So it might score 9/10 for Political impact, and moderately on Reputational impact but pretty low on Economic and General Well-being impact.
Here's how I scored Suez (all out of 10 - higher score means more damage to our Economy, Reputation etc.)
Suez = General Well-being impact - 2, Economy - 4, Political -10, Reputation - 10
Whereas 1940 (Blitz etc.) = General Well-being impact - 10, Economy - 9, Political -10, Reputation - 3
I would say Suez had a more severe impact on our economy than you are allowing. Between a run on the pound and an oil shock the short term consequences were quite fierce. In particular, it caused a recession in shipbuilding and within two years Britain's share of shipbuilding had dropped by two-thirds as they failed to compete for fewer orders against the more modern yards in Japan and Germany. I'd put it at 6 or 7.
By contrast, the political fallout was
All fair points. I guess I scored Suez 10 for political impact because it trashed Eden's reputation but you're right - the Tories survived for another 8 years.
Still - it's just a bit of subjective fun!
I'm a history teacher, author and examiner Ben. Arguing arcane points about the past to formulate a tenable hypothesis is what I get paid woefully inadequate sums of money to do!
Why does anyone study or teach history if one can just read about history from books in ones recreational time?
Because unless you are Mr Gradgrind, it isn't about finding out facts, it's about interpreting be understanding them. And the best way to do that is through discussion and analysis, which is what we're doing here. The best way of all to do it is under guided conditions, in a school or university.
And I might point out that though I am a professional historian there are many others on here who are as good, and some who are better than me at doing that - not by any means all of them with history degrees. Which is helpful to me as well, as it keeps me on my toes and reminds me of the things I still need to learn.
I enjoy history, and it has never been spoilt for me by post O level education!
We can only understand ourselves and our future by studying and reflecting on our pasts, and history is as important as the creative arts when discussing ideas. I would also add theology for similar reasons.
The Swedes and the Swiss have a list of foods that they should stockpile.
What should our list consisit of ?
All of the sweets and snacks we are instructed only to have as treats by well-meaning health campaigners. They:
- are full of energy - make us feel good - don't need cooking, so can still be enjoyed even if the gas and electricity get cut off
Crisps and chocolate are both high on my emergency preparedness list.
Crisps are largely produced domestically, and Chocolate comes from non EU imports, so probably not required in emergency stock. Insulin, however, should be stockpiled as it is not produced domestically.
I don't know of anywhere that makes insulin at the moment, but it surprises me that none is made. Has anyone checked? But it wouldn't take the Manhattan Project to set up manufacturing from scratch. And even if there is no plant dedicated to it at the moment I am sure there must be some contract manufacturers who could make it if need be.
I think the undeniable practical downsides of Brexit are detrimental enough without having to resort to scare stories like this.
Already covered down thread. There are apparently two plants currently manufacturing Insulin in the UK.
Our sterile injectable products cover a wide range of therapy areas including insulin for diabetes, heparin for anticoagulation and also pain management. Our products are available in the most widely used presentations, including cartridges, vials and ampoules and in either liquid or lyophilised forms (dry powder), in a range of sizes.
Big_G will be pleased - they're based in N Wales I see!
I deplore fake news scare stories of this nature but let's not kid ourselves that we won't hear a lot more as No Deal Brexit approaches. We have a huge scare story industry in this country weaned on years of fake EU banana stories, so we shouldn't be surprised.
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
So it might score 9/10 for Political impact, and moderately on Reputational impact but pretty low on Economic and General Well-being impact.
Here's how I scored Suez (all out of 10 - higher score means more damage to our Economy, Reputation etc.)
Suez = General Well-being impact - 2, Economy - 4, Political -10, Reputation - 10
Whereas 1940 (Blitz etc.) = General Well-being impact - 10, Economy - 9, Political -10, Reputation - 3
I would say Suez had a more severe impact on our economy than you are allowing. Between a run on the pound and an oil shock the short term consequences were quite fierce. In particular, it caused a recession in shipbuilding and within two years Britain's share of shipbuilding had dropped by two-thirds as they failed to compete for fewer orders against the more modern yards in Japan and Germany. I'd put it at 6 or 7.
All fair points. I guess I scored Suez 10 for political impact because it trashed Eden's reputation but you're right - the Tories survived for another 8 years.
Still - it's just a bit of subjective fun!
I'm a history teacher, author and examiner Ben. Arguing arcane points about the past to formulate a tenable hypothesis is what I get paid woefully inadequate sums of money to do!
Why does anyone study or teach history if one can just read about history from books in ones recreational time?
Because unless you are Mr Gradgrind, it isn't about finding out facts, it's about interpreting be understanding them. And the best way to do that is through discussion and analysis, which is what we're doing here. The best way of all to do it is under guided conditions, in a school or university.
And I might point out that though I am a professional historian there are many others on here who are as good, and some who are better than me at doing that - not by any means all of them with history degrees. Which is helpful to me as well, as it keeps me on my toes and reminds me of the things I still need to learn.
History and Chemistry were my favourite subjects at GCSE level, but (sadly?) I decided to do sciences from A-level onward.
Sure everything is complicated and there are a multitude of factors in elections.
IIRC the Republicans did very well in the South in 1928 although the Catholic issue might have played a part then. Though conversely the Progressives in 1924 would have picked up many 'Bull Moose' Republican votes as well, after all wasn't LaFollette himself first elected as a Republican.
'Doing well' in this case meant 'winning four of the former ten confederate states, three by quite narrow margins.'
If anyone wants a belly laugh, guess which election the Republicans finally made a clean sweep of the South in!
Edit - with regard to La Folette, yes he was a Republican governor at first but don't get carried away by that. He was a Republican because only a Republican could win that office in that state. On many key issues he was divorced from or hostile to the leadership. Just as Senator Joe McCarthy was a Demorcat for much of his career.
The Republicans did well in the Confederate states compared to how the did in the 1910s and 1930s.
And the first Republican to clean sweep the Confederate states was Nixon in 1972 though as he won 49/50 that's not really surprising or funny.
The Brexiteers haven't been allowed to negotiate so they bear very little responsibility. Though it was interesting that some were happy to row in behind May when she looked likely to land the leadership.
Ah, like Communism? The failures were due to poor implementation, and a failure to deal with enemies quickly and ruthlessly enough.
Did the Communists allow the Tsar handle their negotiations with their neighbours?
The Swedes and the Swiss have a list of foods that they should stockpile.
What should our list consisit of ?
All of the sweets and snacks we are instructed only to have as treats by well-meaning health campaigners. They:
- are full of energy - make us feel good - don't need cooking, so can still be enjoyed even if the gas and electricity get cut off
Crisps and chocolate are both high on my emergency preparedness list.
Crisps are largely produced domestically, and Chocolate comes from non EU imports, so probably not required in emergency stock. Insulin, however, should be stockpiled as it is not produced domestically.
I don't know of anywhere that makes insulin at the moment, but it surprises me that none is made. Has anyone checked? But it wouldn't take the Manhattan Project to set up manufacturing from scratch. And even if there is no plant dedicated to it at the moment I am sure there must be some contract manufacturers who could make it if need be.
I think the undeniable practical downsides of Brexit are detrimental enough without having to resort to scare stories like this.
Already covered down thread. There are apparently two plants currently manufacturing Insulin in the UK.
Our sterile injectable products cover a wide range of therapy areas including insulin for diabetes, heparin for anticoagulation and also pain management. Our products are available in the most widely used presentations, including cartridges, vials and ampoules and in either liquid or lyophilised forms (dry powder), in a range of sizes.
Big_G will be pleased - they're based in N Wales I see!
I deplore fake news scare stories of this nature but let's not kid ourselves that we won't hear a lot more as No Deal Brexit approaches. We have a huge scare story industry in this country weaned on years of fake EU banana stories, so we shouldn't be surprised.
Ironically, the bendy banana regulations are on of the few that are still in force. The vast majority of 'cosmetic vegetable' regs were repealed back in the noughties.
I think anyone legally living in a country has some form of claim on the land, because of self-determination. Denying migrants rights is not appropriate.
As far as Windrush being British is concerned that is indeed of course true, but we were talking about the land. Hence we've already had segways of talking about Welsh and Scots as being distinct too. The Windrush were still migrants in their own way even if they were already British.
But its an interesting observation you make as Jews would view themselves moving to what would be Israel as being akin to Windrush and not simple migration. That was already their homeland they were moving to and they had every right to do it, even if they weren't born there.
There is no point in this debate. As far as you are concerned [ and many in PB ], there is nothing wrong forcibly taking away land and building settlements. Somehow you feel particularly calm that people who had no connection with the land could come in from Europe and take it.
Who forcibly took land?
No force was used in that way pre 1948 which is how the initial borders were drawn.
Force was used in 1948 and 1967 because the Arabs were seeking to destroy Israel but lost both times.
On no occasion was Israel the aggressor unless you either view lawful migration as aggressive or you view ending a ceasefire and blockading a nation you are at war with as not aggressive.
Taking land makes you the aggressor, coming for a foreign place and taking land from the locals for yourself is the cornerstone of war. Yes even if some foreign people who don't live in the place had a vote to give the land away, it is still war.
You cannot take people's land against their will without it being war.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Sure everything is complicated and there are a multitude of factors in elections.
IIRC the Republicans did very well in the South in 1928 although the Catholic issue might have played a part then. Though conversely the Progressives in 1924 would have picked up many 'Bull Moose' Republican votes as well, after all wasn't LaFollette himself first elected as a Republican.
'Doing well' in this case meant 'winning four of the former ten confederate states, three by quite narrow margins.'
If anyone wants a belly laugh, guess which election the Republicans finally made a clean sweep of the South in!
Edit - with regard to La Folette, yes he was a Republican governor at first but don't get carried away by that. He was a Republican because only a Republican could win that office in that state. On many key issues he was divorced from or hostile to the leadership. Just as Senator Joe McCarthy was a Demorcat for much of his career.
I've got you on a factual error now
The Republicans won 5/11 Confederate states in 1928:
Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Florida and Texas.
The Brexiteers haven't been allowed to negotiate so they bear very little responsibility. Though it was interesting that some were happy to row in behind May when she looked likely to land the leadership.
Ah, like Communism? The failures were due to poor implementation, and a failure to deal with enemies quickly and ruthlessly enough.
Did the Communists allow the Tsar handle their negotiations with their neighbours?
No, but the Communists took over from the Menshiviks, not the Tsar. They did also co-opt a lot of Menshevik elements into their army and also in the New Economic Policy, later purged when Stalin had consolodated his position.
The truth is that Populist revolutions eat themselves, and revolutionaries are often assassinated* by other revolutionaries.
*metaphorically assassinated in more peacable societies.
The Swedes and the Swiss have a list of foods that they should stockpile.
What should our list consisit of ?
Crisps are largely produced domestically, and Chocolate comes from non EU imports, so probably not required in emergency stock. Insulin, however, should be stockpiled as it is not produced domestically.
I don't know of anywhere that makes insulin at the moment, but it surprises me that none is made. Has anyone checked? But it wouldn't take the Manhattan Project to set up manufacturing from scratch. And even if there is no plant dedicated to it at the moment I am sure there must be some contract manufacturers who could make it if need be.
I think the undeniable practical downsides of Brexit are detrimental enough without having to resort to scare stories like this.
Already covered down thread. There are apparently two plants currently manufacturing Insulin in the UK.
Our sterile injectable products cover a wide range of therapy areas including insulin for diabetes, heparin for anticoagulation and also pain management. Our products are available in the most widely used presentations, including cartridges, vials and ampoules and in either liquid or lyophilised forms (dry powder), in a range of sizes.
Big_G will be pleased - they're based in N Wales I see!
I deplore fake news scare stories of this nature but let's not kid ourselves that we won't hear a lot more as No Deal Brexit approaches. We have a huge scare story industry in this country weaned on years of fake EU banana stories, so we shouldn't be surprised.
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
It's an interesting thought. If we are headed for Hard Brexit will the EU countenance a transition period? They might want to I guess to avoid chaos but I thought the Transition Period was dependent on there being a deal, and any deal has to include the Irish Backstop.
Maybe a Transition Period with ongoing negotiations still aimed at reaching a deal?
Sure everything is complicated and there are a multitude of factors in elections.
IIRC the Republicans did very well in the South in 1928 although the Catholic issue might have played a part then. Though conversely the Progressives in 1924 would have picked up many 'Bull Moose' Republican votes as well, after all wasn't LaFollette himself first elected as a Republican.
'Doing well' in this case meant 'winning four of the former ten confederate states, three by quite narrow margins.'
If anyone wants a belly laugh, guess which election the Republicans finally made a clean sweep of the South in!
Edit - with regard to La Folette, yes he was a Republican governor at first but don't get carried away by that. He was a Republican because only a Republican could win that office in that state. On many key issues he was divorced from or hostile to the leadership. Just as Senator Joe McCarthy was a Demorcat for much of his career.
The Republicans did well in the Confederate states compared to how the did in the 1910s and 1930s.
And the first Republican to clean sweep the Confederate states was Nixon in 1972 though as he won 49/50 that's not really surprising or funny.
Well, the Democrats in the South said they wouldn't vote Republican because they were liars, traitors, thieves and scum. Which was, actually, mostly not true.
Then they finally changed their minds when the Republicans put up a candidate who was all those things. Doesn't that amuse you even slightly?
That was also the source of the greatest bumper sticker of all time - 'Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts!'
In a funny way you could say Corbyn may well end up being leader for several years because a small group of people could barely stand the idea of him being leader for 1 year
Also they put up Owen Smith as a candidate. What a mistake that was.
Owen Smith wasn't the problem - a perfectly decent man who was a middling to good candidate when an exceptional one was needed. Most challengers would've come out with a similar result and I think perhaps only someone like a Stella Creasy (young, untainted, recognisably anti-Corbyn but with her own story to tell about her achievements) could've really turned the tide.
The problems were strategy - the assumption that Corbyn would be pressured into going was disastrous as it effectively gave Momentum and co a month's head start while all that mucking about was going on and time to mobilise that 'coup' and betrayal narrative that stuck. As a result Smith was savaged and defined extremely unfairly before he'd even started. Secondly, like the Tories a year later, moderates grossly underestimated the effectiveness and brutality of the Momentum attack machine - it's pretty impossible to win an internal election when Owen Jones and co are leading an orchestrated campaign to discredit you and don't remotely care about playing fair to do it. Because of that Smith's 'Corbynism in a nicer suit without the bonkers stuff' approach was dead in the water - even if politically he's largely been proved right, especially on the EU, where one wonders where we'd be if the opposition had really been interested in interrogating Brexit rather than hoping it would go away. It would've been the same though if it had been Nandy, Eagle, or anyone that tried to negotiate.
The great mistake was bringing gift tokens to a knife fight - one that moderates have long made in saying "Well Jeremy's a nice man, but not a winner, or not up to detail, please vote him out", while Momentum go for the jugular and depict everything as an establishment plot to overthrow the Dear Leader. To defeat Corbyn, either internally or externally, moderates have to make a left-wing argument as to why Corbyn and his politics are morally unconscionable and intellectually bankrupt rather than just flimsy electorally. They didn't realise that in time - too many on the soft left (who are essential if you want to oust him) still don't now.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
We still have other choices. In terms of flavours, the EU will accommodate us being Ukraine, Turkey, Norway or Canada. Of course, I belong to the original Soft Brexiteers (maybe we should get the band back together?) that saw nothing too terrible in a decade long sojourn in EFTA/EEA. Sadly, May won't go for that due to her red lines, pink as they now are.
Whatever arrangement we come to with the EU, it won't be the final word. WIlliam will still lobby for a full-fat reentry, Express readers won't be happy until we've towed the country into the mid-Atlantic.
I enjoy history, and it has never been spoilt for me by post O level education!
We can only understand ourselves and our future by studying and reflecting on our pasts, and history is as important as the creative arts when discussing ideas. I would also add theology for similar reasons.
You were two of the people I was thinking of.
It seems I shall have to add @another_richard as well. Fair cop on the numbers.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
There can be no peace until Israel feels safe without the need for force. They are the victims, a nation of persecuted people set up in their own homeland for them to finally feel safe after thousands of tears of persecution and the victims of the worst atrocity the world has EVER seen.
But instead of accepting partition based on who lived there with the Arabs getting the vast majority of the land the Arabs instead tried to murder Israel at birth. Including the nation of Palestinians known as Jordan. Yet interestingly the Palestinian nation known as Jordan which was the nation that Israel took this disputed land from in 1967 after they and Egypt again tried to destroy their neighbour now wants nothing to do with Palestinians.
It's all Israel's fault they were attacked. They were asking for it. They deserved it. Seriously!?
You can't go to a foreign country take their land and then call it self defence, that is war.
Israel shouldn't change course, its current strategy is working perfectly, acquire land and call it self defence.
However If we are on about from a moral point of view then yes of course Israelis should stop killing Palestinians and taking their land. Ì almost feel like the question of why they should do that pretty much answers itself.
Being a victim doesn't allow you to abuse other people. In much the same way we wouldn't accept the Palestinians coming to Britain and killing us and taking our land just because they had been mistreated by the Israelis.
If huge numbers of Muslims descended on Britain to take our land and kill us then you can bet your bottom dollar that Britain's allies in Europe would come to her aid.
The Swedes and the Swiss have a list of foods that they should stockpile.
What should our list consisit of ?
Crisps are largely produced domestically, and Chocolate comes from non EU imports, so probably not required in emergency stock. Insulin, however, should be stockpiled as it is not produced domestically.
I don't know of anywhere that makes insulin at the moment, but it surprises me that none is made. Has anyone checked? But it wouldn't take the Manhattan Project to set up manufacturing from scratch. And even if there is no plant dedicated to it at the moment I am sure there must be some contract manufacturers who could make it if need be.
I think the undeniable practical downsides of Brexit are detrimental enough without having to resort to scare stories like this.
Already covered down thread. There are apparently two plants currently manufacturing Insulin in the UK.
Big_G will be pleased - they're based in N Wales I see!
I deplore fake news scare stories of this nature but let's not kid ourselves that we won't hear a lot more as No Deal Brexit approaches. We have a huge scare story industry in this country weaned on years of fake EU banana stories, so we shouldn't be surprised.
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
It's an interesting thought. If we are headed for Hard Brexit will the EU countenance a transition period? They might want to I guess to avoid chaos but I thought the Transition Period was dependent on there being a deal, and any deal has to include the Irish Backstop.
Maybe a Transition Period with ongoing negotiations still aimed at reaching a deal?
Yes, I think that arrangement will be the figleaf that covers our nakedness.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
Sure everything is complicated and there are a multitude of factors in elections.
IIRC the Republicans did very well in the South in 1928 although the Catholic issue might have played a part then. Though conversely the Progressives in 1924 would have picked up many 'Bull Moose' Republican votes as well, after all wasn't LaFollette himself first elected as a Republican.
'Doing well' in this case meant 'winning four of the former ten confederate states, three by quite narrow margins.'
If anyone wants a belly laugh, guess which election the Republicans finally made a clean sweep of the South in!
Edit - with regard to La Folette, yes he was a Republican governor at first but don't get carried away by that. He was a Republican because only a Republican could win that office in that state. On many key issues he was divorced from or hostile to the leadership. Just as Senator Joe McCarthy was a Demorcat for much of his career.
The Republicans did well in the Confederate states compared to how the did in the 1910s and 1930s.
And the first Republican to clean sweep the Confederate states was Nixon in 1972 though as he won 49/50 that's not really surprising or funny.
Well, the Democrats in the South said they wouldn't vote Republican because they were liars, traitors, thieves and scum. Which was, actually, mostly not true.
Then they finally changed their minds when the Republicans put up a candidate who was all those things. Doesn't that amuse you even slightly?
That was also the source of the greatest bumper sticker of all time - 'Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts!'
Do I get the impression you don't like Richard Nixon ?
The only man who could 'go to China' and who stopped the Yom Kippur war from escalating ?
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
You'll have to ask the people I responded to when these conversations originally started.
My guess is that a conversation about anti-semitism and its relation to criticism of Israel spilled over into a conversation about Palestine rather than say Ireland or India...
You can tell me some small interesting fact about one of them if you want. I remember someone actually did this with me on another forum. They did the usual what about, so I said okay what about, I was genuinely interested...
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
I was about to launch into my Channel 4 News = Guardian TV spiel, but actually in this case I think the chap is not at fault for what he said*. Rawlins is quoted elsewhere as saying that no insulin is made in the UK. Actually, here's the link to the original interview:
* That said, the C4 News chap has made no attempt to correct the misconception that he has helped to promulgate, either. It would not have been difficult to do so. Links to the websites of UK-based Insulin manufacturers can easily be found using a search engine.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
Or indeed Cyprus, Vietnam, Sudan, Somalia, Rhodesia, Congo?
The reason for the high profile of Israel/Palestine is I think (1) because of the religious sensitivities of the Holy Land and (2) because it has a significant knock-on impact in economically vital areas (as Sir Humphrey said, the Holy Places and the Oily Places). Israel's actions have undoubtedly been a factor in driving Islamic fundamentalists, and the conflict in Jerusalem has spread as far as Pakistan.
In Sudan, there's no oil and when the janjaweed are not actually killing (and a lot of the time when they were) the Western news agencies pay little or no attention.
(If that sounds callous and heartless Surby that's because governments and newspapers are callous and heartless.)
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
You'll have to ask the people I responded to when these conversations originally started.
My guess is that a conversation about anti-semitism and its relation to criticism of Israel spilled over into a conversation about Palestine rather than say Ireland or India...
You can tell me some small interesting fact about one of them if you want. I remember someone actually did this with me on another forum. They did the usual what about, so I said okay what about, I was genuinely interested...
I don't think they bothered replying to me again.
But why do you get so hot and bothered about the Partition of Palestine, rather than of Ireland or India?
Sure everything is complicated and there are a multitude of factors in elections.
IIRC the Republicans did very well in the South in 1928 although the Catholic issue might have played a part then. Though conversely the Progressives in 1924 would have picked up many 'Bull Moose' Republican votes as well, after all wasn't LaFollette himself first elected as a Republican.
'Doing well' in this case meant 'winning four of the former ten confederate states, three by quite narrow margins.'
If anyone wants a belly laugh, guess which election the Republicans finally made a clean sweep of the South in!
Edit - with regard to La Folette, yes he was a Republican governor at first but don't get carried away by that. He was a Republican because only a Republican could win that office in that state. On many key issues he was divorced from or hostile to the leadership. Just as Senator Joe McCarthy was a Demorcat for much of his career.
The Republicans did well in the Confederate states compared to how the did in the 1910s and 1930s.
And the first Republican to clean sweep the Confederate states was Nixon in 1972 though as he won 49/50 that's not really surprising or funny.
Well, the Democrats in the South said they wouldn't vote Republican because they were liars, traitors, thieves and scum. Which was, actually, mostly not true.
Then they finally changed their minds when the Republicans put up a candidate who was all those things. Doesn't that amuse you even slightly?
That was also the source of the greatest bumper sticker of all time - 'Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts!'
Do I get the impression you don't like Richard Nixon ?
The only man who could 'go to China' and who stopped the Yom Kippur war from escalating ?
You forgot 'and eventually withdrew from Vietnam.'
As well as a vicious McCarthyist and the only President to resign from office for a totally needless crime that his aides were dumb enough to photograph themselves committing.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
The partition of Ireland was effectively imposed by one side, when you take into account that the Boundary Commission turned out to be a damp squib.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Sure everything is complicated and there are a multitude of factors in elections.
IIRC the Republicans did very well in the South in 1928 although the Catholic issue might have played a part then. Though conversely the Progressives in 1924 would have picked up many 'Bull Moose' Republican votes as well, after all wasn't LaFollette himself first elected as a Republican.
'Doing well' in this case meant 'winning four of the former ten confederate states, three by quite narrow margins.'
If anyone wants a belly laugh, guess which election the Republicans finally made a clean sweep of the South in!
Edit - with regard to La Folette, yes he was a Republican governor at first but don't get carried away by that. He was a Republican because only a Republican could win that office in that state. On many key issues he was divorced from or hostile to the leadership. Just as Senator Joe McCarthy was a Demorcat for much of his career.
The Republicans did well in the Confederate states compared to how the did in the 1910s and 1930s.
And the first Republican to clean sweep the Confederate states was Nixon in 1972 though as he won 49/50 that's not really surprising or funny.
Well, the Democrats in the South said they wouldn't vote Republican because they were liars, traitors, thieves and scum. Which was, actually, mostly not true.
Then they finally changed their minds when the Republicans put up a candidate who was all those things. Doesn't that amuse you even slightly?
That was also the source of the greatest bumper sticker of all time - 'Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts!'
Do I get the impression you don't like Richard Nixon ?
The only man who could 'go to China' and who stopped the Yom Kippur war from escalating ?
And who agreed the 1972 Vietnam ceasefire, and started the SALT talks with the Soviets.
I don't think he liked war, having been brought up as a birthright Quaker, albeit not a faith he followed in adult life.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
You can't go to a foreign country take their land and then call it self defence, that is war.
Israel shouldn't change course, its current strategy is working perfectly, acquire land and call it self defence.
However If we are on about from a moral point of view then yes of course Israelis should stop killing Palestinians and taking their land. Ì almost feel like the question of why they should do that pretty much answers itself.
Being a victim doesn't allow you to abuse other people. In much the same way we wouldn't accept the Palestinians coming to Britain and killing us and taking our land just because they had been mistreated by the Israelis.
If huge numbers of Muslims descended on Britain to take our land and kill us then you can bet your bottom dollar that Britain's allies in Europe would come to her aid.
Except nobody went to a foreign country and took land! Or went to a country to kill anyone. People moved to a country perfectly legally and then the land was partitioned based on who lived there.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I think it's hard to argue it wasn't on a much greater scale, both in terms of fatalities and numbers of displaced.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Indeed a decision that led to the pre-existing Palestinian state as well as Egypt annexing almost all of the land due to the Arabs instead of Israel. Land they held until they unilaterally terminated the ceasefire with Israel in 1967.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Indeed a decision that led to the pre-existing Palestinian state as well as Egypt annexing almost all of the land due to the Arabs instead of Israel. Land they held until they unilaterally terminated the ceasefire with Israel in 1967.
Actually Jordan ended up with more than Egypt, and Israel with more than either.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Indeed a decision that led to the pre-existing Palestinian state as well as Egypt annexing almost all of the land due to the Arabs instead of Israel. Land they held until they unilaterally terminated the ceasefire with Israel in 1967.
Actually Jordan ended up with more than Egypt, and Israel with more than either.
I meant Jordan when I wrote "the pre-existing Palestinian state". Jordan is of course a nation of Palestinians itself derived from Transjordan which was spun out of historic Palestine.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Indeed a decision that led to the pre-existing Palestinian state as well as Egypt annexing almost all of the land due to the Arabs instead of Israel. Land they held until they unilaterally terminated the ceasefire with Israel in 1967.
Actually Jordan ended up with more than Egypt, and Israel with more than either.
I meant Jordan when I wrote "the pre-existing Palestinian state". Jordan is of course a nation of Palestinians itself derived from Transjordan which was spun out of historic Palestine.
Sorry, I misread your comment. I thought it said in effect 'Egypt annexed almost all of the land due to the Arabs.'
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Indeed a decision that led to the pre-existing Palestinian state as well as Egypt annexing almost all of the land due to the Arabs instead of Israel. Land they held until they unilaterally terminated the ceasefire with Israel in 1967.
Actually Jordan ended up with more than Egypt, and Israel with more than either.
I meant Jordan when I wrote "the pre-existing Palestinian state". Jordan is of course a nation of Palestinians itself derived from Transjordan which was spun out of historic Palestine.
I need to check but I think Britain and Pakistan were the ONLY nations to recognise the annexation of the West Bank by Jordan in c.1950.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
I enjoy history, and it has never been spoilt for me by post O level education!
We can only understand ourselves and our future by studying and reflecting on our pasts, and history is as important as the creative arts when discussing ideas. I would also add theology for similar reasons.
You were two of the people I was thinking of.
It seems I shall have to add @another_richard as well. Fair cop on the numbers.
I hated history at school. It was taught in an uninspiring way at my school (at least, it did not inspire me), and I was more interested in the future than the past.
Then, at uni, I discovered the writings of Samuel Smiles (esp. 'The Lives of the Engineers'), and it, and some other things, opened an interest in industrial history.
I still don't have much interest in the Kings and Queens of England pre-1800 (except a little for the Wars of the Roses period), but love anything about the industrial revolution.
Perhaps a problem with history is that there is too much of it? (A problem that escalates every day...)
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Ed Balls on TV in USA, relaxed and thoughtful approach to Trump. Interviewing a black guy on Trump.
Yes, he is growing on me, and I don't think that we have seen the last of him.
Can't imagine Corbyn going to USA to look at why people voted for Trump, let alone mix with rednecks. Would be interesting to interview those who met Balls, what did they make of him?
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Gandhi did not agree to it.
Gandhi wasn't a political leader either.
The former leader of Congress that had been an activist and political leader within India for decades? He wasn't the current leader but he absolutely was a leader.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Hythe and Dymchurch are in ENGLAND, ydoethur
See, you've got Maesteg on your face now!
As far as puns go I've wrecksed 'em.
(Yes I know that perfectly well, but the opportunity of a Railway pun was too good to miss.)
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Gandhi did not agree to it.
But the Congress Party did agree to partition, and actively participated in the process.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Hythe and Dymchurch are in ENGLAND, ydoethur
See, you've got Maesteg on your face now!
Isn't it your bedtime Dr P?
You might be lucky and dream about Milford Haven. (Boxing gloves optional)
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
You'll have to ask the people I responded to when these conversations originally started.
My guess is that a conversation about anti-semitism and its relation to criticism of Israel spilled over into a conversation about Palestine rather than say Ireland or India...
You can tell me some small interesting fact about one of them if you want. I remember someone actually did this with me on another forum. They did the usual what about, so I said okay what about, I was genuinely interested...
I don't think they bothered replying to me again.
But why do you get so hot and bothered about the Partition of Palestine, rather than of Ireland or India?
So you don't actually want to talk about Ireland or India.... you want to complain that I'm not talking about Ireland or India without you or anyone else starting a conversation about Ireland or India for me to join in?
Doesn't that seem a bit silly?
If it makes you happy...
I understand that a lot of people died during the partition of India and I think that is a bad thing, I understand the British government, bears some responsibility for our part. Which we should be sorry about.
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Gandhi did not agree to it.
But the Congress Party did agree to partition, and actively participated in the process.
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
I was about to launch into my Channel 4 News = Guardian TV spiel, but actually in this case I think the chap is not at fault for what he said*. Rawlins is quoted elsewhere as saying that no insulin is made in the UK. Actually, here's the link to the original interview:
* That said, the C4 News chap has made no attempt to correct the misconception that he has helped to promulgate, either. It would not have been difficult to do so. Links to the websites of UK-based Insulin manufacturers can easily be found using a search engine.
Channel 4 Fake-News, tsk tsk.
Well up to a point. That insulin can be made on this island is a simple technical fact, but I can understand why people not in the business wouldn't know that is the case. It isn't even that surprising that a regulator wouldn't know the details.
That we are talking about the consequences of a major potential disruption to the flow of goods is still a pretty good demonstration that the way Brexit is being pursued is grossly incompetent.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Hythe and Dymchurch are in ENGLAND, ydoethur
See, you've got Maesteg on your face now!
Isn't it your bedtime Dr P?
You might be lucky and dream about Milford Haven. (Boxing gloves optional)
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
TheJezziah said as long ago as yesterday that any defence of your property and self that results in less stuff is a worse result but that he didn't imagine that would stop people defending themselves.
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose that the difference is that those two partitions and others like Turkey/Greece in 1923 were by mutual agreement, albeit grudging. The Palestinian partition was imposed by one side.
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Gandhi did not agree to it.
But the Congress Party did agree to partition, and actively participated in the process.
I thought the Muslim League wanted Partition?
Certainly the Muslim League advocated it from 1940, having previously favoured federalism as a solution. Congress's 1942 Quit India campaign led to the internment of the Congress Leaders until 1945 gave Jinnah uncontested political prominence, so he swept the Muslim seats in the postwar election. It was when Mountbatten became Viceroy that Congress leaders reluctantly agreed.
I also think it fair to say that the aftermath of partition does remain a flashpoint still, particularly in Kashmir.
Except nobody went to a foreign country and took land! Or went to a country to kill anyone. People moved to a country perfectly legally and then the land was partitioned based on who lived there.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
Is it just the Palestinians you believe should be killed and driven from their homes? or are there other non Arabic or Muslim countries in which you are equally happy to see people killed and driven from their homes?
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Hythe and Dymchurch are in ENGLAND, ydoethur
See, you've got Maesteg on your face now!
Isn't it your bedtime Dr P?
You might be lucky and dream about Milford Haven. (Boxing gloves optional)
Mahmoud Abbas as long ago as 2011 stated that it was a historic mistake for the Arabs NOT to accept the UN Partition Plan.
Can I ask why the Partition of Palestine was such a grievous, hideously pernicious crime, but the Partitions of (for argument's sake) Ireland or India weren't?
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Gandhi did not agree to it.
But the Congress Party did agree to partition, and actively participated in the process.
I thought the Muslim League wanted Partition?
Certainly the Muslim League advocated it from 1940, having previously favoured federalism as a solution. Congress's 1942 Quit India campaign led to the internment of the Congress Leaders until 1945 gave Jinnah uncontested political prominence, so he swept the Muslim seats in the postwar election. It was when Mountbatten became Viceroy that Congress leaders reluctantly agreed.
I also think it fair to say that the aftermath of partition does remain a flashpoint still, particularly in Kashmir.
It's true that Kashmir is a flashpoint, but Jezziah doesn't seem to know or care about it.
My take is that if Kashmir was a directly administered British province, as opposed to being ruled by a Maharaja, it probably would have been assigned to Pakistan except for the southwestern area around Jammu, which would have been, er, partitioned to India.
The EU is overplaying its hand but does not particularly care, they can ask for everything, PLUS a night with Prince Harry's wife every Thursday, ensuring our money and humiliation and continuing vassalage; and if we disagree, and crash out, then fuck it, the pain we endure will encourage les autres.
Remain or No Deal. Them's the choices.
Indefinite Limbo Transition (defacto EEA +CU) is also possible, with or without A50 withdrawal too.
Sounds like a punishment worse than death.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Can we please not have limbo dancing references to any subject even remotely connected to Theresa May? I was eating at the time.
When I was at Aberdare on Friday, I suddenly thought that "Truth or Aberdare" was a funny pun.
(I'll get me coat...)
Only you could find that funny Sunil
More power to his Ebbw, but I think the joke's gone Rhondda.
I liked that Welsh Presidential candidate - what was his name? Mitt Rhymney?
You can run, but you can't Hythe even in a Dim Church.
Hythe and Dymchurch are in ENGLAND, ydoethur
See, you've got Maesteg on your face now!
Isn't it your bedtime Dr P?
You might be lucky and dream about Milford Haven. (Boxing gloves optional)
Except nobody went to a foreign country and took land! Or went to a country to kill anyone. People moved to a country perfectly legally and then the land was partitioned based on who lived there.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
Is it just the Palestinians you believe should be killed and driven from their homes? or are there other non Arabic or Muslim countries in which you are equally happy to see people killed and driven from their homes?
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
So why are you picking on Israel and not Australia? The Native Tasmanians are no longer with us. Whereas the Palestinian population has steadily increased since 1947.
Except nobody went to a foreign country and took land! Or went to a country to kill anyone. People moved to a country perfectly legally and then the land was partitioned based on who lived there.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
Is it just the Palestinians you believe should be killed and driven from their homes? or are there other non Arabic or Muslim countries in which you are equally happy to see people killed and driven from their homes?
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
The Palestinians weren't killed and driven from their homes. They were given the vast majority of Palestine in two tranches, first Jordan and then Palestine. Those who got killed and driven from their lands were not because of Israeli aggression but because Jordan attacked Israel. The refugees fled during the two wars that Jordan started.
Why discuss Palestine rather than Ireland or India?
I suppose
Imposed by one side? It was voted for by UN member states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181.
Yes, but with the Palestinians being over ruled rather than persuaded.
Do you think that future Indians and future Pakistanis mutually agreed to Partition, given the massive population displacements and violence that occurred during 1946-47? (Arguablyon a much greater scale than what happened in Palestine).
I expect that the surviving deportees were very unhappy about partition, but the political leaders of both sides had agreed to partition.
Gandhi did not agree to it.
But the Congress Party did agree to partition, and actively participated in the process.
I thought the Muslim League wanted Partition?
Certainly the Muslim League advocated it from 1940, having previously favoured federalism as a solution. Congress's 1942 Quit India campaign led to the internment of the Congress Leaders until 1945 gave Jinnah uncontested political prominence, so he swept the Muslim seats in the postwar election. It was when Mountbatten became Viceroy that Congress leaders reluctantly agreed.
I also think it fair to say that the aftermath of partition does remain a flashpoint still, particularly in Kashmir.
It's true that Kashmir is a flashpoint, but Jezziah doesn't seem to know or care about it.
My take is that if Kashmir was a directly administered British province, as opposed to being ruled by a Maharaja, it probably would have been assigned to Pakistan except for the southwestern area around Jammu, which would have been, er, partitioned to India.
Is this the part now where I criticise you for not talking about Ireland?
I do actually know that Kashmir is one of the potential conflict zones. Remember some random mention of that part being fought by the zealots (on the Pakistan side) I guessed as it would be a very high casualty zone so you need people ready to meet their maker...
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
I was about to launch into my Channel 4 News = Guardian TV spiel, but actually in this case I think the chap is not at fault for what he said*. Rawlins is quoted elsewhere as saying that no insulin is made in the UK. Actually, here's the link to the original interview:
* That said, the C4 News chap has made no attempt to correct the misconception that he has helped to promulgate, either. It would not have been difficult to do so. Links to the websites of UK-based Insulin manufacturers can easily be found using a search engine.
Channel 4 Fake-News, tsk tsk.
Well up to a point. That insulin can be made on this island is a simple technical fact, but I can understand why people not in the business wouldn't know that is the case. It isn't even that surprising that a regulator wouldn't know the details.
That we are talking about the consequences of a major potential disruption to the flow of goods is still a pretty good demonstration that the way Brexit is being pursued is grossly incompetent.
Did not Charles say something about this the other day, and it has to do with different sorts of insulin made here and abroad? ETA: apologies in advance if I've completely garbled this; the search function does not work.
Except nobody went to a foreign country and took land! Or went to a country to kill anyone. People moved to a country perfectly legally and then the land was partitioned based on who lived there.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
Is it just the Palestinians you believe should be killed and driven from their homes? or are there other non Arabic or Muslim countries in which you are equally happy to see people killed and driven from their homes?
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
The Palestinians weren't killed and driven from their homes. They were given the vast majority of Palestine in two tranches, first Jordan and then Palestine. Those who got killed and driven from their lands were not because of Israeli aggression but because Jordan attacked Israel. The refugees fled during the two wars that Jordan started.
Their land was given away against their will, by standing up to this, as any people would, they were killed and driven from their homes. If you take land without permission that is war, there is almost no more obvious act of war.
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
I was about to launch into my Channel 4 News = Guardian TV spiel, but actually in this case I think the chap is not at fault for what he said*. Rawlins is quoted elsewhere as saying that no insulin is made in the UK. Actually, here's the link to the original interview:
* That said, the C4 News chap has made no attempt to correct the misconception that he has helped to promulgate, either. It would not have been difficult to do so. Links to the websites of UK-based Insulin manufacturers can easily be found using a search engine.
Channel 4 Fake-News, tsk tsk.
Well up to a point. That insulin can be made on this island is a simple technical fact, but I can understand why people not in the business wouldn't know that is the case. It isn't even that surprising that a regulator wouldn't know the details.
That we are talking about the consequences of a major potential disruption to the flow of goods is still a pretty good demonstration that the way Brexit is being pursued is grossly incompetent.
Did not Charles say something about this the other day, and it has to do with different sorts of insulin made here and abroad? ETA: apologies in advance if I've completely garbled this; the search function does not work.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
Is it just the Palestinians you believe should be killed and driven from their homes? or are there other non Arabic or Muslim countries in which you are equally happy to see people killed and driven from their homes?
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
The Palestinians weren't killed and driven from their homes. They were given the vast majority of Palestine in two tranches, first Jordan and then Palestine. Those who got killed and driven from their lands were not because of Israeli aggression but because Jordan attacked Israel. The refugees fled during the two wars that Jordan started.
It’s no use. Historical facts are irrelevant to the Jezziah, other than the ones he’s learnt from his Ladybird Book on Why Israel is Bad and Wrong about Everything.
He also seems to think, wrongly, that he’s the only one on here who cares about the Palestinians despite a number of other posters saying expressly that they would like the Palestinians to have a state of their own. And then he also says that he has no animus against Israel, doesn’t want it to disappear or any Jews expelled but seems completely oblivious to the incompatibility of that ambition with the stated aims of the current Palestinian leadership.
What I really like though is his so-called analogy with Muslims or Saudi Arabians invading Southern England which is almost endearing in its childishness.
Could it be that the Jezziah is JC himself? If so, hello - **waves** - “how’s the allotment faring in this heat? And isn’t it great that we’ve finally had some proper rain?”
Is it just the Palestinians you believe should be killed and driven from their homes? or are there other non Arabic or Muslim countries in which you are equally happy to see people killed and driven from their homes?
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
The Palestinians weren't killed and driven from their homes. They were given the vast majority of Palestine in two tranches, first Jordan and then Palestine. Those who got killed and driven from their lands were not because of Israeli aggression but because Jordan attacked Israel. The refugees fled during the two wars that Jordan started.
Their land was given away against their will, by standing up to this, as any people would, they were killed and driven from their homes. If you take land without permission that is war, there is almost no more obvious act of war.
Oh or the love of God, you’ve been told endless times. Try and understand: Jews who bought land legally were not stealing anything. Israel was legally created by the UN. You can’t rely on international law one minute to claim - wrongly - that something is an act of war and then ignore international law when it doesn’t suit. Israel is a legally constituted state. The Occupied Territories are not part of Israel and should not be having settlements built there. But Israel proper is a legal state in exactly the same way as lots of other states in the workd created in, say, the last 100 years.
There has been a vile campaign to delegitimise Israel by using Nazi terminology, motivated by anti-semitism precisely so that Israel can be wiped from the map and Jews expelled or killed. Not all those who are concerned about Palestinians are motivated by this, of course, or wish this end but far too many of them do and quite a lot turn a blind eye to their co-campaigners and what their real motivations and aims are.
It’s no use. Historical facts are irrelevant to the Jezziah, other than the ones he’s learnt from his Ladybird Book on Why Israel is Bad and Wrong about Everything.
He also seems to think, wrongly, that he’s the only one on here who cares about the Palestinians despite a number of other posters saying expressly that they would like the Palestinians to have a state of their own. And then he also says that he has no animus against Israel, doesn’t want it to disappear or any Jews expelled but seems completely oblivious to the incompatibility of that ambition with the stated aims of the current Palestinian leadership.
What I really like though is his so-called analogy with Muslims or Saudi Arabians invading Southern England which is almost endearing in its childishness.
Could it be that the Jezziah is JC himself? If so, hello - **waves** - “how’s the allotment faring in this heat? And isn’t it great that we’ve finally had some proper rain?”
Its endearing because people suddenly think again when it is their own property that is given away or their own friends and family killed for a foreign people to move in and create their own country there. Of course that wouldn't be right. But then Cyclefree doesn't have a problem with that happening to those other people the Palestinians because they are at fault for resisting their land being taken in the first place.
Yes you have mentioned a few times you would like the Palestinians to have their own state and claim you have no animus against them but then demand that the Palestinians are somehow starved, bombed and shot into becoming more moderate before Israel can feel okay to stop waging war on them. How about Israel has to keep attacking them until the magical unicorn turns up instead?
I didn't mind the rain as first but I want summer back now, ground has had plenty of rain.
Bloody hell I've been away a few days, am now a few thousand miles away and @TheJezziah is still bemoaning the creation of the State of Israel.
As I noted previously, so many lefties on this site not bothering any more even to deny they are anti-Semites.
Death, taxes and PB.
You seem to think anti-Semitism is believing that Palestinians don't deserve to die and be driven from their homes. I think you are just confused that I don't share your Islamophobic view.
In my defence the tweet was from the editor of Channel 4 news quoting the head of the Medicines Regulatory Authority!
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
I was about to launch into my Channel 4 News = Guardian TV spiel, but actually in this case I think the chap is not at fault for what he said*. Rawlins is quoted elsewhere as saying that no insulin is made in the UK. Actually, here's the link to the original interview:
* That said, the C4 News chap has made no attempt to correct the misconception that he has helped to promulgate, either. It would not have been difficult to do so. Links to the websites of UK-based Insulin manufacturers can easily be found using a search engine.
Channel 4 Fake-News, tsk tsk.
Well up to a point. That insulin can be made on this island is a simple technical fact, but I can understand why people not in the business wouldn't know that is the case. It isn't even that surprising that a regulator wouldn't know the details.
That we are talking about the consequences of a major potential disruption to the flow of goods is still a pretty good demonstration that the way Brexit is being pursued is grossly incompetent.
Did not Charles say something about this the other day, and it has to do with different sorts of insulin made here and abroad? ETA: apologies in advance if I've completely garbled this; the search function does not work.
Bloody hell I've been away a few days, am now a few thousand miles away and @TheJezziah is still bemoaning the creation of the State of Israel.
As I noted previously, so many lefties on this site not bothering any more even to deny they are anti-Semites.
Death, taxes and PB.
You seem to think anti-Semitism is believing that Palestinians don't deserve to die and be driven from their homes. I think you are just confused that I don't share your Islamophobic view.
Nah. You’re over-thinking it.
I think anti-Semitism is when people don't like Jews.
Comments
We can only understand ourselves and our future by studying and reflecting on our pasts, and history is as important as the creative arts when discussing ideas. I would also add theology for similar reasons.
These are Brexit issues that require some sort of Transition preparation. I suspect the action will be to go to WTO at the end of Transition in 2020, with 2 years to plan for this, and for hard borders everywhere.
And the first Republican to clean sweep the Confederate states was Nixon in 1972 though as he won 49/50 that's not really surprising or funny.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JwM9t8AFVVc
I'm not sure I ever said they weren't bad?
Quite frankly not subjects I know a huge amount about. You can try and convince they were no big deal and then call me a hypocrite because I'm discussing Palestine but think they are no big deal but I'm guessing that isn't really what you were looking for....
The Republicans won 5/11 Confederate states in 1928:
Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Florida and Texas.
Very close to wining Alabama as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1928
The truth is that Populist revolutions eat themselves, and revolutionaries are often assassinated* by other revolutionaries.
*metaphorically assassinated in more peacable societies.
Maybe a Transition Period with ongoing negotiations still aimed at reaching a deal?
Then they finally changed their minds when the Republicans put up a candidate who was all those things. Doesn't that amuse you even slightly?
That was also the source of the greatest bumper sticker of all time - 'Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts!'
The problems were strategy - the assumption that Corbyn would be pressured into going was disastrous as it effectively gave Momentum and co a month's head start while all that mucking about was going on and time to mobilise that 'coup' and betrayal narrative that stuck. As a result Smith was savaged and defined extremely unfairly before he'd even started. Secondly, like the Tories a year later, moderates grossly underestimated the effectiveness and brutality of the Momentum attack machine - it's pretty impossible to win an internal election when Owen Jones and co are leading an orchestrated campaign to discredit you and don't remotely care about playing fair to do it. Because of that Smith's 'Corbynism in a nicer suit without the bonkers stuff' approach was dead in the water - even if politically he's largely been proved right, especially on the EU, where one wonders where we'd be if the opposition had really been interested in interrogating Brexit rather than hoping it would go away. It would've been the same though if it had been Nandy, Eagle, or anyone that tried to negotiate.
The great mistake was bringing gift tokens to a knife fight - one that moderates have long made in saying "Well Jeremy's a nice man, but not a winner, or not up to detail, please vote him out", while Momentum go for the jugular and depict everything as an establishment plot to overthrow the Dear Leader. To defeat Corbyn, either internally or externally, moderates have to make a left-wing argument as to why Corbyn and his politics are morally unconscionable and intellectually bankrupt rather than just flimsy electorally. They didn't realise that in time - too many on the soft left (who are essential if you want to oust him) still don't now.
Whatever arrangement we come to with the EU, it won't be the final word. WIlliam will still lobby for a full-fat reentry, Express readers won't be happy until we've towed the country into the mid-Atlantic.
It seems I shall have to add @another_richard as well. Fair cop on the numbers.
Should we rename PoliticalBetting.Com PerpetualBrexit.com?
Israel shouldn't change course, its current strategy is working perfectly, acquire land and call it self defence.
However If we are on about from a moral point of view then yes of course Israelis should stop killing Palestinians and taking their land. Ì almost feel like the question of why they should do that pretty much answers itself.
Being a victim doesn't allow you to abuse other people. In much the same way we wouldn't accept the Palestinians coming to Britain and killing us and taking our land just because they had been mistreated by the Israelis.
If huge numbers of Muslims descended on Britain to take our land and kill us then you can bet your bottom dollar that Britain's allies in Europe would come to her aid.
(I'll get me coat...)
The only man who could 'go to China' and who stopped the Yom Kippur war from escalating ?
My guess is that a conversation about anti-semitism and its relation to criticism of Israel spilled over into a conversation about Palestine rather than say Ireland or India...
You can tell me some small interesting fact about one of them if you want. I remember someone actually did this with me on another forum. They did the usual what about, so I said okay what about, I was genuinely interested...
I don't think they bothered replying to me again.
https://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/opinion/qa/patients-could-be-seriously-disadvantaged-by-brexit-if-we-dont-get-our-act-together/20205237.article?firstPass=false
It would appear that he is wrong.
* That said, the C4 News chap has made no attempt to correct the misconception that he has helped to promulgate, either. It would not have been difficult to do so. Links to the websites of UK-based Insulin manufacturers can easily be found using a search engine.
Channel 4 Fake-News, tsk tsk.
The reason for the high profile of Israel/Palestine is I think (1) because of the religious sensitivities of the Holy Land and (2) because it has a significant knock-on impact in economically vital areas (as Sir Humphrey said, the Holy Places and the Oily Places). Israel's actions have undoubtedly been a factor in driving Islamic fundamentalists, and the conflict in Jerusalem has spread as far as Pakistan.
In Sudan, there's no oil and when the janjaweed are not actually killing (and a lot of the time when they were) the Western news agencies pay little or no attention.
(If that sounds callous and heartless Surby that's because governments and newspapers are callous and heartless.)
As well as a vicious McCarthyist and the only President to resign from office for a totally needless crime that his aides were dumb enough to photograph themselves committing.
I don't think he liked war, having been brought up as a birthright Quaker, albeit not a faith he followed in adult life.
I grew up in Australia, a nation which was founded by migrants to the country that treated the Aborigines far, far worse than any Israeli has ever treated anyone. A nation that was colonised by the actions of another country rather than simply individuals moving to the area of their own free will perfectly legally.
Do you have as much hatred for Australia as you do Israel? It is an illegitimate country? Or is just the Jewish state you're bothered about?
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/hythe/news/human-skulls-stolen-from-crypt-186546/
I shall go to bed.
Sweet dreams to everyone.
Then, at uni, I discovered the writings of Samuel Smiles (esp. 'The Lives of the Engineers'), and it, and some other things, opened an interest in industrial history.
I still don't have much interest in the Kings and Queens of England pre-1800 (except a little for the Wars of the Roses period), but love anything about the industrial revolution.
Perhaps a problem with history is that there is too much of it? (A problem that escalates every day...)
See, you've got Maesteg on your face now!
(Yes I know that perfectly well, but the opportunity of a Railway pun was too good to miss.)
You might be lucky and dream about Milford Haven. (Boxing gloves optional)
Doesn't that seem a bit silly?
If it makes you happy...
I understand that a lot of people died during the partition of India and I think that is a bad thing, I understand the British government, bears some responsibility for our part. Which we should be sorry about.
Is that what you wanted?
That we are talking about the consequences of a major potential disruption to the flow of goods is still a pretty good demonstration that the way Brexit is being pursued is grossly incompetent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milford
I also think it fair to say that the aftermath of partition does remain a flashpoint still, particularly in Kashmir.
Of course they moved to a foreign country and took it, I printed out the figures earlier, the Jewish population was boosted from massive immigration from abroad. They then took by force land from the people that lived there which involved killing people. When you take peoples land and they resist you generally kill them (or stop taking their land)
Yes the treatment of the Aborigines was shocking, Back in the day I certainly wouldn't be here arguing they deserve it for fighting back or that they should be grateful for the bits of land we have left them. I would call what we are doing to them war and I would want us to stop.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milford_Tunnel
My take is that if Kashmir was a directly administered British province, as opposed to being ruled by a Maharaja, it probably would have been assigned to Pakistan except for the southwestern area around Jammu, which would have been, er, partitioned to India.
Yvette's diary entry might be interesting.
10 days ago, it headlines in MEN suggested it was out,
Some firecrews are the moor again.
I do actually know that Kashmir is one of the potential conflict zones. Remember some random mention of that part being fought by the zealots (on the Pakistan side) I guessed as it would be a very high casualty zone so you need people ready to meet their maker...
ETA: apologies in advance if I've completely garbled this; the search function does not work.
Boris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe_OTpEVpXI
Jeremy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov-OfZMnjac
Brexit Augurs No-deal Zone Awfully Inept
He also seems to think, wrongly, that he’s the only one on here who cares about the Palestinians despite a number of other posters saying expressly that they would like the Palestinians to have a state of their own. And then he also says that he has no animus against Israel, doesn’t want it to disappear or any Jews expelled but seems completely oblivious to the incompatibility of that ambition with the stated aims of the current Palestinian leadership.
What I really like though is his so-called analogy with Muslims or Saudi Arabians invading Southern England which is almost endearing in its childishness.
Could it be that the Jezziah is JC himself? If so, hello - **waves** - “how’s the allotment faring in this heat? And isn’t it great that we’ve finally had some proper rain?”
Ski accident victim from 1954, identified by DNA.
FFS! Is he expecting that would provoke civil uprisings across Europe to force EU leaders to give a cake and eat it deal?
As I noted previously, so many lefties on this site not bothering any more even to deny they are anti-Semites.
Death, taxes and PB.
There has been a vile campaign to delegitimise Israel by using Nazi terminology, motivated by anti-semitism precisely so that Israel can be wiped from the map and Jews expelled or killed. Not all those who are concerned about Palestinians are motivated by this, of course, or wish this end but far too many of them do and quite a lot turn a blind eye to their co-campaigners and what their real motivations and aims are.
Yes you have mentioned a few times you would like the Palestinians to have their own state and claim you have no animus against them but then demand that the Palestinians are somehow starved, bombed and shot into becoming more moderate before Israel can feel okay to stop waging war on them. How about Israel has to keep attacking them until the magical unicorn turns up instead?
I didn't mind the rain as first but I want summer back now, ground has had plenty of rain.
Trying, and failing, to make any sense of that Sunil. How about:
Brexit Advantages: Nothing, Zilch, Aught. Idiotic!
https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/1023684855039762432
I think anti-Semitism is when people don't like Jews.