BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 07:45 PM

"Can you believe it?"
Can you believe it
The Israeli Government facilitated the massacre of up to 3,500 unarmed refugees, found themselves not guilty but indicted an Israeli General as being responsible for allowing it to take place, then, as a punishment, they elected him Prime Minister.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 05:44 PM

"I am away now."

With the fairies.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 03:33 PM

Can you believe it? Soldiers stopped two Arab nurses who are cancer patients coming into Israel from Gaza for treatment and insisted on searching their possessions...

oh wait...

Today's news brief: "Forces find explosives among the medical equipment of two Arab nurses allowed into Israel for cancer treatment."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 11:51 AM

"They reported their complaints about anti-Semitism to the Party leadership to deal with, as did those complaining of homophobia and misogyny."
Not what I asked Keith - I asked why they didn't go public
Why didn't they - there was nothing stopping them
You are lying when you deny having said what you said
You've denied it before and I've put it up twice
Why bother putting it up yet again - you'll only ask for proof as if hadn't already done it
I'm really to old to be coping with childishly dishonest behaviour like yours
You want it again - I'll put it up next to your "implant to rape" evidence
Enough really is enough with your dishonesty
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 08:48 AM

There were no objections but yours as far as I can see, Keith, but I am aware of what is currently happening in your life so we shall leave it there until you are fully recovered.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 08:37 AM

Dave,
I do not expect anyone to and I never objected to being offended.
Why bring it up then?

Because of all the actual objections to your behaviour.

I do object to your always and only criticising Christianity and never any other faith.
I did not criticise anything. I linked an article and did not even complete a joke.

yes. Criticise was the wrong word.
I should have said, "I do object to your always and only mocking and ridiculing Christians and never any other faith."

I do object to your claiming it is my fault that you do it.
Your fault that I do what? Your paranoia is showing

No. You claimed you did not attack other faiths because of my "agenda."

I do object to being singled out by name as someone likely to be offended by what you were about to post.
Where did I do that?

You identified me by name on Good Friday as one to whom it is a special day, and then posted your mocking attacks.

Jim, you can not quote me because you were lying.
It is also a lie about any "PACT OF SILENCE."
If it was not a lie then quote me.
They were not silent.
They reported their complaints about anti-Semitism to the Party leadership to deal with, as did those complaining of homophobia and misogyny.
No "pact of silence." You made that up.

I am away now.
Enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 06:23 AM

"Well known Mudcat liar Jim,"
Didn't you just claim you don't go in for personal insults
Seems like it's Well known Mudcat liar Keith
"Why don't you quote them then Jim?"
How can you quote a majority Keith - they have vor=ted him into office twice.
You can quote who you like but until you produce solid evidence of antisemitism it remains an unsubstantiated quote from someone who either sees Corbyn as a liability or from those who have been been prompted by Israel to get rid of the leader who threatens to introduce BDS
If you can't produce actual evidence, the rest is agenda-driven rhetoric
I ASKED WHY THE JEWISH MPS DIDN'T GO PUBLIC WITH THEIR ACCUSATIONS - YOU REFUSE TO ANSWER, SO YOUR ORIGINAL ONE - THAT THEY HAVE ENTERED INTO A PACT OF SILENCE FOR THE GOOD OF THE PARTY STANDS
"If that is not just another Jim lie, quote me."
Are you actually denying that you refuse to respond to a Jewish writer because he has nothing worth saying on British antisemitism(sic)?
At least give this statement a little gap before you start denying having made it
"Thanks for the link Jim - agrees with me that 5.19 million Palestinians
were NOT driven from their homes in 1948."
Who on earth said they were - I gave you the number of refugees - that is the current number
"According to the United Nations there were 5,149,742 Palestinian refugees driven out of their rightful home - ethnic cleansing on a massive scale"
You really need to get whoever reads these things for you to be more accurate
Piss off, you arrogantly stupid little man
What a pair of ludicrous tossers.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 05:52 AM

Keith

I do not expect anyone to and I never objected to being offended.
Why bring it up then?

I do object to you carelessly and gratuitously causing offence on this forum. It had nothing to do with anything being discussed.
Take that up with the moderation team

I do object to your always and only criticising Christianity and never any other faith.
I did not criticise anything. I linked an article and did not even complete a joke. When I do criticise religion you will note that I always refer to any branch of fantasy.

I do object to your claiming it is my fault that you do it.
Your fault that I do what? Your paranoia is showing

I do object to being singled out by name as someone likely to be offended by what you were about to post.
Where did I do that?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 04:39 AM

Well known Mudcat liar Jim,


By declarinbg publicly that Jews have no opinion regarding antisemitism you aare a declarede anti-Semite

If that is not just another Jim lie, quote me declaring it.

It is your mate who is describing a Jewish statement on The Labour Party as 'irrelevant'

If that is not just another Jim lie, quote me.

I did say that Labour insiders are more likely to know what is going on than people who do not even live in this country and have no connection with the British Labour Party.
I did not specify Jews.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Apr 17 - 04:34 AM

Jim,
The majority of the Labour party supports Corbyn

Why don't you quote them then Jim?
Because they are people like Steve who have no knowledge and who no-one has ever heard of.

I quote 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 on Labour Party matters.

Who knows more about what is going on inside Labour?
Not you and Steve!!

Nobody is attempting to ethnically cleanse Cyprus

Many of Greek Christian heritage were forced off their land.
You have never criticised Turkey over their illegal occupation on here, or called for a boycott.

Dave,

The link I provided may well have offended your sensibilities. To be honest, I could not give a toss.

I do not expect anyone to and I never objected to being offended.
I do object to you carelessly and gratuitously causing offence on this forum. It had nothing to do with anything being discussed.
I do object to your always and only criticising Christianity and never any other faith.
I do object to your claiming it is my fault that you do it.
I do object to being singled out by name as someone likely to be offended by what you were about to post.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 06:21 PM

Thanks for the link Jim - agrees with me that 5.19 million Palestinians were NOT driven from their homes in 1948.

Tell me Jim why did the Egyptians invade, occupy and steal Palestinian land in 1948 and then shut Palestinians up in refugee camps on what had been Palestinian land?

Tell me Jim why did the Jordanians do exactly the same thing to Palestinians in the West Bank?

I take it that you do acknowledge that in April 1948 both Gaza and the West Bank were part of the mandated territory of Palestine don't you? So how did they come to be under Egyptian and Jordanian control from 1948 until 1967?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 03:03 PM

"Utterly unbelievable more like Jom as the non-Jewish population of the Mandate of Palestine"
Are you really incapable of responding to a question without being abusive?
Nice to know I've got under your skin - again
SUGGEST YOU TRY HERE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 02:46 PM

"According to the United Nations there were 5,149,742 Palestinian refugees driven out of their rightful home - ethnic cleansing on a massive scale" - Jim

Unprecedented!!!! Utterly unbelievable more like Jim as the non-Jewish population of the Mandate of Palestine in 1948 was only around 1.358 million, care to explain how 5.15 million could have been driven out of their homes? Were they attached by bungie cords and kept springing back?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 02:30 PM

"While the anti-Israel camp refuses to apply that principle to Jews, "#
Who does here and will you provide an example of our doing so?
As you don't go in for that sort of thing I don't expect a reply
It is your mate who is describing a Jewish statement on The Labour Party as 'irrelevant'
Is that not "antisemitic" - if not, why?
Don't expect a response to that one either
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 02:07 PM

While the anti-Israel camp refuses to apply that principle to Jews, it also vaunts the anti-Zionist (read: anti-Semitic) Jew. The only time those on the far left deign Jewish opinions on anti-Semitism and Israel valid are when those opinions gel with their hatred of Israel.

These Jews are trump cards in the anti-Israel arsenal. Their value as people in the eyes of the BDS camp is derived from their identity, but they are not just tokens; they are weapons. We have made it clear that Israel and Jews are inseparable, and perversely, it is this connection that has lent credence to their anti-Semitic ramblings.

Anti-Zionist Jews are, of course, entitled to hold these opinions. Just as white supremacists are entitled to believe that the white race is superior to all others — and they certainly feel entitled. But that does not mean that those opinions are valid or acceptable; they are morally reprehensible, and so is the type of anti-Semitism enabled by and emanating from this fringe group of Jews.

The anti-Semitism of anti-Zionist Jews

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 12:36 PM

Errr, Keith, my Dad found it hilarious. He was strong enough in his faith to laugh such things off. How dare you even presume to suggest that you can even guess what my late Father did or did not like. That really IS a shitty thing to do.

Different Morality

The link I provided may well have offended your sensibilities. To be honest, I could not give a toss. In your own words take it take it up with the writers of the article. It was sweet FA to do with me.

Different Language

Neither Christians or any other fantasists have any different rights to anyone else on the planet. Including you, except of course you are on a

Different Planet.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 12:31 PM

Nothing. I just report what prominent Labour people and most MPs
Sit Keith - they have alluded to antisemitism - neither you nor they have specified what the charges are and until they do they are unfounded
"prominent Labour"
Back to your "real historians" do you never lkearn
You'd never heard of them until you7 sought them out and only then you took them because they were saying the right things
The majority of the Labour party supports Corbyn, but, as with the Jews, their opinion doesn't count
"Please quote my declaration to that effect, liar."
By declarinbg publicly that Jews have no opinion regarding antisemitism you aare a declarede antisemite
By declaring that Jews hid the nature of Labour antisemitism your 'Jewish pact of silence' makes yo an antisemite
IUf you are going to deny this again, pl;ease tell us why the Jewih MPs didn't go public as they easily could have
Failure to answer willleve you with your original statemnent
"Cypress"
I assume you mean Cyprus, nobody occupies trees any more.
I have beEn part of opposition to Turkish fascism since I moved to London in the sixties,
I signed petitions calling for a bycott, I took part in marches in North London and I attended protest meetins
A working man can only do so much
Nobody is attempting to ethnically cleanse Cyprus
I remind you that you presented Turkey as one of those "decent States" who was defending Israel by staying silent - I had to point out its fascist nature to you
Where were you while we were demonstrating - I didn't seem you on any of the marches!!
jIM cARROLL

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 11:59 AM

Oh I understand enough to realise your craving for attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 11:58 AM

Christ, he's rewriting the history of Cyprus now. He's even rewriting its name. Is there no end to his delusions?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 11:56 AM

It all just goes completely over your head Rag dear.
You understand nothing.
Be happy.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 11:42 AM

Give it a f**king rest will you. Frankly if Dave has offended you bloody well done to him.

You are always bleating about being victimised or picked on, poor little you, all the big boys are getting at you.

It's about time you grew up and starting behaving like a adult.

Of course if you really don't like it you could drop out of this forum or threads where you get rattled ............. and I know exactly the response that idea will get.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 11:41 AM

Jim,
Until you specify what you are accusing Labour of,

Nothing. I just report what prominent Labour people and most MPs complain of.

You are now a declared anti-Semite

Please quote my declaration to that effect, liar.

Re occupied land.
Turkey illegally occupies half of Cypress and took it not repelling an invasion in a war of defence, but in an unprovoked act of aggression.

Why no criticism or calls for a boycott Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 11:33 AM

Dave,
Neither of those can be be deemed as attacks on any person by anyone but the terminally deranged

No-one deemed it a personal attack, but your link did not just "make fun of a Christian tradition."
It ridiculed and mocked the core beliefs of all Christians.
Your impression of Jesus on a rubber cross might be hilarious, but I am sure you would not talk of it to your late father, or any Christian you would not wish to offend.

These were attacks on the Christian faith made worse because you made them on Good Friday, and made personal to me by your naming of me on that morning.

Christians have no right not to be offended, but what I object to is your singling out of that one faith for all your "humour."
That is what makes you a bigot.

I also object to your ludicrous claim that my "agenda" makes you do it, and not just that you know Christians will not bite back.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 10:59 AM

It's not for either of his benefits Steve
It's just cathartic to get if off your chest publicly
We should be grateful to these twots for the opportunity they give us
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 10:54 AM

Oh God. Don't argue with either of him. He's not worth it, and neither is he.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 09:32 AM

""Palestinian" land. Under the principle of international law, uti possidetis juris, it is a part of Israel. Israel"
Under the principle of natural law and justice, it belongs to those who own it - the U.N. has reiterated that fact and declared the settlements illegal
The present situation is due to the hasty botch-up carried out by departing Britain, and has no standing whatever.
To drive the Palestinians out of land they have occupied for many centuries would be simple ethnic cleansing, which is what is happening - go look how the world viewed former Yugoslavia if you want a modern example
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 09:06 AM

The "West Bank" is not, nor was it ever, "Palestinian" land. Under the principle of international law, uti possidetis juris, it is a part of Israel. Israel has been trying to relinquish it to the Arabs but has been rebuffed by their "leaders" every time it has made an offer. If the Arabs keep insisting that all of Israel is "Palestinian" land they will never have a state of their own in the "West Bank".

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 08:04 AM

"There are no illegal settlements -"
According to international law there are
The Israeli regime had driven out
According to the United Nations there were 5,149,742 Palestinian refugees driven out of their rightful home - ethnic cleansing on a massive scale
Totally unprecedented
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 07:48 AM

no matter how much land they steal for settlements,

Ah yes the well worn anti-Semitic trope from the well worn anti-Semite.

Let me remind you again Shaw:

There are no illegal settlements - unless of course one assumes that Jews should not own property or build in those areas because they are Jews. Every current Jewish "settlement" is on land owned by Jews before 1948 or purchased after 1967. Settlements that tried to set up on land that was not Jewish owned have been dismantled. We continue to hear the term "illegal", but "legal and illegal" has to be more that political desires and interests. It has to refer to law. And, frankly, law established during the illegal Jordanian occupation of the area in which Jewish property was confiscated and retitled, and current PA regulations that ban sales or ownership of property by Jews is not valid.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 07:14 AM

"You lose."
A regression to imbecility again Keith
Until you specify what you are accusing Labour of, you are not even in the race
You are now a declared antisemite - another one bites the dust and its' not even one o'clock yet
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 06:51 AM

If an attack is aimed at a person rather than an idea it is a personal attack, Keith. The clue is in the name. What I did was neither an attack nor personal. I linked an article written by someone else that made fun of a Christian tradition and asked if anyone had seem my impression of Jesus on a rubber cross. Neither of those can be be deemed as attacks on any person by anyone but the terminally deranged. You chose to respond to that by saying I was a bigot and my morality was shit. Which do you think is closest to the definition of personal attack?

Here - have a few more.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 06:46 AM

Stop being an idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 06:26 AM

"Not true. I have posted a wide range of views including McDonell and the entire NEC."
All from politicians the majority of arguably the largest political Party in Europe backs Corbyn

I am able to quote prominent Labour people on this issue, you are not.

You have to resort people who are not only not members, but do not even live in this country!

This issue is about the British Labour Party, and I quote people who actually know what is going on inside.
You can't!
You lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 06:21 AM

I do not make personal attacks Dave, I am responding to your attack on Christianity that you chose to make personal to me.

It is perfectly possible for an ignorant person to attack any faith if they choose to.
You choose to always and only attack Christians.
That makes you a bigot Dave, and that is not a gratuitous personal attack, but a fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 06:02 AM

As for your doughty defence of the apartheid wall, Teribus, try reading beyond the first few lines of the wiki entry if you can muster the energy. Even the Israelis acknowledge that the wall is by no means the main factor behind the drop in suicide bombings. Post hoc ergo propter hoc, eh, Teribus? The wall has annexed (aka stolen) thousands of acres of the West Bank, including stranding tens of thousands of Palestinians, divided farms, almost cut off villages, split families and made travelling extremely difficult for Palestinians. Your "security barrier" is my enforced future state boundary. It has been condemned nem con by the UN General Assembly and by the International Court of Justice. Not even Keith's decent democracies will stand up for it, will they?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 05:42 AM

It is a FACT that you always and only single out Christianity for mocking, ridicule and attack.
That is shitty morality. It makes you a bigot.

No it doesn't. I have already said umpteen times that I was brought up as Christian and can say what is offensive and what is not in that particular branch of fantasy. I know little about other religions so I am not qualified to say what is offensive or not in those.

Enough of this nonsense anyway. You have chosen to make personal attacks on me so I am sure you will excuse me if I do the same. When you least expect it...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 05:42 AM

He didn't say there was only one type of Zionist organisation. He simply said that Zionism is Zionism. There isn't only one type of left-wing or right-wing organisation either. As for your little litany of party names and what they mean, you forgot to add that the Labour Party is the organisation that supports women in maternity wards.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 05:09 AM

This forum stands in danger of becoming extremely antisemitic – not only are the opinions of Jews on anti-Semitism, unimportant compared to those of a handful of British politicians, bu now we have a proposal that only Israelis are the only ones allowed to express a view on Zionism
Come back Adolf – all is forgiven
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 04:18 AM

"Not true. I have posted a wide range of views including McDonell and the entire NEC."
All from politicians the majority of arguably the largest political Party in Europe backs Corbyn
Your handful of career politicians - all linked to ether the anti BDS campaign of the in-fighting that is happening represent nobody but their own professional or political interests.
These are the facts of Israel's Apartheid - ANOTHER JEW, I'M AFRAID
"Views on "Zionism" would carry a great deal more weight were they made by messrs Rosselson, Lerner & Lendman if they were all Israeli citizens."
What??????????
That statement is antisemitic in the extreme - depriving the world-wide Jewish people a voice on a political movement that represents the world's Jews and putting it in the hands of an extremist right wing country in the process of ethnically cleansing not Jews
Absolutely insane - fascism at its worst
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 04:16 AM

"They have given hundreds of miles in exchange for peace.
Half of Egypt and all of Gaza."

Oh the irony.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 04:06 AM

Jim,
Yup - and the majority of the party back Corbyn - you choose the views of a tiny minority who have an interest in getting rid of him

Not true. I have posted a wide range of views including McDonell and the entire NEC.

Who do you quote?
A non-Party member who lives in Israel!!

Dave,
OK Keith?

No.
It is a FACT that you always and only single out Christianity for mocking, ridicule and attack.
That is shitty morality. It makes you a bigot.

The reason you give, that I might use any attack on other faiths against you, but not attacks on mine, is not believable.
If you are being dishonest, that is also shitty morality.

Your Good Friday posts were made after you identified me by name as one to whom Good Friday is special and sacred.
That makes it personal, and even more shitty.
Despicable Dave.

Steve,
the Israeli regime never has to give an inch.

They have given hundreds of miles in exchange for peace.
Half of Egypt and all of Gaza.

However, giving back Gaza brought them nothing but more indiscriminate attacks on their people.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 17 - 04:04 AM

"The suggestion that the only people who should have a say on Zionism are the people who live in Israel is about as stupid as saying that only the people who live in North Korea should be allowed an opinion on their regime's policies." - Shaw

Did I say that? Is the Government of Israel "Zionist"? Last time I looked it wasn't, "The Zionist Union" was the main opposition party. Political parties in the Knesset describe them selves as being "Secular", "Zionist Labour", "Religious Zionist", "Liberal Zionist", Arab - One thing is certain Shaw, there are many and varied types of "Zionist" organisations in Israel and throughout the world - Not just one as Leon Rosselson stated. Tell me Shaw how many political parties are there represented in Gaza or in the Palestine Authority? Do they actually have an elected opposition, or did they all fly off the roofs of high-rises ten years ago? Tell me do you think the "Palestinians" will ever be given another chance to vote in an election? If so when do you think it might happen? Within our lifetime?

And yes Shaw the only people who do get a direct say in the policies of individual governments throughout the world are the electorates of those countries. As stated in my post Rosselson, Lerner and Lendman have got some bloody nerve advocating and dictating, from the safety of their homes in the UK and in the USA, policies that the Government of Israel should adopt that could well result in the mass slaughter of it's Jewish population.

The Wall and the drop in Israeli deaths can be easily checked Shaw:

"The barrier was built during the Second Intifada that began in September 2000, and was defended by the Israeli government as necessary to stop the wave of violence inside Israel that the uprising had brought with it. The Israeli government argues in defence of the wall, that between 2000 and July 2003 (completion of the "first continuous segment"), 73 suicide bombings were carried out from the West Bank, while from August 2003 to the end of 2006, only 12 attacks were carried out

Excuse me please, teacher Sir, but that is a reduction to 1/6th of the pre-wall number of incidents. Or if you would prefer it a reduction from an average of two suicide bombings a month over a three year period to one suicide bombing every three months over a similar three year period. Seems like one hell of an improvement and pretty effective to me Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 07:10 PM

And apropos of negotiations, every negotation attempt has been a charade and in every case for one reason: the Israeli regime never has to give an inch. No matter what their depredations, no matter what their outrages are in Lebanon and Gaza, no matter how much they discriminate against non-Jews in Israel. They have the unconditional backing, in terms of trade and military aid, of the United States. They know that, no matter how much land they steal for settlements, no matter how much they repress a million and a half people in Gaza, no matter how many cluster bomblets they leave scattered over Lebanon, no matter how many children they kill in Gaza, the US will never do more than give them a little slap on the wrist. Hardly grounds for reasonable negotiations.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 06:21 PM

What a pile of utter nonsense. As you say, things evolve. Your mindset never does. The suggestion that the only people who should have a say on Zionism are the people who live in Israel is about as stupid as saying that only the people who live in North Korea should be allowed an opinion on their regime's policies. Idiotic, and I think you know it. And if you really think that the wall was all about Palestinian snipers, you really are in cloud cuckoo land. You're a sucker for that good old Israeli propaganda, aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 04:41 PM

Views on "Zionism" would carry a great deal more weight were they made by messrs Rosselson, Lerner & Lendman if they were all Israeli citizens. Alas they are not, which is why I suppose that they can feel free to espouse the views they do knowing full well residing as they do in England, California and Chicago respectively none of them or their families will pick up the tab should things go pear shaped.

Rosselson's, "There are no 57 varieties of Zionism" is patently as wrong minded as is him applying what the thinking of the founders and early pioneers of the movement thought over a hundred years ago to the situation and circumstances of today, over the course of time things evolve and things change.

Lerner & Lendman can chatter on about "Apartheid Walls", etc, but they were not in the line of fire of "Palestinian" snipers nor would they have been likely to find themselves in close proximity to suicide bombers that the existence of the Wall prevented. Also liked their idea about negotiating with the "Palestinians" - Only snag there of course is that for any negotiations to take place there have to be at least two parties willing to negotiate and that rules out Hamas, Hezbollah and the Palestinian Authority, perhaps Lerner & Lendman could clue us in on who the Israelis should then negotiate with and what they would negotiate as no-one on the Palestinian side has the slightest interest in any form of a "Two-State Solution" - their aim is the destruction of the internationally recognised sovereign State of Israel and the annihilation of the Jewish population, Lerner & Lendman wouldn't of course be affected.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 03:23 PM

Professor, you have every right to be offended. I have every right not to give a ****.

I am sick and tired of religious zealots of whatever persuasion telling me what I can or cannot do because it offends their religion.

If you cannot deal with that, tough shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 02:47 PM

When I questioned that you said you were afraid of me criticising you for mocking faiths other than mine.
I do not believe that, but I do think you fear criticism.
That is the morality I find shitty.
OK Dave?

No, it is not OK at all. I did not say anything like that and well you know it! I said if I said anything offensive to anyone else you would use that for your own agenda. That is not fear, it is common sense. Yes, it would be shitty if I feared criticism but again, that is blatantly untrue. If I feared criticism, why the hell would I post anything on here? Whether you believe that or not is entirely up to you just as it is entirely up to me to believe that you are deluded.

OK Keith?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 02:42 PM

"The secretary-general of the United Nations (UN) on Friday rejected a report"
Desn't make it untrue Keith - it's has been a commonly accepts belief for several years no
You were quick enough to reject what the United Nations said when they condemned Israel - even described them as "antisemitic"
Now you are just picking out the bits that you like
Life's not like that
Still insisting we can't suggest what a Jew has said, antisemite that you are.
"No-one knows more about that than Labour people."
Yup - and the majority of the party back Corbyn - you choose the views of a tiny minority who have an interest in getting rid of him
That seems fair!!!!!!!!!!!
No charges, no case
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 02:02 PM

Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 12:26 PM

As the subject of recism and bigotry seems to be OK with Keith, with his permission, of course, perhaps this articcle from todat's Irish Times might be acceptable
What do people think - does it pass the censor's blue pencil, or aren't there enough "decent countries in the U.N.?
Jim Carroll

Middle East
ISRAEL IMPOSES 'APARTHEID REGIME' ON PALESTINIANS, SAYS UN
A UN agency published a report yesterday accusing Israel of imposing an "apartheid regime" of racial discrimination on the Palestinian people, and said it was the first time a UN body had clearly made the charge


You forgot to report this Jim,
The secretary-general of the United Nations (UN) on Friday rejected a report, authored by UN officials, that accused Israel of establishing an "apartheid regime," prompting the resignation of the head of the agency that authored it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 17 - 01:56 PM

Dave, your posts were amusing but offensive to most Christians.
We Christians have no right not to be offended, but I noted that, as ever, you always and only mock and ridicule Christianity.

When I questioned that you said you were afraid of me criticising you for mocking faiths other than mine.
I do not believe that, but I do think you fear criticism.
That is the morality I find shitty.
OK Dave?

Jim, this discussion is about Labour and what goes on within Labour.
No-one knows more about that than Labour people.
Quoting others is irrelevant, which is why I have resisted posting the views of members of rival parties, though there have been plenty.