BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 08:04 AM

"Not true. International Law applies to Gaza 2014.2
And has been found possibly liable to investigation by the International Criminal Court - enquiries into whether they have a case to answer are now taking place.
Israel is so confient of its position it has demanded the closure of the International Criminal Court.
"Democratic governments are not uncritical of Israel."
No democratic government has absolved Israel from war crimes and atrocities - they have remain silent
Only America has gone further and used a veto - many, many times, to protect Israel - Obama has threatened to withdraw that veto, despite powerful pro-Israeli lobbying
"Every corrupt regime that fears democracy."
Mostly "supported" by friendly trade and political relations with the "democratic" west.
"Israel has only orange juice."
Are you joking?
Israel has a rapidly expanding arms industry - it tried to sell parts for nuclear weapons to Apatheid South Africa deacades ago, it has an increasingly expanding 'Drone' industry
It has been extimated that Israel is the 7th largest exporter of arms in the world today - all the ethical peace-loving products you could wish for - to anywhere.
As for natural gas.
"In January 17, 2009, a team led by the Texas firm, Noble Energy Inc., discovered methane in a field (Tamar) now estimated to contain 275 billion cubic meters (9.7 trillion cubic feet) of natural gas—about half of what Europe consumes annually. A year later, the same team announced the discovery of monster gas field to the west of Tamar (Leviathan), which alone contains about as much gas as Europe consumes annually. There have been several other finds of smaller, but nevertheless substantial fields. In neighboring Cyprus, another field (Aphrodite) comparable to Tamar was discovered by Noble Energy, abutting and even slightly spilling into Israel's waters. In short, Israel and its neighbor now sit atop roughly two years' worth of European consumption."
Oranges my arse - pehaps you should eat more of them - they are said to be good for your health (don't know about mental health though)!!
"You dishonestly put it in quotes claiming I had actually said it."
I have said since that it makes no difference what you claim amounts to exactly the same thing only more crudely put
"True - what you actually said is "It is all tosh Jim."
"How could any fair minded person object to both sides of an argument being put?"
You are not putting arguments Keith - simply denying Israel's guilt is not an argument - it's a denial.
I've been asking you to put up an argument since the very beginning; instead you have simply resorted to "It is all tosh" level denials.
You made some effort at point 5 of my last lot of evidence, fell at the first fence and now have resorted to "Israel is innocent" again (no apologies for inverted commas - that is exactly what you are saying.
"But daft "rebel" songs inciting and glorifying violence"
see link to "Israelis watch Gazan bombardment from front-row seats"
All examples of the entertainment value of violence, me little cabin-boy
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:47 AM

No I mean exactly what I wrote, I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:47 AM

Jerusalem is just bizarre, part inspired by an unevidenced legend about Joseph of Arimathea bringing the infant Christ to Glastonbury, and part by imagery out of Ezekiel. The first verse poses for questions, the answer to each is a resounding "NO". Not Blake's finest hour, but if its supposed to inspire violence it would be pretty bad at it.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:41 AM

You mean you have no answer Rag!

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:38 AM

I wouldn't expect you to understand professor.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:26 AM

You're clutching at straws, Teribus. Marching bands, rebel songs and whatever that YouTube video is are all out to try to inspire those who think God's on their side. No-one's better or worse than anyone else in that particular regard. As for who kills who, with what and why, well I'll let you lot carry on with that if you don't mind. There is life beyond this website to live.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:21 AM

How do those songs incite and glorify violence?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:16 AM

Do Rule Britannia, Jerusalem, Land of My fathers, Flower of Scotland, Land of Hope and Glory qualify as "daft rebel songs" because they do incite and glorify violence.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:13 AM

Teribus, a bit like songs about crushing rebellious Scots you mean?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 07:08 AM

Ehmmm NO Steve I do not think that I or any other sensible person has ever for one second supposed "that military marching band tunes inspire mass warfare waged by powerful mega-nations".

But daft "rebel" songs inciting and glorifying violence do their bit as propaganda to those who are idiotic and simple enough to pay them any heed. Still I suppose it illustrates the "power" of those who wish to encourage and hold up as "heroes" those who go out and stab unarmed civilians - gosh how brave of them. And then we get complete and utter prats like Jim and the rest of the gang of "usual suspects" crying foul when these murders are themselves killed - totally misguided or what?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 06:27 AM

your ADMITTING not supporting human rights

Another lie about me.
Of course I support human rights.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 05:56 AM

Israel has only acted within "International law" because it has never had to confront "Interntional Law

Not true. International Law applies to Gaza 2014.
It is acceptable to counter an aggressor who attacks civilians indiscriminately, breaking International Law.
If that aggressor further breaks International Law by operating from civilian areas, it is still acceptable to counter them if certain provisions are adhered to.
Israel did.

Your pathetic argument that the Israeli regime must be innocent because Western politicians have continued to have friendly relations with her

Democratic governments are not uncritical of Israel.
Israel's settlement policy has come in for strong criticism, but there is just no evidence of any massacres or atrocities.
Just accusations from Israel's enemies, and propaganda.

We have to hold our noses and deal with some unsavoury regimes because of their strategic assets such as oil.
Israel has only orange juice.
No-one has to be their friend, but decent democracies like to encourage others, especially in a region otherwise devoid of them.

The west's silence is based entirely on the fact that Israel's supporters are politically and economically influential
Who??
Israel's enemies have a lot of clout too!
The whole Arab world.
The whole Muslim world.
Every corrupt regime that fears democracy.

You said you don't claim "Israel is innocent"

You dishonestly put it in quotes claiming I had actually said it.
I never have or would. You lied, not me.
No country is wholly innocent.
All I have done is to put their side, just as you put the opposite side.

How could any fair minded person object to both sides of an argument being put?
What is your objection Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 05:35 AM

Well I suppose that military marching bands in all their warring finery are more respectable than summat on YouTube then, Teribus. A bit like white phosphorus, remote control rifles and cluster bombs being more respectable than kitchen knives.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 04:00 AM

Correction
a real eye-opener - your ADMITTING not supporting human rights
Nice opportunity to repeat this revealing fact
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 03:55 AM

"I just put Israel's case that it acted within International Law, a"
You have had the facts Keith
Israel has only acted within "International law" because it has never had to confront "Interntional Law - it has been protected by American Veto which has prevented it from coming to trial.
Israel's position as far as "International Law is concerned is exactly the same as that of Assad's Syria which is protected by Russian and Chinese veto - both Israel and Syria are terrorist states and both are untried - if "Israel didn't do it" as you claim, then neither did Assad (I wait with interest to see if support of Syrian terrorism will be your next big attention seeker).
We mortals have only the facts to go on.
You have the detailed evidence of Israel's acts of terror - not opinions - on the spot, eye witness accounts from medical staff, from human rights representatives (a real eye-opener - your not admitting to supporting human rights), from Jewish historians documenting Isreal's history, From David Ben Gurion....... every single thing I have put up I have linked to evidence - you have put up none yourself and responded to nothing.
Your pathetic argument that the Israeli regime must be innocent because Western politicians have continued to have friendly relations with her on their crimes exceeds every idiotic excuse you have ever put up - and that's saying something
On that basis, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Russia, China, Syria.... and all the despotic terrorist states the West "has friendly relations with are all as innocent as babes in arms.
Give us a break - that's as feeble-minded as it comes.
The west's silence is based entirely on the fact that Israel's supporters are politically and economically influential - a force to be reckoned with for Western politicians and economists.
Their position in the world today is little different than that of the gun lobby in the U.S. - too powerful to go against - innocent children continue to be massacred in American schoolyards; Palestinians continue to suffer and die in The Middle East.   
You said you don't claim "Israel is innocent", that I "made it up".
You lied and confirmed your lying by continuing to say "Israel is innocent"
Now - give us your evidence that "Israel is innocent" - confront the evidence - your efforts haven't been exactly auspicious so far.
"Songs in praise of stabbing are huge hits on Palestinian street,"

Israelis watch Gazan bombardment from front-row seats

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 03:41 AM

" I suppose that military marching band tunes inspire mass warfare waged by powerful mega-nations"

Well quite a number of contributors to this forum certainly think so going by what they submitted to the Jingoism or Commemoration thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 03:12 AM

I'll tell you what Lilo. Reading some of your posts may not result in knowing more but they certainly help understand more.

Yeah, I'll critique UN and if I am comfortable with their stance, I'll say so. Partisan support for aggression I'll leave to armchair fantasists.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 16 - 02:09 AM

Jim,
yet your entire defence for 2014 is based on just that.

No.
I just put Israel's case that it acted within International Law, against war criminal terrorists flouting it and placing their own civilians in harms way to protect their fighters.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 10:26 PM

Have you checked your garden shed Shaw? There might be Islamophobes in there you know.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 10:00 PM

Hmm. I suppose that military marching band tunes inspire mass warfare waged by powerful mega-nations too, who don't exactly go to battle with knives borrowed out of the kitchen. You really are a dismal clown, aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 06:41 PM

Songs in praise of stabbing are huge hits on Palestinian street, and may be motivators too.

'Lovers of Stabbing,' most popular of stream of gruesome anthems, has over 5 million views on YouTube; manager of band asserts it directly inspired recent attack.

The Times of Israel

Terrorism, Again (Israel)......indeed!

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 06:12 PM

Well there's clearly plenty of room inside it, Greg.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 06:10 PM

Have ya checked in yer head, Fred?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 05:27 PM

Hey Shaw, have you checked under you bed, behind your couch and in your cupboards, there might be Islamophobes hiding there.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 05:16 PM

"And one last point. Another reason for posting simply as Guest is to help keep respondents focused on the content of the post rather than being distracted by the identity of the poster"

Oh yeah? Well it doesn't work, does it? Apart from anything else, the contents of all your posts are uninformed, bigoted and usually downright racist. Which is precisely why you don't want us to "focus on you." Oh, did I say "dishonest and disingenuous" too?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 04:58 PM

A thoughtful and thought provoking piece from Fred Maroun in The Times of Israel: Israel may not survive

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 04:14 PM

Musket, I would never accuse you of knowing too much about anything. Your posts lead me to believe the opposite. I repeat, stick to what you know, you will not look so foolish.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 03:43 PM

"Says who, and why? Is there any confusion over who is being referred to?"

I know I am perhaps not the best person to bring this up given my recent record but, Mr Hertford of Acheson Keith, the man's name is probably important to him.

As a senior political figure common courtesy would normally allow him his given name to most discerning people. (present company accepted)

Unlike you professor he does have considerable kudos.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 03:41 PM

And one last point. Another reason for posting simply as Guest is to help keep respondents focused on the content of the post rather than being distracted by the identity of the poster as they are wont to do, to wit anytime Bearded Bruce posts, actually even when he doesn't post. That's all for now.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 03:41 PM

Problem is Lilo, I probably know too much about it. You claim, conveniently, to have lived in Israel. Either you are "romancing" as we used to call fantasy merchants when I was a kid, have signed up to the fascist dream or you walk round with your shutters over your eyes.

I reckon the former, and my experience includes what civilised people call Palestine too. Business is business. I'll tell you what though. The combination of aggression and terrorism combined with screaming that retaliation is aggression, and only those bankrolled by idealists in New York needing to listen in order to attempt to shame the world into looking the other way whilst Israeli militants try repeating what was done to European Jews but on Arabs, it's sickening. I'm with The UN on this one, not ignorant fools.

It's not a problem reading nonsense from the likes of Keith or Terribulus, who, lets face it, pore over Internet quotes that coincide with their xenophobic armchairs but by claiming knowledge, you, Lilo, are a fucking disgrace.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 03:38 PM

Well I've been called vile names by anonymous Guests as it happens, including "Jew hater" by someone I strongly suspect to be you, going from your own Islamophobia and bigotry and thread contexts. Prove that it wasn't. And if you're going to claim that it wasn't you, tell us why you didn't immediately protest when you saw it, as you're so against name-calling. Unless you didn't see it, of course. Ha bloody ha. Here's a name for you. You're a self-important coward. Tell us: when you decide to post again under your logged-in name, are you also going to be dishonest enough to continue with these Guest posts as well "whenever you feel threatened"? You're a bloody laugh a minute, mate. You've achieved the very opposite of what you disingenuously claim to be your goal. You've made it all about you. Congratulations.

Mods: no posting unless logged in. Everyone with a unique moniker. Just an original suggestion. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 03:23 PM

As maybe. But I don't see why you should have the last word. Whoever you may be, you are not my Mother-in-Law.

≈M≈

Though as a point of purely personal information, I have got on well with both my mothers-in-law & greatly regretted both their deaths. I use the designation here purely allusively & emblematically, in the old conventional stand-up·comic sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 03:10 PM

that somebody might call him by a bit of a naughty name!

That's not the point however. In case you haven't noticed, when a thread degenerates into a litany of back and forth childish name calling it quickly gets closed down.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 02:53 PM

It used not to be 'within the rules of the forum', and I have several times expressed here the opinion, which I maintain, that it was a retrogressive step to permit anonymity. All sorts of complications flow from such usages: some purely administrative, such as never being sure if one is replying to the same correspondent as last time or to some interloper; others tending to a variety of emotional inhibiting factors. I fail to see why anyone with the courage of his convictions should need to resort to such evasions: even if it might mean, ah diddums & deary·weary·me, that somebody might call him by a bit of a naughty name!

As you persist in remaining The Man With No Name, [perhaps Clint Eastwood or some such will be playing you in the film?], I am unable to identify what might have been the subject of these PM exchanges which you recollect between us, so must remain frustratingly inhibited from commenting further.

Adieu, & I do sincerely hope it keeps fine for you.

≈Michael Grosvenor Myer≈

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 02:42 PM

"Have to ask WHAT, precisely, Jim? Lost me, I'm afraid; "
I'm sure I have Mike - none so lost as he who does not wish to be found.
I did the research to cover every point that Keith has claimed "Israel didn't do " - couldn't have hoped for a better result - he said "Israel didn't do it - or - "It is all tosh Jim." - same song, different tune.
"here's your evidence apart from saying Israel is guilty?"
You've had reams of it Keith - from Human Rights Groups (whoops - you're not into Human Rights - much prefer the silence of politicians)
Yo said toy never claimed Israel is innocent" - you lied - that hsi been your claim all along and it continues to be now.
You have not attempted to make a case - any of you.
You ones vehemently denied you supported eh killing of hostages, yet your entire defence for 2014 is based on just that.
I'm sorely tempted to ask Mike, as someone I regard as intelligent, what he thinks of your defence that Israel "didn't do it because "democratic countries" (who trade with Saudi Arabia, Russia, and numerous other dictatorships - specifically targeting the worst for arms sales) wouldn't have anything to do with them if they had - but I won't embarrass him by dong so.
Must be something more interesting on Tele than dynamiting fish in this particular barrel (still hot a @Castle to watch - oh.... that Kate Beckett....) - I'm off
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 02:31 PM

Poor, poor pitiful Guest. Mommie! they're picking on meeee!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 02:28 PM

I can't see how you extrapolate that interpretation from what I posted; perhaps you could specify what I said to lead you to that conclusion.


I stated that my reason for posting anonymously was to thwart those who resort to personal attack against anyone who disagrees with their point of view. I took it that by being called all those names by you means you don't approve of me doing so. From that I infer that you would prefer to see the personal attacks which BTW I had been subjected to mercilessly before deciding to post anonymously, which is if I may remind you, within the rules of the forum. I have also stated the same opinions on the subject of this thread many times previously under my member name and even corresponded with you by PM on occasion so neither cowardice nor evasiveness are my motives. Believe what you will.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 02:12 PM

Hi, BBrucie!

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 02:08 PM

I can't see how you extrapolate that interpretation from what I posted; perhaps you could specify what I said to lead you to that conclusion.

I have, in common with most who from time to time express opinions not uniformly in accord with the sort of PC·ness which tends to obtain among many Mudcatters, received a certain number of what might be regarded as personal attacks over the years that I have been contributing to this forum; and have endeavoured to take them in my stride as far as possible. I should think little of myself if I had simply evaded them by disguising my identity as you do. I repeat, I regard such stratagem as pathetically pusillanimous, and should be ashamed to 'cover my back' by resorting to such cowardly evasions.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:53 PM

So, MGM, do I take it from your post that you enjoy seeing personal attacks?

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:32 PM

"re-enforces my decision to post anonymously. I enjoy seeing them go apoplectic at not being able to tag a post with a name to launch personal attacks against."
.,,.

Does it not occur to you, Mr Pathetic·Guest, that the main impression the rest of us receive from this is of a cowardly, evasive, pusillanimous, contemptible nonentity [in a most literal sense!]? My opinion is that you should be thoroughly ashamed of your pathetic self, not indulge in such petty triumphalism as manifested above.

Signed, non-anonymously,

≈MGM≈

"The fact you have to ask that Mike is indicative of just how critical of the Israeli regime you are - sadly
Jim Carroll"

Have to ask WHAT, precisely, Jim? Lost me, I'm afraid; but that's nothing new. Your posts have many virtues, such as forcefulness and integrity; but I don't think your best friends could claim that consistent hyaline clarity and comprehensibility are always among them.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:25 PM

"but says number of dead and wounded Palestinian children is unacceptable"

I think it is too.
I think that the responsibility for those deaths lies with those who attack civilians with lethal missiles and bombs while hiding among their own civilians.
Mr Ban specifically excluded Israel from blame for the deaths of civilians.
Your claim,
the atrocities done during the invasion the destructuion of occupied hospitals, he unprecedented killing of so many children (according to Ban Ki-Moon)
was made up Jim!

Where''s your evidence apart from Israel saying "we didn't do it?"
Where's your evidence apart from saying Israel is guilty?

You and Israel's enemies accuse it of atrocities and massacres.
Israel denies any such, and no decent democracy holds them responsible. They have the facts and know it is just hate fuelled propaganda. Try not to be so gullible Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:19 PM

Well Jeri, this Guest almost drowned this thread at birth over two weeks ago with his unsupportable Islamophobic nonsense. Look back at the first few posts. Or did he? Was it two of 'em? Three? Team Guest? Well you clearly know who you're talking to, a privilege withheld from the rest of us. Make him log in, make him use a unique moniker. Or don't bother. Don't even bother telling us why you won't. But, if you don't bother, you have no reason to complain.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:14 PM

Musket; you should restrict yourself to subjects you know something about, otherwise you just look foolish.
I'd give this up If I were you Jim, you are just embarrassing yourself now.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:06 PM

"But he does not hold Israel responsible."
"but says number of dead and wounded Palestinian children is unacceptable"
Who does he hold responsible - the Chinese??
Stupid boy.
"No you have not. Just claims and accusations."
Where''s your evidence apart from Israel saying "we didn't do it?"
Doesn't matter - as you ave said often enough - the opinion of one man - a good number of his colleges do (but maybe they're not "real" UN officials who sell their books in "real bookshops"
Still "Israel didn't do it" without evidence eh Keith - still game set and match then
"haven't a clue what it was "linked to"
Last five words superfluous there shipmate.
"What, precisely, was it all for?"
The fact you have to ask that Mike is indicative of just how critical of the Israeli regime you are - sadly
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 01:02 PM

Jeri, what are you referring to by "this shit"? If you mean being called Brucie, how is anyone affected by that? If you mean the hate shit, I do care about whoever is affected by it, that's why I'm trying to counter it.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 12:52 PM

"Richard Bridges"

Oh Fuck, there's more than one? 😱

Oh, hang on, the quote was from Terribulus. Disregard his ramblings as ever..

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 12:48 PM

We all get it Greg, especially Fred, you just missed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 12:35 PM

I think you are a bit late Greg, we got it already.

YOU may have, Hi, but thousands ain't.

And certainly Fred doesn't get it.

Subject: RE: BS: Terrorism, Again (Israel)
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 28 Jan 16 - 12:27 PM

Are moderators now making comments with regard to the quality of the posts..what does "this shit" mean, Jims hateful posts, I presume.