BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 20 May 17 - 01:44 AM

Ah so Jom it would appear that it is perfectly OK for the Arabs of Palestine to openly declare their intention to grab land and annihilate a race but it is totally reprehensible for the Jews of Palestine to defend themselves. Tell me the rationale behind that thinking.

It was the Arabs of Palestine who chose war over peaceful negotiation Shaw. So yes they all must live with the consequences of falling in behind that decision. They are being asked to totally surrender, it was they, under Arafat, who declared war on every single Jew in the world. The same rules applied to Germany, Italy and Japan - if memory serves me correctly, unconditional surrender didn't work out too badly for them.

After 70 years of failure what other choice have the Arabs of Palestine got? Another 70 years of the same? There is no realistic belief in any Two-State solution by anyone, the Palestinian State was always going to be totally dependent economically on Israel. So next time the Arabs of Palestine in Gaza "kick-off" just let them get on with it, no UN brokered ceasefire for Hamas to ignore and defy.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:06 PM

And its gonna get worse - just give Twitler and Mad Dog Mattis a chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:52 PM

That's the nail hit exactly on the head, Jim. Israel never has to give anything in return. Why would they when they have the world's biggest poodle in tow who keeps the military money rolling in and who never offers any more than the mildest scolding for even the worst of the Israeli regime's outrages?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:46 PM

"1: Stop all attacks against Israel and Israeli citizens immediately"
Utter and (as usual) unqualified by a shred of proof bullshit
Israel is demanding total surrender and offering nothing in return
The main cuses of the violencxe is and always has been the land-grabbing policy of Israel aimed at ethnically cleansing the area
https://www.globalpolicy.org/security-council/index-of-countries-on-the-security-council-agenda/israel-palestine-and-the-occupied-territories/land-and-settlement-issues.html
Israel has no intention of halting this, on the contrary, THEY ARE NOW IRREVERSIBLE
Israel has now written into law
THE GRABBING OF PALESTINIAN LAND
Even Israeli politiicians are describing Israel's policy as "EVIL and DANGEROUS"
If you bunch of comedians have any evidence that this is not happening, produce it insted of trying to bully and bluster it through, just like your political right wing heroes
Were's your evidence for all this bullshit?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:45 PM

Israel doesn't have to worry about Egypt and Jordan because those two shabbily-governed non-democracies are propped up, conditionally of course, by the west. Of course, Israel is unconditionally propped up by the west, but hey.

The question "what kind of man are you" was a reference to your disgusting assertion that TWO MILLION Gazans, including over a million women and children, are living under a siege that they brought on themselves. I suppose you believe in original sin too. You have claimed so many times that Hamas don't allow elections and rule Gaza with an iron fist, etc., then you blame all two million for a self-imposed blockade, even though, according to you, they have no say. Well I think that isn't too far removed from the blanket attitude to the Jews that eventually led to the Holocaust. Shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 05:24 PM

Yep, and I'm the Queen of Sheba. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 May 17 - 04:54 PM

The person who wrote that Guardian piece is clearly a dupe of Hamas propaganda. The "new" document still calls for the liberation of all of historical Palestine (ie Israel), says armed resistance is the means to achieve that goal and does not recognize Israel's right to exist.

We have reaffirmed the unchanging constant principles that we do not recognize Israel; we do not recognize the land occupied in 1948 as belonging to Israel and we do not recognize that the people who came here [Jews] own this land

- Hamas senior official Mahmoud al-Zahar

"The uncomfortable fact is that the west is only too happy to leave the people of Gaza inside their prison; it suits us to do so. We don't care about blighted lives, or about whether the electricity is on six hours or four hours or if there is none at all."

The PA pays Israel for the power it provides to Gaza. Abbas is withholding payment as a power play against Hamas after they refused to purchase fuel from the PA for their only power plant. The PA also wants Hamas to either take full responsibility for the territory it governs, or to relinquish control back to it.

The author of this piece has bought into the blatantly false narrative of victimology as propagated by the fakestinians which has enriched their leaders to obscene levels. She demonstrates the soft bigotry of low expectations toward these people. Jew haters lap it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 04:04 PM

"Against all those, why should anyone listen to you Steve?"

You keep saying that but you keep reading my posts. Are you insane?

And no, you won't pay me to give you six of the best across your eager, naked buttocks, Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 03:56 PM

Well cherrypicked, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 17 - 01:34 PM

From Steve's Guardian article.

"Both the US and Britain have made clear they believe that nothing significant has altered in Hamas's position. A Foreign Office spokesman said: "They must renounce violence, recognise Israel and accept previously signed agreements."
True, what Hamas means by its new "General Principles and Policies Document" is still murky, particularly as it still holds out the possibility of a Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine. And it has published the changes now as a strategic move to secure its own survival.
After 10 years of a crippling economic siege Hamas is struggling to govern. It desperately needs money – not least to pay for fuel – and it needs Egypt to open its crossing into the Sinai. In return, both Egypt and Arab paymasters demand that Hamas show moderation."

What she gets wrong,
"The uncomfortable fact is that the west is only too happy to leave the people of Gaza inside their prison; it suits us to do so. We don't care about blighted lives, or about whether the electricity is on six hours or four hours or if there is none at all. "

No. We can do nothing while Hamas pursues its insane war against its neighbour!

"By accepting that Hamas has met at least some of the west's conditions,.."

It has not!

"On the Gaza streets there is no expectation of any change, only predictions of a new war."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/19/hamas-peace-gaza-stalemate

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 19 May 17 - 01:19 PM

Ah Keith, everybody must listen to Shaw because he used to be a teacher and here he behaves as though we are all in his classroom.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 17 - 01:12 PM

You have quoted a long-standing pro-Israeli regime Islamophobe who justified an assassination.

She is just the latest, and only quoted because it is current.

I have quoted many senior, long established and prominent Labour people, including McDonnell the Shadow Chancellor and Corbyn's closest ally, Abbott who is very close to Corbyn, Watson the Deputy Leader, and prominent people like Khan and Thornberry.

Against all those, why should anyone listen to you Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 19 May 17 - 11:12 AM

"So, two million civilians who you claim are powerless to do anything about Hamas have brought that siege on themselves, eh, Teribus?"

Basically yes Shaw. Since 1948 they are and have been conditioned to be professional "victims" firstly by the Egyptians and Jordanians who by force of arms stole and annexed Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from the former mandated territory of Palestine then shut the "Palestinians" up in Refugee Camps - Not a squeak out of any of you about that (Wonder why?). Later when they withdrew the "Palestinians" under Arafat still kept those other "Palestinians" confined to those camps - now why was that Shaw - Meanwhile over in Israel they took in over 800,000 refugees and guess what? Not a single refugee in sight in the entire country.

The "Leadership" of the "Palestinians" found that by parading these poor unfortunates they could through guilt extract money from the non-frontline Arab states and the international community and a concerted campaign of provocation and management they have set out to paint the democratically elected government of Israel as black as possible. This task is made easier by gullible fools such as yourself and Carroll.

I mean, what kind of man ARE you?

You are asking the wrong person. You should be asking the "Palestinians" what sort of people they are. So far according to their track record they are the sort of people who simply cannot learn from their past mistakes. In 1948 they were sold the lie that the armies of five Arab nations would annihilate the Jews and drive them into the sea and that the land, businesses, farms and homes built up by the Jews would be theirs for the taking. They have been fed that cloud cuckoo-land fantasy ever since. By now after God knows how many attempts they should have resigned themselves to the fact that it is just not going to happen. Those two million people living in Gaza and the 2.1 million living in the West Bank have received more in international aid since 1948 than was made available to Europe under the Marshall Plan (Compare what was accomplished with that to what the "Palestinian Leaders" have done with the money that has been paid to them).

The solution is simple:

1: Stop all attacks against Israel and Israeli citizens immediately
2: Officially recognise the internationally recognised sovereign state of Israel.
3: Affirm that the State of Israel and all its citizens have the right to exist free from attack or the threat of attack.

Do that and the "blockade" stops
Do that and there will be no further armed responses by Israel to Arab provocation.

Ask the Egyptians and the Jordanians if Israel keeps their side of the bargain. As far as I know they have.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:45 AM

You are truly despicable Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:42 AM

Come on, sunshine - your link! Which of those comments under the video would you like to endorse? Not nice, some of them, are they? How about the one that referred to rapefugees?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:24 AM

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:21 AM

Very amusing. Now tell me which of the comments from pro-Israeli regime supporters you agree with. Watch it folks if you scroll down them - there are plenty of little bobads down there! They make the video itself look positively saintly (which it isn't, of course).   A word in your shell-like, boobs: if you don't wish to be associated with stuff you link to in your posts, don't post it. Easy!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:16 AM

Trying to link me to the comments below the video is despicable but that's you Shaw. Also your use of the word "siege" for what is a LEGAL blockade is despicable, it is a deliberate lie the purpose of which is to demonize Israel - there's a word for people who deliberately single out Israel for demonization - look it up. BTW, Israel delivers 1000 truckloads of goods to Gaza daily - some siege eh - liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 08:02 AM

I haven't said anything to either contradict or applaud that bloody video. It's a piece of propagandistic silliness. I've tried to tell you a hundred times that I have no truck with Hamas. What do you think of the vituperous nastiness from Islamophobes that it engendered in the comments underneath? Tell me which ones you agree with!

So, two million civilians who you claim are powerless to do anything about Hamas have brought that siege on themselves, eh, Teribus? I mean, what kind of man ARE you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:49 AM

just read the comments under the video.

So, nothing to say about the video just another attempt at diversion because the video shows you to be once again full of shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:43 AM

"We are talking about two million fellow human beings here who are living under siege."

Self-imposed.

"We need to find ways out of the situation."

No Shaw - THEY need to realise that they have absolutely no right whatsoever to deny the right of Israel to exist. They need to realise that they must find a way of making peaceful co-existence work to the mutual benefit of all - They need to do that - NOBODY ELSE CAN MAKE IT WORK - a solution cannot be imposed.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:22 AM

Yep, boobs, and just read the comments under the video. I'm guessing that you wrote them all in a fit of hatefest.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:13 AM

Turn the record over, Teribus. Your unsupported anti-Hamas propaganda serves absolutely no useful purpose. We are talking about two million fellow human beings here who are living under siege. We need to find ways out of the situation. Read the article.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 May 17 - 07:09 AM

Yes, let Hamas show you what it's really like in Gaza these days. Get those blinkers off. As the sign says: Thank you Hamas

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

What it is really like in Gaza these days is the direct result of choices made and actions taken by those who "govern" Gaza (And I use the word "govern" in it's loosest possible meaning).

What it is really like in Gaza these days is the people live with the fact that they live in a one party "state" - anyone wishing to provide a political alternative may find themselves taking a flying lesson without the benefit of an aeroplane from the roof of a seven storey building.

What it is really like in Gaza these days is the people, even in this one-party paradise, have not had the chance to exercise their right to vote since 2006.

What it is really like in Gaza these days is that while the Hamas government, throughout this "blockade", can smuggle in weapons, explosives, in fact anything they want. But they cannot for some strange reason do anything to alleviate the shortages that the people they are supposed to be governing are experiencing.

What it is really like in Gaza these days Shaw is that cement, wiring and steel can be smuggled in to build shelters for Hamas "fighters", yet Hamas have not built one shelter for the people they are supposed to be governing while ordering them to remain in locations that the IDF have clearly issued warnings that they are about to attack.

They have been on the losing side of this conflict, entirely of their own making, for 70 years - that by anyone's measurement is a bloody slow learning curve - high time they started learning from history - their fault - entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 06:22 AM

"Instead I have quoted senior, long established and prominent Labour people"

You have quoted a long-standing pro-Israeli regime Islamophobe who justified an assassination. Why not look at the excellent article in today's Guardian by Sarah Helm instead. Find out what it's really like in Gaza these days. Get those blinkers off.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 17 - 05:30 AM

Steve, you criticise and dismiss Ellman for being anti Hamas so presumably you are pro Hamas, a recognised terrorist group responsible for indiscriminate atrocities such as bombing buses and the kidnap and murder of school kids.

On the Blasphemy thread you express your abhorrence for capital punishment. Israel is the only state in the region that does not practise it. Hamas actually lynches opponents in the street without even a pretence of a trial!

What is the real, underlying reason for your hatred of Israel and support for its enemies?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 17 - 05:22 AM

Steve,
. The trouble with your "authorities," Keith, which are myriad (you employ them routinely instead of presenting honest argument), is that you select the ones that reinforce your personal prejudices

Unfair Steve. You folks just deny that the Labour Left has had serious problems with anti-Semitism.
You would rightly dismiss my own view on the subject because, like you, I have no inside knowledge.
Instead I have quoted senior, long established and prominent Labour people who you can try to dismiss but only make yourself foolish by doing so.
They know rather better than you what is going on in the party.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 17 - 04:17 AM

The man who never "directly answers" anything gives us a perfect example of a rabid post. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 19 May 17 - 02:56 AM

Ducked the question didn't you Shaw (Par for the course for you - that is what you normally do - others, according to your diktats have to explain and substantiate everything but you for some reason best known to yourself are excused this essential process and requirement)

Keith A's very reasonable question - "Why would anyone not be "rabidly anti" a brutal terrorist organisation.
Are you not Steve?

No direct answer from Shaw because both Shaw and Carroll are apologists for Hamas, the internationally recognised terrorist organisation. The organisation that Corbyn and his hard-left pals in the Labour Party refers to as being "friends" (No bloody wonder Jewish members of the Labour Party feel "uncomfortable").

Shaw now mithers about use of the word "rabid", yet he was the one to introduce it with reference to someone who quite rightly forcefully condemns Hamas as a terrorist organisation. Hamas has no interest at all in peace, or in any peace process, because they are making too much money from the current situation - money for nothing. The so-called "leaders" of the Arabs of Palestine have betrayed and let their people down at every turn since 1948. They have robbed them of hope and deliberately kept them in poverty and despair, because poverty and despair is good for attracting billions in international aid and assistance that is paid directly to the "leaders" for them to disburse as they see fit, the "people" never get a sniff of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 May 17 - 09:04 PM

Have a nice cup of cocoa and toddle off to bed. Don't forget your teddy.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 May 17 - 08:50 PM

Perhaps you should look up "rabidly."

Perhaps you should - you're the one playing silly word games to divert when cornered.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 May 17 - 08:18 PM

Dear me. Do you think that Neville really knew what was going to happen to six million Jews, idiot?! Perhaps you should look up "rabidly." It more than implies brainless advocacy, unthinking passion and mindless fervour. Not my approach. Show us that it isn't yours. You may struggle.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 May 17 - 07:43 PM

Being rabidly anti-Hamas is the correct approach to take with rabidly genocidal, anti-Semitic terrorists. A measured approach is what Neville Chamberlain tried with that other rabidly genocidal anti-Semite - how did that work out for him?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 May 17 - 06:55 PM

Does it really. The trouble with your "authorities," Keith, which are myriad (you employ them routinely instead of presenting honest argument), is that you select the ones that reinforce your personal prejudices. This particular lady fits your bill perfectly. I'm glad you admit that she's rabidly anti-Hamas. Personally, I prefer a more measured approach. Be more honest, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 17 - 01:25 PM

.....That makes her a better "authority" than you Steve!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 17 - 01:24 PM

Ellman is rabidly anti-Hamas and rabidly pro-Israel.

Why would anyone not be "rabidly anti" a brutal terrorist organisation.
Are you not Steve?

What is wrong with being pro-Israel, the only democracy in the region?

Why does that make her views on Labour anti-Semitism suspect when there are so many others in labour who say the same?

She is a British Labour Co-operative politician who has been the MP for Liverpool Riverside since 1997. In Parliament, she is Chair of the Transport Select Committee and a member of the Liaison Committee.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 May 17 - 10:35 AM

Well she certainly doesn't understand it, unfortunately. Most of her ranting about it is about Israel, not about Jews at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 May 17 - 10:25 AM

Ellman is rabidly anti-Hamas and rabidly pro-Israel

As are all decent, fair minded people who don't have a problem with Jews.

There has been, Ellman argues, a "real change in how people understand modern anti-Semitism."

Some people excepted, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 May 17 - 09:18 AM

Ellman is rabidly anti-Hamas and rabidly pro-Israel. Anyone reading the two posts above should be aware of that.

Extracted from wiki.
She voted "very strongly for" the Iraq War, "very strongly against" an investigation into that war, and "very strongly for" renewal of Trident, Britain's nuclear weapons programme.

Ellman is also the Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement and Vice Chair of Labour Friends of Israel and has been an active spokeswoman in Parliament on issues relating to the Middle East. Ellman is a member of Labour Friends of Israel. [On the] assassination of Sheikh Yasin, the 66-year-old spiritual leader of Hamas, [she] told Parliament that "Israel's action in killing Sheikh Yasin was a legitimate response to an extraordinary situation". In January 2011, during a debate on Antisemitism she asked: "Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that the anti-Semitism that he describes is rarely opposed by those who declare themselves anti-racist?"

In the 2010 Election campaign leaflets had been distributed in her constituency of Liverpool Riverside targeting Mrs Ellman and Luciana Berger for their membership of Labour Friends of Israel and was headed "Don't vote for Friends of Israel". A leaflet headed "Remember Gaza" and subheaded "Don't vote for Labour Friends of Israel" was written and widely distributed by Liverpool Friends of Palestine and appears on the website LabourNet. An article appeared in The Jewish Chronicle entitled "Racist leaflets against Jewish candidates in Liverpool."

Not a great "authority" then, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 May 17 - 07:59 AM

Labour MP Louise Ellman is talking about our resident Labour Party members right there. If the party brass read their posts they would undeniably face suspension.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 17 - 05:09 AM

Labour MP Louise Ellman last week.
"Ellman also believes that, despite foot-dragging by the leadership, there is now "more of an understanding that there is an issue of anti-Semitism in the Labour party."
She points, too, to the fact that senior figures in the party, such as deputy leader Tom Watson, "continue to speak out very strongly against what's happening."

There has been, Ellman argues, a "real change in how people understand modern anti-Semitism."
She recognizes that while members of the Labour party have always recoiled from the problem in its "traditional form" — she cites opposition to Britain's pre-war fascist leader, Oswald Mosley, and his modern-day adherents in the far-right British National party — some have greater difficulty recognizing left-wing anti-Semitism.
The phenomenon is not a new one, she argues, but has become "more prominent and often shows in discussions about Israel and the way it is treated in a way no other country is."
It is not, though, simply how Israel is discussed which is problematic, but the manner in which parts of the left focus on it to the exclusion of many other issues and conflicts which Ellman finds disturbing.
"It is deeply problematic because Israel is singled out of all the disputes around the world," she says, "and it is then discussed in ways that don't recognize the existential problem that Israel faces, and it then emerges that Israel is uniquely evil — and that is a completely distorted reality."

http://www.timesofisrael.com/this-tough-as-nails-uk-politician-wont-be-cowed-by-the-anti-semitism-of-her-own-party/

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 May 17 - 05:18 AM

Wiki,
"According to data provided by the Palestinian International Middle East Media Center, 79.7% of the Palestinians killed in Gaza were male, with the majority between 16 and 35 (fighting-age)."

"Israel has pointed to the relatively small numbers of fatalities among women, children and men over 60, and to instances of Hamas fighters being counted as civilians (perhaps due to the broad definition of "civilian" used by the Gaza Health Ministry), to support its view that the number of the dead who were militants is 40–50%"

" ITIC reported instances in which children and teenagers served as militants, as well as cases where the ages of casualties reported by GHM were allegedly falsified, with child militants listed as adults and adults listed as children."

"Abbas said that "more than 120 youths were killed for violating the curfew and house arrest orders issued against them" by Hamas, referring to reports that Hamas targeted Fatah activists in Gaza during the conflict. Abbas said that Hamas also executed more than 30 suspected collaborators without trial"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict#Impact

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 May 17 - 05:00 AM

Steve,
The IDF killed hundreds of children in a very short time.

Really? More details of that "fact" please Steve, with an estimate of how many were victims of faulty missiles intended for Israeli civilians.

White phosphorus was used.

It was not.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 16 May 17 - 07:12 PM

Sheesh Teribus, don't be so hard with experience on little Stevie blunder there, it might give him a complex and cause him to question his bias...........no chance lol!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 16 May 17 - 12:35 PM

Steve Shaw - 16 May 17 - 06:26 AM

OK bit by bit:

I don't think that at all and I have given you no reason to make such a stupid assertion.

Well here is the exchange that caused me to believe that "stupid assertion:

Initially - "As he's a military man I suppose we are obliged to think that he's above all suspicion of bias. That seems to be your current theme, cap-doffer-in-chief. Well, as they say, the first casualty of war..." - Steve Shaw - Is truth - i.e. the man is automatically a liar - totally unfounded assumption on your part. What reason does he have Shaw to lie? According to what you infer his reason to lie is because he is part of the military.

Next we have this nugget from military expert and experience warrior Steve Shaw:

"The soldiers in Jim's piece were in the thick of the conflict."

Really? And you know this for sure how? Because they said so? They are military men like Tim Collins or Richard Kemp, who you think are born liars what verification do you have that those men were where they said they were - I mean apart from them telling a story that suits your argument.

Tell me Shaw, from your extensive experience of being in combat, what it is that you notice while under fire in a situation where others are trying their utmost to kill you and your friends, what is it that you know? Now I do know for certain that neither yourself, or your pal Carroll have ever, in your lives been under such circumstances - I on the other hand have. When it comes to the big picture stuff, those at the pointy end of things have got absolutely no idea of what is going on apart from the tiny postage stamp sized snap-shots you get every time you muster the guts to stick your head above the parapet to sneak a look.

Yes Collins visited the war zone a year after the fighting. and all the forensic evidence was still there, he had time to examine it at leisure, there was no-one shooting at him, he had time to look at it. The five dozen IDF men on the ground on ground at the time had none of these luxuries and besides at the time their major concern was focused on achieving the mission they had been set and saving their own hides. As you have no experience of this, please do not even attempt to have the arrogance to argue the point as you haven't got the foggiest notion of what you are talking about.

Tell me why Tim Collins, who had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with UN HRC or UN Watch, be biased in favour of the Israeli regime that he has no allegiance to and who he is not part of? Having no axe to grind whatsoever, he gave his honest opinion of what he saw - simple as that. Travers didn't even f**kin' well bother to LOOK. The prat didn't even bother to check who his Palestinian "witnesses" were, or what organisation they belonged to.

"just as capable of misjudgement as anyone else - Apart from you it seems.

"fraudulent reporter at the Beeb - None more fraudulent than Jeremy Bowen, or Barbara Plett, or Rageh Omaar.

"I'm not saying this to blacken his name. - Hell as like. You have absolutely no knowledge or experience to pass an opinion on anything to do with the military. Your approach to the subject is totally biased and coloured by your ideological belief in stereotypes that you clearly demonstrate in all your arguments.

"As for Judge Goldstone, he made mistakes that he has admitted to. But ask yourself why Israel, if their behaviour has been as saintly as described in the UN Watch report, absolutely refused to cooperate with him right from the outset."

Those mistakes would never have been admitted to had UN Watch not conducted their own investigation and openly challenged what Goldstone had reported. Had the Goldstone report been accepted blindly then it would have been the basis for any legal action taken in the International Court of Justice - as it was the Goldstone report was shown to be biased and seriously flawed. By the way the reason that the Israeli Government refused to co-operate with Goldstone was because under the terms of the mandate given they were only looking to critically investigate actions by the IDF.

Tell me Shaw how has Goldstone "changed the game for Israel"? Goldstone covered the 2009 Operation Cast Lead. What was different on the Israeli approach in 2012 and in 2014? How many rockets have been fired into Israel by Hamas since 2014? Since 2014 a total of 16 rockets have launched into Israel - none since August 2016. How many Israeli incursions into Gaza have been made since 2014? NONE See any connection Shaw?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 17 - 06:26 AM

I don't think that at all and I have given you no reason to make such a stupid assertion.

The soldiers in Jim's piece were in the thick of the conflict. Collins visited the war zone a year after the fighting. You dismiss first-hand accounts by five dozen IDF men on the ground in favour of a single establishment man, far removed from the conflict, a man avidly sought by both the Tories and the Ulster Unionists for their ranks, a man, let's face it, far more likely to side with the Israeli regime than with the Palestinians. He gave a lovely little-Englander speech to his men at the start of the disastrous Iraq invasion, full of purple prose, failing to see the wrongs of it, unlike millions of the rest of us, who couldn't believe what was happening. He has shown himself to be just as capable of misjudgement as anyone else, even working with a fraudulent reporter at the Beeb. I'm not saying this to blacken his name. I'm sure he's a very fine man and a damn good soldier. I'm saying this as a corrective to your rather sycophantic appeal to authority in presenting him to us as a man of flawless and inviolable integrity. He is not that man. It's very amusing to see how your exceptionally sharp critical faculties are always immediately blunted, positively disembowelled, by anyone coming from the establishment. You've clearly been taking lessons from Keith.

As for Judge Goldstone, he made mistakes that he has admitted to. But ask yourself why Israel, if their behaviour has been as saintly as described in the UN Watch report, absolutely refused to cooperate with him right from the outset. And, whatever you think of this alleged self-hating Jew, just consider how he's changed the game for Israel. Their military escapades are under scrutiny like never before, to the benefit of everyone in the region, as a consequence of his report, no matter how flawed.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 16 May 17 - 05:30 AM

So Shaw as you seem to think that anybody connected to the military are all biased born liars who is it that you would select to monitor, examine and analyse the execution and conduct of any given military operation? Possibly you'd side with Jom and opt for milkmen and paperboys.

Bias in military thinking is extremely dangerous. Those who believe in their own superiority and who underestimate their enemy usually live to bitterly regret their error - history, had you read it, is absolutely littered with examples.

My own experience and I daresay the experience of the members of this forum who have served in the armed forces will tend toward a marked objectivity in thinking that is applied to any problem given to the armed forces from straightforward military problems to humanitarian support in disaster areas - neither of which, judging by what you write, you have the foggiest notion about. Your world outside your immediate circle appears to be made up of left-wing, tooth-sucking, ideological stereotypes who bear no resemblance to reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 17 - 04:50 AM

As he's a military man I suppose we are obliged to think that he's above all suspicion of bias. That seems to be your current theme, cap-doffer-in-chief. Well, as they say, the first casualty of war...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 16 May 17 - 02:24 AM

"The committee members are institutionally biased towards producing the findings that the committee wants to hear."

So does that hold good for UN HRC and UNRWA Shaw? Both noted for their anti-Israeli bias? I know how much you believe in there being one sauce for the goose and another for the gander.

Another fly in the ointment as far as your statement goes of course is that those people mentioned who actually undertook the fact finding missions were not members of either UN HRC or UN Watch, so I would be delighted to hear from you exactly how they could possibly be described as being institutionally biased.

Now if you were called upon to put a team together to monitor, examine and analyse the conduct of a military operation who would you select? We know that your pal Jom in his wisdom would pick milkmen and paperboys, dying to hear who you would pick.

Desmond Travers (Colonel Irish Army retired) the UN HRC Team's one and only military expert made mistake after mistake and started out on the assumption that Israel was guilty. One independent military expert (Tim Collins Colonel Irish Rangers retired) who looked into a claim that a mosque had been used to store weapons (A claim that Travers dismissed out of hand) had nothing to do with UN Watch or their team of experts, read accounts of the strike that hit the mosque and the eye-witness accounts of those who observed it and then went to the site and examined it where he found obvious signs of sympathetic secondary explosions inside the building. Now then Shaw if the Israelis only struck the building once - you tell me what caused the secondary explosions? As I know you will not offer up any response to that question I will tell you. For there to have been secondary explosions there would have to be munitions or explosives stored inside the building when it as hit.