BS: Labour party discussion

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 17 - 04:16 AM

Nice to have Trump described as a victim
A new Year brings something new
A guid New Year to nearly all of you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 06:55 PM

Trump IS a huge mess, Ake - he could start by cleaning himself up, as well as his his cabinet of reprobates.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 04:10 PM

Er, what "change of policy" on Israel would that be, then?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 04:08 PM

Obama was elected to be president until the next president is inaugurated. That is some weeks away. Until then he has the same full mandate to carry out whatever legal acts a US president is entitled to carry out as he has had for the last eight years. President-elect Trump's mandate does not kick in until his inauguration. That's the way it works. All the rest is the politics of democracy, Keith, which you purport to be a staunch defender of. I'm really happy to be able to explain this extremely elementary stuff to you, Keith, really I am. I should also like to remind you that the US did not vote in favour of the UN resolution. Gosh, I know how annoyed you must feel as an apologist for that rotten regime in Israel. But, in this case, in spite of your whingeing, no-one has done anything wrong. So tuff titty, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 03:53 PM

It seems to me that the Democrats are making as much mischief as possible before they are turfed out of office, leaving a huge mess for Mr Trump to inherit.

The allegations regarding Russia and the change of policy on Israel are designed for that purpose and no other.

This is the man who met Mr Trump after the election and promised to do everything he could to make the change over as easy as possible.
"It's just the American way".......aye right!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 03:05 PM

"What is the evidence that he said it Jim?"
It is a well known quote, widely available and the source, which I have also linked to, is impeccable.
It is dishonest to question it (you have actually denied it in the past) without proof - if it is inaccurate it is your job to disprove it.
Now what are you saying - he didn't say it, he didn't mean it - it has been made up by a leading Zionist - what?
Now - your proof - or do we have to take the word of the Israelis again - I have no reason to disbelieve it to be genuine - why do you question it ?
Once more you call me dishonest, yet you provide no proof of anything you claim and you admit you are only putting the other side - the claims of a war criminal.
You are going to end this year as you began it - defending atrocities and lying
Nothing new under the sun.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 02:10 PM

Steve,
Obama is the current president and he has the same mandate as he's had for the last eight years. This really isn't hard to grasp, Keith.

I grasp it Steve, but his Party just lost the election.
He has no genuine mandate from the people any more.
Just a technicality.
Why has he always used the veto to protect Israel for the last eight years and only changed that policy now?
Because he will never need the people's vote again so up them.
Revenge served cold.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 02:04 PM

Jim,
Going to break a N Y resolution Keith
Prove it
There, that's an end to it
He said theuy stole the land

What is the evidence that he said it Jim?
Only the word of someone, who was no friend of his, that he once said it to him alone, with no other witness, and he never mentioned it for twenty years, by which time Ben-Gurion was dead and could not deny it.

On the strength of that you assert that it was a fact and post it without any reservation or disclaimer.
You are a dishonest man Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 01:52 PM

Yeah - read them all - none of those people said any of them things - all made up
All the quotes are well known and sourced - none are challenged in any of the links, all the links are untraceable but obviously pro Israeli regime at a time when Israel is spending billions on propaganda
Who is a girl to believe?
Is that the best you could com up with?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 12:55 PM

The anti Israel hate sites are full of them as Carroll well knows.

Fake Zionist Quotes

Exposing Fake Zionist Quotes

More Falsified Ben Gurion Quotes

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 12:51 PM

'Sall right Steve
Helps to digest all the stodgy Christmas pud.
God Jul!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 12:39 PM

"Waste of time Steve - if it puts Israel in a bad light it is either a lie or wrong
Don't you understand the David Irving school of history?"

Damn. Sorry, Jim, I forgot. Must be the fug of all this festive cheer. 🍷🍷🍷😉

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 11:53 AM

Some more examples of not stealing land - lies or anti-semitism or what?
Jim Carroll

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."
-- Moshe Dayan, April 1969, Ha'aretz; quoted in Edward Said, 'Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims', Social Text, Volume 1, 1979, 7-58.

"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.

"How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to."
-- Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.

"How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to."
-- Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.

"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
-- Golda Meir, Le Monde, 15 October 1971                
                
"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!"
-- Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

"[Israel will] create in the course of the next 10 or 20 years conditions which would attract natural and voluntary migration of the refugees from the Gaza Strip and the west Bank to Jordan. To achieve this we have to come to agreement with King Hussein and not with Yasser Arafat."
-- Yitzhak Rabin (a "Prince of Peace" by Clinton's standards), explaining his method of ethnically cleansing the occupied land without stirring a world outcry. (Quoted in David Shipler in the New York Times, 04/04/1983 citing Meir Cohen's remarks to the Knesset's foreign affairs and defense committee on March 16.)                
                
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982.

"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized .... Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."
-- Menachem Begin, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.

"The past leaders of our movement left us a clear message to keep Eretz Israel from the Sea to the River Jordan for future generations, for the mass aliya (=Jewish immigration), and for the Jewish people, all of whom will be gathered into this country."
-- Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declares at a Tel Aviv memorial service for former Likud leaders, November 1990. Jerusalem Domestic Radio Service.

"The settlement of the Land of Israel is the essence of Zionism. Without settlement, we will not fulfill Zionism. It's that simple."
-- Yitzhak Shamir, Maariv, 02/21/1997.

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
-- Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
-- Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989.
                
"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more"....
-- Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time - August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force...."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"I would have joined a terrorist organization."
-- Ehud Barak's response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian.        
                 
"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."
-- Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.

"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many (Palestinian) hilltops as they can to enlarge the (Jewish) settlements because everything we take now will stay ours...Everything we don't grab will go to them."
-- Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of the Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, Nov. 15, 1998.

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 25 March, 2001 quoted in BBC News Online

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 11:30 AM

SOURCE of DAVID BEN GURION QUOTE - a rabid antisemitic Jew Hating Anti Israel liar, no doubt!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 11:22 AM

Waste of time Steve - if it puts Israel in a bad light it is either a lie or wrong
Don't you understand the David Irving school of history?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 10:48 AM

"It is just that, up until now, none ever has taken advantage of that window of un-mandated opportunity."

Obama is the current president and he has the same mandate as he's had for the last eight years. This really isn't hard to grasp, Keith.

"As you say, it is only an unwritten rule that has been violated."

Don't lie, please. I said that there is no unwritten rule. 30 Dec, 06.28pm. Nothing has been violated. You are behaving in an extremely undemocratic way. You are making up rules that do not exist in the US constitution because you disagree with the US's refusing to hold back from criticising the Israeli regime. Sour grapes.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 10:17 AM

"Your Ben Gurion quote is unlikely to be true,"
Going to break a N Y resolution Keith
Prove it
There, that's an end to it
He said theuy stole the land
The maps say they stole the land
Human rights organisations say they stole the land
Jews say they stole the land
The United Nations has now been able to say they stole the land now the U.S. veto has been removed
They stole the land - simple as that
"that's the kind of lie Jew haters.... "
Personally, I'd rather take their word rather than a pair of rabid, anti-Semitic, serial atrocity deniers any day.
Why not try a New Year resolution yourself and show a little common sense, compassion and humanity, instead of supporting mass murder and ethnic cleansing by a fascist state?
Jim Carroll
Too much to expect at this stage, I suppose

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 09:28 AM

You're right Keith, that's the kind of lie Jew haters cling to to justify their hatred, right up there with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 09:14 AM

Jim,
Your Ben Gurion quote is unlikely to be true, as you well know because I have explained it to you many times before.
It is dishonest to post it as if it was accepted.

"If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural, we have taken their country." In fact, according to Nahum Goldmann, Ben-Gurion allegedly said this to him. Goldmann was an adversary of Ben-Gurion, and he came out with this alleged quote, verbatim, in his book published two decades later (The Jewish Paradox, 1978), five years after Ben-Gurion died. There was no recording of the quote, and Ben-Gurion was no longer around to dispute it.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 09:06 AM

Thanks Steve, but I was aware of the peculiar US system of changing administrations.
It gives the opportunity for an outgoing president to do something that his people do not want because he will never need their votes again.
It is just that, up until now, none ever has taken advantage of that window of un-mandated opportunity.
As you say, it is only an unwritten rule that has been violated.

Sadly, a new precedent has been set and I fear what Trump may do with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 08:55 AM

"Of course Israel has not stolen any land from anybody that is just your typical anti-Semitic trope."
Then the Father of Israel was an antisemite
"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?
David Ben Gurion
Ben Gurion also insisted that the Jews did not wish to drive the Arabs from their land
We do not wish and do not need to expel Arabs and take their places.
The mindless repetition of "antisemitism" doesn't get away from the fact that the Arab lands have been reduced to little more than ghettos
Israel continues to steal land and ETHNICALLY CLEANSE the Palestinians and Bedouins and in order to do so, their regimes have turned Israel into a FASCIST STATE
They have done more to dewstroy the Jewish dream than the Nazis could ever have done.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 08:25 AM

Err, Keith, US presidents are elected for a full four-year term. Obama is the president and Trump is not. He will not be the "outgoing president" until Trump is inaugurated. There has been no change of policy. It is not written down anywhere that the US has a policy of automatically vetoing resolutions on Israel. Tradition does not equal policy does not equal mandate and we should applaud Obama for recognising that. Takes courage, actually. There is no express mandate to treat Israel in the same way whatever happens. The trouble with you, Keith, is that you cheerfully embrace democracy when things are going your way but when things look a little adverse, though no less democratic, you come out with a pack of lies. Sour grapes with knobs on sums you up nicely.

So Farage won the popular vote. Can't argue with that statistic. Clinton won the popular vote by 2.8 million. Hardly the "rejection" you lyingly claimed in earlier posts. Can't argue with that statistic. She was nobbled by an electoral college system that sorely needs sorting out. Let's hear you arguing with that. And a bit less of your "rules are rules" guff. It's a debating forum, remember?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 08:21 AM

Of course Israel has not stolen any land from anybody that is just your typical anti-Semitic trope.

Shimon Klein nails the reasons why there is no peace agreement and none forthcoming in the foreseeable future:

Kerry failed to enlarge on the reasons why negotiations failed.There are no partners for peace negotiations. The Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas has its hands tied by Hamas, who is against any form of negotiation with Israel. They view Israel as occupied territory since its establishment. If Abbas signs a peace treaty with Israel it will be "off with his head" as in Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland,

Apart from that, all that Abbas can do is to utter hostile rhetoric against Israel on its intransigence. By doing this, he can drum up support against Israel and thus save his own skin by not signing any peace treaty with Israel.

Meanwhile both Hamas and the PA are raking in the cash from foreign donations for the Palestinians into their leaderships' foreign bank accounts. They plead poverty blaming Israel for its intransigence and lack of progress while they themselves are becoming wealthy under the occupation. This is their livelihood. The eternal negotiator since the Madrid Conference of 1991, Saeb Erekat, is a professional negotiator and not doing badly out of it financially.

John Kerry seems to be devoid of reality and this reflects in his departure speech. He said the right things that are true and really indisputable. He condemned terror in general terms as if it's the settlements that promote it.

Even if there were no settlements in the occupied territory as was the case prior to the June 1967 War, an excuse will be found as it was then to destroy Israel. The problem between Israel and the Palestinians is existential. One needs to read the hate propaganda against Israel even before the Six Day War of 1967 to understand that. The Palestinian education system is full of anti-Israel hate as well as being anti-Semitic. The conflict is not only about land but about religion as well. In this respect, Daesh and Hamas share similar goals. It is unfortunate that Kerry did not touch on this subject in his speech as it really is the root course of the conflict. The settlements in the occupied territories is an added factor of course but the basic hate for Israel even existed before the occupation.

Conflicts in the Middle East

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 07:55 AM

Fairy nuff. Still looks to me like stuff the Obama does that fits in with tarring the Labour party as bad is deemed acceptable yet when he does something that the US should have done years ago he is demonised. But, as you know, that is just a whim from an empty head...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 07:53 AM

Steve,
The US electorate did not reject Clinton.

Under the rules and the system accepted by all parties, Clinton lost the US election and Brexit won the UK referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 07:48 AM

Dave,
So, to take me on to page 30 in this discussion, can I ask why it is OK for Obama to have a go at the British Labour party yet, when he refuses to veto a resolution about Israel, he is breaking 'an unwritten rule'?
Just wondering like...

He was expressing his personal opinions about Labour and making comparisons with his own Party. Anyone is entitled to do that.

The other thing was a dramatic and contentious change in US government policy from an outgoing President with no mandate to make such a change.

UK government has criticised the old administration over this.

"Theresa May rebukes US for 'inappropriate' attack on Israel "

"We do not… believe that the way to negotiate peace is by focusing on only one issue, in this case the construction of settlements, when clearly the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is so deeply complex," Mrs May's spokesman said.
"And we do not believe that it is appropriate to attack the composition of the democratically elected government of an ally"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/29/theresa-may-rebukes-us-attack-israel/

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Dec 16 - 04:56 AM

All the "peace proposals" that have been rejected by the Palestinians have entailed maintaining the situation where land stolen by Israel remains in Israeli hands and those millions of exiles stay exiled.
There has never been a situation in modern history where those driven out by invaders should remain exiled and those who drove them out should retain their property.
Registered Palestinian refugees are calculated at 5 million; those not registered are incalculable.
No sensible Government would accept that position
SOME ****** AGREEMENT!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 06:30 PM

So tell us in words (of one syllable if you like) what those objectionable principles are, bobad.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 06:28 PM

There is no unwritten rule. Obama acted properly within his powers as the elected president. The US electorate did not reject Clinton. Two of Keith's delusions. You loved it when the popular vote won the referendum, Keith. You won't accept that Clinton won the popular vote by a country mile though, will you, Keith? Where's Teribus with his sauce for the goose when you need him? 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 06:19 PM

It is interesting that Kerry's principles for a peace agreement are pretty much what has been proposed several times and soundly rejected by the "Palestinian" leadership:

Kerry did not break new ground it is not possible for us to recognize a Jewish state

Riyad al-Maliki, "Palestinian" foreign minister.


Kerry's principles are not something we could agree with

Mustafa Barghouti, PLO Executive Committee member.

The Obama administration is totally clueless about the "Palestinian" leadership demands for statehood.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 05:52 PM

So, to take me on to page 30 in this discussion, can I ask why it is OK for Obama to have a go at the British Labour party yet, when he refuses to veto a resolution about Israel, he is breaking 'an unwritten rule'?

Just wondering like...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 04:19 PM

Well you see, bobad, yer man in the link fails to realise that THE problem in the Middle East is not "Israel" but the fact that the Israeli regime is happy to be the proxy West in the region and more than happy to have a massive amount of US military and political aid. The upshot is that the Russians have adopted Islamist states in the region as their proxy. The place is a powder keg, not least because Israel has nukes, and Israel is in the thick of it. There will be no peace in the region until the Israeli regime is brought to heel, made to realise that Israel is a tiny country in a diverse region of very big neighbours. The UN has targeted Israel time and time again simply because the US has protected Israel from condemnation time and time again. Open your eyes. And I'd point out to you that yer man is in vehement disagreement with both you and Keith:

"In truth, I believe Israeli settlements to be illegal under international law, built on occupied land, and that Netanyahu has been uncooperative while in office..."

He is also deluded about a future Palestinian state which contains Israeli settlements. The settlements are on the best land and their occupants would be by far the wealthiest in the new state. Anyone who thinks that is viable, from either side of the argument, is in cloud cuckoo land. The region is heading inexorably for a single state. Ultimately, as I heard someone saying today, the choice for Israel will then be either to give up democracy or give up being a Jewish state. Israel's hubris-filled leaders are being incredibly short-sighted. A two-state solution requires settlement land to be handed back. That's the reality whatever your personal ideology tells you. And reality also dictates that it will never happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 03:04 PM

"I defy you to quote me doing it."
You said the Jewish members of Parliament would not take their accusations further because of the love for their party
I've put this up twice already and have referred to it at least ten times - you have never denied it - you are not really going to start now, are you?
"Why will you not discuss the issues instead of just attacking me?"
I must have put up several dozen links, all pertaining to our argument - those you haven't dismissed as propaganda you have ignored
You, in return, have put up nothing.
I don't lie - you have never proven a lie by me - it has become your standard defence, just as Israel's has become "antisemitism"
You are a very stupid man to deny something that you have put up for all to see.
You are a dishonest, reactionary bore
I really do think we have finished here (unless, of course, you would like to put up proof of the Antisemitism you have claimed)
Go live with your Christian concience Keith - I'm damned if I could
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 02:31 PM

Jim,
you are the only one to have openly stereotyped Jews in an antisemitic manner - the only one - I defy youto produce another example.

I defy you to quote me doing it.
Like everything else you accuse me of, just another lie.

Why will you not discuss the issues instead of just attacking me?
Because you can't Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 01:31 PM

There are horrific injustices all over the world, including and especially in the Muslim world, but those are ignored by an institution obsessed with Israel.

Why Did Obama Pander to the UN's Stunning Anti-Israel Bias?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 10:13 AM

Yo, Bubo!! Apparently the majoity of U.S. Jews are serlf-hating anti-semites by your definition!

***

"There's a very clear values clash going on," said Rabbi Jill Jacobs, the executive director of T'ruah, a rabbinical human rights organization. "On the one hand, we have a small but vocal minority of American Jews who believe that supporting Israel means supporting the right-wing agenda, the current government. And on the other, there is a larger percentage of American Jews who are committed to Israel and committed to democracy and want to see it as a safe place that reflects our values."

"These days the right wing has a louder voice in Israel, and, in some ways, it also has a louder voice in America, because the people who are most actively and publicly Jewish, sectarian Jewish, share the right wing point of view, and are very pro-settlement," said Samuel Heilman, a sociology professor of at Queens College specializing in Jewish life. "But it's not the mainstream point of view."

Steven M. Cohen, a research professor at Hebrew Union College and a consultant to a recent Pew study of American Jews, said that Mr. Kerry's speech represents the viewpoints of most American Jews. "On survey after survey, American Jews are opposed to Jewish settlement expansion. They tend to favor a two-state solution and their political identities are liberal or moderate," he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/us/american-jews-john-kerry-israel.html

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 09:59 AM

By the way,
Will you please stop saying I do not want to know the other side of the story
I grew up in a household that was devoted to the dream of Israel (I know Mike G. M. grew up with the same dream)
Both of us came to the same conclusion that what has happened under various right-wing regimes has destroyed that dream.
Israel has fallen into the hands of people who are behaving just like those who sent six million Jews to the gas-chambers.
The basic difference between you and me is that your support is for those people while mine is for the welfare of the Jewish people as a whole.
I don't believe in the "self-haring Jew" slogan Israel has adopted   - you accused me of inventing it – now you just ignore it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 09:39 AM

"Why do you not want to have their side of the story given Jim?"
I have read their side of the story - it sums up as "we didn't do it"
You do not give their side of the story - you dismiss everything that contradicts what they say as "propaganda"
That is not debate - it's stonewalling.
"You accuse us of antisemitism,"
At one time or another, you, Bobad and Teribs have accused me and others of antisemitism, yet you are the only one to have openly stereotyped Jews in an antisemitic manner - the only one - I defy youto produce another example.
Jewish plots of the type that accuse Jews of keeping silent over the type of antisemitism that is claimed of being carried out by Labour Party members is comparable to the Nationalist Socialists of Germany's depiction of the Jews as a secretive threat to their country - that is how you have described Jewish parliamentarians - suppressing the facts of antisemitism.
You choose to put the well-being of the Israeli regime above that of the Jewish people as a whole.
I don't tell lies Keith and I'm sick and tired of being accused of doing so by two people whose track record of dishonesty is breathtaking.
Debate decently or stay away - you wreck threads in your desire to say "You lose, I win" - that is not what this forum is about
If you think this is lie - go count the numbert of times you have said it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 09:18 AM

"I am not. I just put there side of the story."
What's the difference?

Why do you not want to have their side of the story given Jim?
Because it is far more believable than all that stuff you find on propaganda sites!
Who believes all that stuff. Not any decent democratic government however much they disapprove of the settlements.
Just some of the most despicable regimes in the world.

You accuse us of antisemitism,

No. I merely pointed out that some of your statements are anti-Semitic by the accepted definition.

Once again, everything you say about me in this latest, vile, personal attack is a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 07:15 AM

"I am not. I just put there side of the story."
What's the difference?
You have consistenly denied every scrap of evidence of their crimes, when you were presented with dozens of links to evidence - from Human Rights organisations, from Jewish Groups, from newspapers like Haaretz and even the Times of Israel, you dismissed them as "propaganda"
You are an arch supporter of State Terrorism
You accuse us of antisemitism, yet you blame British Jewish politicians of refusing to speak publicly on antisemitism "for the love of their party - 'Jewish plots' such as you claim exists in Britain ate typical of antisemitism.
Your interest has always been the extremist - on its way to being a FASCIST regime,
PART TWO
You are happy to vilify Jews who don't share your affection for this extremist state
Your blind faith in these thugs has become legendary on this forum.
And now you are besmearing a man who is probably the most liberally fair man to have ever served as head of a Western state because he thinks that Israel should stop stealing the land one of Israel's early leaders admitted to stealing:
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?.
You are really prepared to wade through sewers for these people
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Dec 16 - 04:45 AM

Obama told the electorate to vote for Clinton.
He told them it was "her turn" to be President.
He told them Trump did not have what it takes to be president.
The electorate rejected all that and elected Trump instead.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 05:04 PM

The electorate rejected Trump by three million votes. Not one sinlgle vote was cast against Obama. He wasn't on the ballot psper.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 02:40 PM

...their side..

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 02:38 PM

Steve,
Your attitude as an apologist for the extreme right-wing regime in Israel is just sour grapes.

I am not. I just put there side of the story.
What is wrong with that?

And what's this nonsense about his being rejected by the electorate? Last I heard, Obama wasn't on the ballot paper

Obama told the electorate to vote for Clinton.
He told them it was "her turn."
He told them Trump did not have what it takes.
The electorate rejected him.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 01:48 PM

A shameful act by a petulant president who wouldn't stop the genocide in Syria but sees fit, in a final act of revenge against Netanyahu and Trump, to allow to pass, by a notoriously anti-Israel UN, a resolution to deny Jews houses on their ancestral land. Here's what the hypocrite had to say on the issue of UN resolutions against Israel during his previous re-election campaign:

Peace is hard work. Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations -- if it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians -- not us --- who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and on security, on refugees and Jerusalem.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 01:45 PM

And what's this nonsense about his being rejected by the electorate? Last I heard, Obama wasn't on the ballot paper. 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 01:43 PM

The controversial thing was the routine and unconditional veto that the US, which does not even value the UN, gifted Israel every time there was condemnation from the rest of the UN. That controversy has now been resolved, not once and for all obviously, but it's the right move. Morally right, Keith. Morally right and bloody overdue. Your attitude as an apologist for the extreme right-wing regime in Israel is just sour grapes.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 01:41 PM

Allying toerags except you and Israel eh
I agree about the u.S.being the only one to change its mind - the rest of the civilised world has always thought Israel shit, which is why they nave NEVER defended her
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 12:48 PM


Err, Keith, he hasn't instigated anything controversial.

Of course he has, silly!
Have you not listened to any world news recently?

This is the first time USA, including under Obama, has failed to use its veto to protect Israel.
A highly controversial policy instigated by an outgoing President rejected by his electorate.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Dec 16 - 12:44 PM

Jim,

So not only are you declaring for Trump (good to know) but you are condemning all the other democratic countries of the same cynical opportunism?

No.
USA is the only country that has changed its view on this, and outgoing Presidents are not supposed to do that.
How does saying that make me "declaring for Trump?"
Just another lie about me Jim.

It may be an unwritten rule that outgoing Presidents do not behave like that, but none previously has.

like your Labour antisemitism, it doesn't exist

According to the entire NEC, Sadiq Khan, the leader of the Scottish party and many others, it does exist Jim.
Why would anyone take you seriously against all that Jim?
You make yourself ridiculous.