The Iaraelis facilitated the massacre of up to 3,500 unarmed civilians at the refugees in Sabra Shatila in September, 1982
Without their collusion, the killings could not have happened
They collected the killers from the airpor, armed them, tranported them to the camp, allowed access onto the site, provided illumination so the killing could go on uninterrupted, turned back the refugees attempting to escape, provided equipment to bury the bodies, prvided the killers with a meas of escape and eventually built a stadium over the site where most of the bodies were buried so the actual numbers would never be known
THese are verified facts
Next
"Did the use of cluster bombs have anything whatsoever to do with a legitimate and proportionate response to an attack on the sovereign state of Israel by a terrorist organisation based in a neighboring country?"
Did the attacks by a poorly armed ill trained third world force have anything to do with the attempts of the Isrieli regime have anything to do with attempts of a country with a well trained well armed nuclear facilitated army to drive a people who had occupied their land for many centuries out of their rightful homeland
Were the responses proportionate - go count the dead, go work out how many of those dead were non-combatants - including women and children
"When Israel is attacked, which it has been constantly, since its inception in 1948"
The State of Israel was born to the sound of Israeli grenades being tossed into occupied houses to make room for the new settlers
Is your response a defence of mass murder and war crimes
Yes it most certainly is.
And the music goes round and round......
"What would your words be you complete and utter SPRAT."
As does your infantile behaviour towards those whi=o disagree with you
Do you really have such little confidence in your case that you feel you have to bully and bluster and bully it through?
Rhetoriacal question - that's what schoolyard bullies do.
"Liar. If you are not lying quote me, liar."
I have done Keith, twice, and you repeated the accusation
I can't be arsed repeating something everybody knows to be true.
"According to the definition used by democratic countries including this one, it is."
Accordint the that definition, it is antisemitic to implicate the Jewish people in the actions of teh State of Israel
By calling those whho criticise Israel antisemitic, that;'s what you do, that's what Bobad does and that's what the Israeli regime does
The Israeli justice minister has even said punlicly that it it antsemitic to criticise Israeli policy
By doing so she made the definition null and cvoid.
The only workable definition of antisemitism is denigration of the Jewish people - nobody on this forum has ever done that other than you Keith by claiming that Jewish Parliamentarians have put the interest of their party above that of the Jewish People.
Bobad remains an appeaser as he refuses to condemn your antisemitism and he is shows where his loyalties really lie as he refuses to condemn the British government for selling arms to despotic states - including Muslim ones.
Checkmate, I think
Jim Carroll