BS: Palestine

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 09:54 AM

Not the 'loathed Jews that are the problem, but the 'murderous Zionists' still around, still murdering and still in charge – (and still supported by their apologists, as evidenced here)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 10:02 AM

Where?

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 12:03 PM

"Where?"
Here - especially the grotesque 'holocaust-deniers-in reverse' who insist that the massacres that have taken place were no more than minor oversights of duty rather than the cold-bloodedly deliberate race killings that they really were/are (not to mention the chemical weapons used on schools and hospitals that are little more harmful than sparklers, even when used on women and children!!!)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 12:10 PM

There is no evidence that Israel was involved in the massacre and they deny it.
They accept that they should have prevented it.
There are no apologists for the massacre here.

Jim, smoke is only a chemical weapon in your head.
In the real world, no one classes it as such.
It is not even a weapon, as your own cut and paste made clear.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 12:41 PM

'holocaust-deniers-in reverse' ---
.,.,.,
With this phrase, Jim, you are reverting to that offensive over-statement that I drew your attention to above; in particular as DOING NOBODY AS MUCH HARM AS IT DOES TO YOURSELF AND YOUR IMAGE, by the impression it gives of the sort of intellectual & ideological company you make yourself appear to be keeping. Do you want to be associated in your statements and locutions with the National Front and the English Defence League? If not, for your own sake STOP DOING THIS!

Again:~ I genuinely say this as a friend who wishes you nothing but well.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 01:01 PM

"In the real world, no one classes it as such."
In the real world the shit that has been fired directly and deliberately at civilians as WEAPONS, including women and children has, blinded them and burned holes in their faces. I and others have provided numerous (not one) links to articles which include eye-witness accounts and horrific photographs of the results of the use of these weapons (described by the US's own agency as "chemical" until they decided to use it themselves in Fallujah - confirmed in some cases by US soldiers).
The fact that you make it a regular practice to ignore what others have written confirms that "there is nothing new under the sun"
Perhaps you'd now like to repeat your distortion of the Israeli part in the massacre of up to 3,500 refugees at Sabr and Shatila refugee camps?
Thank you for providing us with a perfect example of a holocaust denier in reverse.
Unless you have any definite proof of any of your denials of the war crimes carried out by Israel (haven't got round to mentioning Tzipi Livni's testing of the new Conservative change of law on war crimes and torture yet!) please go and talk to someone else
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 01:08 PM

Christianity is also an offshoot of Judaism. Judaism was undoubtedly an offshoot of whatever came before Judaism...there were many previous religions existing in that region of the world prior to Judaism.

And so what? What does any of that have to do with present day issues of right and wrong? Supposedly being "first" at something does not make someone better than someone else. Justice is based on practicing equality, not on practicing some kind of concept of a Master Race or of preferential treatment for "God's Chosen". We are either all God's Chosen or the concept is utterly fallacious and destructive.

Religious/cultural arrogance and exclusivity is equally offensive whether it is practiced by Nazis, Zionists, Muslim Fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalist, Maoists...or any other kind of "ists".

Land theft is also equally offensive no matter who does it to whom. The Nazis called it a search for "lebensraum" (room in which to live). (Room in which Germans could live at the expense of the previous inhabitants, who would be displaced...or killed, if necessary...by German settlers.) Gosh! Doesn't that sound a wee bit familiar in the present context of the Middle East?

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 01:23 PM

Mike
Sorry - cross posted
Have given your apparent concern about my anti-Zionism being construed as anti-Semitism a great deal of thought over the last week.
I was rather moved at first, but I had forgotten that it came from somebody who can find no racism in describing "all male Pakistanis" as having a "cultural implant" which tends them "ALL" to having sex with under-age girls.
I wonder if you would hold the same opinion had your protegé's target been ALL male Jews, Catholics, Irish people..... (please insert the race, culture, religion of your own choice) having a cultural tendenct towards..... (please insert the crime or perversion of your own choice), or do you reserve your tolerance of such statements only for when it is aimed at Pakistanis?
I should think that anybody who choses to associate my ideas (and anybody elses who finds the Israeli contempt for human rights) as that of the EDL and the NF (thought they were a dead letter) would do so anyway, no matter what I said.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 01:48 PM

Can't go over all that about Keith just quoting someone else without endorsing, but simply taking their word for it as better informed again. Not really related to this point anyhow. I don't spend more time than can help thinking about the NF ~ so whatever may be their current avatar; and don't be evasive, eh?

Even if such people as you mention would think ill of you "no matter what you said", that doesn't alter the fact that some things are more seemly to say than others. Just as comparison of some sections of Jewish thought with "Nazism" is for obvious reasons going to be so provocative to any Jew that it would be IMO best avoided by any person who makes pretension to good faith {surely you can see that ~ honest, now!}, so is the use of the word 'holocaust' which, even with out its cap-H, has acquired a particular and specialist overtone and syndrome of associations which make the motivation of its usage in such a context at least, let us say, highly equivocal; and surely best avoided?

Even if you don't care what all the putative detractors whose presence you hypothecate in the last sentence of your last response to me might think of you ~~ do you really not care what I think? I do think of myself as your friend, even when we may disagree as not infrequently happens; and would like to retain a favourable opinion of you, and of your views, and of your expression of such with some becoming moderation: and hope such might be mutual.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 02:20 PM

""if we all get out of the issue and let things take their course a solution is more probable.""

Indeed it is Ollaimh.

If outsiders stand back, the almost inevitable solution will be a bloody and violent ethnic cleansing of Palestine, and a larger, more arrogant and intractable Israel.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 03:20 PM

"Not really related to this point anyhow"
It is EXACTLY this point Mike
You have threatened me with being branded a racist for finding parallels between what the Nazis did to the Jews and what is happening in Palestine/Israel (even though I have qualified my view and been careful not to aim my statements at ALL Jewish people - male or female) yet you feel free to defend what I consider is a direct racist attack on the male gender of a whole nation.
Would you like me to provide a list of people who think Pakistanis are culturally perverted and ask you whether you are not afraid of being identified with them - happy to oblige.
I was interested to read Robert Fisk's comparisons between Israeli behaviour at Citi Sportif and Pinochet's Santiago Stadium and Srebrenica - would you include him and his newspaper in your warning against being condemned as anti-Semite?
It is cowardice in the extreme to cower behing the cry of "anti Semitism" when the question of Israeli war crimes come up - defend their actions if you feel you must but please stop flinging shit about - you are becoming indistinguishable from your ward.
I am not the slightest surprised that you feel you "can't go over all that again....."; in your shoes, I wouldn't want to either.
I have to say that, given our mutual interest in folksong, I was half expecting you to intervene when he suggested that Travellers were "over-represented" in the crime of keeping slaves - but no - not even a mild admonishment - not in the job description of a modern fairy godmother, it would appear!
Before you accuse, or even hint that I or anybody, by criticising war criminals and terrorists, might be considered racist, I would take a long, hard look at your own attitude and how it is perceived by others.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 03:49 PM

No, Jim. Whataboutery is never an answer.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 04:32 PM

Jim, you posted this.
"The M825A1 rounds, which are the kind identified as being fired by Israeli forces, are made primarily for use as a smokescreen in a way that limits their effect as an incendiary weapon, experts say."

Jim, WP has been used in munitions for about a hundred years.
In all that time no treaty, agency or government did or does classify it as a chemical weapon.
Just one man in one report once in error.
You can go on believing it in your world, but you make yourself ridiculous in the real one.

I never expressed any opinion about Pakistani culture.
I know nothing about it.
I did report the opinion of people who do know about it.
I was not qualified to endorse or dispute it, so I did neither.
This has been explained to you many times but you go on using it in personal attacks on me.
Why must you be so belligerent?
We have had such friendly debate while you were away.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 05:20 PM

And now he uses it in personal attacks on me too, Keith. And just refuses to be told how offensive are some of his remarks and comparisons. He persists in making remarks which are offensive to an important demographic ~~ here, not in a foreign state in the Middle East; and if he refuses to acknowledge how offensive he is being, it is certainly not for lack of telling. And when I point out he is being offensive, he falls back on mistaking my information for accusations of racism, which he knows in fact to be no part of my agenda at all ~~ or if he doesn't, then again it is because he hasn't been listening...

I am beginning to think he is one of those people who always have to know what one means better than one does oneself. Mindset of a certain sort of doctrinaire politicisation, I suspect...

I very much fear that our dear friend Jim is losing it...

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 05:31 PM

""I was not qualified to endorse or dispute it, so I did neither.""

"I do now believe that........etc". Sounds awfully like an endorsement to most people Keith, especially when those who investigate say that no racial conclusions can, or should, be drawn.

Back on topic, these arguments have been done to death, quite frankly, and your frantic defence of everything Israel does is a major part of the reason for that.

Until the apologists STFU, and Israel is told "No Further" or you lose all your international trade, this will continue.

Palestinians also have a right to live peacefully in a sovereign Palestinian state, with borders that the Israeli military, on land, sea, or air, do not cross.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 11 - 06:49 PM

Amnesty is not "one man in one report once in error".

..."White phosphorus is a weapon intended to provide a smokescreen for troop movements on the battlefield," said Cobb-Smith. "It is highly incendiary, air burst and its spread effect is such that it that should never be used on civilian areas."

Donatella Rovera, Amnesty's researcher on Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories said that such extensive use of this weapon in Gaza's densely populated residential neighbourhoods is inherently indiscriminate. "Its repeated use in this manner, despite evidence of its indiscriminate effects and its toll on civilians, is a war crime," she said

When each 155mm artillery shell bursts, it deploys 116 wedges impregnated with white phosphorus which ignite on contact with oxygen and can scatter, depending on the height at which it is burst (and wind conditions), over an area at least the size of a football pitch. In addition to the indiscriminate effect of air-bursting such a weapon, firing such shells as artillery exacerbates the likelihood that civilians will be affected. (From here)

The point is not the materials used, but the way in which they are used. After all chlorine can be used in swimming pools...

Yes it may be possible to use White Phosphorous, even in a war setting in a way that does escapes the definition of "chemical warfare". In the same way, it is possible to use water in a way that does not constitute torture. But the claim that Israel restricted its use in this way is analogous to the USA claim that its use of water-boarding was not torture.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 08:35 AM

MG of H, I did deplore that usage of the stuff and said it may have been illegal.
Amnesty does not say it was a chemical weapon because it is not.
Jim keeps accusing Israel of using chemical weapons.
They do not.

Don you asked for my belief and I gave you an honest answer.
The rest of the sentence makes clear that I only believed it because of the credentials of those who put it forward.
Anti-racist, pro Pakistani Pakistanis.
I believed it as I would believe a weather forecast.
It was not my opinion and I did not endorse it.
I have not the knowledge or experience.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 12:48 PM

"No, Jim. Whataboutery is never an answer."
A simple question AGAIN
If Keith - or anybody - had claimed that ALL MALE JEWS have a culturral implant which makes them inclined to usury (an accusation I have been hearing all my life) would he be making a racist statement, and if yes, why is his claim that ALL MALE PAKISTANIS have a cultural implant which makes them inclined to having sex with underage girls not racist?
That is the level of bigotry you have endorsed and continue to defend.
And again, is Robert Fisk to be accused of racism because he equates Israeli massacres with "Pinochet's Santiago Stadium and Srebrenica"?
It continues to be cowardice in the extreme to cower behing the cry of "anti Semitism"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Stringsinger
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 01:05 PM

Remember that Jews and Palestinians are both Semitic peoples.

"Islam is an offshoot of Judaism." (?)

This is by no means confirmed as a theological fact. They are seen as independent sources and interpretations not one evolved from another.

Judaism predates Islam and Christianity but Hinduism predates all three.

The derivation of religious practice from one sect to another relies on general religious practices found in all religions, not just one.

The problem with this argument is that both Islam and Judaism are practiced differently throughout the world. Even though each religion purports to be a rigid law, there are many interpretations of these laws as there are in courtrooms by lawyers. Any literalist of a religious doctrine can find inconsistencies in their bible, koran or torah if they look hard enough.

The history of Israel is not consistent since at one time, the Jews were forced to flee from it. They are no more entitled to reclamation than are the Native Americans to the U.S.
And we know that ain't gonna' happen.

This is a religio-culture war. The who was there first argument won't wash and is totally irrelevant to the solution of the two religious inhabitants. Zionism is a new idea and is not embraced by many orthodox Jews in the world. Zionism has nothing to do with Islam.
There is one exception, much of the composed music for Israel has been inspired not just by Russia or Europe but a great deal by Arab sources.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 02:40 PM

It is so simple Jim.
I did not claim that anyone had a "cultural implant" so your whole argument falls flat.
You have no case.

All I did was state that some people ascribed certain offending to enforced abstinence.

Asked directly if I believed it I said yes, but only because they had impeccable credentials and no other explanation was produced.

If some meteorologists produce a weather forecast, or doctors a diagnosis, why would I not believe it?
I might even repeat it if relevant to a conversation, but not my claim and not endorsed.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 04:21 PM

Phosphorus is of course a chemical. When it is used as a weapon, rather than as a means of camouflage it is a chemical weapon. There are very strong grounds for thinking it was in fact used as an anti-personnel weapon in Gaza.

If so, this was a war crime, as it would have been if it had been used in the same way by anyone - Hamas, the British Army. Or the IDF.

The crucial distinction is not whether a chemical falls within a particular list of prohibited substances, but what it does, and what are the intentions of those using it, included known and anticipated "collateral damage" when used on a civilian target.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 04:45 PM

When it is used as a weapon, rather than as a means of camouflage it is a chemical weapon.

That is not correct.
The definition is to do with toxicity.
That is how weapons defined as chemical cause casualties.

When used as a weapon it is an incendiary, as is napalm.
They cause casualties because they burn.

It should not have been used in Gaza.
IDF accepted that.
The local commander was in error.
That is why I would not defend its use there.
If I had a son or daughter among those troops and they died for want of screening I would might feel differently.
If I had to explain to grieving parents, wives and orphans why their loved ones could not be screened from their enemies I might feel differently.

The situation arose because Hamas made their positions in civilian areas.
That was a war crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 04:50 PM

There are very strong grounds for thinking it was in fact used as an anti-personnel weapon in Gaza.

WHAT GROUNDS?

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 05:00 PM

The Gaza strip as a whole is a heavily populated civilian area.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 05:17 PM

====It continues to be cowardice in the extreme to cower behing the cry of "anti Semitism"====
.,,.,..,
Persisting in uttering accusations and comparisons which you know, because you have repeatedly been told, are peculiarly offensive to all Jews ~~ not just to the regreattable sections of Israeli government & population, but, I repeat, to ALL jews~~~

is by any definition an

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 05:28 PM

====It continues to be cowardice in the extreme to cower behing the cry of "anti Semitism"====
.,,.,..,
Persisting in uttering accusations and comparisons which you know, because you have repeatedly been told so & have admitted that to be their effect, are peculiarly offensive to all Jews ~~ not just to the regrettable sections of Israeli government & population, but, I repeat, to ALL Jews~~~

is by any definition

an ANTI-SEMITIC act

of which anyone who calls himself any sort of progressive or anti-racist or humanitarian should be

FUCKING WELL ASHAMED

& you know how frequently I employ such language on this forum.

Think it isn't if you like, Jim: but it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 05:30 PM

Look at these images.
http://www.geographic.org/maps/new1/gaza_strip_maps.html
Hamas could have dug in in the large unpopulated areas shown, evacuated civilians from around their positions in built up areas, or just concealed themselves.
They chose to fight surrounded by civilians.
That is a war crime.

There are very strong grounds for thinking it was in fact used as an anti-personnel weapon in Gaza.
What are these very strong grounds please?

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 05:32 PM

... a particularly aggressive, belligerent, intentionally offensive piece of antisemitism moreover.

You think it isn't but it is.

You are a RACIST, Jim

demonstrably

unarguably

& intentionally

You think you are not but you are.

Live with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Oct 11 - 05:38 PM

Jim, your behaviour here is beneath contempt.
We all have strong feelings and views, but the rest of us can conduct ourselves with decency and civility.

In your deranged campaign to demonize me, you have to invent crimes for me in the absence of any real ones.
On the subject of Israel you seem unable to confine yourself to reasoned statements, and manage to offend one of the most inoffensive and reasonable people you could ever come across.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 02:53 AM

The pair of you appear to have now crawled behind your "anti-Semitism defence completely.
"Persisting in uttering accusations and comparisons which you know, because you have repeatedly been told, are peculiarly offensive to all Jews"
So it is permissable to culturally generalise and smear one race/culture but not another - both racist and hypocritical in my book.
"Jim, your behaviour here is beneath contempt."
Your aproach to these debates appears to be that you can be as racist and bigoted as you wish as long as you do it 'politely' - bigotry and racism do not alter one iota in either content or effect no matter how you parcel them up - MacColl once referred to it in one of his songs as "The smiler with the knife", and that'll do for me..
I can't think of anything more evil than excusing massacres of women, children, young, old - all non-combatants by ignoring them, pretending they didn't happen, or downgrading the motives of the killers to 'neglect' - at the same time as promoting the weapons that inflict such horrific damage on human beings (proof provided) as 'harmless illuminations'.
Go and take a cold shower - the pair of you.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 03:21 AM

you can be as racist and bigoted as you wish as long as you do it 'politely'
Lie. I refute any and all bigotry and racism.
excusing massacres of women, children, young, old - all non-combatants
Lie. I have never excused any massacre
- at the same time as promoting the weapons that inflict such horrific damage on human beings (proof provided) as 'harmless illuminations'.
Lie. I have never said that.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 03:59 AM

Is that the song they call 'The Banks of Denial?'
Have a nice day!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 04:23 AM

A dozen showers, cold or hot, are not going to wash the RACIST stench off you, Jim.

You think you're not but you are

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 05:15 AM

Thanks for answering my questions and responding to my points so succinctly Mike
You've made it very clear now
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 06:02 AM

De Nial
Good one Jim.
Yes of course I deny saying WP is "'harmless illuminations'"
Only a fool would describe it as harmless.
I have worked with the stuff.
You made that up.

I would never, and have never, "excused" any massacre.
A very nasty thing to make up about me.
I certainly deny that.

The racism thing.
I deny making the claim you ascribe to me because I did not make it.
The people who did make it are not racists.
It is laughable to describe people like Jasmin Alibhai-Brown as racist.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 06:26 AM

""The situation arose because Hamas made their positions in civilian areas.""

Civilian areas of their own country which was, from their point of view, being attacked and invaded by a foreign army.

And Keith, I would like you to explain to me what part of any nation, absent the presence of a defined front line defended by its own troops, is NOT a civilian area?

You leap to the defence of a regime which thinks nothing of applying vastly superior force against the virtually defenseless population of a neighbour state. Because my friend, whether the world recognises it or not, Palestine is a de facto state, and the only thing that stops it being recognised is the cowardice of western politicians, terrified of losing the votes of their Jewish citizens.

Simples.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 07:06 AM

And Keith, I would like you to explain to me what part of any nation, absent the presence of a defined front line defended by its own troops, is NOT a civilian area?

I mean a built up civilian area Don.
The law of armed conflict states that civilians must be evacuated if fighting is likely, you must not construct military positions in civilian occupied places, and prior warning must be given of any attack (Israel complied with the last).

I am not aware of "leaping to the defence" of anyone Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 07:19 AM

"I have worked with the stuff."
You described yourself as a teacher - on yourr pupils, no doubt!
"I would never, and have never, "excused" any massacre.!"
You claimed the Israelis were only guilty of PREVENTING the Shatila Sabra massacres, and denied their active part in them - you still have to withdraw that statement.
"The people who did make it are not racists."
You headed your "cultural implant" statement "I now believe" - and have still failed to produce a source for the claimed quote.
As I said, have a nice day
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 07:49 AM

I am having a nice day thanks Jim.

I am a science teacher, and have used it in demonstrations.
I was also an army reservist.
I used hand launched wp flares and fired wp smoke from a mortar.

You claimed the Israelis were only guilty of PREVENTING the Shatila Sabra massacres, and denied their active part in them

Not a claim Jim.
Israel denies it and no evidence has been produced.
If it is true I condemn it absolutely.
If.

The "cultural implant" (not my words)
The offending was said to stem from enforced sexual abstinence.
I thought that all or most would be subject to that, but I do not know enough about it.
What proportion would you say Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 08:50 AM

"Israel denies it and no evidence has been produced."
The Israelis would deny it - wouldn't they?
Enough evidedence has been produced for the Israelis to have been DIRECTLY IMPLICATED IN THE KILLING OF up to 3,500 REFUGEES BY AN INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY. THE MASSACRE COULD NEVER HAVE TAKEN PLACE WITHOUT THE FULL CO-OPERATION OF THE ISRAELI TROOPS AND EVEN THEIR GOVERNMENT HAVE BEEN FORCED TO ADMIT PARTIAL COMPLICITY - WITH THEIR TRACK RECORD OF FINDING THEMSELVES NOT GUILTY OF WAR CRIMES, THIS IS ITSELF AN INDICATION OF PROFOUND IMPLICATION IN THESE MASSACRES which appear in virtually every list of Israeli massacres as an Israeli war crime.
Eye witness descriptions have been produced and the man in charge was even in line to be prosecuted until he was elected prime minister.
Robert Fisk's artical not only implicates the Israeli troops of having providing the transport and illumination for the massacres and opening the gates to let the killers in, but also claims that not only were the troops present at the massacres, but also were possibly actively implicated.
As I said - holocaust denial in reverse.
"The "cultural implant" (not my words)"
Whose words are they - you used them?
Who else has claimed such a "cultural implant" and said that this is possessed by " ALL MALE PAKISTANIS"? You have yet to produce one quote using these descriptions - and even if you produced 100, without research or documented evidence to back them up IT IS A RACIST STATEMENT AND THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE PERSENTED IT AS YOUR OPINION in order to prove that a "massive, massive" proportion of BPs are involved in illegal sex with under-age girls makes it YOUR racist statement.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 09:28 AM

What gets lost in this kind of food fight is the extent to which there is agreement on many of the really important issues.

Disagreement about the extent to which Israelis were culpable in the Shatila Sabra massacres is less important than agreement that all those who were culpable were criminal, and deserved to be punished in ways which they were not. So far as I can see, everyone here agrees on this.

Disagreement about the exact classification of White Phosphorous as a tool of war is less important than agreement that its use against civilian populations is intolerable, and that it was used in such a way in Gaza. So far as I can see, everyone here agrees on this.

Disagreement about the past history of what has been called "Cisjordan" (the region between the Jordan and the Mediterranean), and the shape of any future settlement, is less important than agreement that both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to live there in peace. So far as I can see, everyone here agrees on this.

Yes, so far as I can see, everyone here agrees on all these. But it is quite possible to find people who disagree on all of them - and those are the disagreements that matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 09:35 AM

---"As I said - holocaust denial in reverse".---

Yes, didn't you just, Racist Jim! & to quote & adapt some of your own subsequent words back at you [which I own are slightly edited to adapt to present circumstances, not to alter your point which can be ascertained by anyone going back one post]

---IT IS A RACIST STATEMENT AND THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE PERSENTED IT AS YOUR OPINION ... makes it YOUR racist statement.---

Again, Jim:
you are a racist.
I have, as anyone can see just by scrolling back, spent hours above trying to blind myself to the fact, & to make you aware of how undilutedly RACIST your statements are ~~ only for you to attack my bonafides in doing so and to deny their implications, to yourself as well as to the rest of us. I genuinely believe that you can't see what is so patent because you wilfully blind yourself to the truth.

To put it as I have before in the quote from Shaw, with which I am getting as bored as anyone else, but which happens so efficiently to summarise the facts~

You think you are not but you are.

So that I must reassert ~~~

YOU ARE A RACIST, JIM; UNDENIABLY, SELF-CONDEMNED, AN OUT-&-OUT RACIST.

Got it now, have you, Jim Carroll? R-A-C-I-S-T.

Shamelessly so ~~ except that you clearly have no shame...

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 09:46 AM

Enough evidedence has been produced for the Israelis to have been DIRECTLY IMPLICATED IN THE KILLING OF up to 3,500 REFUGEES BY AN INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY.
Fine, but give details please. It is new to me.

THE MASSACRE COULD NEVER HAVE TAKEN PLACE WITHOUT THE FULL CO-OPERATION OF THE ISRAELI TROOPS AND EVEN THEIR GOVERNMENT HAVE BEEN FORCED TO ADMIT PARTIAL COMPLICITY -
Yes, they should have stopped it.
That is the extent of "complicity" they acknowledge.

Eye witness descriptions have been produced and the man in charge was even in line to be prosecuted until he was elected prime minister.

Forgive my cynicism, but the "eye witnesses" were produced 20 years later.
The prosecution was to be in Belgium but never happened because there was no case.
Remember all those "eye witnesses" on the Marvara?
The firing from boats and helicopters before the landings?
The large numbers of dead?
Bodies being dumped over board?
All lies.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 09:53 AM

My offending post in full Jim

Date: 13 Feb 11 - 07:10 AM

Don, no one on this thread has claimed any of those things.

Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims have a culturally implanted tendency" but only because of the testimony of all those knowledgeable people, and always acknowledging that only a tiny minority succumb.

Do you dismiss all that just because it does not fit your preconceptions, or do you have some powerful evidence to the contrary that you have not shared with us?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 01:52 PM

My point being is, disagreement about the facts of the case are important, but in discussing such disagreements it is important not to lose sight of the fact that both parties live in the same moral universe as to what is right and what is wrong. That is more important.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 03:36 PM

"Fine, but give details please. It is new to me."
No - it is you who is challenging the known facts and the findings of an official enquiry into what is commonly accepted as a massacre of over 3,00 refugees which was facilitated and almost certainly participated in by Israeli troops.
It is entirely up to you to present evidence to the contrary.
Even the Israeli government was in the process of prosecuting Ariel Sharon - were they are fault too?
Fisk's report was only confirming what was already known, or at least, widely suspected
On what grounds are you contraditicting all these findings?
As I said - holocaust denial in reverse.
"Yes, they should have stopped it."
No - they should not have driven the killers to the site, they should never have opened the gates and let them in, they should never have provided the illumination so that the killers could see what they were doing and they should never have allowed the killing to go on once they knew what was happening.
Which bit of all of this are you claiming never happened and what is your evidence for doing so?
Sorry - scepticism isn't enough.
So far you have only given us the Israeli PARTIAL denial of their troops part in the massacre.
Are you claiming that the independant enquiry wasn't independant.
Are you saying that they didn't examine the evidence properly - or not at all maybe, or that they are biased - what are you trying to tell us?
AS I SAID - HOLOCUST DENIAL IN REVERSE
"but only because of the testimony of all those knowledgeable people,"
Which knowledgable people and where is your "cultural implant" and "all male Pakistani Muslims" quote - lost in the post maybe?
"or do you have some powerful evidence to the contrary that you have not shared with us?"
You have made the racist statement, you have just reproduced it here (despite previously having denied it) - WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CLAIM WHICH IMPLICATES THE ENTIRE MALE POPULATION OF ONE CULTURE - surely not "a politician told you it was true"?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 03:41 PM

MGof H, I agree.
Jim and I can both agree that the massacre was an appalling crime against humanity.
Our difference is just that I am not sure that Israel was complicit.
Jim is sure but can give no reason or evidence to support it.
If he has no reason or evidence, that is just prejudice.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 03:59 PM

No - it is you who is challenging the known facts and the findings of an official enquiry into what is commonly accepted as a massacre of over 3,00 refugees which was facilitated and almost certainly participated in by Israeli troops.
The facts are disputed. They are not known.
What "official enquiry" found Israel complicit?
"almost certainly" means not certain Jim!

On what grounds are you contraditicting all these findings?
WHAT FINDINGS????

Are you claiming that the independant enquiry wasn't independant.
WHAT INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY??

they should not have driven the killers to the site, they should never have opened the gates and let them in, they should never have provided the illumination
How do you know they did those things?
It is denied.

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 04:25 PM

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CLAIM WHICH IMPLICATES THE ENTIRE MALE POPULATION OF ONE CULTURE
How many times must I say it Jim?
It was not and is not my claim.
Clear now?

The culture claim was made by Jack Straw, Anne Cryer, Lord Ahmed, Mohammed Safiq and Jasmin Allibhai-Brown.
The evidence was their own personal knowledge and experience.

I have no personal knowledge and experience.
I could not make such a claim.

All this has been explained to you many times since February.
Why do you keep on?

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 11 - 04:36 PM

I am not sure that Israel was complicit.

There does in fact appear to be evidence that Israeli forces, with Ariel Sharon in command, colluded in this massacre. This includes evidence from Israeli soldiers who were present.

The Israeli Kahan commission found that, while the actual killi9ng was done by the Christian Phalangist militia, Israeli military personnel were aware that a massacre was in progress without taking serious steps to stop it, and that reports of a massacre in progress were made to senior Israeli officers and even to an Israeli cabinet minister; it therefore regarded Israel as bearing part of the "indirect responsibility." In particular Ariel Sharon bore "personal responsibility", should be dismissed as Defence Minister and never allowed to hold public office again.

This did not prevent Sharon from subsequently becoming Prime Minister of Israel.