to inter¬national sanctions.
In leaked e-mails from the Presi¬dent's office published yesterday, it was revealed that he and his wife have fed the shopping addiction of the Syrian leader's wife, ordering clothes, jewel¬lery and furniture from London's finest boutiques on her behalf.
But an investigation by The Times has found that the extent of his links with the regime, and his connections to London, go far further:
Mr Marouf is a key financial backer of two of Syria's main propaganda outlets, including a television channel accused by the West of inciting violence against civilians.
He has been accused by the Syrian opposition of buying sniper rifles on
the black market after a government attempt to purchase them from South Africa was turned down.
Sources close to Mr Marouf say he has had trouble with his UK banks; one has closed his account. He is also close friends with Mr Assad's father-in-law who lives in London, and in 2010 gave him a new BMW. His assets in Britain include a string of properties in London's most exclusive areas, worth an estimated £10 million.
Mr Marouf, his wife, their three child¬ren and his parents are living in St John's Wood, North London. While people in his home city of Aleppo, in northern Syria, are coping with fuel shortages and the fear of impending civil war, the businessman can be found most. evenings in a Mayfair restaurant, chatting with friends.
Mr Marouf was born into a wealthy Syrian family and has had links to London since, his days at University College. He has also built up intimate links with the Syrian regime, enjoying a close friendship with the President. Before the current unrest, the pair would meet regularly on Mr Marouf s country estate outside Aleppo, discuss¬ing business and politics. Their wives are said to be good friends. E-mails leaked from the President's office support this claim, revealing that Asma Assad used Mr Marouf and his wife as her London fixers to enable her to shop at London boutiques.
In June last year, three months into the uprising, Mrs Assad e-mailed Mr Marouf about a vase worth more than £2,600. She added: "Pis can Abdulia see if this available at Harrods to-order — they have a sale at the moment."
Mr Marouf, a relative of Muham¬mad Nasif, the Syrian Vice-President for security, has also been accused by opposition websites of smuggling sni¬per rifles into Syria on behalf of the regime after the failure of an official at¬tempt to buy them from South Africa.
Despite his intimate links with the Assad regime, Mr Marouf, 38, has suc¬ceeded in keeping a low profile, evad-ing successive sanctions lists imposed by the European Union and the US.
He owns at least eight apartments in London, including a flat in the exclu¬sive new Chelsea Creek development, which he bought in January. The own¬ership of the properties is disguised through a pair of offshore companies in the British Virgin Islands.
Last September, after The Times first revealed Mr, Marouf s links to the re¬gime, he transferred ownership of any remaining assets. A flat in St John's Wood was put under his sister's name.
Mr. Marouf s other business interests include Addounia television, a power¬ful pro-regime channel that has been accused of inciting violence against the civilian population and was last year , added to the EU sanctions list. He also owns Shukumaku, a Syrian news web¬site, which has blamed the unrest on "terrorists" and strenuously denied re¬ports of brutality by the Government.
His Aleppo-based company, al-Sha-hba, is an investor in Cham Holdings, a company owned by President Assad's billionaire cousin, a chief financier of the regime. Mr Marouf is named as the director of two companies registered in the UK, but sources close to him say that his companies in the UK and Syria act as a front for his activities in financ¬ing and supporting the regime.
The Times has put these allegations to Mr Marouf, but he did not respond.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 06:28 AM

So aren't you 'educated' then, Jim? Do you really think such an epithet a suitable term of abuse.

For shame!

~M~

... or is this being 'smug'? One never knows with J.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 08:22 AM

Souher Belhassen, president of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), said Syrians had "survived with outstanding courage one year of systematic and widespread crimes and bloodshed as the world stood by and watched".

"The international community must unite and help Syrians bring an end to the horror."

I think it is only Russia and China refusing to unite.
Jim, what "should be done" about that by Britain and others?

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 01:39 PM

"For shame!"
You didn't respond to my question about Keith skulking behind thread drift
I think I preferred you before you took on the job of nodding dog to a fascist - at least you were principled (or polite) enough to try and answer difficult questions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 02:43 PM

I am not, Jim, I am glad to say, too much influenced in my opinions and expressions by your 'preferences' ~~ if I were, I should simply be, to put it in terms not 1m miles from your own locution, merely nodding dog to a commie, wouldn't I?

The 'shame' I suggested you should feel was no way concerned with the content and opinions of your posts, but merely with your use of the word 'educated' as a term of abuse, which seems to me unworthy.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 03:14 PM

"Commie"
He's trained you well
And the question?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 03:25 PM

Keith skulking behind thread drift

Thread drift is not an instrument I could use to stifle debate.

I expressed the opinion that we should stick to the subject of Syria, as other threads already exist on Arab Spring, and the scale of the horrors in Syria are unique and unprecedented for decades.

Was it wrong of me to express that opinion?
Would you deny me the right if you had the power?

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 12 - 04:07 PM

Or if that particular question is too difficult-
I believe Keith to be a fascist because:
a   He has made openly racist statements on this forum
b   His defence of Britain's record of selling arms to oppressive regimes is simply that it is "anti British to do so.
c   His single proposal on his own thread on Syria is to sell the Syrian regime equipment to suppress opposition to their rule

d   His bullying behaviour in attempting to silence lines of questioning he is uncomfortable with is thuggishly undemocratic.
Which of these are not true?
Now what have I written that makes me a "commie"?
"Thread drift
The only active thread on The Arab Spring is this one - the Syrian protests are a part of the Arab Spring - say they are not.
To actively attempt to suppress comment on the Arab Spring in general is censorship, pure and simple - and very much a part of your fascist outlook - you are the only one on this forum to have used "thread drift" in this way ad to this extent
If "thread drift" is so important to you, why have you consistently demanded that we discuss Palestine - not Syria and not part of the Arab Spring revolt - a million miles away from the topic in hand?
You are denying me the right that you have given yourself
You are not "expressing an opinion" - you are actively attempting to suppress a directly relevant line of discussion because it clashes with your ultra-nationalist agenda
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SUPPRESS DISCUSSION THAT IS DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT IN HAND, NO MATTER HOW UNCOMFORTABLE IT MAKES YOU.
YOU HAVE USED THE SAME TACTIC ON OTHER THREADS AND YOU HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLTY TOLD NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO EXPRESS AN OPINION.
It appears that even your lap-dog is somewhat uncomfortable with your behaviour - hence his 'silence that speaks volumes'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 02:00 AM

Jim: To spell it out. You use "fascist" in the extremely loose and vulgar way lefties commonly do: as an emotionally loaded epithet to denounce any whose views are to the right of their own; for the reinforcement of which they pretend to find pronouncements of a racist or intolerant or persecutive nature even if, as in this instance, no such are there ~~ we have been over & over Keith's "I now find..." all that time ago and disagree as to its intention or significance; no point beating it to death any further.

The right-wing use of 'commie' is the analogue to the lefty one of 'fascist': I didn't actually use it, but only included it it in an adverbial clause of condiditon {"if ... then"} ~~ a conditional expressing a putative, not an outright statement.

So, in sum, you have erroneously called K a 'fascist'; I have not called you an anything, but simply expressed a conditional.

Geddit now? I don't expect so; but I honestly can't be bothered to pursue this petty niggle any further.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 03:01 AM

d   His bullying behaviour in attempting to silence lines of questioning

Desperation Jim!
I asked that the thread I started about the unique horror of Syria should stay on that important subject.
There was nothing to prevent you discussing other countries elsewhere.
No "bullying."
No "censorship."

Why was it SO important for you to change the subject?
Because it exposes the guilt of China and Russia, but gives little scope for attacking Britain.
IT WAS YOU TRYING TO STIFLE A DEBATE, and for political reasons.
No compassion for the suffering from the Hard Left.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 03:16 AM

It appears that even your lap-dog is somewhat uncomfortable with your behaviour

MtheGM had nothing to gain from objecting to your nasty behaviour, except the guarantee of some vile abuse from you.
He makes Mudcat a better place.
You spoil it.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 04:36 AM

Mike
Racism (racial stereotyping) is a part of the facism I have encountered throughout my life - we have been over Keith's particular brand again and again - for you, it seems that racism is only racist when applied to Jews, but not to Muslims - which makes your attitude.... we've been over that too.
His attempts to suppress discussion in certain areas that would leave Britain in a bad light - nationalism - are also a part of the facism I have witnessed; open any BNP site - it's there in bucketfulls.
There is nothing "loose" about these, and they are alive and kicking in Keith's arguments and have been discussed over and over, without any defence being put up on his part (except his somewhat bizarre blaming of somebody else for the statements he has made - how would you react I wonder, if somebody said "I only believe it because Mosely, or Jean Marie LePen, or David Irving told me it was true, and they have studied the subject" - the sum total of Keith's defence of his attitude to British Pakistanis)?
Keith's (in my opinion, ultra) nationalism is present throughout this and numerous other threads - again, nothing "vague" about them.
The fact that he is still attempting to suppress any discussion on the Arab Spring as a whole is evidence enough of his attempts at nationalistic censorship - nothing "vague" about that - it is present two postings away.
I have asked your opinion of this, you decline to give it which is an answer in itself as far as I'm concerned.
Keith,
You fail to address one single point on your behaviour on this thread, either to justify your persistant and continuing bulying and extremely ham-fisted accusations of "thread drift" or an explanation of your own thread drift - which I have not complained about btw.
Until you address both, they will stand as manipulative bullying and breathtaking double standards).
You (and Mike) also fail to produce one scrap of evidence of my "hard leftism"; just as you have failed to produce one scrap of evidence of my supposed support for Hamas.... et al. Until you do, both will remain the empty rhetoric they have always been.
You have also failed to comment on the suggestion that the British Government should seize the properties of supporters of Syria such as Soulieman Marouf - not worth the effort maybe?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 04:47 AM

You fail to address one single point on your behaviour on this thread, either to justify your persistant and continuing bulying and extremely ham-fisted accusations of "thread drift" or an explanation of your own thread drift

My "behaviour" was just to request the thread I started about Syria be allowed to stay on that important subject.
No bullying or censorship, and I just answered that point anyway.

My "own thread drift."
I think you accuse me of making comparisons with Palestine, but YOU referred to it in your second post here.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 05:31 AM

That was in passing and was in terms of your support for the butchering of civilians
You have persisted your demands to discuss my attitude to Palestine, as have your two grotesque mates.
That is deleiberate and persistant attempt at thread drift, having nothing to do with this topic
I have not complained about your thread drift - you have invented mine
The Arab Spring revolt, the arming of terrorist states, the UN intervention in Libya.... all are legitimate aspects of this discussion on Syria, yet you have desperately tried to censor them because they expose Britain's part in atrming killers (including the supplying of ammuntion in Syria)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 05:44 AM

Anti-Islamism is not racism. Objecting to organised gangs of young Pakistanis exploiting underage girls [another case currently being sentenced!] is not racism ~~ it is denounced by their own community and religious leaders. I express, & have expressed, no prejudice against Islam in general;and do not understand your ref to Jews, as my disappointment (& worse) as to the way Israel has developed and is continuing to behave has been expressed many times; apart from which I have no particular interest in Judaism, a faith & community from which I defected long since. {To remind you, atheism has been my default position since early teens, tho I did become a baptised & confirmed member of the CofE and was for some time a fully communicant member of my local church in middle-age to see if it would bring me any sort of emotional or spiritual satisfaction; but, as Valerie put it, it didn't take, & I have been back in my default atheism for some 30+ years now}. I detest any sort of discrimination on merely racial grounds; but despise those, like you, Jim, & others, whose self-righteous, 'doth·protest·too·much', anti-racism is so ingrained as to blind you & them to the realities of what is happening in, e.g. militant Islamism and Pakistant sexual exploitation of white 14 y-o's.

In the so-useful words of that lawyer in the Shaw play, "You think it doesn't but it does."

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 05:46 AM

& re your post cross-posted with mine ~~ if I am one of the '2 mates' refd, I have not mentioned Palestine in any context whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 06:24 AM

In fact, Jim, it occurs to me that your accusing me of objecting only to discrimination against Jews, when I have never expressed any such opinion but its very opposite, must be motivated, perhaps subconsciously, purely by your knowledge of my ancestry; which it seems to me constitutes an instance of instinctual anti-semitism on your part. Think about it!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 06:41 AM

"In fact, Jim, it occurs to me that your accusing me of objecting only to discrimination against Jews,"
You answered a direct question as to whether you would find a statement similar to Keiths but aimed at Jews racist by replying, quite rightly, that you would - plough through the 'Muslim prejudice' thread if you doubt this - double standards, at the very least - selective racism.....?
"if I am one of the '2 mates' "
You are not - I was referring to Terrytoon and Weirdie Beardie - another bit you appear to have missed.
"Anti-Islamism is not racism"
Describing "all British male Pakistainis" as being prone to paedophelia becase of a "cultural implant" is - and it implicates every single male Pakistani in Britan - I don't believe even the BNP went that far - but could be wrong.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 07:09 AM

It has to come up whenever you are losing an argument Jim.
I never said any such thing.

If you must rake it up for the umpteenth time, actually quote both sentences of the post, and the list referred to in the first sentence.

You have persisted your demands to discuss my attitude to Palestine
It appears that your posting history must not be mentioned, but mine is always fair game.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 08:06 AM

I have stopped contributing to the Young Creationist thread because that woman Iona who has monopolised it is too stupid to be argued with. Jim is fast getting to the same stage of pig-headed assertiveness in this thread and those of similar bent. I love the bit in Sense & Sensibility [Jane Austen, like Shax, usually has something pertinent to quote] where Elinor refrains from arguing with Mr Robert Ferrars, 'not considering him to deserve the compliment of rational opposition'. That's how I am coming to feel about Jim Carroll.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 09:09 AM

Mike
I am aware of our arguments having dominated far too many threads.
Racism is an important issue for me, both personally and as a general part of my upbringing
There are a number of racists/fascists on this forum – some of us are feeling the affect of them at the present time.
If Keith had been just another of the maggots I would have made my comments and moved on – He is an obsessive who persists in having the last word – he paints himself into corners as he has here, and he will then attempt to lie his way out of his own stupidity – as he did on the Muslim prejudice thread (by inventing a politician who he claims to have backed him, then failing to produce an example of that backing).
I encountered racism virtually every day of my working life in London, but let it go for the sake of a quiet life – I'm no longer prepared to do that as much as I have tried.
I realise that to be an obsession in itself; not sure I can do anything about it - put it down to old age.
Keith – nobody is winning or losing here – we've managed to drive everybody away again.
You have made no suggestion on Syria except to suggest a plan to assist the regime to further their aims of crushing opposition to their terror.
You have continued to ignore or dismiss the suggestions that have been made and have persistently attempted to suppress the making of those suggestions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 11:28 AM

as he did on the Muslim prejudice thread (by inventing a politician who he claims to have backed him, then failing to produce an example of that backing
Which politician did I invent?
The MP, the former Cabinet Minister, or the House of Lords member.
No. I extensively quoted all of those.
Was it any of these?

Police officers who say there is a specific problem in certain areas.
Sikhs who say they have a specific problem.
Hindus who say they have a specific problem.
Investigative journalists who have found a specific problem.
MPs whose constituents report a specific problem.
A specific problem in Blackburn that vanished after a targeted intervention.
Shafiq who had personal experience of this specific problem.
Ahmed who had personal experience of this specific problem.
Allibhai-Brown who had personal experience of this specific problem.
Wilmer, who's 400 cases were all of this specific problem.
Dando Institute whose investigations found overwhelmingly this same problem.
CEOP whose national figures showed the same problem.

Last time you made up accusations about this we agreed to do it on pm to spare others your made up deluded drivel.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 12:43 PM

Jim: You have addressed the following two comments personally to me on recent posts:

A -- for you, it seems that racism is only racist when applied to Jews, but not to Muslims - which makes your attitude....


B -- You answered a direct question as to whether you would find a statement similar to Keiths but aimed at Jews racist by replying, quite rightly, that you would - plough through the 'Muslim prejudice' thread if you doubt this

B was supposed to be a justification for A ~ which I regard as an inaccurate, spiteful and defamatory remark, and challenged as such. I fail absolutely to see that B was in any way an answer to, or justifcation for, A: for which I hope you will at least have the grace to apologise.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 01:20 PM

"-- for you, it seems that racism is only racist when applied to Jews, but not to Muslims - which makes your attitude...."
On the ocassion I referred to IT WAS APPPLIED ONLY TO JEWS - You having already stated that a similar remark aimed at Pakistanis by Keith was "not racist".
My comments were neither inaccurate, spiteful nor defamatory - they were exactly how you responded to my question.
"I extensively quoted all of those."
None of your 'examples' came anywhere near implicating "all Male Pakistanis"
Had they done so publicly they would have been breaking the law and would have been removed from the political arena as was Enoch Powell when anti-racist laws were far less stringent than they are today -such staements,made publicly - are against the law and lay the culprits open to prosecution . Any vague reference to culture was based on small numbers in isolated areas - you indicted the whole culture.
You failed to produce a single quote when repeatedly requested to do so, and I have no doubt whatever that you will not do so now - I could be wrong, of course - feel free!!
And - as I have pointed out on numerous occasions, it doesn't matter who made the statement (on this occasion, you alone) to stereotype a whole culture in such a way is racist, whoever does it; to proclaim it as your belief is to expose yourself as a racist, which is what all this is about.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 01:46 PM

None of your 'examples' came anywhere near implicating "all Male Pakistanis"
I have told you many times and in many threads and pms where that came from.
I will pm you again, in the full knowledge that you will still repeat the same lies every time you make a twat of yourself in a thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 17 Mar 12 - 02:27 PM

Christmas, you enterded this thread on the back of a lie, you were caught out and called to account fot it - you have been wriggling ever since

400 Up.