Done a blog on Gaza, Israel, and the Mystery of the Disappearing Tweets. http://t.co/0fKGXyuEFK
Broadly speaking, the left is anti-Israeli and the right is pro-Israeli. Is this in truth simply because Communist Russia armed and trained the Arabs, who were utterly thrashed, and the left resents this Communist humiliation because it still thinks Communism a force for good and harmony?
Why is Cameron amongst the vocal world leaders in sticking it to Russia?
It's cynical I know, but what's in that for us?
I think you'll find British PM's don't take too kindly to their citizens being blown out of the skies. They're funny that way.
I've never noticed that "they" give a sh1t to be frank. They didn't exactly cover themselves with glory over Lockerbie.
We ought by rights to get a Congress-of-Vienna resolution against Putin and declare him, like Napoleon, an outlaw. Not Russia, just him and his associates. Then harass him for the rest of his life.
It's funny how this has shifted. In the beginning the Left was quite pro-Israel (and the right was perhaps more prone to anti-Semitism). Israel was, it is often forgotten, very socialist in its origins - cf the kibbutz movement, etc
Now the Left loathes Israel and the Right staunchly defends it - and both sides overdo it.
Yes very true and very interesting.
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
"He's been in action for four years of the most difficult world economic conditions since the 1930s and has proved to be a superb Chancellor."
Hmmmm, wonders, how is that debt pile going? What is going to be the deficit this year compared to last? Is HMG still borrowing close to £100bn a year to pays its bills? What do the nation's trade figures look like? A massive rise in employment but a welfare bill that is still increasing and a tax take that is flat-lining?
A superb chancellor? I think not, Mr. N, my cat could have achieved the same. In fact if Cameron had left the CotE post empty we would probably be not far off the current position. Debt might have been a bit higher but as your superb chancellor seems to think that £1.5tn is acceptable what is a few hundred billion between friends.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
This all started in 2013. The Aussies had Cook sorted over here, despite the result. His capitulation to mediocrity has dragged the whole of English cricket into the mire. Pietersen paid the price, in hindsight, the wrong man was fed to the lions.
Done a blog on Gaza, Israel, and the Mystery of the Disappearing Tweets. http://t.co/0fKGXyuEFK
Broadly speaking, the left is anti-Israeli and the right is pro-Israeli. Is this in truth simply because Communist Russia armed and trained the Arabs, who were utterly thrashed, and the left resents this Communist humiliation because it still thinks Communism a force for good and harmony?
Why is Cameron amongst the vocal world leaders in sticking it to Russia?
It's cynical I know, but what's in that for us?
I think you'll find British PM's don't take too kindly to their citizens being blown out of the skies. They're funny that way.
I've never noticed that "they" give a sh1t to be frank. They didn't exactly cover themselves with glory over Lockerbie.
We ought by rights to get a Congress-of-Vienna resolution against Putin and declare him, like Napoleon, an outlaw. Not Russia, just him and his associates. Then harass him for the rest of his life.
It's funny how this has shifted. In the beginning the Left was quite pro-Israel (and the right was perhaps more prone to anti-Semitism). Israel was, it is often forgotten, very socialist in its origins - cf the kibbutz movement, etc
Now the Left loathes Israel and the Right staunchly defends it - and both sides overdo it.
Yes very true and very interesting.
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Sean...your quill awaits...
The British establishment doesn't recognise an independent Palestine. Only Israel.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
Done a blog on Gaza, Israel, and the Mystery of the Disappearing Tweets. http://t.co/0fKGXyuEFK
Broadly speaking, the left is anti-Israeli and the right is pro-Israeli. Is this in truth simply because Communist Russia armed and trained the Arabs, who were utterly thrashed, and the left resents this Communist humiliation because it still thinks Communism a force for good and harmony?
Why is Cameron amongst the vocal world leaders in sticking it to Russia?
It's cynical I know, but what's in that for us?
I think you'll find British PM's don't take too kindly to their citizens being blown out of the skies. They're funny that way.
I've never noticed that "they" give a sh1t to be frank. They didn't exactly cover themselves with glory over Lockerbie.
We ought by rights to get a Congress-of-Vienna resolution against Putin and declare him, like Napoleon, an outlaw. Not Russia, just him and his associates. Then harass him for the rest of his life.
It's funny how this has shifted. In the beginning the Left was quite pro-Israel (and the right was perhaps more prone to anti-Semitism). Israel was, it is often forgotten, very socialist in its origins - cf the kibbutz movement, etc
Now the Left loathes Israel and the Right staunchly defends it - and both sides overdo it.
Yes very true and very interesting.
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Sean...your quill awaits...
Thats a very fair statement on the current position of Israel and the West. Nice to see TOPPING.
I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves.
Michael Vaughan, Ex-England captain on BBC Test Match Special "It's been absolutely pathetic from England. We've seen some collapses in the last year - against Australia, Sri Lanka and now India - but this is the worst of the lot. Something has got to change."
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
What's the evidence the Russians did it?
Do you mean the Russian supported rebels?
1. Russian supplied anti-aircraft missiles in rebel locations. 2. Missile launched from rebel area. 3. MH17 was flying East away from Ukraine and no threat to them. 4. Rebels had already shot down previous planes (similar size and height). 5. Rebels claimed then withdrew twitter statement that they shot a plane down there.
.... I doubt many of us will be terrified at the thought of Ed as PM
Unfortunately Ed's personal numbers indicate that many others have much greater reservations including a substantial minority of Labour supporters.
This situation is toxic for Labour, not only because it undermines Ed but because non Labour and swing voters will be more determined to ensure Ed never becomes PM.
Ed also has to sharply reverse his "weirdo rating". A man that is giving Nigel Farage a run for his money in this area isn't going to occupy Downing Street.
By "us" I was specifically referring to left of centre voters who are switching from the Lib Dems to Labour. Unless you are claiming that those voters will ultimately not vote Labour because the Mail keeps telling us that Ed M is "weird" then I am not sure of the relevance. There are still significant numbers of voters who will vote on what they think the parties might do in government rather than on the basis of a political version of the X-Factor.
Although I am voting Labour I think the Tories will probably get the most votes next May and it will be very tight in terms of seats. Can't see either getting a majority. Part of me would be very interested to see Cameron/Osborn grapple with the economy beyond next May because I believe that all they have done is manufacture another housing-led consumer bubble to get themselves reelected and that the underlying economic situation / debt situation is no better than it was when they came into office. Although I may have been at odds with the politics of Tory leaders in the past most were worthy of respect - Cam & Os are probably the 2 most vacuous and shallow politicians that the country has ever had the misfortune to be governed by IMO.
I don’t think that those like me who switch between LD & Lab give a tinkers cuss/rats backside what the Heil says.
I say, that's a bit harsh. He was a very good journalist and his letter from America was for many years one of the high spots of my week. Not to mention his magnificent TV series on the history of the USA, surely one of the high points of television and perhaps only rivalled by Jacob Bronowski's "The Ascent of Man".
Oh, sorry, you meant Alastair Cook not Alistair Cooke. Beg pardon, do carry on.
This all started in 2013. The Aussies had Cook sorted over here, despite the result. His capitulation to mediocrity has dragged the whole of English cricket into the mire. Pietersen paid the price, in hindsight, the wrong man was fed to the lions.
Our batting has been poor for a while, but over the last nine months the bowlers have lost their mojo too. They can't dig us out of holes in the way they used to. Too much cricket has left them totally knackered. There's a great deal of work needs to be done behind the scenes now and a great deal of patience is going to be needed. It will get worse before it gets better.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
So the russian are suggesting a ground attack jet, with a service ceiling of 22000 ft was next to an airliner at 30000ft ?
"I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves."
I think they could tolerate that but the fact that Israel has successfully defended itself is what sticks in the craw. Israel's other great crime is that when they say, "Never again", they mean it and for many Western politicians that is just too much.
"He's been in action for four years of the most difficult world economic conditions since the 1930s and has proved to be a superb Chancellor."
Hmmmm, wonders, how is that debt pile going? What is going to be the deficit this year compared to last? Is HMG still borrowing close to £100bn a year to pays its bills? What do the nation's trade figures look like? A massive rise in employment but a welfare bill that is still increasing and a tax take that is flat-lining?
A superb chancellor? I think not, Mr. N, my cat could have achieved the same. In fact if Cameron had left the CotE post empty we would probably be not far off the current position. Debt might have been a bit higher but as your superb chancellor seems to think that £1.5tn is acceptable what is a few hundred billion between friends.
He doesn't think it's acceptable, which is why he is reducing the deficit at the fastest possible pace consistent with not damaging employment and growth, whilst at the same time presiding over a major rebalancing of the economy and introducing huge reforms in terms of the OBR, financial regulation, addressing tax avoidance, reducing corporation tax, and improving incentives:
Done a blog on Gaza, Israel, and the Mystery of the Disappearing Tweets. http://t.co/0fKGXyuEFK
Broadly speaking, the left is anti-Israeli and the right is pro-Israeli. Is this in truth simply because Communist Russia armed and trained the Arabs, who were utterly thrashed, and the left resents this Communist humiliation because it still thinks Communism a force for good and harmony?
Why is Cameron amongst the vocal world leaders in sticking it to Russia?
It's cynical I know, but what's in that for us?
I think you'll find British PM's don't take too kindly to their citizens being blown out of the skies. They're funny that way.
I've never noticed that "they" give a sh1t to be frank. They didn't exactly cover themselves with glory over Lockerbie.
We ought by rights to get a Congress-of-Vienna resolution against Putin and declare him, like Napoleon, an outlaw. Not Russia, just him and his associates. Then harass him for the rest of his life.
It's funny how this has shifted. In the beginning the Left was quite pro-Israel (and the right was perhaps more prone to anti-Semitism). Israel was, it is often forgotten, very socialist in its origins - cf the kibbutz movement, etc
Now the Left loathes Israel and the Right staunchly defends it - and both sides overdo it.
Yes very true and very interesting.
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Sean...your quill awaits...
The British establishment doesn't recognise an independent Palestine. Only Israel.
Out of interest, Sunil, and I have no idea the answer to this - what/how many countries, including those in the Middle East, recognise an independent Palestine?
''I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves.''
Against a vast array of foes sworn to destroy their country, and murder all its people??? how dare they!!!
The Left abandoned the Jews when there was some other minority they could patronise. Not all the Left of course but that significant part of it which adopts and abandons "causes" in direct proportion to how useful they are to them in order to show how terrible the West, America and capitalism are.
There has also been a longer tradition of anti-Semitism on the Left; see, for instance, Israel and the European Left: Between Solidarity and Delegitimization by Colin Shindler.
Done a blog on Gaza, Israel, and the Mystery of the Disappearing Tweets. http://t.co/0fKGXyuEFK
Broadly speaking, the left is anti-Israeli and the right is pro-Israeli. Is this in truth simply because Communist Russia armed and trained the Arabs, who were utterly thrashed, and the left resents this Communist humiliation because it still thinks Communism a force for good and harmony?
Why is Cameron amongst the vocal world leaders in sticking it to Russia?
It's cynical I know, but what's in that for us?
I think you'll find British PM's don't take too kindly to their citizens being blown out of the skies. They're funny that way.
I've never noticed that "they" give a sh1t to be frank. They didn't exactly cover themselves with glory over Lockerbie.
We ought by rights to get a Congress-of-Vienna resolution against Putin and declare him, like Napoleon, an outlaw. Not Russia, just him and his associates. Then harass him for the rest of his life.
It's funny how this has shifted. In the beginning the Left was quite pro-Israel (and the right was perhaps more prone to anti-Semitism). Israel was, it is often forgotten, very socialist in its origins - cf the kibbutz movement, etc
Now the Left loathes Israel and the Right staunchly defends it - and both sides overdo it.
Yes very true and very interesting.
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Sean...your quill awaits...
The British establishment doesn't recognise an independent Palestine. Only Israel.
Out of interest, Sunil, and I have no idea the answer to this - what/how many countries, including those in the Middle East, recognise an independent Palestine?
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
So the russian are suggesting a ground attack jet, with a service ceiling of 22000 ft was next to an airliner at 30000ft ?
I think you'll find British PM's don't take too kindly to their citizens being blown out of the skies. They're funny that way.
I've never noticed that "they" give a sh1t to be frank. They didn't exactly cover themselves with glory over Lockerbie.
We ought by rights to get a Congress-of-Vienna resolution against Putin and declare him, like Napoleon, an outlaw. Not Russia, just him and his associates. Then harass him for the rest of his life.
It's funny how this has shifted. In the beginning the Left was quite pro-Israel (and the right was perhaps more prone to anti-Semitism). Israel was, it is often forgotten, very socialist in its origins - cf the kibbutz movement, etc
Now the Left loathes Israel and the Right staunchly defends it - and both sides overdo it.
Yes very true and very interesting.
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Sean...your quill awaits...
The British establishment doesn't recognise an independent Palestine. Only Israel.
Out of interest, Sunil, and I have no idea the answer to this - what/how many countries, including those in the Middle East, recognise an independent Palestine?
As a matter of historical fact, there never has been a Palestinian state. There was a province of the Roman Empire which the Romans called "Palestine" in order, principally, to erase mention of the Jews following the Jewish rebellions against Roman rule. The Ottomans did not give that area any sort of autonomous or other separate status. Then there was the British mandate.
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
@taffys I am sure they will be found not guilty, and that the Americans have fabricated the case just to make the "City" look bad. Pardon me if I don't offer a bet on it though?
Honestly I am a bit torn by the Israel-Gaza stuff.
Consider:
In virtually all the recent wars (since Oslo 1993) involving Israel, Israel has caused far more death and destruction than Hamas/Hezbollah. Simple maths.
But then I'm thinking also:
The Arab people already have more than 20 states in their Arab League (though not all are actually Arab, such as Somalia), stretching in an arc from Morocco to Muscat, and from the Euphrates to the Equator. Whereas the Israeli "empire", to paraphrase Blackadder, "consists of nothing more than a Falafel factory in Tel Aviv". But you know what I mean
As a matter of historical fact, there never has been a Palestinian state. There was a province of the Roman Empire which the Romans called "Palestine" in order, principally, to erase mention of the Jews following the Jewish rebellions against Roman rule. The Ottomans did not give that area any sort of autonomous or other separate status. Then there was the British mandate.
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
Well, I have posted a map on Wiki up-thread showing precisely where that recognition presently exists.
Anyway:
We have two entities in a territorial dispute. But we in the West only recognise one entity as a state (Israel), and not the other (Palestine).
It would be a bit like only recognising the state of India in its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, or only recognising the UK in the former dispute with Ireland over the North.
That's what really irks Arabs and the wider islamic world. All that oil, all that money, all those people, all that rhetoric, and they can't even push over a piddly little country not much bigger than Wales.
"I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves."
I think they could tolerate that but the fact that Israel has successfully defended itself is what sticks in the craw. Israel's other great crime is that when they say, "Never again", they mean it and for many Western politicians that is just too much.
Bullshit. Israel is now borderline psychotic.
My blog on the Telegraph has brought some raving Zionist nutters to the surface. One has proposed this as a sensible solution to the Palestinian problem.
Basically: drive all the Gazans into Sinai (even though the border is closed), brutally slaughter any that remain behind, seize all their property, repopulate the entire territory with Jews, and then make Gaza a part of the Jewish state for the rest of time.
Clearly insane, right? Just Nazi.
Except, the Man with the Plan is the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
So the russian are suggesting a ground attack jet, with a service ceiling of 22000 ft was next to an airliner at 30000ft ?
ROFLMAO
Hm, I assume you can fire a missile up.
It would be fairly easy to differentiate between a surface to air missile and an air to air missile if you had access to the wreckage, so there is no need for Russian media to speculate on what the SU-25 was doing in the area; they just need to let experts onto the crash site and the truth will out. Of course, the reluctance to allow access and the frantic cleansing of the site by rebels suggest there is not much official belief in this theory.
"I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves."
I think they could tolerate that but the fact that Israel has successfully defended itself is what sticks in the craw. Israel's other great crime is that when they say, "Never again", they mean it and for many Western politicians that is just too much.
Bullshit. Israel is now borderline psychotic.
My blog on the Telegraph has brought some raving Zionist nutters to the surface. One has proposed this as a sensible solution to the Palestinian problem.
Basically: drive all the Gazans into Sinai (even though the border is closed), brutally slaughter any that remain behind, seize all their property, repopulate the entire territory with Jews, and then make Gaza a part of the Jewish state for the rest of time.
Clearly insane, right? Just Nazi.
Except, the Man with the Plan is the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset.
I think you'll find that the Moshe_Feiglin diatribe is a set up, and meant to fool border line anti-semites like you to the edge. And talking about edge you are getting there fast. Time to ease up on the travelling binges.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
So the russian are suggesting a ground attack jet, with a service ceiling of 22000 ft was next to an airliner at 30000ft ?
ROFLMAO
Hm, I assume you can fire a missile up.
It would be fairly easy to differentiate between a surface to air missile and an air to air missile if you had access to the wreckage, so there is no need for Russian media to speculate on what the SU-25 was doing in the area; they just need to let experts onto the crash site and the truth will out. Of course, the reluctance to allow access and the frantic cleansing of the site by rebels suggest there is not much official belief in this theory.
Not that I believe them, but how can you differentiate the two? Wreckage from the missile itself?
''I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves.''
Against a vast array of foes sworn to destroy their country, and murder all its people??? how dare they!!!
The Left abandoned the Jews when there was some other minority they could patronise. Not all the Left of course but that significant part of it which adopts and abandons "causes" in direct proportion to how useful they are to them in order to show how terrible the West, America and capitalism are.
There has also been a longer tradition of anti-Semitism on the Left; see, for instance, Israel and the European Left: Between Solidarity and Delegitimization by Colin Shindler.
Can you elucidate a little more on what you mean by "the Left"? Do you mean the Labour party, for example? If so, can you let us know at what stage it abandoned the Jews?
Of course, anti-Semitism existed long before Israel existed and long before anything that could be described as "the Left" existed. It was entrenched among ruling elites throughout Europe, almost all of which could easily be described as being on "the Right". Indeed, Jews were often associated with communism and treason by the "the Right". But let's not let that get in the way of your prejudices.
"I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves."
I think they could tolerate that but the fact that Israel has successfully defended itself is what sticks in the craw. Israel's other great crime is that when they say, "Never again", they mean it and for many Western politicians that is just too much.
Bullshit. Israel is now borderline psychotic.
My blog on the Telegraph has brought some raving Zionist nutters to the surface. One has proposed this as a sensible solution to the Palestinian problem.
Basically: drive all the Gazans into Sinai (even though the border is closed), brutally slaughter any that remain behind, seize all their property, repopulate the entire territory with Jews, and then make Gaza a part of the Jewish state for the rest of time.
Clearly insane, right? Just Nazi.
Except, the Man with the Plan is the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset.
I think you'll find that the Moshe_Feiglin diatribe is a set up, and meant to fool border line anti-semites like you to the edge. And talking about edge you are getting there fast. Time to ease up on the travelling binges.
Are you saying this entire Wikipedia page - and all the other references on many other sites - are an anti-Semitic hoax, and this man either does not exist, or has not said any of the hundreds of things attributed to him?
Is that your claim?
No I'm not saying that. Unfortunately Moshe_Feiglin is a nut case; he once praised Hitler as a military genius and the Hitler Youth as model to be copied. He deserves all the opprobrium heaped on him.
All I'm saying is that the letter in Feiglins name was not sent by him in this case; but by others seeking to damage the Jews and Israel.
"I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves."
I think they could tolerate that but the fact that Israel has successfully defended itself is what sticks in the craw. Israel's other great crime is that when they say, "Never again", they mean it and for many Western politicians that is just too much.
Bullshit. Israel is now borderline psychotic.
My blog on the Telegraph has brought some raving Zionist nutters to the surface. One has proposed this as a sensible solution to the Palestinian problem.
Basically: drive all the Gazans into Sinai (even though the border is closed), brutally slaughter any that remain behind, seize all their property, repopulate the entire territory with Jews, and then make Gaza a part of the Jewish state for the rest of time.
Clearly insane, right? Just Nazi.
Except, the Man with the Plan is the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset.
I think you'll find that the Moshe_Feiglin diatribe is a set up, and meant to fool border line anti-semites like you to the edge. And talking about edge you are getting there fast. Time to ease up on the travelling binges.
Are you saying this entire Wikipedia page - and all the other references on many other sites - are an anti-Semitic hoax, and this man either does not exist, or has not said any of the hundreds of things attributed to him?
Is that your claim?
His claim seems to be that unless you support the Israeli government and its actions in Gaza and the West Bank you are an anti-Semite who hates Israel.
MikeK, of course, hates the UK as he does not support its government.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
So the russian are suggesting a ground attack jet, with a service ceiling of 22000 ft was next to an airliner at 30000ft ?
ROFLMAO
Hm, I assume you can fire a missile up.
It would be fairly easy to differentiate between a surface to air missile and an air to air missile if you had access to the wreckage, so there is no need for Russian media to speculate on what the SU-25 was doing in the area; they just need to let experts onto the crash site and the truth will out. Of course, the reluctance to allow access and the frantic cleansing of the site by rebels suggest there is not much official belief in this theory.
Not that I believe them, but how can you differentiate the two? Wreckage from the missile itself?
Wreckage from the missile and the blast size and damage itself.
As a matter of historical fact, there never has been a Palestinian state. There was a province of the Roman Empire which the Romans called "Palestine" in order, principally, to erase mention of the Jews following the Jewish rebellions against Roman rule. The Ottomans did not give that area any sort of autonomous or other separate status. Then there was the British mandate.
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
Well, I have posted a map on Wiki up-thread showing precisely where that recognition presently exists.
Anyway:
We have two entities in a territorial dispute. But we in the West only recognise one entity as a state (Israel), and not the other (Palestine).
It would be a bit like only recognising the state of India in its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, or only recognising the UK in the former dispute with Ireland over the North.
I am not an international lawyer. But isn't it the case that the occupied lands i.e. those lands which the Palestinians want to make up the Palestinian state were formerly the lands which had been allocated by the UN, had then been seized by Jordan and were lost in the 1967 war? Legally, I believe that their status is that of "Occupied Territories".
Israel was created as a state long before 1967 and its status as a state does not depend on the Occupied Territory so the issue is not the recognition of Israel but whether that Occupied Land should be part of Israel - as some in Israel think - or, as originally intended, the basis for a Palestinian state.
(Of course, some of those who are in favour of a Palestinian state are at least as interested in the destruction of Israel in order to get it.)
I would have thought it better - personally - to get agreement on the creation of the state and what its borders should be. But this has been a fool's errand for these past 40 years or more, alas.
As a matter of historical fact, there never has been a Palestinian state. There was a province of the Roman Empire which the Romans called "Palestine" in order, principally, to erase mention of the Jews following the Jewish rebellions against Roman rule. The Ottomans did not give that area any sort of autonomous or other separate status. Then there was the British mandate.
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
Well, I have posted a map on Wiki up-thread showing precisely where that recognition presently exists.
Anyway:
We have two entities in a territorial dispute. But we in the West only recognise one entity as a state (Israel), and not the other (Palestine).
It would be a bit like only recognising the state of India in its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, or only recognising the UK in the former dispute with Ireland over the North.
I am not an international lawyer. But isn't it the case that the occupied lands i.e. those lands which the Palestinians want to make up the Palestinian state were formerly the lands which had been allocated by the UN, had then been seized by Jordan and were lost in the 1967 war? Legally, I believe that their status is that of "Occupied Territories".
Israel was created as a state long before 1967 and its status as a state does not depend on the Occupied Territory so the issue is not the recognition of Israel but whether that Occupied Land should be part of Israel - as some in Israel think - or, as originally intended, the basis for a Palestinian state.
(Of course, some of those who are in favour of a Palestinian state are at least as interested in the destruction of Israel in order to get it.)
I would have thought it better - personally - to get agreement on the creation of the state and what its borders should be. But this has been a fool's errand for these past 40 years or more, alas.
Two questions: Wasn't Israel's own 1948 declaration of independence unilateral, or at least kind of? And didn't the UN partition plan involve creation of an Arab state in Palestine alongside Israel?
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
So the russian are suggesting a ground attack jet, with a service ceiling of 22000 ft was next to an airliner at 30000ft ?
ROFLMAO
Hm, I assume you can fire a missile up.
The SU 25 was apparently at 10km height, 5km from flight and missiles can fire up to 12km. Asking important question regarding the failure of Kiev and the US to release information.
Most importantly China has condemned the rush to judgement on the air crash before facts are established.
As a matter of historical fact, there never has been a Palestinian state. There was a province of the Roman Empire which the Romans called "Palestine" in order, principally, to erase mention of the Jews following the Jewish rebellions against Roman rule. The Ottomans did not give that area any sort of autonomous or other separate status. Then there was the British mandate.
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
I am not an international lawyer. But isn't it the case that the occupied lands i.e. those lands which the Palestinians want to make up the Palestinian state were formerly the lands which had been allocated by the UN, had then been seized by Jordan and were lost in the 1967 war? Legally, I believe that their status is that of "Occupied Territories".
Israel was created as a state long before 1967 and its status as a state does not depend on the Occupied Territory so the issue is not the recognition of Israel but whether that Occupied Land should be part of Israel - as some in Israel think - or, as originally intended, the basis for a Palestinian state.
(Of course, some of those who are in favour of a Palestinian state are at least as interested in the destruction of Israel in order to get it.)
I would have thought it better - personally - to get agreement on the creation of the state and what its borders should be. But this has been a fool's errand for these past 40 years or more, alas.
Two questions: Wasn't Israel's own 1948 declaration of independence unilateral, or at least kind of? And didn't the UN partition plan involve creation of an Arab state in Palestine alongside Israel?
The answer to both questions is yes and it is clear that a 2 state solution is the only way out of the impasses. It is so easy to say it but both sides have entrenched positions which allow the other no quarter. No doubt it will happen in some form eventually - however I do not believe the actions of the extremists nor the rather silly journalists within and without the area who are continually trying to demonize the whole Israeli nation are helping us get any nearer to that solution.
I think you'll find that the Moshe_Feiglin diatribe is a set up, and meant to fool border line anti-semites like you to the edge. And talking about edge you are getting there fast. Time to ease up on the travelling binges.
Is that your claim?
ase; but by others seeking to damage the Jews and Israel.
I'm genuinely curious. What letter? There is no letter: there is a newspaper column which, as far as I can see, reiterates Feiglin's oft-expressed views on Gaza, and proposes a more *vigorous* way to end the war.
The fact that his views are quasi-Fascist is not surprising, I've always known there is a Fascist tinge to Zionism. What does surprise me is the fact he is so senior: the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, not some Nick Griffin-esque outsider.
It's actually quite shocking, how Israel's political culture is being infected with the most abhorrent views. It also proves one of the arguments in my article.
Sean your residency in Primrose Hill has got to you.
This bloke is an evident nutter judging by what you and MikeK (two unlikely bedfellows, only on PB, etc) say. I haven't read anything by or about him.
Israel, meanwhile, is a pluralist democracy which adheres to the rule or law although I appreciate the rule of law and the Law of War can be made to mean different things, seemingly incompatible (cf. Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama, etc, etc).
You have fallen into the trap of thinking that Israel should adhere to a far, far higher, almost unattainable standard than anyone else on the planet. And when they stray from that, you excoriate them. Now of course I have never adhered to the argument "well look at what Al Shabab would do ..." but your line of argument shows that you believe that the Israelis are inherently decent people, the sort you can see yourself having a drink with in the Lansdowne.
I think that what the Israelis might say, however, is that they are trying to live up to your expectations but that they believe they are in a fight for their lives. It is not an academic exercise to be rounded off by a designer beer and some nibbles. And hence in that environment the rules is different.
Maybe, Financier, but had Osborn had been Chancellor when the international financial crisis hit in 2008 I think we would have seen the meaning of the word "incompetent" taken to a completely new level. We may yet get to see him in action in a major crisis and when we do I for one will be running for cover.
He's been in action for four years of the most difficult world economic conditions since the 1930s and has proved to be a superb Chancellor.
If you want to know the meaning of the word 'incompetent' in this context, you only have to look at Gordon Brown, starting with his eye-wateringly incompetent 1997 decision to dismantle the supervisory framework of the UK banking system, leaving literally no-one in charge - with exactly the consequences Peter Lilley warned of at the time.
I think you might look more productively back to the Thatcher /Reagan era of deregulation if you want to locate the seeds of the banking crisis.
As a matter of historical fact, there never has been a Palestinian state. There was a province of the Roman Empire which the Romans called "Palestine" in order, principally, to erase mention of the Jews following the Jewish rebellions against Roman rule. The Ottomans did not give that area any sort of autonomous or other separate status. Then there was the British mandate.
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
Well, I have posted a map on Wiki up-thread showing precisely where that recognition presently exists.
Anyway:
We have two entities in a territorial dispute. But we in the West only recognise one entity as a state (Israel), and not the other (Palestine).
It would be a bit like only recognising the state of India in its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, or only recognising the UK in the former dispute with Ireland over the North.
I am not an international lawyer. But isn't it the case that the occupied lands i.e. those lands which the Palestinians want to make up the Palestinian state were formerly the lands which had been allocated by the UN, had then been seized by Jordan and were lost in the 1967 war? Legally, I believe that their status is that of "Occupied Territories".
Israel was created as a state long before 1967 and its status as a state does not depend on the Occupied Territory so the issue is not the recognition of Israel but whether that Occupied Land should be part of Israel - as some in Israel think - or, as originally intended, the basis for a Palestinian state.
(Of course, some of those who are in favour of a Palestinian state are at least as interested in the destruction of Israel in order to get it.)
I would have thought it better - personally - to get agreement on the creation of the state and what its borders should be. But this has been a fool's errand for these past 40 years or more, alas.
Two questions: Wasn't Israel's own 1948 declaration of independence unilateral, or at least kind of? And didn't the UN partition plan involve creation of an Arab state in Palestine alongside Israel?
All true Sunnil. The facts on the ground were different though; all the arab states rejected the UN partition plan which "The Yishuv" (the Jews of Palestine) accepted. 5 arab states including Egypt, Syria and Trans-Jordon invaded the country and eventually a cease fire was proclaimed in 1949. That Israel was established and won her war of independence was a fact.
Ever since the Muslim world has tried rub Israel out of existence and from the map.
Two questions: Wasn't Israel's own 1948 declaration of independence unilateral, or at least kind of? And didn't the UN partition plan involve creation of an Arab state in Palestine alongside Israel?
The UN partition plan did have two states, but it's worth noting that the Israeli Declaration was only of 'their half', they didn't declare a state over the whole area. They got that during the ensuing 1948 war. Initially the pre-67 borders were just armistice lines to stop the '48 war, but as the Arab nations and Israel couldn't reach any peace settlements and no Palestinian state/government emerged to run 'their half' independently things became semi-permanent over time.
EDIT: So to answer the first question, it was slightly unilateral but only really a declaration of the UN plan a few weeks (months? can't remember) ahead of 'schedule'.
The Left abandoned the Jews when there was some other minority they could patronise. Not all the Left of course but that significant part of it which adopts and abandons "causes" in direct proportion to how useful they are to them in order to show how terrible the West, America and capitalism are.
Can you elucidate a little more on what you mean by "the Left"? Do you mean the Labour party, for example? If so, can you let us know at what stage it abandoned the Jews?
Of course, anti-Semitism existed long before Israel existed and long before anything that could be described as "the Left" existed. It was entrenched among ruling elites throughout Europe, almost all of which could easily be described as being on "the Right". Indeed, Jews were often associated with communism and treason by the "the Right". But let's not let that get in the way of your prejudices.
I do not believe that only the Left are anti-Semitic. Far from it. It has been entrenched in too many societies for far too long and is making an unwelcome reappearance, alas. Since my own mother is partly Jewish (according to the racial laws then in force in Italy) and had to hide in a convent during the war when she was a child, I'm well aware of the long and dishonourable tradition of anti-Semitism on the right.
I was merely responding to a comment made about the Left's recent attitude. And, as is clear, I did not make the accusation against all on the Left.
Certainly the Labour Party I knew when I was growing up had a number of prominent Jewish MPs who were vocal in their support of Israel. I do not see that now. There are some Labour MPs (a v small number, such as Jeremy Corbyn) who seem very willing to associate themselves with Hamas and others like then who are undoubtedly anti-Semitic and anti-Israel and this troubles me. Just as it troubled me that Ken Livingstone, who associated with people who proudly boasted of their anti-Semitism, was the Labour Party's official candidate for Mayor. I do not see a Labour Party which is outspoken on the issue of anti-Semitism and that it is all too often a default way of thinking within too many in the Muslim community here (as elsewhere in Europe) and willing to challenge this and say that it is wrong. Kenan Malik has been particularly good on this.
The book I referenced is quite interesting on the Left - if you like the Hard Left's - attitude to anti-Semitism. It is a fact though that this virus which people thought had been killed following WW2 has not, has mutated and been reintroduced and it behoves all of us to do what we can to challenge it wherever we find it.
Agence France-Presse @AFP 8m Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
What's the evidence the Russians did it?
Do you mean the Russian supported rebels?
1. Russian supplied anti-aircraft missiles in rebel locations. 2. Missile launched from rebel area. 3. MH17 was flying East away from Ukraine and no threat to them. 4. Rebels had already shot down previous planes (similar size and height). 5. Rebels claimed then withdrew twitter statement that they shot a plane down there.
Enough?
Point (3). There's a Ukrainian army formation stuck in a pocket near the eastern border with Russia that is (was) being supplied by air. The Antonov transport plane that was shot down recently was flying to that pocket so point (3) doesn't necessarily apply (although it would depend on whether or not MH17's course was in the direction of that pocket).
Maybe, Financier, but had Osborn had been Chancellor when the international financial crisis hit in 2008 I think we would have seen the meaning of the word "incompetent" taken to a completely new level. We may yet get to see him in action in a major crisis and when we do I for one will be running for cover.
He's been in action for four years of the most difficult world economic conditions since the 1930s and has proved to be a superb Chancellor.
If you want to know the meaning of the word 'incompetent' in this context, you only have to look at Gordon Brown, starting with his eye-wateringly incompetent 1997 decision to dismantle the supervisory framework of the UK banking system, leaving literally no-one in charge - with exactly the consequences Peter Lilley warned of at the time.
I think you might look more productively back to the Thatcher /Reagan era of deregulation if you want to locate the seeds of the banking crisis.
We know what Brown's removal of a competent supervisory framework led to. Specifically what measures did you have in mind that were put in place by the Thatcher administration that the led to the banking crisis nearly 20 years after she left office?
In the USA was the Glass-Stegall Act abolished by Regan? In the back of my mind, I have a feeling that it was long after he left office that the Financial Services Modernization Act was passed. It was that Act of course that enable the US Banks run wild.
Ashcroft National Poll: Con 27%, Lab 35%, Lib Dem 7%, UKIP 17%, Green 7% Jul 21, 2014 03:59 pm
UKIP, steady as she goes. Cammo needs to be worried. Cleggover supports assisted suicide. Red Ed can do no wrong, he also can't do right. Greens offering tributes to their gods.
Sorry, Morris Dancer, we shall have to agree to differ. No leader in my lifetime has come anywhere close to Cameron in being totally devoid of any substance. Ideal leader for the times in which we find ourselves living through.
The Greens deserve an article I reckon. Not only are they reaching new heights of national support, but they are doing it without any media presence from their leader. Crossover (as a one-off, granted) with the LDs is practically inevitable at some point.
Maybe, Financier, but had Osborn had been Chancellor when the international financial crisis hit in 2008 I think we would have seen the meaning of the word "incompetent" taken to a completely new level. We may yet get to see him in action in a major crisis and when we do I for one will be running for cover.
He's been in action for four years of the most difficult world economic conditions since the 1930s and has proved to be a superb Chancellor.
If you want to know the meaning of the word 'incompetent' in this context, you only have to look at Gordon Brown, starting with his eye-wateringly incompetent 1997 decision to dismantle the supervisory framework of the UK banking system, leaving literally no-one in charge - with exactly the consequences Peter Lilley warned of at the time.
I think you might look more productively back to the Thatcher /Reagan era of deregulation if you want to locate the seeds of the banking crisis.
We know what Brown's removal of a competent supervisory framework led to. Specifically what measures did you have in mind that were put in place by the Thatcher administration that the led to the banking crisis nearly 20 years after she left office?
In the USA was the Glass-Stegall Act abolished by Regan? In the back of my mind, I have a feeling that it was long after he left office that the Financial Services Modernization Act was passed. It was that Act of course that enable the US Banks run wild.
Still do tell.
I was primarily referring t Thatcher's "Big Bang" which Wiki accurately describes as her cornerstone financial policy. Quoting again from Wiki:
"Although the "Big Bang" eased stock market transactions there is a debate in the UK about how far it affected the 2007–2012 global financial crisis. In 2010, Nigel Lawson, Thatcher's Chancellor at the time, appeared on the Analysis program to discuss banking reform, explaining that the 2007–2012 global financial crisis was an unintended consequence of the "Big Bang".[4] He said that UK investment banks, previously very cautious with what was their own money, had merged with high street banks putting depositors' savings at risk and ...according to the program leading US banks to follow suit".
Far more significant than anything Brown did, though his actions hardly improved matters.
Comments
(With apologies to the Boomtown Rats)
"And the Tebbit chip inside his head, gets set to overload...."
@MSmithsonPB: @ORB_Int Why are pages 3-11 missing? Under British Polling Council rules ORB should publish full details
http://t.co/LtDH8vgqsU
He is captain of Worcestershire (top of their Division) and an opening batsman lying second in the County batting averages.
Time for in-form players to replace those who can only point to a past reputation.
He must be p8ssing himself...
I'm not sure the British Establishment isn't still arabist at heart, although perhaps only from a continued (and outdated) paternalist perspective.
The left has never forgiven Israel for becoming strong, for not pursuing that socialist ideal longer than they needed to, and for making the same mistakes that many western powers have made down the ages. Criticising Israel is also pretty much repercussionless apart from vituperative and half-hearted responses on CiF.
There is a very interesting populist article about the attitudes of left and right towards Israel to be written (Jewish and non-Jewish academics have been agonising about little else for decades).
Sean...your quill awaits...
My Tebbit Chip is functioning normally again
Russian records show a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was flying close to #MH17 before it crashed, senior Russian military official says
Russia is now coming up with evidence (fabricated?) that it was the Ukrainians wot dun it.
England = Tories?
Hmmmm, wonders, how is that debt pile going? What is going to be the deficit this year compared to last? Is HMG still borrowing close to £100bn a year to pays its bills? What do the nation's trade figures look like? A massive rise in employment but a welfare bill that is still increasing and a tax take that is flat-lining?
A superb chancellor? I think not, Mr. N, my cat could have achieved the same. In fact if Cameron had left the CotE post empty we would probably be not far off the current position. Debt might have been a bit higher but as your superb chancellor seems to think that £1.5tn is acceptable what is a few hundred billion between friends.
A run out.
'You might loathe Blair & Brown politically but vacuous & shallow they were not.'
Who will ever forget Blair's ethical foreign policy or Brown's trashing the economy.
I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves.
Absolutely. Bet his phone is ringing off the hook for a comment....
"It's been absolutely pathetic from England. We've seen some collapses in the last year - against Australia, Sri Lanka and now India - but this is the worst of the lot. Something has got to change."
1. Russian supplied anti-aircraft missiles in rebel locations.
2. Missile launched from rebel area.
3. MH17 was flying East away from Ukraine and no threat to them.
4. Rebels had already shot down previous planes (similar size and height).
5. Rebels claimed then withdrew twitter statement that they shot a plane down there.
Enough?
Oh, sorry, you meant Alastair Cook not Alistair Cooke. Beg pardon, do carry on.
ROFLMAO
Against a vast array of foes sworn to destroy their country, and murder all its people??? how dare they!!!
"I might add that some, and not only the left, can never forgive Jews for actually picking up weapons and defending themselves."
I think they could tolerate that but the fact that Israel has successfully defended itself is what sticks in the craw. Israel's other great crime is that when they say, "Never again", they mean it and for many Western politicians that is just too much.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28393377
Not my market, but I did mention him for SPOTY earlier and this may make it likelier.
There has also been a longer tradition of anti-Semitism on the Left; see, for instance,
Israel and the European Left: Between Solidarity and Delegitimization by Colin Shindler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_Palestine
"Serious Fraud Office opens a criminal investigation into allegations of fraud in the foreign exchange market"
I repeat again, it's just as well we don't live in a corrupt country.....
I'm not clear how, as a matter of international law, you can have a "state" without any recognised borders.
(PS I am making no comment as to whether such a state is desirable and, if so, where it should be and who should live in it.)
In contrast Giggs won a hat full of trophies.
Or one in which people jump to conclusions and find those they dislike guilty of crimes before due process has taken effect.
I am sure they will be found not guilty, and that the Americans have fabricated the case just to make the "City" look bad.
Pardon me if I don't offer a bet on it though?
Consider:
In virtually all the recent wars (since Oslo 1993) involving Israel, Israel has caused far more death and destruction than Hamas/Hezbollah. Simple maths.
But then I'm thinking also:
The Arab people already have more than 20 states in their Arab League (though not all are actually Arab, such as Somalia), stretching in an arc from Morocco to Muscat, and from the Euphrates to the Equator. Whereas the Israeli "empire", to paraphrase Blackadder, "consists of nothing more than a Falafel factory in Tel Aviv". But you know what I mean
Anyway:
We have two entities in a territorial dispute. But we in the West only recognise one entity as a state (Israel), and not the other (Palestine).
It would be a bit like only recognising the state of India in its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, or only recognising the UK in the former dispute with Ireland over the North.
That's what really irks Arabs and the wider islamic world. All that oil, all that money, all those people, all that rhetoric, and they can't even push over a piddly little country not much bigger than Wales.
Bet Marine is loving it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_Palestine
Mr Morris Police had to prevent two Paris synagogues from being damaged, apparently.
I'm sure for Le Pen's lot are concerned these are all just unwelcome immigrants causing trouble.
Of course, anti-Semitism existed long before Israel existed and long before anything that could be described as "the Left" existed. It was entrenched among ruling elites throughout Europe, almost all of which could easily be described as being on "the Right". Indeed, Jews were often associated with communism and treason by the "the Right". But let's not let that get in the way of your prejudices.
All I'm saying is that the letter in Feiglins name was not sent by him in this case; but by others seeking to damage the Jews and Israel.
MikeK, of course, hates the UK as he does not support its government.
Wreckage from the missile and the blast size and damage itself.
Israel was created as a state long before 1967 and its status as a state does not depend on the Occupied Territory so the issue is not the recognition of Israel but whether that Occupied Land should be part of Israel - as some in Israel think - or, as originally intended, the basis for a Palestinian state.
(Of course, some of those who are in favour of a Palestinian state are at least as interested in the destruction of Israel in order to get it.)
I would have thought it better - personally - to get agreement on the creation of the state and what its borders should be. But this has been a fool's errand for these past 40 years or more, alas.
Yes. As if Jews in Paris could do anything about it...
Wasn't Israel's own 1948 declaration of independence unilateral, or at least kind of?
And didn't the UN partition plan involve creation of an Arab state in Palestine alongside Israel?
Most importantly China has condemned the rush to judgement on the air crash before facts are established.
Shred away.
Arafat and Palestine were offered a good deal by Ehud Barak in 2000. Arafat stunned everybody by rejecting it.
This bloke is an evident nutter judging by what you and MikeK (two unlikely bedfellows, only on PB, etc) say. I haven't read anything by or about him.
Israel, meanwhile, is a pluralist democracy which adheres to the rule or law although I appreciate the rule of law and the Law of War can be made to mean different things, seemingly incompatible (cf. Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama, etc, etc).
You have fallen into the trap of thinking that Israel should adhere to a far, far higher, almost unattainable standard than anyone else on the planet. And when they stray from that, you excoriate them. Now of course I have never adhered to the argument "well look at what Al Shabab would do ..." but your line of argument shows that you believe that the Israelis are inherently decent people, the sort you can see yourself having a drink with in the Lansdowne.
I think that what the Israelis might say, however, is that they are trying to live up to your expectations but that they believe they are in a fight for their lives. It is not an academic exercise to be rounded off by a designer beer and some nibbles. And hence in that environment the rules is different.
Jul 21, 2014 03:59 pm
Ever since the Muslim world has tried rub Israel out of existence and from the map.
EDIT: So to answer the first question, it was slightly unilateral but only really a declaration of the UN plan a few weeks (months? can't remember) ahead of 'schedule'.
I was merely responding to a comment made about the Left's recent attitude. And, as is clear, I did not make the accusation against all on the Left.
Certainly the Labour Party I knew when I was growing up had a number of prominent Jewish MPs who were vocal in their support of Israel. I do not see that now. There are some Labour MPs (a v small number, such as Jeremy Corbyn) who seem very willing to associate themselves with Hamas and others like then who are undoubtedly anti-Semitic and anti-Israel and this troubles me. Just as it troubled me that Ken Livingstone, who associated with people who proudly boasted of their anti-Semitism, was the Labour Party's official candidate for Mayor. I do not see a Labour Party which is outspoken on the issue of anti-Semitism and that it is all too often a default way of thinking within too many in the Muslim community here (as elsewhere in Europe) and willing to challenge this and say that it is wrong. Kenan Malik has been particularly good on this.
The book I referenced is quite interesting on the Left - if you like the Hard Left's - attitude to anti-Semitism. It is a fact though that this virus which people thought had been killed following WW2 has not, has mutated and been reintroduced and it behoves all of us to do what we can to challenge it wherever we find it.
http://www.jacdec.de/2014/07/14/2014-07-14-ukraine-air-force-antonov-an-26-shot-down-in-eastern-ukraine/
In the USA was the Glass-Stegall Act abolished by Regan? In the back of my mind, I have a feeling that it was long after he left office that the Financial Services Modernization Act was passed. It was that Act of course that enable the US Banks run wild.
Still do tell.
Ashcroft National Poll: Con 27%, Lab 35%, Lib Dem 7%, UKIP 17%, Green 7%
Jul 21, 2014 03:59 pm
UKIP, steady as she goes. Cammo needs to be worried. Cleggover supports assisted suicide. Red Ed can do no wrong, he also can't do right. Greens offering tributes to their gods.
Quoting again from Wiki:
"Although the "Big Bang" eased stock market transactions there is a debate in the UK about how far it affected the 2007–2012 global financial crisis. In 2010, Nigel Lawson, Thatcher's Chancellor at the time, appeared on the Analysis program to discuss banking reform, explaining that the 2007–2012 global financial crisis was an unintended consequence of the "Big Bang".[4] He said that UK investment banks, previously very cautious with what was their own money, had merged with high street banks putting depositors' savings at risk and ...according to the program leading US banks to follow suit".
Far more significant than anything Brown did, though his actions hardly improved matters.