BS: Pathetic goading

Subject: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 09:20 AM

Once again, someone, the same person as last time, has started a thread by challenging "liberals" to defend something that he thinks is bad.

A thread has just opened on the operation trojan horse.

The OP has decided that people will defend the indefensible and invites them to do so.

Is it just me, or are some people beyond help?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 10:06 AM

I think one of the main perpetual barriers to ever establishing sensible solutions to real recognisable problems in society,
is that they inevitably become polarised and apropriated as either 'left' or 'right' propaganda issues.

The stupid, ignorant, stubborn, belligerent, doctrinaire, arseholes at all extremes of the political spectrum,
are all our own worse enemies...

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 10:39 AM

Once again, someone, the same person as last time, has started a thread by challenging "liberals" to defend something that he thinks is bad.

Actually he was just pointing out that our lefties appear to have been proved wrong about something again.
I suppose that is goading, but why should we tip-toe around their feelings when they are so nasty to anyone who challenges or questions them?

If they were ever proved right they would be insufferable!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:02 AM

Who in particular then Keith?

Most of the normal, respectable, decent sane people who you refer to as "lefties" tend to, with few exceptions, oppose the idea of faith schools and this story proves the point that children should be protected from religion rather than brainwashed by its dangerous influence.

By the way, when you say "we" and "they" be careful who you get into bed with... You certainly don't refer to the majority of Mudcat members, the vast majority are rational, balanced and capable of reason.

You just posted to put forward your Islamaphobia didn't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:07 AM

Definition of "liberal (small l)" from the 'Oxford English Reference Dictionary': "given freely, ample, abundant, open-minded, ot prejudiced, not strict or righteous, favouring individuality".....
Just about as far away from our resident old-usual goose-steppers as you could get.
Perhaps our rightist friend meant it as a compliment, d'you think?
Islamophobic threads are a little like London buses - if you miss one, there'll be another one along in a minute.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:12 AM

MacColl's tribute to the archetypal anti-liberal, Eunuch the Excellent
Jim Carroll

Present-day hero,‎
Sporting a pinstripe and wearing the regiment's tie,‎
Blood in his eye - the world on his shoulder.‎
Trims his moustache while he's dreaming of destiny's hour,‎
Greedy for power -‎
Ready to save the nation, and lead us in the fight,‎
Never a doubt that everything he does is right.‎

National hero,‎
Neat little man who's been chosed by Fate to redeem
The national dream: Imperial Greatness.‎
St. George with a briefcase, he's looking for dragons to slay,‎
Waits for the day -‎
We ask him to save the nation, and lead us in the fight,‎
Never a doubt that God is absolutely white.‎

Classical hero,‎
Standing alone on the bridge, he's defending the race,‎
Setting his face against the invader.‎
Knowing the worth of a man can be seen by his skin,‎
The killing begins -‎
Determined to save the nation, and lead us in the fight,‎
Never a doubt that virtue is pure unblemished white.‎

Yesterday's hero,‎
Trapped in a bunker and died like a rat in a hole,‎
Ultimate goal of second-hand heroes.‎
Another one rises, demanding the right to be heard,‎
And gets the bird -‎
History shrugs its shoulders. Gives a big horse-laugh,‎
And the cut-price hero ends up with the rest of the trash!‎

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:20 AM

Strikes me, the priority should be to actively seek pragmatic solutions to perceived social problems.
By active willingness to attempt to achieve workable compromise and consensus, to establish common ground agreements
and mutually benefitial resolutions as swiftly as pracaticable.

Not to indulge in perpetual confrontational fixed vewpoint ideological hostilities
in a never ending costly 'playground bullies' fight of attrition.

ie.. there are far too many loudmouth zealots on all sides who need to be told to shut up and eff off,
so sensible folk caring can get on with trying to unravel the fucked up society
these uncompromising die hard wankers have created and sustained.

I watched 10 minutes of Prime Minister's Question Time the other day;
what a bunch of smarmy smug toss pots.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stu
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:24 AM

"If they were ever proved right they would be insufferable!"

Hmmm. But us 'lefities' were right over:

WMDs in Iraq

The Tories wanting to privatise the NHS and the fact their manifesto pledge to leave it untouched was a lie

Gay marriage

Women bishops

No one gets tried for any of the financial crisis and mismanagement that caused the last recession.

Clegg being a tory arse licker

Most of our leading politicians having their snouts right up the shitter of Murdoch (including Salmond, dear Scots).

The tory desire to privatise everything (Royal Mail etc)


Here's another for you:

The real perpetrators of the Ukraine outrage will never see the inside of a courthouse as there is way too much at stake with regards to trade and energy supplies with Russia to ever bring these bastards to book. And the tories will let it slide.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:31 AM

Jim Carroll: "Definition of "liberal (small l)" from the 'Oxford English Reference Dictionary': "given freely, ample, abundant, open-minded, ot prejudiced, not strict or righteous, favouring individuality".....

...and I call SOME on here, 'so-called liberals', because none of the things that Jim posted fit the description of certain people who claim to be 'liberal'...only because they've been confused...and have become pawns!

'So-called liberals' are some of the most, closed minded, prejudiced, self-righteous, opinionated, small minded, afraid to grow up, anal retentive assholes on the planet...who think more about being accepted for their dumb-fuck opinions, than they care about people..including themselves!
They THINK they are so 'hip' and politically savvy, when all they are are empty-headed, programmed parrots, who can't think beyond their indoctrinations!

I think that pretty much covers it.

GfS

P.S. No it didn't cover it...how about bigoted, immature morons who pride themselves in being armchair name callers, to answer every question that their retarded minds can't honestly answer. They are emotional disasters, who rely on getting others into a whipped up emotional tizzy, as a premise for 'proving a point' which premise is completely false...and if somebody points that out, they go into a menopausal conniption-fit of pretend indignation!!
In other words, they're intellectually suicidal and proud of it..and too arrogant to even consider 'another possibility' to ANYTHING!!

Well, that's getting closer!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:35 AM

The first paragraph in anon guest's message above was, I bet, run through a translator a few times. I personally like "pracaticable", which I'm pronouncing "pracatickable". The whole thing probably started out as "can't we all just get along?" Well, no, but I think having a nice thread for pathetic goading, about another thread about pathetic goading is sort of like looking in a mirror that is aimed at another mirror that reflects the first mirror reflecting the second, etc.

The situation is serious. Not so much discussions on Mudcat including "the usual suspects".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Wesley S
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:38 AM

Oh - Who cares? As the song says "It doesn't mean shit to a tree".

If you really want to piss off the "other side" - whatever that is - just tell them they are right. They win. It will take the wind out of their sails.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:44 AM

Yes, you're right Wesley. You win ;-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:52 AM

""I watched 10 minutes of Prime Minister's Question Time the other day;
what a bunch of smarmy smug toss pots.""

Since you are an anon. Mr./Miss. /Mrs./Ms. Guest, from an unknown location, should we really know what "Prime Minister" of what Nation you refer to? We could make assumptions from posting clues -, but that may be seen as presumptous?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 11:57 AM

"pracaticable" = careless misssssspelling of 'practicable'.

Solution - Eye testing for reading glasses or bifocal lenses and/or dump 14 years old 17" CRT
for new larger widescreen monitor.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: pdq
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 12:11 PM

So, Stu...

You pulled this thread way off-topic, but as long as you did...you said:


Hmmm. But us 'lefities' were right over: WMDs in Iraq


So please explain the "550 metric tonnes of Yellow Cake Uranium" that were airlifted out of Iraq in July of 2008 on orders from George W. Bush so that his successor "would not have to deal with the problem".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 12:27 PM

"because none of the things that Jim posted fit the description of certain people who claim to be 'liberal
Sorry Guest for insanity - you'll have to give us a lingk to your own personal dictionary - until such time, I'll stick with the srndard ones
"So-called liberals' are some of the most, closed minded, prejudiced, self-righteous, opinionated, small minded,"
And many of the rightists her propound views that fill ovens
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 12:35 PM

Go back to sleep, PeeDee. Talk about pathetic.....

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stu
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 12:49 PM

"So please explain the "550 metric tonnes of Yellow Cake Uranium" that were airlifted out of Iraq in July of 2008 on orders from George W. Bush so that his successor "would not have to deal with the problem"."

Where to start . . . Firstly, Yellow Cake is not a WMD, nor is it direct evidence for any WMD. Saddam had no means we know of to use Yellow Cake (a common low-grade ore that's basically been mined and milled) as a basis for making weapons-grade nuclear material. That it was part of a nuclear programme at some point is of no doubt, but Saddam did try to build a reactor there as the Israelis bombed it in the 1980s. It would't even make a very good dirty bomb as it emits too little radiation.

That said, 550 tonnes of the stuff lying about isn't good and all credit to Dubya for removing it for the good of the Iraqi people. Er, except he didn't: the Americans were contractors shifting the stuff on behalf of a Canadian corporation, who had purchased the lot off the Iraqi government with the aim of processing it and selling the resulting fuel on across the globe. As it happens, the UN already knew about this uranium prior to Bush's 2003 invasion as inspectors had visited the site after the first gulf war (when it was bombed). After Saddam was deposed UN and Iraqi troops guarded the site to prevent anyone from nicking the Yelllow Cake, and any other bits of equipment and stuff that might have been lying about.

Of course, it was Bush who went to war using the falsified information regarding Saddam trying to purchase Yellow Cake from Niger; a lie even the CIA wanted no part of for obvious reasons; they were under suspicion for cooking up the whole scam. Those pesky Italians rumbled Bush and Blair and although no-one has been held to account, those lovely, caring people at the CIA deflected attention and outed one of their own as a scapegoat - a betrayal of the most profound and unpleasant nature that shows there's no honour amongst thieves. The right-wing started all sorts of conspiracy theory crap to shore up their case and lack of moral integrity; too late, they pissed that away a long time ago and their case, which is groundless has been subject to numerous take-downs that are easy to find on Google.

The US and UK come out of this sordid little fiasco as they did out of the war: stinking of shit, and showing the depths of their contempt for their own people, who they have lied to constantly.

There were no WMDs.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: pdq
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 01:11 PM

Well Stu...thanks fo answering the qustion. Many on this forum are quite gutless and would not have even tried.

Now, you said: "...Bush who went to war using the falsified information regarding Saddam trying to purchase Yellow Cake from Niger.." after saying that the presence of such material was not important. So why can it possibly be important to have tried to get more?

There were three phases of The Gulf War:

    1991: Eviction of Saddam's forces from Kwuait

    1992-2003: No-Fly Zone Phase. We could not possible be accused of "invading Iraq in 2003 since we already (By demand of The UN!) controlled 70% of the country.

    2003 (march): Phase III, the taking down of Saddam Hussein and his government. BTW, Clinton asked for the go-ahead for this in 1998 when Saddam threw-out the UN weapons inspectors.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 01:30 PM

You start a thread about the pathetic goading on a thread that has hopefully died without reply and look what you get..

The reactionary nutters come out to play.

Throw them a biscuit someone, keep them quiet for a while.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 02:55 PM

Thanks, guest--makes sense now. I still kind of like "pracaticable".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 03:25 PM

is this (guest from sanity)some spoof of some swivel-eyed, outraged and out of time retired colonel blimp from the south? surely to say 'all liberals' or all whoevers are all this or all that is just being wilfully ignorant and gratuitously insulting to many good hearted people. i'm not a liberal - too angry and bitter to indulge in that anymore- but there are good and bad in all groups of people -most of us are all just trying to get by without bothering anyone else. however, in my experience many tories, nearly all big capitalists, most of those who live to acquire and the majority of sad, duped fools who give them any respect can - usually, in my opinion - tend to be on the wrong side of any argument.
then again, what would we find here on mudcat if we all repected each other?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 04:27 PM

"...how about bigoted, immature morons who pride themselves in being armchair name callers, to answer every question that their retarded minds can't honestly answer. They are emotional disasters, who rely on getting others into a whipped up emotional tizzy, as a premise for 'proving a point' which premise is completely false...and if somebody points that out, they go into a menopausal conniption-fit of pretend indignation!!
In other words, they're intellectually suicidal and proud of it..and too arrogant to even consider 'another possibility' to ANYTHING!!"

Oh, wow. I am WAY too polite to suggest that the above paragraphs come much closer to describing a certain not-so-sane guest.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 04:37 PM

Judging by how much they post here and how emotional they get, I don't think some of them have much else going on in their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 04:39 PM

Would it be wrong to start a copycat thread "Pantheistic Goating"?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 05:10 PM

"The only problem with having sex with a goat is you have to walk around to the front when you want to kiss them." ― Ronnie "The Hawk" Hawkins

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 05:15 PM

"I love you more than I love goats, and you know how I feel about goats", Gaby said." 
― James Patterson, The Christmas Wedding

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 05:18 PM

lets not assume the goat wants to be kissed. always keep it consensual- no matter how horny you may be

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 05:18 PM

Mystery Guest #794,912,593: "I think one of the main perpetual barriers to ever establishing sensible solutions to real recognisable problems in society,
is that they inevitably become polarised and apropriated as either 'left' or 'right' propaganda issues.
The stupid, ignorant, stubborn, belligerent, doctrinaire, arseholes at all extremes of the political spectrum,
are all our own worse enemies... "

'Left wing' and 'right wing' are on the same bird"
It's usually an ostrich with it's head in the sand...and can't fly!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 05:19 PM

X: 1
T:Goat Gods and Bean Dip
R:waltz
C:© 1988, 2010 L.E. McCullough
M:3/4
L:1/8
K:D
ag|:fA df ed|eA ce dc|dG Bd AG|A4 Bd|
fB gf ed|e~A3 gf|ed cd ef|e4 ag|
fA df ed|eA ce dc|dG Bd AG|A4 Bd|
fB gf ed|e~A3 gf|eA ce dc|1 d4 ag:|2 d4 cd|]
|:e~A3 gf|e~A3 de|fA gf ed|e~a3 gf|
eA ef ed|ea gf ed|Bd ga fg|e4 ag|
fA df ed|eA ce dc|dGBdAG|A4Bd|
fB gf ed|eA ce dc|dF Ad fe|1 d4 cd:|2 d4 ag|]

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 05:53 PM

"The only problem with having sex with a goat is you have to walk around to the front when you want to kiss them."

I can suggest a fix for that problem but the image it conjures up is.......well let's just say you don't really want to go there.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 06:02 PM

Was it goating, or goading?


my favourite goat song, to date 

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Janie
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 06:17 PM

Hey y'all, keep in mind that
Goats just wanna have fun

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Janie
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 06:24 PM

Dang, only thing between me being witty and not is the lack of an editing button:>)

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 06:31 PM

Goats do seem quite flexible, unlike some goading mudcat goats.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 06:43 PM

Ed, are you responding to Janie's post or bobad's? If it's the latter, I just remembered I'm out of brain bleach...

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 07:03 PM

Goat love

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 08:07 PM

I have had a very pleasant evening, playing irish music with friends in a pub, after reading this thread, I am so pleased that I went out and socialised.
Jeri, how do you manage to put up with this crap, if we ever meet I will buy you a drink.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 09:28 PM

I spent a lot of time in the military, Dick. I've heard and seen a lot. Still, the worst things haven't quite gotten as evil as someone sharing videos of a succession of men fucking a goat. It shocked me more because Bob thought it was worth posting the link to than because it happens.

And that's the last thing I want to have to do with this thread-turned-bucket-of-diarrhea, so I'll let others continue the horrors or the jokes, as the case may be. I'm willing to bet the hate will win out--please prove me wrong.


But Dick, I'd be glad to have a drink with you, no matter who's buying.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 18 Jul 14 - 10:09 PM

Hate?   I thought the thread had turned from that to lighthearted fun. Oh well, chacun à son goat I guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: LadyJean
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 12:38 AM

My sister kept goats, fragrant creatures. You could smell her place before you saw it. Goats can eat poison ivy without getting sick. Goats can and will, eat almost anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 12:50 AM

Musket: "Is it just me, or are some people beyond help?"


It's you.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 03:24 AM

Could be worse. Could be you doing the helping.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 05:34 AM

It's you.

GfS

P.S. The only people who think the 'lefties' are right, or 'proven right', are 'lefties'. The only people the who think that the 'righties' have proven they're right, are 'righties'.
So what's left that isn't right?..and if it's right, what's left?

You're all a bunch of foot soldiers for the way money is handled...you know, like the banksters have created your 'reality'....and like them, you lose your common sense, for humanity!..after all, the goal is contented consumers, even if you get talked out of reality, to get you there.

Havin' a Wonderful Trip?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: selby
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 05:44 AM

As a left handed person I sometimes have to use my right hand. Does that help?
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 08:21 AM

Goofus is ambidextrous. His wanking is apparent in every post.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 08:35 AM

He's pond life, so you possibly mean amphibious.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 10:16 AM

He wouldn't stand a chance in my garden pond. The newts, frogs and water boatmen have the top of the food chain sewn up between them.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 11:32 AM

FYI - if I take your meaning, over here in the US that term would be "pond scum."

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 12:08 PM

SRS....you are tarnishing your glowing image, when you join the name callers.

Mods should not indulge....you should try to be an example to us all?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 12:28 PM

Oh?..We're back to deleting posts...Too bad, they were getting to close!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 01:51 PM

Getting to close what?

The minds of Goofus and Akenaton were never open in the first place.

I get the gist of pond scum, but to me that means surface organisms. Let's not forget the bottom feeders. They both have, by their contributions to various threads, a fascination with bottoms.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 03:45 PM

No posts deleted, no names called.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 03:54 PM

Ake, Stilly was not name-calling, she was translating.

Two countries divided by a common language.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 05:16 PM

Akenaton speaks neither as both countries promote equality regardless of race, gender and sexual orientation.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jul 14 - 07:40 PM

I think I know what Stilly said Don.
Perhaps a little joke? I'm sure there was no REAL malice intended.

But moderators should not undermine their position by making remarks which could be misconstrued as vicious insults.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 12:56 AM

Members who fight all of the time are in no position to dictate to the referees, akenaton. Your interpretation is flawed. Leave it at that.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 12:46 PM

DF: "Two countries divided by a common language."

SRS: "Members who fight all of the time are in no position to dictate to the referees...."

That's so IRONIC, that the very guy that these two hold up, is Saul Alinsky's cornerstone for his 12 rules for radical activists....and then Musket turns around and says, "Akenaton speaks neither as both countries promote equality..."

EQUALITY????!!??...Is that the point of DIVIDING?????

that's the problem with 'so-called intellectuals...they become increasingly boring hypocrites!!

Being as Saul Alinsky Tactics RELY on "finding every crack and driving a wedge into it"...here is his tactical rules for bullshit!!

"Saul Alinsky's 12 Rules for Radicals

Here is the complete list from Alinsky.

* RULE 1: "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)
* RULE 2: "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)
* RULE 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
* RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
* RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
* RULE 6: "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid "un-fun" activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
* RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
* RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)
* RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
* RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)
* RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)
* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)"

Boy can you see the feeble attempts by our resident wannabes??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 01:48 PM

I'll have a pint of what he's on

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 03:23 PM

The difference between the left and the right is that the left want to
help most of humanity. The right just want to help themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 04:21 PM

I say liberate yourself from the chains of political dogma be it left or right it is no different than being a slave to the dogma of religion. Be a free thinker.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 04:42 PM

I'd rather be a thinker. You may have trouble with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 05:34 PM

Who the hell is Saul Alinsky? Never heard of him.

I'm hardly a "radical." I'm a Classic Liberal--no relation to a "so-called liberal," no matter how many times Paul E. Parrot squawks the expression.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 07:08 PM

"550 metric tonnes of Yellow Cake Uranium" are only a WMD if you drop it on one of those buses with no roof! LOL!!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Jul 14 - 07:12 PM

>>Now, you said: "...Bush who went to war using the falsified information regarding Saddam trying to purchase Yellow Cake from Niger.." after saying that the presence of such material was not important. So why can it possibly be important to have tried to get more?<<<

Because they already had 550 metric tonnes that they were not using?

LOLOLOLOLOL and HAHAHAHA!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 03:26 PM

DF: "Who the hell is Saul Alinsky? Never heard of him."

Well there goes your notion of being politically 'well read' (read: literate!)

GfS

P.S. He's the guy who wrote the TACTICS for bringing socialistic changes, while not relying on the truth....just tactics...look him up, you'll drool with delight....though looking up Beethoven would be a better exercise!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 03:48 PM

Not my cuppa, Goofus. Obviously yours, however.

I've always found facts and the truth to be the most powerful and persuasive arguments. Especially to the sane and intelligent.

But whatever turns your crank, Goofy....

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 05:01 PM

Seems like one of those old trendy "catch-all" type of lists, gfs,of the type promoted in more recent years by the likes of Oprah.

I seem to recall reading about this "somewhat confused guy" awhile back, when he was promoting Lucifer, and stating that when he died he prefered to go to hell, versus heaven, as he could better advise folks on how to be radicals there (and, I am not saying heaven, or hell exists or not).

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 05:48 PM

DF: "I've always found facts and the truth to be the most powerful and persuasive arguments. Especially to the sane and intelligent."

When I think of Beethoven verses political activism, One can only be reminded that Austria and Germany have had lots of zealots on both sides of the spectrum, 'left' or 'right', Monarchs, Kaisers, several wars and political overhauls...and each time they were accompanied, with sincere and not-so-sincere activists....only to be overturned, by the next bunch, cut from the same cookie cutter, right?

Beethoven's music has outlasted ALL of them....unchanged!!
What is it that he was 'listening to', within him, that reached into the 'eternal'???.....or at least relative eternal, when compared to all the shit you political know-it-alls, think you know so much about?

I''d rather dial into what he was talking about.

GfS

P.S. WWII Nazi Germany was defeated, but Fascism survived, and you, and resembling ilk, though sincerely denying it, are still trying to promote it, though I'm convinced that it's presentation is well disguised....and though you might 'get it up' to be sincere, you're sincerely wrong....

....Ask Ludwig

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 06:08 PM

Nice post Sanity, I think you've hit on something very important with your music analogy.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 06:51 PM

Nasty Germany was a fact, whose government embraced a particular ideology, not an ideology in and of itself—and it was defeated in World War II. Yes, Fascism still exists—it's an idea or body of ideas, and it will be around as long as there are human beings who want to lord it over everybody else. It's one of a number of totalitarian ideas, and ideas don't die out, as long as there are people around who embrace them.

Classical Liberalism doesn't want to lord it over anyone. It is the very antithesis of Fascism, seeking to leave everyone free to make his or her own choices and seek their own destinies, as long as they do not impinge on the freedom of others to do the same.

That's not the same thing as Capitalism, which is an economic theory whose goal has always been to maximize profit no matter what it has to do. Unrestrained (unregulated) Capitalism almost invariably leads to Fascism, in which big business and the government are the same.

See Benito Mussolini and his description of the "fasces," from which Fascism derives its name—and his explanation of why this symbolizes the relationship—or sameness—between corporations and government.

(Once again I whistle into the wind, attempting to educate the uneducable.)

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, composers and musicians are not above holding unattractive political or social views. Richard Wagner, for example, was very much a German nationalist, and he was a raving anti-Semite. That didn't keep him from writing some pretty magnificent music—but—that does not absolve him from being a pretty damned nasty person.

P. P. S. And although Beethoven was one of the greatest composers who ever lived (and you seem to be trying to equate yourself with Beethoven), he, also, was a very nasty person, especially toward other musicians and composers. Talented, by all means. But a real surly bugger.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 07:08 PM

Gfs, the Monarchy has out lasted very much in England....but, what does that prove? I suspect not much beyond people seem like having them around.

I suspect you are looking for patterns from a broad spectrum of unrelated factors, to prove some type of theory you have? IMO, this type of approach is an unlikely route to arrive at either a "fact" or any "truth", that would hold much water beyond what you have somehow conjured up "in some type of odd fashion".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 07:41 PM

It is thought by the politically naïve that Fascism and Communism are opposite ends of the spectrum. But for all practical purposes, there was damned little difference between Germany and Russia during the latter part of the first half of the last century.

And there is little practical difference between a concentration camp and a gulag.

Oh, yes! Hitler and Stalin trimmed their moustaches differently....

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 10:03 PM

DF: "Nasty Germany was a fact, whose government embraced a particular ideology, not an ideology in and of itself—and it was defeated in World War II. Yes, Fascism still exists—it's an idea or body of ideas..."

And: "Classical Liberalism doesn't want to lord it over anyone. It is the very antithesis of Fascism, seeking to leave everyone free to make his or her own choices and seek their own destinies, as long as they do not impinge on the freedom of others to do the same."

" "Classical Liberalism doesn't want to lord it over anyone. It is the very antithesis of Fascism, seeking to leave everyone free to make his or her own choices ..."

Yeah like all the 'choices we are FREE to make under Obamacare??..or face penalties??

'Liberalism' today, favors national socialism, right?...

Nazism - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist
The full name of Adolf Hitler's party was Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers' Party).
....and isn't is strangely coincidental, that the die-hard 'so-called liberals' on another current running thread, are all VERY MUCH anti-Semitic??...How many more 'coincidence' does it take to see that the corporate/banksters in collusion with the government, own, and propagate the very propaganda that the 'so-called liberals' are expounding today?...Though it is veiled as for 'everyone's well being'?
Get serious!...How stupid and blind to require all your 'followers' to be???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 11:04 PM

Goofball, how the hell do you come with some of this stuff? Certainly not by any depth of analysis or knowledge of political theory--and practice.

Hopeless....

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 11:35 PM

Liberalism does not mean anarchy. NOR does it equate with "National Socialism." If you think that, you're even more ignorant that I ever suspected.

The Affordable Care Act was subject to a VOTE, signed into law by President Obama, and approved by a ruling of the Supreme Court.

Educate yourself, Goofball. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act.

Also http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/rights/.

It allows people who were previously unable to get health insurance to do so. And it requires insurance companies to cover people they previously turned down (for various reasons, such as a pre-existing condition).

It's called the Democratic Process. You don't like this?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jul 14 - 11:57 PM

GfS is a moron troll who self-promotes as some kind of musical genius whilst spouting tea party talking points couched in the "they all do it" fallacy. Move along. Nothing to see here folks.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 12:12 AM

Right, Guest. I've got to stop getting sucked into attempts to inform and educate this black hole of ignorance and nincompoopery.

Bloody hopeless!!

His political view, if it can be called that, is "they're all a bunch of crooks," thinking that this absolves him from the responsibility of having to think, analyse, choose, and vote. So when others are going to the polls and exercising their democratic rights and responsibilities, he sneers at them and goes out for a beer.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 12:15 AM

"It's called the Democratic Process. You don't like this?"
Oh so true! It has replaced the democratic process which refers to all the people, irrespective of party affiliation.
Yes, I, for one, do not like the big D, big P currently practiced in the Senate and White House.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 12:52 AM

"Big D, big P...?"

Sorry, John, am I missing something here?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:00 AM

Okay! I get what you mean. Caps.

Well, there's a lot about Congress I'm not real fond of either. Among other things, "Citizens United." That's a giant step toward Fascism (corporations and government acting as one unit--the "fasces").

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:28 AM

Gosh..I'm not alone!

OK..'we' got the ACA, Asinine Crony Act. This wasn't a move to bring 'affordable healthcare' to anyone..it was brought about, to funnel co-coerced profits to the insurance company cronies, through legislation, and to force everyone to pay increased premiums, plus WAY higher deductibles...to stuff and line the pockets of those cronies, and it was 'presented and packaged' rhetorically, to appeal to the 'so-called liberals'....and as far as passed through Democratic process??...yeah, and it took bribes, waivers, ( its so great that if you vote for it, we'll exempt your state..or favorite 'special interests), political favors just to one party....and all of it ain't over through the Supreme Court, either!
....and all you blind ideologues, this bullshit con job is going to put Republicans in the majority of both houses, and the White House as a 'way' to 'remedy' it....and that will be another disaster!
The Asinine Crony Act, will in effect set 'liberalism' back another 20-30 years!....along with the rest of the crap this guy has promoted!
Are you in favor of NDAA??...like the crap at the IRS??...wait till both houses and the next White House gets control over it! Like the Benghazi lying fest?? Fast and Furious..selling guns to the cartels, and now letting them thrive in human trafficking?? Shovel ready jobs?? Alternative energy crony payouts? Contempt of Congress filed on the AG? Drawing imaginary red lines?? Sending money to Hamas? Soft on Iran, so they have a green light to build nukes??...and then when Israel bombs the shit out of them, you'll criticize Israel over that, too! On the Syria crisis, at the early stages, I posted that they should blockade and set up troops on the borders, to stop any military arms and personnel from getting in or out....HELLO ISIS!..and I could go on and on.I remember during the first primaries I called him 'O-Blabbo', because I thought this guy was an OBVIOUS bullshitter....guess what?....Oh, and you can keep your healthcare and doctor, too!....but your doctor won't be in...he's too busy watching that YouTube video that 'sparked Benghazi'!
Nope, you guys are all subscribers to the liars in DC, that you've become part of their lying apparatus!
So don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about!..You can't even cop to the truth, in any way, shape or form!
take you and your lying bullshit,and go down in history, in flames!

Oh, and BTW, I am not affiliated with any party, right or left..but objectively speaking, the TEA Party, in contrast to what the Democrat Party has become, look like a bunch of geniuses!....and a lot of you helped your own party's demise, by NOT holding up their feet to the fire of accountability!!..You just made more Dumb Fuck excuses for it all!

GfS

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:29 AM

DF: "Among other things, "Citizens United." That's a giant step toward Fascism (corporations and government acting as one unit--the "fasces").

What the fuck do you think Obamacare is about???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:33 AM

...Constipation of the brain and diarrhea of the keyboard....

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 03:44 AM

As an observer from slightly different shores, I did notice that once the trigger term "tea party" was used, Goofus went, in Pavlovian fashion, straight into a rant about Obamacare.

As you said, nothing to see here.






Would Goofus perform gay cure treatment under Obamacare?

Also, he picked on a deaf composer to prove his point. Ha Ha! Let's point and laugh. Mind you, judging by some of the bloodthirsty posts on the Gaza threads, Elgar might be back in fashion with his "Glory, pomp and circumstance of glorious war." Although speaking of Elgar, Goofus has his share of enigma variations.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 04:51 AM

Well, at least you're sticking to the topic:

PATHETIC Goading!!

More stupid name calling and slurs....well it really is all you got!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 04:56 AM

I have been following the Israel thread but have never seen anything remotely "bloodthirsty."
Perhaps you could give an example, or did you make it up?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 05:27 AM

Hang on, I'll cut and paste from one of my own posts, see if that can help you.

All you have to do is look for the blue text with Keith A of Hertford on it, then click on it. The listing you get is easy to wade through, if not a little disturbing at times and as with all pro military right wing crap, contradictory and difficult to substantiate.

(Back in real time now.) Of particular merit is the claim that bombing children on beaches, hospitals and schools is OK because like The IRA, innocent people were given a fair warning, or would have if the electricity supply wasn't down and people could be warned. Obviously, the children on the beach was just target practice, so no warning was given.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 06:14 AM

"I have been following the Israel thread but have never seen anything remotely "bloodthirsty."
Try your approval of the use of missiles which indiscriminately explode ober civilian areas showering tiny darts on the population below, or your approval of the use of chemical phosphorus flares which burned away the flesh from children s faces as "harmless illumination", or sniper bullets sold to Assad at the time his men were cutting down women carrying children and making a sport of it by offering each other cigarettes for actually shooting through the children before hitting the mother) as "only a few sniper bullets", or suggesting that Assad, whose torture chambers were full of victims - later to be "disappeared", should be sold riot control equipment....?   
The list is pretty endless
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 06:19 AM

It is a lie that I have ever made any post that could remotely be described as "bloodthirsty."

It is just pathetic goading.
Go ahead and produce one if you are not lying.

You can't.
Hopeless liars the pair of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 11:10 AM

"I defy you to...

You cant...."

Seems like a Keith post if I'm not mistaken.

A huge difference between having style and having a style.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 11:27 AM

Have you gotten your keyboard hand bound up in your undershirt, gfs? Your normally easy to understand posts recently seem to be as Dylan wrote, "drifting, like a satellite".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 11:32 AM

Nothing to do with "style" Musket.
You referred to "bloodthirsty" posts in the Israel thread, but you can't produce a single one because there are none.
I was just pointing up your dishonesty.

Or, perhaps you have found one {chortle}

Confident prediction, you will not because there are none.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 12:01 PM

Naw, none at all Keith, if viewed from your skewed sense of morality.

Hey Ed? I take my hat off to you if you reckon Goofus is normally easy to understand. I must be thick as pigshit then cos be buggered if I know which planet he orbits.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 12:19 PM

OK, put up a post that would seem "bloodthirsty" to ANYONE, not just me with my "skewed sense of morality."

Confident prediction, you can't because there are none.
It is all your invention.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:18 PM

"It is a lie that I have ever made any post that could remotely be described as "bloodthirsty."
Then we must presume that firing missiles at civilians that burst, letting loose thousands of darts capable of burying themselves into concrete, never mind human flesh, if what you call normal in your christian world.
As is selling an inhuman dictator ammunition used to train men to shoot through women and children.
Not forgetting proposing the same dictator be sold riot control equipment in order to neutralise all opposition and slam those opposing his terror into already his well-known torture chambers to be mutilated, before being murdered.
You have recently ben given the first example, which you have dismissed as an acceptable way to conduct a war - the other two were your own proposals.
I'd say a surfeit of Draculitis, wouldn't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:39 PM

Put up the "bloodthirsty" post then Jim, if it exists.

Musket said there were some in the current Israel thread.
You clearly agree with me he is wrong about that, but I know I have never made one.
Prove me wrong?
Confident prediction, you can't Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 01:59 PM

"current Israel thread."
"Then we must presume that firing missiles at civilians that burst, letting loose thousands of darts capable of burying themselves into concrete, never mind human flesh, if what you call normal in your christian world."
Apologies accepted
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 03:00 PM

You might add -
You once took umbrage when I accused you of advocating that it was acceptable to kill hostages
Throughout every thread concerning Israel, your defence for their atrocities has been that Hamas has hidden behind hostages, so it was acceptable for them to behave as they do - ie - kill hostages - pretty bloodthirsty by anybody's standard - even John Mclean wouldn't do that, and he's pretty bloodthirsty.
Your perstant defence of atrocities is the most inhuman I have ever encountered in my whole, over-long existence - you seem to get off on it, yet you present it as some weird sect of Christianity.
Odd or what?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 03:07 PM

100.

Goes with the 1 I originally posted.

Jim, Christianity is about having a pathetic excuse for being a twat rather than just being one. If he prays, he must be on the side of the angels.

Angels with dirty faces.. To recall my youth.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 03:21 PM

""Angels with dirty faces.. To recall my youth.""

Weird and scary- I dont recall any such dark and dirty angels from my youth.

In fact, that sounds more like a Dickens novel. No wonder you are such a serious and vocal religious sceptic, (though I gather educated, wealthy, and apparently well-endowed and even well-linked). It really ain't right to expose a youth to a dirty-faced angel. You escaped the stigma, but, others were likely not so lucky.
:)

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 05:34 PM

I'm glad you noticed that I am well endowed. The rest is merely relative.

The angels with dirty faces comes from my past in a punk band.

Less of the "serious" if you don't mind. You can't be serious and prick the bubble of pomposity at the same time. It's people taking themselves seriously that makes Mudcat a laugh in the first place, of the pseuds corner variety.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 05:59 PM

""I'm glad you noticed that I am well endowed. ""

Yes,in fact, it is quite easy to determine the sexual prowess of each mudcatter by their posting style, even if they dont mention it.

On a related matter, a few years ago I was visiting a friend, and his wife was watching the TV program on the Shopping Channel. A music stereo was up for sale, and a woman called in by phone who was quite excited to purchase the product . She made a product endorcement statement that both puzzled me, and remained with me since tgat time. She said, "the stereo looks like it will sound very good".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 06:00 PM

Original use of the phrase, from which all others derive acc to wikipedia "disambiguation" entry --

"Angels with Dirty Faces is a 1938 American gangster film directed by Michael Curtiz and starring James Cagney, Pat O'Brien, the Dead End Kids and Humphrey Bogart, along with Ann Sheridan and George Bancroft. The film was written by Rowland Brown, John Wexley and Warren Duff with uncredited assistance from Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur."

Have seen it on tv -- v good, with clever ambivalent twist ending. See full Wiki entry.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 22 Jul 14 - 06:12 PM

Inspiration... Our rendition of Angels with Dirty Faces was far more shouty.

Funny how we were discussing Israeli atrocity and ended up talking about gangsters?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 02:03 AM

"Angels with dirty faces"
Yeah - I remember the beginning of 'The Bowery Boys', or am I mis-remembering?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stu
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 03:27 AM

My prediction from 18th July at the top of this thread:

"The real perpetrators of the Ukraine outrage will never see the inside of a courthouse as there is way too much at stake with regards to trade and energy supplies with Russia to ever bring these bastards to book. And the tories will let it slide."


Lo and behold, everyone is still trading with Russia.

You can't slaughter enough innocents in this day and age to disrupt trade. What a fucking world.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 03:35 AM

And another way of looking at it is that you can't let terror disrupt trade, otherwise, the objective of terrorism has been realised.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 03:38 AM

Jim, you are just spouting more shit and the quote you produced was fake.
A lie.
I have never said anything like that.
A deliberate lie intended to discredit me.



If I have ever made a post that any reasonable person could construe as "bloodthirsty" why can you not produce it?

The answer is that it is just another false accusation.
I have never made any such post.
You lie.
Both of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 03:41 AM

Jim - I think they were billed as The Dead End Kids in that film, but aka The Bowery Boys, also Little Tough Guys &c in later ones. There is a Wikipedia entry with filmography about them, which opens

The Dead End Kids were a group of young actors from New York who appeared in Sidney Kingsley's Broadway play Dead End in 1935. In 1937 producer Samuel Goldwyn brought all of them to Hollywood and turned the play into a film. They proved to be so popular that they continued to make movies under various monikers, including the Little Tough Guys, the East Side Kids, and the Bowery Boys, until 1958.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 04:31 AM

Both of you?

Make an appointment with my secretary if you are referring to me. I prefer to screen out warmongering liars these days. It costs good money to keep having to shower.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stu
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 04:40 AM

"And another way of looking at it is that you can't let terror disrupt trade, otherwise, the objective of terrorism has been realised."

The shooting down of MH17 wasn't an act of terrorism; it was as a result of a war and the weapon used to kill those people was supplied by Russia.

This is the problem with capitalism: it has no moral boundaries.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 04:55 AM

Yes you too Musket.
You made the original accusation that I made "bloodthirsty" posts on the current Israel thread.

That was untrue, so you were unable to produce a single one.

Now, several days later, you still have not.

Will you now {chortle}?

Can you guess my confident prediction?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 05:30 AM

Keith...

You have defended murdering of children playing on a beach on the basis that it is somehow "lawful" You said that it is alright to bomb residential areas, hospitals and schools. That it is the fault of the dead people because they should have evacuated their lawful homes, schools and hospitals. I remember The IRA coming up with the same mealy mouthed excuse after setting off their bombs.

No, I am not producing a single one. You produce dozens of the fuckers yourself with no help whatsoever.

You need help though, all the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 05:58 AM

You are not producing one because you can't.
If you could you would.

It is just your pathetic, lying way of hitting back at someone who you can not answer in any other way.

It reveals your inadequacy.
Pathetic goading is all you are capable of.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 06:12 AM

"they were billed as The Dead End Kids in that film, but aka The Bowery Boys"
They were Mike - I remember them particularly as 'The Bowery Boys' (I was a great fan in my 'Saturday matinee days), and later, a couple of them became actors in their own right - I remember Hunz Hall (Satch?) particularly.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 08:13 AM

If I can shout down supporters of terrorism, I am not being quite as inadequate as some.

Taking sides in a dog fight between two sides that are both in the wrong is repugnant. To then blame the dead men, women and children caught up in it for not doing as one side tells them rather than the other is beyond the bounds of decency.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 09:22 AM

It is impossible to "shout down" people on a forum.
It is possible to challenge their views, although you are incapable of that.
It is possible to lie and smear.
That is all you do, because of your inadequacy.

Still not found a bloodthirsty post I see.
Just one of your lying smears.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 09:32 AM

Challenge?

You don't put alternatives forward when faced with such appalling posts, you make it quite clear that civilisation has moved on since such views were aired publicly.

Yes, inadequacy is a popular term when used to try and shout down those who expose a position you deep down are ashamed of.

Decency has to be inadequate for hatred and bigotry to flourish.

Twas ever thus. It just isn't so common these days in decent company.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 09:33 AM

"Still not found a bloodthirsty post I see."
You can't be reading what you've been given - fragment bombs on civilians, the bombing of hospitals, killing civilians because it is claimed they are hiding terrorists in their midst.... you have supported all these acts, openly, by denying them or by simply ignoring them.
In the past you have supported giving torturers and mass murderers the wherewithal to lock up his opponents, selling him chemicals capable of use in the manufacture of weapons, the us of white phosphorus on built up civilian areas - you have even denied the part played by these animals in the massacre of 3,500 civilians.
Give us a break Keith - you are a serial vampire.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 10:09 AM

No Jim.
That is all you.
Show any post of mine that anyone could possibly construe as "bloodthirsty."

An actual post please.
Not you telling us about how bloodthirsty they are.
SHOW US ONE!

Confident prediction, neither of you will produce one between you.
It was just a smear.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 11:31 AM

Hey Keith!

it's been a good few minutes since you challenged anyone to find your posts because we are inadequate!

Any chance of challenging us again? Go on. For me?

Bloodthirsty fool.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 11:44 AM

You made an accusation but could not substantiate it because it was a lie.
I think that makes you look more foolish.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 11:45 AM

Pathetic goading BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 01:01 PM

Saying that bombing civilians is a permissable form of defence for Israel to indulge in is as bloodthirsty as it gets - are you really claiming you have never suggested this?
Supporting the shelling of hospitals because Hamas is in the vicinity is an appalling proposal in support of an atrocity - you've never suggested such a thing of course - somebody else wrote this?
"Hospitals have been hit because Hamas sites positions in and near them." - ie - the slaughter of non-combatant "hostages"
Throughout these threads, you have shown a total disinterest in the taking of the lives of non-combatants, the use of illegal and marginally so weapons; ones that maim women and children, a support for the destruction of their homes, of hospitals, schools and medical centres.
From the very beginning of all this you have given your total support to the Israeli fascists, their ethnic cleansing, their setting up of an apartheid state, using both illegal and borderline actions to do so.
This has included a total denial in their part in the massacre of 3.5000 unarmed refugees, men women and children
You are a supporter of fascist thuggery, making you an armchair thug.
Now you don't even have the bottle to stand up to your own convictions.
A little late to attempting to hide any of this - it's become part of your persona
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 01:04 PM

The UN is now suggesting that Israel has committed war crimes - defended by you, no doubt
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 01:08 PM

You misrepresent me and my views Jim.
If I have really said something "bloodthirsty" quote it.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 01:47 PM

"If I have really said something "bloodthirsty" quote it.
Your whole attitude in supporting terrorism and inhumanity makes you what you are on every thread you have posted to
Supporting or defending or denying the destruction of hospitals when you have been given evidence of the fact is inhuman
The same with flechette weapons likewise
Excusing the killing of civilians - human shields or not - likewise.
Fuck off Keith - you are a raving nutter
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 01:52 PM

Rather succinct. I have nothing to add.

Raving nutter... I might pad it out a bit, being me, and say fucking raving nutter, but I think Jim has captured the essence.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 02:13 AM

Musket: "Hey Ed? I take my hat off to you if you reckon Goofus is normally easy to understand. I must be thick as pigshit then cos be buggered if I know which planet he orbits."

Don't be upset, if I'm not at all interested in Uranus.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 02:21 AM

Musket: "I must be thick as pigshit ... "

He's been enrolled and taking a self-realization course....Hey, you said it, not me....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 02:30 AM

Rather quick of you to notice my hidden self depracation. In fact it takes a degree of self defacation.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 04:11 AM

Jim and Musket, pages of accusations but, NOT ONE POST THAT COULD REMOTELY BE DESCRIBED AS "BLOODTHIRSTY."

You lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 05:22 AM

Is it hurting?

Be careful which atrocities you sit there in your comfy chair and condone in future.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 05:36 AM

More pathetic goading Musket.
You will not be quoting me condoning any atrocities either.
(or will you prove me wrong this time?)

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 05:40 AM

Yawn.

I refer the dishonourable gentleman to his earlier diatribe.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 05:58 AM

Keith, Let it go...peace!
Show some compassion and mercy to the lesser evolved...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 11:53 AM

"NOT ONE POST THAT COULD REMOTELY BE DESCRIBED AS "BLOODTHIRSTY."
You have just approved the use of missiles that are vbeing used on civilians which shoot out thousands of darts
Dictionary definition of bloodthirsty
Keen and ready for bloodshed, murderous, cruel.
Keen and ready for violence
Displaying or pandering to such feelings
Perhaps you have a different definition?
Perhaps you would like to add the white phosphorus and Dime missiles - one chemical, one with biological effects, which are now being put to use in Gaza.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 12:40 PM

It's alright Goofus, he isn't getting at you.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 14 - 04:24 PM

You have just approved the use of missiles that are vbeing used on civilians which shoot out thousands of darts

No I have not.
I was helping you get your pretty little head around their legality.
I was stating fact, and expressed no opinion except that their illegal use would be "disgusting."

So, still no "bloodthirsty" posts from me Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 03:01 AM

"No I have not."
"Jim, re your description of flechettes.
"The "twist" being that they hurl thousands of two centimetre darts into anybody within range"
Replace the word "darts" with "fragments" and you have a description of the kind of shell in use since Napoleonic times.
They are considered legal weapons but like all weapons can be used illegally."
The above is what has been used against the civilians of Gaza - here you have described their use as permissible because they are legal (in fact they are not in the use against civilians), but beside the point - in declaring them legal and refusing to condemn their use, you are approving of them - unless, of course, you will condemn their use by the Israelis as an inhuman act, which you will not.
After all, six of these missiles measure small against the facilitating of the massacre of 3,500 refugees, which the Israelis dis, and you defended.
Or the use of flesh-burning chemicals on civilians, which the Israelis did, and you described as "harmless fireworks" - the Israelis have been found to b using white phosphorus again, and you will no doubt defend that fact again.
You have refused to comment on the us of DIME missiles, that are in use in Gaza, and have been found to have biological effects on their victims - no doubt, when put to it, you will defend their use.
You denied the destruction of hospitals on the basis that "it would have been front page news" - it was then and it certainly is now - you now support it - was there ever any doubt you would?
This argument has polarised into humanitarians who have take no side in this conflict, but are appalled at the inhuman and criminal way it is being conducted, and a band of (mainly) three fanatics who have entered into some sort of weird blood pact with Israeli fascism.
Creepy or what?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 03:06 AM

"their illegal use"

The convenient use of legal and illegal to justify their use doesn't make the fuckers hurt any less.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 04:16 AM

"The convenient use of legal and illegal to justify their use doesn't make the fuckers hurt any less."
Especially as the people who vote it 'legal' are the ones who use it and sell it.
Isn't it interesting how people who condone atrocities hide behind laws made up and passed by politicians - the last refuge of a monster?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 04:47 AM

And those politicians are advised by a combination of old men in uniforms who know nothing of the world outside their crosshairs range and arms manufacturers.

Whenever health ministers started rattling on about NHS waste, I referred them to their colleagues at MoD. That usually shut them up.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 05:05 AM

The legality of weapons is decided by Geneva Conventions.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/500?OpenDocument

The laws of armed conflict have been honed by some of the greatest minds over the last two centuries.
Obviously Jim and Musket could come up with something much better before their tea times, but meanwhile it remains the greatest humanitarian achievement of human History.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 10:11 AM

The legality of weapons is decided by those countries who allow them to be manufactured and then sit in a meeting in Switzerland to ratify them.

Do keep up.

Legality is only ever based on defensive purpose. The oppression of Palestinians and Israeli formed barrier on Palestinian land is not deemed defensive. Hence the same meeting room hosted meetings censoring Israel.

Do keep up.

Neither Israel nor Hamas are working to war conditions that such conventions cover. Nobody outside of their internal deliberations sees this as war.

Hence nothing is legal under this conflict.

Do keep up.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 10:41 AM

Musket, your ramblings based on a total lack of any knowledge are not a very useful contribution to the world or anyone in it.

The Geneva Conventions are.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 10:44 AM

I couldn't have put your knowledge any better myself..

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 10:53 AM

If only you had it!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 11:12 AM

"The Convention is an umbrella covering the Protocols and containing only general provisions. It contains no provisions explicitly prohibiting the use of specific weapons. Provisions on the prohibition or restrictions on the use of certain weapons are the object of the Protocols annexed to the Convention"
The use of these weapons on civilians, if not explicitly a war crime, in the protocols, is in practice, considered such by the conventions.
That anybody could use such weapons on civilians or defend their use is obscene and inhuman -and extremely "bloodthirsty"
Christians - I've shit better!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 11:19 AM

Amnesty International report
27 January 2009
Israeli army used flechettes against Gaza civilians
A flechette embedded in a wall in a Bedouin villlage in GazaEnlarge
Apart from white phosphorus, the Israeli army used a variety of other weapons in densely populated civilian areas of Gaza in the three-week conflict that began on 27 December.

Flechettes are 4cm long metal darts that are sharply pointed at the front, with four fins at the rear. Between 5,000 and 8,000 are packed into 120mm shells which are generally fired from tanks. The shells explode in the air and scatter the flechettes in a conical pattern over an area about 300m wide and 100m long.

An anti-personnel weapon designed to penetrate dense vegetation, flechettes should never be used in built-up civilian areas. The Israeli army has used them in Gaza periodically for several years. In most cases their use has resulted in civilians being killed or injured.

Amnesty International's fact-finding team in Gaza first heard about the use of flechettes in the most recent conflict some ten days ago. The father of one of the victims showed the team a flechette which had been taken out of his son's body.

In its latest post on Amnesty International's Livewire blog, the team described how on Monday it visited towns and villages around Gaza and found more hard evidence of the use of flechettes.

In 'Izbat Beit Hanoun, to the south-west of the town of Beit Hanoun, several flechette shells were fired into the main road, killing two people and injuring several others on the morning of 5 January.

Wafa' Nabil Abu Jarad, a 21-year-old pregnant mother of two, was one of those killed. Her husband and her mother-in-law told the team that the family had just had breakfast and were outside the house drinking tea in the sun.

Wafa' and her husband were standing by the corner of the house when they heard a noise, followed by screams. They turned to go back into their house but at that moment Wafa' and several other members of the family were hit by flechettes. Wafa' was killed outright.

That same day, at the other end of the street, 16-year-old Islam Jaber Abd-al-Dayem was struck in the neck by a flechette. He was taken to the hospital's intensive care unit but died three days later. Mizar, his brother, was injured in the same attack and still has a flechette lodged in his back.

In the village of al-Mughraqa on the morning of 7 January, a shell struck the room where Atta Hassan Aref Azzam was sitting with two of his children, Mohammed, aged 13 and Hassan, aged two and a half. All three were killed. The six other members of the family who were in the house fled to the nearest school for shelter. The team examined the bloodstained wall by which the three were killed. It was full of flechettes.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 11:45 AM

That anybody could use such weapons on civilians or defend their use is obscene and inhuman -and extremely "bloodthirsty"

But no-one is Jim, except Hamas.
It is always illegal to target civilians with any weapon.

In your view, should Hamas continue illegally firing rockets or stop?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 11:52 AM

Amnesty International Report. 11 July 2014.

"Meanwhile, Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip have fired more than 600 indiscriminate rockets at Israel, including at major Israeli cities such as Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Be'er Sheva, Ashkelon and Hadera, placing millions of people at risk. A Hamas spokesperson has stated that all Israelis are legitimate targets.

"Firing indiscriminate rockets, which cannot be aimed accurately at military targets, is a war crime, as is deliberately targeting civilians," said Philip Luther. "
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/israelgaza-un-must-impose-arms-embargo-and-mandate-international-investigation-civilian-death-t

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 12:48 PM

"But no-one is Jim, except Hamas."
Hamas has never used flechette weapons or white phosphorus or DIME missiles - only Israel has
Israel has used them over civilian areas - you derisively compared them to "Napoleonic missiles" - making you the appalling, inhuman shit that you are.
"In your view, should Hamas continue illegally firing rockets or stop?"
Using your own argument, the use of rockers is not a war crime - targeting them at on civilians is.
Israel is now indiscriminately attacking civilian areas
If one is a war crime both are - doesn't get more simple.
The total number of deaths from missiles fired on Israel since 2001 is 28
The total number of civilian dead in the present conflict in Gaza is 882 - 550 of those have been civilians and 20% of them have been children.
Do I think they should not be fired - of course I do - as long as Israel agrees to stop the state terrorism it has aimed at Gaza for decades in order to create a single-culture apartheid state.
One of the demands made, and backed-by many nations, is an immediate lifting of the blockade and a removal of the apartheid walls - anything less is a surrender to state terrorism.
What you are suggesting amounts to total surrender to return to Israeli oppression - giving way to brute force, no less and it wouldn't make the slightest difference to the conditions Israel have created back home.
I doubt if I would have the courage to continue opposing these thugs, but I tend to feel that to do so would be a betrayal of all those who have been slaughtered in this obscenity that passes for a war.
It's hard to ignore the fact that, while Israelis are busy in Gaza slaughtering civilians, back home they are killing and maiming protesters   
I said at the beginning tat the Middle Eastern situation should be in the hands of the United Nations, without the interference of the U.S. and its vetoes - God knows, America has a record of war crimes and human rights abuses of its own, pat and present, without assisting the Israelis with theirs
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 12:50 PM

"Meanwhile, Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip have fired more than 600"
causing 28 deaths in twelve years - compared to.....
see above
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 01:33 PM

Using your own argument, the use of rockers is not a war crime - targeting them at on civilians is.
The rockets are indiscriminate and aimed at population centres.
An unequivocal war crime.

Israel is now indiscriminately attacking civilian areas
No it is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 01:48 PM

Err.. Either Keith is right or dozens of BBC reporters in flack jackets and with cameras are on a huge Elstree film set.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jul 14 - 03:06 PM

"The rockets are indiscriminate and aimed at population centres."
No they are not - they are aimed as far as they can be thrown - pretty much like a naughty kid throwing a stone over a wall
The missiles are not capable of being aimed anywhere with any accuracy (we've discussed this before) nor are those firing them capable of aiming them
However, what you described id exactly what is happening in Gaza at the present time - unless the Israelis are deliberately targeting hundreds of the civilians they have killed (more likely anyway) - which would be an unchangeable war crime in anybody's book
Can't have it both ways, as much as you have tried to - often enough
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 05:10 AM

The rockets ARE aimed at population centres (and the airport).
Israel is not attacking indiscriminately.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 05:17 AM

(Reuters) - Islamist Hamas's armed wing has warned airlines that it intends to target Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport with its rockets from Gaza and has told them not to fly there, a statement by the group said on Friday.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 05:24 AM

Guardian 9 July.

One hundred and sixty-five rockets have been fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel in the past 24 hours, according to Israeli military estimates. There have been no reports of deaths from the rocket attacks. About 45 of those rockets targeted cities in the centre of Israel – Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Hadera, 72 miles north of the Gaza Strip.

On Wednesday morning, several missiles were fired towards Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport. The city's smaller airstrip at Herzliya has been closed due to the threat of rocket fire

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 05:29 AM

"Israel is not attacking indiscriminately."
Then they are deliberately attacking civilians hospitals, chools andmedical homes - they are war criminals
We have agreement
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 06:02 AM

Then they are deliberately attacking civilians hospitals, chools andmedical homes - they are war criminals

If that is true, yes.
If legitimate targets are present, no.
The war crime is the siting of fighters in those locations.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 07:02 AM

When Israel are attacking another country, contrary to UN criteria, there are no legitimate targets.

None whatsoever.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 07:11 AM

"If legitimate targets are present, no."
Israelis are claiming the presence in all the places that have been destroyed - or have you appointed yourself spokesman on their behalf.
Israel are either indiscriminately attacking or targeting what they are destroying - which is it to be?
You really are an arse-licking squalid, aren't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 08:30 AM

They are targeting Hamas fighters who have illegally placed themselves among civilians.
It is not civilians killing IDF in unprecedented numbers.

Musket, your ignorance is priceless!
When Israel are attacking another country, contrary to UN criteria, there are no legitimate targets.

If it ever does you might have a point.
UN is questioning proportionality, but not Israel's absolute legal right to respond to the totally illegal bombardment of its people by going into Gaza.

You so want to be heard, but have nothing to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 08:48 AM

"They are targeting Hamas fighters who have illegally placed themselves among civilians."
No they are not and they have not claimed to
"IDF in unprecedented numbers."
The current death toll has just been announced - 987 Palestinians, 38 Israelis - on "unprecedented if you take sides.
Whole townships have been leveled to the ground - the survivors are using the cease fire to search for bodies and (highly unlikely) survivors
A tank attack on an occupied home chalked up an entire Palestinian family - Hamas under the bed, no doubt
This is plain simple slaughter of civilians and your attitude is genocide denial - nothing less
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 09:08 AM

My ignorance is non existent. My dog, lying at the side of me seems to know more about this than you.

Keith's post above requires the moderators to intervene because if people read it, they are reading awful lies, put about to defend Israeli terrorism.

Now to the facts, available only to special people. In order to get access, you need a computer and something called google. Keith is working on the principle that nobody can find out..

However, and I don't do this often, I shall now quote from the Wikipedia entry for Israeli aggression;

"The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a number of resolutions saying that the strategic relationship with the United States encourages Israel to pursue aggressive and expansionist policies and practices.[3] The 9th Emergency Session of the General Assembly was convened at the request of the Security Council when the United States blocked efforts to adopt sanctions against Israel.[4] The United States responded to the frequent criticism from UN organs by adopting the Negroponte doctrine."

Back to me now.

There are still 45 UN resolutions from the UN Human Rights Council outstanding against Israel since the council formed in 2006. To put that in context, that is almost half the resolutions they have made full stop against anywhere. Add the dozens of other UN from 1948 onwards and Israel is seen as a pariah state, only able to be an aggressor due to sympathisers funding US politics.

There is no official recognition by UN for Israel's aggression. Their excuse concerning Hamas missiles is that Hamas started it. Hamas only exist because Israel is an aggressor to its neighbours. Without Hamas missiles, Netanyahu might not win the next election. (Just in case anyone wonders what this is all about.)



Now we have the facts, back to discussing the terrorist actions from both sides in this dispute and stop all this disgraceful claptrap about Israel being legitimate when they target hospitals, schools, shelters and children playing on beaches.

I don't know where you get your information about military matters Keith, but I suggest you widen your search, or ask some soldiers. They might know a bit. Or at least, a damn site more than you.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:21 AM

By "UN criteria" you presumably mean international law.
That allows a state to intervene across its borders in self defence.
You will find no UN statement denying Israel's right to intervene in Gaza.

Quite rightly there is concern that the response is proportionate, and for humanitarian considerations.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:31 AM

You can't stop yourself can you?

45 UN resolutions since 2006 ststing that Israel is an aggressor towards its neighbours, Palestine especially.

Considering Israel only exists by dint of a UN resolution in the first place.

Take your choice of denying Israel's right to dross borders. It isn't doing it in self defence, it never has done.

Thick twat.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:34 AM

BBC
"Enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, the right of self-defence is accepted as a fundamental principle of international law. While aspects of this principle are disputed, it is universally agreed that a state can defend itself against an armed attack.

There is some debate as to the intensity that an armed attack should reach before a state can lawfully resort to self-defence. Most international lawyers would agree that rockets launched against civilians that disrupt the social life of part of a country constitute an armed attack for the purposes of Article 51"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20415886

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jul 14 - 10:46 AM

"a state can defend itself against an armed attack
There is no question of self- defence - this is simple butchery of non combatants who are attacking nobody.
The Nazis gave the same eccuse when they butchered the people of Lidice
You don't even bother to respond to the appalling death toll and the behaviour that has brought it about - the 16 dead desrve all they got for sheltering Hamas, no doubt
I've said it before Keith - you are a fascist
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 02:47 AM

I suppose pretending I hadn't brought the UN resolutions to the debate is as bad as saying there aren't any. There again armchair soldiers think real soldiers don't like UN interference. Been watching Rambo again?

Quoting irrelevant in this case criteria doesn't exactly help your credibility. It just reinforces the attitude and persona that comes out in these threads.

You should be ashamed. Don't forget to say a prayer for those Palestinian families you call legitimate targets when you get to your church later. Watch out for thunderbolts on the way out too.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 02:57 AM

Isn't the thread title, altho we have somewhat drifted from original question addressed, peculiarly appropriate for much of the conduct towards Keith on the part of some posters, with their ad hominem attacks instead of any attempt at rational response to the perfectly sensible points he makes?

Par for the Mudcat course, I suppose, mind.

≈M≈

Sometimes ask myself why I keep logging on, just to subject myself to so much more irritation. Some sort of addiction? Anyone interested in starting up a Mudcats Anonymous campaign!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 03:20 AM

"peculiarly appropriate for much of the conduct towards Keith "
Keith deliberately places himself in the firing-line with his extremism.
He comes with no fore-knowledge of most of the subjects he dominates (I notice with a little satisfaction that this has lessened of late) - he scrabbles round for 'evidence to back his case' (this has also lessened -now he just pronounces), and has nor taken to sneering at those who disagree with him and declares himself superior and the rest of us "muppets" - on several occasions he has declared himself "infallible".
He appears to 'get off' on defending the more despicable side of humanity.
That we should all grow old defending such behaviour!   
Leave you to your celebration of Israel's victory over the Muslim menace.
Off to my 73rd at Blessington Lake
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 03:25 AM

M the GM, the tactics you mention are not used by accident, or even through an obvious personality disorder, but are to my mind, used with the premeditated intention of driving posters away from the site and causing it to close; to further one particular ideological agenda.

I have watched over the last couple of years how successful these tactics are, how numbers have dwindled, how each thread has become a battleground littered with personal abuse and nonsensical drivel.
very little attempt to address controversial issues which are raised by members......it is far easier to attempt to bully and browbeat opposition into the dust.

I admire the volunteer moderators for allowing all shades of OPINION here, but I feel that in the interests of the forum, these childish tactics need to be terminated, before there are no posters interested in reasonable discussion left.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 03:38 AM

Noted, ake. Thank you.

Happy Birthday, Jim, young man.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 05:10 AM

2but I feel that in the interests of the forum, these childish tactics need to be terminated"
Ake's whigeing self-righteousness never fails to astound.
They ring somewhat hollow coming from someone who makes Mudcat a no-go area for those who do not share his sexual inclinations, with his 'disease carrying' accusations and his exhortations that we should listen to mass-murderer Brievik because he has something important to say.
His friend has similarly made this forum 'no Muslims need apply' territory with his claims of 'cultural implants' and 'the enemy within' depictions.
The breadth of the opinions expressed on this forum is very much to be admired, the abuse that that liberality (whoops - soory, Ake hates liberals) is subjected to is not
Thank you Mike - I have no doubt that your well wishes are sincere.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 05:24 AM

It would help if Keith stopped lying and Michael stopped egging him on. If Michael thinks that stating lying propaganda that Israel is within its rights to murder children, bomb civilians and be an aggressor outside of its own territory, then logging on to read Keith's latest missive is right up his street. Even when you quote UN resolutions condemning Israel, Keith says they don't. A tactic best used by the nazis.

I am not too sure about Michael's sincerity. His comments lately have been reactionary, discriminatory and worthy of his favourite newspaper.

Akenaton is irrelevant to this, as his posts preclude judging his diatribe as a view, just a personality disorder. His last post I bothered reading said that Scotland will be a brotherhood of equal people, except gays because they spread disease and are only about 1% of the people anyway. I thought such views had either died out or were rightly too ashamed to spout them in the first place. He'd be a monster if he wasn't an insignificant small person.

Far too many people leave Mudcat because of the pathetic right wing bloodthirsty claptrap contained in the bullshit posts. They aren't leaving because normal people point out bigotry, they leave because it sickens them to read the bigotry in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 05:45 AM

Jim, I could see your point if I was making up the MSM health figures, but unfortunately for you, they are not MY figures.
They pertain to every country in the world, and are quite incontrovertible.

"The breadth of the opinions expressed on this forum is very much to be admired, the abuse that that liberality (whoops - soory, Ake hates liberals) is subjected to is not"

Sorry again Jim, but that is gobbled gook.....what is the abuse you refer to?

I don't hate people through colour, sexual preference, or political ideology.

I can disagree about how some of these things affect society, but no hatred.


The important thing is that anyone who attempts to put forward a conservative view on any subject, social or political, is immediately attacked by a gang of ideological blinkered people, who have no alternatives to supply, so depend heavily on personal invective.

I say that as a lifelong socialist.
That lifetime has taught me that no matter our political leanings, we need to listen to other views and either dispute them in a reasonable manner, or learn from others that some of our firmly entrenched views may be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 05:47 AM

Indeed, Jim. We don't agree about much, but I certainly wish you well.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 05:54 AM

Suggest you look up all the times you have sneered at liberals Ake
"I say that as a lifelong socialist."
That I find impossible to accept
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 07:47 AM

It would help if Keith stopped lying

Will you produce an example of me lying.
Of course not, because only a fool like you would stoop to lying on here just to try to win a point.

You have not the knowledge or intellect to join in this debate, so you post shit like that.

You are indeed a sad, inadequate buffoon.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 09:22 AM

Ian, if you go back to the threads concerning homosexual "marriage", adoption, etc, you will find that the posts numbered into many thousands. The debates were interesting...and for the most part civil.

When the nasty personal stuff started to appear, most of the real liberals disengaged or left the forum.
Now it is almost impossible to have an objective discussion on any controversial subject, without the "attack dogs showing their fangs.

Verifiable facts used to be the order of the day, now it is politically correct myth which rules this forum.

The "myth bearers" have the temerity to mock good Christian people for their beliefs what a sick joke!

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 01:18 PM

Allow me to quote from Akenaton the other day on the Scotland thread;

"Brotherhood and equality in my book, does not run to legislation in favour of a tiny sexual minority which is associated with such high rates of ill health, even if it only affects 1 in 100 of the population of Scotland."

And as for Keith.. he says The UN have no resolutions out on Israel, (it's 46 since 2006 alone, condemning them.) Then calls me a buffoon for saying so. About the same time he says that Israeli bombing of residential areas, hospitals and schools is permissible under some law or other, despite Israel's venture being classed by UN as aggression rather than the self defence that Israeli terrorists and Keith claim.



No, I'm on the side of reality and the angels. I don't see gay people as sub human as Akenaton does, and I don't profess to be a member of a right wing fascist political party one minute and deny it later, as Keith does.

Keith is a "good Christian person" why don't you ask him if he shares your views on gay people Akenaton? If he has any courage of conviction, you might be interested in his answer. You see, the Christian view is that gay people are equal and can / should be married to each other. it is bigots and schisms that say otherwise, and they need mocking.

Big time.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 01:43 PM

And as for Keith.. he says The UN have no resolutions out on Israel,

Why would I say such shit?
More made up Musket shit.

(it's 46 since 2006 alone, condemning them.) Then calls me a buffoon for saying so.

No.
I described you as an inadequate buffoon because of your lack of knowledge and because you compensate by lying.

About the same time he says that Israeli bombing of residential areas, hospitals and schools is permissible under some law or other,

Showing your ignorance again.
I have explained it to you as simply as I could and gave you a Red Cross explanation of it, but it has all gone right over your pretty little head.

despite Israel's venture being classed by UN as aggression rather than the self defence that Israeli terrorists and Keith claim.

Not true.
The General Council always votes against Israel but no-one takes any notice.
I have quoted UN officials on this.
You just have no understanding of these things.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jul 14 - 04:18 PM

Ian, Keith has different views from me on many subjects, but I have the greatest respect for him.
He is accurate, deals in facts, never misrepresents other members opinions and as far as I can see never lowers himself to lie on this forum......He deserves respect.

I have no truck with liars and twisters such as you and the few who have not deserted you. Your gang is breaking up and your disruptive tactics are heading for failure.....I am pleased about that!

This forum has a large number of highly intelligent members, members who PM me regularly to argue a point or to disassociate themselves from you and your ageism, misogyny and disgusting misrepresentation.

The meaning of the remark which you quoted should be perfectly clear, we should not be legislating in favour of a sexual minority which carries such abysmal health figures, we should not be forcing churches to accept such a minority into Christian marriage while their behaviour and its results are unacceptable to a large section of society at large
Try to burst the bubble of media hype and look at the real world for a change.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 03:16 AM

Scotland has abysmal health figures but we still see them as equal members of society.

Keith repeats again that nobody takes any notice of The UN. He then says it always votes against Israel.

Never occurred to him there's a reason for that. The USA defends Israel and The UN deplore them doing so. The intervention by Obama over the weekend direct to Netanyahu was designed to try to address that after Kerry pointed out the harm that has come from propping up one side in a dispute.

So, Musket, equal members of society, The UN and The White House on one side and Keith and his pet worm on the other. (Oh, add Netanyahu and Farage I suppose.)

We buffoons like to stick together against the vast intelligence and fair society aims of Keith & his worm.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:37 AM

Keith repeats again that nobody takes any notice of The UN. He then says it always votes against Israel.

Just the General Assembly which is dominated by grubby dictatorships each with a vote.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:44 AM

The General assembly of The United Nations, including all western democracies...

Coor, I bet good old Kofi would become depressed if he knew such an eminent twat thought The UN was a bad idea.

OK, which idiot bought Keith a Rambo box set for his birthday? You know he gets excited about playing soldiers.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 04:49 AM

You revert to abuse because you can not make a case.
Western democracies are a minority and easily outvoted by all the nasty regimes of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 05:01 AM

The General Assembly chastises Israel three times as often as all other countries combined; it has declared Palestinian terrorism to be a "legitimate" means of "fulfilling…one of the goals and purposes of the United Nations"; that once classified Zionism as a form of racism; and that has three special bodies devoted exclusively to agitating against Israel although no other such body exists for any other country.
http://nypost.com/2014/07/26/how-the-united-nations-was-perverted-into-a-weapon-against-israel/

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 05:53 AM

I am greatly relieved to hear that Christmas is celebrating his 73rd birthday - Many happy returns of the day. The relieve is due to the fact that being over 70 he will never actually have to sit on a Jury and pretend to listen to "evidence" or be directed as to what constitutes admissible evidence and fact, or what is to be viewed as being "legal" and "illegal" in any criminal case.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 07:04 AM

"Far too many people leave Mudcat because of the pathetic right wing bloodthirsty claptrap contained in the bullshit posts. They aren't leaving because normal people point out bigotry, they leave because it sickens them to read the bigotry in the first place."

A very good comment from Mither.


Ake - keep digging. You keep coming up with purported reasons to discriminate against travellers, homosexuals, and non-Xtians. In this you expose yourself.

Somewhat similarly, KtheA, the vast predominance of your posts seek to point out or argue something that you present as a wrong done by Muslims. In view of that predominance there can really only be one view about your motivation.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 07:51 AM

Your conclusion is not justified Richard.
Would it stand up in court?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 08:29 AM

Hmm...when the preponderance of threads about Islamism turn into Israel bashing and the preponderance of threads about Israel run into thousands of posts. In view of that predominance there can really only be one view about the motivation of the Jew haters.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 08:45 AM

Just so.
Those threads run on for years.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 10:25 AM

What the fuck do you mean by jew hater poo bad? Fuck all to do with anything. This is about Israeli terrorism, not the superstition used as part of the excuse. This is about state affairs and not all Israelis are jewish anyway. The superstition of the inhabitants of either side are irrelevant to me. I treat all god botherers with equal contempt when they hide behind it to disguise bigotry and ulterior motive.

Just because you prejudge, don't think decent people sink to your level.

By the way, just been looking at the news. Perhaps when Keith next uses his precious google, he might look up Lord Haw Haw. Then get out his Boys Own dictionary and look up "treacherous."

"Just so." Does that mean anyone who disagrees with you is a jew hater? You pathetic specimen.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 12:42 PM

I note that my post has been modded off.

---

None of yours were removed from here. It probably disappeared into the ether. Remember to select and use ^C to save it on your clipboard until you see it appear as a post. --mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 12:46 PM

You have to support Israeli militants in order to guarantee your posts stay put Bridge. Something to do with the servers based in The USA, using American software I think..

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 08:34 PM

" bobad - PM
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 08:29 AM

Hmm...when the preponderance of threads about Islamism turn into Israel bashing and the preponderance of threads about Israel run into thousands of posts. In view of that predominance there can really only be one view about the motivation of the Jew haters."

A total non-sequitur, Poo-bad. One may criticise the activities of Israel and/or the actions of Zionists without conflating either with a collective guilt of Jews - particularly since most critics of Israel or Zionism are careful to make the distinction, and post fairly plentifully on other topics.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 08:51 PM

Sorry Richard but you appear to be caught in some sort of 60s time warp. The current consensus on the usage of the euphemism "Zionism" is that it IS anti-Semitism pure and simple. But don't take it from me (which I'm sure you won't in any case) but check out what the Jewish community has to say about the usage: Google

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jul 14 - 09:26 PM

The current consensus on the usage of the euphemism "Zionism" is that it IS anti-Semitism pure and simple.

Pure and simple bullshit, that is. Didn't I just read something you posted about opinions and assholes?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 03:40 AM

Zionism
ˈzʌɪənɪz(ə)m/
noun
1.
a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel. It was established as a political organization in 1897 under Theodor Herzl, and was later led by Chaim Weizmann.
2.
(in southern Africa) a religious movement represented by a group of independent Churches which practise a form of Christianity incorporating elements of traditional African beliefs.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 03:41 AM

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 03:47 AM

An article discussing several aspects of Zionism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

In short, Boo-bad, Zionism is a claim to own a patch of land because the god of a particular religion says so. A theocratic fetish.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 03:51 AM

To say that opponents of Israeli militancy is somehow anti Semitic is to say that such actions by Israeli forces are because they are Jews.

I guess that slurs Jewish people.

How fucking anti Semitic can you get?

Ignorance was always a feature of apologists for terrorists.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 04:05 AM

But you people ONLY criticise Israel while ignoring far worse crimes by far worse states.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 08:53 AM

So start a thread about the role of the Anglican church in Ugandan law?

One interesting aspect of such threads is that they can be about current affairs. If Israel wasn't punishing the Palestinian people for democratically voting for their leaders, murdering well over a thousand people in the last couple of weeks...

You use of "far worse" is subective to say the least....

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jul 14 - 01:12 PM

The action being taken by Israel certainly looks disproportionate, but the West sometime in the not to distant future may have to take similar action against Islamist extremists.

Sometimes, everything boils down to survival.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 04:54 AM

Thats you fucked then.

Bugger off and start your own like minded militia eh? Darwin had a bit to say about survival and the bigot gene seems to be dying out as the species evolves. You see that kind of talk when reporters and journalists interview far right thugs at marches so we can all laugh at their lack of intellect.

Just when you think he can't sink any lower, he proves you wrong...

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 08:49 AM

The UN Middle East envoy also stated his belief that militant Islamism was the greatest threat to world peace.
We had a thread about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 10:02 AM

You had dozens of threads about it. The only thing demonstrated there is that Mudcat has a core group of participants who keep arguing about the same disputes over and over and expect a different outcome.

Sounds familiar . . .

Oh, yeah, that's one illustration of insanity.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 11:04 AM

But, SRS, people have their hobbies, you know; which, notoriously, can sometimes become obsessive...

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 11:31 AM

There was only one thread about that statement, which was described in the OP.
It was in April and the title was "Islamic Radicalism."

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 11:51 AM

""Tide comes in, tide goes out.
You cant explain that!""

William James Bill O'Reilly'Jr.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 12:00 PM

Yes you can.

Musket PhD (app' physics)



Oh, as Keith just said something completely irrelevant.

Using Islam as a weapon to destabilise western democracy is potentially one of the largest threats we have at present.

Musket VD & Bar.

Although what that has to do with Israeli aggression of neighbouring Palestine is completely beyond me. Perhaps Keith wants us to think the Israeli murder of innocent families is OK because 98% of Palestinians are Muslim.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 12:16 PM

"Musket VD"

Sorry to hear it......penicillin is effective.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 12:54 PM

This thread is not about Gaza Musket.
You said Ake had sunk really low just because he said the same thing Blair did.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 01:11 PM

"This thread is not about Gaza Musket."
This thread is about whatever aspect of pathetic goading contributors want to make of it.
Have you not got your head around the fact that you do not own this forum and have no right whatever to tell anybody where and when to post.
"The UN Middle East envoy also stated his belief that militant Islamism was the greatest threat to world peace."
I thought Israel had nuclear weapons - don't right-wing terrorist states count then?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 02:43 PM

My point was it is not just Ake who thinks that, so he should not be so maligned for saying it.
Musket voted for Blair's Labour Party all the while he was leader and pm.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 04:08 PM

Yes Keith...Blair did say that, though I am not one of his political supporters. In fact I can proudly say I never voted for Mr Blair.

However, the danger of Islamic radicalism is so obvious that only a fool would deny that it exists.
Any human being who worships martyrdom is a hugely dangerous weapon, and Radical Islam has millions of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 04:32 PM

Yes.
Our UK security services say it is the greatest threat to us here.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 04:52 PM

"Our UK security services say it is the greatest threat to us here."
Wouldn't they just - is that before or after trades unionists, or civil rights protesters, or miners, or republicans..... or all the other "enemies within"?
"Musket voted for Blair's Labour Party all the while he was leader and pm."
I do believe you voted for Thatcher while she was dropping her knickers for Pinochet and claiming he was a wonderful example of democracy - you've certainly written in support of her and her policies
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 05:21 PM

I voted for Blair just as Musket did.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 05:34 PM

I think, to express it with all moderation, that that 'dropping her knickers' was an unfortunate -- well, I would like to say "lapse" on Jim's part; but in fact too unhappily typically tasteless an ill-natured vulgarity. Can Jim not have any relationship of friendship & mutual respect with a member of the opposite sex without the 'dropping of knickers' being a factor? Well, then much as he might detest the very thought of the late Lady Thatcher, he has no need to be so gratuitously offensive.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 07:55 PM

Well, "The" of recently-changed soubriquet (you big bloody kid), I happen to think that Jim's allusion was entirely appropriate. Maggie did suck up enthusiastically to dictators (Pinochet) or to people who enthusiastically propped up dictators (Reagan). Had she been a man she would have enjoyed big juicy erections at the very thought of these two tosspots - and we would have said so here. Nothing sexist in saying that she dropped her knickers, figuratively speaking, in the presence of power-fellows. Fer chrissake, she even sucked up to Gorby. That was her style. If she's up there somewhere, seeing your pathetic defence of her from on high, she'd tell you to piss thoroughly off, and quite right too.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 03:34 AM

"Can Jim not have any relationship of friendship & mutual respect with a member of the opposite sex without the 'dropping of knickers' "
A political metaphor Mike and you know it.
Thatcher hailed Pinochet as a champion of democracy after he had overthrown a legally elected government and massacred those who opposed him in their thousands.
He ruled Chile and a fascist dictator for 17 years with her support and she was largely responsible for his escaping trial as a mass murderer.
She implicated Britain in fascism by using her Party as a supporter for his 'democracy' - I have little doubt that she would have loved to take his inspiration far further than British democracy allowed her to, had she been able.
Your response, I seem to remember, was "she did time good things for Britain" - making the trains run on time, maybe, as did Mussolini for Italy?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 03:59 AM

"she did time good things for Britain"
Sorry should have read "did some" - possibly a Freudian slip on my part perahpas if was thinking of "she should have done time" preferably in the next cell to Augusto.
I really should reset the level of my chair; my typing is getting beyond the pale.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 05:06 AM

"Thatcher hailed Pinochet as a champion of democracy after he had overthrown a legally elected government and massacred those who opposed him in their thousands." - Christmas

Thatcher hailed Pinochet as a champion of democracy - and that adulation was given in what context Christmas?

1: In reference to Pinochet's and Chile's offers and actions in the immediate aftermath of the Argentine invasion and armed occupation of the Falkland Islands?

2: After he had overthrown a legally elected government and massacred those who opposed him in their thousands?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 05:37 AM

Akenaton's hate filled publications are illegal and cannot be seen as free speech as he has to lie to justify them.

If you have not made that up Musket, please actually post Akenaton's lie.
I am going to stick my neck out again, and predict that you can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 05:48 AM

Let's just stick the latest one where he says sexual orientation is not to be regarded as equality on the same level as gender, (contrary to law.)

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton - PM
Date: 30 Jul 14 - 01:18 PM

"I repeat what you and I have debated many times in the past. I cannot see how organised religions can pick and choose based on scripture, not actually believe it literally but then cling onto it as set in stone when it conflicts with decency. The role of women and the equality of all regardless of creed or sexual orientation being two large elephants in the room."

The role of women in society, and the acceptance of ANY sort of sexual orientation are completely different and should not be lumped together as if they were the same.

The role of women differs slightly in various societies, but is widely accepted worldwide.
Many form of sexual orientation are not accepted and some and are even criminalised here in the UK.
Many more are criminalised worldwide.

The church at least attempts to set some moral standards for society.



Do we get to include his wonderful post on the Scotland thread where he says that brotherhood and equality for all Scots except homosexuals because they are only 1% and spread disease?

Or do we keep going back?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 06:25 AM

"and that adulation was given in what context Christmas?"
It was given in the context of a mass murderer being held under house arrest in order to be brought to justice.
The fact that his Junta gave support to an ex-colonial power's fight to hold on to one of its former colonies of the South American coast alters that fact not one iota.
Thatcher described Pinochet's butchery as her ideal of democracy - there, but for the grace of her Christian god, went us all, had she got her way.
Sorry - didn't get the point of you last question mark - do you challenge that that is exactly what he did
PINOCHET'S MASSACRES
Any quibble on the actuel numbers - thousands 'disappeared from his torture chambers, never to be found again.
You might remember that Victor Jara was one of those - on the other hand, you might choose to ignore it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 06:50 AM

Where is the lie in all that Musket, except for your misrepresentation of his views on Scotland?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 07:07 AM

Ehmmm Christmas I suggest you look up what the word Context means - Clue: It means more than just setting.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 07:07 AM

Why don't you and your thug mate go out and do a bit of queer bashing?

If you don't understand what sexual orientation means, at least stop making yourself look a wicked fool.

Where have I misrepresented his views on Scotland? He said


Subject: RE: BS: lets develop Scotland
From: akenaton - PM
Date: 23 Jul 14 - 03:19 AM

A personal attack on my views, has no relevance to this thread.
Brotherhood and equality in my book, does not run to legislation in favour of a tiny sexual minority which is associated with such high rates of ill health, even if it only affects 1 in 100 of the population of Scotland

Mr Salmond and the SNP can bring forward whatever policies they wish, as long as we achieve the goal of independence......the end in this case, justifies the means.

After independence has been won, there will be much to do regarding all issues, political AND social.




Putting to one side his view of Scotland is wonky as only a few psychopaths in any country don't like equality, he then uses lies to support his discriminatory bigotry. Notwithstanding Scotland itself being associated with high rates of ill health....

You know this.

You have read it.

Yet you agree with it.

Scum.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 07:17 AM

Musket, you claimed he said, " he says that brotherhood and equality for all Scots except homosexuals" but he did not say that.
You misrepresented him.

You also stated that he lied but you have still not produced one.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 08:20 AM

"Ehmmm Christmas I suggest you look up what the word Context means "
And I suggest that you explain why an ex-Prime Minister described a mass murderer and a fascist as a hero of democracy.
Jim Carroll

Thatcher's take on democracy
Was Thatcher's Friendship with Augusto Pinochet Indefensible?
APR 28, 2013
The very public eulogies given by Margaret Thatcher's ideological descendants in the wake of her death were seen by many to be a cynical attempt to push a neoliberal narrative of modern British history in a time economic strife. It was obvious, claimed her detractors, that several subjects would not be covered in any depth in the broadcast media, no more so than her policy of legislating state sanctioned homophobia and her support for authoritarian dictatorships across the globe.
In the name of freedom, Thatcher cultivated close relationships with some of the worst regimes on Earth, including Saddam Hussein's Iraq (pre-Kuwait invasion), Suharto's Indonesia and Pol Pot's Cambodia. But even her relationship with Suharto, a perpetrator of genocide whom she described as "one of our very best and most valued friends," cannot be compared to the closeness expressed in her friendship with Augusto Pinochet.
If we were to accept Thatcher's rhetoric of the defence of civilisation, democracy and freedom, Pinochet would seem an unlikely ally, let alone a close friend and confidant. Following the United States directed destabilisation of the Chilean economy, Pinochet came to power in a bloody CIA-backed coup in 1973, overthrowing the legitimate democratically elected government of Salvador Allende. He immediately suspended all political activity and the constitution.
Following the coup, a Chilean army death squad named Caravana de la Muerte, the "Caravan of Death," flew aeroplanes which dropped the mutilated corpses of political opponents into the sea.[1] Despite minimal military opposition to the coup, Pinochet's government waged a war of savage repression against the Chilean people, and thousands of Chileans were murdered because of their political affiliation.[2]
Many more trade unionists, leftists and their families were not murdered but faced tortures so unimaginably gruesome that death would have been preferable for them. In an estimate widely considered to be overly conservative, the Valech Commission concluded that over 40,000 Chileans were subject to torture by the Chilean secret police.[3]
It is worth examining the personal testimony of those who were held captive by Pinochet's secret police to get an idea of how this systematic repression was experienced. Political activist Nieves Ayres and her family were snatched from her home by the Chilean secret police. As American historian Temma Kaplan recounts:
"Once at the prison camp, agents questioned Ayress for hours to gain information about liberal intelligence. She refused to answer and suffered immense torture. Ayress's torture began with nude beatings. Agents yelled insults at her while they beat her. They screamed, "Speak, red dog, or we will shoot your father and brother in front of you!" Each day her torture worsened. Agents sliced her skin and burnt her with cigarettes. Then they hung her from the ceiling and crammed tree limbs and coke bottles into her vagina and anus. As the days passed Ayress endured more gruesome treatment. Tortures stripped her naked and placed her on metal bedsprings where they shocked her tongue and vagina. Guards employed animals to conduct torture on Ayress and forced her to endure rape by Dobermans. They also shoved starved rats into her vagina. She screamed as the rats ripped and tore their way out. Guards raped Ayress over 40 times and consequently she became pregnant. She feared that if her tortures learned of her pregnancy she would face maniacal experimentation on her foetus. She kept quiet about her pregnancy but as a result of endless torture miscarried."[4]
This use of systematic sexual violence as a form of political punishment was routine. An account recalls from the Valech Report states that:
"For women, it was an especially violent experience. The commission reports that nearly every female prisoner was the victim of repeated rape. The perpetration of this crime took many forms, from military men raping women themselves to the use of foreign objects on victims. Numerous women (and men) report spiders or live rats being implanted into their orifices. One woman wrote, "I was raped and sexually assaulted with trained dogs and with live rats. They forced me to have sex with my father and brother who were also detained. I also had to listen to my father and brother being tortured."[5]
These desperately alarming testimonies should provoke untold disgust in anyone with a conscience, but Thatcher chose to dismiss any such sentimentalism. In 1999, she dismissed opposition to the man responsible for the systematic rape of tens of thousands of women as latent pinko "poisonous prejudices".[6] These words would have been utterly contemptible if they were expressed during her time in office.
Thatcher apologists have attempted to justify her support for Pinochet by citing the dictator's support for Britain during the Falklands conflict, arguing that the Falklands left Britain with "a debt of honour".[7] Yet such statements ignore her pre Falklands admiration of Pinochet. As staunch admirers of Hayek and fanatical anti-Communists, she and Pinochet were natural allies. In 1980, the year after Thatcher became Prime Minister and two years prior to the Falklands War, Thatcher lifted Britain's arms embargo on Pinochet's Chile.[8]
After Pinochet's covert support for Britain during the Falklands War, the personal relationship between Thatcher and the dictator went far beyond that of two heads of state, with the Pinochet family visiting the Thatchers in London annually. This continued long after Thatcher's time in office. In retirement, the pair regularly had tea parties together.
Much to the consternation of both, reality eventually interrupted their cups of tea and lady fingers when Pinochet was indicted for human rights violations by Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón.[9] Thatcher did everything in her power to ensure that he would not face justice for his crimes.[10] During the legal battle to avoid extradition to Spain, she regularly visited Pinochet, and lobbied Tony Blair's government in public to ensure that he would not be extradited. In a gross perversion of reality, she compared the Blair government's treatment of Pinochet to that of a police state.[11]
In the full knowledge that Thatcher was not on their side, the peoples of Latin America mostly contemptuously ignored her death. Unsurprisingly, the tiny minority of Chileans who recall fond memories of Pinochet chose to mourn the passing of their dictator's backer.[12]
Supporters must remember that part of her legacy was her support for a man responsible for thousands of murders and the systematic use of torture and rape. A total lack of empathy for the victims of Augusto Pinochet is part of that legacy too, and demonstrates that Thatcher failed to meet even the most minimal standards of human decency.
Article by James Donnelly.

1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6973614.stm

2 http://elpais.com/diario/2011/08/20/internacional/1313791208_850215.html

3 http://elpais.com/diario/2011/08/20/internacional/1313791208_850215.html

4 Elizabeth Simmons 'Torture Under Pinochet's Regime' Paper Given to the University of Alabama, Huntsville 2009

5 http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2007/2/7/torture-under-pinochet-we-were-peeling/

6 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/oct/06/pinochet.chile

7 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3635244/Thatcher-always-honoured-Britains-debt-to-Pinochet.html

8 http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/04/neruda-pinochet-thatcher-chile-murder-exhumed.html

9 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/195413.stm

10 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/victims-of-pinochets-police-prepare-to-reveal-details-of-rape-and-torture-1183793.html

11 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/oct/06/pinochet.chile

12 http://www.la-razon.com/mundo/Seguidores-Pinochet-lamentan-fin-Thatcher_0_1813018712.html

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 08:29 AM

Sorry to have spoiled our little relationship, Hen, with my change of designation. But you can go on calling me "The" as ever was; you know I respect ancient traditions.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 09:06 AM

Now let me see Christmas:

Evidence of Margaret Thatcher's support for General Augusto Pinochet prior to 1980?

I select 1980 as that was the date that Margaret Thatcher made a commercial decision in favour of British industry - not in favour of Chile or its Government. That decision was to reap benefits for Great Britain only two years later when British territory was invaded and occupied.

Allende's Government ignored the Chilean Constitution, one of the reasons it was overthrown. Pinochet was instrumental in ensuring that a new Constitution was drawn up in consultation with the people of Chile through referenda. He limited the term of office of the President and stood down when he had completed his own term of office.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 09:17 AM

Keith A of Hertford has lost all credibility now.

He said, I just quoted it and you read it.

You can't keep saying I am lying when I quote the odious little man himself, exhibiting hatred, dismissing a section of the community as not worth being equal and claiming they spread disease.

And Keith reckons he isn't saying that, despite the fact he just fucking well said it.

You are just having a laugh. A fairly sick one, granted, but you are in good company.

Terribulus is rewriting history as I type regarding Pinochet and his crimes against humanity. Is he eminent enough for you? Pinochet rounded up a few gay people together with folk singers, trade unionists and those who, like Akenaton judges, not worthy of favourable legislation and shot them in a football stadium.

Why don't you pm each other? Members of the human race won't have to throw up from reading it.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 09:34 AM

So you support Pinochet's murderous regime as Mrt T did - no surprise there then.
You maybe can get someone count the dead of Chile and Israel for you - come back with a total, when you have one.
Long live democracy eh?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 10:43 AM

Keith, Ian is unable to comprehend what he reads, he is completely blinded by his mythical equality agenda.

It is impossible to debate with someone like Ian, he distorts everything he reads to suit his agenda....."What's truth got to do with it....got to do with it!"......with apologies to my friend Graham.

It amazes me that a few here seem to regard Ian as intelligent?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 10:53 AM

"his mythical equality agenda."
Lifelong socialist my arseum
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 11:04 AM

By the way, the stadium is now named after Victor Jara. I laid a flower at the shrine to those who fell foul of Pinochet's "regard for the constitution" a few years ago when I visited it. Victor was one of the victims, as most singers know only too well.

Seems like the good people of Chile don't share Terribulus's fascination with fascist monsters. Very few share his love of the dead bitch either.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 11:27 AM

This from someone who has a "thing" for Hamas and the Caliphate........hmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Musket
Date: 31 Jul 14 - 12:02 PM

Whos that then?

You say I have a thing about Hamas and with similar evidence I say you have a thing for raping schoolgirls. You say I have a thing for a caliphate and under the same evidence I say you steal from churches to raise money for your drug habit.

The only bit of truth is from what people type and Bobad says Israeli terrorists are justified in killing children.

Considering I hold religion in contempt and have said so at every opportunity, Bobad might want to find some other fantasy slur when referring to me.

I like coming on the BS threads to see what inferior scum are saying. I suppose I should watch the TV programmes that supply similar entertainment. A bit like our ancestors visiting Bedlam in the same way you visit the zoo.

Apart from the difference that monkeys don't exhibit criminal tendencies like incitement to hatred and parrots dont go around repeating and defending it.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 01:57 AM

"The only bit of truth is from what people type and Bobad says Israeli terrorists are justified in killing children."
Not just Bobad - the Terminal Trio and their hanger-on have all suggested this at one level or another.
What is interesting is that the one of them has been thick enough to have declared his undying love for a South American fascist dictator whose regime facilitated the rape, torture and murder of his opponents, aided and abetted by a British Prime Minister who had taken the first tottering steps on the same road by declaring those who opposed her as 'The Enemy Within'.
Amazing what a bit of blood-letting brings crawling out of the woodwork.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 03:32 AM

Ah Christmas, so you have no evidence whatsoever that Margaret Thatcher evinced any support for Pinochet or his regime pre-1980 and that even post 1980 what "support" she did voice was restricted to the fact that Pinochet and Chile gave invaluable covert assistance to the British during the Falklands crisis and that he and his Government laid the foundations for Chile's return to democratic Government - in British history Pinochet's direct parallel would be Oliver Cromwell (A good bad man - who actually saved Parliament - from itself, and laid the foundations for the "Constitutional Monarchy").

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 04:03 AM

Jim....You and I both know, that wasting time promoting the rights of homosexuals to purloin the word "marriage", will make zero difference to the real inequality inherent in the Capitalist system.

If you do not understand that, you are no socialist and have no understanding of what Maccoll was trying to tell us.

The fact that I support a form of socialism, does not prevent me from listening and sometimes learning from others.
I have learned that social conservatism can often be a valuable influence in the construction of a fair but workable society.

The people that you vilify here are decent intelligent folk, you would do well to come out of your box sometimes and listen to the argument.....if you do not, you may end up a one trick pony like Ian.

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 04:07 AM

"Thatcher evinced any support for Pinochet or his regime pre-1980 and that even post 1980 "
Thatcher turned the good offices of the Conservative Party over to a murderous South American right-wing dictator, held a rally in his support in Kensington while he was under house-arrest a couple of miles down the road, awaiting a decision as to whether he would have to face trial for mass murder
She had the hall draped with crossed British and Chilean flags and she and one of her cohorts stood up on the platform and declared him a friend of Britain and his behaviour in Chile as a shining example of democracy as she saw it.
She accused the then government of the day, who were considering his extradition to face trial of "operating a police state".
Im over the moon that you should compare him with a seventeenth century demagogic butcher and describe them both as "good" - sorry - son't understand good/bad - they were both despotic, murderous thugs - making you, in supporting them - what exactly - a good/bad right wing extremist, maybe?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 05:44 AM

Bobad says Israeli terrorists are justified in killing children."
Not just Bobad - the Terminal Trio and their hanger-on have all suggested this at one level or another.

We just tried to explain the legal position to you Jim.
You and Musket were sadly incapable of understanding it.
Would you like me to try again?

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 07:12 AM

Some people just can't stand to see Jews defend themselves. Like Gandhi said about the Jews in Hitler's Germany, they should neither flee nor resist but rather offer themselves up to be killed by their enemies, since their "suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and joy."

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: bobad
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 07:40 AM

"You and Musket were sadly incapable of understanding it."

Hence the term "useful idiot".

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 08:15 AM

"We just tried to explain the legal position to you Jim."
No you haven't - you've given us the invented situation of Human Shields and hidden caches of arms in hospitals as an excuse of wholesale slaughter of non-combatants (you actually had a hissy-fit once once I suggested you supported the killing of hostages - now you are openly advocating it)
From day one Israel saw fit to slaughter everyone within range - after the first few atrocities they came up with 'Human Shield' as an excuse, and went on doing it.
Around ten hospitals and refugee centres, 100+ schools and medical centres and over 1,000 non-combatants later - surprise, surprise - their propaganda machine has coughed up weapons hidden in the walls of the last one and their extremist Zionist press has pumped out these 'findings' as an excuse for continuing to slaughter civilians.
There are no actual figures, but it is estimated that 7 out of 10 of those slaughtered in Gaza are civilians.
The actual armed opposition dead (automatically described as "terrorist" by terrorist Israel, of course) is unknown, but the percentages indicate that it is the result of random rather than planned attack - you have supported both - why not - you have your nose wedged so far up the Israeli arse that you wouldn't know if they had used a nuclear weapon.
The U.N. has dithered as to whether the Israeli behaviour breaches war rules - (a sick concept in itself).
Humanitarian organisations have unequivocally sated they are committing war crimes and human rights abuses- I'll go with them - no doubt which side you choose.
Would I like you to explain it to me again?
No, thanks all the same Keith - the idea that you, of all people, are in a position to explain anything to anybody is entertainment enough for one day - a girl can only take so much, after all!!
Bloody moron.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 08:19 AM

It's just been announced that the temporary cease-fire has broken down with an immediate death toll of 50 Palestinians (though an Israeli soldier may have been kidnapped) - certainly is a defensive war, as far as the Israeli's are concerned, eh!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Pathetic goading
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Aug 14 - 12:05 PM

You just can't get your silly little head around it!

It is illegal to target civilians or fire indiscriminately.
Hamas guilty.
It is illegal to fire from civilian area.
Hamas guilty.

If you are fired on by war criminals like that, you may fire back even if civilian casualties are inevitable, but you must give warnings as IDF do, and it must be proportionate to the military importance of the target.

Criminal missile systems and tunnels targeting civilians would be the EXTREMELY important targets.