BS: The New World Order

Subject: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 09:26 AM

Refugee Crisis in Syria Raises Fears in South Carolina

By RICHARD FAUSSET SEPT. 25, 2015

DUNCAN, S.C. — The worried citizens gathered in the high school cafeteria, about 200 strong. Patriotic songs played on the stereo, a man in a blue blazer from the John Birch Society hovered by a well-stocked literature table, and Lauren L. Martel, a lawyer from Hilton Head, told the crowd that 25 Syrian refugees were already living among them.

"The U.N. calls it 'refugee resettlement' — the Muslims call it hijra, migration," said another speaker, Jim McMillan, a local businessman. "They don't plan to assimilate, they don't plan to take on our culture. They plan to change the way of American life."

Evan Mulch, the field coordinator for the John Birch Society, told the crowd the resettlements were "part of the New World Order game plan."

The United States, Ms. Martel said, is "a Judeo-Christian nation."

"We are not a Muslim nation, and those two things cannot coexist," she added.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/26/us/refugee-crisis-in-syria-raises-fears-in-south-carolina.html?_r=0

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,#
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 11:02 AM

Fear sells, especially to uninformed people.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Stu
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 11:04 AM

"The United States, Ms. Martel said, is "a Judeo-Christian nation."

Not to the people you stole it off it isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 11:11 AM

Not to the people you stole it off it isn't.

You mean not to the people your people stole it off.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Stu
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 11:38 AM

"You mean not to the people your people stole it off."

Nope, I meant what I said.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 11:39 AM

Oddly enough No GUEST 11:11 AM - "WE" generally lived up to and honoured our treaty obligations, the "colonists" through greed and their perceived "need" to expand didn't (It was one of the prime motivators used to sell the American War of Independence - To enable the "colonists" once independent to break the Treaty reached with the North American natives after the Wilderness/Frontier War in 1754). Elsewhere the newly independent "colonists" took land from the Spaniards and bought land from the French (They also had a couple of half-assed attempts at stealing more land from us - but they didn't get anywhere with the venture)

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 01:50 PM

Gosh, for a moment I thought the thread was going to be about the international bankers who control both parties, and corrupted the political systems of the industrialized nations, both parties, and were deceiving the populous, with phony 'news', by the media that they own as well...oh never mind, they own your ideologies, too!

There's no business like show business!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 04:26 PM

Well, a couple of generations ago for these people it'd have been "a Christian nation", with the Jews very much part of the assault on the way of American life. Now it's "a Judeo-Christian nation", so I suppose it's an advance of sorts. (Where do the Mormons fit in here? In some ways, as followers of a latter day prophet and revelation, there position is fairly analogous to Muslims.)

But seeing the mass flight of desperate refugees from the Syrian holocaust as a kind of underhand bid to take over other countries - you really have some sick sick people in America. Well, we all have, but ours are generally a bit more embarassed about it.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 04:49 PM

you really have some sick sick people in America.

And more of 'em every day. They're a Republican Growth Industry! Just listen to the clown car full of Republican idiots vying for the presedential nomination.

See - it ain't always "the Brits" criticising the U.S. There are home grown folks who are tired unto death of the moronocracy who wear dumb as a badge of honor.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 06:01 PM

Trouble is, the issues are rarely as simple as some people believe they are.
It would be nice if accepting all the poor people from Eastern Europe, or Middle Eastern war zones, would SOLVE the problem, but we all know in our hearts that it wont.
Demonising those who recognise and tell the truth is not a good idea.

If Islamic State continues to expand, and borders are not closed in Europe we will be faced by countless millions of economic migrants/refugees....are you all prepared to stick your heads in the sand till that happens?
Our people are already protesting about our decrepit infrastructure, our health service, housing problems, the price of further education, public transport. benefits being crushed with no worthwhile employment available to take their place.

Do we really need more bodies? we were partially responsible for rise of Islamic Fundamentalism by crushing the people who kept them down, but at some point it would have happened in any case. They see Western values as debauched and perverted, they see Western society as greedy, wasteful and Godless.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 06:26 PM

Demonising those who recognise and tell the truth is not a good idea.

The fucking TRUTH??? Jesus wept. I didn't know the John Birch Society had chapters in the UK. Apparently brain death is all the rage in Blighty.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 06:45 PM

Nowadays on U.S. talk radio programs, "New World Order" seems to be a buzzword to describe a takeover of the world by godless, totalitarian liberals in black U.N. helicopters led by a Kenyan-born, Muslim Commander in Chief. My mother-in-law was addicted to talk radio shows until she died a couple years ago at the age of 98, and she's often fret about the "New World Order" that they talked about on the radio.

Wikipedia says the term has benign origins, particularly in its use by Woodrow Wilson to describe the hope for the future League of Nations after World War I.

How it became a Conspiracy theory, is hard for me to understand.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 06:59 PM

The problem is... one half-truth plus one more half-truth do not add up to one full truth.

Ignorant people take a selection of information, (chosen according to various fears & prejudices,) season it with slogans & guesses, stir in various bits of hyperbolé, boil it with the lid on without testing it for flavor, and serve it up way too hot as "Truth Soup". Then they tell everyone how bad it tastes.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 07:00 PM

Joe, you need to read Charles Pierce's " Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free".

And then of course there's just good old-fashioned racist xenophobia, stoked by the current crop of Republician morons.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 07:43 PM

I'll put that one on my list, Greg. Sounds like a good read. I ordered a copy.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 09:55 PM

Yup. Again.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 02:56 AM

don't tell me that accepting untold numbers of migrants or refugees can solve this problem.
These problems must be tackled in-situ.......it looks an impossible challenge, but there is no other way.
Do we have the guts or the right to stop IS?

If we want to protect the values which have made us obscenely rich, selfish and Godless in the eyes of the Eastern world, then we have no alternative......but are our values the right values, taking into account the future of humanity and the planet?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,LynnH
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 03:40 AM

......and don't forget that a Republican president, along with a british prime minister are primarily responsible for the middle east disaster area and the growth of IS.

The syrians are fleeing from the merciless and indiscriminate bombings carried out by 'president'Assad and his army, as well as, in the case of young men, dodging the draft into said army. Familiar to you in the USA? As long as they can see no future for their familieas and themselves they will head for anywhere that vaguely looks like a promised land.

Tackling the problems on the spot means properly funding the UNHCR so that it can do its' job, talking countries like Turkey into actually giving syrians refugee status and also persuading them to stop bombarding the PKK since they the only really effective oppostion to IS.

Then again, we shouldn't forget that some palestinians have been living in refugee camps for 70 years..................

What's the inscription on the statue of liberty?

Lynn

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 03:45 AM

Why leave out Mrs Clinton, the heroine of Libya?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 10:24 AM

What's the inscription on the statue of liberty?

According to the late Lou Reed, its

"Give us you're tired, your poor;
Piss on 'em."

And unfortunately, of late, that's just about right.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 05:27 PM

"some palestinians have been living in refugee camps for 70 years"
.,,.
A disgrace to the countries in which these camps are situated. Refugees have poured into Israel from Europe, Asia, Africa ---- and not one has spent any time in any sort of refugee camp.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 05:44 PM

A disgrace to the countries in which these camps are situated
Like the occupied territories controlled by the Israeli government, you mean??

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Stu
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 03:47 AM

Bilderberg.

That's it, right there.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Stu
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 03:58 AM

Bilderber. That's it, right there. Here's an example of how this works: http://nicholaswilson.com/bbc-bilderberg-and-hsbc-secrets-and-lies/

"in Europe we will be faced by countless millions of economic migrants/refugees"

Ake, they're coming anyway and it's been known a long time that they they're on their way. Islamic State is a sideshow compared to the consequences faced by countless millions in the face of climate change, which we could stop and choose not to. People are going to be fighting over resources and the poor are going to have to migrate to survive. Are we going to deny them the chance of life? Would you see them suffer and die as we look away from a global disaster we actively and enthusiastically contributed to?

Both ISIS and climate change are a product of the actions of the western capitalist powers; we started the industrial revolution in the UK and the US and other belligerent capitalist nations propagated the conflict in the middle east and then acted without any moral constraint; they still do.

Everyone has to pay the reaper eventually.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 08:28 AM

Have to agree with most of that Stu, but bringing tens of millions here will not solve anything....the global warming problem will have to be addressed by a world government and we are far away from that.

So long as humanity is motivated by financial aspiration development cannot be stopped...how can we, the developed West, say to the poorer nations that they cannot have the living standards which apply here?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Stu
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 11:18 AM

"but bringing tens of millions here will not solve anything"

I'm not suggesting we bring them, simply that they are going to come.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Jan Sobieski
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 01:49 PM

IS have threatened to infiltrate thousands of their followers into Europe within the so-called refugees. Islam is the most intolerant cult around - try being a Christian (or, worse, a homosexual), in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. "jihad" = struggle, "Mein Kampf" = my struggle, and that is not the only similarity between Islam and Nazism. What is it about "totalitarian" that you do not understand?

By all means let us offer sanctuary to the Coptic Christians and other non-Muslims who are being murdered and persecuted by Islamists throughout the Muslim world, but no more followers of the illiterate misogynist paedophile "prophet", please. Otherwise our children and grandchildren will be paying jizya within 30 years.

Why are the Muslim "refugees" not heading for the Gulf states, Pakistan or Bangladesh? I wonder.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 02:27 PM

"These problems must be tackled in-situ."
The "in-situ" situation, if David Cameron gets his way, is that Assad - the man who oversaw the massacre of his people over decades - will remain in power.
The extremist regimes Jan mentioned are Britain's allies and customers for their weapons - a 'safe pair of hands' as far as the west is concerned.
"A disgrace to the countries in which these camps are situated"
No Mike - a world disgrace, particularly those nations who have propped up terrorist regimes and despotic monarchs.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 08:02 PM

Deeply shocked, Terribilis. Surely you as a defender of the old-world UK colonialist order know that "half-arsed" is so spelt.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 08:05 PM

try being a Christian, in Saudi Arabia

Conversely, try being a Muslim in the United states.......

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 04:26 AM

No freedom of religion in Saudi.
No churches.
No comparison with USA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Saudi_Arabia

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 04:42 AM

Jim,
"A disgrace to the countries in which these camps are situated"
No Mike - a world disgrace,

No Jim.
Their host countries should have assimilated them, but chose not to.
Israel assimilated far more refugees in their tiny sliver of land, and there were literally millions of refugees in Europe at the same time, all settled.

The countries in which these camps are situated forced them all to stay in the camps to the present day with refugee status passed down through the generations.
That has happened to no other refugees in the world.
It does disgrace those "host" nations.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:50 AM

Thanks for support, Keith. You take my point precisely. GregF & Jim, re your replies to my last post: just please to remember what, proverbially, two blacks do not make.

Best

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:55 AM

Ah Bridge - I have long known that you are pay no great respect to attention to detail - odd considering your profession.

As the further attempts to invade Canada were made by the newly independent Americans - half-assed IS the correct term and is the correct spelling.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:02 AM

"two blacks do not make."
Quite -
The fact that the wealthy west behave as do the poorer third world towards refugees makes one no better than the other - you are the one who chose to point the finger.
The former payed and is still playing a great part in creating the refugee crisis, yet, when faced with the consequences of their behaviour - "no room at this particular inn - go back to where you've come from".
here is no reason at all either to expect or demand that the Arab countries should take them in - the people of those countries are as much victims of Western behaviour as are the Assad's victims - and we are now actively supporting the Syrian mass-murderer and demanding he be left in control of the people he has massacred.
Some time ago, when I suggested that the West should intervene to stop the killing in Homs, I was called "a fascist", yet we have a government now actively fighting on Assad's side and claiming that any peace deal has to leave him in charge - let's here it for Cameron's fascism - I don't think!!.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:03 AM

...ie, you don't make something any the less disgraceful simply by citing other things of which you disapprove. A foolish tactic, unworthy of the intelligences of such as Jim -- and even, ???, of Greg!

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:09 AM

you are the one who chose to point the finger
,..,.

I reiterate, the fact that other things might also be ☜ ☞worthy doesn't make this particular manifestation of fingerpointworthiness any the less so; & I reiterate that it is an attemptedly deflectory tactic, unworthy of your intelligence, Jim, to urge that it does.

Regards
≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:02 AM

Not saying one is more or less to blame than the other as far as the treatment of refugees are concerned - I'll leave that to you and yours
I am saying that to the West (and Israel) bears responsibility for the exodus of human beings from their homes and it their responsibility to assist the refugees and stop supporting the despots.
None of you and yours seem to want to address that fact.
http://ardc-israel.org/en/content/refugees-israel
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:24 AM

ISRAEL'S REFUGEES
MORE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 08:13 AM

Jim,
and we are now actively supporting the Syrian mass-murderer and demanding he be left in control of the people he has massacred.

"We" are not.
Russia and Iran are.

Guardian last week,
"British ministers keep repeating the mantra that Assad is part of the problem, not part of the solution. "

"For Britain and its western allies to continue to insist that Assad must go would simply ensure that no negotiated settlement is ever reached."
Avi Shlaim is author of The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/23/cameron-assad-defeat-isis-syria

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 08:32 AM

"I'll leave that to you and yours" ...

Leave what to me and my what, precisely, Jim? I fear it sounds to me oddly like another, somewhat inarticulate, instance of that antisemitism of yours: you think you're not but you are, as I have demonstrated before. You become confused and inarticulate [as here], and then turn defensive and abusive when it is pointed out. You also contrive to sound both rude and aggressive. If you can't dispute in civil fashion then I shall have nothing further to say to you.

Those links you provide appear to have been published in Israel by an internal Jewish-Israeli organisation of some kind. Can you just see any Islamic state anywhere around allowing such internal dissent?

And if you think of denouncing this by your favourite R word, which you fall back on when desperate, forget it, or you will only make yourself look sillier.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 09:20 AM

"We" are not.
Russia and Iran are."
Yes we - in the form of Prime Minister, David Cameron bloody well are.
CAMERON'S U-TURN
The argument being put forward is that "it is only for the short term, but we know damn well that, given his murderous track record and Russia's backing, he will remain in power, will never be put on trial for his crimes against humanity and continue his 'disappearing' and torture of his opponents.
This whole bloody mess started because of the West's failure to act on Assad's atrocities, and leaving him where he is will only ensure that he continues where he hasn't really left off.
Pointing the finger at Russia avoids the fact that Britain has done SFA about Assad - not even to show disapproval by confiscating his British-held property when it might have made a difference.
" instance of that antisemitism of yours"
It is - by definition - antisemitic to link Israel's behaviour with that of the Jewish people as a whole - a definition you have been happy to wave in my face in the past.
Your accusation is Antisemitic (you may not believe it is, but it is) - you have joined the squalids in your argument - shame on you!!
You continue to make my point - one is no better than the other in this affair
"Rude - uncivil - defensive - inarticulate - desperate - even sillier" - you are the one using these abusive terms (as is your usual practice) - not me.
C'mon Mike - you're better than that (or so I used to believe)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 09:24 AM

And neither of you has responded to Israel's treatment of refugees - but there again, you wouldn't - would you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 10:03 AM

We do know that being anti Israel is not automatically anti semetic, however, it is a good place for anti semites to hide. I have often wondered why you seem to turn so many threads into anti Israel rants.You seem to be obsessed.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 10:29 AM

"however, it is a good place for anti semites to hide"
We also know that those who support Israel's atrocity and terrorism are quick enough to crouch behind the dead of Auschwitz to defend their support for the Israeli right-wing regime.
Not so long ago, a petition from Holocaust survivors and their relatives, was published, condemning the slaughter in Gaza last year.
A few years ago, six ex-directors of Mossad were filmed (The Gatekeepers) describing their duties while in office - one very pointedly, stopped himself from comparing the present Israeli regime to that of the Nazis.
Some of the most stringent criticism of Israel's behaviour (including accusations of ethnic cleansing and Apartheid) has come from within Israel.
Anti Semites all, no doubt
One of the common features of those who defend Israel is the total failure to respond to its behaviour - rather, the easy way out is to accuse critics of Antisemitism - a truely cowardly short-cut - and Antisemitic by a definition accepted world-wide.
"why you seem to turn so many threads into anti Israel rants"
Wonder no further - because I believe the Israeli regime has betrayed the Jewish people in making Israel the most dangerous reactionary power in the Middle-East, if not the world.
How do you fancy responding to the accusations rather than joining the mob - no - I thought not!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 11:15 AM

I can't say too often that Israel is not what we [elderly Jews] all hoped for in our youth [& you can call that 'lipservice' in your usual o-so-charmingly evasive way if it gives you any satisfaction, Jim; but for all your overweening conceit you can't see into my head!].

But to rubricate it as "the most dangerous reactionary power in the Middle-East, if not the world" -- a Middle East that contains adulteress-stoning, blasphemer-hanging, liberal-blogger-flogging Arab states without number, while the world contains -- don't know where to begin! -- Taleban? China?? -- is the statement of one eaten up by an irrational obsessive hatred. And you have the all-fire gall to say you expected better of me!

You should be ashamed, Jim Carroll. But I don't expect for a moment that you are, you hidebound monomaniac, you!

Luvya just the same in an odd sort of way; we have much memory to share. But...

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 11:21 AM

I should have said "Muslim" or "Islamic" rather than "Arab" states. No Arabs in N Nigeria (where they cane 15-year-old girls on the bare bottom in public for dressing inappropriately), Malaysia &c ...... It's not a racial, but an ethical and ideological, thing.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 11:26 AM

'No -- not just for 'dressing inappropriately': for having the carelessness to be raped, so becoming 'impure' thru premarital sex ... Lovely rational people, eh, innit?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 11:48 AM

Jim, your claim was based on a reported quote from one "unnamed government source."
Since then Cameron has continued to demand that Assad be removed, as has Obama and all Western leaders.

Your claim, "we are now actively supporting the Syrian mass-murderer and demanding he be left in control of the people he has massacred." is entirely false!

The supporters of Assad are Russia, Iran and China, not the West.

the West's failure to act on Assad's atrocities, and leaving him where he is will only ensure that he continues where he hasn't really left off.
Obama and Cameron wanted to launch reprisal raids against Assad, but the British left defeated the move.
Meanwhile Russia has a huge military presence in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 12:01 PM

An arse is an arse wherever it is. If one is speaking English. Much like Terribilis. In the first case if not the second.

Nigeria is a complex "state" formed by colonialists out of the areas occupied by at least three tribes (predominantly the Yoruba, the Igbo, and the Hausa). Not all parts even of Northern Nigeria impliment the more unislamic parts of Sharia law, and its prevalence is more aligned with religion than region. Regrettably, both Xtianity and Islam are invasive weeds in Nigeria and much of West Africa, where, in general, traditional animist beliefs have more to recommend them - although I did have a bit of a row outside an IFA meeting on Sunday with an ordinarily pleasant rational and scientifically-minded chap who was seeking to assert that humans were seeded here by aliens and that the historical record supported this by proving the ancient existence of giants. The absence of all religions and spiritual belief systems would be a major improvement in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 01:11 PM

"Since then Cameron has continued to demand that Assad be removed,"
No he hasn't
Ther press is full of Cameron's insistence that Assad be left where he is, reported as a fact - including the Tory Daily Telegraph
REUTERS
VOICE OF AMERICA
THE MIRROR
THE GUARDIAN
There are two separate reports of Cameron's change-of-mind in the Telegraph, but you can't link to them unless you subscribe.
Common knowledge, widely accepted.

" is entirely false!"
Britain has had planes supporting government forces in Syria for some time now - not one claim of "fascism" by you.
SKY NEWS

"but the British left defeated the move."
Parliament - including Labour right supported the move - the left has had no say in British Parliamentary politics up to the advent of Corbyn - among those who defeated the move are those who are now refusing to serve under him.
I know damn well where Russia stands at present - I also know she is one of us since the fall of Communism - one of the 'good guys'
"But I don't expect for a moment that you are, you hidebound monomaniac, you!"
Far easier to respond with childish name-calling than actually answer the points made Mike - doesn't make one iota of difference to the fact that your accusations of Antisemitism are Antisemitic - by the definition you have used in the past.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 01:14 PM

By the way Mike - I have never "evaded" on single point you made - I have responded to every one of them
Your only response has been Antisemitic claims of Antisemitism
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 01:27 PM

Where have I used the word "evade" or any of its derivatives, Jim? Can't understand the point you make here.

"Antisemitic claims of Antisemitism" -- 'a paradox, a paradox, a most ingenious paradox' [W S Gilbert]: but I have not a notion of what you mean by it.

As someone points out above, Jim, you obsessively hijack threads with attacks on Israel. That my or may not be 'antisemitic'; but it sure as hell comes over as a bit odd.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 01:28 PM

... and obsessive

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 02:19 PM

Jim, I think you know very little about the Jewish people, or Israel for that matter. Your accusation of hiding behind the holocaust is an ugly one and I have never heard that accusation from anyone other than you.I used to think you were just an obsessed nutter. I have changed my mind.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 02:38 PM

Jim, all your links refer to the same quote.
E.g. Reuters,
Sky's correspondent, travelling with Cameron to the United States, said Cameron was not ruling out that Assad could be part of a transition, but "what he is very clear about is that Assad cannot be part of Syria's future in the long run".

I also know she is one of us since the fall of Communism - one of the 'good guys'

Russia is still not a Western power, and nor is China or Iran who all support Assad.
Communism may have fallen, but a KGB officer is still in charge.

Britain has had planes supporting government forces in Syria for some time now -

No it has not Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 02:59 PM

"Jim, all your links refer to the same quote."
Fully accepted - even by the Tory press - unless you have evidence to the contrary..... no? Thought not.
"Jim, I think you know very little about the Jewish people, or Israel for that matter"
Then you think wrong.
My family were very much part of the movement against Ati-semitism in the 1930s, some of them did time for their opposition to The Blackshirts.
My father fought alongside Jewish volunteers in Spain, some of whome were fellow prisoners of war with him there.
In my youth they were constant visitors to our home.
My parents were among those who welcomed the setting up of the State of Israel.
Some of my closest associates when I lived in Manchester were Jews, some of them actual Holocaust survivors and most of the others, family of same - including my first serious girl-friend - we fell out when she referred to the State of Israel as "Fascist".
I've shown you mine, now how about you showing me yours instead of accusing me of ignorance.
And all of you - how about some argument instead of empty and somewhat desperate abuse?
You are a disgrace - the lot of you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 03:46 PM

I used to think you were just an obsessed nutter. I have changed my mind.

I've had his number for quite some time now.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:41 PM

Didn't expect anything else from you Bruce.
Simple way to prove what I say
PRODUCE ONE SINGLE POSTING ON THIS FORUM THAT ACCUSES "THE JEWS" FOR ISRAELI WAR CRIMES AND ATROCITIES - ONE WILL DO
The only postings that have implicated The Jewish People in the atrocities carried out by the Israeli regime(s) are those defending those atrocities.
To do so would have been Antisemitic and in doing so, they have helped paint a target on every single Jew on this planet.
If any of your little band can produce one single incident of me or anybody blaming "The Jews" for Sabra Shatila, the carnage in Gaza, the slaughter of civilians, women and children, the ethnic cleansing of Isreal.... any one of the atrocities that has gone into the making of The State of Israel, I will happily hold my hands up to being Antisemitic and join you in condemning those who have - if not, please flush your accusations and your personal abuse down the toilet, where they belong.
A reminder of one of the definitions of Antisemitism, by the Europeaqn Forum on Antisemitism:
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Hi lp
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 08:11 PM

You have told us your family history Jim , countless times . But you are what you are!

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 12:31 AM

Oh, yes: I see where I said "evasive". If you think, Jim, that persistently denouncing all my statements of disappointment in Israel as mere "lipservice" is "responding" to them, then I can only rejoin, with all moderation, that as a "response" I consider it to fall somewhat short.

As well, as I have already said, as being unconscionably bloody rude!

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 01:15 AM

"The New World Order"???......You call this order????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 03:33 AM

"But you are what you are!"
Aren't we all - and if you have any accusations to make, you need to provide facts to back them up, not innuendo and smear.
I have laid out what I believe as clearly as I can - you people have not - only insults.
Put your money where your mouth is.
"As well, as I have already said, as being unconscionably bloody rude!"
Coming from a master who constantly reverts to schoolyard name-calling and pompous strutting, I will have to give that serious thought Mike!
You have my case - lets have yours eh?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 04:05 AM

"Case" for what? I have no case to urge, relevant to this thread, for anything in particular. I simply call attention to what I consider shortcomings in the 'cases' you make for your various obsessions and prejudices. You claim to have 'responded' to all my animadversions; but I reiterate that I do not consider repeated resort to such terms as 'lipservice' (together with accusations of 'schoolyard namecalling' & so forth, for which you always appear reluctant when challenged to provide any specific examples) to be any sort of valid or rational or effective 'response'.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Hilo
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 04:08 AM

Yes , you have clearly stated your beliefs. It is those beliefs that I find ugly and offensive. I am stating clearly what I believe. I have not smeared you, you have . I have said all I have to say on this .

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 04:20 AM

Jim, you are talking bollocks again.
Guardian 18 hours ago,

"The prime minister said: "I know there are people who think IS [Isis] is even worse than Assad, so shouldn't we somehow cut a deal with Assad to team up and tackle IS. It sounds enticing, but even if it were the right thing to do, which it isn't, it wouldn't work. We need a Syria free from IS and Assad."

"Russia had sent troops into Syria to bolster Assad because the president was on the brink of falling, Cameron suggested. He acknowledged that it was a fair criticism to say the efforts of Britain, the US and other countries to train moderate rebels had been a military failure.

The prime minister said: "We did work to train moderate opposition forces. We haven't trained enough, they haven't been successful enough and they haven't been a big enough presence."

Cameron later repeated his earlier contention that Assad should ultimately face international justice for war crimes. He said: "He has done appalling things, massacred hundreds of thousands of his own citizens, millions have fled. In my view, he has broken international law and he has to go.""

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/29/david-cameron-syria-uk-us-russia-iran-assad-cbs-putin-rouhani

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 04:23 AM

Jim,
Britain has had planes supporting government forces in Syria for some time now -
Total bollocks.

Ther press is full of Cameron's insistence that Assad be left where he is, reported as a fact - including the Tory Daily Telegraph
Total bollocks.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 05:37 AM

You have had the press reports Keith
TWO DAYS AGO
AND AGAIN - ALSO TWO DAYS AGO
You have alos had the press reports of British planes supporting the Government troops in Syria.
ONE MORE TIME
AND AGAIN
That Cameron says that Assad should face trial is utterly meaningless - if he is left in charge, as Cameron proposes, he will stay there - with the support of Russia and with the threat of re-opening the Civil War.
Cameron is demanding that he stays where he is - in charge.
"It is those beliefs that I find ugly and offensive."
And I find your Antisemitic equating Israeli war crimes and atrocities with the Jewish people as a whole equally ugly and offensive.
"I simply call attention to what I consider shortcomings in the 'cases"
You call attention to nothing Mike - you have reverted to insulting abusiveness yet again.
If you claim to have made a case for anything - where is it?
I have provided "specific examples" to all my arguments from day one - I have made a point of doing so.
As far as I can see, your criticism of Israel has never gone beyond the uprooting of trees - not a single word of condemnation on last year's bloodbath, Sabra/Shatila, ethnic cleansing, persecution of Bedouins, 'The Israeli 'Berlin Wall', a decade old blockade, evictions to make room for settlers, Israeli attempted sale of Nuclear weapons to South Africa, making Israel an Apartheid state..... nothing - SFA!
Do not accuse me of Antisemitism - (any of you) - while your whole argument flies in the face of the definition you have yourself been happy to raise in the past.
If this is not the case - please show where I am wrong.
You have accused my of being abusive and rude - I have not - yet your postings here have been the most abusively insulting I have ever encountered - and they continue to be.
Answer the points made and stop your childish name-calling
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:01 AM

The reports were wrong.
See the more recent Guardian piece which gives actual Cameron quotes not "reported" ones.
Cameron does not support Assad.
Putin does.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:03 AM

Guardian 18 hours ago,

Cameron,
"We need a Syria free from IS and Assad."

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:34 AM

BBC 13 hours ago,

"Syria war: 'Assad must go' to ensure IS defeat - Obama"

"Speaking at the summit, UK Prime Minister David Cameron said the UK would "continue to support the transition in Syria...that we need to see so badly".
He earlier told CBS television that getting rid of IS also meant getting rid of President Assad: "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34393523

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:51 AM

"The reports were wrong."
No they weren't - Cameron has quite clearly proposed that Assad should stay on for an interim period and he has never withdrawn that statement.
His idea idea appears to be that Assad will calmly step down and and face trial for his war crimes - in his dreams!!
"Despite signalling Mr Cameron would be prepared to discuss Mr Assad's involvement in a political transition, one senior British official told the Press Association: "The prime minister's view is still very clearly that in the endgame you need a different leader to build a peaceful and inclusive Syria."
BBC
"Cameron does not support Assad."
British planes are supporting Government forces in Syria in defiance of the Parliamentary decision not to - you have the evidence.
The world press has covered this as fact - bluster away!!
Done and dusted
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:06 AM

Without President Assad and his Army, the war against the Islamist terrorists will never be won. To beat IS we need boots on the ground and the West is afraid to provide them or to work with Assad's forces which have been fighting IS for five years.

Putin is right, air power allied to Assad's ground troops will finish IS in months.....then the job of rebuilding Syria can begin.

Had we joined the US two years ago in liquidating Assad, the whole of Syria would now be in IS hand.

We have caused the crisis in the Middle East and North Africa by the stupid, ill considered action in supporting terrorists against legitimate governments(Arab Spring).....personally I believe that the purpose was to provoke destabilisation, but like every thing else we get involved in, it has come back to bite us firmly on the arse.

Did anyone listen to Putin's measured speech to the UN? Do so and educate yourselves, contrast it with President Obama's histrionics and subsequent back peddling by all Western governments.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:31 AM

"Without President Assad and his Army, the war against the Islamist terrorists will never be won."
Assad is a terrorist and every bit a threat to his people as Isis - and with a twenty year track record to prove it.
Assad declared war on his people and slaughtered them indiscriminately, Isis took advantage of the West's inaction and built their forces on its basis - neither is fit to lead a country and both need to be brought to justice.
Had we joined the U.S. two years ago, Assad would have been put on trial for the mass-murderer he is and Isis would not have had a breeding ground.
The "legitimate Governments" (like Qaddafi) were despotic monsters who terrorised their people - hence the 'Arab Spring' protests - instead of opposing them the West supported them in their despotism, even training those who would inherit the leadership when the monsters-in-power passed on.
Within a month of The Arab Spring protests, having already sold ammunition and military equipment to Assad, despite his and his family's horrendous human rights record going back several decades, Cameron opened an arms fair, targeting these monsters as continuing or future customers.
Some of the chemicals sold by Britain to Syria could easily have gone into the manufacture of the gas Assad used against his people.
We have caused the world-wide crisis today by allowing an unholy alliance of our government and big businesses to trade in death and support monsters in order to make the rich even richer.   
While this continues to happen, world terrorism will feed on the slaughter and chaos we are causing.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:40 AM

Jim,
British planes are supporting Government forces in Syria

Total bollocks. Some are operating in Syria with US, who are also not supporting Assad and also adamant he must go.

Guardian 18 hours ago,
Cameron,
"We need a Syria free from IS and Assad."

BBC 13 hours ago,
"Syria war: 'Assad must go' to ensure IS defeat - Obama"
"Speaking at the summit, UK Prime Minister David Cameron said the UK would "continue to support the transition in Syria...that we need to see so badly".
He earlier told CBS television that getting rid of IS also meant getting rid of President Assad: "

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:46 AM

"Total bollocks."
In ignoring what is happening - that is exactly what your repetitive responses have become
If, on the other hand, you would like to produce a quote from Cameron or his minister taking back his suggestion that Assad should stay in power for the time being.....!
Won't hold my breath though!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:54 AM

He is adamant Assad should go, as is Obama.
Putin, Iran and China are equally adamant Assad should stay.

If, on the other hand, you would like to produce a quote from Cameron or his minister, or Obama, or any Western leader saying otherwise, please do.

And, neither US nor UK warplanes are operating in support of Assad.
All total bollocks Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 09:05 AM

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.....CHECK

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.....CHECK

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.....CHECK

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 10:15 AM

"British planes are supporting Government forces in Syria in defiance of the Parliamentary decision not to - you have the evidence.
The world press has covered this as fact - bluster away!!
Done and dusted
Jim Carroll"

Really Jim - what planes? what evidence? No bluster, just like to point you to the articles that you have put up as "evidence" - No mention of any British planes supporting Assad's forces in Syria. What your links state is that a number of British PILOTS on exchange with and assigned to USAF squadrons have taken part in operations in Syrian airspace, the number of personnel involved runs to mind boggling and massive low single figures probably as many as five people. They are not operating under UK command and their strikes are directed against IS targets and are in support of Syrian minorities (Over Kobane it was Syrian Kurds) NOT the Assad Government's forces.

Love the way you totally believe things stated in the press one minute when it suits you and then completely disparage newspaper articles when they run counter to your rather weird views.

By the way accepting the reality that Assad might have to stay in power while some form of transition is negotiated is not the same as supporting the position that Assad must stay in power. Another endearing trait of yours - how selectively you read, or chose to understand what you read.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 10:42 AM

The new world order is a term for the ownership society in which the rich rule by ownership which is motivated by the wealth of the richest individual, not the Republic.

Lofty ideas be damned, the bottom line, wealth ranking and revenue streams are supreme.

200 years ago the NWO referred to rule by democracy instead of King and Church.

Use whatever definition you want but the question of who is in charge is usually too fluid to ever pin down for any length of time.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 11:40 AM

"By the way accepting the reality that Assad might have to stay in power while some form of transition is negotiated is not the same as supporting the position that Assad must stay in power."

Sorry Keith (or is it Terry? I find them so weaselly confused rather than stoatally different) that is a very clear statement that Assad is to stay in power. Just not for very long, and who knows how long it might be?

And while Gadaffi was a shit, can you seriously advance an argument that Libyans are better off now than under him?

Iraq may be less clear. Iran I believe is a far worse place than under the Shah. And what about Africa?

Hard as it may be regime change is a matter for the sovereign state in question - acquisition of land by conquest is different. It seems to me that IF (that's a big if) the Southern Irish were legitimate in seeking to expel the English conquerors after about 600 years, the previous occupants of the Levant region might be regarded as legitimate in seeking after a mere 60 years to expel those who went there and took over, even if the English colonial administration purported to authorise it.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,iain
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 11:58 AM

Now the Russians are running missions in Syria. This could make life interesting.
I would also add that until recent times, Assad's Syria had Christianity, Judaism and Islam co-existing in relative harmony.
This is not something found in most of the middle east.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 11:59 AM

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/21318-russian-israeli-coordination-in-syria-includes-air-sea-land-and-cyp

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 01:08 PM

"No bluster, just like to point you to the articles that you have put up as "evidence"
You have the evidence.
There are two sides fighting in Syria - Isis and Assad's Government forces - you''re not seriously suggesting that Britain is supporting Isis, - not even you....!!
Britain and the rest of the world refused to intervene when Assad was butchering the people of Homs - Isis thrived on the lack of support.
Britain was begged to take diplomatic steps to stop the killing by Assad's defectors - the did S.F.A. and Assad's brother-in-law gofer was a regular visitor to London, unmolested in any way, to ascertain that his millions of pounds-worth of property was kept in good order throughout the slaughter.
Don't disagree with the newspapers in any way, just prefer them when nowt's left out.
Cameron has called for Assad to be left in power for an interim period and eventually stepped down and face trial - really!!!
Allowing a mass murderer to continue to hold office for any length of time is to guarantee that he stays there.
Richard
Don't disagree with much you have to say, would only add that any change from feudal despotism is bound to be a leap in the dark, and one way to assist in the direction it takes is to win hearts and minds - not to train people to continue the dynasty - as happened in Libya.
Neither is it helpful to continue to sell arms arm more despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia or Bahrain as was happening from the beginning of The Arab Spring protests.      
The protests in Syria were being quelled by British riot control equipment and Amnesty claimed that the torture being carried out on Assad's victims was being facilitated by British electronic equipment (pause for loud howls of denials from those who actually suggested that it was not only ok to provide Assad with such equipment and ammunition, but that he should have been sold more - "all you could come up with were a few sniper rifles" (unquote)(see Homs Horror thread).
The situation that exists in these States is bound to break eventually - if we put our own interests in these places first, Isis will reap the benefit.
The Arab Spring Protests were a sadly missed opportunity to win friends and influence people, and others were not backward in coming forward.
"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.....CHECK"
Nobody on this forum has ever made such a claim - if they have, produce the quote
Checkmate
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 01:49 PM

There are many groups opposing Assad besides IS Jim.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.....CHECK"
Nobody on this forum has ever made such a claim - if they have, produce the quote

There were comments about "The Jewish State" just in recent days.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 02:21 PM

"There are two sides fighting in Syria - Isis and Assad's Government forces "

The over simplification of the decade. What idiotic rag did you get that jewel from? Inside Syria there are a large number of factions representing the rebellion against Assad and his allies (Hezbollah, Iran and the Russians). Those factions are not only fighting against Assad they are also fighting against one another. ISIS took advantage of the latter conflict to carve themselves what they see as "their" Caliphate.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 03:12 PM

"The over simplification of the decade."
I'm aware of that - the conflict at present is two sifdes
Do you not know what a pompous prat you sound when you bully and bluster the way you do - all wind and pee like the barber's cat?
Thought you were beginning to get over that.
Wanna bluster your way out of your original argument that it was ok to deal with Assad because "we couldn't possibly know what he was up to"? and "only a few sniper rifles" (Homs Horror again)
No - thought not
"There were comments about "The Jewish State" just in recent days."
Where - feel free to point them out.
The main criticism of Israel has been that it blmes the Jewish people for its atrocities.
No decent person accepts that - can't speak for the apologists.
Many Israelis have argues that the setting up of a 'Jewish State' is tantamount to Apartheid, but unfortunately, they don't post to Mudcat
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 05:57 PM

Syria could have been Libya all over again if Pres Putin had not taken the initiative and started to support Assad.

Remember Libya?.....how you all assured us that Gaddafi had to go and the people who were fighting against him had to be supported to make Libya a free democratic nation.

Where are they now, these freedom loving democrats.
Libya is a lawless breeding ground for Islamic Terrorists and Mrs Clinton is standing for President.

Are you all mad.

ISIL is a serious threat to us all, they must be defeated and if Putin/Assad can do it lets get right behind them.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:34 PM

Putin is bombing in support of Assad. Today's bombs were not directed against ISIS rather they targeted the rebels trying to oust him. China, Russia and Iran are supporting Assad, giving his army free rein to barrel bomb his civilians and produce more and more refugees that, you can bet your bottom dollar, will not be seeking refuge in Russia, China or Iran. It's a sad state of affairs.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:08 PM

Father Abraham...had many sons...

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

<And I am one of them and Joe is too...and so are the Muslem and we all began with the Jew.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:14 AM

Keith A of Hertford: "BBC 13 hours ago,
"Syria war: 'Assad must go' to ensure IS defeat - Obama""

What Obama says is absolutely meaningless and is absolutely no indication of what he intends to do...about ANYTHING!...just like the 'Red line' bullshit, that ended up just being more hot air....but we've covered that before, no need to go over it again..if you like Obama, you wouldn't pay attention to it, anyway!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:52 AM

your original argument that it was ok to deal with Assad because "we couldn't possibly know what he was up to"? and "only a few sniper rifles"

Not my original argument at all.
Fake quotes.
You revert to making shit up as you always do Jim.

Britain supplied no rifles or any other weapons.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:53 AM

"you all assured us that Gaddafi had to go and the people who were fighting against him had to be supported to make Libya a free democratic nation."
You are making this up - nobody ever said or believed this - The Arab Spring was always an inevitable leap in the dark that might have brought improvements had it been handled properly -
The west's arms policy meant that both sides were pounding the shit out of each other with British sold/supplied ammunition (interesting Panorama programme at the time filmed inside a captured Libyan Government arms store crammed full of British shells.
The failings of the Arab Spring were due to opportunities lost because of the predatory approach by the West to propping up feudalistic monarchies as 'a safe pair of hands, a regular oil supplier and a good customer, (especially for arms).
This opportunistic policy is now reaping the whirlwind it stirred up.
Ake's alternative appears to be that the Arab people should have bitten the bullet, accepted their position in Gods good order of things and let the world go on its merry way - never going to happen, nor should it.
What is it with you and Hillary Ake - still saying no, is she?
Perhaps you should have persisted with Sarah Palin - far surer thing eh!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:03 AM

"Not my original argument at all."
Wasn't talking to you Keith - little point, you don't listen to what you don't want to hear.
It was Mr Oakhampton who asked if we had a crystal ball when I pointed out Britain was dealing with a torturer and mass murderer (despite the Amnesty report on Syrian crimes against humanity)
Pretty sure it was your "only a few sniper rifles" though)
Another of your gems of wisdom was that if only we could just sell Assad riot control equipment something like "even democratic countries have a right to keep civil order"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:12 AM

Yup - thought I remembered rightly
There you go.
"Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Feb 12 - 09:21 AM
But why do you ONLY criticise Britain?
Not Russia.
Not China.
Not Syria.
Britain is hardly in the same league.
You have clearly been searching vigorously, but all you have come up with is some sniper rifles.
The only other "weapons" supplied were armour plated buses, tear gas and water cannon."
Shortly followed by:
"Even liberal democracies have to deal with riots.
Non-lethal crowd control techniques are preferrable to live rounds.
If only Syria would restrict its security forces to using tear gas and water.
It would not be such a crime to supply such things, compared to what Russia and China supplies."
Please don't tell me I make things up - I dont
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,LynnH
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:16 AM

Wenn Putin is doing an Erdogan- angeblich attacking IS, actually hitting syrian/kurdish rebel groups- we in Europe can look forward to even more refugees. What some people need to understand is that the refugees are principally fleeing the syrian army and the more radical of the local rebel groups,IS having 'also ran' status in this respect.

A while back, a german journalist and former politician was able, with guaranteed safe passage, to look behing the IS scenery for a few weeks. According to him,IS is principally an Iraqi sunni organisation, called into life to fight the perceived discrimination of the iraqi sunnis by the shia majority.In his opinion, the only way to defeat IS is for the iraqi government to give the sunni minority full equality with the shias and so remove the need for sunnis to support IS.

Assad will have to go eventually, but as long as his army, and the PKK, are offering the only effective resistance to IS, the 'the west' will have to bite on the bullet and find a way to work with Assad and the Kurds.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,iain
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:24 AM

I am sure that if the oil reserves of Syria were the equal of those of Saudi the bad press that Assad receives would cease immediately. Is not the Saudi regime the more repressive of the two?

RT headline: 8 ISIS targets hit during 20 combat flights in Syria – Russian military
Daily Mail: Russia was accused of 'pouring gasoline on the fire' of Syria's civil war after it defied the West to drop bombs over the war-torn state.
A wonderful example of the power of the press to mislead. The modern smoke and mirrors of the great game.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:47 AM

The pro-democracy rebels which we supported in Libya and are arming in Syria, disappeared like snow from a dyke after the murder of Gaddafi.......these self same "rebels" are simply an extension of IS in Syria and will require to be removed as an obstruction to the progress of Assad's troops.

Support for these people was the West's biggest mistake .....a carbon copy of the Libyan debacle.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 05:12 AM

Ah Christmas, dragging up the old Homs thread again - just in order to back up the point I made about your inability to read and comprehend the articles you put up as evidence?

This thread:
Jim's understanding is that British planes are striking targets in Syria - Truth: They are NOT

The Homs Thread:
Jim's understanding is that the British (Government) sold arms to Assad's regime - Truth: They most categorically have NOT.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 05:39 AM

"Truth: They most categorically have NOT."
Truth - they licenced sniper rifle ammunition to be sold to Assad shortly before he llet his snipers loose on the men, women and children in homs.
Also truth, they sold armoured cars and riot control gear, including water cannon and tear gas, to him that was used to round up protesters and herd them into his cells and torture chambers - shorly afterward, Amnesty published the numbers of 'disappeared'
Also truth, they sold him chemical that were capable of being turned into chemical weapons - around the time he was found to have been using them on civilians this came to light and Britain was reprimanded for same.
You pair of clowns were given the evidence - you gave seven different and conflicting excuses to deny all of these facts.   
"Ah Christmas, dragging up the old Homs thread again "
Ah me old scullery scrubber - I didn't drag it up - your faithful galley hand, Keith denied something that was on it - he lied.

David Cameron 'knew British pilots were bombing Syria' - as it happened, July 17, 2015
MoD admits UK personnel carry out Syrian bombings, despite Parliament not authorising action, by being embedded with allied nations - latest reaction
David Cameron 'knew British pilots were bombing Syria' - as it happened, July 17, 2015
MoD admits UK personnel carry out Syrian bombings, despite Parliament not authorising action, by being embedded with allied nations - latest reaction
• British military pilots conduct air strikes over Syria for first time
• Three RAF pilots embedded with US and Canadian air forces
• Revelation despite Commons voting against military action in 2013
• Government accused of showing 'insensitivity' and lack of leadership
• Video: Will it make a difference if Britain bombs Isil in Syria?
• Revealed: How many planes RAF has available to fight Isil
From the Daily telegraph - 1st October
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11745689/British-pilots-in-air-strikes-against-Isil-in-Syria-live.html
BEFOREITSNEWS
Next!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 06:22 AM

Jim,
but all you have come up with is some sniper rifles.

You had not even come up with those. That was another country altogether.

Iain,
RT headline: 8 ISIS targets hit during 20 combat flights in Syria – Russian military

Non Russian sources are challenging that IS was targeted.

I heard the "gasoline on the fire" description on BBC yesterday. Not just press and not just Mail.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,iain
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 06:40 AM

Does it really matter what news source said what? I would make the point that no source quoted represents the reality of the situation.
What we are seeing in the Middle East is an ongoing resource war, muddied by religion.
Did not Bush say the American way of life will not be compromised.
If there ain't no oil it will most certainly compromised and a big chunk of the oil imports come from the middle east and Syria would provide excellent pipeline routes.
I think this would be called the 'big picture'.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:04 AM

I do not think you are seeing "the big picture" Iain.
I am no expert either, but I know that pipelines are not a big issue in all this.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:12 AM

"You had not even come up with those. That was another country altogether."
It's all down in black and white - when in a hole, stop digging
Will you never learn (by the way - that's now the 8th excuse for the sale - totally new)
Don't ever tell anybody they make things up - your specialty entirely (and you're note even very good at it)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,iain
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:20 AM

Correct-pipelines are not a major issue but Quatari gas to the Med would be very convenient for western europe. Would not have to rely on those nasty ruskies. De-stabilise and grab the oil is more the game plan.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:44 AM

BEIRUT, Lebanon — In a second day of raids in Syria, Russian warplanes carried out 30 airstrikes on Thursday in the northern province of Idlib that targeted not the Islamic State but a rival insurgent coalition, according to a Lebanon-based news channel that leans toward the Syrian government and is well sourced there.

The channel, Al Mayadeen, also said that Russia was targeting "a known list of terrorist organizations" that it had agreed on with the Syrian Army. If confirmed by Russia, that would be the first official admission that its military is targeting insurgents other than the Islamic State, also known as ISIL or ISIS.

Source: New York Times, oct.1, 2015.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 10:03 AM

It's all down in black and white - when in a hole, stop digging

It is still wrong.
You had not come up with any weapons supplied to Syria by UK.
The thread was about Syria but you kept bringing up other places for your own reasons.

How many more times are you going to try that one?
I bet it is ten or more times in the last 4 years.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 11:29 AM

Jom me little daft geriatric marxist

"That they (British Government Department) licenced sniper rifle ammunition to be sold to Assad shortly before he let his snipers loose on the men, women and children in homs."

1: Granting an export licence to a third party is not selling arms
2: The "sources" you threw up could not state or substantiate that any ammunition had ever been sold or delivered
3: "Shortly before"??? Hardly Jom - IIRC it was over two years before Assad started his campaign of democide against his own people and the amount of ammunition covered by the export licence was tiny.

My guess Jom is that the sale did not go through because someone in Syria woke up to the fact that NATO 7.62mm ammunition would be of F**K All use in Russian 7.62 AK47 type Assault Rifles.

"they sold armoured cars and riot control gear, including water cannon and tear gas, to him that was used to round up protesters and herd them into his cells and torture chambers - shorly afterward, Amnesty published the numbers of 'disappeared'"

In stating "armoured cars" Christmas rather vainly hopes to give the impression of wheeled or tracked vehicles fitted with weapons - not the "armoured" buses that were sold - the rest is just Jom's own wild imaginings - he tends to be rather good at it - the man is barrel bombing his own people Jom with the full aid, agreement and support of his allies (Hezbollah, Russia and China) - were I on the receiving end, don't know about you Jom but I'd rather be targeted by a water canon than a barrel bomb.

"they (A British Company) sold him chemical that were capable of being turned into chemical weapons - around the time he was found to have been using them on civilians this came to light and Britain was reprimanded for same."

1: Just because a "dual purpose" ingredient is supplied does not necessarily or automatically mean it was used to manufacture chemical weapons. In fact the chemical was used to make toothpaste and the factory it was supplied to churned out that product in sufficient quantities to cover what was supplied
2: "Around the time" Jom??? Again your timing is out and records show that the UK along with all other EU countries placed an embargo on sales to Syria as soon as Assad turned on his own people.

"You pair of clowns were given the evidence"
No Christmas you little fruitcake you supplied us with unsubstantiated rumours supplied in a newspaper you normally dismiss as a right wing rag - not evidence at all.

"David Cameron 'knew British pilots were bombing Syria' - as it happened, July 17, 2015"

Ah but Christmas you exploded onto this thread shrieking that British aircraft were carrying out airstrikes against targets in Syria - I was the person who drew your attention to the fallacy of that claim - please do not now try to claim that you meant British personnel all along - that would be dishonest wouldn't it.

"MoD admits UK personnel carry out Syrian bombings, despite Parliament not authorising action, by being embedded with allied nations"

Parliament did not authorise Britain getting directly involved in the conflict in Syria. British personnel serving with allied formations are not covered by this - same thing happened in Vietnam.

"• Revealed: How many planes RAF has available to fight Isil
From the Daily telegraph - 1st October"

I take it Christmas that you do see the difference between:

1: "How many planes RAF has available to fight Isil"

AND

2: "How many planes the RAF has currently flying missions against Isil in Syria"

The RAF does have strike aircraft based to fly anti-IS missions against IS targets in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 01:40 PM

"Jom me little daft geriatric marxist"
Still talking down to people - you won't lear, will you.
Arent you fed up of looking the bollix you are?
"Granting an export licence to a third party is not selling arms"
No - it's knowingly allowing them to go to terrorist regimes - whence the difference
"The "sources" you threw up could not state or substantiate that any ammunition had ever been sold or delivered"
The fact that they
Were granted a licence is the main point - a preparedness of the British Government to arm murderous, torturing scum.
""Shortly before"???"
Doesn't matter when - the Assad regime's record in torture and mass-murder was public knowledge.
Can we shorten this.
Last time - according to you and littler Stanley:
The deal never existed - then it did, but the licence was withdrawn
Then there weren't enough bullets to do any harm.
Then the weapons used by the Syrians weren't of the type to be suitible for the non existent order
Then they were a private order for sporting purposes.
Then granting licenses wasn't selling weapons.
Then the order was too small to have been used on the streets of Homs
Then the British Government would have needed a crystal ball to have known that the Assad regime were interrogating and massacring their opponents.
Then several others
And now - from little Stanley - the order was for another country altogether.
Well - Mr Hardy - I suggest you contact My Laurel, call a site meeting, go back to the drawing board and then draft up a new hymn sheet - and practice, practice, practice.
You have made up every single one of your responses to this disgusting piece of terror trade - even your entertainment value has become boring.
These are nothing but excuses to defend the unacceptable practice of selling instruments of torture and murder to torturers and murderers
It's a waste of time asking why you wade in such sewers and there's no reason to ask which party you vote for.
It really is a waste of time responding to your ignorance and pretended knowledge - I'd stick to trying to improve the fry-ups if I were you.
Pity Monty Python isn't still running - you might have been good for new material
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 01:48 PM

I return without apology, Jim, to your formulation that Israel is "the most dangerous reactionary power in the Middle-East, if not the world", because I am reeling from report in today's paper (it's news again because J Corbyn has mentioned it) that Ali al Nimr is still under sentence of beheading + crucifying in Saudi Arabia for having, at 17 years old, blogged something or other; & R Badawi, still doing his 10 years for blogging, still has 950 of his 1000 lashes to come. For all its manifold shortcomings, I don't think Israel beheads & crucifies many people for things they said as children a year or two back. Do you still stand by that above formulation? If so, then you really do seem to be nothing but a perverted bigot.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:00 PM

Israeli soldiers and airmen have, in fairly careless fashion, killed hundreds of children who have actually done nothing wrong except for being in the wrong place. Not your best gambit there, Michael.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:02 PM

Jom:
When doesn't matter?

Your contention was that ammunition that there is no proof at all that it ever was sold or delivered was used by Syrian Army snipers to kill people in Homs. Now the fact that the latest that the ammunition could ever have possibly been delivered preceded the killings in Homs by about two years is definitely significant - there again you probably are completely unaware that ammunition has a shelf life. Completely passed over your head at about 40,000 ft that the ammunition covered by the licence would have been of no use whatsoever to the Syrian Army who use Russian and Chinese weapons.

The weapons being used by Assad to murder his own people are being supplied by Russia, they have been exporting by the ship-load ever since the conflict began - not a squeak of protest condemning them about it from you - just weasel words about condemning all arms sales yet strangely enough you only seem to reserve your venom for Britain.

Stick to talking about traditional folk music you do seem to know something about that. Never had any complaints about my fry-ups on the rare occasions that I have ever cooked them.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:05 PM

MGM, I firmly believe that his beliefs regarding Israel are the manifestation of a mental illness and he is more deserving of pity than scorn.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:32 PM

Israeli soldiers and airmen have, in fairly careless fashion, killed hundreds of children who have actually done nothing wrong except for being in the wrong place.

Not deliberately.
Not even carelessly.
So not comparable.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:00 PM

I don't really see what Israel has to do with this thread.

Are there any alternatives available after the failure of the US bombing campaign?
We obviously need ground troops, but the Western powers will never get involved as they did in Iraq. There must be cooperation between air power and President Assad's Army.....who but the Russians can provide it/

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:40 PM

Not deliberately.
Yes deliberately
Last year, residents of a hospital besieged by Israeli troops reported to their commander that the patients were in no fit state to be moved.
He ordered them to remain where they were and the following morning opened fire on the hospital - one of several incidents brought up (along with links) on this forum at the time.
Anti-personnel flechette weapons were photographed after having been used in built up areas - also linked (and denied, as it is about to be now)
As the fighting died down, Israeli troops reported that numbers of their forces had formed themselves into death squads, taking out Gazan civilians who had been rendered homeless by the fighting - there has never been a report of any action having been taken against any of those killers.
The deliberate targeting of hospitals, clinics and schools was a regular occurrence throughout the invasion.
One -two-three.......
"All lies invented the terrorists (despite the huge number of civilian - particularly women and children - casualties)
Terry-Terry-Terry......!
You've blown it - your clownish behaviour must have made it difficult for even you to take yourself seriously.
Aren't you even going to try to deny your list of claims and contradictions? - Whoops, 'course you're not - they're all there for reference.
Stick to the pots and pans - a good scourer usually gets off the most resistant grease.
"I don't think Israel beheads & crucifies many people for things they said as children a year or two back."
No but they have been ethnically cleansing, evicting for settlement, killing, humiliating, attempting to starve into submission, showering with chemical weapons, chemically defoliating lands, facilitating massacres of refugees.... and lots, lots more for an awfully long time in order to create a monotheist state -
And best of all - they are nuclear facilitated (as well as having god on their side if all else fails) - which makes them very, very,very, very very bad boys, as things stand at they present time.
Just a reminder - your glorious leader, 'Dave the Rave' attended a funeral not so long ago, to pay respects to a deceased King, just out of earshot (I am sure) of the sound of a journalist in the process of receiving a thousand lashes ordered by said deceased's heir.
Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent blokes (excuse the pun)
One no better than the other, than the other, than the other.... ad infinitum.
"I firmly believe that his beliefs...."
Brucie - I firmly believe that your permanent inability to admit to your own identity has led to a serious dose of schizophrenia.
And the cock crew thrice!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 03:45 PM

"crowed" actually............:0(

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:09 PM

Not your most convincing rejoinder either, Steve! Those children were not judicially executed in primitive fashion. Your ref to 'the wrong place' suggests that, at least in some instances, they were probably being used as human shields by the charming among their own side who were so bravely sheltering among them as they fired their missiles.

Doesn't it?

Hardly comparable, I would think, to judicial public decapitation & humiliation of the corpse for something done as a juvenile.

But I return to my 'two blacks' formulation; especially as the incipient fate of the unfortunate Ali-al-Nimr seems to me of an incomparably blacker blackness than the misfortunes of those who, for whatever reason, found themselves in the line of fire in the course of battle. Especially as Jim still seems to regard it as 'one no better than the other' while inconsistently failing to withdraw his assertion that one is "the most dangerous reactionary power in the Middle-East, if not the world". How can it be, when the others, even Jim admits, are 'as bad as...'

Oh, what's the use!

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:26 PM

... and Jim still hasn't produced any examples of this "schoolyard name-calling" that he purports constantly to find in my posts. I should honestly be interested to know what I have written that he feels can accurately be so described. But, as that would involve his doing a modicum of research into recent posts, I daresay we might be treated to yet another of his "can't be arsed" copouts.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:40 PM

Well, er, dead is dead, Michael, and, arguably, or maybe not arguably, an execution, no matter how brutal, is quicker and cleaner then getting your legs blown off or your body riddled with shrapnel. The human shield argument doesn't help the kids either. But we do know who fired the missiles is what I was saying.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 05:14 PM

You make very valid points, Steve. I do not defend Israel's conduct, which I find frequently insufferable, and which constitutes, literally, the very greatest disappointment of my entire life, a complete negation of all my youthful hopes. All v well for Jim to denounce this as lipservice, to which I can only reply that I know it isn't, it's entirely sincere and from the heart, and his persistence in giving me the lie in the matter makes not an iota of difference to me.

But I feel, Steve, that your introduction of this particular motif into the discussion is incongruous. Not saying you are wrong; just that I feel the deaths of those unhappy children are part of a different discourse from the one which this thread was following. No reason not to introduce another issue; but I can't feel it was either helpful or enlightening here. Their deaths, as Keith said, were just not comparable to that of Ali, so I can't quite see what you thought introducing them as a topic would contribute. Just saying "well, dead is dead" doesn't make your motivations or thought processes any clearer or more comprehensible - to me, in any event..

Regards ≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 05:41 PM

"The closest ISIS location to Kafranbel is at least 100 kilometers away. Those ruins were protected by Ahrar al-Sham brigades and Kafranbel residents."

How Russia bombed a UN Heritage Site in Syria

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 05:51 PM

In the words of Christy, everyone in the graveyard votes the same. A killed child is a horrible waste. Unconscionable. I find it hard to rank the killing of children in any sort of order of merit.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 06:41 PM

So, no vehemence, bile or sheer unadulterated hatred to spare for the Russian slaughter of innocents civilians, including children, in Syria today? Thought not, as the saying goes.....no Jews, no news.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:05 PM

I ask again, are there any alternatives which could have been used to ensure the defeat of IS, before Russia was invited to take part?

The bombing campaign without coordination with troop movements failed miserably, we seem to be afraid to employ troops, or assist Assad's fight against terrorism, so why are we complaining when Putin steps up to the plate.

The removal of Assad and his army will guarantee another Libya....what are the alternatives.?

Cant we get away from the Israeli question for once?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:07 PM

" and Jim still hasn't produced any examples of this "schoolyard name-calling" that he purports constantly to find in my posts. "
Oh come on mike - you're not really going to deny that you don't and have me slip through back threads.
You really shouls have taken the avccination before you sat next to Keith
You haven't responded to any of my points - not worth the bother - eh?
Ethnic Cleansioing, Apartheid State, massacre of refugees, slaughter of civilians.... all unworthy of comment
Now - if it was olive trees....!!!
What's the use, indeed!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 07:12 PM

Ethnic Cleansioing, Apartheid State, massacre of refugees, slaughter of civilians.

All lies and pure antisemitic tropes......you really are a sick puppy!

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 08:25 PM

"All lies and pure antisemitic tropes"
So the Jews and not the Israelis are responsible for Israel's DOCUMENTED war crimes - is that really what you are saying ?
All these incidents have been accepted and discussed in depth by Jews from Israel and elsewher, including Holocaust survivors, Jews for Justice, Rabbis for Justice, Jewish supporters of the People of Palestine, Einstein - all Antisemitic, no doubt.
A reminder
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 09:24 PM

Your obsessive attempt at demonizing Israel with egregious and slanderous lies is blatantly antisemitic behaviour. You might not think so but it is.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 03:41 AM

Your blaming The Jews for Israel's documented and accepted (even by many Jews) atrocities is Antisemitic - You might not think so but it.
is.
It is typical of all those who defend those atrocities with nothing but personal (and in your case anonymous) abuse, including the tiny handful on this forum, and the fact that none of you are prepared to offer a half decent defence of Israel is an indication that you have no defence for them.
You personally (Bruce) have attacked one of the Jewish people's great writers as being "Anitisemitic", and apparently felt such shame in having done so that, shortly after went incognito - I fully understand why you did so - I probably would have probably felt the same.
This from October 2nd's edition of Haaretz (to which I subscribe on line)
"Hundreds of Holocaust survivors and descendants of survivors have signed a letter, published as an advertisement in Saturday's New York Times, condemning "the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza" and calling for a complete boycott of Israel.
According to the letter, the condemnation was prompted by an advertisement written by Elie Wiesel and published in major news outlets worldwide, accusing Hamas of "child sacrifice" and comparing the group to the Nazis.
The letter, signed by 327 Jewish Holocaust survivors and descendants of survivors and sponsored by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, accuses Wiesel of "abuse of history" in order to justify Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip:
"…we are disgusted and outraged by Elie Wiesel's abuse of our history in these pages to justify the unjustifiable: Israel's wholesale effort to destroy Gaza and the murder of more than 2,000 Palestinians, including many hundreds of children. Nothing can justify bombing UN shelters, homes, hospitals and universities. Nothing can justify depriving people of electricity and water."
The letter also blames the United States of aiding Israel in its Gaza operation, and the West in general of protecting Israel from condemnation."
The present regime in Israel is well aware of the extremism of its own behaviour and is now beginning to interfere with the rights of the Israeli people themselves.
Haaretz also reported last year that, despite father of Israel, David Ben Gurion's archived papers are now legally in the public domain, many have been returned to secrecy and are no longer accessible - a scandal broke out in 2015 when one of them which slipped the net was published.
The present regime is even betraying the ideals of those who dedicated, risked and even gave their lives to create the State of Israel.
These are the people you are defending with your insults and your dishonesty.
Today's Israel is not the one that was fought for and it is certainly not the one that my family and their associates and comrades-in-arms supported and welcomed.
I don't expect in the least that any of your rather disturbing trio will respond in any way honestly and decently to any of this and will continue your tirade - an indication of your own 'great respect' for the Jewish People and their history.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 04:04 AM

Israel's DOCUMENTED war crimes
None actually.
Lots in Syria all the time, but no Jews there.

Russia bombs not IS but those moderate rebel groups supported by the West.
More Iranian and Hezbollah fighters enter Syria to fight for Assad.
All Shias together.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 04:50 AM

Of course everybody must take Jom's definition of "well documented" into account. To him it means vast cut'n'pastes of poorly written, ill-informed, at times completely unresearched newspaper articles, lacking any substantive evidence, that appear as mushrooms (here today gone tomorrow) that are never followed up on. Quote anything from the same paper that counters any of Jom's many intolerant and bigoted viewpoints and all of a sudden his formed fount of all knowledge becomes a biased ring wing rag.

On numerous occasions it has been clearly demonstrated that he has not even bothered to read through and thoroughly understand the articles he shoves forward as "documented evidence" and all he can witter on about once he has run out of road is some hair brained fiction involving "pots and pans" - C'mon Jom ages since you mentioned Balham.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 05:16 AM

"None actually."
All documented Keith otherwise Israel would never have needed protection from prosecution by US vetoes.
Israel's behaviour is well documented, and always has been, as far back as Jewish historian Max Morris (all accessible until the present regime decide to send it to join the Ben-Gurion Mss)
It is an indication of deep contempt for the Holocaust survivor signatories that you should dismiss what they have to say the way you have - not in the least surprising though.
Mornin' Ollie
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 05:59 AM

It is an interesting fact that President Assad as the President of Syria requested Russian help. America and her allies have no legal mandate to carry out operations in Syria. Following due process and law gives rise to somewhat incongruous situations.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 06:08 AM

All documented Keith

By who?
Not by the International Criminal Court.
No Western government holds Israel to be guilty of war crimes.
It is just propaganda from enemies of Israel, which people like you suck up without question.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 07:09 AM

"Not by the International Criminal Court."
The US has kept Israel clear of the International Criminal Court with its Veto and Isreal is still campaigning for its abolition - leaving the world without a means of trying war criminals and human rights abusers.
And still no response to 'the Holocaust Survivors' petition - not worth the bother eh?
As with your troll pal - CHECKMATE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:12 AM

The ICC recognises no vetoes.
No Western government accuses Israel of war crimes.
None are "documented."
Only accusations.

Any views on this week's events in Syria Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 10:51 AM

And still no response to 'the Holocaust Survivors' petition

BBC.
"The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network placed the statement as an advertisement in the New York Times.
It was in response to an advertisement by Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel which compared the Palestinian militant movement Hamas to the Nazis."

"The IJAN, founded in 2008, is a small left-wing organisation which is highly critical of Israel."

"The advertisement in the New York Times is signed by 40 Holocaust survivors "

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 11:04 AM

Irwin Graulich,

"But studying the ad carefully tells a rather different story. First of all, very few of those 327 individuals actually experienced Nazi atrocities personally. My count was about 14 people. The other 26 survivors were either very young or babies, which is not to minimize an involvement of some kind. However, the 287 other so called "survivors" only had a secondary experience with the Holocaust through parents, grandparents, or other relatives (I too am a descendant of Holocaust survivors). Yet these self-proclaimed morality experts jumped on the anti-Semitic bandwagon with all the people who have been terrorizing Jews and Israel since 1948."

"The Jewish Left is even worse; and most of those 327 so called "Jewish" individuals, many of whom do not even practice Judaism, are hard Left. If we understand the Stockholm Syndrome, where kidnapped victims began to identify with and support their kidnappers on political issues, we can begin to understand the "Israel-Palestinian Syndrome," where some Jews like J Street, begin to identify with their enemies' issues and arguments, even though those issues include the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews worldwide.

The International Jewish anti-Zionist Network's charge of a "massacre in Gaza" is an obscenity. Comparisons to the Holocaust actually trivialize the Holocaust. How can they have the audacity to compare a war that Hamas began and has approximately 2,000 casualties, to the burning, gassing, and torturing of 6 million Jews. The real problem is that these Leftist Jews are mostly pacifists who hate war, because part of the reality of war is that civilians will also get killed – not just the military. However, someone should tell each one of these 327 Jews that if not for war and a lot of German babies dying in Dresden and Berlin, they would not be here today. Unfortunately war is sometimes the only answer, which is an important lesson of the Holocaust."

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 11:22 AM

Fanatic extremists come in many guises as demonstrated by Mudcat's own.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 03:20 PM

"Irwin Graulich,"
You have obviously dredged the net to find support for the Israeli regime and all you have come up with is a right wing activist Zionist supporter of that regime who is prepared to denigrate Holocaust survivors and their families in order to excuse Israeli right-wing excesses - a propagandist mouthpiece for the regime – one of their very own - what else is he going to say - that's his job.
It's no different than your previous arguments that the Israeli regime is innocent becaus it says it didn't do it
The Holocaust came about in order to create an ethnically and culturally "pure" Germany by exterminating those who did not measure up to those aims - result - six million dead Jews and countless millions of others who also didn't measure up, physically, mentally racially, culturally or politically..
The right in Israel (not the Jews as a whole) have embarked on a course of creating a culturally pure State by driving out the orignal occupants and replacing them with a pure (still referred to as) "chosen people" - that is only a step down from what happened in Germany – according to the ex-Mossad bosses.
As part of their crusade, the right were prepared to arm the White South Africans, who were embarking on a similar course there with the black, indigenous population, with nuclear weapons - an unholy extreme right wing Nuclear alliance.
They only failed when it was pointed out that when the white regime fell, as it was bound to, the arms would be left in the hands of the indigenous population - couldn't have that happen.
You people use "left wing" as an insult yet is heroic left wing humanitarians like Mordechai Vanunu who informed the world what the extreme right was doing with nuclear weapons and it was leftish leaning journalism like Haaretz who has kept the Israeli people informed in their efforts to ethnically cleanse the Bedouins, introduce Apartheid on the transport systems, , the spread of settlements, of the daily persecution and humiliation of imposed on the Arabs living in Israel, of the atrocities carried out during the Gazan bloodbaths of the regimes censorship of the writings of the Father of the Israel State, David Ben Gurion ...
The right you support has turned Isreal into the terrorist state that it has become - the left has provided the opposition and the humanity to at the very least, slow them dow in their tracks.
Call me a "leftie" any time you want.
Now go and find another extremist Zionist right winger to back up the other one you have just dredged up.
Sheesh - what a bunch!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,#
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 03:35 PM

Interesting how a thread about the NWO has turned into the usual con-rants and pro-rants about Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 04:53 AM

a right wing activist Zionist supporter of that regime who is prepared to denigrate Holocaust survivors and their families

Just balance.
You posted the views of some left wing anti Israel holocaust survivors prepared to denigrate Israelis.
The one I quoted is also as much a "holocaust survivor" as most of yours.

Re Syria.
Russia is hitting all the anti-Assad groups, and building its already large force of "boots on the ground" who may march any time.

The Shia axis of Assad, Iran and Hezbollah are pouring troops in.
The West is becoming irrelevant.

The anti-Assad Sunni majority in Syria feel abandoned and betrayed, and with good reason.

I blame the left who thwarted Obama and Cameron two years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 04:57 AM

I do not know why the rest of us bother commenting on this thread. It has been hijacked by two idiots.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 05:41 AM

"It has been hijacked by two idiots."
Yes it has - once again - keep saying it won't happen again, but it does
Apologies
Won't happen again (but it probably will)
Apologies in advance
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 05:50 AM

However:-
         The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 05:50 AM

Incidentally
The original op referred to a "Judeo/Christian nation" - Israel is as much a part of these discussions and the Middle Eastern problems as is Assad and Syria
Israel is bound to enter into all these discussions and the problem (for me) are those tiny few who take time out to appease war criminals of any shape or form.   
Sort of like "Don't mention the war".
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 08:40 AM

those tiny few who take time out to appease war criminals

No one here does that.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 08:41 AM

The US should go into Ukraine to prop up their government against the rebels as Putin has done in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 09:33 AM

GUEST - 02 Oct 15 - 05:59 AM

Assad asked for Russian help so have a legal mandate.

The internationally recognised government and leaders of Afghanistan asked for help in their civil war against the Taleban in September 2001 thereby making the US intervention in Afghanistan legal.

The internationally recognised government and leaders of Afghanistan asked for the help of the UN in the reconstruction of their country in December 2001 thereby making the intervention by ISAF perfectly legal.

When ISIL struck in Anbar Province of Iraq the elected and internationally recognised government of Iraq request the help of their allies to combat the ISIL threat thereby making intervention by those allies perfectly legal. ISIL have declared the area they see as forming "THEIR" Caliphate and the Iraqi and Syrian forces along with their allies have a perfectly legal right to attack ISIL wherever and whenever they can be encountered.

The big difference is that the USA and their allies are fighting ISIL - The Russians and their allies are fighting to keep Assad in place. One benefits the people of Syria the other does not.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 09:52 AM

Ukraine President Poroshenko has also requested help from the US but Obama has so far failed to act.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 12:25 PM

Teribus, the Us campaign against IS has been completely ineffective, because there are no "boots on the ground"

Putin knows, that to defeat IS he has to use Assad's army, that is why he is attacking the anti -Assad rebels, they are at the moment performing as a buffer between the Syrian Army and IS.

This is war, bad things happen civilians get hurt and killed, the best thing is to get the mess sorted out Quickly and Putin seems to be the only guy fit to do the job.

If we liquidate Assad, his army and his civilians{he retains a lot of support), the "rebels" will immediately join the fundamentalists or one of the tribal militias.

I remember you saying that IS should be dealt with by opening a free fire zone.....that would mean even more civilian casualties.

Another point, in tribal politics, are there any real civilians, other than very small children?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 12:48 PM

"I remember you saying that IS should be dealt with by opening a free fire zone.....that would mean even more civilian casualties."

Assad has been attacking civilian targets from Day One, entirely with weapons supplied to him by the Russians. Absolutely no point at all in deploying US troops this mess has to be sorted out by the "locals". Even Putin is not stupid enough to put Russian boots on the ground apart from the specialist teams of advisers (the US have done the same in Iraq). In Iraq boots on the ground are the Iraqi Army which is getting better and Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Shia Militias and the Kurds.

Turkey got hit and shouted to the world that they were going to crack down on IS then promptly used their airforce to hit Kurdish positions.

Russia shouted to the world that they were going to hit IS then promptly struck at any target but IS in their drive to help Assad. Now Russia's approach will be basically the old Soviet style if it is civilian casualties that you are concerned with the Russian tactics will massacre them in their thousands. If Russia starts hitting Kurdish positions I sincerely hope that US Coalition aircraft start knocking Russian planes out of the sky.

Obama is not daft enough to pour fuel on the fire - Putin basically couldn't give a F**K. And sorry Ake Putin is not going to sort anything out it can only get worse.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 12:53 PM

"other than very small children?
Assad's snipers were betting packets of cigarettes to any of their number who managed to achieve a 'two with one bullet' on the streets of Homs - ie- a mother carrying a babe-in-arms.
These appear to be the people you are suggesting should be supported.
Strange 'socialism' indeed!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 01:22 PM

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/317521-russia-us-confrontation-syria-islamic/

The above is a very interesting view. Where is the truth?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 01:35 PM

"Where is the truth?"

Definitely not at Putin's propaganda organ RT.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 02:01 PM

I wish I could believe the content of the western mainstream media. If I could I would be a rabid supporter of the tooth fairy as well.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 02:13 PM

Ha, ha....yes all mainstream western media is in the hands of governments. Have you tried a tin foil hat?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Oct 15 - 06:07 PM

Teribus strangely you don't seem to get the point of my last post.

To allow Assad's troops to move forward to engage IS fighters hopefully weakened by Russian air strikes, the anti Assad terrorist have to be defeated.

What is the point of striking against IS positions if there is no ground attack to follow up? .....That is what the US was doing and it failed miserably.
Why would President Putin wish to defend IS. Russia is in grave danger from Islamic fundamentalism

I would be interested to hear YOUR views on how these fundamentalist maniacs are to be stopped.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 05:17 AM

"Ha, ha....yes all mainstream western media is in the hands of governments. Have you tried a tin foil hat?"

A bit of an extreme response and indicative of how successful the brainwashing has been.
I would recommend Fox, CNN, RT, Al Jazeera, the Times and any other sources. The truth is somewhere in amongst the respective garbage but to take one source in isolation as being the absolute font of truth would be extremely reckless. Safer to think and draw your own conclusions.
    I also draw your attention to the following quote that is very apt for our times:

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
― Benjamin Franklin

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 06:06 AM

1: "To allow Assad's troops to move forward to engage IS fighters hopefully weakened by Russian air strikes, the anti Assad terrorist have to be defeated."

The whole thing started in Syria due to Assad failing to listen to the calls within his country by Syrians for reform. Assad's response to what he saw as challenges to his Ba'athist Party's rule was exactly the same as his late father's - violent and bloody repression. When will the wishes of the Syrian people be considered if Assad is given leave to destroy them before his forces and the Russians get round to taking on a movement (ISIL) formed inside Syria by former Ba'athist supporters and insurgents who fled from western Iraq to Syria and were welcomed in in 2007?

2: "What is the point of striking against IS positions if there is no ground attack to follow up?" .....That is what the US was doing and it failed miserably.

It robs them of the opportunity to use heavy weapons and puts them on a level footing with the people they are trying to wipe out. It forces them to curb their activities and be far more circumspect in the scale of their operations. Has the intervention of US air support been such a failure? I don't think so. In Iraq no more helpless refugees from minority groups huddled on mountain tops being fired upon by IS artillery pieces. The town of Kobane in Syria no longer being blown to bits by IS in their attempt to kill the Kurdish population. The Kurds in Iraq are pushing IS back. Towns in Iraq have been liberated from IS control, Mosul is still under siege with IS very much on the back foot - No IS boasting about capturing Baghdad has been heard now for months.


3: "Why would President Putin wish to defend IS. Russia is in grave danger from Islamic fundamentalism."

Who said Putin wished to defend IS? I most certainly did not. What I did say was that Putin sees it in Russia's best interest to keep Assad in place - Putin could not care less about the Syrian people. The Islamic fundamentalism that "threatens" Putin's Russia is nothing new and it is entirely "home grown" there are no vast numbers of foreign jihadis trekking across borders into Russia to threaten the peace, since 1990 they have been in place in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan, nursing religiously fueled grievances dating back to the time of Stalin.

Oh and by the way Ake Putin's plan for Syria as far as defeating the "terrorists" go is identical to those of the USA's plans for defeating "terrorists" in Iraq and in Syria, as clearly demonstrated as follows:

Russia in Syria:
(a) Russian supplied arms
(b) Russian "special advisors"
(c) Russian air power
(d) Use of local proxies to provide the "boots on the ground" - Hezbollah, Syrian Army, Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

USA in Iraq:
(a) US supplied arms
(b) US "special advisors"
(c) US air power
(d) Use of local proxies to provide the "boots on the ground" - Shia Militias, Iraqi Army, Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Kurdish Peshmerga forces.

My views?

In general realise and recognise that Islamic fundamentalism did not just spring up in response to the west's reaction to 9/11 or from the invasion of Iraq in 2003 - Islamic fundamentalist terror organisations have been attacking the "west" since 1970.

There will be no peace possible in Syria until Assad has been removed from power - he has killed far too many of his own people for them ever to forgive him or his repressive ruling Alawite faction.

The so-called "terrorist" groups and the civilian populations that support them currently being targeted by Russian aircraft pose no threat to anyone other than Assad - they are fighting IS and have been constantly under attack by both IS and Assad yet neither IS or Assad seem capable of defeating them. The "big bad west" should therefore do much more to help those groups inside Syria in much the same way as the Mujahideen were helped in Afghanistan when they were fighting the Russians and Najibullah's PDPA regime.

In Iraq it has taken time and will take yet more time to make good the damage done to Iraq's armed forces during the stewardship of Nouri al-Maliki. That is work in progress, but even at this point IS successes in Iraq have been reversed and they are now on the defensive. Like most complex problems it takes time - there are no "instant" fixes or "silver bullets".

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 06:32 AM

Thanks for that measured post MrT, and I agree with more of it than you would suppose.....but we must be realistic, all commentators including some in the American govt agree that the bombing campaign has been an abject failure....and I certainly don't blame Islamic terrorism on the "big bad West".   We did of course aid its development by our ill considered interventions in Iraq and Libya.

Islamic Fundamentalism as been bubbling away for years and at one time the lid was kept on the cauldron by "our despots"
As "our despots" began to look East, we decided that "boots on the ground" would be the best option.....with disastrous results.

Our best option is to assist in the defeat of IS by joint action with Russia as Putin is the only person who is politically capable of using the Syrian Army as a ground force

The Syrian people can either accept or reject President Assad after the major danger to the world is contained.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 07:32 AM

To allow Assad's troops to move forward to engage IS fighters hopefully weakened by Russian air strikes, the anti Assad terrorist have to be defeated.

The deployment of the Russian forces in Syria indicates beyond doubt that the main concern of the Russians is to defend Assad against the rebels. The proclamations against Islamic State are a feint to add moral authority to the defence of the dictator.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 07:47 AM

Guest, look at Syria, how many Syrians do you think find themselves in a "better place" now than under the Col?

If Assad and the legitimate government of Syria and his army are allowed to be butchered in the same manner, in all probability we shall see the same conclusion.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 08:23 AM

If Assad is allowed to be returned to power, he will have no hesitation to returning to the systematic torture and mass murder - why wouldn't he, having been granted a reprieve and total immunity for his crimes.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 09:37 AM

I would recommend Fox,

Yeah, right.

Abandon truth, all ye who enter here.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 12:06 PM

"The Syrian people can either accept or reject President Assad after the major danger to the world is contained."

Won't be an issue, by the time those 2 freedom fighters,Putin and Assad, finish with the Syrian people there won't be enough of them left to accept or reject your favorite butcher.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 01:05 PM

"The Syrian people can either accept or reject President Assad"
The Assad family have spent at least two decades proving that this is exactly what they can't do - this is what this was all about in the first place.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 04:25 AM

This time Jim, the West is with you in wanting Assad gone, and Russia and Iran against you, attacking the Free Syria Army and other rebel Syrian groups who are supported by the West.
That must be a strange feeling.
Even Israel and Hezbollah are on the wrong sides for you.
Will you share your feelings with us?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 04:38 AM

"This time Jim, the West is with you in wanting Assad gone"
Pity it didn't happen while he was slaughtering the Syrian people (and no - the left certainly did not prevent them doing so)
It has now become a matter of self-interest for the West that he be removed - perhaps one day that will include the despots of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain and we will stop selling them the means of oppression and honouring their leaders while they are handing out their 1,000 lashes.
Share their feelings - what - of me first?
No I will not.
These people need to be dealt with because they are mobsters, not because they are embarrassing boat-rockers.
Now that would be worth supporting
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 04:46 AM

"mobsters,"
Monters - feckin' keyboard
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 09:39 AM

"Pity it didn't happen while he was slaughtering the Syrian people"

No "while he was" about it Jim, as far as I am aware, Assad along with his trusted allies, Hezbollah, Iran and Putin continue to slaughter Syrians.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 10:00 AM

Russia and China vetoed any action against him.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 10:43 AM

"Russia and China vetoed any action against him."
And if Syria had had any oil worth mentioning that veto wouldn'd have been worth the paper it was printed on - as shown by the present military action taking place.
Assad could have been stopped at the time you were shedding your crocodile tears for the people of Homs - the West wasn't interested then.
Defectors from the Syrian Regime were begging that Britain played on its influence (British wife, masses of investment in London) by bringing diplomatic pressure on Assad - nothing was done and his brother-in-law gofer came in an out of London as easily if it were Harrods front door.
You described stopping Assad with military force as "fascism" and the pair of you defended the sales of ammunition, anti-personnel equipment ad chemicals as acceptable - even suggesting that he might be provided with more.   
The Assad family had a track record of illegal imprisonment, torture and mass-murder stretching back a couple of decades, yet they remained Britain's valued friends and allies.
Whatever the outcome of all this, Britain and the West have to clean up their act in regard to dealing with military regimes - so far it has managed to fuel the rise of Isis and create a world crisis.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 11:54 AM

so far it has managed to fuel the rise of Isis

ISIS is just one of many manifestations of militant Islam, whose agenda is the imposition of governance based on Koranic principles. It actually arose in the 1920's with the establishment of the Ikhwan al-Muslimun or Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt by Hassan al-Banna. Blaming it's rise on actions of the west is specious at best but it is what those with their own agenda are fond of doing.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 12:30 PM

Your first sentence is is blatantly untrue, troll.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 12:35 PM

You are wrong - educate yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 12:59 PM

"educate yourself."
Why not you educate us
ORIGINS OF ISIS
Now you show us yours
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 01:32 PM

No matter whether they choose to call themselves ISIS, Al-Quaeda, Taliban, etc. they are all Islamist movements which began with the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Makings of a Movement

In time, the Islamist vision crystallized. They not only rejected the influence of the West, they rejected the legitimacy of their own governments in the Arabic world, which they saw as subservient to the West. Thus, the overthrow of these regimes became an important part of the Islamist agenda.

The biggest push for this agenda came in 1928, with the founding of the Ikhwan al-Muslimun or Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. This organization became the cornerstone for most of today's Islamist movements, advocating Islamic beliefs and values as expressed by the common Egyptian. The organization, founded by Hassan al-Banna (1906-1949), rejected western rule and England's secular influence over Egypt. Without religious governance, al-Banna believed the Muslim world would be "a society of cultural mongrels and spiritual half-castes."

At War With Whom?
A short history of radical Islam

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 01:45 PM

ISIS is just one of many manifestations of militant Islam

ISIS is just one of the results of years of fuck-ups in the Middle East by U.S. and western foreign policy in general.

You got problems? Take 'em up with George Dumbya Bush, Paul Wolfowitz & Dick Cheney.

Now piss off.

And do keep your eyes open for clear and present danger of Militant Christianity.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 01:50 PM

Both of your links lead to Middle East Forum", an organization set up to protect American rights in The Middle East.
It is a pro-Israeli, Islamophobic organisation which seeks to undermine the position of lawful Muslims in the Middle East.
Its policy is:
"The Middle East Forum promotes American interests in the Middle East and protects Western values from Middle Eastern threats.
The Forum sees the region — with its profusion of dictatorships, radical ideologies, existential conflicts, border disagreements, corruption, political violence, and weapons of mass destruction — as a major source of problems for the United States. Accordingly, we urge bold measures to protect Americans and their allies.
In the Middle East, we focus on ways to defeat radical Islam; work for Palestinian acceptance of Israel; develop strategies to contain Iran; and deal with the great advances of anarchy.
At home, the Forum emphasizes the danger of lawful Islamism; protects the freedoms of anti-Islamist authors, activists, and publishers; and works to improve Middle East studies."
None of this in any way alters the fact that Isis rose from the present conflicts in The Middle East and has SFA to do with traditional Muslimism
Try again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 01:51 PM

Now piss off.

You piss off.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 01:55 PM

So, Carroll, you don't dispute anything I quoted just attack the source.

Ho, hum.

PS I won't mention the fact that you source is a former reporter with Fox news, GregF's favorite news source. :)

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 02:54 PM

"!So, Carroll, you don't dispute anything I quoted just attack the source."
Your links are to opinions - not facts.
Those opinions come from a pro-Israeli, Islamophobic publication dedicated to undermining Muslims settled in the United States and stating openly it's objective is to further the interests of the U.S. in the Middle East -
If I wanted to underline the fact that Isis is the product of the West pursuing a self-interest policy in the Middle East, I could have chosen no better example.
As it was, you did the job for me - many thanks.
Why on earth should I bother my arse disputing unqualified opinions from an Islamophobic publication.
Sorry Bruce - no cigar - again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 06:11 PM

Sorry but the parts I quoted are historical fact.....live with it.

Here's some more facts from the link:

"The Muslim Brotherhood found further inspiration in the 1950s and 1960s from Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), a radical exegete who provided Koranic justifications for attacking secular Arab leaders that called themselves believers, but who did not run their governments according to the shari'a or Islamic law. In his most famous book, Milestones, he advocated jihad, or holy war, as a means to shake off the shackles of repressive secular regimes.

    "This movement . . . harnesses material power and invokes jihad for eliminating the Jahili [ignorant] order and its supporting authority, for they interfere with and prevent the efforts to reform the beliefs and ideas of humanity at large, and by dint of its resources and aberrant methods forces them to obey it and makes them bow before human lords instead of the Almighty Lord... The very purpose of this movement is to set human beings free from the yoke of human enslavement and make them serve the One and Only God."

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Oct 15 - 06:59 PM

Facts? Those are not facts. They are tendentious Daily Mailisms. I find it odd that you can so boldly make a fool of yourself by demonstrating that you can't tell the difference. At least you don't need us to do it.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 03:37 AM

Not facts? Do you deny the existence of the Muslim Brotherhood? Do you deny that the date of their founding predates by decades the start of the Second World War? Do you deny their clearly stated aims?

"The Brotherhood's stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for ... ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state."[12] Its mottos include "Believers are but Brothers", "Islam is the Solution", and "Allah is our objective; the Qur'an is the Constitution; the Prophet is our leader; jihad is our way; death for the sake of Allah is our wish. [13][14][15]"

[12] - Kull, Steven (2011). Feeling Betrayed: The Roots of Muslim Anger at America. Brookings Institution Press. p. 167.
[13] - Helbawy, K., (2009) The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt: Historical Evolution and Future Prospects, p.65
[14] - Ikwanonline, 2013
[15] - Yusuf, Khalil (19 December 2013). "Does the Muslim Brotherhood still have a role to play in Egypt's revolutionary politics?"

Don't see the Daily Mail featured or mentioned there once Mr Shaw.

What GUEST has provided you with ARE FACTS - Check them for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 04:12 AM

Jim,
You described stopping Assad with military force as "fascism"

Lie, as was your other claims against me and others.

Steve,
Your first sentence is is blatantly untrue, troll.

"ISIS is just one of many manifestations of militant Islam, whose agenda is the imposition of governance based on Koranic principles."

In what way is that untrue Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 04:28 AM

Checked - over and over again - Muslimism extremism is no more a part of being a Muslim than is extremism a part of being part of any other religion
Guest (Bearded Bruce) has sought to defend Israeli behaviour by claiming that to criticise Israel is to be Antisemitic, making him a bit of an extremist.
Here, he is using the writings of a pro- Israeli activist whose stated aim is to defend the United States' interests in the Middle East.
The West's behaviour towards the Middle East is the cause of the rise of Isis.
The Daily Mail and the right wing press in general have adopted the position of distancing Britain and the U.S. from any blame for what is now taking place - more or less your own position with your convoluted and contradictory arguments which change by the minute.
Every religion has its nutters - they shoot up schools, bomb family planning clinics, persecute pregnant women, gays......
They are nutters.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 04:58 AM

Teribus, you of all people should be able to tell neutrally-presented facts from statements that contain information presented in a tendentious way. That should make you suspicious. If it doesn't, you've been reading too manly tabloids. That is exactly their style. What you presented, on the other hand, are facts, sort of. But what you omitted from your copy and paste was the next bit, which, er, sheds a slightly different light than what you and Guest have tried to bring. Lessee:

As a Pan-Islamic, religious, and social movement, it preached Islam, taught the illiterate, set up hospitals and business enterprises. The group spread to other Muslim countries but has its largest, or one of its largest, organizations in Egypt despite a succession of government crackdowns in 1948,1954, 1965, and 2013 after plots, or alleged plots, of assassination and overthrow were uncovered. Over the years it also developed branches in other Muslim countries.

The Arab Spring brought it legalisation and substantial political power at first, but as of 2013 it has suffered severe reversals.The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood was legalized in 2011 and won several elections, including the 2012 presidential election when its candidate Mohamed Morsi became Egypt's first democratically elected president. One year later, however, following massive demonstrations, anger at perceived discrimination and disenfranchisement against religious minorities, and anger at repressive religious policies, Morsi was overthrown by the military and arrested. As of 2014, the organization has been declared a terrorist group both in Egypt and by its erstwhile ally Saudi Arabia, and is once again suffering a severe crackdown in Egypt as well as pressure in other Arab countries. The Brotherhood itself claims it is a peaceful, democratic organization, and its leader "condemns violence and violent acts".

Tendentious means that you included the bits that seem to make your case but left out the rather awkward more moderate bits. I'm happy to supply them for you. I could suggest that instead of quoting "stated aims", which you can do for any organisation under the sun, you should more closely adhere to the biblical " by their fruits shall ye know them."

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 05:20 AM

Well, for a start, I don't believe for a moment that the "Anti Assad rebels" are "moderates", and I am certain that neither GUEST nor Teribus believe that either.

We all saw these "moderates" when victorious in Libya, and it was not a pretty sight.....more importantly their moderation disappeared and the country is now ungovernable, with a huge number of people displaced or seeking refugee status.

Lets get real here, the danger to the world is not President Assad, any more than it was Saddam Hussein or Col Gaddafi.
We used these people or people very similar, when it suited us.

The danger is the dark spectre of Islamic Fundamentalism. Madmen who will butcher everyone who refuses to accept their religion.
If Putin is worried enough to put aircraft and advisors into Syria, we should all bee worried.
A combined operation is required to contain these madmen "democracy"
can be postponed in the face of more important issues, as we do in the case of Saudi Arabia etc etc.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 06:17 AM

"The danger is the dark spectre of Islamic Fundamentalism."
No - the danger is from the clashes between religious fundamentalism (that being perpetrated in the name of the Jewish people included) and the interests of world capitalism, mainly in the shape of oil supplies.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 09:36 AM

Spectre? Guess we need James Bond to sort this then......

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 09:50 AM

"religious fundamentalism (that being perpetrated in the name of the Jewish people included)"
.,,.
Where, precisely, Jim? & of what nature? Jewish fundamentalism is far more politically & nationalistically, than religiously based. The religious parties in Israel occasionally hold a certain political balance, but they are by no means politically dominant as in so much of the Muslim world.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 10:02 AM

"Jewish fundamentalism is far more politically & nationalistically, than religiously based"
Is it?
The driving force behind what is happening in Israel appears to be extreme Zionism based on the idea of a chosen people having a right to territory defined in biblical times.
The moderates within the religious groups, such as Rabbis for peace seem to have been marginalised and vilified by the Israeli right.
I have never suggested that Judaism has ever been the cause of what is happening, but it certainly has become a rallying point for the right.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 10:27 AM

"The driving force behind what is happening in Israel appears to be extreme Zionism based on the idea of a chosen people having a right to territory defined in biblical times."

More antisemitic tropes from the usual suspect.

Israel is, indisputably, the historic, ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. Zionism is the recognition of that fact.

You have no idea what the term "chosen people" means to Jews. I suggest you look it up instead of using it to slander them.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 10:33 AM

It's also the ancestral homeland of many other people. And I'm not aware that chosen people, a term used by Judaism itself, is a pejorative term.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 10:47 AM

I thought it was the UN that gave Jews the right to the land of Israel, quite long after the bible was written.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 10:59 AM

"More antisemitic tropes from the usual suspect."
If you haven't got the bottle to come out from behind the dead of Auschwitz please deal with the facts of Israeli behaviour
"Israel is, indisputably, the historic, ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. Zionism is the recognition of that fact. "
The territory Israel is claiming as its own has been occupied by Arabs for millenia - of course it is disputed - that's what the killing is about.
Nobody on this forum has ever denied the right of the Jewish People to a homeland and nobody has ever suggested that Israel is not that homeland - you have been challenged on numerous occasions to prove otherwise, and you never have.
The only people here to have earned the description of "Antisemitic" are those who equate the behaviour of the Israeli regime with being Jewish.
It is a despicable and cowardly defence made by people defending policies comparable to those which sent six million Jews and many others to their deaths.
Jim Carroll
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 11:03 AM

"I thought it was the UN that gave Jews the right to the land of Israel, quite long after the bible was written."
The U.N. has no right to give exclusive rights to land occupied by people for millenia.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 11:56 AM

Incidentally.
"Lie, as was your other claims against me and others."
"Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 22 Sep 13 - 11:19 AM
This thread is about Syria, armed by Russia and China, and not about the global arms trade.
You are such a fascist Jim.
By what right do you decide that it has to be yet another thread about how much Jim hates Britain?"
I've asked you to stop lying - you obviously have no intention of doing so
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 12:16 PM

to come out from behind the dead of Auschwitz

Another antisemitic trope - you're really on a roll and not even bothering to hide it anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 12:24 PM

Why - most of my Jewish friends accused Israel of the same and still do, to my knowledge - as did Einstein and the signatories of the Holocaust Survivors petition.
It is you and your small band of friends who associate Israeli war crimes and atrocities with the Jewish people - nobody else.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 12:57 PM

It's also the ancestral homeland of many other people.

Which people? Are you referring to the Canaanites and Philistines?

The territory Israel is claiming as its own has been occupied by Arabs for millenia

Not true. The Arabs (from Arabia, get it?) were outsiders who moved into the region through conquest in the seventh century.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 01:20 PM

Anyway, leaving Israel out of this just for a moment or two although I really don't see the Balfour declaration as a legitmate source of legal jurisdiction, the question, I think, here, is who the biggest problem is.

Is Assad, backed by and therefore controlled by Russia the greatest threat to the world, or is it Daish?

It seems to me that the legitimation of a theocracy would be disastrous for the world. At least the Assad regime is notionally secular. So the least bad option (if achievable) is to wipe out all of the wannabee theocrats and then try to mitigate the vileness of the Assad regime.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 01:37 PM

"Which people? Are you referring to the Canaanites and Philistines? "
The Arabs have occupied those lands from Biblical times - or is that a myth?
" were outsiders who moved into the region through conquest in the seventh century."
Er no - nomadic Arabs have been travelling those lands far longer, but even if it were that case, that gives them 1300 years worth of squatters rights
You appear to be suggesting that they have no rights to a land they have occupied for at least 1000 years - is that the case?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 01:53 PM

Jim, in that ancient post I was calling you a fascist for insisting on changing the subject from the horror of Syria to Britain.

The U.N. has no right to give exclusive rights to land occupied by people for millenia.

It has and did.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 02:06 PM

" I was calling you a fascist for insisting on changing the subject from the horror of Syria to Britain."
Will you never stoop lying?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 14 Sep 13 - 05:11 AM
Jim is no liberal on this!
He favoured Western military intervention long before the issue of gas arose.
And he did not favour just a limited air strike.
He demanded an actual boots on the ground invasion by US and British forces to solve another Muslim nation's problems, without Security Council backing and ignoring all vetoes.
If you are looking for labels it would have to be Western Militarist Imperialist Fascist.
If you are looking for labels it would have to be Western Militarist Imperialist Fascist.

Bruce:
One of the reasons it became necessary for the present Israel regime to 'disappear' the writings of, foudinf father,David Ben Gurion was his forthright honesty.
One of his quotes that slipped the net last year was when he wrote "It is natural that the Palestinians should hate us - we have stolen their land" - published in Haarez
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 03:21 PM

Jim,
One of his quotes that slipped the net last year was when he wrote "It is natural that the Palestinians should hate us - we have stolen their land" - published in Haarez

Haaretz does not seem to have published that quote. It is not on line.
Have you got it right?
Can you show us the context in which it appeared?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 03:25 PM

You have no idea what the term "chosen people" means to Jews.

'bout the same thing it means to Kim Davis, innit Bruce?

Or did you mean perhaps

Tevye [to God] : I know, I know. We are Your chosen people. But, once in a while, can't You choose someone else?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 05:02 PM

One of his quotes that slipped the net last year was when he wrote "It is natural that the Palestinians should hate us - we have stolen their land" - published in Haarez [sic]

It was never Palestinian land unless you mean the Jewish people who were referred to as Palestinians before the term was usurped by the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza well after Israel's independance. Palestine is not even an Arabic word.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 05:37 PM

And all this time I thought "jihad" meant a personal struggle, silly me:

"Dozens of conservative Saudi Arabian clerics have called for Arab and Muslim countries to "give all moral, material, political and military" support to what they term a jihad, or holy war, against Syria's government and its Iranian and Russian backers."

Saudi Clerics Call for Jihad Against Iran and Russia in Syria

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 06:44 PM

Keith - This is not about Israel, but Balfour's gift was of land occupied but for which there had been no valid transfer of jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of the Ottoman empire had ceased to be valid considerably before the post-WW1 treaties.    Valid jurisdiction had therefore reverted to occupants - in those days Arabs. The legal rights of the Jewish enclaves acquired by purchase included occupation but not jurisdiction.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Oct 15 - 10:25 PM

So what is the New World order?
Interesting conversation but there is a forest for the trees factor
that is making the new world order opaque while minutia is becoming overwhelmingly transparent.

Who has won?

Imperial Power?
Nationalism?
Religious rule?
Tribal rule?
Democracy, fascism, socialism, Plutocracies?

just WHO IS WINNING?

and for how long?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 03:17 AM

"Haaretz does not seem to have published that quote. It is not on line."
Yes - I have got that ****** right
I put it up the last time you were defending Israeli atrocities
Haaretz is on line to subscribers - I have subscribed for some time now.
The statute of limitations on David Ben Gurion's writings have now expired and legally, everything is open for public scrutiny.
The Israeli regime, in its democratic wisdom has placed all of his Mss under lock and key again - Haaretz published several items that they had overlooked.
I'm not doing your scrabbling round for you - you really aren't important enough.
I suppose you are going to pass over your having called me a fascist - why not? - that's what you do best.
DEFINITION OF JIHAD
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 03:27 AM

On the other hand.
Quote: read it this time.
"I don't understand your optimism. Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the moment there is no chance. So, it's simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipe us out."
David Ben Gurion. CBS interview, 5th October, 1956.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 08:32 AM

So Jim,
"It is natural that the Palestinians should hate us - we have stolen their land" - published in Haarez

Not true. Another of your faked quotes.

What about the new "quote?"
Why do you claim it was said in an interview?

If he did say it, was he not just trying to see it from the Palestinian perpective?
Not his own view.

Israel was created legally by the UN.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 08:51 AM

Faked quotes, Keith? Remember Wheatcroft? Glass houses, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 09:25 AM

"Not true. Another of your faked quotes."
Apology please - I should be so lucky!!
Do you not get tired of proving yourself a moron - you really don't need to?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,#
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:09 AM

"U.S. companies stashed $2.1 trillion offshore to avoid taxes: report
Apple alone hides $181B offshore so it can avoid $59B in taxes"

Ever wonder why health care and social assistance get blamed for being a waste of money because of what they cost? The above headline may help explain why.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:16 AM

I quoted Wheatcroft in full Steve.
The quote was accurate. Not a misquote.
Later, I abbreviated the quote, the whole quote having already been given so everyone knew what I was referring to.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:23 AM

You changed its meaning quite deliberately. You're a bit of fraud, aren't you, Keith? Anyway, it's all out there somewhere for all to see so save yer breath. I've made my point, person in glass house, and will not respond further to that particular line of discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:26 AM

Jim, your faked quote said "we have stolen their land."

That does not appear in your Wiki link. No reference to stealing.
You made it up.

Your new quote does appear, but is not attributed to him directly.
You claimed he said it in an CBS interview.
You made that up.

"As quoted in The Jewish Paradox : A personal memoir (1978) by Nahum Goldmann (translated by Steve Cox), p. 99."

So we are relying on an individual's recollection with no confirmation that he really said it.

If he did say it, was he not just trying to see it from the Palestinian perpective?
Not his own view.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:29 AM

Steve,
You changed its meaning quite deliberately.

No. I quoted him accurately and in full.
Having made that clear I did not need to give the full quote every time I referred to it.

You try to make something of nothing.
That is all you can do.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:35 AM

Well I read the wiki link and I saw the reference to the CBS interview and the reference to stealing. You stopped reading too soon.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:38 AM

"Jim, your faked quote said "we have stolen their land."
I have faked nothing - that is how it appeared in Haaretz, who also attributed it to CBS
What he actually said in the Wiki quote is "That is natural: we have taken their country. "
Exactly the same meaning
I have made nothing up - I have no need to, your idiocy makes that sort of thing unnecessary.
This is done and dusted Keith - Israel had the nouse to censor Ben Gurion's statement
Stop making an idiot of yourself
And yes - you did edit the Wheatcroft quote - that is what you do.
Jim Carroll

One more time - its says what I said it says - I edited nothing - that is how you behave.
"I don't understand your optimism. Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the moment there is no chance. So, it's simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipe us out.
As quoted in The Jewish Paradox : A personal memoir (1978) by Nahum Goldmann (translated by Steve Cox), p. 99."

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:38 AM

If you contextualize the quote attributed to Abba Eban it becomes plain that he was speaking from the point of view of how the Arabs perceive the state of Israel.

Some real, sourced quotes:


    "Under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them. Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement, should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price."[2]

    About the quote: Written statement (1920).

    "We do not wish and do not need to expel Arabs and take their places."[3]

    About the quote: Letter to his son Amos (October 5, 1937).


    We extend the hand of peace and good-neighborliness to all the States around us and to their people, and we call upon them to cooperate in mutual helpfulness with the independent Jewish nation in its Land. The State of Israel is prepared to make its contribution in a concerted effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.

Israel's Proclamation of Independence, read on (14 May 1948)

Even amidst the violent attacks launched against us for months past, we call upon the sons of the Arab people dwelling in Israel to keep the peace and to play their part in building the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its institutions, provisional and permanent.

Israel's Proclamation of Independence, read on (14 May 1948)

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:40 AM

Previous post should read Ben Gurion instead of Abba Eban.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 10:46 AM

I stand corrected.
The Wiki quote says "They (the Palestinians) only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country"

That is how they see it.
Their view not his, if he actually said it anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 11:04 AM

You have what he said - you have his admission - you may interpret it any way you choose, as you will.
The Israeli regime had the nouse to censor his writing on the basis of what he said.
Another quote
"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 12:03 PM

The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down,
Why not welcome them?
and in their view we want to take away from them their country and in their view we want to take away from them their country

"in their view."
Not his.

you have his admission

No admission.
He was putting the Palestinian perspective, not his own view.
Did he even say it?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 12:32 PM

"He was putting the Palestinian perspective, not his own view.
Did he even say it?"
You have the statements - you have the sources
He also said "A people which fights against the usurpation of its land will not tire so easily"
If you have any evidence that any of these sourced quotes are faked - provide it
"Did he even say it?"
Why should you question it if he's only putting the Palestinian point of view
You appear to want to have your cake and eat it!!
Lie down Keith - you're dead
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 01:26 PM

The connotations of Ben Gurion's quote seem clear to me, he was obviously giving the Palestinian take on the State of Israel.

Don't they call it Devils Advocate?

Keith wins again! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 01:29 PM

Much more likely Ben Gurian was describing the reality of the situation as opposed to the Zionist mythology that has flourished since to excuse all manner of things.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 01:45 PM

"The connotations of Ben Gurion's quote seem clear to me, he was obviously giving the Palestinian take on the State of Israel."
Three quotes - all from different sources, two of which do not attempt to show that he refers to the Palestinian point of view show that not to be the case.
Should have gone with Keith's original claim that I made it up, or his second (and continuing one) that somebody else did if you are going to back your pro-Zionist friend.
You are every bit as inept as he is.
Jim Carroll
Neither of these refer to it being the Palestinian point of view
"A people which fights against the usurpation of its land will not tire so easily"
politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 01:52 PM

If the quote is true, Ben Gurion was illustrating how the Palestinians felt about the Israeli State.

Are You seriously advancing the notion that DBG was promoting the idea that his people were thieves and robbers?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 01:59 PM

I wonder if Israel will cease the illegal occupation of the Golan heights now oil has been found there?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 02:39 PM

"If the quote is true, Ben Gurion was illustrating how the Palestinians felt about the Israeli State"
Either - or again eh cake and eat it
There is no question of his sayig it and there is no indication that he was speaking on anybody's but his own behalf
Both are inventions of Keith which you lap up like the nodding dog you are.
Ben Gurion was a pragmatist who believed his people had a god given right to the land so it didn't matter that it was stolen from non-believers.
More or less what he said.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 15 - 03:01 PM

The quote was one person's recollection repeated in a book with no confirmation that it really was said.
It was not said in a CBS interview as you claimed Jim.

Even if genuine, he is only giving the Palestinian perspective, not his, so what is your point Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 08:31 AM

Done and dusted Keith
There is no question that the QUOTES = 3 are genuine - nobody but you and your nodding dog have ever questioned them - they have been in the public domain since they were made - the earliest being 1936 and they have never been challenged by anyone as anything but genuine over that time (if you have any evidence that they have - produce it.
Nor has anybody ever been explained away by anybody over that period using your bizarre excuse - that is purely your on-the spot invention.
Again - if you have any example of any historian, politician, statesman ever offering such an explanation - please produce it - anybody.
The Israeli reaction, when it was produced last year was not to explain it away, as you have here, but to lock Ben-Gurion's papers away from public access.
Ben-Gurion was a pragmatist who believed that Israel had a God-given right to the territory and was prepared to drive out the indigenous residents in order to fulfil was the divine destiny of his people, he was honest enough to say exactly that - that is what his STATEMENTSsaid and that has what the Israeli regime has locked away from the public gaze.
You haven't even bothered to produce one of your 'historians' or any of your edited cut-'n-pastes to make your case - you have invented either-or excuses to explain away a very simple, self-explanatory statement - either they are fakes (you insist only one - there are three) or they mean something entirely different
The fact that you give yourself an either-or get-out-of-jail card is an obvious indication that you are making this up - who has ever claimed them to have been fakes - who has ever suggested his statement was a hypothesis and not just telling it as it was?? - Who - where are your historians when you need them now?
This is part of your long running - "Israel never dun nuffin' wrong, your honour" campaign" argument whenever the actions of the Israeli terrorist regime has been criticised for its behaviour.
At no time have you ever accepted critiscism in any shape or form of Israel - the early massacres, the slaughter of refugees, the forcible seizure of territory, ethnic cleansing of the Bedouins, attempts to set up an Apartheid state, regular bloodbaths in Gaza, use of chemical and anti-personel weapons, last years destruction of homes schools and hospitals and massacre of men, women and children.... YOU HAVE UNFAILINGLY SUPPORTED EVERY INHUMAN ACTION THEY HAVE CARRIED OUT - THAT IS VERY SICK, TOTALLY UNPRECEDENTED FANATICISM
As I said - done and dusted
I have continued this argument with you much against my better judgement; what you have to say about Israel is as predictable as the fact that it will probably piss with rain here in the next few days.
I am interested in the subject matter of this thread – a possible new world order, and I believe Israel is very much a part of that subject.
The failure of the Arab Spring protests led to a huge disillusionment among the Muslim people in the support they might expect from the rest of the world – self interest and the predatory nature of international capitalism means that the monsters continue to stay where they are assisted by Western bought arms and support = end result – a massive tsunami of refugees converging on the Western countries.
The Israeli regime's policy of expansionism and ethnic cleansing andthe devastation caused by last year's massacres and destruction is quite likely to add to that flood of refugees over the next four years if nothing is done.
You and your tiny handful of buddies have no interest in truth, or the Jewish people, or even the Israeli people as a whole, and certainly not of the mass of humanity being killed and made homeless by Israeli policy.
Your support is for the Israeli right wing regime and the reputation of the British in its dealings with despots.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 08:31 AM

Done and dusted Keith
There is no question that the QUOTES = 3 are genuine - nobody but you and your nodding dog have ever questioned them - they have been in the public domain since they were made - the earliest being 1936 and they have never been challenged by anyone as anything but genuine over that time (if you have any evidence that they have - produce it.
Nor has anybody ever been explained away by anybody over that period using your bizarre excuse - that is purely your on-the spot invention.
Again - if you have any example of any historian, politician, statesman ever offering such an explanation - please produce it - anybody.
The Israeli reaction, when it was produced last year was not to explain it away, as you have here, but to lock Ben-Gurion's papers away from public access.
Ben-Gurion was a pragmatist who believed that Israel had a God-given right to the territory and was prepared to drive out the indigenous residents in order to fulfil was the divine destiny of his people, he was honest enough to say exactly that - that is what his STATEMENTSsaid and that has what the Israeli regime has locked away from the public gaze.
You haven't even bothered to produce one of your 'historians' or any of your edited cut-'n-pastes to make your case - you have invented either-or excuses to explain away a very simple, self-explanatory statement - either they are fakes (you insist only one - there are three) or they mean something entirely different
The fact that you give yourself an either-or get-out-of-jail card is an obvious indication that you are making this up - who has ever claimed them to have been fakes - who has ever suggested his statement was a hypothesis and not just telling it as it was?? - Who - where are your historians when you need them now?
This is part of your long running - "Israel never dun nuffin' wrong, your honour" campaign" argument whenever the actions of the Israeli terrorist regime has been criticised for its behaviour.
At no time have you ever accepted critiscism in any shape or form of Israel - the early massacres, the slaughter of refugees, the forcible seizure of territory, ethnic cleansing of the Bedouins, attempts to set up an Apartheid state, regular bloodbaths in Gaza, use of chemical and anti-personel weapons, last years destruction of homes schools and hospitals and massacre of men, women and children.... YOU HAVE UNFAILINGLY SUPPORTED EVERY INHUMAN ACTION THEY HAVE CARRIED OUT - THAT IS VERY SICK, TOTALLY UNPRECEDENTED FANATICISM
As I said - done and dusted
I have continued this argument with you much against my better judgement; what you have to say about Israel is as predictable as the fact that it will probably piss with rain here in the next few days.
I am interested in the subject matter of this thread – a possible new world order, and I believe Israel is very much a part of that subject.
The failure of the Arab Spring protests led to a huge disillusionment among the Muslim people in the support they might expect from the rest of the world – self interest and the predatory nature of international capitalism means that the monsters continue to stay where they are assisted by Western bought arms and support = end result – a massive tsunami of refugees converging on the Western countries.
The Israeli regime's policy of expansionism and ethnic cleansing andthe devastation caused by last year's massacres and destruction is quite likely to add to that flood of refugees over the next four years if nothing is done.
You and your tiny handful of buddies have no interest in truth, or the Jewish people, or even the Israeli people as a whole, and certainly not of the mass of humanity being killed and made homeless by Israeli policy.
Your support is for the Israeli right wing regime and the reputation of the British in its dealings with despots.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 09:20 AM

Where's that "like" button?

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 09:52 AM

Jim, We could avoid all this bickering if you gave accurate quotes, and at least some evidence of them being genuine.

Instead of making wild and false accusations about me, why not just refute what I actually say?

My guess is that you can't.

Your support is for the Israeli right wing regime and the reputation of the British in its dealings with despots.

I do not support any right wing movements, but I have put Israel's side of the story for balance.
It is not just Britain on friendly terms with Israel. All Western governments are.
If any of your accusations were true, they would not be.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 10:36 AM

.....the mass of humanity being killed and made homeless by Hamas and PA policy.

Fixed!

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 04:32 PM

"Jim, We could avoid all this bickering if you gave accurate quotes"

Jaysus, of all the people here who can say that. I'll give you this much, Keith, you've got bloody big balls.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 04:45 PM

Well, no, he probably talks more balls (possibly Akenaton and Terribilis excepted).

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 05:44 PM

Well, I've been blocked again, due to the 'open-mindedness of the 'purveyors of diversity.'....still locked, but.....quotes???

about the 'New World Order'.......

Sounds familiar???

GfS

P.S. How about lifting the block???

---

No block. You posted a blank message, and that was deleted.

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Oct 15 - 06:01 PM

Of what do you speak? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: The New World Order
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Oct 15 - 04:45 AM

Well, no, he probably talks more balls

Just abuse.
You do not challenge anything that I have actually said, because you can't.