BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 17 - 06:36 AM

Makes more sense than which posts Dave?
Will you identify one or are you just coat trailing?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 May 17 - 04:19 AM

This is the Zager and Evans post!

Makes more sense than some

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 17 - 10:49 AM

You misrepresent what I have said on all those issues.
Of course I am neither racist nor anti-Semite.

As ever when you lose an argument, you resort to smearing me by lying about old ones.

Now, returning to the subject, what do Thursday's elections tell us about the situation of the Labour Party?

Stephen Kinnock said Labour had moved toward the "hard left" and was out of touch with the electorate.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 May 17 - 10:30 AM

You been at the Keith-juice again Dave?

Nah, just a few pints of Hobgoblin. Not sure what Keith's excuse is

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 17 - 08:35 AM

"I am not racist or anti-Semitic."You accused all Muslims of being prone to underage sex becaue of their culture
That is deeply racist
You accused the Traveller community of being overrepresented as "slaveers" on the basis of the actions of about five criminals
That is deeply racist
You accused Irish shcool children of being brainwashed to hate Britain even though you ahev never been able to give examples of that hatred
That is deeply racist
You claim that tere isa massive problem with antisemitism in the labour Party, but are unable to explain why the Jews in the Party haven't gone public
Your first explanation was that they love their Party - you now deny havving said that, but it doesn't make any difference
If there was massive antisemitism, the Jewish members would have made that public - any race or culture would -- they haven't so it doesn't exist
You continue to insst there is, therefore you are accusing all the Jewish Members of of refusing to announce publicly the type of antisemitism that is supposed to be happening - a pact of mutual silence - classic antisemitism
When you were given a statement by a Jewish writer on the situation in the Labour Party, you refused even to discuss it, saying he had nothing worth listening to about the British Labour Party - a Jew with nothing to say about antisemitism - how antisemitic can you get?
Are wer wrong yo discuss the Holocaust because we are not German?
Yo are a raving xenophobic madman Keith - the only value in arguing with you is to allow you to expose yourself for what you truly are.
There's nothing "vacuous" about any of this - I've laid it out detail by detail
ou are a seriously troubled individual
Over and out
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 17 - 07:26 AM

You resort to vacuous name calling Jim.
I am not racist or anti-Semitic.

You accused the Jewish parliamentarians from staying silent
Even if you did not, you are claiming that there is antisemitism in the party that they are refusing to make public

No I am not.

You can not argue with anything I actually say so you pretend I said something else.
That is why your silly accusations never come with an actual quote.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 17 - 07:20 AM

Piss of Keith
same answers (or not)
Same lies
You are a racit and an antisemite
You accused the Jewish parliamentarians from staying silent
Even if you did not, you are claiming that there is antisemitism in the party that they are refusing to make public
"I have. They were not silent."
They did not go public as they easily could have done
You are making it up
If there is antisemitism - what is it
You are a lying, very disturbed obsessive little man
End of story
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 17 - 05:21 AM

Jim,
Refusing to responsd to the fact that no decent contry would stand by silently while a country is being accused of something unjustly

You can not stop nasty regimes spewing propaganda. Decent countries ignore it.

Supporting Israel is supporting ethnic cleansing and mass murder

No decent country believes that.

If it is not just another of your lies, QUOTE ME!"
I have half a dozen times

If that is not just more lying, re-quote me.

If you did not say it - what is the anser to the above question

The answer is that they did.
Complaints against the party were made to the leadership.
That is how such things are done.

"No Jim. People like Ward have been thrown out just for saying what you say."
Don't care what he goth thrown out for
What I say is not antisemitic -

That is also what he said.
They still threw him out.

You refuse to answer the question of the silence of the Jewish members of parliament

I have. They were not silent.

If I have ever quoted extremists, quote me doing it, liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 17 - 07:03 PM

You been at the Keith-juice again Dave?
What did the doctor tell you
You'll be boring next!!
You win
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 17 - 06:22 PM

I challenge anyone to quote me saying something that I have not said, regardless of what we may be talking about at the time. In fact, whatever anyone says, I am always right because no one knows what the fuck I am on about half the time and when they do I just deny it anyway. You lose because you are all shit. So there.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 17 - 03:53 PM

"No Jim. People like Ward have been thrown out just for saying what you say."
Don't care what he goth thrown out for
What I say is not antisemitic - I have never attacked the Jews in my life
The Israelis have destroyed all other definitions by refusing to adhere to one of the major points
You are now doing the same
You refuse to answer the question of the silence of the Jewish members of parliament
You where asked why they didn't go public - you refuse to answer so your original excuse stands - that they have made a pact of silence
If that's not what you said - tell us why they have not gone public.
Your extremism
You made the most extreme statement ever on this forum - that all male members of an community of one and a half million are culturally implanted to have underage sex - a statement that is in fact breaking British laws.
You claim you only said it because somebody else did (though you have never produced their doing so)
Whoever said it, it is that statement of a racist fanatic.
You either quoted (unnamed) extremists or you made it up yourself
Doesn't matter which.
Yo single-handedly claimed that the Traveller community was "massivey 0ver-represented for holding slaves (one family of five members)
Nobody else has ever made that claim - it is the statement of a racist madman
Brainwashed Irish children - you are a frothing at the mouth nutter - you need to be locked up in a padded cell
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 17 - 03:29 PM

"Is being pro Israel is a bad thing?"
Is is under the present regime
Supporting Israel is supporting ethnic cleansing and mass murder
"That is a fact not an implication."
And that is what all the conflict is about - a parliamentary group at odds with its mambership and its leader
That's what has to change
"Nothing cowardly about it"
Hiding behind the silenvce of politicians is exactly that
Refusing to responsd to the fact that no decent contry would stand by silently while a country is being accused of something unjustly

"They raised their complaints about anti-Semitism within the Party "
A repetition of this shite is both cowardly and extremely dishonest
There was nothing to stop them from goiing public that was what was asked
W£hy didn't they - and you will continue to avoid this question in your equally cowardly and dishonest faschion
"!I did not claim that.
If it is not just another of your lies, QUOTE ME!"
I have half a dozen times
If you did not say it - what is the anser to the above question
What you call a double whammy, I would say
"I have never quoted one.
If you are not lying, QUOTE ME!"!
You made the most extreme racist statement ever made on this forum - that all male Muslims are implanted to rape children
The excuse you gave is that "experts" had said the same
Whoever said it - it is an extreme racist statement - one which would be subject to legal proceedings if made public.
You either quoted extremists or incvented them - take your pick
Any description of that antisemitism in the labour party yet?
Don't think tere's much point in continuing this - do you
No evidence - no case
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 May 17 - 01:46 PM

Rag,
Not a chance professor, you would merely refute that they were right wing extremists.

I promise not to, so quote me.

Now that is far, far better than reading your lies, evasions and general deceit day after day.

Day after day? If you are not lying about me, it should be very easy to quote an example then.
I challenge and defy you to quote one.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 May 17 - 12:02 PM

Britain is not the ancestral homeland of the Italians

Nor were "The Jews" the first inhabitants of the area in question.

PS: Define "ancestral homeland". Anything like "der vaterland"?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 May 17 - 10:31 AM

Not a chance professor, you would merely refute that they were right wing extremists.

I have far better things to do like popping over to the Dingle peninsula for a week with a group of friends before toddling up to the Connemara for a few weeks.

Now that is far, far better than reading your lies, evasions and general deceit day after day.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 05 May 17 - 10:24 AM

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency describe UN Watch as "a pro Israel Organisation"

Is being pro Israel is a bad thing?

UN Watch does an admirable job exposing the hypocrisy and anti-Semitism on display at the UN.

After PLO, Qatar, Syria, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and other Arab regimes accused Israel of 'apartheid', UN Watch's Hillel Neuer took the floor: "Algeria, Egypt, Syria, Iraq: Where are your Jews?"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 05 May 17 - 10:01 AM

When is Britain going to be given back to the Italians, by the way?

The problem with your yet another false equivalence Greg is that Britain is not the ancestral homeland of the Italians and the Canaanites don't have a seat at the United Nations.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 May 17 - 09:46 AM

Rag,
Isn't it strange professor that you can quote all manner of right wing extremist

I have never quoted one.
If you are not lying, QUOTE ME!

if 14 countries criticize the state of Israel you try and maintain that only one country made one remark.

The statement you quoted from the UN report was only made by one country. It was not generally accepted.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 May 17 - 09:41 AM

I wouldn't want to be a member of any mainstream Party Keith - but if you are implying that my observation is in any way antisemitic - prove it

No Jim. People like Ward have been thrown out just for saying what you say.
That is a fact not an implication.

"No decent democratic country describes Israel as "terrorist state" or accuses it of "ethnic cleansing."
#A cowardly defence

Nothing cowardly about it.
Your beliefs are not common in lands of democracy, free speech and free media. That is my point in making that statement.

About the silence of the Jewish members of Parliament WHY, WHY, WHY, if it is as serious as you claim?

There was no silence.
They raised their complaints about anti-Semitism within the Party to the leadership, as did those complaining of homophobia and misogyny.

It is antisemitic to suggest they they stay silent while their fellow Jews are being attacked in the way you claim

I did not claim that.
If it is not just another of your lies, QUOTE ME!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 17 - 09:29 AM

Never mind the Romans, what about the Iceni?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 May 17 - 09:17 AM

But who were these indigenous peoples? And by your "logic" don't they have a better claim on the area than "The Jews"?

When is Britain going to be given back to the Italians, by the way?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 04 May 17 - 09:34 PM

Ah, but who was there BEFORE "The Jews"??

It sure as hell wasn't the Arabs or Fakestinians.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 May 17 - 06:06 PM

regained self determination on ancestral land

Ah, but who was there BEFORE "The Jews"??

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 17 - 05:54 PM

Political commentator Chris Deerin:

By the time Corbyn is finished, Labour will only be fit for conspiracy theorists and Jew-baiters

I find it all genuinely heartbreaking. It's awful to watch some of the party's brightest talents quit politics in despair or disillusionment. It's infuriating that a bunch of ideological obsessives from the bottom of the barrel are blithely destroying one of the UK's two great vehicles for social change. And the very idea it could be allowed to continue after June is enraging.

So for me, and I hope for you, this is an ABL election – Anyone But Labour. The only hope I can locate is that the humiliation about to be visited on the party is so complete, so shockingly great, so unprecedentedly painful, that not even the most shameless Trot could credibly consider carrying on. Let's show these hideous goons there is no floor to our contempt. Let's show them who's boss.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 17 - 05:46 PM

a Terrorist State carrying our a programme of ethnic cleansing on an entire culture of people who have occupied the area for many centuries

For the first time in history, an indigenous people regained self determination on ancestral land they had been exiled from and the Jew haters can't get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 17 - 05:11 PM

Isn't it strange professor that you can quote all manner of right wing extremist and consider that the rest of the people on this forum should accept them as "gospel" (I detest that word) but if 14 countries criticize the state of Israel you try and maintain that only one country made one remark.

Did you actually read the link I provided?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 17 - 01:35 PM

"Saying that will get you thrown out of any mainstream political party here."
I wouldn't want to be a member of any mainstream Party Keith - but if you are implying that my observation is in any way antisemitic - prove it
I would be joined by many millions of Jews who now share that view.
"No decent democratic country describes Israel as "terrorist state" or accuses it of "ethnic cleansing."
#A cowardly defence
No decenbt democratic country would stay silent while their friends are being attacked as Israel is
Piss off
You've played all these cards far too many times
Now
About the silence of the Jewish members of Parliament WHY, WHY, WHY, if it is as serious as you claim?
It is antisemitic to suggest they they stay silent while their fellow Jews are being attacked in the way you claim
You have no interset in The Jewish Peopl - Just the extrem right Isreali regime
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 17 - 01:24 PM

Jim,
We know Israel to be a Terrorist State carrying our a programme of ethnic cleansing on an entire culture of people who have occupied the area for many centuries,

Royal "We" Jim?
Saying that will get you thrown out of any mainstream political party here.
No decent democratic country describes Israel as "terrorist state" or accuses it of "ethnic cleansing."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 17 - 01:14 PM

Rag,
Which bit of "Settlement activity constituted the single biggest threat to peace, and had led to settler violence, home demolitions and denial of development. Decades of human rights violations had frustrated those with nothing to lose, leading to acts of violence" do you not understand.

That was something only said by Malaysia.

Which bit of "The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel's establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders" do you not understand.

No-one here denies that the settlements are regarded as illegal by other countries.

Decent countries however do not believe Israel to be guilty of any of those things in Jim's recent post.
Just saying them will get you suspended from any of our political parties, except the extreme Right or Left.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 May 17 - 12:59 PM

Well I've read a good few wacky, unworldly rants in the papers in my time but that one takes the biscuit. Remind me -- how many hate crimes per annum directed at Jews do we have in this country?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 17 - 12:54 PM

Your link is to an article by Stephen Pollard who is an extreme right winger and a Islamophobic racist linked to extremist right-wing movements and campaigns
A summary of his views here
Interesting to read some of the others associated with his campaigns (Keith's Jim Murphyt is a hoot!!)
I was interested to see a mantion of the Holocaust
The authoir, in his attack on the left, carefully neglects to mention that the Left shared the fate of the Jews under facism
Right wing polotics broucht about the holocaust and ift was financed by German Capitalism who had no compunction in using Jews as slave labour until they had outlived their usefulness, when they were shipped off to the ovens.
It's too often forgotten that the Holocaust was not aimed solely at the Jews, even though they were the main victims
Communists, Trades Unionists,, Gypsies -or anybody considered superfluous to New Germany's Right wing Reich, all ended up in the same horrific place
Jim Carroll

Stephen Pollard
Politics
On Islam
In the London Review Blog Eliot Weinberg has described Pollard as an 'anti-Muslim hatemonger',[6] much like Bruce Bawer whose latest book, Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom, he reviewed in the New York Times Book Review on 26 July 2009.[7] Pollard began his review thus:
There is no more important issue facing the West than Islamism, Islamofascism or — to use yet another label — radical Islam. And there is no more necessary precondition to countering that threat than understanding it...But before we do any of that, we have to agree that the threat exists.
Pollard proceeds to accuse 'many liberals and others on the European left' of 'making common cause with radical Islam and then brazenly and bizarrely denying both the existence of that alliance and in fact the existence of any Islamist threat whatever'.[8] He acknowledges that he finds "Surrender" 'at times, hard going', but this is only in part 'because of the level of detail Bawer offers in support of his argument' and because 'Bawer is unquestionably correct, and that fact is quite simply ¬terrifying'.[9]
On Public Services
On his blog, Pollard disparages both the NHS[10] and the Royal Mail[11], and speaks approvingly of private alternatives. After accusing the Guardian and other British critics of ignorance about the US healthcare system, Pollard writes:
The plain fact is that if you have a serious disease or need long term care, if you have the right coverage you are so much better off being treated in the US that the NHS is not even comparable.
Although he qualifies the statement by adding that the 'crucial words, of course, are "if you have the right coverage", and clearly the US system is not remotely a model to be followed', he adds:
But to leap from that to the conclusion that the NHS is 'better' is dangerously deluded. The NHS is a system designed for an era when food rationing was the norm, and is metaphorically, ideologically and financially bankrupt.[12]

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 17 - 11:22 AM



And because Israel is part of the Western imperium, as well as a key target for Islamists, it is also enemy number one for progressives. So an obsessive preoccupation with the Jewish state becomes the default position of the Left. China, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia – pah! The focus must be on Israel and Israel alone. From that springs an entire worldview that encompasses "Zionist" control of the media, of business, of everything. And we can't be accused of targeting Jews because we don't use the word. We say Zionist, not Jew.

So deep does this warping of what it means to be Left and progressive now run that it is almost prosaic to assert Zionist control. But now, to cap it, we have a Labour leader whose entire political career has been in this milieu – feeding it, growing it and pushing it.

For months now, week by week, examples have been emerging of cut and dried anti-Semitism – most dressed up, oh so cleverly, as anti-Zionism, but much not even bothering to hide it. And the Labour leader's response to the criticism that he is soft on anti-Semitism and that it's his political mindset that has fuelled its rise is not to get hard on anti-Semitism. It's to get irritated.

The Left's hatred of Jews chills me to the bone

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 17 - 10:06 AM

"You criticize Global Research."
I'm not the slightest bit interested in Global research Iains
It is a webiste among many which puts forward opinions on politocal topics.
I'm have no itention of entering itto its merits or demerits
You have my arguments both on Israel and on The United Nations - they reprent no other view than my own
You want to challenge those views, feel free to do so with your own views
I anked you what yo propose as an alternative to the U.N. , just as I've asked you your alternatives to the human rights groups when we were arguing about Assad
There is enough information slewing around to make an independent assessment of both - nobody has to hide behind just one.
How about Amnesty International - do you still dis their account of the history of torture and oppression by the Assad Regime
If you don't like Amnesty - there's plenty more to choose from - including the statements of deserters Syria who decided they'd had enough
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 01 May 17 - 09:29 AM

Jim
To my knowledge only 5 permanent members of the UN have veto powers, China, Russia, US, GB and France.
You criticize Global Research.
I take the same stance as a blog response below, on the accuracy of their reporting:
"12. michel chossudovsky's globalresearch.ca is a light in the halls of pol darkness

agree not all globalresearch.ca writers meet high scholarly or informed opinion standards, but the vast majority do. the site is a clearinghouse for many kinds of critical pol views, from the right and left. if i need quick access to left views in particular i search the site. dr paul craig roberts is routinely featured (a repub anti-fascist former reagan treas dept undersec) as is dr chossudovsky from the left, whose pol-ec views are unassailable from the left. whoever 'conspires' to trash the site as unworthy should look in the mirror first."

As to the UN it is time the smaller countries showed initiative and destroyed the veto powers of countries and also employed sanctions against those that take action without authorisation i.e. The US.

I have a greater belief in the accuracy of Global research reporting than I have in the belief the white helmets are purely a humanitarian organisation in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 17 - 09:06 AM

Only in your (lack of) understanding of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 17 - 08:57 AM

The first part of the last sentence puts to lie the second part.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 17 - 08:52 AM

True Bobad, it end "for alleged bias against Israel" the defining word being alledged.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 17 - 08:35 AM

The last sentence is a little telling.....

The second to last more so.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 17 - 07:18 AM

"If the findings do not meet the approval of uncle sam they are ditched and all who sail with her."
That is actually what I said
The U.N. includes the US which is one of the six rich and powerful nations with a veto.
More opinions from a rich and powerful publication from a rich and powerful nation
AS I said - the work of the UN is far more democratic and transparent than any government empowered to suppress information and block its being gathered
I asked you a question - I ask again
What do you propose as an alternative.
I repeat, we do not rely on such organisations to make up our minds - we do so on the basis of all information to hand
I've shown you mind - you show me yours.
This is little more than a smokescreen to avoid the main issues here - the terrorist nature of the Israeli regime
To you actually have anything to show this is not the case (apart from Global Research)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 01 May 17 - 07:01 AM

Committees do the research, powerful nations block actions their findings
It is not the findings that are at fault (which is what you are challenging)
It is the lack of action on those findings.
Jim
If only that were true. If the findings do not meet the approval of uncle sam they are ditched and all who sail with her. Also if the UN does not condone the actions of the US the US writes it's own agenda beholden to no one. That makes the UN a fairly useless organisation in my book. It also need to move its base to a more neutral country. From the little I have seen of the UN in various countries they have fleets of brand new land cruisers parked in the best hotel in town and they rarely move. Their peace keeping role I have no firsthand knowledge of.
A series of articles to elaborate:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=un+american+influence&x=11&y=8

Try reading the message and not decry the messenger

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 17 - 06:57 AM

UN Watch has been described as "a lobby group with strong ties to Israel" (Agence France-Presse)

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency describe UN Watch as "a pro Israel Organisation"

From Wiki:

"Ian Williams, former president of the United Nations Correspondents Association[67] and author of The UN For Beginners,[68] wrote in an opinion piece in The Guardian in 2007 that the main objective of UN Watch "is to attack the United Nations in general, and its human rights council in particular, for alleged bias against Israel". Williams supported UN Watch's condemnation of the UN Human Rights Council as a hypocritical organization, but also accused UN Watch itself of hypocrisy for failing to denounce what he called "manifest Israeli transgressions against the human rights of Palestinians.

The last sentence is a little telling ..........

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 17 - 06:42 AM

UN, Israel & Anti-Semitism

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 17 - 05:17 AM

"Jim. How can the UN function correctly when 5 members hold veto powers "
I have been making this point for as long as I can remember
Committees do the research, powerful nations block actions their findings
It is not the findings that are at fault (which is what you are challenging)
It is the lack of action on those findings.
The fact that all of this is done publicly is the greatest value of the U.N. - we know when they are not doing their duty
Interestingly, the two greatest blockers of action by vetoes are your particular flavours of the month - Russia and the United States
The U.S. has operated over 100 vetoes in order to prevent action against Israeli war crimes and human rights abuses.
Personally, I think the power of veto should be removed, but that is beside the point
As flawed as it may be, its actions are open to public scrutiny
If you took your attitude we would have no health service because of its weaknesses, no justice system, no government...... anarchic barbarism
You seek to improve it, not undermine its work
As I said, you don't need a committee to tell you what to think, but you do need one such as the U.N. to get a cross-section of differentiating views
If you believe their statement to be flawed, challenge the statement and not teh fact that any organiseation such as this is made up of flawed human beings
We all have access to the facts and the intelligence to make up our own mind on them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 01 May 17 - 04:53 AM

Jim. How can the UN function correctly when 5 members hold veto powers and kill many worthwhile resolutions stone dead? Have a read of gaddaffi's UN speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 17 - 04:28 AM

"The original concept was good but it took a ride on a roller coaster to hell."
You take flaws in a complicated system to undermine an organistion of international States - you have attempted to do so with Humn Rights organisations Iaians
Your alternative appears to be that the only thing we have to rely on are the denials of the terrorist states
That would be a real "road to hell" in my opinion - no international laws, not war crimes commissions, ho overseeing of human rights.... nothing
The Israelis demanded the International Court of Justice be dismantled, when she was called to face her crimes following the last set of massacres of civilians in Gaza
Is that what you are suggesting - if not, what
We don't rely on pronouncements from any of these organisations for our information and understanding - we have world wide and largely neutral observers, witness statements and, certainly in the case of Gaza, a blow-by-blow view of what was happening, as it was happening - we saw the results nightly on our televisions, read it in the papers - and we have our own intelligence and moralities to judge the rights and wrongs of the situation.
Without the United Nations, Amnesty.... and all these other organisations, the world would be an extremely dangerous, shitty place for all of us.
Instead of attempting to undermine these organisations, why not just reply to what they are actually saying?
We know Israel to be a Terrorist State carrying our a programme of ethnic cleansing on an entire culture of people who have occupied the area for many centuries, god knows, there are enough Jews and Israelis who have said the same thing themselves.
You have an npleasant habit f denying apparent facts on the basis of the opinions of largely unknown and untrustworthy sources
One of your favourites, Global Research" is a site st up by a Russian billionaire - very reliable, I'm sure.
I'd rather trust Rupert Murdoch, shit that he is.
At least he employs teams of experts skilled in the trade of journalism
It's facts that carry the weight in these discussions, not random opinions that any moron can scoop up off the net.
For any opinion one person can scoop up making a case, there are hundreds out there to contradict it
"The facts man, the facts, as Joe Friday used to say
C'mon - give us a real argument
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 17 - 04:22 AM

Did you actually read the link professor, if so which part of "The Council called for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction" do you not understand.

Which bit of "Settlement activity constituted the single biggest threat to peace, and had led to settler violence, home demolitions and denial of development. Decades of human rights violations had frustrated those with nothing to lose, leading to acts of violence" do you not understand.

Which bit of "The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel's establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders" do you not understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 17 - 04:15 AM

Iains, neither of the links worked, one said "sorry, something went wrong. Please try again in a couple of minutes" I did, and got the same message. The other read "Page not found"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 17 - 04:11 AM

Rag, no-one here denies that the settlements are regarded as illegal by other countries, as in your link.

Decent countries however do not believe Israel to be guilty of any of those things in Jim's recent post.
Just saying them will get you suspended from any of our political parties, except the extreme Right or Left.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 17 - 04:05 AM

Jim, as Teribus said, only enemies of Israel believe all that propaganda.

It is not a "fascist state" and not engaged [n "ethnic cleansing."
Just saying that got Ward dropped by the Lib Dems.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 01 May 17 - 03:46 AM

Raffytash. A view of the UN.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-takeover-of-the-united-nations/5303368

credibility is further stretched by the recent election of saudito the UN women's rights commission

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-un-womens-right-commission-un-watch-middle-east-muslim-driving-

The original concept was good but it took a ride on a roller coaster to hell.