BS: Netanyahu

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 09:10 AM

So if Israel denies it that's OK then. Israel doesn't even admit to having the Bomb, so, er, in the words of Mandy Rice-Davies... By the way, that story was also carried in the Telegraph, a bit more up your alley than the Grauniad, I would have thought, Teribus, though possibly a little less so now...

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 08:59 AM

"Israel tried to sell nuclear weapons to Apartheid South Africa"

Ehmmmm No Christmas Israel and South Africa were co-operating on the development of a nuclear weapon for South Africa - in the end South Africa built six bombs which were dismantled in 1989 two years before South Africa the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Once again Christmas grabs hold of a newspaper article and waves it like a flag as though it and it alone proved proof positive:

"In 2010, The Guardian released South African government documents that it alleged confirmed the existence of an Israeli offer to sell South Africa nuclear weapons in 1975. An allegation which Israel categorically denied at the time - the documents themselves do not indicate any offer for a sale of nuclear weapons. Israeli President Shimon Peres said that The Guardian article was based on "selective interpretation... and not on concrete facts." - much like Jim's take on things. Avner Cohen, author of Israel and the Bomb and the forthcoming The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb, said "Nothing in the documents suggests there was an actual offer by Israel to sell nuclear weapons to the regime in Pretoria."

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 06:02 AM

Israel still won't admit that it's got the bomb. A sort of secret, eh?

The only trouble with this "deterrent" malarkey is that there's no evidence that it works. It didn't work on Argentina, it doesn't work on Hamas, it doesn't work on Hezbollah, it didn't work on the 9-11 attackers, it doesn't work on the Taliban. It didn't work on the Vietcong or Saddam. I think the existence of the EU has prevented a major European conflagration but I can't prove it. You think nuclear weapons deter attack. You can't prove that either. 70 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki and there's an increasing suspicion that there will never be an opportunity for appropriate use of nuclear weapons. The MAD argument is spurious because "deterrence" doesn't even work on non-nuclear powers.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 05:47 AM

Israel tried to sell nuclear weapons to Apartheid South Africa (perhaps in exchange for information on how to establish the same system in Israel!!)
Wonder where they thought the Aartheid regime would use it?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 05:44 AM

"The Falklands were walked over by Argentina."

In much the same way as the Golan Heights, Sinai, Gaza and the West Bank were walked over by Israel? So what's right for the Goose is right for the Gander? Well as far as Netanyahu, Israel and settlements go that seems to settles that - it is apparently alright to "walk over" things and take possession of them according to our secondary school master - What an example you set Mr. Shaw.

Can anyone tell me what he's talking about? Did I say anywhere that the Argies were justified?

What do you do, if anything, for a living, Teribus?

...Wait for it... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 05:42 AM

"developing a nuclear weapon in secret means that you intend to use it"
Israel has one - where does it mean to use it, I wonder?
No comment on Mrs T fascist tendencies? - didn't think so.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Musket
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 04:58 AM

"For the most part"

👳🔫👮

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 04:09 AM

"The Falklands were walked over by Argentina."

In much the same way as the Golan Heights, Sinai, Gaza and the West Bank were walked over by Israel? So what's right for the Goose is right for the Gander? Well as far as Netanyahu, Israel and settlements go that seems to settles that - it is apparently alright to "walk over" things and take possession of them according to our secondary school master - What an example you set Mr. Shaw.

As far as the attacks of 1996, 1998, 2000 and 2001 go. Al-Qeada claimed responsibility for all of them and during that time Al-Qaeda were based in Afghanistan, protected by the Taliban in return for hard currency and Al-Qaeda assistance in the the ongoing civil war in Afghanistan against the Northern Alliance and in October 2001 the USA took action, not by invading Afghanistan but by assisting and giving support to the Northern Alliance - care to tell me how you start a war in October 2011 that has already been underway since November 1994?

Independent of one another the Joint House Security Committee and all 19 of the USA's intelligence and security agencies identified Iraq as posing the greatest threat to the USA in the Spring of 2002, prompting George W. Bush to go to the UN to demand enforcement of UN Resolution 687. Actions subsequently taken had nothing to do with Iraq having WMD, that was the myth and total misrepresentation fed to the public via extremely poor reporting by MSM which was largely anti-Bush because of the result of the 2000 election and anti-war in general. Had people actually listened or read what was said by the principals instead of reading some second hand account of what some reporter thought or was told they had said then the myth about Iraq having WMD would have been shown exactly for what it was. The plain truth was that nobody knew for certain and that was writ large in the UNSCOM Reports that formed the basis of all intelligence evaluations presented to the UN, to Congress and to the House of Commons:

"As is evident from this report, Iraq did not provide the full cooperation it promised on 14 November 1998.

In addition, during the period under review, Iraq initiated new forms of restrictions upon the Commission's work. Amongst the Commission's many concerns about this retrograde step is what such further restrictions might mean for the effectiveness of long-term monitoring activities.

In spite of the opportunity presented by the circumstances of the last month, including the prospect of a comprehensive review, Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in either the fields of disarmament or accounting for its prohibited weapons programmes.

Finally, in the light of this experience, that is, the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded against that the commission is not able to conduct the substantive disarmament work mandated to it by the Security Council and, thus, to give the Council the assurances it requires with respect to Iraq's prohibited weapons programmes." - UNSCOM Report to the President of the UN Security Council dated 15th December 1998 signed by Kofi Annan, Mohammed El Baradei & Richard Butler.

In the assessment of discrepancies thrown up inspections and in evaluations undertaken by UNSCOM, their reports only highlight what Iraq MAY HAVE - check that for yourself - you sure as hell are not going to take my word for it. Claims made and seized upon as "lies" told by various principals by the MSM centre around what those principals BELIEVED to be the case - Sorry but what you believe to be the case does not necessarily make it in fact the case - so no lie told, if they are guilty of anything it is erring on the side of caution.

Action was taken against Iraq to ensure in a verifiable manner that it could be announced to the world with 100% absolute certainty that Iraq possessed NO WMD, that it had NO WMD related research and development programmes running and that it was NOT developing weapons systems for the delivery of WMD.

As a result of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 the following "apples" fell out of the tree:

- Libya renounced it's WMD programme and revealed a secret and up till then unsuspected nuclear weapons - developing a nuclear weapon in secret means that you intend to use it - if it is secret then it serves no deterrent purpose.

- The Libyan nuclear weapons programme exposed the illegal nuclear weapons proliferation network of Pakistan's Dr.A.Q.Khan, which was shut down.

- A secret nuclear weapons plant was discovered in Syria and destroyed by the Israelis with assistance from Turkey.

- The existence of two secret, and therefore undeclared, uranium enrichment plants was exposed in Iraq.

That is three countries (five if you include Pakistan and North Korea) striving towards acquiring nuclear weapons in secret, that could only be targeted at one nation - Israel.

As a disruptive influence in the region and a state sponsor of terrorism were the same USA agencies to repeat the evaluation undertaken in 2002 today then the country posing the greatest threat would in all probability be identified as Iran.

As for UN sanctions against Israel? Perhaps you should read them Mr. Shaw, just as you should listened to or read what GWB and Blair actually said, if you read those UN Security Council Resolutions "against Israel", as you describe them, you will find that they include undertakings and commitments that have to be honoured by the other side and while Israel for the most part honoured her commitments the other side have not.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Musket
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 03:43 AM

I am rather appalled by the post by Michael saying that if your criticise Israeli aggression you are anti semitic.

Bollocks.

Large, veiny, wrinkly bollocks.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Mar 15 - 03:25 AM

GUEST cynical, is there no one in US politics capable of waking them up?
I think perhaps the US electorate give their "representatives" a little too much respect.
There does seem to be a schism appearing within both parties concerning Iran?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST,cynical
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 09:33 PM

Netanyahu told Congress that if the US won't invade Iran, Israel will do it alone. So his speech was mostly directed at Iran, as more threats about what will happen to them if they don't stop trying to undermine the petrodollar.

Akenaton: Things like this don't affect US elections. Americans vote on the basis of a candidate's position on abortion or gay marriage. They support wars if the president at the time is the guy they voted for, and they oppose wars when the other guy is president.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 07:35 PM

Thatcher didn't start wars - she supported thugs who did
She befriended mass murderer Pinochet, helped get him off facing being tried for the torture, rape and massacre of thousands of his opponents and described him as being a hero of democracy
Care to comment -no/ Didn't think so.
Blair and Bush created the situation that now prevails in the Middle East which has lead to the death of many thousands of people - all in pursuit of oil
If it hadn't been for the shaky democracy that prevails in the West, both would have bene put on trial for their crimes.
"Netanyahu" is a serial war crimial, as have been several Israeli leaders before him.
Not only is he guilty of mass, he is now attempting to abolish the International Criminal Court with the aid of the U.S., which means that there will be no way of trying crimes such as those being presently carried out by Isis.
Funny old world!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 07:35 PM

By the way, Teribus, if you're so keen on nations complying with UN resolutions, why do you let Israel off the hook? Just asking...

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 07:31 PM

All three total bollocks. The Falklands were walked over by Argentina. Not a war until Maggie started one. No-one from Afghanistan attacked the US on 9-11. Iraq was attacked on the bogus basis that it had WMDs which it did not have and that it harboured terrorists which it did not. Why don't you write a fairy story book? You're a bloody expert when it comes to fantasy history.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 07:23 PM

The Khomenist regime must be wiped off the map.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 06:52 PM

So tell me Mr. Shaw what wars did Thatcher, Blair and Bush START? No need to scratch your head it was after all yourself who stated that they HAD STARTED wars so tell us all what wars:

Certainly NOT the Falklands which was the direct result of Argentine aggression so that gets Thatcher off the hook

Certainly NOT Afghanistan which was the direct result of an attack on mainland USA.

Certainly NOT Iraq which was the direct result of Iraq's failure to comply with the agreed terms and conditions of a UN ratified ceasefire agreement (UN Security Council Resolution 687)

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 06:20 PM

Some interesting views on the face off between Israel and Iran SRS, but almost nothing on the effect of the speech on the principle Democratic candidates, or their likely direction of travel.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 06:10 PM

Certainly got me scratching me head, Greg. Thatcher, Bush, Blair...such pacifists... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 05:47 PM

They have a lot to worry about.

Israel (not "the Jews") sure does, PeeDee- mos of it brought on itself.

what wars did Thatcher, Blair and Bush start?

T-Bird, dod you mean that as a joke, or a rhetorical question?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 05:41 PM

'the practice of disguised antisemitism masquerading as legitimate criticism of Israel'.

So, MG- Rabbi John Rosove is an antisemite in your book, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 05:13 PM

Thanks SRS.....I had heard of Diane Rheims, but haven't had time to read your link, just home.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 05:07 PM

Ake, go listen to that radio link I posted. It is an hour long discussion with journalists, think tank members, with calls in from the listeners during the program. You might find it interesting.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 04:56 PM

There is little benefit in another re-run of the Israeli/Palestinian argument, we've been through it a thousand times and a hundred threads.
As I said earlier it was a historic mistake made by people who simply were not up to the job and thousands have died or lived in refugee camps ever since.....both Israelis and Palestinians have been pawns of the great powers, but power is now in flux...expect exciting times.

I would really have appreciated a little input concerning the effect of Mr Netanyahu's speech on American voting intentions....leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 04:26 PM

........little talk of destroying Israel...... well, it is reassuring that any threats made in the past by israels enemies are now forgotten....

Not forgotten, but wouldn't it be nice if what's in the past could be persuaded to stay in the past. Sorry to inflict my Christian values on you, pete.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 04:06 PM

This was discussed on the Diane Rehm Show today in the first hour. Panelists discussed the whole "Iran wants a bomb, Israel has one" conundrum, and felt that if Iraq got a bomb then Turkey and Saudi Arabia would also want them. Because of Iran, not because of Israel.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 03:40 PM

"Arab nations have joined Israel in expressing concern over the emerging details of a US-led international nuclear deal with Iran, indicating in private talks with US officials that they are worried about the apparent terms of the agreement, the Wall Street Journal reported Saturday.

Leaders of Sunni states such as Egypt, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia fear a bad deal with Tehran would allow it, with the removal of sanctions, to become a nuclear threshold state, the WSJ reported. They say it could also lead to a nuclear arms race in the region.

Arab officials have also reportedly held discussions with the US over the possibility of Washington placing their countries under its "nuclear umbrella" — a guarantee to take military, even nuclear, action to protect an allied state under certain circumstances."

Arab nations said deeply worried by Iran nuke deal

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 03:40 PM

........little talk of destroying Israel...... well, it is reassuring that any threats made in the past by israels enemies are now forgotten....

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 03:09 PM

So Netanyahu is not the only one against the deal:

"Delivering the Tehran Friday Prayer, hardline cleric Ahmad Khatami took a tough line on the ongoing nuclear talks: "The 5+1 Powers, especially the US, intended to deceive the Iranian team of negotiators by trying to clinch a two-phased agreement instead of a single-phased deal."

This the place where every Friday since 1979 they have been chanted "Death to America, Death to Israel"

So I will ask you again Mr. Shaw what wars did Thatcher, Blair and Bush start?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 02:55 PM

I don't wear that at all. There is little talk of destroying Israel. Israel's fate is in the hands of its own leaders. Netanyahu is ditching the progress the west has made with Iran. No- one in Iran is bothering much about Israel at the moment and Iran is further away from a bomb than it was two years ago. We seriously need to stop demonising those hundreds of millions of people you refer to. The vast majority of them are like you and me. They want peace, prosperity and security. Israel's leaders can help by playing fair with their neighbours.

As for you, Teribus, the more childish of us round here are best exemplified by those who fail to keep civil tongues in their heads. And do keep calm, my dear. Your head sounds like it's exploding.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: pdq
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 02:08 PM

The current list of countries in the Arab World numbers 22.

In the West, we are usually shown a map where Israel exists and the West Bank and Gaza are lumped together is place called Palestine.

In the Arab World, Israel does not exist. Gaza and what we like to think of as Israel are joined in a fictitious state called Palestine.

The Arab World now has almost 400 million people. Both Iran and Turkey are not Arab, but their populations push the number of Israel-hating Muslims, just in the Middle East, to well over 1/2 billion.

Israel has just 6 million Jews. They have a lot to worry about.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 02:04 PM

"Starting wars? Yeah, sure, it takes two to tango, innit. But the Falklands wasn't a war till the task force got there. And, remind me, who struck the first blows in Iraq and Afghanistan?"

Shocking considering that that comes from someone responsible for educating children.

1: "Yeah, sure, it takes two to tango, innit." WTF what age you? - time you started acting it. Or is dumbing down and and aping illiterate teenagers too "kool" for you to resist? In your position you are supposed to be setting an example FFS.

2: "the Falklands wasn't a war till the task force got there." - Ehmmm NO, the Falklands was a war the second the Argentines landed on British sovereign territory in order to impose their rule on a free population against their will at the point of a gun.

3: "who struck the first blows in Iraq and Afghanistan?"

As far as Afghanistan goes Osama bin Laden supported to the hilt by the Taliban "government" of Afghanistan issued a fatwa in 1996 and then repeated and expanded it in 1998 that declared war on every single American, man woman and child declaring open season on them throughout the world. Al-Qaeda at Osama bin Laden's behest then launched an attack on mainland USA, an attack that had been organised, planned and financed under the direction of Mohammad Atef Al-Qaeda's Chief of Operations from inside Afghanistan (Atef was killed in Afghanistan in a US drone strike in November 2001).

With Iraq, Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athist regime governing Iraq signed up to undertake some specific undertakings in order to end hostilities in March 1991 at Safwan. Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist regime failed to comply with that ceasefire agreement.

So I will ask you again Mr. Shaw what wars did Thatcher, Blair and Bush start?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:35 PM

"...for every step closer to a peace agreement or a two-state settlement, they slide two steps..."

Israel accepted, and the Palestinians rejected, the two-state solution in 1938 and 1948.  It offered land for peace in 1967, only to be greeted with the three "no's:" no peace, no negotiation and no recognition. It offered generous proposals in 2000-01, 2008, and most recently in 2014, none of which was accepted.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:34 PM

Israel has no universally recognised and accepted borders

And why would that be? Nothing to do with successive Israeli regimes refusing to acquiesce in UN resolutions, supported in that by routine US vetoes?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:30 PM

Starting wars? Yeah, sure, it takes two to tango, innit. But the Falklands wasn't a war till the task force got there. And, remind me, who struck the first blows in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:24 PM

"the Israelis encroach on Palestinian lands routinely"

The Israelis build housing developments on land that was owned by Jews prior to 1948 or was purchased by them after 1967. There is no border designating so called "Palestinian" land, there is an armistice line which was drawn up as a clause of the truce to end the war in 1967 with the stipulation, agreed to by both parties, that the final border would be determined by negotiation. Do you support the PA's policy of Jewish apartheid for a future Palestinian state?

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:23 PM

the Israelis encroach on Palestinian lands routinely

I agree with the rest of your post, but, if I were one of the many Israelis who find these incursions into Palestine totally unpalatable, I'd be a bit cross for being included in "the Israelis". There are many voices in Israel which give the lie to the Israeli people's all being in it together.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:22 PM

Thatcher, Blair and Bush started what wars Mr. Shaw?

Both the USA, Russia and the UN stand as guarantors of Israel's sovereignty.

Israel has no universally recognised and accepted borders. The Palestinian Authority wanders the globe talking about how they are seeking a Two State Solution but for some reason cannot show anybody their proposed borders for these two states - there is a very good reason for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:21 PM

Indeed, SRS -- but bear in mind nevertheless the 2005 definition of antisemitism by the EUMC {The European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia}, regarding 'the practice of disguised antisemitism masquerading as legitimate criticism of Israel'.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:13 PM

Netanyahu's performance was for his own domestic audience, he is about to go into an election and needs to show that he potentially has at least got tacit support if not absolute backing of US Congress

Absolutely. But he went to Congress knowing full well that he would be seen on telly at home getting a standing ovation or six from a sycophantic right-wing Congress packed, fortuitously, with backwoodsmen. And he knew that it would temporarily take the pressure off him over his inept handling of the domestic abuse and housing crises at home. It's what statesmen always do when there's trouble at home and there's an election in sight. Go and kick a foreigner or two on their soil. Even better, rattle your sabre or start a war. Orwell suggested it and Thatcher and Blair did it and Bush did it. Support from Congress for Israel is eternal. There are plenty of knives being quietly sharpened in the wings to make sure of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 01:07 PM

There ARE people on here with intimate knowledge of Mrs Clintons views.

I doubt it but can always be proved wrong. I suspect that there are people who believe they know the views of politicians but they only know what the politicians and press tell them.

If there is anyone on here who actually knows her and is privy to her thoughts I will, of course, apologise. Provided that they share those thoughts with us. Think there is any chance?

You, ake, must have an interest or you would not have asked. If you have an interest you must have some views. Why not share them with everyone rather than just ask for the opinion of others? It is only polite when asking for something that you have already given something yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 12:58 PM

Israel is a bad neighbor, and when they are the only one in the region with The Bomb, it is not surprising that someone else in the region wants to influence their behavior by developing their own.

Bill D can speak to this well for all of us "US liberals" - the Israelis encroach on Palestinian lands routinely, and for every step closer to a peace agreement or a two-state settlement, they slide two steps back when the zealots put in more new settlements and when walls are built around prime Palestinian orchards and more. I also agree with his remarks re: Hillary. She hasn't said much (but at times she is more hawkish than I like). It would be stupid to insert herself into this conversation and she isn't stupid.

A note to those who would start calling names - being opposed to Israel's politicians and governmental behavior is not being anti-Semitic. It's being rational.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 12:45 PM

You weren't working it properly Ake, so here's the C&P from it:

"putz: jerk, fool, simpleton (vulg. penis)"

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 12:43 PM

Netanyahu's performance was for his own domestic audience, he is about to go into an election and needs to show that he potentially has at least got tacit support if not absolute backing of US Congress, everybody knows that he and the President don't get along, but this current President is a dead duck with a Congress he cannot control and the next US Presidential election scheduled for Tuesday, November 8, 2016.

With a US Presidential election and more importantly selection of various Presidential candidates for both major parties coming up then I would very much doubt if any of the front runners would be sticking their heads above the parapet and commenting on the detail of this speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Musket
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 12:10 PM

I think you can answer your own question, and reset your cookie so everyone can see who you are, although the Secretary of the Israeli Aggression League doesn't need to say who he is, it's rather obvious.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 11:53 AM

"Barking. And I mean the adjective, not the borough in East London."

Try again.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 11:52 AM

"Putz, a Yiddish vulgarism for penis"

Wikipedia

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 11:48 AM

Greg that was in Hebrew....unless I wasn't working it properly.
Still don't know what a putz is??? :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 11:45 AM

Hi Bill, I agree about the nature of Mr N, but he has similarities to President Putin, seeing himself surrounded by warlike enemies.
Israel and her neighbours is a complicated issue, stemming from lack of forethought in the 1940's.....no black and white in this argument.

My post was more about the effect on US voting intentions, given the distance between President Obama and Mrs Clinton which has become apparent. Big change in policy as a response to IS, or is it as Guest says, just a bit of cynical electioneering?

Off out till later but would be interested in your views.
I know at least one member who is a family friend.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 11:09 AM

"....annex more & more territory"

What territory has Israel annexed?

Barking. And I mean the adjective, not the borough in East London.

Subject: RE: BS: Netanyahu
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 15 - 10:58 AM

"Jim, your problem is personalities, you just cant handle them."
I don't know any of you people - I detest your hatred of minorities, of other cultures, of homosexuality.... and I abhor the idea that you are prepared to use this forum for your bigotry when it a fact that if you made many of your statements away from the safety of the net you would lay yourselves open to prosecution.
I don't exactly admire the way you refuse to respond to points people make, avoiding having to do so by putting them down to "personalities".
You are of a type - not very bright and totally lacking in humanity in any shape or form.
Jim Carroll