Councillor Ruth Buckley makes u-turn on plans to second a motion to boycott of Israeli good and services in Brighton and Hove

Councillor Ruth Buckley

Councillor Ruth Buckley

First published in News
Last updated
by , Crime reporter

THE deputy leader of the city council has changed her mind about seconding a motion calling for the authority to boycott Israeli good and services.

Green Party councillor Ruth Buckley says she has decided not to second independent councillor Ben Duncan’s motion calling for Brighton and Hove City Council to support the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign.

Coun Duncan said the motion was still in the pipeline to be debated in October, but seconded by another Green councillor.

Cllr Buckley said she had thought “long and hard” and said: “I, like many, are deeply concerned about the recent escalation in violence and destruction.

"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem.

“Needless to say that as a pacifist I also condemn the violent actions of Hamas and other organisations in the region and around the world.”

She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

She said: “Instead they have a pacifist basis advocating non-violent rather than violent direct action to achieve equality and peace for all inhabitants of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

“Therefore those seeking to distort the issue are either abhorrently using the current conflict as an excuse to exhibit their racism/anti-Judaism, or on the other hand are linking the BDS campaign to these incidents, which is disingenuous.

“On balance I have decided not to second the motion as I feel my intentions have been misinterpreted.

“The debate is certainly not clear-cut and is fraught with emotion and nuance, especially at this difficult time.”

The party calls for a “fair and humane solution” to the conflict, she said, and other councillors in the party were free to second the motion based on their personal views.

Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law.

Comments (98)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:24am Fri 29 Aug 14

Quiterie says...

Does the Council actually use any Israeli goods and services? If not what's the point of a boycott?

Although the violence and deaths are dreadful, haven't our Councillors and more importantly Council Officers got better, more local, things to do than waste time on this kind of thing?
Does the Council actually use any Israeli goods and services? If not what's the point of a boycott? Although the violence and deaths are dreadful, haven't our Councillors and more importantly Council Officers got better, more local, things to do than waste time on this kind of thing? Quiterie
  • Score: 65

6:36am Fri 29 Aug 14

rogerthefish says...

What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza . rogerthefish
  • Score: -41

6:46am Fri 29 Aug 14

Brighton90 says...

The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward
The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward Brighton90
  • Score: 62

7:01am Fri 29 Aug 14

homewood says...

Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda.

its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides.

The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect..
.
Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda. its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides. The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect.. . homewood
  • Score: 58

7:01am Fri 29 Aug 14

We love Red Billy says...

rogerthefish wrote:
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
With the behaviour of Hamas towards its own people ( 18 men executed out of hand on suspicion of being Israeli spys or the young members of Fatah thrown off high buildings when Hamas took over Gaza ) have you considered changing your on line name to Roger the misinformed?
[quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .[/p][/quote]With the behaviour of Hamas towards its own people ( 18 men executed out of hand on suspicion of being Israeli spys or the young members of Fatah thrown off high buildings when Hamas took over Gaza ) have you considered changing your on line name to Roger the misinformed? We love Red Billy
  • Score: 55

7:37am Fri 29 Aug 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Councillor Buckley, you were elected to deliver local services for local people.
Why does the Green council believe it is ok to get into international politics when it has failed to deliver any of the external targets set for councils?
Do you think the public would have any faith in the Green councillors judgement on a complex international issue when you can't even pick up the rubbish effectively?
Councillor Buckley, you were elected to deliver local services for local people. Why does the Green council believe it is ok to get into international politics when it has failed to deliver any of the external targets set for councils? Do you think the public would have any faith in the Green councillors judgement on a complex international issue when you can't even pick up the rubbish effectively? Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 61

7:59am Fri 29 Aug 14

JHunty says...

homewood wrote:
Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda.

its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides.

The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect..
.
Well it all depends on your starting point as to who started what. One thing is for certain though, a bunch of Palestinians didnt go to Europe and America and force the indigenous population off their land at gunpoint all the while claiming their religion justified their actions.
[quote][p][bold]homewood[/bold] wrote: Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda. its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides. The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect.. .[/p][/quote]Well it all depends on your starting point as to who started what. One thing is for certain though, a bunch of Palestinians didnt go to Europe and America and force the indigenous population off their land at gunpoint all the while claiming their religion justified their actions. JHunty
  • Score: -24

8:05am Fri 29 Aug 14

JHunty says...

We love Red Billy wrote:
rogerthefish wrote:
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
With the behaviour of Hamas towards its own people ( 18 men executed out of hand on suspicion of being Israeli spys or the young members of Fatah thrown off high buildings when Hamas took over Gaza ) have you considered changing your on line name to Roger the misinformed?
Actually most people are well informed enough to see that the most moral army in the world has a longer track record of killing Palestinians than Hamas has.
The most moral army in the world routinely shoots dead unarmed protestors and then provides examples of fake justifications for its soldiers to use in their defence, if indeed they are ever taken to court.
Of course Israel seeks to divide the Palestinians, but the simple fact remains that far more Palestinian civilians are killed by Israel than are killed by Hamas.
Israel is the aggressor and certainly has no right to claim the moral high ground.
[quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .[/p][/quote]With the behaviour of Hamas towards its own people ( 18 men executed out of hand on suspicion of being Israeli spys or the young members of Fatah thrown off high buildings when Hamas took over Gaza ) have you considered changing your on line name to Roger the misinformed?[/p][/quote]Actually most people are well informed enough to see that the most moral army in the world has a longer track record of killing Palestinians than Hamas has. The most moral army in the world routinely shoots dead unarmed protestors and then provides examples of fake justifications for its soldiers to use in their defence, if indeed they are ever taken to court. Of course Israel seeks to divide the Palestinians, but the simple fact remains that far more Palestinian civilians are killed by Israel than are killed by Hamas. Israel is the aggressor and certainly has no right to claim the moral high ground. JHunty
  • Score: -28

8:17am Fri 29 Aug 14

hoveguyactually says...

"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem."

Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame.

"She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing.

"Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law."

So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?
"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem." Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame. "She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.” Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing. "Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law." So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say? hoveguyactually
  • Score: 34

9:01am Fri 29 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

Yes - yet again these irresponsible green councillors who think they should concentrate on promoting their individual activist agendas rather than worrying directly about the needs of residents, businesses and visitors.

How about them focussing on real issues - rubbish collection, street cleaning, grass verge trimming, and mending roads rather than 'international' law' which, IMHO, is better served by experts in the Foreign Office rather than immature idealogical watermelons.

How about really sorting out environmental problems like emission levels, recycling levels, and dealing properly with travellers?

Do you remember when Kitty-cat declared the city and fracking free-zone. Another pointless bit of posturing as the geology in the area isn't suitable for fracking?

These really are a loathsome party - roll on May 2015 when some other party (Please - any other party!) - can start to run the council properly.
Yes - yet again these irresponsible green councillors who think they should concentrate on promoting their individual activist agendas rather than worrying directly about the needs of residents, businesses and visitors. How about them focussing on real issues - rubbish collection, street cleaning, grass verge trimming, and mending roads rather than 'international' law' which, IMHO, is better served by experts in the Foreign Office rather than immature idealogical watermelons. How about really sorting out environmental problems like emission levels, recycling levels, and dealing properly with travellers? Do you remember when Kitty-cat declared the city and fracking free-zone. Another pointless bit of posturing as the geology in the area isn't suitable for fracking? These really are a loathsome party - roll on May 2015 when some other party (Please - any other party!) - can start to run the council properly. G Wiley
  • Score: 39

9:14am Fri 29 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

I seem to recall that it was the actions of individuals and organisations, including councils, that were important in terms of showing support to those in South Africa overturning apartheid.
I seem to recall that it was the actions of individuals and organisations, including councils, that were important in terms of showing support to those in South Africa overturning apartheid. HJarrs
  • Score: -40

9:59am Fri 29 Aug 14

still waiting says...

Gesture politics, n.; any action by a person or organization done for political reasons and intended to attract public attention but having little real effect.
Gesture politics, n.; any action by a person or organization done for political reasons and intended to attract public attention but having little real effect. still waiting
  • Score: 8

10:01am Fri 29 Aug 14

We love Red Billy says...

JHunty wrote:
homewood wrote:
Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda.

its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides.

The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect..
.
Well it all depends on your starting point as to who started what. One thing is for certain though, a bunch of Palestinians didnt go to Europe and America and force the indigenous population off their land at gunpoint all the while claiming their religion justified their actions.
And ISIS has been invited in because they are so democratic? Naive, left wing middle class posturing like yours is quite pathetic. You would soon be screaming for the army to come and protect you if nasty people started suicide bombing in Hanover.
[quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]homewood[/bold] wrote: Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda. its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides. The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect.. .[/p][/quote]Well it all depends on your starting point as to who started what. One thing is for certain though, a bunch of Palestinians didnt go to Europe and America and force the indigenous population off their land at gunpoint all the while claiming their religion justified their actions.[/p][/quote]And ISIS has been invited in because they are so democratic? Naive, left wing middle class posturing like yours is quite pathetic. You would soon be screaming for the army to come and protect you if nasty people started suicide bombing in Hanover. We love Red Billy
  • Score: 22

10:13am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

rogerthefish wrote:
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
If that is the case, which land was grabbed during this last crisis?
[quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .[/p][/quote]If that is the case, which land was grabbed during this last crisis? ok,jared
  • Score: 2

10:14am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

HJarrs wrote:
I seem to recall that it was the actions of individuals and organisations, including councils, that were important in terms of showing support to those in South Africa overturning apartheid.
Is there any evidence that the South African government indicated that to be the case?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: I seem to recall that it was the actions of individuals and organisations, including councils, that were important in terms of showing support to those in South Africa overturning apartheid.[/p][/quote]Is there any evidence that the South African government indicated that to be the case? ok,jared
  • Score: 2

10:20am Fri 29 Aug 14

theargusissoinformative says...

JHunty wrote:
homewood wrote:
Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda.

its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides.

The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect..
.
Well it all depends on your starting point as to who started what. One thing is for certain though, a bunch of Palestinians didnt go to Europe and America and force the indigenous population off their land at gunpoint all the while claiming their religion justified their actions.
Ah, the memories
[quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]homewood[/bold] wrote: Roger the fish. The last war and previous wars started by Hamas ! Really what planet are you on.. Perhaps you need to go back to school so you can learn to read news reports. Hamas, IS, Islamic Jihad, Boko etc all have the same agenda. its a real shame terrorists like Hamas are now representing the Palestinians, it is the worst thing for peace between the two sides. The council should stick to local issues that effect our lovely city not complicated internationsl issues, especially as . councillors in the main do not have either the Knowledge about the issue or with respect the intellect.. .[/p][/quote]Well it all depends on your starting point as to who started what. One thing is for certain though, a bunch of Palestinians didnt go to Europe and America and force the indigenous population off their land at gunpoint all the while claiming their religion justified their actions.[/p][/quote]Ah, the memories theargusissoinformative
  • Score: -6

10:24am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Once again, JHunty writes a load of drivel despite being told the facts often enough:

"Actually most people are well informed enough to see that the most moral army in the world has a longer track record of killing Palestinians than Hamas has."

Given that Hamas was only formed in 1997, a mere 50 years after Israel was created, and that Hamas doesn't have any right to kill anyone, that's a pretty fatuous comment to make.

Hamas shouldn't be killing ANY Palestinians......bu
t it does.

Curiously, you had no problem with the murder of 18 innocent Palestinians by Hamas the other week.

"The most moral army in the world routinely shoots dead unarmed protestors and then provides examples of fake justifications for its soldiers to use in their defence, if indeed they are ever taken to court."

You mean Israeli soldiers receive fair trials?

I don't see anything wrong with that, but you plainly do.

If protesters are firing missiles at IDF forces, they will be met with force.

"Of course Israel seeks to divide the Palestinians, but the simple fact remains that far more Palestinian civilians are killed by Israel than are killed by Hamas."

Hamas shouldn't be killing ANY Palestinians.

"Israel is the aggressor and certainly has no right to claim the moral high ground."

Israel, as you've been told many times, isn't the aggressor.

It receives a daily shelling from Gaza, and has the right to stop that happening.

I look forward to correcting more of your drivel, seeing as you appear to have comprehension issues.
Once again, JHunty writes a load of drivel despite being told the facts often enough: "Actually most people are well informed enough to see that the most moral army in the world has a longer track record of killing Palestinians than Hamas has." Given that Hamas was only formed in 1997, a mere 50 years after Israel was created, and that Hamas doesn't have any right to kill anyone, that's a pretty fatuous comment to make. Hamas shouldn't be killing ANY Palestinians......bu t it does. Curiously, you had no problem with the murder of 18 innocent Palestinians by Hamas the other week. "The most moral army in the world routinely shoots dead unarmed protestors and then provides examples of fake justifications for its soldiers to use in their defence, if indeed they are ever taken to court." You mean Israeli soldiers receive fair trials? I don't see anything wrong with that, but you plainly do. If protesters are firing missiles at IDF forces, they will be met with force. "Of course Israel seeks to divide the Palestinians, but the simple fact remains that far more Palestinian civilians are killed by Israel than are killed by Hamas." Hamas shouldn't be killing ANY Palestinians. "Israel is the aggressor and certainly has no right to claim the moral high ground." Israel, as you've been told many times, isn't the aggressor. It receives a daily shelling from Gaza, and has the right to stop that happening. I look forward to correcting more of your drivel, seeing as you appear to have comprehension issues. ok,jared
  • Score: 10

10:35am Fri 29 Aug 14

argchat says...

My opinion is, what does this have to do with us. Don't we really need to be focsuing on issues closer to home, or is that selfish. I have noticed a massive influx of people moving to this area over the last 5-6 years, should the focus not be on for example, our jobs, our local services, housing, transport and whether we can cope now or in the future.
My opinion is, what does this have to do with us. Don't we really need to be focsuing on issues closer to home, or is that selfish. I have noticed a massive influx of people moving to this area over the last 5-6 years, should the focus not be on for example, our jobs, our local services, housing, transport and whether we can cope now or in the future. argchat
  • Score: 15

10:39am Fri 29 Aug 14

NathanAdler says...

Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values.

Vile party.
Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values. Vile party. NathanAdler
  • Score: 22

10:42am Fri 29 Aug 14

theargusissoinformative says...

argchat wrote:
My opinion is, what does this have to do with us. Don't we really need to be focsuing on issues closer to home, or is that selfish. I have noticed a massive influx of people moving to this area over the last 5-6 years, should the focus not be on for example, our jobs, our local services, housing, transport and whether we can cope now or in the future.
I think we have to accept that the people of the Middle East are pretty close neighbours who will only ever want to kill each other. This is an issue for David Cameron. So what on earth is an elected representative of Brighton and Hove City Council (a LOCAL authority) doing showing an interest in INTERNATIONAL law?
[quote][p][bold]argchat[/bold] wrote: My opinion is, what does this have to do with us. Don't we really need to be focsuing on issues closer to home, or is that selfish. I have noticed a massive influx of people moving to this area over the last 5-6 years, should the focus not be on for example, our jobs, our local services, housing, transport and whether we can cope now or in the future.[/p][/quote]I think we have to accept that the people of the Middle East are pretty close neighbours who will only ever want to kill each other. This is an issue for David Cameron. So what on earth is an elected representative of Brighton and Hove City Council (a LOCAL authority) doing showing an interest in INTERNATIONAL law? theargusissoinformative
  • Score: 9

10:47am Fri 29 Aug 14

Goldchrisevans says...

Brighton90 wrote:
The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward
It would be terrible if true that only "Jewish residents" of Cllr Duncan's ward are upset by his tacit support for Hamas. The latter oppresses women and gays, murders its fellow Palestnian poliitcal opponents in cold blood, uses women and children as human shields denying them bomb shelters whilst the Hamas leadership live in underground air conditioned concrete bunkers The latter are built with Israeli cement bought with EU Aid money purposed for genuine reconstruction and development. That's all before the fact that its Islamic fascist ideology is the same as IS I Iraq and it published Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews.
[quote][p][bold]Brighton90[/bold] wrote: The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward[/p][/quote]It would be terrible if true that only "Jewish residents" of Cllr Duncan's ward are upset by his tacit support for Hamas. The latter oppresses women and gays, murders its fellow Palestnian poliitcal opponents in cold blood, uses women and children as human shields denying them bomb shelters whilst the Hamas leadership live in underground air conditioned concrete bunkers The latter are built with Israeli cement bought with EU Aid money purposed for genuine reconstruction and development. That's all before the fact that its Islamic fascist ideology is the same as IS I Iraq and it published Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews. Goldchrisevans
  • Score: 20

10:57am Fri 29 Aug 14

theargusissoinformative says...

Goldchrisevans wrote:
Brighton90 wrote:
The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward
It would be terrible if true that only "Jewish residents" of Cllr Duncan's ward are upset by his tacit support for Hamas. The latter oppresses women and gays, murders its fellow Palestnian poliitcal opponents in cold blood, uses women and children as human shields denying them bomb shelters whilst the Hamas leadership live in underground air conditioned concrete bunkers The latter are built with Israeli cement bought with EU Aid money purposed for genuine reconstruction and development. That's all before the fact that its Islamic fascist ideology is the same as IS I Iraq and it published Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews.
It will only be jewish residents that will be upset by Ben Duncan. The rest of us are thinking 'aren't there local things that he should be thinking about?'
[quote][p][bold]Goldchrisevans[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brighton90[/bold] wrote: The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward[/p][/quote]It would be terrible if true that only "Jewish residents" of Cllr Duncan's ward are upset by his tacit support for Hamas. The latter oppresses women and gays, murders its fellow Palestnian poliitcal opponents in cold blood, uses women and children as human shields denying them bomb shelters whilst the Hamas leadership live in underground air conditioned concrete bunkers The latter are built with Israeli cement bought with EU Aid money purposed for genuine reconstruction and development. That's all before the fact that its Islamic fascist ideology is the same as IS I Iraq and it published Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews.[/p][/quote]It will only be jewish residents that will be upset by Ben Duncan. The rest of us are thinking 'aren't there local things that he should be thinking about?' theargusissoinformative
  • Score: -4

10:58am Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values.

Vile party.
Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles.

They DON'T want to sell off the NHS to companies that bribe them. They DO want to renationalise the railways to give customers cheaper travel and to copy the success of the state-run East Coast line. They would NOT follow the US into a pointless war because both the President and God told them to. They DO want to make sure that hard working people receive a living wage.

The other parties have sold off most of your British values for a few peices of silver and a future position on the board.

If you disagree with me could you please actually tell me one of these 'British Values' that their manifesto is against? Fairness? Tollerance? Invention? Good luck!
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values. Vile party.[/p][/quote]Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles. They DON'T want to sell off the NHS to companies that bribe them. They DO want to renationalise the railways to give customers cheaper travel and to copy the success of the state-run East Coast line. They would NOT follow the US into a pointless war because both the President and God told them to. They DO want to make sure that hard working people receive a living wage. The other parties have sold off most of your British values for a few peices of silver and a future position on the board. If you disagree with me could you please actually tell me one of these 'British Values' that their manifesto is against? Fairness? Tollerance? Invention? Good luck! Fercri Sakes
  • Score: -17

11:02am Fri 29 Aug 14

Vigilia says...

Interesting that her decision should be announced today, the anniversary of the day in the year 70 that the Romans captured Jerusalem leading to the break up of the Jewish State.
Having reestablished their State, they will surrender it to no man.
Interesting that her decision should be announced today, the anniversary of the day in the year 70 that the Romans captured Jerusalem leading to the break up of the Jewish State. Having reestablished their State, they will surrender it to no man. Vigilia
  • Score: 5

11:08am Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

Goldchrisevans wrote:
Brighton90 wrote:
The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward
It would be terrible if true that only "Jewish residents" of Cllr Duncan's ward are upset by his tacit support for Hamas. The latter oppresses women and gays, murders its fellow Palestnian poliitcal opponents in cold blood, uses women and children as human shields denying them bomb shelters whilst the Hamas leadership live in underground air conditioned concrete bunkers The latter are built with Israeli cement bought with EU Aid money purposed for genuine reconstruction and development. That's all before the fact that its Islamic fascist ideology is the same as IS I Iraq and it published Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews.
Wrong wrong wrong! The IDF have more in common with ISIS.

There are thousands of Israelis including Holocaust survivors who are condemning the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza by Israeli forces.

Did you not see the t-shirts that some of the IDF wore after their previous incursion into Gaza? It had an innocent pregnant veiled woman with a sniper's scope pointed at her belly. The words read "1 shot 2 kills".
[quote][p][bold]Goldchrisevans[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brighton90[/bold] wrote: The council shouldn't even be considering this. They are a local body of people who need to focus on issues directly affecting the city, of which this isn't one. And you'd think Duncan would be more careful considering he has a Jewish residents in his ward[/p][/quote]It would be terrible if true that only "Jewish residents" of Cllr Duncan's ward are upset by his tacit support for Hamas. The latter oppresses women and gays, murders its fellow Palestnian poliitcal opponents in cold blood, uses women and children as human shields denying them bomb shelters whilst the Hamas leadership live in underground air conditioned concrete bunkers The latter are built with Israeli cement bought with EU Aid money purposed for genuine reconstruction and development. That's all before the fact that its Islamic fascist ideology is the same as IS I Iraq and it published Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews.[/p][/quote]Wrong wrong wrong! The IDF have more in common with ISIS. There are thousands of Israelis including Holocaust survivors who are condemning the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza by Israeli forces. Did you not see the t-shirts that some of the IDF wore after their previous incursion into Gaza? It had an innocent pregnant veiled woman with a sniper's scope pointed at her belly. The words read "1 shot 2 kills". Fercri Sakes
  • Score: -13

11:10am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:

"Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles."

Such as our membership of the EU and its 'open border' policy?

Both are destroying this country.

Lucas also supports groups like the UAF, the anti-patriot organisation which uses physical violence.

I do hope you feel as stupid as I've made you look.
Fercri Sakes wrote: "Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles." Such as our membership of the EU and its 'open border' policy? Both are destroying this country. Lucas also supports groups like the UAF, the anti-patriot organisation which uses physical violence. I do hope you feel as stupid as I've made you look. ok,jared
  • Score: -3

11:13am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:

"Wrong wrong wrong! The IDF have more in common with ISIS."

More in common with ISIS than do Hamas??

Hamas and ISIS are a threat to Israel. They share the same barbaric religion, they execute their own people without trial, and they are terrorists.

I look forward to your explanation of your stupid comment.
Fercri Sakes wrote: "Wrong wrong wrong! The IDF have more in common with ISIS." More in common with ISIS than do Hamas?? Hamas and ISIS are a threat to Israel. They share the same barbaric religion, they execute their own people without trial, and they are terrorists. I look forward to your explanation of your stupid comment. ok,jared
  • Score: 5

11:22am Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:

"Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles."

Such as our membership of the EU and its 'open border' policy?

Both are destroying this country.

Lucas also supports groups like the UAF, the anti-patriot organisation which uses physical violence.

I do hope you feel as stupid as I've made you look.
So all the other parties except UKIP obviously hate Britain then?

I'm sorry to break it to you but Fascism is not a British value. We even had a war about it in the 40's. Are you still claiming the March For England was a demonstration of British values, like a cup of tea with the vicar or a village fete? Do you really think that all those people demonstrating against this yob mob shouting, "Get out of our city and don't come back!" are people that hate Britian?
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote: "Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles." Such as our membership of the EU and its 'open border' policy? Both are destroying this country. Lucas also supports groups like the UAF, the anti-patriot organisation which uses physical violence. I do hope you feel as stupid as I've made you look.[/p][/quote]So all the other parties except UKIP obviously hate Britain then? I'm sorry to break it to you but Fascism is not a British value. We even had a war about it in the 40's. Are you still claiming the March For England was a demonstration of British values, like a cup of tea with the vicar or a village fete? Do you really think that all those people demonstrating against this yob mob shouting, "Get out of our city and don't come back!" are people that hate Britian? Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 4

11:22am Fri 29 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
NathanAdler wrote:
Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values.

Vile party.
Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles.

They DON'T want to sell off the NHS to companies that bribe them. They DO want to renationalise the railways to give customers cheaper travel and to copy the success of the state-run East Coast line. They would NOT follow the US into a pointless war because both the President and God told them to. They DO want to make sure that hard working people receive a living wage.

The other parties have sold off most of your British values for a few peices of silver and a future position on the board.

If you disagree with me could you please actually tell me one of these 'British Values' that their manifesto is against? Fairness? Tollerance? Invention? Good luck!
@Fercri Sakes - how about the Green Parties lack of responsibility, lack of economic understanding, focus on activism, with no leadership, and lack of competence?

How about a party that ignores the needs of majority voters, businesses and visitors as they carry on ineptly implementing their idealogical policies as they 'know what is best for us'!

How about their focus on left-wing anti-capitalism and the nationalisation of major parts of the British economy to fulfil their desire to maintain a communist/socialist dream that only dictatorial states impose on their people?

Yes - a party of incompetent dreamers, who still think they are living in the 1970s where unions ruled the country and we had regular national strikes, a party who couldn't be trusted to sit the right way round on a toilet seat!

The watermelon greens - Fairness - to themselves? Tolerance - but not of what the majority wants? Invention - of monumental c*ck-ups?
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values. Vile party.[/p][/quote]Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles. They DON'T want to sell off the NHS to companies that bribe them. They DO want to renationalise the railways to give customers cheaper travel and to copy the success of the state-run East Coast line. They would NOT follow the US into a pointless war because both the President and God told them to. They DO want to make sure that hard working people receive a living wage. The other parties have sold off most of your British values for a few peices of silver and a future position on the board. If you disagree with me could you please actually tell me one of these 'British Values' that their manifesto is against? Fairness? Tollerance? Invention? Good luck![/p][/quote]@Fercri Sakes - how about the Green Parties lack of responsibility, lack of economic understanding, focus on activism, with no leadership, and lack of competence? How about a party that ignores the needs of majority voters, businesses and visitors as they carry on ineptly implementing their idealogical policies as they 'know what is best for us'! How about their focus on left-wing anti-capitalism and the nationalisation of major parts of the British economy to fulfil their desire to maintain a communist/socialist dream that only dictatorial states impose on their people? Yes - a party of incompetent dreamers, who still think they are living in the 1970s where unions ruled the country and we had regular national strikes, a party who couldn't be trusted to sit the right way round on a toilet seat! The watermelon greens - Fairness - to themselves? Tolerance - but not of what the majority wants? Invention - of monumental c*ck-ups? G Wiley
  • Score: 2

11:24am Fri 29 Aug 14

Plantpot says...

I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.
I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

11:27am Fri 29 Aug 14

s&k says...

Greens=no moral stance?
Greens=no moral stance? s&k
  • Score: 4

11:27am Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:

"Wrong wrong wrong! The IDF have more in common with ISIS."

More in common with ISIS than do Hamas??

Hamas and ISIS are a threat to Israel. They share the same barbaric religion, they execute their own people without trial, and they are terrorists.

I look forward to your explanation of your stupid comment.
Churchill and Hitler shared the same religion.

ISIS and the IDF indescriminately kill civilians and illegally occupy huge swathes of land they do not own.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote: "Wrong wrong wrong! The IDF have more in common with ISIS." More in common with ISIS than do Hamas?? Hamas and ISIS are a threat to Israel. They share the same barbaric religion, they execute their own people without trial, and they are terrorists. I look forward to your explanation of your stupid comment.[/p][/quote]Churchill and Hitler shared the same religion. ISIS and the IDF indescriminately kill civilians and illegally occupy huge swathes of land they do not own. Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 0

11:28am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:

"So all the other parties except UKIP obviously hate Britain then?"

We're talking about the Greens, but any party that supports our membership of the EU and having open borders hates the people of this country.

"I'm sorry to break it to you but Fascism is not a British value."

How is fascism involved here?

"We even had a war about it in the 40's."

And we are now 80 years on from that.

We even invite Germans and Italians to this country - how weird of us!

" Are you still claiming the March For England was a demonstration of British values, like a cup of tea with the vicar or a village fete?"

Who mentioned the MFE?

I didn't, so I wasn't making any claims about it.

However, the aims of the MFE are exactly those of what being English means to most.

" Do you really think that all those people demonstrating against this yob mob shouting, "Get out of our city and don't come back!" are people that hate Britian?"

I didn't refer to every protester.

I referred to the UAF.....do you have comprehension issues?
Fercri Sakes wrote: "So all the other parties except UKIP obviously hate Britain then?" We're talking about the Greens, but any party that supports our membership of the EU and having open borders hates the people of this country. "I'm sorry to break it to you but Fascism is not a British value." How is fascism involved here? "We even had a war about it in the 40's." And we are now 80 years on from that. We even invite Germans and Italians to this country - how weird of us! " Are you still claiming the March For England was a demonstration of British values, like a cup of tea with the vicar or a village fete?" Who mentioned the MFE? I didn't, so I wasn't making any claims about it. However, the aims of the MFE are exactly those of what being English means to most. " Do you really think that all those people demonstrating against this yob mob shouting, "Get out of our city and don't come back!" are people that hate Britian?" I didn't refer to every protester. I referred to the UAF.....do you have comprehension issues? ok,jared
  • Score: -3

11:32am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:

"Churchill and Hitler shared the same religion."

They also had two legs apiece......how stupid do you feel now?

The major flaw in your comparison is that neither was driven by that religion. Hamas and ISIS are.

"ISIS and the IDF indescriminately kill civilians and illegally occupy huge swathes of land they do not own."

Utter rubbish!

The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it.
Fercri Sakes wrote: "Churchill and Hitler shared the same religion." They also had two legs apiece......how stupid do you feel now? The major flaw in your comparison is that neither was driven by that religion. Hamas and ISIS are. "ISIS and the IDF indescriminately kill civilians and illegally occupy huge swathes of land they do not own." Utter rubbish! The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it. ok,jared
  • Score: 7

11:32am Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

Plantpot wrote:
I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.
I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty.

Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.[/p][/quote]I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty. Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are? Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 7

11:38am Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:

"Churchill and Hitler shared the same religion."

They also had two legs apiece......how stupid do you feel now?

The major flaw in your comparison is that neither was driven by that religion. Hamas and ISIS are.

"ISIS and the IDF indescriminately kill civilians and illegally occupy huge swathes of land they do not own."

Utter rubbish!

The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it.
ok,jasred said: "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."

Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless".

What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote: "Churchill and Hitler shared the same religion." They also had two legs apiece......how stupid do you feel now? The major flaw in your comparison is that neither was driven by that religion. Hamas and ISIS are. "ISIS and the IDF indescriminately kill civilians and illegally occupy huge swathes of land they do not own." Utter rubbish! The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it.[/p][/quote]ok,jasred said: "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it." Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites? Fercri Sakes
  • Score: -14

11:43am Fri 29 Aug 14

Plantpot says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
NathanAdler wrote:
Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values.

Vile party.
Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles.

They DON'T want to sell off the NHS to companies that bribe them. They DO want to renationalise the railways to give customers cheaper travel and to copy the success of the state-run East Coast line. They would NOT follow the US into a pointless war because both the President and God told them to. They DO want to make sure that hard working people receive a living wage.

The other parties have sold off most of your British values for a few peices of silver and a future position on the board.

If you disagree with me could you please actually tell me one of these 'British Values' that their manifesto is against? Fairness? Tollerance? Invention? Good luck!
Firstly, please define exactly what British values are?

If elections are anything to go by, what we Brits want is to be left alone by govt. and not to live in some form of collective. We want low taxation, a strong economy and the ability to make something of ourselves regardless of where we start in life.

The Green vision of socialism is that someone has to pay for it, but not us, typical of all socialist agendas. This sort of policy hasn't flown since the 70's, and won't be taking off again in the foreseeable future.

To address the specific points you make, I couldn't care less who runs the NHS as long as the extortionate taxes that I pay are all I continue to pay. As long as the healthcare is of the right quality, who runs it or whether they make a profit is of little concern. BTW, GP's went private many years ago, and many aspects of the NHS have been private for years, including consultants and doctors who divide their time between the NHS and their private practice. Finally, I pay for prescriptions, therefore I could argue that the NHS isn't free at the point of delivery for those that contribute financially to society. Which co.'s bribe the govt. for NHS contracts? Please name names.

Railways - aren't truly privatised, they receive huge subsidies from the taxpayer and impose tight controls on what the franchises can and can't do. Are you suggesting that taxpayers should pay even more to try and reduce travelling costs? Why don't you subsidise my diesel?

The greens will never be in a position thank goodness to decide if we go to war or not, but I respectfully suggest that their first bit of military spending would be a white flag.

Ref the living wage, that's great as long as my taxes don't pay for it and public services and benefits are reduced to cover it.
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values. Vile party.[/p][/quote]Ha ha! Are you mad or brainwashed? The Green Party is based on hate and destroying British values? It's the only party I know willing to stand up for British principles. They DON'T want to sell off the NHS to companies that bribe them. They DO want to renationalise the railways to give customers cheaper travel and to copy the success of the state-run East Coast line. They would NOT follow the US into a pointless war because both the President and God told them to. They DO want to make sure that hard working people receive a living wage. The other parties have sold off most of your British values for a few peices of silver and a future position on the board. If you disagree with me could you please actually tell me one of these 'British Values' that their manifesto is against? Fairness? Tollerance? Invention? Good luck![/p][/quote]Firstly, please define exactly what British values are? If elections are anything to go by, what we Brits want is to be left alone by govt. and not to live in some form of collective. We want low taxation, a strong economy and the ability to make something of ourselves regardless of where we start in life. The Green vision of socialism is that someone has to pay for it, but not us, typical of all socialist agendas. This sort of policy hasn't flown since the 70's, and won't be taking off again in the foreseeable future. To address the specific points you make, I couldn't care less who runs the NHS as long as the extortionate taxes that I pay are all I continue to pay. As long as the healthcare is of the right quality, who runs it or whether they make a profit is of little concern. BTW, GP's went private many years ago, and many aspects of the NHS have been private for years, including consultants and doctors who divide their time between the NHS and their private practice. Finally, I pay for prescriptions, therefore I could argue that the NHS isn't free at the point of delivery for those that contribute financially to society. Which co.'s bribe the govt. for NHS contracts? Please name names. Railways - aren't truly privatised, they receive huge subsidies from the taxpayer and impose tight controls on what the franchises can and can't do. Are you suggesting that taxpayers should pay even more to try and reduce travelling costs? Why don't you subsidise my diesel? The greens will never be in a position thank goodness to decide if we go to war or not, but I respectfully suggest that their first bit of military spending would be a white flag. Ref the living wage, that's great as long as my taxes don't pay for it and public services and benefits are reduced to cover it. Plantpot
  • Score: 3

11:46am Fri 29 Aug 14

Plantpot says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.
I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty.

Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?
Eh?
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.[/p][/quote]I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty. Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?[/p][/quote]Eh? Plantpot
  • Score: -1

11:49am Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."):

"Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". "

Note how he was unable to argue against my point.

"What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?"

Do you know what a UN Resolution is?

It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more.

It certainly has nothing to do with international law.

My pleasure.
Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."): "Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". " Note how he was unable to argue against my point. "What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?" Do you know what a UN Resolution is? It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more. It certainly has nothing to do with international law. My pleasure. ok,jared
  • Score: 2

11:57am Fri 29 Aug 14

robinxx says...

Well done Councillor Buckley. It is good to see that you have decided to engage brain before selecting gear on what would have been a fallacious and contentious decision to second this proposal.
Well done Councillor Buckley. It is good to see that you have decided to engage brain before selecting gear on what would have been a fallacious and contentious decision to second this proposal. robinxx
  • Score: 12

11:58am Fri 29 Aug 14

Plantpot says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.
I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty.

Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?
Police state? On the turps a bit early aren't we? Nationalised railways were a disaster. Living wage, so called, will lead to a lack of competitiveness if applied widely and discourage employers from taking people on. I don't want to be overpaying for goods and services and will go to the most competitive supplier, all other things being equal. Elements of the NHS have been privatised for years.

The renewable energy, fairness, living wage etc. that you talk about are as much a fat cat gravy train industry for someone as their capitalist counterparts, if not more so as non-capitalist enterprises tend to be subsidised and unaccountable. Witness that the Rotherham child sex scandal will lead to very few, if any people actually being held to account. This wouldn't be the case in a corporation.

Of more concern to me is that only 52% of households in this country are net financial contributors to society, yet we have enormous welfare bills. Like it or lump it, the UK needs capitalism more than it needs collectivism, because without private enterprise and wealthy individuals paying enormous sums of tax, we'd be stuffed.
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.[/p][/quote]I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty. Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?[/p][/quote]Police state? On the turps a bit early aren't we? Nationalised railways were a disaster. Living wage, so called, will lead to a lack of competitiveness if applied widely and discourage employers from taking people on. I don't want to be overpaying for goods and services and will go to the most competitive supplier, all other things being equal. Elements of the NHS have been privatised for years. The renewable energy, fairness, living wage etc. that you talk about are as much a fat cat gravy train industry for someone as their capitalist counterparts, if not more so as non-capitalist enterprises tend to be subsidised and unaccountable. Witness that the Rotherham child sex scandal will lead to very few, if any people actually being held to account. This wouldn't be the case in a corporation. Of more concern to me is that only 52% of households in this country are net financial contributors to society, yet we have enormous welfare bills. Like it or lump it, the UK needs capitalism more than it needs collectivism, because without private enterprise and wealthy individuals paying enormous sums of tax, we'd be stuffed. Plantpot
  • Score: 2

12:13pm Fri 29 Aug 14

Goldchrisevans says...

ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."):

"Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". "

Note how he was unable to argue against my point.

"What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?"

Do you know what a UN Resolution is?

It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more.

It certainly has nothing to do with international law.

My pleasure.
Also, please note that the majority of the regimes with votes at the UN are terrible. Going through the alphabet, starting say with Algeria and ending with Zimbabwe, they are mostly kleptocratic and cruel. What makes Cllr Duncan and the Brighton branch of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and it many SWP activist members seem anti-Semitic is that they ignore these terrible regimes and then only demonise Israel. Why don't they want a boycott, say, of the Algerian gas that the UK imports in vast quantities? Not only is the Algerian regime vile but also, burning hydrocarbons is bad for the environment and anti-Green, Innit?
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."): "Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". " Note how he was unable to argue against my point. "What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?" Do you know what a UN Resolution is? It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more. It certainly has nothing to do with international law. My pleasure.[/p][/quote]Also, please note that the majority of the regimes with votes at the UN are terrible. Going through the alphabet, starting say with Algeria and ending with Zimbabwe, they are mostly kleptocratic and cruel. What makes Cllr Duncan and the Brighton branch of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and it many SWP activist members seem anti-Semitic is that they ignore these terrible regimes and then only demonise Israel. Why don't they want a boycott, say, of the Algerian gas that the UK imports in vast quantities? Not only is the Algerian regime vile but also, burning hydrocarbons is bad for the environment and anti-Green, Innit? Goldchrisevans
  • Score: 12

12:47pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

It appears that botcotting Israeli goods etc has a negative effect on Palestinians:

http://www.theargus.
co.uk/opinion/letter
s/11440745._Boycott_
is_wrong_/#commentsf
orm
It appears that botcotting Israeli goods etc has a negative effect on Palestinians: http://www.theargus. co.uk/opinion/letter s/11440745._Boycott_ is_wrong_/#commentsf orm ok,jared
  • Score: -1

12:47pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

It appears that boycotting Israeli goods etc has a negative effect on Palestinians:

http://www.theargus.
co.uk/opinion/letter
s/11440745._Boycott_
is_wrong_/#commentsf
orm
It appears that boycotting Israeli goods etc has a negative effect on Palestinians: http://www.theargus. co.uk/opinion/letter s/11440745._Boycott_ is_wrong_/#commentsf orm ok,jared
  • Score: -5

2:10pm Fri 29 Aug 14

s&k says...

Plantpot wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:
Plantpot wrote: I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.
I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty. Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?
Police state? On the turps a bit early aren't we? Nationalised railways were a disaster. Living wage, so called, will lead to a lack of competitiveness if applied widely and discourage employers from taking people on. I don't want to be overpaying for goods and services and will go to the most competitive supplier, all other things being equal. Elements of the NHS have been privatised for years. The renewable energy, fairness, living wage etc. that you talk about are as much a fat cat gravy train industry for someone as their capitalist counterparts, if not more so as non-capitalist enterprises tend to be subsidised and unaccountable. Witness that the Rotherham child sex scandal will lead to very few, if any people actually being held to account. This wouldn't be the case in a corporation. Of more concern to me is that only 52% of households in this country are net financial contributors to society, yet we have enormous welfare bills. Like it or lump it, the UK needs capitalism more than it needs collectivism, because without private enterprise and wealthy individuals paying enormous sums of tax, we'd be stuffed.
Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few. And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: I have noticed that the Greens have views that they could only have as long as the institutions they despise in this country exist to protect them.[/p][/quote]I agree. I always find that investment in renewable energy, living wages for workers, the NHS and nationalised railways leads to the end of the freedom of speech. It's a logical certainty. Hold on a minute!? Surely it's harder to have views of fairness, equality and the protection of the environment if we slowly turn into a police state, as we currently are?[/p][/quote]Police state? On the turps a bit early aren't we? Nationalised railways were a disaster. Living wage, so called, will lead to a lack of competitiveness if applied widely and discourage employers from taking people on. I don't want to be overpaying for goods and services and will go to the most competitive supplier, all other things being equal. Elements of the NHS have been privatised for years. The renewable energy, fairness, living wage etc. that you talk about are as much a fat cat gravy train industry for someone as their capitalist counterparts, if not more so as non-capitalist enterprises tend to be subsidised and unaccountable. Witness that the Rotherham child sex scandal will lead to very few, if any people actually being held to account. This wouldn't be the case in a corporation. Of more concern to me is that only 52% of households in this country are net financial contributors to society, yet we have enormous welfare bills. Like it or lump it, the UK needs capitalism more than it needs collectivism, because without private enterprise and wealthy individuals paying enormous sums of tax, we'd be stuffed.[/p][/quote]Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few. And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax? s&k
  • Score: 2

2:31pm Fri 29 Aug 14

hursthill says...

As a human rights campaigner & peace activist, who was active in the fight against Apartheid , I call upon Cllr's Duncan & Buckley to demand a boycott of Hamas.

Hamas is a racist homophobic totalitarian terrorist group, alien to all the principals basic to the people of Brighton.

Hamas have in their charter the aim of destroying Israel. We see what they do to their own people , public executions of those with different political beliefs, that is why Israel has the moral & legal right to defend itself.

Could Duncan & Buckley call for a boycott of Syria - the greatest humanitarian disaster in history - according to the UN yesterday - 200000 killed + 3 million refugees.

Also boycotts of Russia, Ukraine, Iraq etc. After they have solved all the world's problems they can deal with more mundane issues in Brighton.
As a human rights campaigner & peace activist, who was active in the fight against Apartheid , I call upon Cllr's Duncan & Buckley to demand a boycott of Hamas. Hamas is a racist homophobic totalitarian terrorist group, alien to all the principals basic to the people of Brighton. Hamas have in their charter the aim of destroying Israel. We see what they do to their own people , public executions of those with different political beliefs, that is why Israel has the moral & legal right to defend itself. Could Duncan & Buckley call for a boycott of Syria - the greatest humanitarian disaster in history - according to the UN yesterday - 200000 killed + 3 million refugees. Also boycotts of Russia, Ukraine, Iraq etc. After they have solved all the world's problems they can deal with more mundane issues in Brighton. hursthill
  • Score: 21

2:34pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

s&k wrote:

"Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few."

So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers?

I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality.

Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything."

" And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?"

It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners.

They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.
s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum. ok,jared
  • Score: -2

3:16pm Fri 29 Aug 14

s&k says...

ok,jared wrote:
s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.
Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.[/p][/quote]Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore? s&k
  • Score: 3

3:23pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

s&k wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.
Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?
So you were unable to counter any of my points.
[quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.[/p][/quote]Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?[/p][/quote]So you were unable to counter any of my points. ok,jared
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Fri 29 Aug 14

s&k says...

ok,jared wrote:
s&k wrote:
ok,jared wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.
Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?
So you were unable to counter any of my points.
http://www.iea.org.u
k/blog/in-praise-of-
trickle-economics
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.[/p][/quote]Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?[/p][/quote]So you were unable to counter any of my points.[/p][/quote]http://www.iea.org.u k/blog/in-praise-of- trickle-economics s&k
  • Score: 2

3:37pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

s&k wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
s&k wrote:
ok,jared wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.
Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?
So you were unable to counter any of my points.
http://www.iea.org.u

k/blog/in-praise-of-

trickle-economics
Still unable to counter my points?

Diddums.
[quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.[/p][/quote]Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?[/p][/quote]So you were unable to counter any of my points.[/p][/quote]http://www.iea.org.u k/blog/in-praise-of- trickle-economics[/p][/quote]Still unable to counter my points? Diddums. ok,jared
  • Score: 2

4:08pm Fri 29 Aug 14

vivelavive says...

Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things! vivelavive
  • Score: -5

4:12pm Fri 29 Aug 14

RootyRoo says...

rogerthefish wrote:
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
Wtf has it got to do with Brighton council and it's residents.
[quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .[/p][/quote]Wtf has it got to do with Brighton council and it's residents. RootyRoo
  • Score: 4

4:16pm Fri 29 Aug 14

s&k says...

ok,jared wrote:
s&k wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
s&k wrote:
ok,jared wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.
Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?
So you were unable to counter any of my points.
http://www.iea.org.u k/blog/in-praise-of- trickle-economics
Still unable to counter my points? Diddums.
What points, diddums? Hope you enjoy spending all that wealth you've accrued from the City bankers, multi nationals, elite families when it finally gets to you.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: s&k wrote: "Really?! You seem to believe in the discredited Thatcherite idea of 'trickle down economics' where the wealth of a few filters down the stratas of society to which we all benefit. In fact that wealth stays in the hands of the few." So rich people only buy their groceries from rich bakers? I'm not sure how many rich bakers there are, but your comment isn't based on reality. Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything." " And do you really believe they pay enormous sums of tax?" It's a fact that high-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.[/p][/quote]Fascinating re-imagining of economics. Do you really believe wealth 'trickles down' or is redistributed? Why do so many multi-nationals off-shore?[/p][/quote]So you were unable to counter any of my points.[/p][/quote]http://www.iea.org.u k/blog/in-praise-of- trickle-economics[/p][/quote]Still unable to counter my points? Diddums.[/p][/quote]What points, diddums? Hope you enjoy spending all that wealth you've accrued from the City bankers, multi nationals, elite families when it finally gets to you. s&k
  • Score: -1

4:16pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? "

There was one.

Have you heard of the Oslo Accords?

"Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank."

It wasn't theirs in the first place.

The area was once part of Judea.

After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967.

The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area.

"Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. "

No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live.

"Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT"

It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance.

My pleasure!
[quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? " There was one. Have you heard of the Oslo Accords? "Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank." It wasn't theirs in the first place. The area was once part of Judea. After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967. The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area. "Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. " No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live. "Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT" It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance. My pleasure! ok,jared
  • Score: 4

4:17pm Fri 29 Aug 14

J_Brightonandhove says...

vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
Vivelavive: -

Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything!

Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians!

It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic
[quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]Vivelavive: - Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything! Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians! It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic J_Brightonandhove
  • Score: 16

4:20pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

"What points, diddums? Hope you enjoy spending all that wealth you've accrued from the City bankers, multi nationals, elite families when it finally gets to you."

The points I raised were:

1) Rich people buy things from poor people.

You had made the claim that the rich pass their money amongst themselves - they don't.

2)Wealth must and does trickle down.

Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything.

3) High-earners pay more in tax than low earners.

They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum.

Those are the three points which I made in response to your claims and which you weren't able to counter.

HTH
"What points, diddums? Hope you enjoy spending all that wealth you've accrued from the City bankers, multi nationals, elite families when it finally gets to you." The points I raised were: 1) Rich people buy things from poor people. You had made the claim that the rich pass their money amongst themselves - they don't. 2)Wealth must and does trickle down. Rich people own companies which employ people, sometimes low-earners. If those companies didn't exist those employees wouldn't be earning anything. 3) High-earners pay more in tax than low earners. They might pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on low-pay, but they contribute a greater sum. Those are the three points which I made in response to your claims and which you weren't able to counter. HTH ok,jared
  • Score: 1

4:42pm Fri 29 Aug 14

Zeta Function says...

Vigilia wrote:
Interesting that her decision should be announced today, the anniversary of the day in the year 70 that the Romans captured Jerusalem leading to the break up of the Jewish State.
Having reestablished their State, they will surrender it to no man.
This is misleading. Before the Romans the different Jewish communities in what is now Israel came under the control of the Abyssinians, Alexander the Great and others. After the Romans, the Byzantine Empire, then the Ottomans followed by the imperial powers of Europe.
[quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: Interesting that her decision should be announced today, the anniversary of the day in the year 70 that the Romans captured Jerusalem leading to the break up of the Jewish State. Having reestablished their State, they will surrender it to no man.[/p][/quote]This is misleading. Before the Romans the different Jewish communities in what is now Israel came under the control of the Abyssinians, Alexander the Great and others. After the Romans, the Byzantine Empire, then the Ottomans followed by the imperial powers of Europe. Zeta Function
  • Score: -4

4:44pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Zeta Function wrote:
Vigilia wrote:
Interesting that her decision should be announced today, the anniversary of the day in the year 70 that the Romans captured Jerusalem leading to the break up of the Jewish State.
Having reestablished their State, they will surrender it to no man.
This is misleading. Before the Romans the different Jewish communities in what is now Israel came under the control of the Abyssinians, Alexander the Great and others. After the Romans, the Byzantine Empire, then the Ottomans followed by the imperial powers of Europe.
But it was the obvious location for a Jewish state were one to be created.
[quote][p][bold]Zeta Function[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: Interesting that her decision should be announced today, the anniversary of the day in the year 70 that the Romans captured Jerusalem leading to the break up of the Jewish State. Having reestablished their State, they will surrender it to no man.[/p][/quote]This is misleading. Before the Romans the different Jewish communities in what is now Israel came under the control of the Abyssinians, Alexander the Great and others. After the Romans, the Byzantine Empire, then the Ottomans followed by the imperial powers of Europe.[/p][/quote]But it was the obvious location for a Jewish state were one to be created. ok,jared
  • Score: 5

5:43pm Fri 29 Aug 14

yifat says...

we in uk,as other European and non-European countries are complicit in gross Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians due to our arming of the IDF and economic support through the favourable trading terms of the EU-Israel Association agreement. At a national level would we accept another EU country committing such abuses without sanction? At a local level the council has a lucrative contract with Veolia for waste management services. Veolia is one of the companies responsible for entrenching an apartheid system in Israel due to its light rail project, that links illegal settlements in the West Bank to Jerusalem.
Brighton should follow the example of other UK councils like Portsmouth, Richmond, West Midlands and Tower Hamlets, among others in excluding Veolia from public procurement processes, even though this would be largely symbolic as, like most large contracts they are tied for many years, in this case 2015.
Furthermore Brighton has an arms factory, Exelis, formerly EDO MBM, that manufactures components used in the aerial bombardment of Gaza.
we in uk,as other European and non-European countries are complicit in gross Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians due to our arming of the IDF and economic support through the favourable trading terms of the EU-Israel Association agreement. At a national level would we accept another EU country committing such abuses without sanction? At a local level the council has a lucrative contract with Veolia for waste management services. Veolia is one of the companies responsible for entrenching an apartheid system in Israel due to its light rail project, that links illegal settlements in the West Bank to Jerusalem. Brighton should follow the example of other UK councils like Portsmouth, Richmond, West Midlands and Tower Hamlets, among others in excluding Veolia from public procurement processes, even though this would be largely symbolic as, like most large contracts they are tied for many years, in this case 2015. Furthermore Brighton has an arms factory, Exelis, formerly EDO MBM, that manufactures components used in the aerial bombardment of Gaza. yifat
  • Score: -15

5:52pm Fri 29 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

At least nobody is suggesting that the councillor should not be able to change their mind. I suppose that is a start.
At least nobody is suggesting that the councillor should not be able to change their mind. I suppose that is a start. HJarrs
  • Score: -3

6:32pm Fri 29 Aug 14

Martha Gunn says...

Jarrs (@5.52) states the obvious.

But when indecision, incoherence and incompetence become the everyday hallmarks of a party - then we all have cause for concern.

This latest dithering is typical of the shambolic administration which has ruined our city.
Jarrs (@5.52) states the obvious. But when indecision, incoherence and incompetence become the everyday hallmarks of a party - then we all have cause for concern. This latest dithering is typical of the shambolic administration which has ruined our city. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 5

7:19pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

yifat wrote:
we in uk,as other European and non-European countries are complicit in gross Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians due to our arming of the IDF and economic support through the favourable trading terms of the EU-Israel Association agreement. At a national level would we accept another EU country committing such abuses without sanction? At a local level the council has a lucrative contract with Veolia for waste management services. Veolia is one of the companies responsible for entrenching an apartheid system in Israel due to its light rail project, that links illegal settlements in the West Bank to Jerusalem.
Brighton should follow the example of other UK councils like Portsmouth, Richmond, West Midlands and Tower Hamlets, among others in excluding Veolia from public procurement processes, even though this would be largely symbolic as, like most large contracts they are tied for many years, in this case 2015.
Furthermore Brighton has an arms factory, Exelis, formerly EDO MBM, that manufactures components used in the aerial bombardment of Gaza.
Run along, sonny, and leave the discussion to the grown-ups.
[quote][p][bold]yifat[/bold] wrote: we in uk,as other European and non-European countries are complicit in gross Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians due to our arming of the IDF and economic support through the favourable trading terms of the EU-Israel Association agreement. At a national level would we accept another EU country committing such abuses without sanction? At a local level the council has a lucrative contract with Veolia for waste management services. Veolia is one of the companies responsible for entrenching an apartheid system in Israel due to its light rail project, that links illegal settlements in the West Bank to Jerusalem. Brighton should follow the example of other UK councils like Portsmouth, Richmond, West Midlands and Tower Hamlets, among others in excluding Veolia from public procurement processes, even though this would be largely symbolic as, like most large contracts they are tied for many years, in this case 2015. Furthermore Brighton has an arms factory, Exelis, formerly EDO MBM, that manufactures components used in the aerial bombardment of Gaza.[/p][/quote]Run along, sonny, and leave the discussion to the grown-ups. ok,jared
  • Score: 3

7:21pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.
I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English. ok,jared
  • Score: 3

7:48pm Fri 29 Aug 14

Fercri Sakes says...

ok,jared wrote:
I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.
Do you change your username because you have to or for just for a lark?

People, "ok,jared" has posted under the "ZeeGeeFFS", "notslimjim" and "Stevo!!". He is a March For England marcher, leaves nasty comments on every suicide story and he doesn't believe in climate change.

He's an angry man who is blaming everyone but himself for his lot in life. He spends all day on here instead of leading a constructive life.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.[/p][/quote]Do you change your username because you have to or for just for a lark? People, "ok,jared" has posted under the "ZeeGeeFFS", "notslimjim" and "Stevo!!". He is a March For England marcher, leaves nasty comments on every suicide story and he doesn't believe in climate change. He's an angry man who is blaming everyone but himself for his lot in life. He spends all day on here instead of leading a constructive life. Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 0

7:53pm Fri 29 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Jarrs (@5.52) states the obvious.

But when indecision, incoherence and incompetence become the everyday hallmarks of a party - then we all have cause for concern.

This latest dithering is typical of the shambolic administration which has ruined our city.
You describe the Conservatives. Never seen a party u turn as much.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Jarrs (@5.52) states the obvious. But when indecision, incoherence and incompetence become the everyday hallmarks of a party - then we all have cause for concern. This latest dithering is typical of the shambolic administration which has ruined our city.[/p][/quote]You describe the Conservatives. Never seen a party u turn as much. HJarrs
  • Score: -2

7:57pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.
Do you change your username because you have to or for just for a lark?

People, "ok,jared" has posted under the "ZeeGeeFFS", "notslimjim" and "Stevo!!". He is a March For England marcher, leaves nasty comments on every suicide story and he doesn't believe in climate change.

He's an angry man who is blaming everyone but himself for his lot in life. He spends all day on here instead of leading a constructive life.
I'm delighted that you admit you don't have any responses for my points and questions from earlier.

My hopes weren't high, of course, but it's always nice to be proven right.
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.[/p][/quote]Do you change your username because you have to or for just for a lark? People, "ok,jared" has posted under the "ZeeGeeFFS", "notslimjim" and "Stevo!!". He is a March For England marcher, leaves nasty comments on every suicide story and he doesn't believe in climate change. He's an angry man who is blaming everyone but himself for his lot in life. He spends all day on here instead of leading a constructive life.[/p][/quote]I'm delighted that you admit you don't have any responses for my points and questions from earlier. My hopes weren't high, of course, but it's always nice to be proven right. ok,jared
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.
Do you change your username because you have to or for just for a lark?

People, "ok,jared" has posted under the "ZeeGeeFFS", "notslimjim" and "Stevo!!". He is a March For England marcher, leaves nasty comments on every suicide story and he doesn't believe in climate change.

He's an angry man who is blaming everyone but himself for his lot in life. He spends all day on here instead of leading a constructive life.
I'm delighted that you admit you don't have any responses for my points and questions from earlier.

My hopes weren't high, of course, but it's always nice to be proven right.
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: I can guarantee that all those who talk about having a Palestinian homeland exclusively for them would be the first to start screaming at anyone who proposed the same for the English.[/p][/quote]Do you change your username because you have to or for just for a lark? People, "ok,jared" has posted under the "ZeeGeeFFS", "notslimjim" and "Stevo!!". He is a March For England marcher, leaves nasty comments on every suicide story and he doesn't believe in climate change. He's an angry man who is blaming everyone but himself for his lot in life. He spends all day on here instead of leading a constructive life.[/p][/quote]I'm delighted that you admit you don't have any responses for my points and questions from earlier. My hopes weren't high, of course, but it's always nice to be proven right. ok,jared
  • Score: 0

8:01pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

This is one post which you failed to address:

Fercri Sakes wrote:

"So all the other parties except UKIP obviously hate Britain then?"

We're talking about the Greens, but any party that supports our membership of the EU and having open borders hates the people of this country.

"I'm sorry to break it to you but Fascism is not a British value."

How is fascism involved here?

"We even had a war about it in the 40's."

And we are now 80 years on from that.

We even invite Germans and Italians to this country - how weird of us!

" Are you still claiming the March For England was a demonstration of British values, like a cup of tea with the vicar or a village fete?"

Who mentioned the MFE?

I didn't, so I wasn't making any claims about it.

However, the aims of the MFE are exactly those of what being English means to most.

" Do you really think that all those people demonstrating against this yob mob shouting, "Get out of our city and don't come back!" are people that hate Britian?"

I didn't refer to every protester.

I referred to the UAF.....do you have comprehension issues?
This is one post which you failed to address: Fercri Sakes wrote: "So all the other parties except UKIP obviously hate Britain then?" We're talking about the Greens, but any party that supports our membership of the EU and having open borders hates the people of this country. "I'm sorry to break it to you but Fascism is not a British value." How is fascism involved here? "We even had a war about it in the 40's." And we are now 80 years on from that. We even invite Germans and Italians to this country - how weird of us! " Are you still claiming the March For England was a demonstration of British values, like a cup of tea with the vicar or a village fete?" Who mentioned the MFE? I didn't, so I wasn't making any claims about it. However, the aims of the MFE are exactly those of what being English means to most. " Do you really think that all those people demonstrating against this yob mob shouting, "Get out of our city and don't come back!" are people that hate Britian?" I didn't refer to every protester. I referred to the UAF.....do you have comprehension issues? ok,jared
  • Score: -1

8:02pm Fri 29 Aug 14

inmegarden says...

ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."):

"Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". "

Note how he was unable to argue against my point.

"What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?"

Do you know what a UN Resolution is?

It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more.

It certainly has nothing to do with international law.

My pleasure.
Wrong!
It is not 'an expression of opinion' .
"Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture.
The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens."
I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."): "Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". " Note how he was unable to argue against my point. "What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?" Do you know what a UN Resolution is? It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more. It certainly has nothing to do with international law. My pleasure.[/p][/quote]Wrong! It is not 'an expression of opinion' . "Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture. The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens." I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image. inmegarden
  • Score: 0

8:09pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

inmegarden wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."):

"Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". "

Note how he was unable to argue against my point.

"What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?"

Do you know what a UN Resolution is?

It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more.

It certainly has nothing to do with international law.

My pleasure.
Wrong!
It is not 'an expression of opinion' .
"Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture.
The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens."
I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.
Nice try, but you've described the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Nothing to do with the United Nations.

Every time I look in the mirror, I see someone who deals in facts.
[quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."): "Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". " Note how he was unable to argue against my point. "What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?" Do you know what a UN Resolution is? It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more. It certainly has nothing to do with international law. My pleasure.[/p][/quote]Wrong! It is not 'an expression of opinion' . "Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture. The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens." I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.[/p][/quote]Nice try, but you've described the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Nothing to do with the United Nations. Every time I look in the mirror, I see someone who deals in facts. ok,jared
  • Score: 2

9:01pm Fri 29 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

ok,jared wrote:
inmegarden wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."):

"Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". "

Note how he was unable to argue against my point.

"What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?"

Do you know what a UN Resolution is?

It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more.

It certainly has nothing to do with international law.

My pleasure.
Wrong!
It is not 'an expression of opinion' .
"Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture.
The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens."
I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.
Nice try, but you've described the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Nothing to do with the United Nations.

Every time I look in the mirror, I see someone who deals in facts.
You wouldn't know a fact if it came up to you, shook you by the hand and told you it was a fact.

Why do you keep changing you name?
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."): "Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". " Note how he was unable to argue against my point. "What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?" Do you know what a UN Resolution is? It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more. It certainly has nothing to do with international law. My pleasure.[/p][/quote]Wrong! It is not 'an expression of opinion' . "Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture. The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens." I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.[/p][/quote]Nice try, but you've described the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Nothing to do with the United Nations. Every time I look in the mirror, I see someone who deals in facts.[/p][/quote]You wouldn't know a fact if it came up to you, shook you by the hand and told you it was a fact. Why do you keep changing you name? HJarrs
  • Score: -1

9:13pm Fri 29 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

HJarrs wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
inmegarden wrote:
ok,jared wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."):

"Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". "

Note how he was unable to argue against my point.

"What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?"

Do you know what a UN Resolution is?

It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more.

It certainly has nothing to do with international law.

My pleasure.
Wrong!
It is not 'an expression of opinion' .
"Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture.
The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens."
I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.
Nice try, but you've described the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Nothing to do with the United Nations.

Every time I look in the mirror, I see someone who deals in facts.
You wouldn't know a fact if it came up to you, shook you by the hand and told you it was a fact.

Why do you keep changing you name?
"You wouldn't know a fact if it came up to you"

So correct my comment about UN Resolutions only being the UN's opinion and not legally enforcible.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: Fercri Sakes wrote ( in response to my comment "The IDF doesn't indiscriminately kill civilians, and any soldier who does goes on trial for it."): "Ha ha, best laugh of the day. You are so blinkered. Have you not seen the news? Even Israelis would laugh at your comment and think, "how naive, bless". " Note how he was unable to argue against my point. "What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Or are they some barmy left-wing organisation full of anti-semites?" Do you know what a UN Resolution is? It is an expression of opinion by the UN, and nothing more. It certainly has nothing to do with international law. My pleasure.[/p][/quote]Wrong! It is not 'an expression of opinion' . "Rules of jus cogens generally require or forbid the state to do particular acts or respect certain rights. However, some define criminal offences which the state must enforce against individuals. Generally included on lists of such norms are prohibitions of such crimes and internationally wrongful acts as waging aggressive war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture. The evidence supporting the emergence of a rule of jus cogens will be essentially similar to that required to establish the creation of a new rule of customary international law. Indeed, jus cogens could be thought of as a special principle of custom with a superadded opinio juris. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed the international public policy aspect of the jus cogens." I presume you look at yourself in the mirror...do you weep?...do you recoil in disgust?... if not, why not?...might it be that the scales of indoctrination blind you to your true image.[/p][/quote]Nice try, but you've described the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Nothing to do with the United Nations. Every time I look in the mirror, I see someone who deals in facts.[/p][/quote]You wouldn't know a fact if it came up to you, shook you by the hand and told you it was a fact. Why do you keep changing you name?[/p][/quote]"You wouldn't know a fact if it came up to you" So correct my comment about UN Resolutions only being the UN's opinion and not legally enforcible. ok,jared
  • Score: 1

11:07pm Fri 29 Aug 14

inmegarden says...

RE: jared@9.13

Please reference;
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/United_Nati
ons_Security_Council
_resolution; "The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter."
Thus a Non-Binding Resolution is "In a house of a legislature, the term non-binding resolution refers to measures that do not become laws. This is used to differentiate those measures from a bill, which is also a resolution in the technical sense. The resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support."
Therefore the UN Resolution against Israel RE aggressive war is legally enforceable. See you and Tony Blair, GW Bush et al in court!
PS What DO you see in the mirror?
RE: jared@9.13 Please reference; http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/United_Nati ons_Security_Council _resolution; "The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter." Thus a Non-Binding Resolution is "In a house of a legislature, the term non-binding resolution refers to measures that do not become laws. This is used to differentiate those measures from a bill, which is also a resolution in the technical sense. The resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support." Therefore the UN Resolution against Israel RE aggressive war is legally enforceable. See you and Tony Blair, GW Bush et al in court! PS What DO you see in the mirror? inmegarden
  • Score: -1

12:47am Sat 30 Aug 14

From beer to uncertainty says...

"Religion and sky pixie worship result in..."

Please could the above words precede headlines about atrocities committed by all the various nutters that use religion to support depravity?
"Religion and sky pixie worship result in..." Please could the above words precede headlines about atrocities committed by all the various nutters that use religion to support depravity? From beer to uncertainty
  • Score: 0

12:49am Sat 30 Aug 14

brighton bluenose says...

hoveguyactually wrote:
"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem."

Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame.

"She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing.

"Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law."

So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?
Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?!
Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!!
[quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: "I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem." Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame. "She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.” Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing. "Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law." So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?[/p][/quote]Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?! Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -14

12:54am Sat 30 Aug 14

brighton bluenose says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values.

Vile party.
Didn't your people murder British soldiers in their attempt to set up the 'Promised Land'?!!
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Whatever views she has changed, it will never detract from the fact her overall politics are based on hate and destroying British values. Vile party.[/p][/quote]Didn't your people murder British soldiers in their attempt to set up the 'Promised Land'?!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -5

1:25am Sat 30 Aug 14

brighton bluenose says...

J_Brightonandhove wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
Vivelavive: -

Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything!

Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians!

It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic
The same as ISIS?!! Don't fall for Israeli lies and propaganda!
[quote][p][bold]J_Brightonandhove[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]Vivelavive: - Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything! Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians! It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic[/p][/quote]The same as ISIS?!! Don't fall for Israeli lies and propaganda! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -14

1:35am Sat 30 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

inmegarden wrote:
RE: jared@9.13

Please reference;
http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/United_Nati

ons_Security_Council

_resolution; "The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter."
Thus a Non-Binding Resolution is "In a house of a legislature, the term non-binding resolution refers to measures that do not become laws. This is used to differentiate those measures from a bill, which is also a resolution in the technical sense. The resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support."
Therefore the UN Resolution against Israel RE aggressive war is legally enforceable. See you and Tony Blair, GW Bush et al in court!
PS What DO you see in the mirror?
When you sober up tomorrow, you'll realise how stupid that post was.
[quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: RE: jared@9.13 Please reference; http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/United_Nati ons_Security_Council _resolution; "The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter." Thus a Non-Binding Resolution is "In a house of a legislature, the term non-binding resolution refers to measures that do not become laws. This is used to differentiate those measures from a bill, which is also a resolution in the technical sense. The resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support." Therefore the UN Resolution against Israel RE aggressive war is legally enforceable. See you and Tony Blair, GW Bush et al in court! PS What DO you see in the mirror?[/p][/quote]When you sober up tomorrow, you'll realise how stupid that post was. ok,jared
  • Score: 0

1:36am Sat 30 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem."

Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame.

"She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing.

"Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law."

So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?
Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?!
Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!!
Oh,don't talk ****, you ignoramus.
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: "I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem." Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame. "She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.” Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing. "Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law." So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?[/p][/quote]Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?! Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!![/p][/quote]Oh,don't talk ****, you ignoramus. ok,jared
  • Score: 0

1:46am Sat 30 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

inmegarden wrote:
RE: jared@9.13

Please reference;
http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/United_Nati

ons_Security_Council

_resolution; "The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter."
Thus a Non-Binding Resolution is "In a house of a legislature, the term non-binding resolution refers to measures that do not become laws. This is used to differentiate those measures from a bill, which is also a resolution in the technical sense. The resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support."
Therefore the UN Resolution against Israel RE aggressive war is legally enforceable. See you and Tony Blair, GW Bush et al in court!
PS What DO you see in the mirror?
Blimey!

When you read that in the morning, you'll wonder what the f*ck drove you to write such utter drivel.
[quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: RE: jared@9.13 Please reference; http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/United_Nati ons_Security_Council _resolution; "The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter." Thus a Non-Binding Resolution is "In a house of a legislature, the term non-binding resolution refers to measures that do not become laws. This is used to differentiate those measures from a bill, which is also a resolution in the technical sense. The resolution is often used to express the body's approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. An example would be a resolution of support for a nation's troops in battle, which carries no legal weight, but is adopted for moral support." Therefore the UN Resolution against Israel RE aggressive war is legally enforceable. See you and Tony Blair, GW Bush et al in court! PS What DO you see in the mirror?[/p][/quote]Blimey! When you read that in the morning, you'll wonder what the f*ck drove you to write such utter drivel. ok,jared
  • Score: -1

2:25am Sat 30 Aug 14

championshipgull says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem."

Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame.

"She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing.

"Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law."

So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?
Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?!
Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!!
It only takes a quick google to find out Hamas lead Gaza has fired thousands of rockets into Israel including in the current conflict 260 rockets from schools, 50 rockets from hospitals & 160 rockets from Mosques (jnnnews.com) To suggest some other extremist group outside the control of Hamas fired them Is absurd
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: "I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem." Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame. "She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.” Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing. "Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law." So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?[/p][/quote]Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?! Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!![/p][/quote]It only takes a quick google to find out Hamas lead Gaza has fired thousands of rockets into Israel including in the current conflict 260 rockets from schools, 50 rockets from hospitals & 160 rockets from Mosques (jnnnews.com) To suggest some other extremist group outside the control of Hamas fired them Is absurd championshipgull
  • Score: 16

2:40am Sat 30 Aug 14

championshipgull says...

Seated here in southern England it can look like the Israelis have over reacted but sitting in southern Israel with rockets being fired at you and then terrorists coming out of tunnels killing your children, maybe I would have thought the same and sent in the troops to stop them.
If Hamas stop firing rockets and sending murderers into Israel, the Israelis will not retaliate and nobody will get killed. Sadly I have now come to the conclusion that Palestinian Hamas are so full of hate and hell bent on destabilizing and ultimately destroying Israel they care little if at all about the lives of the people of Gaza
Seated here in southern England it can look like the Israelis have over reacted but sitting in southern Israel with rockets being fired at you and then terrorists coming out of tunnels killing your children, maybe I would have thought the same and sent in the troops to stop them. If Hamas stop firing rockets and sending murderers into Israel, the Israelis will not retaliate and nobody will get killed. Sadly I have now come to the conclusion that Palestinian Hamas are so full of hate and hell bent on destabilizing and ultimately destroying Israel they care little if at all about the lives of the people of Gaza championshipgull
  • Score: 17

7:28am Sat 30 Aug 14

talbot says...

massacres of GAZA IS THE END OF ISRAEL IS NEAR YOU ARE SONS OF DAVIL FROM TURKEY
massacres of GAZA IS THE END OF ISRAEL IS NEAR YOU ARE SONS OF DAVIL FROM TURKEY talbot
  • Score: -11

9:56am Sat 30 Aug 14

brighton bluenose says...

championshipgull wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem."

Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame.

"She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing.

"Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law."

So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?
Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?!
Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!!
It only takes a quick google to find out Hamas lead Gaza has fired thousands of rockets into Israel including in the current conflict 260 rockets from schools, 50 rockets from hospitals & 160 rockets from Mosques (jnnnews.com) To suggest some other extremist group outside the control of Hamas fired them Is absurd
Did you not read what was written?! The fact, and I repeat - the fact, is that Hamas has not fired rockets into Israel since 2012 - until the present conflagration of course. Various other groups have tried in that period and Hamas has cracked down on these to the point that over the last year or more the average rocket attacks are just five a month not the thousands that you suggest and in 2013 these attacks were at their lowest since 2001!
As for suggesting that no other group are responsible for the rocket attacks in the period I am referring to - ie before the present crisis - then you are woefully ill-informed! The most notable group attempting to carry out these attacks were Islamic Jihad with various splinter groups and offshoots of these - all the foregoing are facts, pure and simple but you won't get that from a biased website such as jnnnews and frankly if you are forming your views after reading such a biased pro-Israel propaganda tool you must be an absolute idiot!!
[quote][p][bold]championshipgull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: "I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem." Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame. "She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.” Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing. "Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law." So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?[/p][/quote]Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?! Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!![/p][/quote]It only takes a quick google to find out Hamas lead Gaza has fired thousands of rockets into Israel including in the current conflict 260 rockets from schools, 50 rockets from hospitals & 160 rockets from Mosques (jnnnews.com) To suggest some other extremist group outside the control of Hamas fired them Is absurd[/p][/quote]Did you not read what was written?! The fact, and I repeat - the fact, is that Hamas has not fired rockets into Israel since 2012 - until the present conflagration of course. Various other groups have tried in that period and Hamas has cracked down on these to the point that over the last year or more the average rocket attacks are just five a month not the thousands that you suggest and in 2013 these attacks were at their lowest since 2001! As for suggesting that no other group are responsible for the rocket attacks in the period I am referring to - ie before the present crisis - then you are woefully ill-informed! The most notable group attempting to carry out these attacks were Islamic Jihad with various splinter groups and offshoots of these - all the foregoing are facts, pure and simple but you won't get that from a biased website such as jnnnews and frankly if you are forming your views after reading such a biased pro-Israel propaganda tool you must be an absolute idiot!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -13

10:55am Sat 30 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

There do seem a lot of bigoted religious/racist zealots posting here - shame that this was not the topic of the original article!

How about if the two sides in the fighting actually sat down together and negotiated a mutually agreeable peaceful settlement rather than each putting their own position and dismissing the opposition as lies - how sad it is that so many that kill do so because they believe it is gods will!

I thought all religions inspired peace and understanding and acceptance that others can have differing views and that killing is wrong.

In general I think religions are a good idea and those that support and work for churches are wonderful people. However, it is those that take religion to extremes to further their own political or financial rewards that ruin any hope of peace as it is in their own selfish interest to ensure peace does not result.
There do seem a lot of bigoted religious/racist zealots posting here - shame that this was not the topic of the original article! How about if the two sides in the fighting actually sat down together and negotiated a mutually agreeable peaceful settlement rather than each putting their own position and dismissing the opposition as lies - how sad it is that so many that kill do so because they believe it is gods will! I thought all religions inspired peace and understanding and acceptance that others can have differing views and that killing is wrong. In general I think religions are a good idea and those that support and work for churches are wonderful people. However, it is those that take religion to extremes to further their own political or financial rewards that ruin any hope of peace as it is in their own selfish interest to ensure peace does not result. G Wiley
  • Score: 3

11:33am Sat 30 Aug 14

Gods Son says...

rogerthefish wrote:
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
It must make you wonder then, why Israel offered Gaza back to Egypt after they lost it in a war and why did Egypt say no thanks? Also its bizarre that Israel offered the West Bank back to Jordan after they also lost it in a war but again the Jordanians, like the Egyptians said no thanks. And why would Israel offer back the Sinai in to Egypt in exchange for peace, which Egypt agreed to...Also why did Israel withdraw completely from Gaza in 2005?

Bizarre land grabbing if you ask me...
[quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .[/p][/quote]It must make you wonder then, why Israel offered Gaza back to Egypt after they lost it in a war and why did Egypt say no thanks? Also its bizarre that Israel offered the West Bank back to Jordan after they also lost it in a war but again the Jordanians, like the Egyptians said no thanks. And why would Israel offer back the Sinai in to Egypt in exchange for peace, which Egypt agreed to...Also why did Israel withdraw completely from Gaza in 2005? Bizarre land grabbing if you ask me... Gods Son
  • Score: 4

12:29pm Sat 30 Aug 14

KENT-S3 says...

rogerthefish wrote:
What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .
Where did this love of the terrorist spring from, Israel have a right to protect themselves from Hamas who are linked to Isis and who we are under threat by in this country. I do wonder about the British sometimes. What the hell planet do you live on?
[quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: What most don't realise this war and previous ones initiated by Israel is just a cover for more land grab, they know exactly what they are doing by slowly suffocating Gaza .[/p][/quote]Where did this love of the terrorist spring from, Israel have a right to protect themselves from Hamas who are linked to Isis and who we are under threat by in this country. I do wonder about the British sometimes. What the hell planet do you live on? KENT-S3
  • Score: 3

12:38pm Sat 30 Aug 14

KENT-S3 says...

I'm truly shocked that so many people seem to be in support of a bunch of idiotic murderers called Hamas who are linked with Isis. If these morons that are a blight on humanity just stopped firing rockets, we wouldn't have to be here listening to all these antisemitic remarks. We are under threat by these monstrous organizations on our very own soil and you think its clever to support a bunch of murdering terrorists, I pity you and your total ignorance.
I'm truly shocked that so many people seem to be in support of a bunch of idiotic murderers called Hamas who are linked with Isis. If these morons that are a blight on humanity just stopped firing rockets, we wouldn't have to be here listening to all these antisemitic remarks. We are under threat by these monstrous organizations on our very own soil and you think its clever to support a bunch of murdering terrorists, I pity you and your total ignorance. KENT-S3
  • Score: 8

1:12pm Sat 30 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

Bluenose wrote:

"The fact, and I repeat - the fact, is that Hamas has not fired rockets into Israel since 2012 - until the present conflagration of course."

There is no evidence that Hamas wasn't involved since 2012.

Indeed, all the listing I can find state that Hamas was involved.

So, it's not a fact' at all.

" Various other groups have tried in that period and Hamas has cracked down on these to the point that over the last year or more the average rocket attacks are just five a month not the thousands that you suggest and in 2013 these attacks were at their lowest since 2001!"

Attacks in 2013 were indeed low.

What you seem to ignore is that these 50-odd missiles should not have been fired in the first place.

Try not to sound so proud of these terrorist scum.
Bluenose wrote: "The fact, and I repeat - the fact, is that Hamas has not fired rockets into Israel since 2012 - until the present conflagration of course." There is no evidence that Hamas wasn't involved since 2012. Indeed, all the listing I can find state that Hamas was involved. So, it's not a fact' at all. " Various other groups have tried in that period and Hamas has cracked down on these to the point that over the last year or more the average rocket attacks are just five a month not the thousands that you suggest and in 2013 these attacks were at their lowest since 2001!" Attacks in 2013 were indeed low. What you seem to ignore is that these 50-odd missiles should not have been fired in the first place. Try not to sound so proud of these terrorist scum. ok,jared
  • Score: 6

3:19pm Sat 30 Aug 14

Gods Son says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
J_Brightonandhove wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
Vivelavive: -

Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything!

Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians!

It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic
The same as ISIS?!! Don't fall for Israeli lies and propaganda!
"The same as ISIS?!! Don't fall for Israeli lies and propaganda!"

So prey tell if its all lies and propaganda, how do they differ? Please explain.
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J_Brightonandhove[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]Vivelavive: - Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything! Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians! It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic[/p][/quote]The same as ISIS?!! Don't fall for Israeli lies and propaganda![/p][/quote]"The same as ISIS?!! Don't fall for Israeli lies and propaganda!" So prey tell if its all lies and propaganda, how do they differ? Please explain. Gods Son
  • Score: 3

3:38pm Sun 31 Aug 14

ok,jared says...

To all those idiots who believe that a UN Resolution is a legally-binding act, here's what the the UN says on the matter:

"The General Assembly is the central organ. This is where all 191 Member States can gather to discuss the pressing problems of our times, most of which involve many countries or continents and therefore require international cooperation. The General Assembly is not a world government - its resolutions are not legally binding upon Member States. However, through its recommendations it can focus world attention on important issues, generate international cooperation and, in some cases, its decisions can lead to legally binding treaties and conventions. "

http://www.un.org/pu
bs/cyberschoolbus/un
tour/subgen.htm

So I was right all along.....as usual.
To all those idiots who believe that a UN Resolution is a legally-binding act, here's what the the UN says on the matter: "The General Assembly is the central organ. This is where all 191 Member States can gather to discuss the pressing problems of our times, most of which involve many countries or continents and therefore require international cooperation. The General Assembly is not a world government - its resolutions are not legally binding upon Member States. However, through its recommendations it can focus world attention on important issues, generate international cooperation and, in some cases, its decisions can lead to legally binding treaties and conventions. " http://www.un.org/pu bs/cyberschoolbus/un tour/subgen.htm So I was right all along.....as usual. ok,jared
  • Score: 5

2:03pm Mon 1 Sep 14

vivelavive says...

ok,jared wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? "

There was one.

Have you heard of the Oslo Accords?

"Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank."

It wasn't theirs in the first place.

The area was once part of Judea.

After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967.

The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area.

"Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. "

No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live.

"Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT"

It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance.

My pleasure!
The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established.
The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist.
Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists.
Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT!
Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent.
The pleasure is all mine.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? " There was one. Have you heard of the Oslo Accords? "Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank." It wasn't theirs in the first place. The area was once part of Judea. After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967. The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area. "Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. " No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live. "Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT" It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance. My pleasure![/p][/quote]The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established. The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist. Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists. Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT! Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent. The pleasure is all mine. vivelavive
  • Score: 0

2:03pm Mon 1 Sep 14

vivelavive says...

ok,jared wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? "

There was one.

Have you heard of the Oslo Accords?

"Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank."

It wasn't theirs in the first place.

The area was once part of Judea.

After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967.

The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area.

"Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. "

No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live.

"Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT"

It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance.

My pleasure!
The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established.
The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist.
Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists.
Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT!
Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent.
The pleasure is all mine.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? " There was one. Have you heard of the Oslo Accords? "Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank." It wasn't theirs in the first place. The area was once part of Judea. After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967. The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area. "Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. " No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live. "Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT" It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance. My pleasure![/p][/quote]The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established. The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist. Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists. Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT! Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent. The pleasure is all mine. vivelavive
  • Score: 2

2:04pm Mon 1 Sep 14

vivelavive says...

ok,jared wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? "

There was one.

Have you heard of the Oslo Accords?

"Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank."

It wasn't theirs in the first place.

The area was once part of Judea.

After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967.

The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area.

"Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. "

No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live.

"Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT"

It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance.

My pleasure!
The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established.
The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist.
Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists.
Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT!
Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent.
The pleasure is all mine.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? " There was one. Have you heard of the Oslo Accords? "Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank." It wasn't theirs in the first place. The area was once part of Judea. After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967. The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area. "Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. " No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live. "Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT" It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance. My pleasure![/p][/quote]The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established. The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist. Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists. Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT! Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent. The pleasure is all mine. vivelavive
  • Score: 1

2:04pm Mon 1 Sep 14

vivelavive says...

ok,jared wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? "

There was one.

Have you heard of the Oslo Accords?

"Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank."

It wasn't theirs in the first place.

The area was once part of Judea.

After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967.

The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area.

"Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. "

No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live.

"Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT"

It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance.

My pleasure!
The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established.
The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist.
Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists.
Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT!
Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent.
The pleasure is all mine.
[quote][p][bold]ok,jared[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]"So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? " There was one. Have you heard of the Oslo Accords? "Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank." It wasn't theirs in the first place. The area was once part of Judea. After 1947, it was deemed to be an Arab state but was immediately over-run by Jordan, who lost it to Israel in 1967. The West Bank has never been a Palestinian-owned area. "Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. " No, peace to the Israelis means no-one shelling Israel, and everyone getting along, no matter which of the three areas they live. "Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence' given what I have written above is FACT" It wasn't 'fact', as I just pointed out - it was ignorance. My pleasure![/p][/quote]The Oslo Accords did not settle anything. No Palestinian state was established. The West Bank was set aside as part of a Palestinian state in the same UN Resolution that created the state of Israel. Therefore in denying the Palestinians' right to this land you undermine the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist. Palestinians didn't move en-masse to a Jewish land and start aggressively settling it backed up with Western arms and financial and political support. This conflict was not chosen by the Palestinians but forced on them by American and European colonists. Continuing growth of settlements in the West Bank proves my argument as FACT! Now I am not generally one for name calling but seeing as you started this I would like you to now that you are a bigoted thug. I don't believe that you are ignorant. I think you know that what I say is FACT but this makes you uncomfortable. It is easier to be rude than intelligent. The pleasure is all mine. vivelavive
  • Score: -4

2:22pm Mon 1 Sep 14

vivelavive says...

J_Brightonandhove wrote:
vivelavive wrote:
Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things!
Vivelavive: -

Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything!

Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians!

It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic
A lunatic?
You are clearly a very simple minded creature. Why else would you be looking at a 70 year conflict in such narrow terms. None of this has anything to do with Israel defending itself from rockets. It is about the Palestinians resisting a military occupation of their territory. Israel reaps what it sows. Palestinian resistance is nothing like ISIS or Boko Haram or Al Qaeda. They have a legitimate grievance and every right to resist Israeli aggression. And as for your nonsense about beheadings and lack of democracy etc, I hope you are not seriously arguing that it is OK to kill people on a massive scale including women and children because they do not share the same value system as you!?
[quote][p][bold]J_Brightonandhove[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vivelavive[/bold] wrote: Convenient how Hamas is now the sticking point and obstacle to piece. "The Hamas charter says blah blah blah.....". So why no settlement with the Palestinians before the arrival of Hamas? Oh wait! Of course. Because the Palestinians will not given up the West Bank. Israel's long-term goal has always been the annexation of the West Bank. All the lies and propaganda won't wash. Nor will shouting people down by calling them Jew haters. Peace for Israel means the Palestinians giving up all claim to their homeland and living as second class citizens in their own home. Or even better melting away into diaspora. Now all you lot out there defending 'Israel's right to self-defence'; given what I have written above is FACT, tell me how you would respond if put in the same position. Bitterness and shame are dreadful things![/p][/quote]Vivelavive: - Hamas are a TERRORIST organisation. What has bitterness and shame got to do with anything?! How can you possibly stand up for an organisation that doesn't believe in democracy, in equal rights for women, believes in executions and stoning its own people, has no legal system and no right to fair trial? They also believe in the Destruction of Israel therefore they WANT to murder all Israeli civilians! You have written nothing above that changes anything! Hamas FIRED ROCKETS in to Israel before Israel retaliated and has every right to defend itself! Every ceasefire so far has been broken by the further firing of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians! It astounds me that you'd support such a vile organisation. They're the same as ISIS, IS etc. and you're happy for that to spread around the middle east? You're an absolute lunatic[/p][/quote]A lunatic? You are clearly a very simple minded creature. Why else would you be looking at a 70 year conflict in such narrow terms. None of this has anything to do with Israel defending itself from rockets. It is about the Palestinians resisting a military occupation of their territory. Israel reaps what it sows. Palestinian resistance is nothing like ISIS or Boko Haram or Al Qaeda. They have a legitimate grievance and every right to resist Israeli aggression. And as for your nonsense about beheadings and lack of democracy etc, I hope you are not seriously arguing that it is OK to kill people on a massive scale including women and children because they do not share the same value system as you!? vivelavive
  • Score: -3

11:30pm Mon 1 Sep 14

ARMANA says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
hoveguyactually wrote:
"I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem."

Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame.

"She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.”

Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing.

"Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law."

So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?
Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?!
Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!!
Still the same old bolxxx brown nose, Yea im back, !!
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: "I feel that pressure must be brought to bear upon the main perpetrators of recent and ongoing violence – the Israeli government – for their decisions being made in contravention of international law, their use of force against civilians, and their disregard of basic human rights as recorded by independent organisations such as B’Tselem." Sorry, madam, but the main perpetrators are Hamas, who have been firing rockets into Israel for years, following their intention to destroy the country. The more they continue to do so, the more Israel will respond. Why are so many people blind to the obvious? Or does prejudice really lie behind their comments. The sub-text, as always, is that the Jews are to blame. "She said the aims of the BDS movement – ending Israeli occupation, equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and protect the right of return for Palestinian refugees – were “quite clearly not anti-Semitic.” Oh yes, the right of return to commit acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombing. "Coun Duncan, an independent after being suspended from the Green Party over a Tweet, says he wants the council to show its support for international law." So if he was suspended, why is anyone paying any attention to what he has to say?[/p][/quote]Do you actually believe the rubbish that you write or are you just completely thick?! Hamas hasn't been 'firing rockets into Israel for years' and to say so is just ill-informed nonsense - the FACT is that Hamas hasn't fired a rocket since 2012 and has cracked down on other extremist groups attempts at firing them too!![/p][/quote]Still the same old bolxxx brown nose, Yea im back, !! ARMANA
  • Score: 2
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree