Ken Livingstone Suspended

[Swillis]

Correct me if I am wrong here but we have never addressed each other untill you jumped in with the moron comment. It cant be that difficult for you to remember? 24 hours?

Oh and I know plenty about AIPAC and how in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion its a term for Jew Gold. Or how jews use their wealth to rig the system.It Ignores all other non jews who have wealth in the same way focusing on black muggers ignores other kinds of crime. Its not high brow and abstract arguments, this is basic stuff that you are indulging in.

I suppose I could be said to putting words in peoples mouths, but then what else could a lazy term like "Nasty little country"" mean in a thread topic on anti-Semitism?

They are a nasty little country. Many Jews campaign against Israel. Speaking out against Israel and there practice's is not anti Semitic. In the same way that speaking out against isis is not racist.

 

[Buzzer]

But a debate with you is not a debate. You always try to jump on your high horse and put words in other people's mouths. Thtas why I cannot be bothered to go into things with you. You try to find things that are not there, the only difference between you and Looney in this debate is that he came out and called people anti semitic, where as you just inferred it.

I think you mean implied. You can only infer from an implication. Hope that helps.

 

[Swillis]

I think you mean implied. You can only infer from an implication. Hope that helps.

Hmmmm what's that I said about high horse again? Truth hurts I see
Okay I meant implied. Now if I were to call you a *rick would I be implying or inferring it? Either way you are one of the biggest on this board.

 

[London Irish]

Hmmmm what's that I said about high horse again? Truth hurts I see
Okay I meant implied. Now if I were to call you a *rick would I be implying or inferring it? Either way you are one of the biggest on this board.

Right was going to steam into this tread but see now my contribution would be superfluous

 

[Buzzer]

Hmmmm what's that I said about high horse again? Truth hurts I see
Okay I meant implied. Now if I were to call you a *rick would I be implying or inferring it? Either way you are one of the biggest on this board.

My goodness, you really are quite the delicate snowflake. I'm clearly not hurt, you're the one effing and jeffing and claiming that I'm getting on my high horse for just pointing out the difference between implied/inferred. I'm quite calm and you're projecting your anger and you know it and now you're calling me names. Boo hoo. Save it for Looney, it doesn't work with me.

 

[Swillis]

My goodness, you really are quite the delicate snowflake. I'm clearly not hurt, you're the one effing and jeffing and claiming that I'm getting on my high horse for just pointing out the difference between implied/inferred. I'm quite calm and you're projecting your anger and you know it and now you're calling me names. Boo hoo. Save it for Looney, it doesn't work with me.

you really are a melt. That whole post smacks of someone on their high horse and attacking the person but not the argument. I'm not delicate at all, I just have a low tosspot threshold. Im not angry, more exasperated. You came into this thread telling me what I should and shouldn't say. I then gave my reasons for not liking Israel and even backed it up with evidence as to why. Whereas you done none of that. I will leave you to you're own little world, the one where you are always right.

 

[Buzzer]

you really are a melt. That whole post smacks of someone on their high horse and attacking the person but not the argument. I'm not delicate at all, I just have a low tosspot threshold. Im not angry, more exasperated. You came into this thread telling me what I should and shouldn't say. I then gave my reasons for not liking Israel and even backed it up with evidence as to why. Whereas you done none of that. I will leave you to you're own little world, the one where you are always right.

Hahaha! Oh dear oh dear. You do make me laugh.

 

[Machiavelli]

Are you referring to the Brent Council Leader who shared a post on Facebook comparing Israel to ISIS? He's quoted as saying "I apologise for sharing this on social media. I do not agree with these views and as Leader of Brent Council I have championed diversity, tolerance and respect for all faith communities, and will continue to do so."

Or did you mean the calls by some Labour MPs to include comments made by the Labour Director of Communications, Seumas Milne when he said that the creation of the state of Israel was a crime?

Would you agree that the prevention of the state of Palestine is a crime?

 

[Buzzer]

Would you agree that the prevention of the state of Palestine is a crime?

Good question. I've never really thought about it like that. I'm a firm believer in a two-state solution and so I do think that Israeli intransigence on the issue doesn't help...and if it doesn't help then it hinders. And anything that hinders a chance for peace in the Middle East is a criminal waste of an opportunity. Whether it's a crime under international law though, I've got no idea. I certainly think the land grabs by hardline settlers are criminal.

Edit - What about yourself?

 

[darkwolf666]

Would you agree that the prevention of the state of Palestine is a crime?

Yep!

 

[looney]

They are a nasty little country. Many Jews campaign against Israel. Speaking out against Israel and there practice's is not anti Semitic. In the same way that speaking out against isis is not racist.

Are you deliberately being Ignorant? The Jews that speak out against the state of Israel existing are a small group of crackpot adventists who say only the messiah can recreate the jewish state. Its like Holding up Salafists as an example of non violence in the west as they beleive it can only kick of when moho comes back but all other strictures are valid, like not voting etc.

Nobody is claiming ISIS are racist, nobody I know is claiming specific Israeli actions are anti-Semitism.Its just that people who condemn Israel as a nasty little state over look that a third of chechnyas muslms have been killed, another third displace by a Nasty big state that wont recognise their homeland and has annexed more land in the last few years than Israel has done in thirty. For Example.

 

[Swillis]

Are you deliberately being Ignorant? The Jews that speak out against the state of Israel existing are a small group of crackpot adventists who say only the messiah can recreate the jewish state. Its like Holding up Salafists as an example of non violence in the west as they beleive it can only kick of when moho comes back but all other strictures are valid, like not voting etc.

Nobody is claiming ISIS are racist, nobody I know is claiming specific Israeli actions are anti-Semitism.Its just that people who condemn Israel as a nasty little state over look that a third of chechnyas muslms have been killed, another third displace by a Nasty big state that wont recognise their homeland and has annexed more land in the last few years than Israel has done in thirty. For Example.

The point is, it does not make those crackpot Jews (your words) anti semitic. I think Israel is a nasty little bullying country, you obviously do not. Let's leave it there.

Those crackpots as you call them, are certainly not all crackpots

 

[Machiavelli]

Good question. I've never really thought about it like that. I'm a firm believer in a two-state solution and so I do think that Israeli intransigence on the issue doesn't help...and if it doesn't help then it hinders. And anything that hinders a chance for peace in the Middle East is a criminal waste of an opportunity. Whether it's a crime under international law though, I've got no idea. I certainly think the land grabs by hardline settlers are criminal.

Edit - What about yourself?

Livingstone is crass, and Labour is in a mess, but this is all a distraction from the central issue which is criminal, although not under international law.

The Palestinians have done something rarely done: they've formed a people before they've formed a state. This is patently apparent, and has been the case for decades.
In terms of international law, it is the UN that grants nations statehood. The UN broadly is comprised of a General Assembly and the Security Council, with the former the equivalent of a legislature, the latter an executive. The GA has attempted to create a Palestinian state on numerous occasions, but it has been prevented by the SC, due to one of the Permanent Five exercising its veto, and it is over issues related to Israel-Palestine that the veto has been exercised quite comfortably on the most occasions in the UN's history.
Two other points:
-- I agree with much of your post, but it's not hardline settlers, it's Israeli policy: look at historical maps of the incursions that Israel has made into the Gaza strip and the West Bank
-- you're well informed on current and international affairs, and I'm genuinely surprised that this hadn't crossed your mind previously, which leads me to speculate that such information doesn't feature in our media, much of it that has real form in being pro-Zionist

 

[London Irish]

real form in being pro-Zionist

BREAKING: Machiavelli suspended from the Labour Party

 

[Buzzer]

you're well informed on current and international affairs, and I'm genuinely surprised that this hadn't crossed your mind previously, which leads me to speculate that such information doesn't feature in our media, much of it that has real form in being pro-Zionist

I think I can answer that quite simply, there doesn't appear to be widespread international recognition of a Palestinian state under a UN mandate which is what usually happens (I think - could be wrong here though) if people have a right under international law to tracts of land. Take Northern Cyprus, for instance, we don't recognise that under international law because the law states that it belongs to Cyprus. I'm sure the Palestinians have an extremely compelling argument for their own country as do the Basques, the Catalans, the Kurds and many others and although I think in every single case it's patently unfair and there has been oppression in keeping those people subjugated, I'm not aware that it's a criminal act to refuse these regions under their present rule. As I say, I could well be wrong.

Re. your point about the Israeli state making the land grabs, I think we're both right. The settlers make the illegal land grabs with state complicity.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I have good friends in Israel and Lebanon. . . I was emailing one mate in Tel Aviv when Sadam's scuds were flying in. An interesting exchange . . . I have spent time in Israel, and had a good look around. One mate of mine, who did his national service in mossad, told me in his opinion the biggest nightmare in Israel are the guys in black with the strange haircuts who breed like flies and don't work (his words). On the other hand, the whole of 'Palestine' was cock a hoop when Saddam invaded Kuwait (because they thought Saddam wouldd be coming for the Jews next). My brother, an old lefty, gets extremely exercised whenever I say a good word about Israel . . .

My point is this. Israel is a complex and interesting state, surrounded by states most of which want them gone. They do what they must. They are what they are/ They are not a metaphore for something else . . . .

Ken Livingstone, therefore, is a complete arse to attack 'Zionism' because Hitler alledegly supported it, implying that Israel = Zionism = Nazi-ism. Livingstone is someone I always had time for, but he likes to flirt with the Devil, and this time he has indulged in actual penetration. Consequently . . . he's ****ed.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

There is also something mildly ironic and amusing seeing people who have spent most of their political life defining what acceptable opinions we should hold and name calling others for having 'incorrect' views or using inappropriate language/terminology .... getting hoist by their own petard.

 

[BadFish]

There is also something mildly ironic and amusing seeing people who have spent most of their political life defining what acceptable opinions we should hold and name calling others for having 'incorrect' views or using inappropriate language/terminology .... getting hoist by their own petard.

Or even those who cry foul when called out as islamophobes and racists when when offering their opinions on Islamic extremists doing exactly the same here and calling people anti semites when they express an opinion on Israel. Hoisted by their own petard indeed.

It would seem many people on all sides of political debate are happy to use this lazy method of shutting down debate.

 

[Machiavelli]

I think I can answer that quite simply, there doesn't appear to be widespread international recognition of a Palestinian state under a UN mandate which is what usually happens (I think - could be wrong here though) if people have a right under international law to tracts of land. Take Northern Cyprus, for instance, we don't recognise that under international law because the law states that it belongs to Cyprus. I'm sure the Palestinians have an extremely compelling argument for their own country as do the Basques, the Catalans, the Kurds and many others and although I think in every single case it's patently unfair and there has been oppression in keeping those people subjugated, I'm not aware that it's a criminal act to refuse these regions under their present rule. As I say, I could well be wrong.

Re. your point about the Israeli state making the land grabs, I think we're both right. The settlers make the illegal land grabs with state complicity.

Good job you're not a politician. Your conflation of Palestine with Catalonia, the Basque country and Kurdistan might just have led you into considerable trouble...
... if there was an organised campaign to lead you into it.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Or even those who cry foul when called out as islamophobes and racists when when offering their opinions on Islamic extremists doing exactly the same here and calling people anti semites when they express an opinion on Israel. Hoisted by their own petard indeed.

It would seem many people on all sides of political debate are happy to use this lazy method of shutting down debate.

I'm not sure who you are referring to, can you please clarify? (See post #31 for my opinion)