Unbottling the debate over Brighton’s Ecostream store (From The Argus)

Congratulations to the Argus on a fair & balanced article.

Let's hope the Police follow the advise of Caroline Lucas & arrest anyone who engages in "aggresive harrassement".

As this article explains, this new shop is good news for Brighton, Israel & the Palestinians.

Isreali factory in occupied territory - what was there before? Houses, gardens parks?

Spx wrote:
Isreali factory in occupied territory - what was there before? Houses, gardens parks?

Dust, sand, rocks, bushes.

Naturally the factory has made the desert green! Another colonial myth

tonygreenstein wrote:
Naturally the factory has made the desert green! Another colonial myth

Mind how you go, Tony...

Great article. It's about time someone visited the factory and spoke to the Palestinian workers to find out what they think about working for Eco Stream. It rather gives lie to the rantings of the anti Israeli protestors, who maintain there are no Palestinians in managerial roles in the factory, that they all work there because they have no choice and the best thing would be to plunge them all back into poverty by closing the factory. Drinks all round on Eco Stream?

tonygreenstein wrote:
Naturally the factory has made the desert green! Another colonial myth

"She said: “My work in the constituency and in Parliament takes priority and I do not have the capacity to make such a trip at present. “I have visited Israel and Palestine on a number of occasions, on both official delegations and other trips, and seen for myself the realities of life on the ground. ".....

In other words "I only see what I want to see, and will not entertain another viewpoint, as it may be different from my own" Typical of the Watermelon Party, and bleeding hearts in general.

I have the right to go about my lawful business in Brighton. I do not expect to be prevented to go into a shop of my choice by people who do not know what is going on in another country, other than inaccuracies being fed to them by people who have an anti Israel agenda. Being told that I am a 'butcher' by the pro Palestinian lobby because I want to be eco friendly is utter ignorance by these protesters. They do not know who I am, what my religious persuasion is! I may well be a BNP supporter, who wants to buy recyclable products! Give it a rest you ignorant people and let the citizens of Brighton and Hove and the people who visit go about their lawful business! However much you protest, Soda Stream is staying in Brighton. note: I am not employed by the company, neither am I a relative of anyone who works there or of anyone who owns the store. I am just a customer who is fed up with the ignorance of a bunch of small minded, easily led, sheeple.

When a company pays for a member of the press to visit their factory, the reporter see ONLY what that company wants them to see.

Your readers aren't that naive or stupid.

I'm certain that a draft of the article was sent to SodaStream before publication for approval.

Bill Board wrote:
When a company pays for a member of the press to visit their factory, the reporter see ONLY what that company wants them to see.

Your readers aren't that naive or stupid.

I'm certain that a draft of the article was sent to SodaStream before publication for approval.

How naive are you, coming on here trying to distract people away from the truth.

Its simple, the shop should be allowed to trade without harassment from a disheveled and scruffy miscreant group, who seem to have forgotten that this is Brighton, England.

There is such thing as freedom of the press...of course the article wasn't trimmed to suit the Soda-Stream ethos, or awaited their approval before it could be printed...nice try to feed any sort of info that detracts from the truth because it doesn't fit in with your biased views...

It must be a bit of a shock to understand that what you are doing by protesting against this shop in Brighton...doesn't help the Palestinians one bit, and is just another annoyance to the people in Brighton....and it must be an even bigger shock to know that despite all the posturing, nothing your protesting does will stop the shop...another Ahava is not going to happen.
So please do us all a favour and pack up and go home. Thanks.

"Another Ahava isn't going to happen."

Wanna bet?

In the UK we have a right to protest injustice and its only a matter of time before EcoStream's history.

Doesn't help the Palestinians? Then read the 2005 call for BDS by Palestinian Civil Society.

The article is SodaStream Propaganda.

This same tactic was also tried by apartheid South Africa and other nameless racist regimes throughout the 20th Century.

Bill Board wrote:
When a company pays for a member of the press to visit their factory, the reporter see ONLY what that company wants them to see.

Your readers aren't that naive or stupid.

I'm certain that a draft of the article was sent to SodaStream before publication for approval.

What an insult to John Keenan and the Palestinian family he stayed with. Eco Stream would have given him the freedom to talk to anyone he wanted and ask any questions he chose. Perhaps you think the photo of the Palestinian workers was doctored as well. After all, they actually look, oh no I can't believe it, happy.

Bill Board wrote:
"Another Ahava isn't going to happen."

Wanna bet?

In the UK we have a right to protest injustice and its only a matter of time before EcoStream's history.

Doesn't help the Palestinians? Then read the 2005 call for BDS by Palestinian Civil Society.

The article is SodaStream Propaganda.

This same tactic was also tried by apartheid South Africa and other nameless racist regimes throughout the 20th Century.

Oh be quiet, no one cares, this is Brighton

To the members of the BDS particularly Mr Greenstein; who is it that you think your helping.? Your concern for the Palestinian workers in Mishoe Adumim was 'admirable' however they don't want your help!! Enough is enough, you have strong views about the Israeli/Palestinian problem and that is another story (and protest) In this particular case, at this store, on this situation, on this Saturday your protest is not wanted nor needed! Please dont bother coming to Ecostream on Saturday, your protest is misguided and foolish.

hursthill wrote:
Congratulations to the Argus on a fair & balanced article.

Let's hope the Police follow the advise of Caroline Lucas & arrest anyone who engages in "aggresive harrassement".

As this article explains, this new shop is good news for Brighton, Israel & the Palestinians.

Totally agree. Well put.

Bill board writes of racist regimes and, by implication, has the singular lack of klnowledge to term Israel as one of them. How sad and ignorant. Hadn't he even read the article in which it states that the Sodastream factory the journalist visited, employs '442 Palestinians, 237 Israeli Arabs and 107 Israel-born Jews'.

Someone would have to be unspeakably moronic or very badly educated not to know that Arabs make up the vast majority of staff, are paid three times the regional average, and are clearly content with this. There is no official racism in Israel, and certainly no apartheid. There is discrimination. Now, take a deep breath and tell me of every country (especially Arab countries) that has discrimination. All of them? Almost. So, why blackguard Israel with this epithet? Because they are mostly Jews? That's how it looks to me. When you get rid of your own prejudice perhaps you can comment on Israel's.

Dabthirtyfive wrote:
Great article. It's about time someone visited the factory and spoke to the Palestinian workers to find out what they think about working for Eco Stream. It rather gives lie to the rantings of the anti Israeli protestors, who maintain there are no Palestinians in managerial roles in the factory, that they all work there because they have no choice and the best thing would be to plunge them all back into poverty by closing the factory. Drinks all round on Eco Stream?

Completely agree.

Lucas will be upset her anti Israeli position has shown to be either very badly informed or just plain bigoted.

"This is not to say that the daily grind of checkpoints and hassle is not corrosive."

“We hate the occupation. But we like our jobs.”

These are the only small nods to any meaningful wider context about the situation of a land under occupation.

Shockingly blinkered and biased journalism which demands a right to reply from people who are suffering greatly from the occupation and illegal settlements. But then what would one expect - not exactly independent investigative journalism.

Bill Board wrote:
"Another Ahava isn't going to happen."

Wanna bet?

In the UK we have a right to protest injustice and its only a matter of time before EcoStream's history.

Doesn't help the Palestinians? Then read the 2005 call for BDS by Palestinian Civil Society.

The article is SodaStream Propaganda.

This same tactic was also tried by apartheid South Africa and other nameless racist regimes throughout the 20th Century.

You wanting Eco Stream to be history, doesn't mean its going to happen. It's not one little shop that you have the power to close down. It's part of a large chain and you can protest all you like, it means nothing to them. You are of no consequence.

I'm sure SodaStream didn't invite Keegan to Bil'in, Sheikh Jarrah, Silwan, Hebron, etc...

Keegan only saw what SodaStream wanted him to see. Goebbels would of been proud of him.

EcoStream has about as much legality as a crack house and it will disappear sooner rather than later.

Completely agree.

Thankyou Argus for a factual article.

Many Israeli companies employ Palestians and Israeli Arabs as well as Jewish Israelis.

gaz scott wrote:
"This is not to say that the daily grind of checkpoints and hassle is not corrosive."

“We hate the occupation. But we like our jobs.”

These are the only small nods to any meaningful wider context about the situation of a land under occupation.

Shockingly blinkered and biased journalism which demands a right to reply from people who are suffering greatly from the occupation and illegal settlements. But then what would one expect - not exactly independent investigative journalism.

Then perhaps you should ask Eco Stream to give you free access to the factory so you could do your own investigations. I'm sure they would be only too happy to accommodate you.. So what's stopping you putting your money where your mouth is?

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

Bill Board wrote:
"Another Ahava isn't going to happen."

Wanna bet?

In the UK we have a right to protest injustice and its only a matter of time before EcoStream's history.

Doesn't help the Palestinians? Then read the 2005 call for BDS by Palestinian Civil Society.

The article is SodaStream Propaganda.

This same tactic was also tried by apartheid South Africa and other nameless racist regimes throughout the 20th Century.

You wanting Eco Stream to be history, doesn't mean its going to happen. It's not one little shop that you have the power to close down. It's part of a large chain and you can protest all you like, it means nothing to them. You are of no consequence.

So then why exactly are they flying local reporters to their factory to write articles?

If the protests were of no consequence this wouldn't have happened nor would counter-protesters be mobilising every week including some from outside Brighton.

But we will continue the protests and the people of Brighton can make their own choice.

gaz scott wrote:
"This is not to say that the daily grind of checkpoints and hassle is not corrosive."

“We hate the occupation. But we like our jobs.”

These are the only small nods to any meaningful wider context about the situation of a land under occupation.

Shockingly blinkered and biased journalism which demands a right to reply from people who are suffering greatly from the occupation and illegal settlements. But then what would one expect - not exactly independent investigative journalism.

Most of the checkpoints were put in place as a response to suicide bombing. It has helped reduce deaths and injuries by over 90%.

Don't think the Israelis can be blamed for taking that decision.

gaz scott wrote:

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

Bill Board wrote:
"Another Ahava isn't going to happen."

Wanna bet?

In the UK we have a right to protest injustice and its only a matter of time before EcoStream's history.

Doesn't help the Palestinians? Then read the 2005 call for BDS by Palestinian Civil Society.

The article is SodaStream Propaganda.

This same tactic was also tried by apartheid South Africa and other nameless racist regimes throughout the 20th Century.

You wanting Eco Stream to be history, doesn't mean its going to happen. It's not one little shop that you have the power to close down. It's part of a large chain and you can protest all you like, it means nothing to them. You are of no consequence.

So then why exactly are they flying local reporters to their factory to write articles?

If the protests were of no consequence this wouldn't have happened nor would counter-protesters be mobilising every week including some from outside Brighton.

But we will continue the protests and the people of Brighton can make their own choice.

They fly people out to show they have nothing to hide... And as I said before, put your money where your mouth is and go out to the factory yourself..ask to have free access.. Speak to the Palestinians. If you're not prepared to do that, you have no basis on which to comment.

I've explained on an earlier thread in great detail why I think that is a silly suggestion and I've no intention of repeating myself. I have also since learned that there are activists who have tried to speak to people who work there but have been denied access to workers for a number of years.

Bill Board wrote:
"Another Ahava isn't going to happen."

Wanna bet?

In the UK we have a right to protest injustice and its only a matter of time before EcoStream's history.

Doesn't help the Palestinians? Then read the 2005 call for BDS by Palestinian Civil Society.

The article is SodaStream Propaganda.

This same tactic was also tried by apartheid South Africa and other nameless racist regimes throughout the 20th Century.

Yep...I'd bet on it.

In fact I would bank on Ecostream spreading across the UK as people catch on to this new concept in marketing.

Sure some Palestinian groups might have called on the BDS for help, probably because of the way the BDS was marketed for them..but I bet the man in the street who just wants to get on with his life and provide for his family would not support something that is an outrageous own goal...The BDS need and seek out Palestinian compliance...but the Palestinians sure don't need them.

As for the tired old apartheid comparisons with South Africa, they just don't have a ring of truth to them, and as someone has already pointed out, there are major domestic problems within the whole of Israel...but they are trying their hardest to sort it out ethically and morally.

Why not ring up the journalists from the Argus who went over to Israel...I spoke to a company executive from Soda-Stream, and he said they had absolute free reign to go wherever they wanted and to ask any questions they wanted.

I would be interested myself to know if they asked the Palestinians working there, and others living locally, if they were encouraged to know demonstrations were going on in Brighton on their behalf to try and get the shop shut down...personally I would have asked some substantially more telling questions than what we have been privy to thus far, but maybe they are holding those in reserve for a further article.

But the long and short of it is that the people demonstrating outside the shop seem more concerned with continuing their demands, than actually seeing they are not helping the people they say are being exploited...in fact they appear to be exploiting the situation for their own ends, and even if the hare is taken away they will still continue to race around the track.

Well done John Keenan for providing this oasis of sanity in the midst of BDS distortion and rhetoric. One doesn't need to read a single word... as the photograph says it all. Conditions look great... and the workforce are happy.

The protesters now clearly have nothing to protest about, unless of course it is the government's austerity measures at home, the reason they were not protesting last Saturday.

Bill Bored and Gaz Scott, you are rebels without a cause.

gaz scott wrote:
I've explained on an earlier thread in great detail why I think that is a silly suggestion and I've no intention of repeating myself. I have also since learned that there are activists who have tried to speak to people who work there but have been denied access to workers for a number of years.

I've no idea what you've said about going out there, on a previous thread, so I'm afraid I'm in the dark. I'm afraid I don't believe you when you say that activists have gone out to the factory and been denied access to the workers. Theyre not prisoners. Every one of them is free to speak about Eco Stream as they wish and the fact is they are all very happy with the situation. Wouldnt you be if you could earn enough in one year to buy a house. I think they would all be a darned sight unhappier if they lost their jobs because of your interference. I repeat, Eco Stream is willing for anyone to visit. I repeat, put your money where your mouth is.

John Keenan had an expenses paid trip to the factory and wrote what he was told. He didn't write that the independent trade union in Israel, that organises both Palestinian and Israeli Jewish workers, had to take them to court a few years ago to get them to pay the minimum wage.

Or that trade union representatives or workers who join unions are sacked.

I spoke to John Keenan and he made it clear that he opposed the Boycott of South Africa.

People also went to Nazi Germany at the time and came back full of glowing reports.

Some people are willing to see anything that they wish to see and disregard the rest. That is what Keenan has done and of course the Israel propaganda puppets will nod accordingly.

There were those who approved of slavery in its time on similar grounds. And we all know, or should know of Uncle Tom's cabin. All nations produce quislings and you'll of course find a Palestinian with nothing but praise for a company that is established on land from which the Bedouin has been driven off and relocated to a shanty town.

Fact is that it is the Palestinians who want us to Boycott the store and the protest will continue, despite having bought off one tame reporter.

That the Christian Fundamentalist Goyboy is supportive of Sodastream is no surprise. In years gone by they were supportive of segregation in the American Deep South too!

The Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU) is the Palestinians’ biggest national union grouping and it is the only Palestinian union grouping affiliated to the International Trade Union Confederation.

The PGFTU has long held out against officially supporting a boycott of West Bank settlements, despite constant pressure from radical forces within the PA and from within the union movement abroad. On 5 December 2010 PGFTU President Shahir Sa’ad announced that Palestinians employed in settlements will not give up their jobs until the Palestinian Authority provides alternative work. The PGFTU leadership understands that what is needed is practical support for efforts to build bridges between Israeli and Palestinian workers and their unions, not boycotts that drive them apart.

Fact is the majority of Palestinians don't want this boycott.

Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis.

http://azvsas.blogsp
ot.co.uk/2012/10/sur
vey-most-israeli-jew
s-would-support.html


Survey: Most Israeli Jews would support apartheid regime in Israel


Survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews
By Gideon Levy | Oct.23, 2012
It's called co-existence!


Palestinians waiting to cross through the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus. Photo by Nir Kafri
Most of the Jewish public in Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it formally annexes the West Bank.
Just change 'Arabs' to 'Jews' and go back 70 years
A majority also explicitly favors discrimination against the state's Arab citizens, a survey shows.

The survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews. The survey was commissioned by the Yisraela Goldblum Fund and is based on a sample of 503 interviewees.
Like the Hitler Youth - they get 'em young
The questions were written by a group of academia-based peace and civil rights activists. Dialog is headed by Tel Aviv University Prof. Camil Fuchs.

The majority of the Jewish public, 59 percent, wants preference for Jews over Arabs in admission to jobs in government ministries. Almost half the Jews, 49 percent, want the state to treat Jewish citizens better than Arab ones; 42 percent don't want to live in the same building with Arabs and 42 percent don't want their children in the same class with Arab children.
A right-wing demonstrator holding a sign that reads 'The Land of Israel for the People of Israel' during a protest in 2009. Photo by Emil Salman / Jini
A third of the Jewish public wants a law barring Israeli Arabs from voting for the Knesset and a large majority of 69 percent objects to giving 2.5 million Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank.
It's another way of saying 'Shalom'
A sweeping 74 percent majority is in favor of separate roads for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank. A quarter - 24 percent - believe separate roads are "a good situation" and 50 percent believe they are "a necessary situation."
Almost half - 47 percent - want part of Israel's Arab population to be transferred to the Palestinian Authority and 36 percent support transferring some of the Arab towns from Israel to the PA, in exchange for keeping some of the West Bank settlements.
Although the territories have not been annexed, most of the Jewish public (58 percent ) already believes Israel practices apartheid against Arabs. Only 31 percent think such a system is not in force here. Over a third (38 percent ) of the Jewish public wants Israel to annex the territories with settlements on them, while 48 percent object.
You can't fool an Israeli soldier when it comes to spotting terrorists
The survey distinguishes among the various communities in Israeli society - secular, observant, religious, ultra-Orthodox and former Soviet immigrants. The ultra-Orthodox, in contrast to those who described themselves as religious or observant, hold the most extreme positions against the Palestinians. An overwhelming majority (83 percent ) of Haredim are in favor of segregated roads and 71 percent are in favor of transfer.

The ultra-Orthodox are also the most anti-Arab group - 70 percent of them support legally barring Israeli Arabs from voting, 82 percent support preferential treatment from the state toward Jews, and 95 percent are in favor of discrimination against Arabs in admission to workplaces.

The group classifying itself as religious is the second most anti-Arab. New immigrants from former Soviet states are closer in their views of the Palestinians to secular Israelis, and are far less radical than the religious and Haredi groups. However, the number of people who answered "don't know" in the "Russian" community was higher than in any other.

The Russians register the highest rate of satisfaction with life in Israel (77 percent ) and the secular Israelis the lowest - only 63 percent. On average, 69 percent of Israelis are satisfied with life in Israel.

Secular Israelis appear to be the least racist - 68 percent of them would not mind having Arab neighbors in their apartment building, 73 percent would not mind Arab students in their children's class and 50 percent believe Arabs should not be discriminated against in admission to workplaces.

The survey indicates that a third to half of Jewish Israelis want to live in a state that practices formal, open discrimination against its Arab citizens. An even larger majority wants to live in an apartheid state if Israel annexes the territories.

The survey conductors say perhaps the term "apartheid" was not clear enough to some interviewees. However, the interviewees did not object strongly to describing Israel's character as "apartheid" already today, without annexing the territories. Only 31 percent objected to calling Israel an "apartheid state" and said "there's no apartheid at all."

In contrast, 39 percent believe apartheid is practiced "in a few fields"; 19 percent believe "there's apartheid in many fields" and 11 percent do not know.

The "Russians," as the survey calls them, display the most objection to classifying their new country as an apartheid state. A third of them - 35 percent - believe Israel practices no apartheid at all, compared to 28 percent of the secular and ultra-Orthodox communities, 27 percent of the religious and 30 percent of the observant Jews who hold that view. Altogether, 58 percent of all the groups believe Israel practices apartheid "in a few fields" or "in many fields," while 11 percent don't know.

tonygreenstein wrote:
Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis.

http://azvsas.blogsp

ot.co.uk/2012/10/sur

vey-most-israeli-jew

s-would-support.html



Survey: Most Israeli Jews would support apartheid regime in Israel


Survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews
By Gideon Levy | Oct.23, 2012
It's called co-existence!


Palestinians waiting to cross through the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus. Photo by Nir Kafri
Most of the Jewish public in Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it formally annexes the West Bank.
Just change 'Arabs' to 'Jews' and go back 70 years
A majority also explicitly favors discrimination against the state's Arab citizens, a survey shows.

The survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews. The survey was commissioned by the Yisraela Goldblum Fund and is based on a sample of 503 interviewees.
Like the Hitler Youth - they get 'em young
The questions were written by a group of academia-based peace and civil rights activists. Dialog is headed by Tel Aviv University Prof. Camil Fuchs.

The majority of the Jewish public, 59 percent, wants preference for Jews over Arabs in admission to jobs in government ministries. Almost half the Jews, 49 percent, want the state to treat Jewish citizens better than Arab ones; 42 percent don't want to live in the same building with Arabs and 42 percent don't want their children in the same class with Arab children.
A right-wing demonstrator holding a sign that reads 'The Land of Israel for the People of Israel' during a protest in 2009. Photo by Emil Salman / Jini
A third of the Jewish public wants a law barring Israeli Arabs from voting for the Knesset and a large majority of 69 percent objects to giving 2.5 million Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank.
It's another way of saying 'Shalom'
A sweeping 74 percent majority is in favor of separate roads for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank. A quarter - 24 percent - believe separate roads are "a good situation" and 50 percent believe they are "a necessary situation."
Almost half - 47 percent - want part of Israel's Arab population to be transferred to the Palestinian Authority and 36 percent support transferring some of the Arab towns from Israel to the PA, in exchange for keeping some of the West Bank settlements.
Although the territories have not been annexed, most of the Jewish public (58 percent ) already believes Israel practices apartheid against Arabs. Only 31 percent think such a system is not in force here. Over a third (38 percent ) of the Jewish public wants Israel to annex the territories with settlements on them, while 48 percent object.
You can't fool an Israeli soldier when it comes to spotting terrorists
The survey distinguishes among the various communities in Israeli society - secular, observant, religious, ultra-Orthodox and former Soviet immigrants. The ultra-Orthodox, in contrast to those who described themselves as religious or observant, hold the most extreme positions against the Palestinians. An overwhelming majority (83 percent ) of Haredim are in favor of segregated roads and 71 percent are in favor of transfer.

The ultra-Orthodox are also the most anti-Arab group - 70 percent of them support legally barring Israeli Arabs from voting, 82 percent support preferential treatment from the state toward Jews, and 95 percent are in favor of discrimination against Arabs in admission to workplaces.

The group classifying itself as religious is the second most anti-Arab. New immigrants from former Soviet states are closer in their views of the Palestinians to secular Israelis, and are far less radical than the religious and Haredi groups. However, the number of people who answered "don't know" in the "Russian" community was higher than in any other.

The Russians register the highest rate of satisfaction with life in Israel (77 percent ) and the secular Israelis the lowest - only 63 percent. On average, 69 percent of Israelis are satisfied with life in Israel.

Secular Israelis appear to be the least racist - 68 percent of them would not mind having Arab neighbors in their apartment building, 73 percent would not mind Arab students in their children's class and 50 percent believe Arabs should not be discriminated against in admission to workplaces.

The survey indicates that a third to half of Jewish Israelis want to live in a state that practices formal, open discrimination against its Arab citizens. An even larger majority wants to live in an apartheid state if Israel annexes the territories.

The survey conductors say perhaps the term "apartheid" was not clear enough to some interviewees. However, the interviewees did not object strongly to describing Israel's character as "apartheid" already today, without annexing the territories. Only 31 percent objected to calling Israel an "apartheid state" and said "there's no apartheid at all."

In contrast, 39 percent believe apartheid is practiced "in a few fields"; 19 percent believe "there's apartheid in many fields" and 11 percent do not know.

The "Russians," as the survey calls them, display the most objection to classifying their new country as an apartheid state. A third of them - 35 percent - believe Israel practices no apartheid at all, compared to 28 percent of the secular and ultra-Orthodox communities, 27 percent of the religious and 30 percent of the observant Jews who hold that view. Altogether, 58 percent of all the groups believe Israel practices apartheid "in a few fields" or "in many fields," while 11 percent don't know.

Bravo!
Nothing like a truth torpado for sinking the good ship SS Propaganda.

Game set and match

Greenstein - tiny surveys of people mean nothing.

You seem to like to try to stir things up. Quite a sad individual in my opinion.

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:
I've explained on an earlier thread in great detail why I think that is a silly suggestion and I've no intention of repeating myself. I have also since learned that there are activists who have tried to speak to people who work there but have been denied access to workers for a number of years.

I've no idea what you've said about going out there, on a previous thread, so I'm afraid I'm in the dark. I'm afraid I don't believe you when you say that activists have gone out to the factory and been denied access to the workers. Theyre not prisoners. Every one of them is free to speak about Eco Stream as they wish and the fact is they are all very happy with the situation. Wouldnt you be if you could earn enough in one year to buy a house. I think they would all be a darned sight unhappier if they lost their jobs because of your interference. I repeat, Eco Stream is willing for anyone to visit. I repeat, put your money where your mouth is.

From experience, its very hard to surface any truth in the majority of gaz scott;s responses to questions. His attempts at deflecting probing is second to none, however he does have a useful purpose.....

I and others have noted that wherever he is involved in supporting or challenging activity in a thread, if you simply adopt the opposite view then you will be correct.

It;s still Brighton outside my window this morning Gaz.

LOL directly at you!

tonygreenstein wrote:
Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis.

http://azvsas.blogsp

ot.co.uk/2012/10/sur

vey-most-israeli-jew

s-would-support.html



Survey: Most Israeli Jews would support apartheid regime in Israel


Survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews
By Gideon Levy | Oct.23, 2012
It's called co-existence!


Palestinians waiting to cross through the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus. Photo by Nir Kafri
Most of the Jewish public in Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it formally annexes the West Bank.
Just change 'Arabs' to 'Jews' and go back 70 years
A majority also explicitly favors discrimination against the state's Arab citizens, a survey shows.

The survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews. The survey was commissioned by the Yisraela Goldblum Fund and is based on a sample of 503 interviewees.
Like the Hitler Youth - they get 'em young
The questions were written by a group of academia-based peace and civil rights activists. Dialog is headed by Tel Aviv University Prof. Camil Fuchs.

The majority of the Jewish public, 59 percent, wants preference for Jews over Arabs in admission to jobs in government ministries. Almost half the Jews, 49 percent, want the state to treat Jewish citizens better than Arab ones; 42 percent don't want to live in the same building with Arabs and 42 percent don't want their children in the same class with Arab children.
A right-wing demonstrator holding a sign that reads 'The Land of Israel for the People of Israel' during a protest in 2009. Photo by Emil Salman / Jini
A third of the Jewish public wants a law barring Israeli Arabs from voting for the Knesset and a large majority of 69 percent objects to giving 2.5 million Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank.
It's another way of saying 'Shalom'
A sweeping 74 percent majority is in favor of separate roads for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank. A quarter - 24 percent - believe separate roads are "a good situation" and 50 percent believe they are "a necessary situation."
Almost half - 47 percent - want part of Israel's Arab population to be transferred to the Palestinian Authority and 36 percent support transferring some of the Arab towns from Israel to the PA, in exchange for keeping some of the West Bank settlements.
Although the territories have not been annexed, most of the Jewish public (58 percent ) already believes Israel practices apartheid against Arabs. Only 31 percent think such a system is not in force here. Over a third (38 percent ) of the Jewish public wants Israel to annex the territories with settlements on them, while 48 percent object.
You can't fool an Israeli soldier when it comes to spotting terrorists
The survey distinguishes among the various communities in Israeli society - secular, observant, religious, ultra-Orthodox and former Soviet immigrants. The ultra-Orthodox, in contrast to those who described themselves as religious or observant, hold the most extreme positions against the Palestinians. An overwhelming majority (83 percent ) of Haredim are in favor of segregated roads and 71 percent are in favor of transfer.

The ultra-Orthodox are also the most anti-Arab group - 70 percent of them support legally barring Israeli Arabs from voting, 82 percent support preferential treatment from the state toward Jews, and 95 percent are in favor of discrimination against Arabs in admission to workplaces.

The group classifying itself as religious is the second most anti-Arab. New immigrants from former Soviet states are closer in their views of the Palestinians to secular Israelis, and are far less radical than the religious and Haredi groups. However, the number of people who answered "don't know" in the "Russian" community was higher than in any other.

The Russians register the highest rate of satisfaction with life in Israel (77 percent ) and the secular Israelis the lowest - only 63 percent. On average, 69 percent of Israelis are satisfied with life in Israel.

Secular Israelis appear to be the least racist - 68 percent of them would not mind having Arab neighbors in their apartment building, 73 percent would not mind Arab students in their children's class and 50 percent believe Arabs should not be discriminated against in admission to workplaces.

The survey indicates that a third to half of Jewish Israelis want to live in a state that practices formal, open discrimination against its Arab citizens. An even larger majority wants to live in an apartheid state if Israel annexes the territories.

The survey conductors say perhaps the term "apartheid" was not clear enough to some interviewees. However, the interviewees did not object strongly to describing Israel's character as "apartheid" already today, without annexing the territories. Only 31 percent objected to calling Israel an "apartheid state" and said "there's no apartheid at all."

In contrast, 39 percent believe apartheid is practiced "in a few fields"; 19 percent believe "there's apartheid in many fields" and 11 percent do not know.

The "Russians," as the survey calls them, display the most objection to classifying their new country as an apartheid state. A third of them - 35 percent - believe Israel practices no apartheid at all, compared to 28 percent of the secular and ultra-Orthodox communities, 27 percent of the religious and 30 percent of the observant Jews who hold that view. Altogether, 58 percent of all the groups believe Israel practices apartheid "in a few fields" or "in many fields," while 11 percent don't know.

Could you summarise your point please; assuming of course that you actually have one to make?

Tony, am I right in assuming by your name you are of jewish descent and are highly read in the jewish diaspora. You must know it was partly the brits, now your homeland that created the nightmare that is now Israel, it was always going to be too small for the number of displaced Jews around the world to have as homeland and jews were never going to get a warm welcome from the neighbours. I would have thought Israel was trying to do its best in a hpoeless situation.

John Keenan take note:
“A responsible journalist has no business taking a free trip to Israel — or to any other country, or to a Hollywood film studio’s junket at a resort, or to any other destination that is involved in the subject matter that the journalist covers or is likely to cover in the future. Period,” said Samuel Freedman, a journalism professor at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and an expert on media ethics. Freedman stressed that even if the free trips do not create actual bias in the reporting, “they absolutely create the perception of bias, and that perception is just as corrosive to a journalist’s credibility.” Larry Lorenz, professor emeritus of journalism at Loyola University New Orleans, agreed that receiving free trips is wrong regardless of whether reporters write about the issue. “Journalism organizations should be concerned about giving the appearance of being bought,” Lorenz said."

http://warincontext.
org/2012/08/25/how-a
ipac-corals-american
-journalists-into-th
e-pro-israel-camp/

@Bill Board SodaStream did not request, nor were they given, copy approval of this piece. I did not send it to the firm prior to publication. Nobody from the management accompanied me during my visit to the Palestine Authority.

@Tony Greenstein I have never made it clear to you that I opposed the boycott of South Africa. For the record, I supported the boycott of apartheid South Africa.

I see a good nights sleep has invigorated Tony Greenstein. He is in best copy and paste, bottle half empty, form this morning.
Now Tony, I want you to do something useful today... Write five hundred lines saying, I am a fool, submit to the editor for printing and tomorrow the people of Brighton, will, for the very first time, be able to read truth coming from your pen.

The survey was of a little over 500 out of a Jewish population of maybe 5.5 million. That is not a tiny survey. Opinion polls in the UK typically take samples of around 1000 out of a popuation of sixty something million.

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:
I've explained on an earlier thread in great detail why I think that is a silly suggestion and I've no intention of repeating myself. I have also since learned that there are activists who have tried to speak to people who work there but have been denied access to workers for a number of years.

I've no idea what you've said about going out there, on a previous thread, so I'm afraid I'm in the dark. I'm afraid I don't believe you when you say that activists have gone out to the factory and been denied access to the workers. Theyre not prisoners. Every one of them is free to speak about Eco Stream as they wish and the fact is they are all very happy with the situation. Wouldnt you be if you could earn enough in one year to buy a house. I think they would all be a darned sight unhappier if they lost their jobs because of your interference. I repeat, Eco Stream is willing for anyone to visit. I repeat, put your money where your mouth is.

Well it was discussed on a previous thread and is easily available if you could be bothered to look but the upshot of it was: "The UN, International Court of Justice as well as the International Community consider these settlements illegal. I don't see how any number of visits can change this fact." I don't need to go to Tibet to disagree with the Chinese occupation, I didn't need to go to South Africa to object to Apartheid and as someone else said wittily "I don't need to go to the North Pole to know it's cold".

There are always people who do well out of an occupation even some of those who are occupied. If I stole someone's house and then gave them a job cleaning it would it make it OK?

I do think that some (Arabic speaking) Brighton activists would indeed be very happy to take up any invitation to visit the factory specifically. But I think you greatly underestimate the number of local activists who have actually been to this area. If the factory allowed someone from Corporate Watch for example totally free access I would be very surprised. Maybe they could send them an invitation.

To George Smith:

Yes I am Jewish. My father was an Orthodox rabbi. Israel is not my homeland (I'm not quite sure if you were saying it is!). Nor was it ever meant to be a Jewish homeland if by that you mean a refuge for Jewish victims of anti-Semitism. You cannot create a refuge for particular groups who are subject to racism, without reproducing racism. Otherwise what you are saying is that racism is a product of the victim not society.

Israel was always intended to recreate the 'Jewish race' or nation as they now call it. During the war the Zionist political movement, in alliance with British imperialism, turned its back on the Holocaust. For it building a Jewish state was more important than saving the Jews from the holocaust. indeed they obstructed rescue to anywhere but Palestine.

In a very well known-quote (but most of the Zionists here will be ignorant of it!) David Ben Gurion, Israel's first Prime Minister wrote:

'If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of
these children, but also the history of the People of Israel.' Yoav Gelber, Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry (1939-42), Yad Vashem Studies, vol.XII, p.199.

This was the attittude of the whole government in the making, the Jewish Agency. So of course Israel was not large enough or, more importantly, developed enough to accept most Jewish refugees.

Today the most dangerous place in the world for Jews is Israel, which is why most secular Jews have a second passport. I posted the latest opinion poll about Israeli Jewish attitudes to non-Jews (& there is much worse). But the attitude of the Orthodox, the Haredi is much worse - genocidal would be the correct term. Over 90% of them support removal of all rights from Arabs and their deportation from Israel, hence skewing the poll. But they are getting stronger and the secular is getting weaker in Israel (for reasons I don't have space to cover).

So no Israel is not doing its best, it is following an inexorable logic which will lead to the expulsion of the Palestinians (again) over the Jordan and to new and horrific massacres such as Sabra & Chatilla, if it is not stopped.

Meanwhile false friends of Jews, such as the goyboys and other Christian fundamentalists, who in the war opposed any immigration of Jewish refugees to the US or Britain, are gung ho in favour of a Jewish 'return'.

To John Keenan. I recall very well what you said. You specifically disagreed with me that the Boycott of South Africa had anything to do with the end of Apartheid. In our short conversation you poured cold water on the idea although you offered no other exlpanation for the ending of apartheid. That was in the context of explaining why I supported an economic and cultural boycott of Israel. The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that if a boycott has no effect, why support it?

You certainly, at no time during our conversation, said that you supported a boycott of Apartheid and I don't believe it for one moment in the light of that conversation.

I am sure you didn't submit your piece to Sodastream. You didn't need to. As the old quote goes:

' "You cannot hope to bribe or twist (thank God!) the British journalist. But, seeing what the man will do unbribed, there's no occasion to."

You went to Ramallah unaccompanied. You came back full of praise for the dynamism of this bubble. I pointed out to u it was artificial. Security is still in the hands of Israel, whose squads pounce at night. It is supported by 'aid'. Its paramilitary security forces trained by Gen. Dayton in Jordan, 95% of whose detainees are tortured (yes the US is the main sponsor of torture the world over).

To all this you said nothing. And surrounding Ramallah olive groves burn and land continues to be confiscated. I suggest you watch the film 5 Broken Cameras at the Duke of York this week and you'll see more in 90 minutes than you did on your sponsored trip.

I won't pull any punches. Your article was an example of yellow journalism at its worst. You went to a land of misery and deprivation and brutal occupation and saw nothing, you spoke to no one and you didn't even begin to ask as to the conflict with an Israeli-Palestinian trade union over minimum wages and the barring of union reps. from the plant you walked into. Clearly they trusted u more than they did local trade union reps. from Kav LaOved.

Mr Keenan, when you visited the West Bank perhaps you should have gone to see the Bedouin who were displaced by the construction and expansion of illegal settlements such as Mishor Adumim, home of the Sodastream factory. The factory, being on occupied territory, is illegal under international law. Perhaps you should also have spoken to the Palestinians who have to endure, among others: house demolition,Israeli check points where they are often humiliated, imprisonment, loss of livelihood, rationing of water, regular harassment and in some cases violent attacks by Israeli settlers. Under any occupation there are always people who are willing to compromise their conscience because of the desperation created by a lack of jobs and opportunities.

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

hursthill wrote:
Tony greenstein either has mental health issues, or he is a Mossad spy who has infiltrated the bds movement in order to cause it maximum damage.

Do you actually have a point to make about his posting or are we to assume that the fact you have had to resort to insults means you have nothing to say in answer to the points he mentions above?

Tony Greenstein invented the insult. Have you actually read his blog and seen the lies and scurrilous accusations he directs towards all those who oppose him. It's ludicrous to the point of being laughable. So in your own words, insults prove TG has nothing relevant to say. Well I think we all knew that.

Well we are all able to read the points he makes above and agree or disagree with them. But in the end (on either side) it is informed argument and informed counter-argument that is persuasive rather than scurrilous accusations of mental health problems following a long post full of facts and opinions to be either accepted or rejected.

But we are all capable of insults especially on a list which does have more than its fair share of the ignorant and uninformed (you know who you are).

yifat wrote:
Mr Keenan, when you visited the West Bank perhaps you should have gone to see the Bedouin who were displaced by the construction and expansion of illegal settlements such as Mishor Adumim, home of the Sodastream factory. The factory, being on occupied territory, is illegal under international law. Perhaps you should also have spoken to the Palestinians who have to endure, among others: house demolition,Israeli check points where they are often humiliated, imprisonment, loss of livelihood, rationing of water, regular harassment and in some cases violent attacks by Israeli settlers. Under any occupation there are always people who are willing to compromise their conscience because of the desperation created by a lack of jobs and opportunities.

Maybe Mr. Keenan could go to Tibet and do a bit of his "good work" for the Chinese Occupation.

From Forbes: "Tibetans are not naturally allergic to business. In fact, traditionally they have been doing well in trade with India and China".

So Mr. Keenan all you need to do is find someone to pay your way out to Tibet and you can "unbottle" this debate too.

hursthill wrote:
Congratulations to the Argus on a fair & balanced article.

Let's hope the Police follow the advise of Caroline Lucas & arrest anyone who engages in "aggresive harrassement".

As this article explains, this new shop is good news for Brighton, Israel & the Palestinians.

In response to the article by John Keenan about Sodastream Company ,I would like to point out that even if 400 Palestinians had wonderful wages and were able to build beautiful houses for their families, this would never justify seven millions Palestinian refugees in the world, an apartheid system , the destruction of homes and Palestinian land, the detention and incarceration of children and frequent torture of Palestinians. Finally I would like to mention the bulldozing of an ancient Palestinian cemetery in East Jerusalem which shows the determination of the State of Israel to erase the very memory of Palestinian History.

Yousef Besharat who works as an assembly line manager at the Mishor factory. Yousef, in his early 20s, told me that with one year’s salary he has built a house in Jabba which he was looking forward to moving into.
count yourself lucky m8,here in england you are lucky to have enough money left from your sallary after all the tax WE pay to be able to built a house..let alone enough to park in brighton to go shopping.

tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

for fizzy drinks

Yousef Besharat who works as an assembly line manager at the Mishor factory. Yousef, in his early 20s, told me that with one year’s salary he has built a house in Jabba which he was looking forward to moving into.
count yourself lucky m8,here in england you are lucky to have enough money left from your sallary after all the tax WE pay to be able to built a house..let alone enough to park in brighton to go shopping.for fizzy drinks

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

Whatever Eco-stream/Soda-stre
am is doing in Israel at the moment, however valuable it might be for all kinds of reasons, the essential fact remains that Israel is in continuing breach of several United Nations resolutions through its occupation of Palestnian territory and shows no sign of ceasing its illegal activities in East Jerusalem. And anyone who justifies any activity by calling it God-sanctioned has already lost their case. For Israel, US-sanctioned would be more accurate since the state of Israel would cease to exist without US permission.

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

I shouldn't worry too much. You're not that important.

Palestinans deserve their own land ONLY when they renounce terrorism.

At present Hamas's charter states it seeks Israel's destruction and hatred and violence against Israelis is commonly taught in Palestinian schools and university's.

Whatever the wrongs and rights of the current situation, it will not change until the Palestinians are prepared to live in peace within their own lands and not continue to threaten its neighbour Israel and seek its destruction.

This is not merely a land dispute but dealing with the far more complicated matter of Islamist terrorism, in which Israel is in the forefront.

Hence the support Israel gets not just from America but also from Australia, New Zealand, and many European countries including Britain and quite rightly so.

All other debate is irrelevant and which is why nothing has moved forward over the last few years.

John Keenan wrote:
@Bill Board SodaStream did not request, nor were they given, copy approval of this piece. I did not send it to the firm prior to publication. Nobody from the management accompanied me during my visit to the Palestine Authority.

@Tony Greenstein I have never made it clear to you that I opposed the boycott of South Africa. For the record, I supported the boycott of apartheid South Africa.

John, Please just ignore Bill board and Tony Greenstein, they are just wind up merchants and they don't want to hear or accept the truth because it exposes them for what they are...

juleshove wrote:
Palestinans deserve their own land ONLY when they renounce terrorism.

At present Hamas's charter states it seeks Israel's destruction and hatred and violence against Israelis is commonly taught in Palestinian schools and university's.

Whatever the wrongs and rights of the current situation, it will not change until the Palestinians are prepared to live in peace within their own lands and not continue to threaten its neighbour Israel and seek its destruction.

This is not merely a land dispute but dealing with the far more complicated matter of Islamist terrorism, in which Israel is in the forefront.

Hence the support Israel gets not just from America but also from Australia, New Zealand, and many European countries including Britain and quite rightly so.

All other debate is irrelevant and which is why nothing has moved forward over the last few years.

Absolutely 100% agree.

Many of us have not forgotten the legacy of the Palestinians in Jordan and especially in Lebanon where they terrorised the local inhabitants and murdered and tortured untold thousands, and where they are believed to have raped upwards of 100,000 women.

So forgive us if we are a wee bit untrusting as to their motives, and don't easily buy into the whole idea that all they want is justice and to be treated fairly. Using the International community, seeking help and legitimacy from the UN and the ICJ is all part of their methodology in reaching their goal...it is part of the 'Phased plan.' that bleeding heart liberals don't comprehend but readily add their support to them if it comes to opposing Israel in any form.

Number Six wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

I shouldn't worry too much. You're not that important.

Oh well there go my plans for world domination.

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Well I think this list is a bit different.

Many of the more nasty and disturbed contributors are frequently accusing me (as Gaz Scott) of habitual lying and saying things I have not said both completely unsubstantiated. Also I have even had one particularly disturbed individual post something abusive about an individual police officer under my name and then condemning me for doing so (this was confirmed publicly by the admin). I'm very, very thick skinned especially when it comes to dealing with idiots but I do have a job and a reputation to worry about like many others on here.

It is obviously up to Tony Greenstein how he decides to moderate his own comments page. Even on this Argus play-pen list people do need to give a valid email address so I don't think that's a problem for me or anyone and gives a limited amount of accountability should serious problems occur. I have seen some of the personal abuse he gets on this and other lists and I think as he gives his own name on his list (and other lists) then he has every right to expect others to do the same and I would respect that right.

Thanks for the article - well written and objective. I'm an Israeli presently living in the UK. Like many Israelis I strongly object to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and, as is my democratic right, I express my objection by not buying goods from there. If others choose to buy these products, that is their right and they should not be heckled, insulted or prevented from doing so. The protesters achieve nothing by their demonstrations. The protesters might achieve more by highlighting the daily massacres in Syria.

I see the usual posters, plus a few more sensible ones have posted. Hursthill even questions my mental health! He should have worked as a psychiatrist in the Soviet Union - he'd had done a roaring business.

i. I posted an opinion poll, which is a fair sample by British standards, on what is obvious to anyone who has been to Israel, viz. the growing level of racism there. Given the choice between a Jewish state and a democratic state, 69% say they would prefer the former. Anyone with any knowledge of the situation would know that that represents mainstream Zionist opinion.

ii. The article was disingenous to put it mildly. Companies paying journalists to go on free trips is not journalism.

iii. Sodastream don't allow Kav LaOved, an NGO that represents Palestinians in Labour courts and takes up issues such as minimum wages so Keenan's information isn't correct.

iv. I realise that to Porky and co. that probably is of no account but those of us who are socialists do believe that solidarity is international or meaningless. Every single trade union in this country supports withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories. The only state to maintain that the occupation is legal is Israel. If it is legal to sell goods which are effectively stolen in this country and in breach of international law then that says a lot for British law. Regardless, the morality is quite clear.

v. John Keenan made it clear to me that he thought the Boycott of South Africa had had no effect and it is unsurprising that he drools over Israel's occupation and apartheid regime.

vi. A few people have mentioned Syria et al. I don't think they are at all sincere since the most avid supporter of Mubarak and his own torture state 18 months ago was Netanyahu. Israel has also been in favour of stability in Syria, just as it was in favour of the fascist phalange in Lebanon. Those who point to other countries in order to divert attention from the one you are campaigning against are usually dishonest. What they mean is you should do nothing anywhere.

vii. Of course people have a right to buy Sodastream products. Just as people had the right to buy German goods in the 1930's. But we also have the right to persuade them not to. That is the real objection.

And yes, I use my real name because I'm prepared to be accountable for the opinions I express. The hursthills and porkies of this world prefer anonymity. So be it.

Bravo Tony!

gaz scott wrote:

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Well I think this list is a bit different.

Many of the more nasty and disturbed contributors are frequently accusing me (as Gaz Scott) of habitual lying and saying things I have not said both completely unsubstantiated. Also I have even had one particularly disturbed individual post something abusive about an individual police officer under my name and then condemning me for doing so (this was confirmed publicly by the admin). I'm very, very thick skinned especially when it comes to dealing with idiots but I do have a job and a reputation to worry about like many others on here.

It is obviously up to Tony Greenstein how he decides to moderate his own comments page. Even on this Argus play-pen list people do need to give a valid email address so I don't think that's a problem for me or anyone and gives a limited amount of accountability should serious problems occur. I have seen some of the personal abuse he gets on this and other lists and I think as he gives his own name on his list (and other lists) then he has every right to expect others to do the same and I would respect that right.

From my experience people reap what they sow and those out there who are happy to lie and mislead receive exactly what they deserve when caught out.

And you have been well and truly found wanting on many occasions.

gaz scott wrote:

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Well I think this list is a bit different.

Many of the more nasty and disturbed contributors are frequently accusing me (as Gaz Scott) of habitual lying and saying things I have not said both completely unsubstantiated. Also I have even had one particularly disturbed individual post something abusive about an individual police officer under my name and then condemning me for doing so (this was confirmed publicly by the admin). I'm very, very thick skinned especially when it comes to dealing with idiots but I do have a job and a reputation to worry about like many others on here.

It is obviously up to Tony Greenstein how he decides to moderate his own comments page. Even on this Argus play-pen list people do need to give a valid email address so I don't think that's a problem for me or anyone and gives a limited amount of accountability should serious problems occur. I have seen some of the personal abuse he gets on this and other lists and I think as he gives his own name on his list (and other lists) then he has every right to expect others to do the same and I would respect that right.

If you have a job to worry about, that rules you out as one of TGs protesters.

Somethingsarejustwro
ng wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Well I think this list is a bit different.

Many of the more nasty and disturbed contributors are frequently accusing me (as Gaz Scott) of habitual lying and saying things I have not said both completely unsubstantiated. Also I have even had one particularly disturbed individual post something abusive about an individual police officer under my name and then condemning me for doing so (this was confirmed publicly by the admin). I'm very, very thick skinned especially when it comes to dealing with idiots but I do have a job and a reputation to worry about like many others on here.

It is obviously up to Tony Greenstein how he decides to moderate his own comments page. Even on this Argus play-pen list people do need to give a valid email address so I don't think that's a problem for me or anyone and gives a limited amount of accountability should serious problems occur. I have seen some of the personal abuse he gets on this and other lists and I think as he gives his own name on his list (and other lists) then he has every right to expect others to do the same and I would respect that right.

From my experience people reap what they sow and those out there who are happy to lie and mislead receive exactly what they deserve when caught out.

And you have been well and truly found wanting on many occasions.

Yea yea. When you actually provide the slightest shred of evidence of this or example then come back. You mistake having opinions that differ from yours as attempts to mislead and lie.

But since you appear to not actually have any opinions except concerning your work status and the assumed work status of others I and I'm sure many others think you are just a silly little boy.

gaz scott wrote:

Somethingsarejustwro

ng wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Well I think this list is a bit different.

Many of the more nasty and disturbed contributors are frequently accusing me (as Gaz Scott) of habitual lying and saying things I have not said both completely unsubstantiated. Also I have even had one particularly disturbed individual post something abusive about an individual police officer under my name and then condemning me for doing so (this was confirmed publicly by the admin). I'm very, very thick skinned especially when it comes to dealing with idiots but I do have a job and a reputation to worry about like many others on here.

It is obviously up to Tony Greenstein how he decides to moderate his own comments page. Even on this Argus play-pen list people do need to give a valid email address so I don't think that's a problem for me or anyone and gives a limited amount of accountability should serious problems occur. I have seen some of the personal abuse he gets on this and other lists and I think as he gives his own name on his list (and other lists) then he has every right to expect others to do the same and I would respect that right.

From my experience people reap what they sow and those out there who are happy to lie and mislead receive exactly what they deserve when caught out.

And you have been well and truly found wanting on many occasions.

Yea yea. When you actually provide the slightest shred of evidence of this or example then come back. You mistake having opinions that differ from yours as attempts to mislead and lie.

But since you appear to not actually have any opinions except concerning your work status and the assumed work status of others I and I'm sure many others think you are just a silly little boy.

There you go again, making sweeping statements using your version of the truth, which interestingly doesn't really tally with fact.

Once again the audience will be laughing at you; indeed go back and read your comments (novel approach for you maybe) and in particular the many responses and surely even you will be able to grasp that no one supports, or is prepared to back anything you say.

You make the Occupy Brighton 2 seem intelligent.

I see the usual posters, plus a few more sensible ones have posted. Hursthill even questions my mental health! He should have worked as a psychiatrist in the Soviet Union - he'd had done a roaring business.

i. I posted an opinion poll, which is a fair sample by British standards, on what is obvious to anyone who has been to Israel, viz. the growing level of racism there. Given the choice between a Jewish state and a democratic state, 69% say they would prefer the former. Anyone with any knowledge of the situation would know that that represents mainstream Zionist opinion.

ii. The article was disingenous to put it mildly. Companies paying journalists to go on free trips is not journalism.

iii. Sodastream don't allow Kav LaOved, an NGO that represents Palestinians in Labour courts and takes up issues such as minimum wages so Keenan's information isn't correct.

iv. I realise that to Porky and co. that probably is of no account but those of us who are socialists do believe that solidarity is international or meaningless. Every single trade union in this country supports withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories. The only state to maintain that the occupation is legal is Israel. If it is legal to sell goods which are effectively stolen in this country and in breach of international law then that says a lot for British law. Regardless, the morality is quite clear.

v. John Keenan made it clear to me that he thought the Boycott of South Africa had had no effect and it is unsurprising that he drools over Israel's occupation and apartheid regime.

vi. A few people have mentioned Syria et al. I don't think they are at all sincere since the most avid supporter of Mubarak and his own torture state 18 months ago was Netanyahu. Israel has also been in favour of stability in Syria, just as it was in favour of the fascist phalange in Lebanon. Those who point to other countries in order to divert attention from the one you are campaigning against are usually dishonest. What they mean is you should do nothing anywhere.

vii. Of course people have a right to buy Sodastream products. Just as people had the right to buy German goods in the 1930's. But we also have the right to persuade them not to. That is the real objection.

And yes, I use my real name because I'm prepared to be accountable for the opinions I express. The hursthills and porkies of this world prefer anonymity. So be it.

I think a degree of focus wouldn't come amiss here. The issue now is Keenan. He has demonstrated that he will sell the integrity of The Argus for a freebie all expenses paid jolly to the sun kissed near east. Keenan has to go.

tonygreenstein wrote:
I see the usual posters, plus a few more sensible ones have posted. Hursthill even questions my mental health! He should have worked as a psychiatrist in the Soviet Union - he'd had done a roaring business.

i. I posted an opinion poll, which is a fair sample by British standards, on what is obvious to anyone who has been to Israel, viz. the growing level of racism there. Given the choice between a Jewish state and a democratic state, 69% say they would prefer the former. Anyone with any knowledge of the situation would know that that represents mainstream Zionist opinion.

ii. The article was disingenous to put it mildly. Companies paying journalists to go on free trips is not journalism.

iii. Sodastream don't allow Kav LaOved, an NGO that represents Palestinians in Labour courts and takes up issues such as minimum wages so Keenan's information isn't correct.

iv. I realise that to Porky and co. that probably is of no account but those of us who are socialists do believe that solidarity is international or meaningless. Every single trade union in this country supports withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories. The only state to maintain that the occupation is legal is Israel. If it is legal to sell goods which are effectively stolen in this country and in breach of international law then that says a lot for British law. Regardless, the morality is quite clear.

v. John Keenan made it clear to me that he thought the Boycott of South Africa had had no effect and it is unsurprising that he drools over Israel's occupation and apartheid regime.

vi. A few people have mentioned Syria et al. I don't think they are at all sincere since the most avid supporter of Mubarak and his own torture state 18 months ago was Netanyahu. Israel has also been in favour of stability in Syria, just as it was in favour of the fascist phalange in Lebanon. Those who point to other countries in order to divert attention from the one you are campaigning against are usually dishonest. What they mean is you should do nothing anywhere.

vii. Of course people have a right to buy Sodastream products. Just as people had the right to buy German goods in the 1930's. But we also have the right to persuade them not to. That is the real objection.

And yes, I use my real name because I'm prepared to be accountable for the opinions I express. The hursthills and porkies of this world prefer anonymity. So be it.

And what precisely is your point, an executive summary of your verbose post would be most helpful and it may even help gaz scott keep up with what's going on.

Stop bickering and get focussed smell the scent. Hold Keenan responsible. He aold the integrity of The Argus for an all expenses paid jolly to the sun kissed near east. Keenan has to go.

Stop bickering and get focussed. Keenan has to go.

Somethingsarejustwro
ng wrote:

Somethingsarejustwro

ng wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Somethingsarejustwro



ng wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Dabthirtyfive wrote:

gaz scott wrote:

Goyboy wrote:
tonygreenstein says...
2:03am Wed 24 Oct 12

"Although most of the posters here would undoubtedly have supported Apartheid in South Africa (after all they were better off than in surrounding countries etc. etc.) the following article from Ha'aretz, Israel's most prestigious daily, says it all about the real attitude of Israelis towards the Palestinians and Arab Israelis."

I think you shoot yourself in the foot once again TG when you can't resist adding a scurrilous preface to the statisical evidence you put such obvious store by...it would be far more beneficial from your point of view if you stuck with facts, and resisted the temptation to veer towards defamy...I know it must be almost impossible to do as it appears to be an apparent addition...but why not give it a go.

Shalom.

I'm no legal expert but not sure it's possible to defame an unidentified group of people who mostly use pseudonyms is it? Especially since he's said "most" and a few posters have actually said they'd support Apartheid and the slave trade (although probably because they wrongly believe it winds people up).

As Mr. Greenstein is brave (some might say silly) enough to use his own name it is of course possible to defame him.

And yes mine is a false name. I usually use my real name when I frequently post almost elsewhere else but this is such an abusive playpen of a forum I consider it sensible to stay anonymous.

This is such an abusive playpen of a forum, you think it best to
stay anonymous??? Yet Tony Greenstein has said on his blogs, that he refuses to accept posts from people who stay anonymous, because if they're not prepared to give their full name and e mail, they're scum whose posts are not worth printing. I take it you're not with Greenstein on that one. Be very careful Gaz. You will be kicked out of Greensteins motley group if you're not careful. You know what happens to those who disagree with him!

Well I think this list is a bit different.

Many of the more nasty and disturbed contributors are frequently accusing me (as Gaz Scott) of habitual lying and saying things I have not said both completely unsubstantiated. Also I have even had one particularly disturbed individual post something abusive about an individual police officer under my name and then condemning me for doing so (this was confirmed publicly by the admin). I'm very, very thick skinned especially when it comes to dealing with idiots but I do have a job and a reputation to worry about like many others on here.

It is obviously up to Tony Greenstein how he decides to moderate his own comments page. Even on this Argus play-pen list people do need to give a valid email address so I don't think that's a problem for me or anyone and gives a limited amount of accountability should serious problems occur. I have seen some of the personal abuse he gets on this and other lists and I think as he gives his own name on his list (and other lists) then he has every right to expect others to do the same and I would respect that right.

From my experience people reap what they sow and those out there who are happy to lie and mislead receive exactly what they deserve when caught out.

And you have been well and truly found wanting on many occasions.

Yea yea. When you actually provide the slightest shred of evidence of this or example then come back. You mistake having opinions that differ from yours as attempts to mislead and lie.

But since you appear to not actually have any opinions except concerning your work status and the assumed work status of others I and I'm sure many others think you are just a silly little boy.

There you go again, making sweeping statements using your version of the truth, which interestingly doesn't really tally with fact.

Once again the audience will be laughing at you; indeed go back and read your comments (novel approach for you maybe) and in particular the many responses and surely even you will be able to grasp that no one supports, or is prepared to back anything you say.

You make the Occupy Brighton 2 seem intelligent.

Oops, forgot that you might have been one of the Occupy Brighton 2, apologies if I mislead anyone.

Do you actually have any counter-arguments or are you just going to carry on posting your usual "you're just wrong" arguments?

You are one of the most frequent posters on this site and you've hardly expressed any hint of an opinion or argument about anything on any of your numerous posts over several years. Generally if you disagree with someone it is usual to say why rather than just disagreeing and accusing them of lying, etc. And saying how much you laugh at them doesn't really cut it I'm afraid. But then you are rather special.

realzionist wrote:
Stop bickering and get focussed. Keenan has to go.

As we type he's no doubt looking for his next sponsored hatchet job. Maybe he could unbottle the Syrian crisis next. Go Keenen.

Stay focussed. That is my testimony to the whole world.

sodastream and Keenan have screwed up big time here focus on it. Oh if only there was money in this Iwouldn't have to hire out my body at 100 quid an hour helping old ladies across the road.

All expenses paid I would go with an open mind too. I am not proud.

Let the facts speak for themselves and ignore the people on here who are renowned for prolific misrepresentation and avoidance of the truth.

Gaz, you know who I am referring to

getthis dont over egg a case you are already winning. It only affords the opportunity for them to divert.

I mean the first rule of salesmanship is when the customer has bought don't buy it back !!!!

realzionist wrote:
sodastream and Keenan have screwed up big time here focus on it. Oh if only there was money in this Iwouldn't have to hire out my body at 100 quid an hour helping old ladies across the road.

Hiring out your body fits in with TGs bunch. The underlife.

realzionist wrote:
Stop bickering and get focussed. Keenan has to go.

Hey, stop trying to bully Mr Keenan. You are annoyed because he found you out to be talking rubbish..Live with it.

This article could have been written in the 1980s about Sun City in South Africa, a notorious tourist resort which employed many blacks - but didn't allow them as guests. I'm sure those workers would have echoed Yousef's brother in this article and said "We hate apartheid - but we love our jobs".