BS: Syria: the new nightmare?

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 12:17 PM

The article implies that "We" represents all of humanity- so you are off the hook.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 12:11 PM

It's not just Aleppo we've murdered. It's truth

I'm assumng you meant to include yourself in the "we",Bruce.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 10:51 AM

Terry Glavin: It's not just Aleppo we've murdered. It's truth

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 10:49 AM

Greggie,

Try looking at the clickey for the previous post.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 10:48 AM

You mean that bunch of anti-semitic totalitarian jack-booted thugs that are always picking on Israel for no reason??

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon Admits UN Biased Against Israel

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 10:33 AM

The U.N. CFBruce? You mean that bunch of anti-semitic totalitarian jack-booted thugs that are always picking on Israel for no reason??

By the way, what's the source for your latest right-wing screed?

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 10:25 AM

As much as I admire President Obama for the many things he got right I can't say the same for his two abject failures, the Iran nuclear deal and Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 10:08 AM

Shame on you, bobad. You can't say such things about the US President ( unless he is a Republican).

" The UN Security Council could have stopped the bloodshed, but it would not, because the warmongering Russian veto-holders wouldn't let it. The UN General Assembly could have overridden the Security Council by invoking the 1950 "Uniting for Peace" Resolution 377A, but it would not do so, on account of excuses likely as numerous as the General Assembly's 193 member states.

United States President Barack Obama could have made some use of himself on behalf of the Syrian people, but he chose not to. An American-led no-fly zone over Syria, enforced by the 28-member NATO alliance, is not some small thing that even Vladimir Putin could have ignored. Obama could have stood up to Iran, but he didn't because he didn't want to. What he wanted instead was his legacy nuclear-deal rapprochement with the ayatollahs in Tehran, a cascading failure that may not survive even the tyrant-admiring president-elect, Donald Trump. The main reason all those Syrians had to die was that Obama didn't want to do anything to hurt the ayatollahs' feelings.

It's painful, facing up to the reality that the most stylish and charming American president since John F. Kennedy, the Chicago boy with such gifts of soaring oratory, the president who spent eight years dancing on the Ellen Degeneres Show and chumming around with Hollywood's hottest stars, might have spent most of his time in the Oval Office falling-down drunk on the elixir of his own glamorous, impeccable image."

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 09:53 AM

After nearly half a million Syrian deaths and the uprooting of roughly 11 million people, the horror and obscenity reached a kind of crescendo last week when Aleppo, Syria's last rebel stronghold, finally imploded in a mayhem of atrocities and war crimes. Aleppo fell under the weight of a starvation siege, Russian jet fighters, Hezbollah militiamen, Iranian Quds Force thugs and Bashar Al-Assad's barrel bombers.

Savagery triumphed, but even against the abject humiliation of the United Nations and the pathetic, bawling impotence of the United States of America, one must keep up appearances. There are comforting delusions to attend to, and quite a few of us appear to be hysterically possessed of a desperate need to be told there was absolutely nothing we could have done to stop it.

Terry Glavin: It's not just Aleppo we've murdered. It's truth

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 04:16 AM

""The total of my evidence is that Britain licensed an order of small arms ammunition.......
And that is the total evidence of YOUR information, it is all we both have
Out of which you have concluded (can't be bothered to do this in order any more).
The licence doesn't exist - don't believe everything you read in the press
It does exist but it was rescinded
It was issued but the shipment was never sent
It was sent far too early to be used in the fighting
It was sold to a private buyer
It was for sporting equipment
The ammunition was the wrong size to be used in Syrian weapons
And finally back to:
There is no evidence that a licence ever existed
The ammunition was the wrong size
Back on La Ronde - and so on, ad infinitum
You have now added to your contradictory makkie-ups that you never challenged the existence of the licencedenied that I have put up your saying the licence never existed AND I SHOULDN'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING IN THE PRESS.
If you haven't denied it, what should I not believe in the press?
Not bad for The total of my evidence is that Britain licensed an order of small arms ammunition.......
You are a bigger joke than your History Man mate - at least he sticks to one story - you have given over half a dozen here.
The licence for sniper ammunition exists - end of story - all the other excuses underline that you make things up on the spot, whether they relate to one another or are contradictory.
You have been crudely and ineptly making up a whole string of excuses for the sale of equipment to a mass murderer
Also sold by Britain was riot control equipment, armoured cars, tear gas and water cannon which we know to have ben used on the streets to quell demonstrators during the Arab Spring Protests BEFORE THIS SQUALID AFFAR BECAME A CIVIL WAR
Britain has been condemned world wide for selling CHEMICALS to this monster that could have been used to produce his stockpile of foul weapons.
The bottom line is that Britain sells weapons to whoever will buy them
End of...
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 03:34 AM

Jim Carroll - 21 Dec 16 - 06:53 PM

"you have had all the information - complete with documented evidence"

Information relating to what Jim? What "documented evidence"? The following was stated quite categorically by you wasn't it?

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.......

And you have no evidence at all of me ever having denied that that licence was issued.

You have lost the plot on this matter so comprehensively now Jim that you no longer have the foggiest clue what point you are arguing or trying to make.

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: bobad
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 06:58 PM

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

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

Fixed!

Subject: RE: BS: Syria: the new nightmare?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 06:53 PM

"Only thing is Jim I have never denied that an export licence for £30,000 worth of small arms ammunition was issued "
you really are finished on this one - you have had all the information - complete with documented evidence, so, as all your claims have cpme without anything other than denials - they are no more than the opinions of a cyber-bully - over and out.
Go and sneak up and stab another thread in the back
Jim Carroll

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.

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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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