Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Returning to the Holy Land after a gap of 46 years – and st

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited May 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Returning to the Holy Land after a gap of 46 years – and still no sign of peace

The above comment, made over dinner at the Jerusalem Press Club by a prominent Israeli journalist in mid-February to me and five other UK-based journalists, in a nutshell explained why we were there. The state of Israel, created by the United Nations in 1948, has an ongoing PR problem and needs if not friends people in the outside world who at least understand it.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    First!
  • I thought Tony Blair was sorting this out?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Second !
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    I thought Tony Blair was sorting this out?

    Yes. For Israel.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,457
    Fascinating.

    Thanks OGH.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Some interesting comments earlier this weekend from a senior Iranian about Cyrus the Greats acknowledgement of the existence and right of the Jewish people to a Judah and and a temple in Jerusalem.

    Mood music ahead of this supposed US-Iranian deal.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    Great story about how you met your wife, OGH.

    The self-preservation gene must be strong in your offspring!
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    "Burnley Police @BurnleyPolice · 10h
    Anyone lost a huge amount of cannabis in the Burnley area? Don't panic, we found it! Pop in to the station to collect it.. #we'rewaiting"

    twitter.com/BurnleyPolice/status/462845154177466368
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    That street sign is a tragedy.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    That street sign is a tragedy.

    What's tragic about it?

  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Good evening all and let us not forget the current Israeli PM has been a strong supporter of the Israeli settlement incursions into Palestinian territory over the past 20 years.

    What is the point of the UN when it seems every country is expected to conform to UN Resolutions except Israel? I resigned from the Conservative Friends of Israel in the aftermath of the 1st Gulf War in which Benjamin Netanyahu came to prominence as the official government spokesman. I am a strong supporter of the 2-state solution and believe Israel has an absolute right to exist in peace. However if I was a Palestinian farmer forced off my land to enable Russian Jewish immigrants to build houses, I know what I would do and sitting watching and letting it happen peacefully would not be it!

    I cannot see a long term solution until there is a fundamental change in attitude in Israel and part of that will be neutralising the power of the extreme right wing religious parties which have held so much power and influence since 1948. I also think they will need to revisit the land boundaries. A Palestine comprising 2 separate areas of land will simply not work. Look at East and West Pakistan.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    I prefered the picture with the nice border fence.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    MD, Cameron is just a big feartie. When he is forced to debate he will get monstered.
    I saw threats today that due to Darling being carp and not being seen for 6 weeks , Cameron is planning to come to Scotland , the big pansy will get a roasting if he deigns to have any public debate rather than the usual behind closed doors with only acolytes asking tame questions.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    MikeK said:

    That street sign is a tragedy.

    What's tragic about it?

    I said it was a tragedy for the residents of any country when immigrants make their residents the minority, don't speak the lingo, and street names are made in the immigrants language

    Southam thinks saying the same happened in Israel benefits his argument
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. G, that's silly, and you know it. Cameron doesn't have a vote. This is a vote by Scots about Scotland's future. having Cameron represent No in a debate would paint No as evil English Tory baby-eaters, whilst Yes would be represented by an actual Scotsman. It's silly buggers, and obviously so.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,963
    There is something desperately sad about Israel. A country that needs to not only exist but provide Jews with a safe home. Yet the actions of so many Israeli politicians seem determined to guarantee that peace is impossible.

    The Palestinians are not going away, nor is their claim to the land. Refusing to negotiate, continual taking of more land and making life for them difficult if not impossible, these are not actions to promote peaceful coexistence, they are actions to oppress terrorise and demean. Israel is surrounded by people it has made its enemies yes, but that doesn't justify it being a terrorist state. And it does terrorise. And the west allows it to disregard and flagrantly breech every UN resolution it chooses.

    A two state solution - almost certainly with the UN forcibly separating the two like in Cyprus - is the only long term solution. But the settlers will never allow it. So we have endless slaughter. Very sad
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Mr. G, that's silly, and you know it. Cameron doesn't have a vote. This is a vote by Scots about Scotland's future. having Cameron represent No in a debate would paint No as evil English Tory baby-eaters, whilst Yes would be represented by an actual Scotsman. It's silly buggers, and obviously so.

    MD, Darling has not been seen for at least 6 weeks, some leader. He will be maximising his personal income and expenses to tide him over when he is jobless.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    malcolmg said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    MD, Cameron is just a big feartie. When he is forced to debate he will get monstered.
    I saw threats today that due to Darling being carp and not being seen for 6 weeks , Cameron is planning to come to Scotland , the big pansy will get a roasting if he deigns to have any public debate rather than the usual behind closed doors with only acolytes asking tame questions.
    Euro voting intention - YouGov

    SNP 33%
    Labour 31%
    Conservatives 12%
    UKIP 10%
    Liberal Democrats 7%
    Others 6%

    With Cameron at a pathetic 12% in the latest full-sample poll it is hardly surprising that his minders keep him away from the Scottish general public. He is a big feartie. At least Thatcher and Major had the balls to occasionally get out and about and meet ordinary Scots.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    isam said:

    MikeK said:

    That street sign is a tragedy.

    What's tragic about it?

    I said it was a tragedy for the residents of any country when immigrants make their residents the minority, don't speak the lingo, and street names are made in the immigrants language

    Southam thinks saying the same happened in Israel benefits his argument
    Isam, on a minor point you placed emphasis on whether English was the first language or not.

    Is that something worth emphasis? I mean talking about the level of fluency of their English is one thing, but if they're essentially bi-lingual does it matter what is their 'first' and 'second' language.

    Of course the whole language issue is a bit flipped on its head in Wales, more contentiously so in some parts than others. (I'm from a very anglicised bit of Wales, which is often semi-jokingly referred to as not being 'proper Wales' by other Welshier parts).
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Dickson, you're comparing a different geographical area *and* different electoral question. It's not a valid comparison.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    MD, Cameron is just a big feartie. When he is forced to debate he will get monstered.
    I saw threats today that due to Darling being carp and not being seen for 6 weeks , Cameron is planning to come to Scotland , the big pansy will get a roasting if he deigns to have any public debate rather than the usual behind closed doors with only acolytes asking tame questions.
    Euro voting intention - YouGov

    SNP 33%
    Labour 31%
    Conservatives 12%
    UKIP 10%
    Liberal Democrats 7%
    Others 6%

    With Cameron at a pathetic 12% in the latest full-sample poll it is hardly surprising that his minders keep him away from the Scottish general public. He is a big feartie. At least Thatcher and Major had the balls to occasionally get out and about and meet ordinary Scots.
    The unionists have reached the bottom of the barrel and scraped through it , they have nothing to add to the debate but lies and smears.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. G, reasonably sure I haven't lied or smeared...
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    malcolmg said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    MD, Cameron is just a big feartie. When he is forced to debate he will get monstered.
    I saw threats today that due to Darling being carp and not being seen for 6 weeks , Cameron is planning to come to Scotland , the big pansy will get a roasting if he deigns to have any public debate rather than the usual behind closed doors with only acolytes asking tame questions.
    Euro voting intention - YouGov

    SNP 33%
    Labour 31%
    Conservatives 12%
    UKIP 10%
    Liberal Democrats 7%
    Others 6%

    With Cameron at a pathetic 12% in the latest full-sample poll it is hardly surprising that his minders keep him away from the Scottish general public. He is a big feartie. At least Thatcher and Major had the balls to occasionally get out and about and meet ordinary Scots.
    Stuart

    Please would you point me to an "ordinary Scot".

    I have yet to have the pleasure of meeting one.

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,709
    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    corporeal said:

    isam said:

    MikeK said:

    That street sign is a tragedy.

    What's tragic about it?

    I said it was a tragedy for the residents of any country when immigrants make their residents the minority, don't speak the lingo, and street names are made in the immigrants language

    Southam thinks saying the same happened in Israel benefits his argument
    Isam, on a minor point you placed emphasis on whether English was the first language or not.

    Is that something worth emphasis? I mean talking about the level of fluency of their English is one thing, but if they're essentially bi-lingual does it matter what is their 'first' and 'second' language.

    Of course the whole language issue is a bit flipped on its head in Wales, more contentiously so in some parts than others. (I'm from a very anglicised bit of Wales, which is often semi-jokingly referred to as not being 'proper Wales' by other Welshier parts).
    It's not really a problem if their English is fluent, but the real point s still makes it easier for segregation to exist if communities can speak to each other in language that big parts of the country cannot understand IMO

    Helps create a them and us feeling that would be less if English was first language

    I'm off now to meet my immigrant girlfriend haha
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Netanyahu doesn't want peace. He wants to keep colonisation of Palestinian land until the point where Palestine is not viable as a state. A peace deal is thus impossible.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    To you maybe

    More people than ever before are admitting voting for and being a member of ukip?!

    Fair enough if you're not keen but that argument is ridic!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Mr. G, reasonably sure I haven't lied or smeared...

    MD, I do not class you as an evil unionist , I mean the Better Together lot , the MSM and Westminster mob. We get it day after day, worst culprit is the BBC.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. G, hard to argue that the BBC adopts political positions when it should be neutral (cf climate change, pro-EU etc).
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    AveryLP said:

    malcolmg said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    MD, Cameron is just a big feartie. When he is forced to debate he will get monstered.
    I saw threats today that due to Darling being carp and not being seen for 6 weeks , Cameron is planning to come to Scotland , the big pansy will get a roasting if he deigns to have any public debate rather than the usual behind closed doors with only acolytes asking tame questions.
    Euro voting intention - YouGov

    SNP 33%
    Labour 31%
    Conservatives 12%
    UKIP 10%
    Liberal Democrats 7%
    Others 6%

    With Cameron at a pathetic 12% in the latest full-sample poll it is hardly surprising that his minders keep him away from the Scottish general public. He is a big feartie. At least Thatcher and Major had the balls to occasionally get out and about and meet ordinary Scots.
    Stuart

    Please would you point me to an "ordinary Scot".

    I have yet to have the pleasure of meeting one.

    Having witnessed your constant counter-productive goofs on PB, your admission does not come as a surprise.

    Go spend 4 hours knocking doors on a Scottish housing estate. Any Scottish housing estate. Ask the people that answer the doors about David Cameron, about the Union, about Salmond, about Lamont, about the health service, about transport, about housing. Get a feel for the lie of the land.

    You haven't got the guts, but the responses would deeply worry every Unionist who dared.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    We all knew Brown couldn't do his sums, it seems the Sun on Sunday reminds us of him via the photo...



    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5607044/Ex-Chancellor-Gordon-Brown-claims-for-1-calculator-on-expenses.html
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    isam said:

    corporeal said:

    isam said:

    MikeK said:

    That street sign is a tragedy.

    What's tragic about it?

    I said it was a tragedy for the residents of any country when immigrants make their residents the minority, don't speak the lingo, and street names are made in the immigrants language

    Southam thinks saying the same happened in Israel benefits his argument
    Isam, on a minor point you placed emphasis on whether English was the first language or not.

    Is that something worth emphasis? I mean talking about the level of fluency of their English is one thing, but if they're essentially bi-lingual does it matter what is their 'first' and 'second' language.

    Of course the whole language issue is a bit flipped on its head in Wales, more contentiously so in some parts than others. (I'm from a very anglicised bit of Wales, which is often semi-jokingly referred to as not being 'proper Wales' by other Welshier parts).
    It's not really a problem if their English is fluent, but the real point s still makes it easier for segregation to exist if communities can speak to each other in language that big parts of the country cannot understand IMO

    Helps create a them and us feeling that would be less if English was first language

    I'm off now to meet my immigrant girlfriend haha
    But is she a proper londoner? ;)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2014

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    100 reasons not to vote UKIP

    PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR UKIP IF……

    • If you are a woman, if you love a woman, if you are friends with a woman, if you have a daughter or sister.

    • If you think politicians should do the job they are paid for.

    • If you think that Nigel Farage is a good honest bloke, down to earth, represents the common man, and is the sort of bloke you could have a drink with.

    • If you believe that people have the right to protest.

    • If you think that people can be judged by the company they keep.

    • If you believe that the AV referendum was a waste of time and Tax-payers money.

    • If you believe that UKIP represent you, the normal people.

    • If you believe that UKIP can do a better job of running the country than the other main parties.

    • If you think that political posters should be honest.

    • If you are a Royalist.

    • If you have concerns about the amount of aid we send abroad, but are not a horrible racist.

    • If you, or your children ride a bike. (Honestly)

    • If you think that most of the loutish behaviour from UKIP is a handful of oiks.

    • If you are northern.

    • If you are concerned about German influence in the UK.

    • If you think that Vladimir Putin is a bit of a worry.

    • If you have a child, and think that children have some value for our future.

    • If you are Asian, love or care about someone who is Asian.

    • If you oppose apartheid.

    • If you just hate racism.

    • If you care about the NHS.

    • If you are gay, or have gay friends, family or people that you love who are gay.

    • If you are concerned that UKIP are simply the acceptable face of racism, supplanting the BNP and EDL.

    • If you are concerned about security on Facebook….

    • If you listen to their own people…


    Each reason supported by argument and quotations on: http://maxjfreeman.com/2014/05/03/100-reasons-not-to-vote-ukip/

    You can even add your own reasons in the comment section! He hasn't reached 100 yet. Opportunity for an 80 year old here.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    Beware any old hands (I'm thinking of you Mr Llama) offering to help the newbies out of the goodness of their hearts
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    Interesting article - thanks Mike.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    edited May 2014
    AveryLP said:

    malcolmg said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    FPT: Mr. Dickson, Salmond is not on 34% in the UK. It's a completely daft comparison, as you well know.

    I see the PB 2014 Mk3 game is up to 6/7 players (password: catsandkittens). A number of us will be in our first or second games, so if you're a newcomer (or an old hand wanting to prey on the inexperienced) do feel free to join in.

    MD, Cameron is just a big feartie. When he is forced to debate he will get monstered.
    I saw threats today that due to Darling being carp and not being seen for 6 weeks , Cameron is planning to come to Scotland , the big pansy will get a roasting if he deigns to have any public debate rather than the usual behind closed doors with only acolytes asking tame questions.
    Euro voting intention - YouGov

    SNP 33%
    Labour 31%
    Conservatives 12%
    UKIP 10%
    Liberal Democrats 7%
    Others 6%

    With Cameron at a pathetic 12% in the latest full-sample poll it is hardly surprising that his minders keep him away from the Scottish general public. He is a big feartie. At least Thatcher and Major had the balls to occasionally get out and about and meet ordinary Scots.
    Stuart

    Please would you point me to an "ordinary Scot".

    I have yet to have the pleasure of meeting one.

    Go to Sweden - it's full of them and very ordinary they are too.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    But what is irritating (even if done with some elan by eg. SO) is to tell Kippers that their opinions are "wrong". Still less to equate their legitimate views on immigration and the EU with racism (which I am not saying SO does).

    I have said this before - @iSam doesn't need my help in arguing his cause but the mini-PB version of the intellectual/political elite sneering at the Kipper POV exemplifies why on a broader scale, they are picking up so much support.

    Given that the euros are less important than answering a survey from auto-trader to the British Public I am quite looking forward to UKIP getting a stonking majority.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    oh and on-topic Mike are you suffering from CiF comment hunger? Really - an Israel-Palestinian thread??
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    I would be far more embarrassed to admit I was a Labour voter or a Cameroon.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    There is something desperately sad about Israel. A country that needs to not only exist but provide Jews with a safe home. Yet the actions of so many Israeli politicians seem determined to guarantee that peace is impossible.

    The Palestinians are not going away, nor is their claim to the land. Refusing to negotiate, continual taking of more land and making life for them difficult if not impossible, these are not actions to promote peaceful coexistence, they are actions to oppress terrorise and demean. Israel is surrounded by people it has made its enemies yes, but that doesn't justify it being a terrorist state. And it does terrorise. And the west allows it to disregard and flagrantly breech every UN resolution it chooses.

    A two state solution - almost certainly with the UN forcibly separating the two like in Cyprus - is the only long term solution. But the settlers will never allow it. So we have endless slaughter. Very sad

    How do you negotiate with somebody who refuses to accept your right to exist?

    Don't forget that at Oslo and at Cap David the Palestinians were getting almost everything they wanted, but they refused to deal when the chips were down.

    I am sure that if the Palestinian leadership were able to deliver sustainable compliance with a two-state solution (and accept no right of return) the Israelis would do a deal overnight.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    TOPPING said:

    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    But what is irritating (even if done with some elan by eg. SO) is to tell Kippers that their opinions are "wrong". Still less to equate their legitimate views on immigration and the EU with racism (which I am not saying SO does).

    I have said this before - @iSam doesn't need my help in arguing his cause but the mini-PB version of the intellectual/political elite sneering at the Kipper POV exemplifies why on a broader scale, they are picking up so much support.

    Given that the euros are less important than answering a survey from auto-trader to the British Public I am quite looking forward to UKIP getting a stonking majority.

    Top post Mr Topping!
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    Was that produced by UAF - Unite Against Farage?
  • Outstanding piece. It's likely that I will be visiting the State of Israel in the summer. Have been advised that it is best for the outspoken to keep their opinions to themselves...
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    I see the UK has fallen four places in the press freedom index:

    https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

    Nice going David "liberal Conservative" Cameron. It's funny how much he believed in press freedom when the Murdoch press could be clamped down upon, but not when it means sending round the muscle to the Guardian offices...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    AveryLP said:

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    100 reasons not to vote UKIP

    PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR UKIP IF……

    • If you are a woman, if you love a woman, if you are friends with a woman, if you have a daughter or sister.

    • If you think politicians should do the job they are paid for.

    • If you think that Nigel Farage is a good honest bloke, down to earth, represents the common man, and is the sort of bloke you could have a drink with.

    • If you believe that people have the right to protest.

    • If you think that people can be judged by the company they keep.

    • If you believe that the AV referendum was a waste of time and Tax-payers money.

    • If you believe that UKIP represent you, the normal people.

    • If you believe that UKIP can do a better job of running the country than the other main parties.

    • If you think that political posters should be honest.

    • If you are a Royalist.

    • If you have concerns about the amount of aid we send abroad, but are not a horrible racist.

    • If you, or your children ride a bike. (Honestly)

    • If you think that most of the loutish behaviour from UKIP is a handful of oiks.

    • If you are northern.

    • If you are concerned about German influence in the UK.

    • If you think that Vladimir Putin is a bit of a worry.

    • If you have a child, and think that children have some value for our future.

    • If you are Asian, love or care about someone who is Asian.

    • If you oppose apartheid.

    • If you just hate racism.

    • If you care about the NHS.

    • If you are gay, or have gay friends, family or people that you love who are gay.

    • If you are concerned that UKIP are simply the acceptable face of racism, supplanting the BNP and EDL.

    • If you are concerned about security on Facebook….

    • If you listen to their own people…


    Each reason supported by argument and quotations on: http://maxjfreeman.com/2014/05/03/100-reasons-not-to-vote-ukip/

    You can even add your own reasons in the comment section! He hasn't reached 100 yet. Opportunity for an 80 year old here.
    You should set it to one of the gloomier bits of Elgar.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682
    Charles said:

    There is something desperately sad about Israel. A country that needs to not only exist but provide Jews with a safe home. Yet the actions of so many Israeli politicians seem determined to guarantee that peace is impossible.

    The Palestinians are not going away, nor is their claim to the land. Refusing to negotiate, continual taking of more land and making life for them difficult if not impossible, these are not actions to promote peaceful coexistence, they are actions to oppress terrorise and demean. Israel is surrounded by people it has made its enemies yes, but that doesn't justify it being a terrorist state. And it does terrorise. And the west allows it to disregard and flagrantly breech every UN resolution it chooses.

    A two state solution - almost certainly with the UN forcibly separating the two like in Cyprus - is the only long term solution. But the settlers will never allow it. So we have endless slaughter. Very sad

    How do you negotiate with somebody who refuses to accept your right to exist?

    Don't forget that at Oslo and at Cap David the Palestinians were getting almost everything they wanted, but they refused to deal when the chips were down.

    I am sure that if the Palestinian leadership were able to deliver sustainable compliance with a two-state solution (and accept no right of return) the Israelis would do a deal overnight.
    not a chance. The Israelis have done nothing and will do nothing to deal with their settlers and without that being resolved any deal is meaningless.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    AveryLP said:


    100 reasons not to vote UKIP
    Each reason supported by argument and quotations on: http://maxjfreeman.com/2014/05/03/100-reasons-not-to-vote-ukip/

    That piece is most unfair to UKIP and Nigel Farage.

    The author claims that Farage said the 2010 manifesto which he launched, and to which he co-authored the preface, was 'tosh'. That's a smear, completely untrue. He said it was 'drivel'.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    Yet, 27-38% of voters plan to vote UKIP, and the party's membership keeps growing.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    Nonsense. There is a world apart from the violent racist thugs of the BNP and a campaign against mass immigration. Their enemies can have all the ammunition they like. All I'm seeing is various establishment organisations excessively highlighting the cases of a handful of council candidates out of thousands, and also smearing non-racist statements as racist. The more this is done, the more it will push people with concerns about immigration to UKIP. It's funny how their "extreme folly" has set them on the path for more than a quarter of the vote at the next election...
  • I would be far more embarrassed to admit I was a Labour voter or a Cameroon.

    Those parties are home to supporters of 90 day detention without trial, control orders, secret justice, Middle Eastern crusading, prices and incomes policies etc. And they claim UKIP are mad?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682
    AveryLP said:

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    100 reasons not to vote UKIP

    PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR UKIP IF……

    • If you are a woman, if you love a woman, if you are friends with a woman, if you have a daughter or sister.

    • If you think politicians should do the job they are paid for.

    • If you think that Nigel Farage is a good honest bloke, down to earth, represents the common man, and is the sort of bloke you could have a drink with.

    • If you believe that people have the right to protest.

    • If you think that people can be judged by the company they keep.

    • If you believe that the AV referendum was a waste of time and Tax-payers money.

    • If you believe that UKIP represent you, the normal people.

    • If you believe that UKIP can do a better job of running the country than the other main parties.

    • If you think that political posters should be honest.

    • If you are a Royalist.

    • If you have concerns about the amount of aid we send abroad, but are not a horrible racist.

    • If you, or your children ride a bike. (Honestly)

    • If you think that most of the loutish behaviour from UKIP is a handful of oiks.

    • If you are northern.

    • If you are concerned about German influence in the UK.

    • If you think that Vladimir Putin is a bit of a worry.

    • If you have a child, and think that children have some value for our future.

    • If you are Asian, love or care about someone who is Asian.

    • If you oppose apartheid.

    • If you just hate racism.

    • If you care about the NHS.

    • If you are gay, or have gay friends, family or people that you love who are gay.

    • If you are concerned that UKIP are simply the acceptable face of racism, supplanting the BNP and EDL.

    • If you are concerned about security on Facebook….

    • If you listen to their own people…


    Each reason supported by argument and quotations on: http://maxjfreeman.com/2014/05/03/100-reasons-not-to-vote-ukip/

    You can even add your own reasons in the comment section! He hasn't reached 100 yet. Opportunity for an 80 year old here.
    LOL. What a load of garbage. Some people are really getting desperate. It is quote funny really to see them squirming so.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Socrates said:

    I see the UK has fallen four places in the press freedom index:

    https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

    Nice going David "liberal Conservative" Cameron. It's funny how much he believed in press freedom when the Murdoch press could be clamped down upon, but not when it means sending round the muscle to the Guardian offices...

    Still above US and France.

    Compared to the rest of the world, we're looking pretty good.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited May 2014
    @Stuart_Dickson

    'Go spend 4 hours knocking doors on a Scottish housing estate. Any Scottish housing estate. Ask the people that answer the doors about David Cameron, about the Union, about Salmond, about Lamont, about the health service, about transport, about housing. Get a feel for the lie of the land.'

    What's wrong with the health service,transport & housing,Salmond falling short?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    There is something desperately sad about Israel. A country that needs to not only exist but provide Jews with a safe home. Yet the actions of so many Israeli politicians seem determined to guarantee that peace is impossible.

    The Palestinians are not going away, nor is their claim to the land. Refusing to negotiate, continual taking of more land and making life for them difficult if not impossible, these are not actions to promote peaceful coexistence, they are actions to oppress terrorise and demean. Israel is surrounded by people it has made its enemies yes, but that doesn't justify it being a terrorist state. And it does terrorise. And the west allows it to disregard and flagrantly breech every UN resolution it chooses.

    A two state solution - almost certainly with the UN forcibly separating the two like in Cyprus - is the only long term solution. But the settlers will never allow it. So we have endless slaughter. Very sad

    How do you negotiate with somebody who refuses to accept your right to exist?

    Don't forget that at Oslo and at Cap David the Palestinians were getting almost everything they wanted, but they refused to deal when the chips were down.

    I am sure that if the Palestinian leadership were able to deliver sustainable compliance with a two-state solution (and accept no right of return) the Israelis would do a deal overnight.
    not a chance. The Israelis have done nothing and will do nothing to deal with their settlers and without that being resolved any deal is meaningless.
    Not what my contacts in Jerusalem and the US say. But you are probably right ;-)
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    note: if anyone else is thinking of responding to Avery's drolll UKIP comment can they please effing well snip it.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Next said:

    Socrates said:

    I see the UK has fallen four places in the press freedom index:

    https://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

    Nice going David "liberal Conservative" Cameron. It's funny how much he believed in press freedom when the Murdoch press could be clamped down upon, but not when it means sending round the muscle to the Guardian offices...

    Still above US and France.

    Compared to the rest of the world, we're looking pretty good.
    Yes, because the US has fallen precipitously on the same basis. That's no reason for us to be complacent about the same thing. France famously has clamped down on its press for years.

    We're worse than most of the developed world, and a fair few developing countries to boot.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited May 2014
    @Topping
    If you want to understand the history, read the judgment of the Central Criminal Court (Mr Justice Sweeney) granting a stay for abuse of process in R v Downey. There never was an amnesty, either de facto or de jure.

    There was a prisoner release agreement, given effect to in this country by the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act 1998. There are crucial distinctions. Firstly, it applied only to those who had been convicted of an offence. Accordingly, it is still open to the police to investigate, and for the Crown to institute proceedings for an offence committed in the course of the Troubles. Indeed, if it is in the public interest, it their duty to do so. Secondly, for prisoners serving indeterminate sentences (i.e. those convicted of murder, or otherwise sentenced to life imprisonment), the agreement provided that they be released on licence. This ensures that the sentence is still extant, for example they are prohibited from voting in parliamentary elections. More importantly, they are liable to recall to custody for contravening the conditions of their licence, particularly in relation to participating in terrorist-related activity. Moreover, if the cease fire breaks down, the Secretary of State may suspend the scheme, without prejudice to the validity of any licence granted thereunder before the suspension.
  • AveryLP
    " Good old Nigel who you could have a drink with down the pub, probably wouldn't want to sit next to an oik like you anyway, because you, unlike him, would not have been able to afford to go to the £10k a year school that Nigel was educated in"

    If we shouldn't vote for a party that has privately educated leaders. Who is there left to vote for?
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    john_zims said:

    @Stuart_Dickson

    'Go spend 4 hours knocking doors on a Scottish housing estate. Any Scottish housing estate. Ask the people that answer the doors about David Cameron, about the Union, about Salmond, about Lamont, about the health service, about transport, about housing. Get a feel for the lie of the land.'

    What's wrong with the health service,transport & housing,Salmond falling short?

    Hilarious. You automatically assume that the answers would be a problem for Salmond. Just further proof of the lamentable ignorance of Scottish society here at PB.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
    Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools.

    R.U.Kipling
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Thank God for that long blog post about UKIP. My sister is a woman. I was initially going to vote UKIP because I believed it would mean the school system for her son would be less under pressure, and leaving the CAP would reduce grocery costs for her family. But I now see that one of their MEPs joked with some female friends about them being sluts for not cleaning their fridges. I'm definitely voting Labour now.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2014
    Sean_F said:

    AveryLP said:

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    100 reasons not to vote UKIP

    PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR UKIP IF……

    • If …


    Each reason supported by argument and quotations on: http://maxjfreeman.com/2014/05/03/100-reasons-not-to-vote-ukip/

    You can even add your own reasons in the comment section! He hasn't reached 100 yet. Opportunity for an 80 year old here.
    You should set it to one of the gloomier bits of Elgar.
    Or better still, Bruckner.

    Then The Nabavi would approve. I think he has a prejudice against provincial organists!

    After all they do go on a bit.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    TOPPING said:

    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".

    I've always found clarity to be vital, when negotiating a compromise. The PSNI can't be expected to adhere to something that was never agreed by the parties to negotiation.

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    Sponsored by the state, supported by Labour, addicted to lies and propaganda

    https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152056917395814&set=a.410814070813.186068.101124430813&type=1&theatre

    UKIP's anti-immigration campaign is starting to look like extreme folly. They were doing just fine without having to resort to it, and now they've poisoned their own well and provided their enemies with no end of ammunition. UKIP are in great danger of becoming a pariah party like the BNP, and it's entirely of their own doing. How many people now would be embarrassed to admit they were a UKIP voter in polite company?
    Yet, 27-38% of voters plan to vote UKIP, and the party's membership keeps growing.
    UKIP have made british elections much more interesting. :-)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    TOPPING said:

    note: if anyone else is thinking of responding to Avery's drolll UKIP comment can they please effing well snip it.

    I quite agree.

    It is after all a thread on Israel.

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited May 2014
    AveryLP said:



    Or better still, Bruckner.

    Then The Nabavi would approve. I think he has a prejudice against provincial organists!

    I have an even bigger prejudice against Bruckner.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Outstanding piece. It's likely that I will be visiting the State of Israel in the summer. Have been advised that it is best for the outspoken to keep their opinions to themselves...

    I believe the technical term for that is 'being polite'.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    @Topping
    If you want to understand the history, read the judgment of the Central Criminal Court (Mr Justice Sweeney) granting a stay for abuse of process in R v Downey. There never was an amnesty, either de facto or de jure.

    There was a prisoner release agreement, given effect to in this country by the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act 1998. There are crucial distinctions. Firstly, it applied only to those who had been convicted of an offence. Accordingly, it is still open to the police to investigate, and for the Crown to institute proceedings for an offence committed in the course of the Troubles. Indeed, if it is in the public interest, it their duty to do so. Secondly, for prisoners serving indeterminate sentences (i.e. those convicted of murder, or otherwise sentenced to life imprisonment), the agreement provided that they be released on licence. This ensures that the sentence is still extant, for example they are prohibited from voting in parliamentary elections. More importantly, they are liable to recall to custody for contravening the conditions of their licence, particularly in relation to participating in terrorist-related activity. Moreover, if the cease fire breaks down, the Secretary of State may suspend the scheme, without prejudice to the validity of any licence granted thereunder before the suspension.

    Exactly. If you were in jail you had another two years to serve; if you weren't in jail you could still be jailed for two years, post-conviction. This seems a fudge as it left people like Gerry Adams in a sort of limbo.

    You say there was no amnesty as did I and we are both right but, crucially, the UK Govt behaved as though there was an amnesty ("Gerry Adams in IRA shock breaking news"?) so that they could push through with the GFA and Gerry Adams was the person who they could do business with.

    It was an informal arrangement. Which has now been broken.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    AveryLP said:

    TOPPING said:

    note: if anyone else is thinking of responding to Avery's drolll UKIP comment can they please effing well snip it.

    I quite agree.

    It is after all a thread on Israel.

    I thought Israel vs Palestine was also a fight about unwanted immigrants.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,709
    Socrates said:

    All I'm seeing is various establishment organisations excessively highlighting the cases of a handful of council candidates out of thousands

    I wasn't referring to the off-beam remarks of council candidates, embarrassing though they are. I was referring to the campaign about indigenous workers being made redundant as employers replace them with immigrants. This would be illegal of course - employers can't make a worker redundant and then immediately rehire someone else for the post - so this can be legitimately deemed as scaremongering. So the Left (for once) has a point. As this campaign was only launched last week we've yet to see what effect it will have on UKIP support and membership, but I suspect it won't be good.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    Had a look at Betfair and see Euro-turnout predictions hovering around last time's 34.7%. Interest IS gradually rising - in canvassing, over half the voters think I'm calling about the Euros, whereas a month ago they had to be reminded. Lots of people saying they'll vote Labour or Tory next year but are going to have a UKIP outing this month, so the 4-9 favourite position looks plausible. As you'd expect, they're strong in semi-rural and deep working-class areas, weaker in the middle-class suburban wards. A factor is that many people are treating the election as an ersatz referendum rather than a choice of representatives.

    We can't really tell at this stage whether the voters will mostly then revert as they expect, since the dynamics will change if UKIP are ahead in lots of seats. Will we start to see UKIP barcharts saying the Euros show that only they can beat ... here?
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    TOPPING said:

    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    I skimmed through a couple of UKIP interviews on YouTube this weekend. There was some talk of a 2015 manifesto being vetted by "a think tank", which will be launched after the EU Parliament elections.


  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".

    I've always found clarity to be vital, when negotiating a compromise. The PSNI can't be expected to adhere to something that was never agreed by the parties to negotiation.

    Thing is, the agreement was the best that could have been achieved in still volatile times. But yes I agree if you have an agreement which you don't set down in statute and simply have an implicit understanding, don't blame people (in this case the PSNI) for doing their jobs.

    But the realpolitik of it is that somewhere along the lines (as we are in that game anyway) the implicit understanding should have been communicated to the PSNI and other agencies.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    I was chatting with an ex-colleague yesterday when the radio news said that "A UKIP council candidate who tweeted that Islam is "evil" and homosexuality an "abomination" has been suspended from the party."

    My colleague said "Well, I agree with half of that tweet."

    As he's a devout Muslim, I suspect I know which was which. So even when Ukip are doing their best to annoy people, they're still getting 50% approval.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2014

    AveryLP
    " Good old Nigel who you could have a drink with down the pub, probably wouldn't want to sit next to an oik like you anyway, because you, unlike him, would not have been able to afford to go to the £10k a year school that Nigel was educated in"

    If we shouldn't vote for a party that has privately educated leaders. Who is there left to vote for?

    I was going to suggest the Green Party of England and Wales.

    But then I realised it was founded by an Old Etonian and is currently led by a British-Australian who attended an all-girls private school in Burwood, New South Wales.

    I fear the only course left for a principled voter is to seek advice from an "ordinary Scot" living in a grim central-belt housing estate.

    Either that or to take the waters in Bath.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    @Topping - if you believe an opinion is wrong, then you should say so. I disagree with iSam so I tell him I do. I find his fixation on race bizarre. That's not me calling him a racist; I don't think he is. It's me saying it's all a bit more complicated than that. As far as I can tell there is only one poster on here who does flirt with racist ideas, and who pops up every now and again to talk about gangs and bankstas, but he is the exception. Neither do I think UKIP is a racist party. It is thriving in the way the BNP never did precisely because it isn't. For me as someone on the centre left the way to take on UKIP is not to throw insults at them, it's to point out they are a neo-liberal party in which most right wing Tory MPs would sit very comfortably. That's what the argument should be about.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Stuart_Dickson

    'Hilarious. You automatically assume that the answers would be a problem for Salmond. Just further proof of the lamentable ignorance of Scottish society here at PB.'

    Hilarious,you are unable to answer a simple question,guess that's just the lamentable ignorance of someone living in Sweden.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    I skimmed through a couple of UKIP interviews on YouTube this weekend. There was some talk of a 2015 manifesto being vetted by "a think tank", which will be launched after the EU Parliament elections.


    I look forward to seeing it because then there will be something of substance to discuss.

    As they seem to have been such a jumble of left-right-centre on socio-economic issues I also believe it will be fascinating.

    One thing's for sure, NFarage won't be able to respond with an "oh I haven't read that" any more.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,457

    TOPPING said:

    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    I skimmed through a couple of UKIP interviews on YouTube this weekend. There was some talk of a 2015 manifesto being vetted by "a think tank", which will be launched after the EU Parliament elections.
    I think we should go for Midland Maroon for the coaches, and GWR green and coppertop for the locomotives. Taxi drivers should, of course, always wear bowler hats and be adorned with handlebar moustaches.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    @Topping - if you believe an opinion is wrong, then you should say so. I disagree with iSam so I tell him I do. I find his fixation on race bizarre. That's not me calling him a racist; I don't think he is. It's me saying it's all a bit more complicated than that. As far as I can tell there is only one poster on here who does flirt with racist ideas, and who pops up every now and again to talk about gangs and bankstas, but he is the exception. Neither do I think UKIP is a racist party. It is thriving in the way the BNP never did precisely because it isn't. For me as someone on the centre left the way to take on UKIP is not to throw insults at them, it's to point out they are a neo-liberal party in which most right wing Tory MPs would sit very comfortably. That's what the argument should be about.

    I specifically said that you have not called them racist. And I also said that yours was an amusing response to the Kippers.

    But, chatroom interaction analysis can see how some of your responses are not just amusing but mocking perhaps sneering.

    There is a minority of people (perhaps a majority?) who don't like the changing face of British society. It is a legitimate view to have and on some scale we all agree with it if you put no immigration at one end and, say, 50 million immigrants at the other.

    You may not believe UKIP racist (I'm sure there are plenty of racists in every party) but the impression you give is that those views are not worthy of engagement and only worthy of contempt.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    I skimmed through a couple of UKIP interviews on YouTube this weekend. There was some talk of a 2015 manifesto being vetted by "a think tank", which will be launched after the EU Parliament elections.


    I look forward to seeing it because then there will be something of substance to discuss.

    As they seem to have been such a jumble of left-right-centre on socio-economic issues I also believe it will be fascinating.

    One thing's for sure, NFarage won't be able to respond with an "oh I haven't read that" any more.
    Before the 2010 election Iain Martin wrote a piece for the WSJ, praising Mr Cameron for attempting to marry economic liberalism with social conservatism. (can't find a link)

    Perhaps UKIP will deliver where Mr Cameron did not?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".

    I've always found clarity to be vital, when negotiating a compromise. The PSNI can't be expected to adhere to something that was never agreed by the parties to negotiation.

    Thing is, the agreement was the best that could have been achieved in still volatile times. But yes I agree if you have an agreement which you don't set down in statute and simply have an implicit understanding, don't blame people (in this case the PSNI) for doing their jobs.

    But the realpolitik of it is that somewhere along the lines (as we are in that game anyway) the implicit understanding should have been communicated to the PSNI and other agencies.
    In my experience, implicit understandings fail, because the parties have different understandings.

    A nod and a wink from Tony Blair or Jonathan Powell doesn't bind anyone else.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    re. UKIP

    see here's the thing; I believe they will fail as a political party because they don't have the resolve to create a substantial and comprehensive manifesto which they can then fight elections with.

    I skimmed through a couple of UKIP interviews on YouTube this weekend. There was some talk of a 2015 manifesto being vetted by "a think tank", which will be launched after the EU Parliament elections.


    I look forward to seeing it because then there will be something of substance to discuss.

    As they seem to have been such a jumble of left-right-centre on socio-economic issues I also believe it will be fascinating.

    One thing's for sure, NFarage won't be able to respond with an "oh I haven't read that" any more.
    Before the 2010 election Iain Martin wrote a piece for the WSJ, praising Mr Cameron for attempting to marry economic liberalism with social conservatism. (can't find a link)

    Perhaps UKIP will deliver where Mr Cameron did not?
    It would be interesting if they did - I rather take the Cons as being economically conservative and socially liberal (at least the leadership)!!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".

    I've always found clarity to be vital, when negotiating a compromise. The PSNI can't be expected to adhere to something that was never agreed by the parties to negotiation.

    Thing is, the agreement was the best that could have been achieved in still volatile times. But yes I agree if you have an agreement which you don't set down in statute and simply have an implicit understanding, don't blame people (in this case the PSNI) for doing their jobs.

    But the realpolitik of it is that somewhere along the lines (as we are in that game anyway) the implicit understanding should have been communicated to the PSNI and other agencies.
    LOL the reality is you should visit NI sometime where you might just learn something. While you're still stuck in 1973 the place has moved on.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Fascinating article.If anyone's arranging another flotilla to Gaza count me in.The last one got stopped in Athens,courtesy of NATO.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited May 2014
    edit: for @Alanbrooke‌

    haha and this is the person who said that the July marches are similar to a bonfire party on Wandsworth common.

    But, and I have no intention of reprising our discussion from the other night, much as I appreciate that you would like to think of NI now as being at the sunlit upland end of societal behaviour, the reality is that those 1973 emotions are not very far below the surface.

    My point was that there was no amnesty from the GFA so the UK Govt and Gerry Adams operated as though there was one. It was a lie but a workable one and now the PSNI have called the bluff.

    My view is that that is a mistake. I'm really not sure what your view is save that you are a local and therefore have an unparalleled and far more insightful view of what is happening.

    Like a frog in a well, in fact.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited May 2014
    TOPPING said:

    It was an informal arrangement. Which has now been broken.

    Fortunately, we live in a system where the executive cannot under the colour of law enter into informal agreements with terrorists. The police are crown servants, responsible to the law alone. All indictments are presented in the name of, and on behalf of the crown. Should independent investigating and prosecuting authorities unlawfully have regard to such "informal arrangements"? Surely not. Then all it will take to stop a man being put on trial for murder is a phonecall from Downing Street. The Bill of Rights condemned the practice of 'Assumeing and Exerciseing a Power of Dispensing with and Suspending of Lawes and the Execution of Lawes without Consent of Parlyament.' It went on to provide that
    Noe Dispensation by Non obstante of or to any Statute or any part thereof shall be allowed but the same shall be held void and of noe effect Except a Dispensation be allowed of in such Statute.
    Let us take our stand on the constitutional traditions of England, not Stuart despotism.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".

    I've always found clarity to be vital, when negotiating a compromise. The PSNI can't be expected to adhere to something that was never agreed by the parties to negotiation.

    Effectively, the British Government in the form of the PSNI have reneged on an understanding without which there would not have been peace in the first place.

    How do we know that the Queen's dinner guest will not be next ?
  • surbiton said:

    How do we know that the Queen's dinner guest will not be next ?

    Henry VIII had dinner with Thomas More on several occasions. Roger Casement was even given the dignity of a knighthood...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    TOPPING said:

    haha and this is the person who said that the July marches are similar to a bonfire party on Wandsworth common.

    But, and I have no intention of reprising our discussion from the other night, much as I appreciate that you would like to think of NI now as being at the sunlit upland end of societal behaviour, the reality is that those 1973 emotions are not very far below the surface.

    My point was that there was no amnesty from the GFA so the UK Govt and Gerry Adams operated as though there was one. It was a lie but a workable one and now the PSNI have called the bluff.

    My view is that that is a mistake. I'm really not sure what your view is save that you are a local and therefore have an unparalleled and far more insightful view of what is happening.

    Like a frog in a well, in fact.

    My view is quite simple there is either an amnesty for all or an amnesty for none. SF are currently trying to play they get off scot free and everyone else has to account for what they did. That won't work as no-one else will put up with it. So if you want a settlement rather than do a Blair and cave in to everything there comes a time to call their bluff. Do that and there's a better chance of a lasting peace.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    surbiton said:

    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh x 2 on Gerry Adams, Prof Tonge on the BBC clarified the last remaining piece of the puzzle for me.

    It seems that an "amnesty" (for those yet to be convicted) simply wouldn't have flown in NI with the electorate and the politicians so the UK Govt operated as though there was one to get the GFA through and hoped the details would sort themselves out subsequently.

    Hence Gerry Adams couldn't ever say "yes" to any incriminating question (a la SA truth & reconciliation) because he wasn't assured immunity from prosecution because the GFA didn't allow for t. But de facto there was an amnesty and now for some idiotic reason, that understanding has been ignored by PSNI (and...?).

    Not such a great example for future "peacemakers".

    I've always found clarity to be vital, when negotiating a compromise. The PSNI can't be expected to adhere to something that was never agreed by the parties to negotiation.

    Effectively, the British Government in the form of the PSNI have reneged on an understanding without which there would not have been peace in the first place.

    How do we know that the Queen's dinner guest will not be next ?
    British Government ≠ PSNI.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    It was an informal arrangement. Which has now been broken.

    Fortunately, we live in a system where the executive cannot under the colour of law enter into informal agreements with terrorists. The police are crown servants, responsible to the law alone. All indictments are presented in the name of, and on behalf of the crown. Should independent investigating and prosecuting authorities unlawfully have regard to such "informal arrangements"? Surely not. Then all it will take to stop a man being put on trial for murder is a from Downing Street. The Bill of Rights condemned the practice of 'Assumeing and Exerciseing a Power of Dispensing with and Suspending of Lawes and the Execution of Lawes without Consent of Parlyament.' It went on to provide that
    Noe Dispensation by Non obstante of or to any Statute or any part thereof shall be allowed but the same shall be held void and of noe effect Except a Dispensation be allowed of in such Statute.
    Let us take our stand on the constitutional traditions of England, not Stuart despotism.

    yeah all that.

    But sometimes you have to get your hands dirty to achieve a greater good and in this instance, although I can't think how on earth they would have done it, the greater good was peace in NI.

    And even though @Alanbrooke‌ and @Y0kel‌ think that NI is similar in social cohesion to Eastbourne but with worse weather, the reality is that things are still very volatile.

    Give me the 1744 judicial precedent on that one....
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    haha and this is the person who said that the July marches are similar to a bonfire party on Wandsworth common.

    But, and I have no intention of reprising our discussion from the other night, much as I appreciate that you would like to think of NI now as being at the sunlit upland end of societal behaviour, the reality is that those 1973 emotions are not very far below the surface.

    My point was that there was no amnesty from the GFA so the UK Govt and Gerry Adams operated as though there was one. It was a lie but a workable one and now the PSNI have called the bluff.

    My view is that that is a mistake. I'm really not sure what your view is save that you are a local and therefore have an unparalleled and far more insightful view of what is happening.

    Like a frog in a well, in fact.

    My view is quite simple there is either an amnesty for all or an amnesty for none. SF are currently trying to play they get off scot free and everyone else has to account for what they did. That won't work as no-one else will put up with it. So if you want a settlement rather than do a Blair and cave in to everything there comes a time to call their bluff. Do that and there's a better chance of a lasting peace.
    "SF are currently trying to play they get off scot-free"

    who the hell are Gerry Adams and Martin McG for heaven's sake?

    They are in power. Or are at the moment - who knows what surprises UK Govt/PSNI have in store for them.

    The GFA tested what was at the very limit of what anyone could put up with and that didn't include amnesties. And yet you want to make it more rigorous for a "lasting peace".
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    TOPPING said:

    @Topping - if you believe an opinion is wrong, then you should say so. I disagree with iSam so I tell him I do. I find his fixation on race bizarre. That's not me calling him a racist; I don't think he is. It's me saying it's all a bit more complicated than that. As far as I can tell there is only one poster on here who does flirt with racist ideas, and who pops up every now and again to talk about gangs and bankstas, but he is the exception. Neither do I think UKIP is a racist party. It is thriving in the way the BNP never did precisely because it isn't. For me as someone on the centre left the way to take on UKIP is not to throw insults at them, it's to point out they are a neo-liberal party in which most right wing Tory MPs would sit very comfortably. That's what the argument should be about.

    I specifically said that you have not called them racist. And I also said that yours was an amusing response to the Kippers.

    But, chatroom interaction analysis can see how some of your responses are not just amusing but mocking perhaps sneering.

    There is a minority of people (perhaps a majority?) who don't like the changing face of British society. It is a legitimate view to have and on some scale we all agree with it if you put no immigration at one end and, say, 50 million immigrants at the other.

    You may not believe UKIP racist (I'm sure there are plenty of racists in every party) but the impression you give is that those views are not worthy of engagement and only worthy of contempt.

    I guess I am pretty contemptuous of isam's way of expressing himself sometimes. His fixations on race, leftie conspiracies and white working class victimhood can get rather tedious. As someone born into a working class family I never considered myself a victim. But I don't see isam as representative of UKIP. I like to think I engage with most on here courteously and seriously.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited May 2014
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    It was an informal arrangement. Which has now been broken.

    Fortunately, we live in a system where the executive cannot under the colour of law enter into informal agreements with terrorists. The police are crown servants, responsible to the law alone. All indictments are presented in the name of, and on behalf of the crown. Should independent investigating and prosecuting authorities unlawfully have regard to such "informal arrangements"? Surely not. Then all it will take to stop a man being put on trial for murder is a from Downing Street. The Bill of Rights condemned the practice of 'Assumeing and Exerciseing a Power of Dispensing with and Suspending of Lawes and the Execution of Lawes without Consent of Parlyament.' It went on to provide that
    Noe Dispensation by Non obstante of or to any Statute or any part thereof shall be allowed but the same shall be held void and of noe effect Except a Dispensation be allowed of in such Statute.
    Let us take our stand on the constitutional traditions of England, not Stuart despotism.
    yeah all that.

    But sometimes you have to get your hands dirty to achieve a greater good and in this instance, although I can't think how on earth they would have done it, the greater good was peace in NI.

    And even though @Alanbrooke‌ and @Y0kel‌ think that NI is similar in social cohesion to Eastbourne but with worse weather, the reality is that things are still very volatile.

    Give me the 1744 judicial precedent on that one....

    things are very volatile - based on your vast experience of Surrey presumably.

    As I said to you the other night the average NI teenager has no direct experience of terrorism. Bar some nutters there's no wish to go back. Nor in some sense could they as the world has moved on

    1. US support for "the struggle" died on 9/11
    2. The USSR no longer exists
    3. The Irish government is probably more anti SF than the UK one these days
    4. David Cameron is a fantastic PM ( ok that's a piss take )



  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    It was an informal arrangement. Which has now been broken.

    Fortunately, we live in a system where the executive cannot under the colour of law enter into informal agreements with terrorists. The police are crown servants, responsible to the law alone. All indictments are presented in the name of, and on behalf of the crown. Should independent investigating and prosecuting authorities unlawfully have regard to such "informal arrangements"? Surely not. Then all it will take to stop a man being put on trial for murder is a from Downing Street. The Bill of Rights condemned the practice of 'Assumeing and Exerciseing a Power of Dispensing with and Suspending of Lawes and the Execution of Lawes without Consent of Parlyament.' It went on to provide that
    Noe Dispensation by Non obstante of or to any Statute or any part thereof shall be allowed but the same shall be held void and of noe effect Except a Dispensation be allowed of in such Statute.
    Let us take our stand on the constitutional traditions of England, not Stuart despotism.
    yeah all that.

    But sometimes you have to get your hands dirty to achieve a greater good and in this instance, although I can't think how on earth they would have done it, the greater good was peace in NI.

    And even though @Alanbrooke‌ and @Y0kel‌ think that NI is similar in social cohesion to Eastbourne but with worse weather, the reality is that things are still very volatile.

    Give me the 1744 judicial precedent on that one....

    As I said to you the other night the average NI teenager has no direct experience of terrorism.



    Yep I saw that on the TV. Are the "Loyalist Blackskulls" a basketball team?
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689

    AveryLP
    " Good old Nigel who you could have a drink with down the pub, probably wouldn't want to sit next to an oik like you anyway, because you, unlike him, would not have been able to afford to go to the £10k a year school that Nigel was educated in"

    If we shouldn't vote for a party that has privately educated leaders. Who is there left to vote for?

    I would think that unless the schoolboy Nigel was getting far to much pocket money at the time that he couldn't afford it either.

    Many conservatives have argued (quite rightly as well) that condemning someone for the choices their parents made such as which school to send them to is quite frankly ridiculous. Anyone who is a member of such a party that is subject to frequent attacks on its leaders yet still feels they should turn around and accuse other politicians of the same "crime" is not to mince words an idiot
This discussion has been closed.