|
Post by alancalverd on Sept 1, 2018 16:30:12 GMT 1
Even if we believe the Barabbas story, Pilate showed failure in administering justice in deciding the accuseds fate by referring the matter to a baying mob. Bar abbas - "the son of the father". How odd, to base an entire superstition used to justify the buggery of children and murder of millions, on a pun. Humans are such a stupid species.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Sept 1, 2018 17:49:13 GMT 1
I see that Trump has withdrawn US funding from UNRWA, the UN body that lookS after Palestinian 'refugees'. As a US spokesman said there were initially - in 1948 300,000 or so and that has grown to 4M. It is a disgrace that only Trump has the balls to deal with. They are not going back to Israel, everyone knows that - so the time for a change is long overdue. However Israel must face up to it's past policy of 'ethnic cleansing' and pay compensation to those that they deliberately drove from their lands
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Sept 1, 2018 18:19:12 GMT 1
native Germans forced out of Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Italy .......They lost their land, their property, their fortunes, their ancestral homelands Kind of begs the definition of "native Germans", doesn't it? Care to elucidate? Ahh...I was using the terminology of the time. Nowadays they would be called "ethnic" Germans. It's not nitpicking to point out that they were never, in fact, democratically elected. Not to be in power, at any rate. It's true that after his assumption of that power Hitler held a referendum, and was said to have received an over-90% approval of his seizure of dictatorial authority - but I don't think any historian considers that a valid democratic result (any more than any respectable historian would ever judge Hamas to be democratically elected - despite people like Stephen Hawking and Naom Chomsky posing as authorities on any subject under the Sun, they are not, in fact, historians - or authorities, imo.) I don't know. Given the recent history, such disinfection seems a sensible precaution, especially in Poland and Czechoslovakia. The comparison to Israel is perhaps instructive - polls repeatedly show that a very clear majority of Israeli moslems have no desire to be anything other than Israeli. Not really surprising, unless you're habituated into thinking of Arabs as irrational - Palestinians living in Israel have more rights and freedoms than any other moslems in the world.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Sept 1, 2018 18:32:55 GMT 1
AFAIK there have been no reported incidents since 0830Z today. Perhaps August is a special month, but July certainly wasn't. And remember body counts are pretty much irrelevant: war is not tennis, where you take it in turns to serve, nor 15-a-side rugby where the loser restarts after a point, but 7-a-side where the winner kicks off. And there is no referee, just a winner on one side and a hole in the ground on the other. The question is whether,like Hamas, you want to see Israel returned to the hole in the ground that it was in 1945. You previously said "Now and again they persuade some kids (never themselves) to cause trouble at the border or attack people in Israel." So I asked what they did to attack the people of Israel this month, and you cannot point to any attack. The people shot and killed were not causing any trouble nor attacking anybody. They were walking, unarmed, inside the border of their own territory. Don't be silly. There are thousands of them, not "walking in their own territory", but repeatedly trying to assault the border fence. That's why they're there. 600,000 Jews. A very glib and insouciant presumption. The Iranian C707 missiles intercepted by Israel's blockade could very easily have done that - major parts of Israel, anyway. They could have wiped out Tel Aviv, the Haifa refineries, nuclear power plants. What can you mean by "if"? The response mandated under International Law - you like UN international law, don't you? - is very clear on the matter. It is the duty under law of every UN signatory nation to do everything it can to prevent any proscribed terrorist organisation from controlling territory. UN Security Council Resolution 1379. That is the legal obligation. That's the obligation of the UN. Utter silliness. The purpose of limited intermittent killing is to protect the integrity of the border, against a threat to break it and commit widespread murder of Israeli civilians (AKA "Jews".) Hamas hates Jews. When people like you stop being so silly.
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Sept 1, 2018 20:54:13 GMT 1
You have evidence that they assaulted the border fence in August? I have looked up that resolution and I cannot see where it says anything like that. unscr.com/en/resolutions/1379 That requires unarmed people to be killed does it? Suppose I, and all those "people like me" die tomorrow, thus ending our "silliness". How, exactly, will the conflict end then? Let's just debate this without insults please - there is no necessity to call each other silly, just stick to the facts.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Sept 2, 2018 1:15:05 GMT 1
It's not nitpicking to point out that they were never, in fact, democratically elected. Not to be in power, at any rate. It's true that after his assumption of that power Hitler held a referendum, and was said to have received an over-90% approval of his seizure of dictatorial authority - but I don't think any historian considers that a valid democratic result (any more than any respectable historian would ever judge Hamas to be democratically elected - despite people like Stephen Hawking and Naom Chomsky posing as authorities on any subject under the Sun, they are not, in fact, historians - or authorities, imo.) History sees it otherwise It's good enough definition of democratic election to power for Theresa May.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Sept 2, 2018 1:57:38 GMT 1
Fascinating: Let's look at this "border fence" thing rationally.
You, presumably, have a fence around your property. Or maybe a front door. Would you not have just the teensiest frisson of concern if your neighbours, having sworn for three generations to murder you and your family, equipped themselves with the weapons to do so at long range, and infiltrated your property from time to time to carry out random killings, now persuaded their children to climb the fence or break down the door? Would you turn the other cheek, or mobilise your lads to kick the shit out of them?
Now put yourself in the position of a military commander charged with (a) maintaining the integrity of a national border and the safety of nine million civilians who will be slaughtered if the border is breached and (b) minimising risk to your own troops. You have driven armoured vehicles and infantry into clear view of the enemy. The mob is advancing. Do you deploy sympathy or gunfire? (Hint - you are not paid to be sympathetic)
The sort of people with whom I feel most comfortable did not defeat the Nazis and restore sanity to Europe, or establish a modern democracy in Israel, by smiling and grumbling as their enemies dismantled the border.
The political initiative rests with Hamas. Until they take it, the only viable option is military, and that means killing any perceived threat.
Yes.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Sept 2, 2018 8:10:59 GMT 1
Fascinating: Let's look at this "border fence" thing rationally. Now put yourself in the position of a military commander charged with (a) maintaining the integrity of a national border and the safety of nine million civilians who will be slaughtered if the border is breached and (b) minimising risk to your own troops. If this the premise of your argument, then your argument can be ignored, for the premise is false, you know it is false, so just waht are you doing? Enjoying yourself
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Sept 2, 2018 10:14:31 GMT 1
It's happened before, in a much more civilised country, and within living memory. I think we can pardon the survivors and their descendants for being just a wee bit sensitive about it.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Sept 2, 2018 11:27:24 GMT 1
It's happened before, in a much more civilised country, and within living memory. I think we can pardon the survivors and their descendants for being just a wee bit sensitive about it. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." It has NEVER happened before What you suggest is absurd Never have a group of a few thousand rioters broken through the fence of a military Mega-power and killed 9 million people!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 2, 2018 14:24:17 GMT 1
I am so glad to hear that some people are now actually discussing the fact that subsidising Palestinian refugees so that they grow from 30,000 in number in 1948 to 5 million today may have been be a tad irrational.
Well done Mr Trump for withdrawing some of the funding. Maybe the Arab nations can now be persuaded out of giving subsidy to Palestinian "refugees" to stay in refugee camps and instead to offer citizenship and passports to them? Isn't it also time for Jordan (75% of the land area of post-Ottoman "Mandate Palestine") to regularise the status of the two million West Bank and other Palestinian refugees dwelling in their midst for many decades by giving them Jordanian citizenship and passports?
If Jordan won't accept these folk (their kinsmen) as their citizens why the f*** should Israel?
There are many alternatives to the 70 year long Palestinian-Israel standoff than that demanded by the likes of fascinating (which always seem to contain the demand for an element of "sacrifice" on the part of the Jews, n'est ce pas?)
I don't think the Jews need offer restitution for anything "in settlement" with Palestinians. If ever there were a case for a people to stand firm and intransigent on their nationhood, national interest and security it is this one.
Sod the Palestinians. Their misery is self imposed over many generations. Let them "move on" like so many others have before them - including Jews fleeing from the Spanish Inquisition and from Pogroms in Russia.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Sept 2, 2018 15:22:21 GMT 1
I've seen the footage on RT, yes. Thousands of teenage boys approaching the fence, responded to by teargas volleys. What "evidence" do you require? The order to breach the fence and kill as many Jews as they can comes from their government. It says exactly that. As does a host of such resolutions, from 1189, 1373, and 1377. Hamas has explicitly instructed the "protesters" to conceal their weapons until they have broken through the fence, precisely in order to prevent the IDF being able to identify who is armed and who is not. Nevertheless, the tactic doesn't seem to have worked very well. By Hamas' own account, about 95% of those killed have been Hamas operatives. Hamas and Fatah draw their support and raison d'etre from those abroad who consider their struggle worthwhile. That's why they spend so much money and effort propagandising. Without that support they couldn't go on so thoroughly deceiving their people. They'd have to surrender their absurd demand for the "Right to Return" and the whole mess could be negotiated away within a few weeks. "Silliness" wasn't meant as an insult, but an objective description of your whole stance. If there were hundreds of people trying to break into your house with the express intent of slaughtering you and your family, I imagine you wouldn't be saying, oh, leave them alone, they're only walking on the pubic street so far. You'd want the police to come and arrest them; and if that wasn't enough, for the army to come and shoot them. I am. That is a fact. I'm sorely tempted to go a great deal further; but it would seem you genuinely are clueless about this matter, and do sincerely believe - for heaven knows what reason - that any other country in the world would have reacted to this assault on their border in any way differently. So - silliness was a mild perhaps too indulgent compliment, given this parallel-universe ignorance. Let's just say that your beliefs are not anti-semitic, where you're holding Israel to an entirely different self-sacrifical standard you'd apply to everyone else - let's just say you sincerely believe that any other country in the world would allow its borders to be undefended against mobs intent on murdering their citizens rather than use violence to defend them. Shall we?
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Sept 2, 2018 15:43:41 GMT 1
It's not nitpicking to point out that they were never, in fact, democratically elected. Not to be in power, at any rate. It's true that after his assumption of that power Hitler held a referendum, and was said to have received an over-90% approval of his seizure of dictatorial authority - but I don't think any historian considers that a valid democratic result (any more than any respectable historian would ever judge Hamas to be democratically elected - despite people like Stephen Hawking and Naom Chomsky posing as authorities on any subject under the Sun, they are not, in fact, historians - or authorities, imo.) History sees it otherwise Huh? What "history" have you been reading? I'll look it up if you insist, but as far as I recall the Nazis won about a quarter of the seats in the Reichstag. Through clever manipulation and the stupidity of his opponents, who believed they were using him rather than vice versa, Hitler managed to be made Chancellor, nevertheless - along with a few other ministerial posts. The first thing he did as Chancellor was take a vote on him being made effective Dictator - in a parliament packed with Nazi thugs, overtly intimidating his opponents. The vote was duly carried - and that was that. His first edict was then tp outlaw any other political Party. The referendum giving popular approval ofthese acts was held under conditions of similar nationwide intimidation, ballot-rigging, total press control, and suppression of any opposition. Hawking was a mathematical physicist, where the notion of "authority" is supposed not to apply; Chomsky a theoretician in linguistics, for which ditto. Their political opinions have no greater weight than, say, the absurd self-stroking ramblings of Vanessa Redgrave or Eddie Izzard. That's so, but in a political system where there were dozens of parties where, by the Weimar constitution, government by coalition was required. It's not like our system, or the American, largest party takes all. Only after Pappen and the other leaders recommended it, under the deluded belief that they could effectively neuter him in that position. Noooo...If May proposed a law giving her power by diktat, and packed the Commons and Lords with armed thugs forcing every MP to vote for the measure, and then she banned the Labour, LIbDems, or any other party, then perhaps you'd have a valid comparison.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Sept 2, 2018 16:38:55 GMT 1
I am so glad to hear that some people are now actually discussing the fact that subsidising Palestinian refugees so that they grow from 30,000 in number in 1948 to 5 million today may have been be a tad irrational. Well done Mr Trump for withdrawing some of the funding. Hear hear. At last! They did so, until Arafat attempted - with the support of a Syrian invasion force - to overthrow the Jordanian government. I've asked her repeatedly what she believes Israel should do, bu so far she's refused to answer. Israel has always offered full monetary restitution. At Taba it offered the right of return to any refugee who'd fled the warfare in 48-49 or 67 - at the moment that's less than 30,000 people. That offer is still on the table - and as the Palestine Papers revealed, was accepted by Fatah. Those negotiations were then disrupted and called off when Hamas found out about this "treachery". But since then, Hamas has granted - ostensibly at least - Fatah full negotiating rights for all Palestinians. So - the only hold-up is this years-long "Right to Return" protest, (which Fing believes is like some harmless walk in the park with placards by the Countryside Alliance): which is precisely its whole raison d'etre. Imposed on them by their terrible misfortune of having had the leaders they've been saddled with, I'm afraid. Starting with that lunatic the Grand Mufti, an then of course his descendant Yassir Arafat. Both the products of the fanatical Muslim Brotherhood. The vast majority of Palestinians are far more moderate and reasonable - 90% of them have no interest in any "Right of Return". If any political party other than Fatah or the even more insane Hamas were allowed to exist in either the West Bank or Gaza - a party that stood for peace, a settlement with Israel that assured both parties mutual recognition and security, all the polls show it would win by a landslide. They're not really allowed to, unless they have the watsa or necessary bribes by which the whole Arab world operates. There's no incentive to let them move on while billions pours in from the UN and EU to supposedly "educate" them.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Sept 2, 2018 17:00:56 GMT 1
Most UK legislation is now passed by diktat from the EU or by unscrutinised order in Council (e.g. the power of the Heath & Safety Executive to extort unlimited fines ("fees") without proof of offence). That which cannot be achieved by diktat is achieved by wiping the magic arse of the incompetent DUP thugs with your money. It's called politics, even if the EU bit doesn't even pretend to be democratic. 'Twas ever thus, with varying degrees of transparency and skullduggery, and if the Irish population happens to express a contrary opinion, they have to vote again.
But we are getting off the subject.
|
|