Monday, November 21, 2011

I'm back (sort of)

Hi all. I am truly sorry for my latest and longest hiatus to date. The demise of Gubu World has been greatly exaggerated (where does that particular phrase originate from?). The simple truth is I have been exceptionally busy in recent months. My absence has nothing to do with a loss of enthusiasm for the blogosphere. If anything, it killed me to be offline during recent dramatic events such as the demise of the Mediterranean Mad Dog, the Irish Presidential election with all its eccentricities, and the current rumours that Israel's patience with the International community has run out regarding a nuclear Iran and that an air strike is imminent. These are all issue which I will blog about in the very near future.

The gruesome demise of Col Gadaffi is one of the issues I missed during by absence

My absence can be explained by a combination of what I previously had thought were my final law exams (October) ,the Dublin West by election (November) of which I was heavily involved in and my role in the family business which as of recent weeks has involved a lot of travelling around Ireland. I am actually writing this in a Guesthouse in Clonakilty Co Cork. One advantage (blogwise) of my journeys around the country, is the "photo of the day" opportunities that arise. Just today I passed through Beal Na Mblath, the village were Michael Collins was assassinated in 1922. However as all us bloggers know, time is the real enemy and my work schedule between now and Christmas will make it difficult for me to post regularly but I will try very hard to publish two posts and several photos a week. Please be patient with me, particularly when it comes to responding to comments.

91 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good to seeya back blogging Ted, a lot has happened.

eoghan

Rob Harris said...

Welcome back Ted. I reckon the phrase, which must be in response to what your anonymous Islamist friend said on another post, goes back to Mark Twain.

BTW the Dublin West by-election was interesting. I didn't like Joe Higgins insisting on a recount.

Yusuf said...

Salam brother good to see your back. You know liam egan is back on the scene posing as "someone else" although he is not keeping up a very good pretence. He has ripped off my little blog EireIslam and now uses the name EireMuslim. Recently he posted a mission statement in which he pretty much categorised a list of all those that he hates before proclaiming "but we (must be the proverbial) don't hate the Irish people "per sai". The problem is that by the time he had completed his list there wasn't really any Irish man or woman outside of it.

Allah Hafiz

Jenny said...

And here I thought you were playing football all this time.

Gary said...

Welcome back, Ted. You have been missed.

Gary

The System Works said...

Welcome back to the blogosphere - you were truly missed!

Anonymous said...

You weren't missed - one less apologist for the terrorist Jewish state has got to be a good thing. Do us a favor and crawl back under your tallit.

Paul said...

Liam, why not do civilised people the world over a favour and run your own TV show? There's a vacancy for that going in Yemen now that Anwar al Awlaki has left the scene. Get on the next flight out there or is living in the west just too comfortable?

Anonymous said...

Liam? My jihad is in Ireland Paul.Anwar Al Awlaki (rh) will get his just reward for his actions, as will we all.

Nothing comfortable nor civilized with the west. I'm glad my little contribution (www.eiremuslim.com) is having an impact with the youth as well as making people like yourself and Yusuf Pender uncomfortable.

Yusuf said...

Uncomfortable Liam? Why I enjoy your Tooney-Tunes style convulsive hatred. As I have said before its very monthypythonesqe :p

Anonymous said...

Pender - glad ur enjoying the site Pender, read it more you might learn a thing or two - like how to spell, reference and basically write. Now be a good little cultist and run back to Noonan the overlord. Ahmadiyya will never take hold here, Irish people in general are too smart and intellectual to accept the crap u goons come out with (which of course doesn't really say much for either u or Noonan). What was it Pender, did the largely immigrant Indian group give u some sense of importance - pathetic!

builder man said...

Israel's patience has run out? Surely if any country has a right to nuclear weapons, it is Iran. An unprovoked attack by our then favourite Sadaam Hussein with the support of the UK, the US and Israel left them with almost a million dead. They have every right to seek protection from another attack. The best solution would be to have a non-prof. treaty that includes Iran AND Israel.

Paul said...

I mean sure what could be the problem with Iran having nuclear weapons? Never mind the fact that we are already at war with them they declared a Jihad in '79 and meant it. They have also stated repeatedly they wish to see Israel destroyed; they are an aggressive terrorist supporting theocracy led by a thug and loon.

Please read history before you spout support of regimes that publicly hang gay people from cranes to the delight of muppets like Liam Egan (he wants to see that in Ireland and across the Caliphate. For one thing the attack by Saddam was neither unprovoked nor supported by the US. Not least as Iran was holding US hostages at the time and the attack by Saddam gravely increased the risk to said hostages. Other than that yes a NP treaty mightn’t be a bad idea although even if the Iranians signed it, they would never follow it.

builder man said...

To Paul. You mistake reasoning for support.What I do support (financially) is the Iran Liberty Association which works for peaceful democratic change in Iran.I suggest you read Alan Friedman's book 'The Spider's Web-The Secret History of how the White House Illegally Armed Iraq. The weapons included WMD. You appear to have fallen into the Israeli propaganda machine. Unless you are fluent in Farsi, I think you will find that the threat 'to destroy Israel' was in fact 'calling for regime change in Jerusalem', something which all decent peace loving people would subscribe to.Including Obama.From Jerusalem's Haaratz:'The idiotic claim that Iran would bring about Israel's destruction does not hold water.'The human rights abuses are shocking but not unique to Iran.Israel is a major abuser as you would expect from an occupying power.

Rob Harris said...

Paul, I don't wish to take a dig at Builder Man but I would expect him to be very much more concerned about Iran's security than Israel's! Ahmadinnajacket did actually threaten Israel's existence contrary to what the pro-Palestinian campaigners keep claiming because it seems they wish they delegitimise any claim by Israel that it is in danger. A detailed article on the farsi in the New York Times (no friend of Israel BTW) called "Just How Far Did They Go, Those Words Against Israel?" attests to that fact:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/weekinreview/11bronner.html

Builder Man bangs (pun intended) on about all the Iranian deaths, and relativises the human rights abuses in Iran. During the Iran-Iraq war Iranian children were trained to walk over landmines in order to protect Iran's limited military resources. These children were called the Basij, which was a newly invented concept of child martyrdom. Tens of thousands of children as young as twelve were killed and their families financially compensated. Ahmadinejad was a Basji instructor, apparently quite a well known fact in Iran – in fact Basji interest groups helped get him elected, and were instrumental in sacking the UK embassy recently.

The System Works said...

The use of false quotes has been instrumental in the Israel-bashers' jihad (http://www.z-word.com/z-word-essays/false-confessions%253A-how-anti-zionists-incriminate-zionism.html), but so is whitewashing or denying inflammatory quotes attributable to Iranian, Arab or Islamist figures.

Paul said...

Builder man, I take heart from your claim that you don’t support the theocracy in Iran or its terroristic government. However your other statements are well off kilter, for instance supplying Saddam’s arsenal. A cursory glance at his armed forces quickly displays the hardware to have been overwhelmingly Russian and some French there are a few exceptions to this.
Dinnerjacket did threaten to destroy Israel publicly and has made that claim repeatedly, phrases such as ‘removing from the pages of history’ or ‘dismantling the Zionist regime’. Furthermore his government supplies trains and mentors both Hamas and Hezbollah two fascistic Islamist regimes publicly committed to Israel’s destruction. If all he wanted was ‘regime change’ why does he support those groups? Allowing this government to arm itself with WMD would be a mistake along the lines of the 1930’s appeasement policy towards Hitler’s Germany. Pro-secular democracy groups should be supported and all means utilised to prevent a nuclear equipped Iran. A country that has declared war against the west and followed through on that claim, with repeated terroristic acts against both the west and its people.

The System Works said...

Paul: I believe Hack-Me-Dinner-Jacket's predecessor even called Israel 'a one bomb country' (referring to the fact that Israel's size would be to its disadvantage in a nuclear exchange and that Iran could withstand more damage, making war worth it for Iran).

builder man said...

To Paul. I can only urge you to read the book I suggested to show how extensive was the US and UK military support for Saddam. As an ex military man may I recommend to you another book. The author is Lt. Col. Sir John Baynes who has written many books on military history including:'Morale- A Study of Men and Courage.' But that is not the book I am suggesting now. It is instead 'FOR LOVE OF JUSTICE', the story of the long life of Major Derek Cooper,O.B.E.,
M.C. who served with distinction in WW2 and later in Mandate Palestine, from which chaos has spawned Hamas and Hezbollah. I'm no apologist for either but Hamas was originally supported By Israel as a counter to Fatah. This book will give you an insight as to why these two military men became such
fervent supporters of the Palestinian cause. The complexities of Middle East politics are difficult. Ahmadinajad's rhetoric may be 'over the top' but that is often for local consumption and Iran has not attacked another country for 300 years. The informed consensus of expert opinion is that there is no physical threat to Israel. However, Israel in its short history has attacked: The Palestinians, the British, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and the USA.
By supporting Saddam when it suited us and Israel uncritically, we have undermined those Western values which I support wholeheartedly, and encouraged the extremists everywhere.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. The NYT no friend of Israel? From Adbusters: On Israel the NYT is perniciously one sided. Editor Ethan Bronner and chief columnist Isabel Kersner are ciitizens of Israel and their relatives have fought for it. Child soldiers are as old as warfare itself and countries often behave desperately when they are under attack and fearful for their survival. Britain would have used anthrax to deter a Nazi invasion in WW2 even though it would have affected our own population. Are there human rights abuses in Iran? Yes -see Amnesty. Are there human rights abuses in Israel? Yes-see Amnesty. Is that relativism or just the truth? Our duty, if we believe in them, is to uphold and promote democratic Western values, WITHOUT HYPROCISY and Israel commits abuses daily. I do that by supporting those values in Iran and Israel. I think that by turning a blind eye to Israel, you are undermining them.
To The System Works.I think your comments indicate a childlike naivety. 'Israel bashing jihad' is not adult language.

Rob Harris said...

To Paul: Builderman also was recommending on my blog some book, and quoted some unnamed bishop from said source in the British Mandate era, who stated that the Jews acted as if they owned the place! Its interesting to see such recommendations, as if all one’s own knowledge and understanding off said conflict gathered over years will be overturned by reading one of these marvellous tomes!!

Builderman stated above: “Ahmadinajad's rhetoric may be 'over the top' but that is often for local consumption and Iran has not attacked another country for 300 years. The informed consensus of expert opinion is that there is no physical threat to Israel. However, Israel in its short history has attacked: The Palestinians, the British, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and the USA.”

It never ceases to amaze me how some folks paint black as white and vice versa. In the first day after Israel declared independence no less than eight nations declared war on it: Egypt, British-Egyptian administered Sudan, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, along with other collective Arab entities such as the Arab Liberation Army. Oh and how about 1967 and 1973? lol

Is there any doubt that Dinnajacket was “over-the-top”? lol Why must it be that no one should take such threats seriously, when Iran has for years denied inspectors proper access to the relevant facilities, and Iran has been shown to actively develop the necessary technology only applicable to bomb use? People like Builderman retort about Israel having nuclear weapons but has Israel ever threatened another nation with extinction? Of course not. Many Arab nations in the Middle-East are very worried by what they see as expansionism on the part of Iran, and know full well that Iran carried out a proxy war against the US in Iraq, as it did when they hit a US base in Lebanon in 1982 killing a large number.

builder man said...

To Paul.I forgot to answer your question about Hamas and Hezbollah and Ahmadinajad's support. I guess he would see them as resistance movements. It's the old adage, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. What do I think? If they stove in the head of a little Israeli girl (this has happened), who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, then they are terrorists. If they are resisting the IDF from evicting Palestinians from their homes or stealing their land, then they are freedom fighters. Although I never sought it, I have some experience of 'terrorism'. For 10 years, I lived in the Irish Republic when there was a lot of activity in the North and the UK. I would remostrate with an IRA supporter (and a friend), a respectable, affluent, middle class mother of 4.
'Yes I understand the genuine grievances of the Catholics but it cannot warrant putting bombs in litter bins in Warrington and blowing up English kids.'She was
unrepentant. 'Governments take no notice until there is violence.'
In 1986 I joined an Indian mission
in the UK whose leader was shot dead in front of us by Punjabi seperatists - the Khalistanis. I went to the Punjab for the funeral - a closed zone then - and
saw the results of terrorist activities. The UK followers were all put on their hit list (good publicity!), but fortunately they captured them first.One of the groups I belong to has members who have sat down with Hamas. They are not monsters(they may carry out monstrous acts),and are capable of negoiating as the recent prisoner swap has proved. It is said that we create terrorists ourselves and recent history proves that. These are facts all verifiable on the net. When the Russians were in Afghanistan defending the Communist gov. against the mujahadin, Gorbachev made an offer to Reagan.As you know, the US had
recruited Bin Laden and others and supplied them with Stinger missiles. The gov. was not a democracy but at least girls went to school and women graduated from uni. Gorbachev offered to withdraw Russian troops and they should then work together to counter Islamic Fundamentalism, then on the rise. Reagan (with Thatcher's support), was a fanatical anti-communist and refused.

The System Works said...

builderman: Adbusters is not a grown-ups magazine..

builder man said...

To The System Works. Adbusters is a magazine for radical, free thinking individuals who refuse (like the BBC) to be corrupted by advertising. What does that remind you of? Oh yes, the Enlightenment.
That does with Spinoza, Locke, Newton & Voltaire then. Never mind, you still have the thoughts of Alan Dershowitz and Newt Gingrich!

The System Works said...

builderman: Get out of your little ghetto. Why on earth would you think I have a any affections for nasty Newt Gingrich?

Locke and Voltaire praised the free market and minimal government (see Voltaire's remarks on the London stock exchange). To link them with a rag like Adbusters is simply distasteful.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris.Yesterday I spent the day with a friend of 40 years, a 90 year old veteran of the last months of the British Mandate in Palestine.His experience was akin to that in 'The Promise',a film by Peter Kosminsky. They could not understand how, having fought the Nazis and liberated the camps, the Jews would then turn on them with such brutality. We watched the film showing Major Derek Cooper -'Going Home' about his time in Palestine when he was sent to stop the Irgun ethnically cleansing Jaffa.They were indiscriminately shelling with heavy mortars.Cooper's regt. drove them back to Tel Aviv. In the film he revisits the scene nearly 50 years on where there is now a musuem celebrating the Irgun with an ex Irgun in charge. 'No, we never retreat' he says with a light display showing their advance. Cooper laughs 'I was there!' Yet a few weeks later the British moved out, and thousands of Arabs went with them, traumatised by the shelling and Jewish loudspeakers telling them 'remember Deir Yassin' - the Irgun massacre in an Arab village.Vidal Sassoon, the famous Jewish hairdresser was also there and on Desert Island Discs talked about the thoroughness of the training.'We had just come through the Holocaust' he explains,
'and we needed a country of our own.'It didn't seem to occur to him that he was stealing someone else's country! This is the reality of the time and not the IRGUN MYTH MUSEUM and the myths contained in your last post.BEFORE
the end of the Mandate the Jews attacked Arab towns with their overwhelming superiority in forces, in areas that the UN had decreed were to be part of the Arab State.Tiberias was occupied on the 19th April;Haifa on 22nd; Jaffa on 28th; Arab New Jerusalem on the 30th; Besel on 8th May; Safad on the 10th and Acre on 14th. The Arabs only came in AFTER May 15th and mostly into the areas allotted to The Arabs in the UN plan, and to prevent ethnic cleansing. But they were not unified and did not have the manpower or resources of the Jews who had prepared for years for this moment. So Israel has not only threatened but actually done everything it can to destroy the Palestinian State.On Ahmadinejad's
'threats' see AntiWar.Com -'Wiped off the Map' -the Rumor of the Century. Of course he is antagonistic to Israel, but he's a POLITICIAN. 1. He can be removed internally and 2. Why believe anything a politician says? Let's bring this up to date. What, in your view, are the boundaries of Israel? Be the first pro-Israeli to answer this! Finally see how it could be, SHOULD be. Watch 'Jerusalem on a plate' on BBC4 I player with Jews siting down with Palestinians eating together. The Palestinians are the most generous, hospitable and forgiving people on Earth, and we should support them in their quest for justice.

Rob Harris said...

To Builderman: For some reason my responses to your pathetic comments, where you even excused Iran's use of children as martyrs by stating above that nations do extreme things when invaded after I cited the Basji, has disappeared but let me tell you one thing. As you rant and rave, twisting yourself into a pretzel in an almighty effort to excuse tyrants like that Iranian chap all the more, it shows that you are a base Israeli-basher with obsessive motives.

Its amusing that you quote Adbusters on the New York Times, a paper which netanyahu even refused to write an op-ed for because it is so anti-Israel. A paper in which an Israeli official was subjected to a sustained verbal assault when he visited the Grey Lady's offices. Adbusters has advocated conspiracist theories about the Jews, and listed neo-cons that they considered to be Jewish. So its very fitting that a demagogue like yourself cites it.

Tell your arsehole of a friend (if he exists in your childlike fastasist brain) that Britain abandoned the Jews in the Holocaust.

Yusuf said...

Salam,

Hay Ted Merry Hollidays and a happy New Year from my good self and your friends in the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community Ireland.

Wasalam

The System Works said...

builderman: The Irgun consisted of about 1500-2000 fighters. There is no way they could have ethnically cleansed Arab predominantly Arab cities like Jaffa, but their actions did scare many into leaving. The ALA alone was three times bigger than the Irgun at the height of their presence. The ALA being the members of Arab armies who infiltrated the region before the invasion of the Arab countries in May.

Many of the places you name were actually incorporated into the Jewish state, not the Arab one, in the UN partition plan.

I did a review of that awful propaganda piece 'The Promise' here:

http://thesystemworks.wordpress.com/2011/03/04/the-promise-breaks-its-promise/

Rob Harris said...

More bigoted anti-Israel blather Builderman. You sound more and more like a contemptible disingenuous individual. What myths did I write in my last post? You questioned those nations making war on Israel within a day of the state’s foundation. Israel’s independence was declared on the 14 May and within hours Arab forces invaded, with a formal declaration of war the following day where the Arab nations sent a cable to the UN proclaiming Palestine a single Arab state. Did the Egyptians not order UNIFIL troops out of the Sinai in 1967, did a coalition of Arab forces not mount a surprise attack in 1973 on a religious holiday, nearly destroying Israel until the US came to the rescue with the airlift?

It doesn’t matter if there was conflict was outside the tiny UN planned state. The Arabs rejected it remember? There were Jewish communities all over the Mandate, and there were a number of acts of ethnic cleansing by Arab forces, destroying Jewish communities, and permanently cleansed them outside the Armistace lines. What of Jewish refugees forced from those Arab nations? They were a substantially larger number than the Palestinians (many of the 650,000+ refugees were actually economic migrants) http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/jewref.html numbering 850,000.

Ok Ahmadinejad is a politician so we shouldn’t believe what he says. And here I was thinking that the likes of Hitler and Stalin not politicians too? That has to be one of the stupidest comments I have ever heard. We shouldn’t believe him? That suits you down to the ground considering your views the place.

AntiWar is a joke of a website http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2011/02/antiwarcom-blatant-anti-semitic-lying.html even a site like Daily KOS objects to their conspiracist, neigh on anti-Semitic conspiracist drivel http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/07/09/129084/-Antiwarcom-Is-NOT-a-Legitimate-Source such as the Jews knowing about the 9/11 attacks and the 7/7 bombings beforehand.

The British shafted Israel and the Jews. How big of them to “liberate” the camps when in reality they could have easily destroyed them long before, how big of the British to say no to an offer by the Germans for a modest amount of infrastructure in exchange for a million Jewish lives, how big of the British to renege on the promises of the Mandate and fail to establish a Jewish state (with their establishment pretending it wasn’t to be such within months, despite the clear wording of the text) because it wasn’t in their interests as their new Arab oil rich friends didn’t want it. How lovely to see them ceding 78% of the Mandated territory to Transjordan after a few months, how nice to see these friends of Jewdom colluding with Arabs to generate a sectarian climate in Palestine, leading to massacres of Jews such as in 1929, how nice of Britain to train Arab only security forces, how nice of Britain to let in a massive number of poor Egyptians to try to make the establishment of a Jewish state impossible, how wonderful to restrict entry of Jewish people into the region, especially during the era of the Third-Reich and the Holocaust itself, when the Jewish equivalent of Irish coffin ships of Holocaust survivors were turned away by the British leading to the drowning of thousands, how nice of Britain to be the principle power at the time to campaign very intensively against the UN partition plan, how nice of Britain to train and arm many of Israel’s foes during the 1948/9 war, how nice of Britain to be one of only two states in the world to recognise Jordan’s annexation of Jerusalem/West Bank in ‘50.

Gee the Jooz should be grateful!! Next you’ll be wondering why the Irish don’t like the British, and sure didn’t the Famine help Ireland? You increasingly sound like you are lecturing ignorant Paddies on these blogs by the way.

Paul said...

I did entertain hopes for builder man that he may provide a balanced point of view, I was wrong.

Anonymous said...

Yusuf from the Ahmadiyya sect is being dishonest in wishing you a happy xmas. Their cult leader, who was an opium addict, cursed Jesus. Muslims on the other hand respect and honour this noble prophet.

Yusuf is also being dishonest as his cult believe you are all hell bound and the sons of prostitutes as long as you remain outside of Ahmadiyya and refuse to pay the cult fees called chana.

As for us at eiremuslim we will speak the truth, know that this festival is evil in its origins and present day practice. Abandon your recklessness, drunkenness and licentiousness before the day of reckoning comes upon you and all is lost. Accept Islam for your salvation.

Anonymous said...

Yusuf from the Ahmadiyya sect is being dishonest in wishing you a happy xmas. Their cult leader, who was an opium addict, cursed Jesus. Muslims on the other hand respect and honour this noble prophet.

Yusuf is also being dishonest as his cult believe you are all hell bound and the sons of prostitutes as long as you remain outside of Ahmadiyya and refuse to pay the cult fees called chana.

As for us at eiremuslim we will speak the truth, know that this festival is evil in its origins and present day practice. Abandon your recklessness, drunkenness and licentiousness before the day of reckoning comes upon you and all is lost. Accept Islam for your salvation.

Paul said...

'Abandon your recklessness, drunkenness and licentiousness before the day of reckoning comes upon you and all is lost. Accept Islam for your salvation.'

No thanks but happy Christmas to everyone else on this blog? Ted banned you from posting ages ago if you remained anonymous.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I have never suggested
the Arabs were saints and they committed atrocities too. My point was that the Jews had a long considered plan for Eretz Israel and implemented it ruthlessly, disregarding the UN Mandate. They
assassinated UN Mediator Count Bernadotte remember.The British armed
and trained 22,000 Jews to crush the Arab Revolt in 1936, virtually
guaranteeing a Jewish victory in 1948.The Special Night Squads were
particularly ruthless and killed
at random. In the squads were Moshe
Dayan and Yigal Allon and led by the generally acknowledged nutter, Orde Wingate.I would not try to excuse British policies towards the Jews. Like any superpower, it acted in its own interest first.I don't know how many times I have to point out that I support (incl. financially)the OPPOSITION to Ahmadinajad. Hitler had absolute power and a popular mandate. Stalin
had absolute power and a manufactured acclaim which persists
today.The highest authority in Iran is the Supreme Leader. Below that is a 12 member Guardian Council who
can veto the President whose role is more representative than policy
making. Protests against him in Iran are persistant and ever more
vocal.By exaggerating and encouraging Israel to bomb Iran will suit him just fine. It will unify the people through nationalism and silence his critics.It would suit Israel as it always needs an enemy in order to
manipulate the simplistic (see Orwells 1984) of whom there are many in the USA, its most important
audience.I recommend a book: The Lion's Shadow by Fariborz Mokhtari. It tells the story of Abdol-Hossein Sardari - the Iranian Schindler who
saved thousands of Jews from the Holocaust and to whom Israel accords the status of the
Righteous.The author says:'he represents the true, tolerant Iranian culture that is still alive today.' My friend was a foot soldier and spoke about what he saw.He had nothing to do with the
machinations of politicians. I have
many friends in Ireland in spite of
the history or perhaps because of because I always acknowledge the
truth. Being personally insulting is a sure sign you have lost the argument.

builder man said...

To The System Works.My information on Jaffa comes from 'City of Oranges; Arabs and Jews in Jaffa' by Adam LeBor
which is a balanced account criticising both sides.The Haganah were against attacking but the Irgun,
using their usual ruthless terrorist
tactics (killing orphaned children
with bombs and mortars) prevailed.
They did not, however, molest the
remaining Arabs after their victory, so accusations of genocide are unfounded. Ethnic cleansing was
part of the general policy though.
I looked at your blog for your review of 'The Promise'. It is verbatim, word by word, the same review in CIF watch, a Zionist pro-
Israel group. Is there some cross-
funding here? It has been favourably reviewed by ex. servicmen blogs. Yet to appear on
US tv. The land of the free?
I looked at your Bibi interviews. You are kidding, yes? A selected,
cheering audience with the host saying 'an honour to meet you'!
Really searching stuff! He then
compared Hamas rockets which I agree are unpleasant,traumatic, occasionly dangerous and in international law
illegal, with the German V1 and V2
which killed thousands and took out
whole streets in the UK. As one of
the kids who had to sleep in air raid shelters at night and witness
the destruction the next day, his remarks are insulting and obviously
intended for an American audience who were spared such things and too
ignorant to find out about others.
His enthusiasm for the only free Arabs in the region did not extend to their freedom to buy property anywhere in Israel. And no mention
that US support for regimes like Mubaraks Egypt is what
curtails the freedom of other
Arabs.He's a clever shyster though.

builder man said...

To Paul. I'm sorry that you think I do not have a balanced view. When there is occupation and oppression,
then balance is not appropriate.
Would you have wanted a balanced view
of Nazi Germany? It's up to you where
you form your opinions and I have
suggested some ideas. I collect for the British Legion because I will be eternally grateful for their sacrifice
that allows me to think freely and
express my views. I am surprised
that you do not respect veterans
like Major Cooper enough to
consider their views. Good luck!

The System Works said...

builderman: I don't get any money for blogging apart from the occasional generous donation.

I don't think those kind of preachy-lefty dramas are to the taste of American audiences. If they are, they are not put out by public broadcasters (land of the free, somewhat). At least the Americans don't have to subsidize tv shows created to assuage the guilt of the white leftist westerners that make them.

On your remarks to Rob: There is no such thing as a 'true' Iranian culture when it comes to tolerance towards Jews. The Persian-Jewish relationship has had its ups and downs. You can see on my own review of The Promise how easy it is to poke holes in one of the founding myths of the Palestine religion, that before Zionism Jews and Arabs lived in bliss and peaceful coexistence. The same is true with regards to Iran.

Rob Harris said...

You claim you never suggested the Arabs were saints. Wrong, it can be inferred from your argument that they are the righteous ones since you only have eyes for condemning and demonising Israel to the extent you ignore the wrongs of the other side completely. Its not enough to go the “I don’t support Hamas but…” jive. It’s a pretty tired routine and will only convince those that want to be convinced.

And here you go again about “Jews” implementing a plan for Eratz Israel “ruthlessly”, disregarding the UN plan. Bullshit, what UN mandate? There was none other than the UN partition plan. The Jews supported it very strongly. The Arabs rejected it utterly as they rejected peace with the three “no’s” in 1967. There were massive celebrations due to it but Britain according to Arab wishes put the kibosh in it, not even letting UN personnel in to the Mandate to help put the plan in place when the Brits left.

Who is the “they” who assassinated Count Bernadotte? If you mean the Lehi, a radical leftist group who carried out the act, then the “they” you use is certainly misleading, meaning Jews generally. In fact the Lehi split afterward due to a strong public reaction to the act in proto-Israel even though Bernadotte had rejected the UN partition plan, and proposed his own plan instead which was generous to the Arabs http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/bernplan.html but was still rejected.

Yes the British helped train around 20,000 Jews but that was only after the Arab Revolt of 1936-39, when it was in their interests to do so. It did in no way guarantee Jewish victory in 1948. That’s utter rubbish. As I said, the British trained and armed the Arab militaries in the lead up to the 1948 war clearly with the intent of crushing Israel. This included heavy armaments and planes. By contrast the Israeli side bolted together a few spitfires until buying around 25 or so from Albania (NOT Britain).

You are playing the “Oh Ahmadinajad is just a fool and a puppet” game which I see on many forums. Yes the highest authority in Iran is the Supreme Leader but the President is not more representative than policy making. Oh yeah, protests against him are “persistant”, ever heard of what happened to the Green Revolution? lol It was brutally put down. Your grip on facts is weak. His critics are already silenced so Israel bombing the place won’t make a huge difference as long as it doesn’t harm civilians.

You state Israel will use a nuclear Iran as a sort of false flag situation to “manipulate the simplistic of whom there are many in the USA”. This shows the extent of your bias. BTW I like how patronising you are about the Americans. One of the things I really dislike about the British and French is the arsey-ness over American folks. Get over the fact that you aren’t the big boys on the block anymore.

So let me get this straight, because one Iranian chap helped save a significant number of Jews over 60 years ago, you use it to prove they now have a culture of tolerance toward Jews? It was one of the significant population centres culturally. However, Jews there were persecuted to a greater extent especially in the 19th Century leading them to flee to Palestine. Iran still had up to 100,000 Jews living there until the 1979 Revolution. Now it is 20,000, and they are subjected to very real discrimination still, some of which is officially sanctioned http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/iranjews.html frequently accused of being Zionists, for which a number have been executed.

To be honest, I think you deserve an insult here and there for the horse shit you have been shamelessly spouting, even justifying the Basji! It shows the depths to which pro-Palestinians will since to defend all of Israel’s enemies. You will say black is white just to suit your intellectually dishonest arguments.

Paul said...

Builder man, of course I respect veterans I may disagree however with their individual views. There is no comparison whatsoever between Israel and Nazi Germany as you insinuate with your other point. A very childish and cheap statement indeed. You have gone out of your way here to make excuses for terroristic and fascist individuals and organisations. As others have commented and you have stated several untruths about Israel itself and it's history. Enjoy your turkey sandwiches I feel our debate may be other.

Ted Leddy said...

Excellent discussion guys, I am a bit late joining I'm afraid but there will be lots more similar rows to come.

Oi, Liamo, I told you you're banned. Your future comments will be deleted, unless of course you decide to identify yourself and lose the Jew hatred. But I do hope you had a happy Christmas, even though I am not supposed to wish you that, not according to this guy anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFW3ZNC8sjw

builder man said...

To Paul. If you don't read their books, how do you know you disagree
with them? I try not to stick labels on people, so I would appreciate your
view of the respect due to the hundreds of thousands of muslims who
fought for the UK in WW2. If I meet
anyone who disparages muslims generally (I'm not talking about the idiots who put up sharia law posters
on lamp posts in the East End), then
I refer them to the citation for Ali Haider V.C.
No turkey sandwiches - I'm a vegetarian! How did a big meat eater become a vegetarian? Easy -
an open mind. How did a believer in
Israeli myths become a Palestinian
supporter? Easy - an open mind!

builder man said...

To The System Works. Throughout history minorities have suffered and
still do.The experience of the Jews is exceptional but not unique, and when they have been in positions of
power they have behaved just as badly.The Ukrainian Holocaust, when
7 million died of starvation as a
result of Stalin's collectivisation,
those in charge were Bolshevik Jews. Now in Palestine we see constant human rights abuses against a minority. I once supported the ANC in its struggle for democratic rights. Now I condemn it for its abuses in Government. We should support people of integrity like Desmond
Tutu who also condemns it -quote
'worse than apartheid', a phrase
he also uses about the situation
in Palestine. A new Palestine Government will have a constitution
based on human rights. Will they
honour it when they have more power? There are no guarantees but
they deserve the chance.It's up to
those of us who believe in freedom
and democracy to constantly monitor
comment and act when we can to sustain it. What makes that more difficult is the hyprocrisy of many
western countries who proclaim its
virtues but when they see it being
abused as it is in Palestine, say
little or nothing about it.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. If the Jews strongly
supported the partition plan, why didn't they stick to it?We now know from released documents that this was just the first stage in the plan for a Greater Israel. The truth of history is the reality on the ground. The assassins of Count Bernadotte were
national heroes and their leader
Yitzhak Shamir was later elected
prime minister. This served Israel's interests because his plan
would have fixed boundaries, allowed return of refugees and internationalized Jerusalem, all of
which Israel has circumvented through force. But it would have been a fairer solution and possibly
avoided a lot of conflict. What the
Jews did after 1936 was to consolidate their forces (always
greater than the Arabs), build
secret arms factories etc. The Palestinian forces were decimated,
and were complacent enough to mistakenly rely on the Arab countries for support, who all had
their own agendas and were disunited.The British training was
longstanding and did not escalate.
In fact, as a result of a mistake,
the entire Egyptian air force was
destroyed by the British on May22
1948.'Bolting together a few spitfires' is another myth I'm afraid. The Machal is a list of the
thousands of foreigners who fought
for Israel - many not Jewish. One
of them was Englishman Gordon Levett who was committed to the cause and instrumental in the founding of the IAF.He organised and flew 25 Avia S99 fighters and
76 Mk.9 Spitfires and huge amounts
of weapons from Czechoslovakia to
Israel in early 1948.What the Jews
also had was plenty of money. They
used mercenaries and in Levett's
book, 'Flying under 2 flags', he tells of Americans being paid 2,000
dollars a month and 500 dollars for
every plane shot down. They also
had mustangs shipped illegally from
America and transporters converted
to bombers. (See IAF v RAF). The best unbiased account is from Israeli historian Avi Shlaim. The
various conflicting power bases in Iran continue to prove that Ahmadinajad does not have unbridled
dominion and can be removed at anytime. What I defend is decency and justice everywhere. On that point I still have yet to hear from
you what are Israel's boundaries. I
support those values whenever I can
in Iran, Israel and here in the UK.
The sweep of history is on our side
-not least amongst moderate Israelis, where we have many contacts. Recently we put on the film 'Budrus'. I recommend it to you.
prime minister.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I forgot to mention your slur on my attitude to Americans. I consider them to be a
friendly and generous people but their ignorance of international affairs is legendary and many surveys have confirmed this. (Not to mention
Sarah Palin!). In a recent one, 37% of Americans were unable to answer a
single question whereas Mexico, Spain
Italy,Canada, Germany, Britain and
France averaged 19%.One reason is
their media. They have no equivalent of the BBC, whose noble
ideals have been exported around
the world. President Kennedy instituted public broadcasting because he was so disgusted at the
domestic output, but it is a poor
relation. There are signs of hope.
The new Jewish lobby group J Street
want to 'give a voice to the majority of the American Jewish Community that is liberal and open
and isn't supportive of settlements
opposed the Iraq war and isn't keen on a war with Iran.'Also the huge
involvement of young people on the
campuses in support of Palestine is
ever growing. With the latest European statement, Zionist controlled America is becoming isolated and increasingly redundant
on this issue. When Obama finds his
courage again, probably after the
election, we may see a return to
his thoughts on justice spelt out in the Cairo speech.

builder man said...

POSTSCRIPT. Israeli group Zochrot
(remembering) has posted a film of
Palmach veteran Amnon Neumann which
leaves no doubt that Israel is a
gangster state that stole the land from the Palestinians using the most
brutal methods. At last the world is
waking up. In spite of billions
spent on PR, Israel is a toxic brand.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman: You’re wish to rewrite history is unrelenting. The Jews did strongly support the partition plan. You are deliberately obfuscating by asking why they didn't stick to it. They didn’t because the Arabs rejected it outright, just as they rejected all other solutions outright so it didn’t work. You hold Israel/Jews to one standard and Arabs (and lets face it everyone else as well) to another. The Arabs declared war on Israel. It was up to the country to get as much territory as it could in the interests of its own state in the face of hostile neighbours that had far greater resources.

You claim “we now know from released documents that this was just the first stage in the plan for a Greater Israel”. Abject bullshit. Of course some Israeli’s wanted to reclaim all of Israel but the reality is that Israel wanted to find peace, even after the 1967 war when Israel were expecting a peace deal, the Arab League responded in Khartoum by issuing the “three no’s” (no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel) http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/khartoum.asp – yet despite the failure of a comprehensive peace with the Arab nations, Israel actually gave back about 78% of the territory they took (the Sinai and then left Gaza) during that war, and took none in the 1973 war.

Count Bernadotte effectively wanted to sign away a Jewish state, and have some sort of weak bi-national state which would have resulted in instant civil war, and effectively stopped Jewish immigration into the Jewish zones by leaving permission up to the Arabs to do so. A fairer deal indeed. lol The deal was a joke to the Jewish side so no doubt some agreed with his assassination but the Lehi was still disbanded after the event due to extreme condemnation of the act. Even so it is a fact that the Arab side rejected the deal. Why? Because they wanted to DESTROY Israel. Get it through your head.

Some of your points are just bolted together, and don’t follow. The fact is that Jews in the Mandate were precluded from training in the British forces for a long time. For example, they were not allowed train as pilots in the RAF until 1943. Britain had a grand plan of essentially giving the Mandate back to the Arabs (perhaps uniting it with Syria), and training Jews in combat would’ve been counter that plan.

Who were the Palestinian forces decimated by? You imply Israel. The Arab Higher Committee was established in 1936 in the early stages of the 1936-39 Arab Revolt by friend of Hitler, and Nazi sympathesiser, al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. They were behind the terrorist activity of the revolt, and ejected from the Mandate by Britain. They started “Army of the Holy War” as a military force to fight in 1947. Arab nations chose the ALA, as they were explicitly on the side of the British.

You say “'Bolting together a few spitfires' is another myth I'm afraid.” It isn’t a myth. The Israeli forces used parts and the remnants of crashed planes to build three or so. They did not get any from Britain. They got planes in Eastern Europe as I already said http://101squadron.com/101real/people/senior.html

You state “What the Jews also had was plenty of money.” – oh, some Jews had money had they? How awful. I bet it compares with emerging oil-rich Arab nations that had a vast resources at their disposal.

You have clearly indicated in your posts above that you have no idea whatsoever about “bias” so stop the continual the book and film recommendations. What a patronising thing to do.

You claim “The various conflicting power bases in Iran continue to prove that Ahmadinajad does not have unbridled dominion and can be removed at anytime.” What utter shit especially after I reminded you of the brutal suppression of supporters. What a strange land you mind must occupy. Did it ever occur to you that he is also in power because he shares the same ideals as the supreme religious leader? Its comical how you trot out every fucking excuse to dismiss serious threats to Israel. Unbiased indeed!

The System Works said...

builder man: Communism is a great evil. The most murderous, inhuman ideology in the history of mankind. Jew or Gentile, those who take up that ideology are on the side of evil and just as repulsive as Nazis. Yes, Jews were over-represented in the Bolshevik hierarchy, particularly under Lenin, but at the end of the day most of Stalin and Lenin's henchmen were not Jews but of an Orthodox Christian background (indeed, Stalin trained to be a monk). Of course, many of those Bolshevik Jews were anti-Zionist and eagerly worked to persecute fellow Jews who clung to Zionism or the Jewish religion.

Whats funny is that you condemn the actions of Jewish communists in the Ukraine and the communist racists in the ANC, but promote the work of Jewish communists in Israel. Zochrot's insignificant grassroots membership is almost all communist, and their funding is almost entirely from abroad. They are even supported by Oxfam. And their name doesn't even make sense, because the verb 'zachor' is masculine, not feminine. They use a feminine form in order to "challenge what it sees as the masculine historical narrative". This tells you everything you need to know about the postmodernist, Cultural Marxist loonies of that organisation. Similarly, the Israeli Jewish academics like Ilan Pappe who try to undermine Zionism are mostly communists. Pappe even stood for election for the Israeli Communist Party.

Rob Harris said...

To Builderman. Yet ANOTHER long comment and a short one! Stop writing all these essays. You were doing the same before on another blog. Get your thoughts in order and stick tightly to the points.

I did not make any “slur” on your attitude to Americans. What a joke. You stated: “By exaggerating and encouraging Israel to bomb Iran will suit him just fine. It will unify the people through nationalism and silence his critics.It would suit Israel as it always needs an enemy in order to manipulate the simplistic (see Orwells 1984) of whom there are many in the USA, its most important audience.” You stated that Americans are simplistic people. Could it be any more clear than that?

I have British ancestry myself, and I don’t hate the English but so many have an ugly patronising attitude to Americans that it would be fair if not charitable to call it a cuntish attitude. That’s exactly what you have my friend. The French are the same if not worse with their blatant arseholism. You trot out Sarah Palin as an example. She is a laughing stock amongst Americans even more than in Britain. I have spoken with people in Britain who didn’t even know where Dublin is. I hate the BBC. What a shower of arrogant all-knowing leftist twats. I recall what Peter Sissons said about that place in his excellent autobiography. He stated that anyone who had vaguely conservative values wouldn’t stand a chance of promotion. The Americans have a lot of radio and television public service broadcasters.

Its funny how your shower (pro-Palestinians) scream and rage on about the “Jewish lobby” just like a lot of ZOG fantasists but still praise a group like “J Street”. At certain times they even dropped the claim they were Jewish, feature Arab extremists at a good number of their conferences, and there are questions about their funding. They do not represent a majority of Jews. Statistics still prove that the majority of Jews in the US support Israel even if they are thick enough to vote for the democrats.

You show your blatant fanaticism when you talk about “Zionist controlled America” – you could be David Duke’s twin, and you have made utterances in the past that also made me question your attitude toward Jews, e.g. when you claimed Jews were using their finances to control British foreign policy.

Same thing when you blame the “Jews” for what you artfully call the “Ukrainian Holocaust”, that appalling famine which Stalin is responsible for, where around 4.5 million people died according to best estimates. Firstly a small but quite significant number of Jews died in said “Holocaust”. Secondly, a few years later Stalin was executing a large number Jewish people in the USSR in the Great Purge.

You said “What I defend is decency and justice everywhere.” – that’s comical coming from a chap who actually relativised Iran’s use of Basji child martyrs! You’ve scraped the bottom in terms of depravity.

Paul said...

'they have no equivalent of the BBC, whose noble
ideals have been exported around
the world.'

Good God man please remove head from your rectum! The BBC is a biased left wing and anti-Israel body. Whose employees paid out of a public purse openly weep at the funerals of dead terrorists. Don't take my word for it read what Robin Aiken, David Vance or Peter Sissons have had to say on the subject. Nowhere here have you provided a sensible, balanced or well referenced view on the subjects concerned. You have also conveniently ignored entire historic facts in favour of anti-western relativism.

My own personal view is that British policy in Palestine after 1945 was illegal, immoral and unfair towards the Jews. A group that (unlike the Nazi supporting Arabs) had offered long support to Britain. But you can't change history the onus on any western democracy is good diplomacy and support to the Jewish state as a means of reconciling past differences. It is possible to do that of course with a western country and culture. Not so with militant Islam which wants to destroy the west starting with Israel whom they particularly hate as they are Jewish and democratic.
.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. The reason these blogs
are getting longer is because nearly
every sentence of yours is so inaccurate and slanted that it takes
a lot of information to counter.
The Arabs were the indegenous majority pop. Why should they accept
their country being stolen? Origins are the Balfour Dec.Drafted by a Zionist and manipulated into effect
by Zionists. Israeli historian Avi Shlaim:'One nation promising another nation the land of a third nation''The greatest contradiction
lay in supporting the right of determination of a minority(9%) while implicity denying it to the majority (91%)' 'British actions tended to weaken the Arabs and strengthen the Zionists.'The Sinai. The US made massive commitments for
aid,technology and diplomatic support. It was a very good deal for Israel. Left Gaza? Israel controls everything and has stolen their gas.In 1940 there was a Jewish pilot in the Battle of Britain. In 1940, 15 Jewish battalions were formed in the British Army and one was attached to the East Kents IN PALESTINE.
The Palestinians were decimated by the British using armed Jewish groups 1936-39. 1948 Effect confirmed by the Palmach veteran:'
There were no battles with the Palestinians. They had no weapons.'
The vast majority of Jewish planes were not 'bolted together'. The facts I gave before are irrefutable. I said the majority of Americans are simplistic when it comes to international affairs and
anyone who's been there knows this.
The BBC has it's faults and because
it depends on the gov.for funding, left or right, can get nervous. There is every range of opinion on
it. Who do you think is better-Fox
News?The players in the Ukrainian
Holocaust are well documented. This
does not make the Jews a horrible people but just like the rest of us
Sometimes the aggressor, sometimes
the victim. But not ALWAYS the victim.I did not 'relativise' the
Basji. It's obviously wrong but as the Palmach veteran said, 'in wars
horrible things happen.'He confirmed one such. They raped a 17
year old Arab girl. After they had
finished with her, they shot her in the head. Then, to destroy any evidence,they 'cleaned her up.' Did
the Arabs commit atrocities? Of course they did. But don't expect
an intelligent person to believe
the Hollywood myths of a moral,clean cut army of defenceless
Davids taking on the might of an
Arab Goliath.
?

builder man said...

To The System Works. Communists are
as various as Catholics. It's an idealistic idea which has failed in practice and led to repressive, evil
regimes.However, the International
Brigade (many affiliated to communist
groups) fought the fascists in the
Spanish Civil War. So just because
Zochrot has communists in its organisation does not automatically
make it evil in my view.Anyway they
are just the conduit.What is more
important is what is the validity
and truth of the Palmach's veteran
evidence? Why would he lie? He was
guarded but obviously wanted, with
some prompting, to tell the truth of HIS experiences. This is not necessarily the general experience,
but many other sources confirm the
ethnic cleansing and the brutal methods used by the Jews. I'm reading at the moment Weeds Don't
Perish, the autobiography of Zionist Hanna Braun, who was in the
Haganah in the War of Independence
and knew Moshe Dayan. She confirms the methods used.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman claims: “The reason these blogs are getting longer is because nearly every sentence of yours is so inaccurate and slanted that it takes a lot of information to counter.” – what a load of shite. I have asked Builderman repeatedly what he was referring to by way of “myths” such as “What myths did I write in my last post? You questioned those nations making war on Israel within a day of the state’s foundation. Israel’s independence was declared on the 14 May and within hours Arab forces invaded, with a formal declaration of war the following day where the Arab nations sent a cable to the UN proclaiming Palestine a single Arab state. Did the Egyptians not order UNIFIL troops out of the Sinai in 1967, did a coalition of Arab forces not mount a surprise attack in 1973 on a religious holiday, nearly destroying Israel until the US came to the rescue with the airlift?” He didn’t answer, surprise!

The real reason Builderman’s posts are long is because he can’t keep on topic. As he did on the Eirael forum, when one of his points is smacked down, he just brings up more and more drivel which correspondingly leads my posts to become longer to reply to about new 10 points at a time.

Ahh so now we get to it: “The Arabs were the indegenous majority pop. Why should they accept
their country being stolen?” That is the basics of Builderman’s simplistic world. Indigenous simply means “from” as in one’s origin. Thus the Jews are actually the indigenous people of that particular region, and contrary to the myth making of your pro-Palestinian compatriots, remained in significant numbers in Palestine until the first millennium. Its well known that the Arabs (AKA Palestinians) are people whose cultural origins are far more recent and of nearby territory, principally Syria. Their culture is no different to that of Syria. Anyone was a Palestinian before and during the British Mandate, Christian, Jew or Muslim, e.g. the pro-Zionist Jerusalem Post was called the Palestine Post. The name merely referred to those that lived there. Arafat’s great victory was in co-opting the name for his lot.

Your great “unbiased” (translation: he agrees with you) Israeli historian Avi Shlaim doesn’t have a fucking clue. It wasn’t merely promised by one nation. The Balfour declaration wouldn’t have meant shit without the League of Nations. His claim that 'British actions tended to weaken the Arabs and strengthen the Zionists.' is also utter bullshit. As I stated above the British severely limited Jewish immigration, whilst encouraging vast Arab economic immigration in Egypt. This is a matter of fact. They promised Palestine to Syria which led King Abdullah to form the ALA to snuff out chances of a Jewish state. The British helped train and arm Egypt and Jordan particularly, knowing full well war would commence against a prospective Jewish state. Britain was the only major power of the era to campaign intensively against UN 181 for partition, and one of only two nations to recognise Jordan’s annexation of Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1950. You can lie all you want but you won’t convince.

British interests lay with appeasing the Arabs for their own strategic interests. As Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain said “if we must offend one side, let us offend the Jews rather than the Arabs.”

You lie about the Sinai. The US made big commitments for money but for both sides to sign the deal. Israel actually got the less impressive part because the money the received was based in late 1970’s oil prices for the highly productive Israeli oil fields that they developed there so in the long term they made a major economic loss. Fuel security was especially important for Israel at this time so the loss was two-fold. The territory, which was a lot larger than Israel itself, provided vital strategic security if another invasion occurred. Israel gave all that up for peace. Egypt gained that territory back, the oil fields, and a great deal of aid that made them a larger military power than Israel, the 11th biggest.

builder man said...

To Paul.Thank you for putting me the way of those blogs. I couldn't find Aiken.Sissons didn't say 'bias' but
'mindset'. I think that's fair. The BBC recruits arts graduates who probably are still idealistic enough
to believe in socialism. Mind you, so
did Jesus, but I don't think we are
developed enough as a species yet to make it work. The David Vance blog I found unconvincing.Is that
the same NI guy with the right wing
blog 'A Tangled Web'?Probably not
because he goes on the BBC.Evidence
I think of the multiplicity of views you can find there.It's a big
organisation so can be wasteful.In
the 60's I was working in Maidstone
prison and the officers were complaining about a BBC crew.'There's 10 of 'em, been 'ere
for weeks, God knows what they're
doing!I listened to the Humphreys
interview on Afghanistan. He was
courteous, mentioned 'our brave
soldiers', but it's his job to ask
what have the sacrifices been for.
The thousands of civilians too. In
WW1 for every civilian killed, 10
soldiers died. Now for every soldier killed, 10 civilians die.
I went to Afghanistan (in 1988),interested in its history.
Best book:'The Taliban' by Ahmed
Rashid.In the 80's, the Russians
went in to support the communist
gov.(no democracy but at least girls went to school and women
graduated from uni). They were defeated after Reagan(with Thatcher's support) recruited Bin Laden et al and armed them with Stinger missiles. Gorbachev made a
unique offer. He would pull out and they should join together to counter Islamic Fundamentalism, then on the rise. Reagan, a fanatical anti-communist,refused.Could have avoided the loss of thousands of lives,including 9/11.This is why
narrow, short term actions (like
bombing Iran!)never work. All the
facts on the Web. When I've more time I'll look again at the blog.

Rob Harris said...

Builder man, pretend all you want but Israel left Gaza. They only instituted a blockade after Hamas got into power on a mandate of continued conflict. A blockade is obviously a controlling influence but it is not anything like an occupation, compared to Hamas, which rules what is effectively a de facto state.

You continue to lie and obfuscate when you assert “The vast majority of Jewish planes were not 'bolted together'. The facts I gave before are irrefutable.” I said that initially the first few planes were made up of parts http://www.iaf.org.il/2540-30131-en/IAF.aspx & subsequently they came from Eastern Europe, which you actually asserted subsequently yourself so stop fucking misrepresenting what I say. Neither did I say there were no Jews in the RAF. I said none were allowed join in Mandated Palestine.

Who is your “Palmach veteran” lol. I did search on Google of your quote http://www.google.ie/#q=there+were+no+battles+with+the+Palestinians.+They+had+no+weapons.%27&hl=en&rlz=1R2ADFA_enIE454&prmd=imvnsb&ei=BOH9TunPI8mChQeS3MS7AQ&start=30&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=1226c557269f8c3f&biw=1280&bih=632 and there are absolutely no hits for it so its probably from a highly dubious source. Here is another Palmach veteran you should cite http://www.thejewishstar.com/stories/West-Hempstead-hostsPalmachveteran,1732?content_source=&category_id=26&search_filter=&event_mode=&event_ts_from=&list_type=most_viewed&order_by=&order_sort=&content_class=&sub_type=&town_id=

You are of course grossly misrepresenting the 1936 Arab Revolt. The Arabs targeted Jewish people during the revolt which began in 1935 with them objecting to Jewish immigration and the purchase of land http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=118&x_article=1691 – it turned against them when they stupidly targeted the British, who used intensive measures to suppress them.

You said: “It would suit Israel as it always needs an enemy in order to manipulate the simplistic of whom there are many in the USA” You stated meant Americans are more stupid than most. That assertion hadn’t to do with international affairs. I found many Americans to be well informed, and less prone to bullshit than many a European (I include the Irish here). Others know more about the Americans than they do in the reverse but that is simply because their programming and film industry is exported around the world to a far greater extent.

No one is pretending Jews are always victims or better than anyone else but the sum of your arguments is that they are worse. You’re the one here making out they’re the aggressor, and exaggerating their influence in Ukraine. Its a perverse thing to do because “Jews” generally didn’t exert a controlling influence, unless I suppose you think Stalin was Jewish too like a lot of far-right conspiracists do.

You did “'relativise' the Basji.” – you excused Iran's use of children as martyrs by stating above that nations do extreme things, and suggested if Germany invaded Britain, the British would use nerve gas which would harm their own populace, in response after I cited the Basji. What a pathetic sickening reply, drawing equivalences between using children to walk over landmines and attack armed soldiers with sticks. Here you trot out the “oh horrible things happen in war” bullshit before going on in lurid detail about more atrocities Jews have made before troting out a “oh of course the Arabs were bad too” sentiment to appear balanced after myself and others repeatedly challenged you over that fact. It won’t convince after your continual demonisation. Funny how you don’t extend that attitude toward Jews. As I said, you have one standard for these people and another for the rest of the world, where you make a great effort to excuse abject appalling tyrants and tyranny when it is on the side you support.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. If you go to this link: ‫ you should find the Palmach veteran. The Zochrot films on
YouTube are a good source and this
one will confirm exactly what I said
about the state of the Palestinians in 1948. In the YouTube box put in:
Bridging Memory -Zochrot. I don't
think the Jewish Virtual Library is
a valid source for unbiased information. For instance in its
biography of Count Bernadotte it omits to mention that he was assassinated by Jewish terrorists!
I'll give a longer explanation of your myths in the new year. Happy new year by the way!

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I don't know why the link did not come out. But it's easy to find. Just google his name:Amnon
Neumann. or again in the UTube box his name and Zochrot.Incidentally,
I have aquaintances and contacts with
Jews, Israelis, Muslims,Palestinians
and Arabs who are not Palestinian.

Rob Harris said...

To Builderman: for someone who has quoted sources that advance anti-Semitic conspiracy theory like Adbusters to criticise the Jewish Virtual Library is comical but then again you believe Jews control the White House, British foreign policy etc. Whilst the Jewish Virtual Library is not a neutral source because they obviously write from a Jewish perspective, they do not hide that fact (hence the name), and most importantly their articles are well referenced, and facts easily verifyable. The biography of Count Bernadotte is found here http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Bernadotte.html and it does mention he was assassinated by the Stern Group (AKA Lehi) so you’re wrong there too.

I asked you numerous times to explain my “myths” and your lengthy blathering replies failed. I don’t care what the Zochrot films say. Israeli pro-Palestinians are a dime a dozen. I heard it all before because they are given huge coverage internationally (many are well known names) as if to say “Look these are Israeli’s so we’re not anti-Semitic”. Thus its amusing that you act as if the pro-Palestinian message is rarely heard!! It is predominate throughout the mainstream media. I grew up in Ireland where media treatment of the issue is even more one-sided than in the UK, where Arafat was welcomed as a hero so give it a rest. I know this stuff as would SystemWorks and maybe Ted as well. We’ve heard virtually all your arguments a thousand times before, and they have failed to convince.

I think even you must know I view you as a dishonest immoral individual who could essentially excuse the use of child suicide bombers by Iran because Iran oppose the side you clearly loathe (Israel) but then that is per the course for many pro-Palestinians. It isn’t at all the fact that they criticise Israel as no country should be above criticism, and I have criticised the place in the past myself. It is their constant lies I’ve heard over the years to demonise and delegitimise the existence of the sole Jewish nation that I object to. Thus I won’t be hypocritical by wishing you a “happy new year”. I’ll wish you a personally enlightening one instead because I know that nothing I say could ever convince a bigot like yourself.

Rob harris said...

Paul I don’t know if you saw this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html – its an extract of Peter Sissons’ book. His criticism was minimised by a certain someone here. In fact he thrashed the Beeb. He said that people had to actively hide the fact they read non-left papers or risk becoming outcasts, and loose the chance of promotion!!

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. Bernadotte and J.V.L.
Point accepted. The bit I saw didn't
have it but they put out a lot of stuff.As you said, the bias is in the
name.Sissons. I'll follow up the link
but he worked for the BBC for nearly
25 yrs.Excellent pay and pension.Then
when he has a book to sell, he uses
the words that the buyers of his book want to hear.Where were his ethics then, working all those years for an unethical organisation?Myths. You said'bolting a few Spitfires together and LATER buying 25 aircraft.'All following facts from
Wikipedia.These armanent deals were
set up in 1946!The Jews had a secret airfield waiting.They had nearly 100 aircraft before the end
of May.On 29th the IAF was in full
combat mode, on 31st they bombed
Amman and by autumn they had complete AIR SUPERIORITY.You said 'the Palestinians were in the same state to wage war as the Jews.'To wage war successfully you need the three
M's-money,men and materials.The Jews had money from Zionists in USA,always more trained men and women and material thanks to the backing of Stalin with arms from
the Czechs.Also their own caches -
in the kibbutz sufficient in most
cases even to repel the Eqyptian
army - and their own extensive arms
manufacturing in Palestine. The only inferiority was in tanks but they had plenty of anti-tank weapons.The Palestinians were limited to what they already had and did not have enough to wage war.See Wiki and Palmach veteran.To
sum up: The Jews were brave and resourceful, united on the soil they considered theirs and fighting
for their country with massive
assistance from the East and the West.The Arabs were disunited, not
prepared to commit fully and therefore inferior in all three M's
The outcome was never in doubt.
Sinai. Part of the deal was guaranteed oil supplies from Egypt
and USA. Can you really see the Jews not making a good deal?
Israel's quest for energy raises
interesting questions. At www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO200607268&articleId=2824 you will find its
all about oil!Israel is a small country but a BIG player in the global arena. In the 50's Eisenhower (no leftie!),warned of the growing power of the military/industrial complex. It's
not just the US and its not a conspiracy theory-its just the way the world works. Ordinary people are expendable in this game (in Israel itself people are protesting
at inequalities) and 'collateral
damage' is the most obscene phrase.
Manipulation is part of the game. Islamic Fundamentalism. Who encouraged its
growth? The US and the UK.(Wiki)
And it will find areas to exploit
where there is injustice to Muslims
I believe that every person on the
planet has the right to 'life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness' and I campaign in my small way whenever I see that idea
under attack, be it in Iran or
Palestine.I'll finish with Eisenhower, a decent man who saw the very worst aspects of humanity.
'One day the ordinary people of the
world will push aside the politicians and make peace themselves.'

Rob Harris said...

Builderman your dishonesty continues. There is only one biography of Bernadotte on the site as far as I know, and it probably wasn’t condemnatory enough by not naming them as “Jewish terrorists” in your mind. I didn’t say the “the bias is in the name.” I said it wasn’t a neutral source akin to a disinterested information source. The sources you spout such as Adbusters have a demonising biased agenda. Here is a definition of what bias actually means http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/bias – bias is more than being a source that isn’t neutral, it is actually a prejudice or unjust inclination.

More excuses for the BBC. I would expect you to object less to the BBC than Fox. That’s all people on the left seem to bitch about “Fox, Fox, Fox” as if it’s the only broadcaster around. Peter Sissons would not have thrashed the BBC’s reputation the way he did if there wasn’t a lot of truth in it or it would have caused a great deal of outrage, and condemnation of him as a liar because it is extreme. I doubt he worked consistently for the BBC for 25 years as he worked for ITN and Channel 4 too. Why would buyers of his book have wanted him to thrash the BBC when they would have been the ones who would have seen him on it. You really try to find every excuse under the sun when it doesn’t suit you.

I read numerous sources that said initial aircraft Israel had were put together from parts, some salvaged from wrecks. You quote a wiki source and don’t even have the decency to provide links. Wiki can be a dubious source at times unless carefully referenced. Here is they say about the early history of the IAF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli_Air_Force “the Israeli Air Force was officially formed on May 28, 1948, shortly after Israel declared statehood and found itself under immediate attack. At first, it was assembled from a hodge-podge collection of civilian aircraft commandeered or donated and converted to military use. A variety of obsolete and surplus ex-World War II combat aircraft were quickly sourced by various means – both legal and illegal – to supplement this fleet.”

Although it doesn’t mention that some planes were put together manually, that source still lends credence to my point because it states some planes were modified, and they subsequently sourced the military planes from abroad. By contrast you claim they bought them in 1946. That is utter bullshit. Britain would not have allowed in a large number of fighter planes during the time of the Mandate.

You really are a liar. I never said 'the Palestinians were in the same state to wage war as the Jews.' That quote is nowhere to be found in my comments above. I would have said the Arabs were gearing up for war, some nations being trained and armed by the British, and had massive resources at their disposal compared to a small nascent state (Israel) that had little in the way of substantial armaments. I’m sure some Jews did get money from abroad but so what? They were facing massive odds against them.

You are a fantasist. So farm labourers on Kibbutz were able to repel the Egyptian army? lol That would be an embarrassment to the Egyptians rather than a suggestion the Jews had superior arms. Then I hear the Jews had a great arms manufacturing industry (!!) when in reality they probably tried to fashion some guns to defend themselves. Stalin didn’t back Israel but he was unopposed to it initially and gave his backing for UN 181 - they had to buy planes from the Czechs, hardly a gesture of great support. Oh and there is no hit for this precious “Palmach Veteran” after doing several pages of searches.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris.Peter Sissons. From the Press Gazette:Left BBC in 2009.
Autobiography serialised in Daily Mail- a ferocious critic of BBC. We can understand. He has a holiday home in Barbados -very expensive to maintain!For the Palmach veteran just google his name:AMNON NEUMANN.Your Wiki link did not work.In any case you quote from Wiki:'was OFFICIALLY formed on May 28.'The secret of the Jews
victory was that they had (naturally),CLANDESTINE operations
all over the mandate.The DEALS were
set up in 1946, not the deliveries.
Here are my links. Google GORDON LEVETT for the airlifts in early 1948 from Czech. to Israel with
Soviet (i.e. Stalin's)help.Google
1948 Arab-Israeli War, select Wikipedia and you will find the following:'In November 1947 The Haganah was an underground paramilitary force that had existed as a highly organised national force since the riots of
1920-21 and throughout the riots of
1929 and 1936-39''By Sept.47 it had
over 35,000 under arms with 10,500
rifles,702 light machine guns,
2,666 sub machine guns,186 medium
machine guns, 672 2"mortars and 92
3"mortars.Also a relatively advanced arms producing capacity
producing 3million 9mm bullets,
150,000 hand grenades,16,000 sub
machine guns and 210 3" mortars.
On Palestinian weapons on same site:'The equipment of the Palestinian forces was very poor.The British took all their weapons after 1936.'-EXACTLY AS I SAID. The Palmach veteran confirms
this.This refers to the Palestinians not the Arabs but it meant the Jews did not have to worry much about them as they faced
the 'invasion' from the Arabs. On the same site is detailed the mainly poor performance and divisions of the
Arab armies, inferior in everything
except tanks.
I don't wish to be rude but if you are going to post on this subject,
you should really research properly
instead of relying on the Jewish
Virtual Library. It's very time consuming doing it twice and I don't wish to do it again unless
you have some genuine new information.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman I see you are continuing this charade so I will reply to your subsequent points in your second last comment:

Stop making this out to be the Jews versus the Palestinians. Firstly they were all Palestinians at that time. Secondly the conflict was a pan-Arab one and still is. It was the Arabs versus the Jews. The reality is that the British trained and armed professional Arab armies. Britain’s Labour government only stopped supplying the Arabs after the US threatened to supply arms to Israel’s side. It was a massive shock when the Arabs lost by ‘49, and what I mean by lost is that they failed to destroy Israel.

Here is something that will skupper your rubbish about the Jooz being the only bad guys at that time. The head of the Arab League openly threatened http://www.meforum.org/3082/azzam-genocide-threat mass genocide in 1947 toward the future Jewish state. It was an existential war of survival for Jewish people in Israel, some believing a second Holocaust would happen. Elsewhere at same time in the Arab world, there were numerous massacres of Jewish people going on, and the expulsion of vast numbers.

Here you are again quoting anti-Semitic conspiracist sites such as Global Research! Is it time to query whether your own attitude toward Jews? God knows you have made enough utterances and referred to enough anti-Semitic sources to do so. The Jews did make a good deal with Egypt – they opted for peace at the expense of a level of security and economic well-being. The point is they opted for peace.

Correction, Israel is a tiny country, smaller than Munster but its economy is incredible. In Ireland many are advocating the emulation its success by focusing on scientific innovation and education rather than post-industrial “services” as the rest of the world does. So now you appear to be suggesting they are part of some Zionist World Government conspiracy as you mention Israel’s power internationally and “conspiracy”. lol The rest of your post is nonsense about Islamic fundamentalism that I’ll drop for now.

One of the aggravating features of your monologue on here and elsewhere is the fact that you display an extraordinary bias favouring those you feel are against the West, and Israel especially. For example You are disgracefully whitewashing what happened in Afghanistan but being a leftist I suspect all you can possibly do is blame the US. Its in your DNA as Sissons would say. The USSR installed a puppet government which had no support from Afghani’s themselves who then rebelled. The soviets butchered Afghani’s on a grand scale. 1.5 to 2 million http://necrometrics.com/20c1m.htm#Afghanistan died, and a third of the country was pushed out or fled abroad in those nine or so years, and many more displaced. If the Gorbster made such an offer, supposedly at a time when Islamic fundamentalism was on the rise (A dubious story IMHO), it was likely to be when Russia was loosing there on a very grand scale indeed.

Rob Harris said...

Well its strange that your previous link didn’t magically appear and now mine didn’t work either! Is it a Jewish conspiracy to silence a noble critic of Israel? lol Wouldn’t surprise me if you thought that after you accused SystemWorks of being in the pay of Zionists. If the link doesn’t appear fully on the comment, copy it into Word along with a following word, and it will appear completely.

Who cares what some source says about Sissons. Again you cite sources that you cannot back up like your continual references to Wiki without links. His book got great publicity and it is so harsh about the BBC that a backlash would be expected if he had lied through his teeth.

You kept going on about “The Palmach Veteran”. There are many and I googled it, not finding a single reference to this fierce critic of Israel in several pages of listings. I looked up his name and all I saw were references to him on extreme pro-Palestinian sites like the despicable shoah.org and far-right neo-Nazi sites. If the man wants to testify and show his credentials, give names and dates for verification that can be scrutinised by people that would oppose him then his testimony should be taken seriously.

I’m not na├»ve enough to think nasty things were not done by the Israeli side. There was a vicious sectarian conflict there, which was initiated by the Arabs (or “Palestinians” as you call them) such as when they slaughtered a large number of Jews in Jerusalem in the 1840’s. That is the context and I can see that both sides did ugly things. That’s civil war which is typically the most vicious form of conflict.

Your problem is that you completely excuse the Arabs of all wrongdoing and continually bang on about the Jews. Similar or worse stories are told of British Colonials in Australia, what the Turks did to Armenians and Kurds, what Muslims did to Christians, Palestinians to Christians in Lebanon etc. The truth is that few people don’t have blood on their hands so it’s a joke that you only target Israel.

If the deal was set up in 1946 why the fuck are you saying that disproves what I said about the Jews subsequently getting planes? That is the point, when did they actually get them. If it is true, why is this even an issue, after all the Arabs were planning conflict too at this early stage? Stalin sent arms to Syria which was fighting Israel at the time.

You need to familiarise yourself with what “links” are. It isn’t telling someone to Google loads.

I know the Haganah was a paramilitary force. They had existed as a defence against sectarian violence by the Arabs against Jews. So what? Were the Jews not entitled to defend themselves, and defend themselves against the coming war. Is this how stupid it is getting?

On the same Wiki page you quote it also states “the Haganah had no heavy machine guns, artillery, armored vehicles, anti-tank or anti-aircraft weapons, nor military aircraft or tanks.” I was correct to say that the Israeli’s had little in the way of heavy armaments for a period. You moan about guns and a couple hundred mortars against professional armies that were trained and armed by Britain.

The same Wiki page states http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War 'The equipment of the Palestinian forces was very poor. The British took all their weapons after 1936.' Indeed and it proves that they made a colossal mistake by taking on the British as I said before. It also proves they were gearing up for conflict too so what exactly is your problem. I never said the Palestinians were as well armed as the Jews. I stated that the Jews had to take on massive Arab power as this was a pan-Arab conflict. The same page also adds that they had considerable help from other Arab nations before the British left the mandate. Of course you excluded that part conveniently.

What a joke pretending I do all my research at the Jewish Virtual Library. I quoted numerous here. All you pretty much do is quote extremist sites and organisations.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. Afghanistan.I pointed
out that the communist gov. was not
democratic (or pleasant) but what the
West did for its own purposes created
something far worse. The whole point
is that politicians who do not act
with intelligence and who manipulate
others are the curse of the world.
Why support them and excuse them? If
you don't read authentic material
like Ahmed Rashid's book 'The Taliban', then you will never understand. The details of the
Gorbachev offer is at:www.slate.com/articles/news-and-politics/war-stories/2004/06/
reagans-osama-connection.html.
Sissons.His book deal with The Mail
would have been set up well before
publication.That's how these things
work.I don't say he didn't have ANY
valid criticisms of the BBC - I
have some myself-but the book would
have been slanted towards that
specific newspaper and its
readership. To sell books you write
what people want to read.
Palmach veteran. You could not have
googled the name I gave you. I
suspect you don't want to see this.
Arabs. I don't doubt that the Arabs
would have been ruthless towards
the Jews (at least up to a point we
cannot know) had they won.
Conspiracy Theories. I was clear
that these are NOT conspiracy theories but just the way the
modern world works and applies to
all major economies including the
UK.I said that Israel is a small
country geographically -when will
we hear from you what you think
Israel's boundaries should be, by the way -but is a big player on
the world scene. It has the world's
4th largest armed forces,financially connected to big
economies and has highly
technological industries, as you say.As a consequence it is involved
in big schemes with geopolitical
questions. Fact NOT conspiracy.
Haganah. You don't seem able to
distinguish between the different
phases of the fighting in 1947-48.
The Jews had overwhelming
superiority against the Palestinians and neutralised them.
Then, later, when the Arab 'armies'
(remember they never deployed their
their full capabilities and some only a token),'invaded', the Jews had early setbacks against Egypt
and Jordan (again confirmed by the
Palmach veteran)but with the
influx of massive arms shipments
soon afterwards, mainly from Czech.
(with Stalin's help) they turned
the tide.For their sake, thank
goodness they had an Englishman
dedicated to their cause! Gordon
Levett was later honoured by the
Israelis for his commitment.

Paul said...

Rob, you are absolutely right about the BBC and builder man is talking out of his ass. David Vance, Peter Sissons and Robin Aiken are all former beeb employees who have detailed to great extent the degree of the BBC's bias. Indeed Aiken's work 'can we trust the BBC' is one of the most authoritative sources on the subject. Yet of course numbnuts goes on about Sarah Palin and Fox news. Barrack Obama has made vastly more serious gaffs then either Dubya or Palin has but guess what not a smidgen off it on the beeb?

On a separate subject the USSR in Afghanistan, both you and Builderbollocks have made errors with respect.

Al Qaeda and Bin Laden were never supported by the US in any way. Most of their support came from Saudi and other Arab sources as well as Pakistan. Indeed Bin Laden never actually fought in Afghanistan apart from one brief clash with Soviet Forces the rest is mythology.

It's doubtful that the USSR was really defeated in any real way by the Mujahedeen forces ranged against them. They withdrew from an expensive war (proving they controlled the battle space) but left in place a regime that lasted longer than the Soviet Union did, their experience therefore was less traumatic and more successful than US involvement in Vietnam. But that is for a separate day history is full of mythologies.

The System Works said...

builder man: I never understood this worship of the International
Brigades during the Spanish Civil War. The Spanish Republicans were just as nasty as the Nationalists, and a subsequent Stalinist Spain would have been far worse than Franco's.

Franco himself lifted the ban on Jews living in Spain and permitted tens of thousands of Jewish refugees to enter the country and escape Europe. The country remained non-belligerent during World War II (helping and hindering the Nazis in many respects).

Spain and the rest of the world was better off with a Nationalist victory, though I stress I am not a fan of Franco's ideology at all.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, you stated that the government in Afghanistan was not democratic. You did not say it was “unpleasant”, rather it was better than what was before. You blame the West as you do here for what went on when in fact the USSR pushed that form of government on the people, and then committed what would be fairly described as war crimes. What do you do? You give out about Reagan! A twisted morality that illustrates how the left cavorted with tyrannical regimes as long as they are anti-West.

Your response to Sissons was pathetic as you attacked the man rather than consider what he was saying. His book deal was not with The Mail. It was with Biteback which as far as I know is not in business with them. As I said, Sissons would not have merely invented all this very strong stuff because if fabrication it would have destroyed his credibility.

Your criticism of the BBC was mild, and not to do with the matter at issue, that it’s inefficient and isn’t funded sufficiently. You championed it as a noble institution when SystemWorks criticised Adbusters.

I did google the name you gave me, both the “Palmach veteran” and his name, along with other words to try to narrow the search. Just extremist bullshit came up. I already stated here and elsewhere before you mentioned this chap that this was a nasty sectarian conflict - bad was done by both. It was only when I challenged you that you admitted it in one sentence before bashing Israel in the same breath.

We can know that the Arabs would have been genocidal towards the Jews. They were elsewhere at the time and they said often enough that they would be. The simple fact is that it doesn’t suit your demonising stance to accept that Israel had any real fears or still does

They are conspiracy theories, whether you like it or not, and you repeatedly quoted sites that endorse them. Global Research is well known as a site advancing anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, featured material on Holocaust denial http://www.jewishtribune.ca/tribune/jt-050825-05.html and other racist content http://chroniclinghate.wordpress.com/2011/03/04/globalresearch-ca-a-collection-of-racist-fantasies/ along with 9/11 truther bullshit.

It’s a common lie that Israel has the fourth largest military in the world. It’s impossible due to the small populace. It is more like the 19th largest according to the figures I saw two or so years ago but if you have proof from a good online source show it. Egypt has a bigger military - the 11th largest.

You have shown your true colours. You’re a Zionist World Government fantasist.

It was a pan-Arab conflict. Initially it started with the Arabs of Palestine (they were all Palestinian then so stop using obfuscating terminology) who initiated mass conflict in 1936. They were weakened but still supplied with considerable material by neighbouring Arab states before the ALA stepped in with a substantial well armed force. They didn’t neutralise the Palestinians remained in force during the 1948 war itself, with the “Army of the Holy War” having a presence although Arab forces led the conflict by that time. Some Arab armies were token forces but the neighbours (Egypt, Transjordan and Syria) were vastly more committed, sending 60,000 trained troops. Israel conscripted more but it was a makeshift army relying on limited arms. You have also failed to admit that Britain armed Jordan and Egypt, a fact acknowledged in the wiki page you trumpeted.

Rob Harris said...

Hi Paul, thanks I must look up Robin Aiken's material on the BBC. I recall how they also spent a quarter of a million pounds of licence payer's money in legal fees just suppressing a report they themselves commissioned on the quality of ther coverage on the Middle-East, at a time when there was widespread concern over how the licence fee was being used!

You are quite right to say that the USSR wasn't necessarily defeated in Afghanistan. Indeed Gorby wanted to improve relations with the Chinese who demanded that they pull out of Afghanistan. Yet at the same time some view it as something of a defeat or at least a humiliation because they had been in there for nearly ten years and failed to crush the Mujahedeen.

builder man said...

To The System Works. There was little
difference between the Nazis and Franco's Spain, but a big difference
between them and The Popular Front.
The Front won the election in 1936.
DEMOCRACY. Franco was aided by Fascist Germany and Italy. Picasso's
'Guernica' tells one story. Mass killings by Franco, political prisoners taken to concentration
camps and homosexuals to mental asylums tells another. Link:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_
(Spain). But at least we know now where you stand. You prefer a brutal fascist dictatorship that
shares your views to a democracy
that doesn't.

builder man said...

To Paul. From Peter Sissons book:'The
BBC, despite all its imperfections,
can be relied upon to keep the flag of broadcast journalism flying.'
Originally he said 'bias' is too
blunt a word, more a mindset.''Bias'
was the Daily Mail's word who paid him handsomely for serialisation.
It was only later he used the word
'bias'. Link: "Left-wing bias? It's
written through the BBC's very DNA,
says Peter Sissons". He actually
plugs his book on the BBC. So much
for their bias! Link: www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/bOOyc03b.
The truth is the BBC is a broad
church and is accused of left-wing
AND right-wing bias. It will make
mistakes but the volume of output is such that you would be hard pressed not to find most views
expressed there.Balance is often
difficult.Would you like to hear a
'balancing' view from Holocaust
deniers and supporters of the Third
Reich? There are certain historical
scientific and humanitarian issues
that are almost beyond question.
Still question yes - but sensibly.
The Earth really is not flat!
It is true there is no evidence for
Bin Laden receiving funds and weapons directly from the US, but in Jane's Intelligence Review of
10/1/98 they say:'Bin Laden worked
in close association with US agents
There is a wealth of evidence to
prove that they did supply the
Afghan mujahideen. Link: Google:
'Operation Cyclone'. The CHANNEL
was Pakistan. This created an insurgent swamp where Bin Laden
could recruit, arm and train terrorists leading to Al-Quaida and
the Taliban.The USSR withdrew without achieving its aim of
supporting the communist gov. and it was only a matter of time before
the mujahideen prevailed.

The System Works said...

builderman: The differences between Franco's Spain and Nazi ideology are huge.

Republicans were aided by that notoriously oppressive, murderous block known as the Soviet Union.

There was also a 'Red Terror' during the war, you know. The White Terror killed more people, most likely due to the fact that it went on much longer. A Communist Spain close to Soviet ideology would likely have been poorer, more murderous and a sponsor of terrorism and violent Communist revolutions.

I have no loyalties either way, but I am annoyed seeing the hagiography devoted to one side.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I didn't say the
communist gov. was better than BEFORE
but better than what came AFTERWARDS.
I stand corrected on Israel's position in the military hierarchy,
though it is difficult to be accurate
as obfuscation abounds. Israel does not declare its nuclear weapons for
instance. According to Haraatz, Israel spends nearly 20 billion dollars.That would put it in 14th place.But it is technologically
advanced and has a large armanents
industry itself which sells stuff
around the world.Conspiracy theories. Most are questionable but
some are true.In 1956 Israel's attack on Egypt was in collusion
with UK and France. Link: Google:
Protocol of Sevres. All denied it at the time but now proven. In return Israel got nuclear knowhow
from the French. Ben Gurion proposed Jordan divided, East Bank
to Iraq and they take ALL the Palestinians, West Bank to Israel and Israel extended to Litani river.As I said, Israel has always
been a BIG player and this only 8
years after killing British troops!
The Lavon Affair. Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon Affair.
An Israeli false flag operation denied for 51 years until the agents were officially honoured in
2005.The BBC's suppressed Balen
report includes a study taken in
2006 that concluded:'The BBC's
coverage implicitly favoured the
ISRAELI side.' Link: 'BBC bids to
suppress study on Middle East 'bias' -The Independent.' After the
refusal to broadcast the Gaza appeal agreed especially as the new DG Mark Thompson had a private meeting with Ariel Sharon in 2005.
Link:Google Mark Thompson. His wife
is Jewish but there is no evidence
of any pro-Israel activity on her
part but she has family members there.Why I support the BBC (with
qualifications), is because their
Charter is a noble document which
has been copied around the world.
Unlike Israel's toxic brand it is
the most valued in its genre.They
are bound by it to 'inform, educate
and entertain.'In a home without
books it taught me about the contribution of Judaism AND Islam
to civilisation, and that knowledge
is a worthy ambition for its own
sake. It's one reason why I continually point to areas where
Palestinians and Jews come together
-The One Voice Movement, Budrus,
Jerusalem on a plate, etc., but this does not seem to interest you.
Time constraints will prevent me
from posting further so I will leave this rather incesteous mutual
admiration society except for an
occasional post on 'What I learned
from the BBC Today.'

builder man said...

WHAT I LEARNED FROM THE BBC TODAY.
The Irish invented spaces between
words. Apparently the early latin
scripts were contiguous and confusing
and the Irish monks thought this
through and by putting in spaces made
them much more intelligible.
From Melvyn Bragg Radio 4.

The System Works said...

builder man: By the way I have no problem with democracy. I don't appreciate state looting of private property, brainwashing of children in state schools and the masses by state television. Democracy is the most rotten system on earth if it allows 51% of the people to take away the rights of the other 49%

Socialists should go and form their own businesses and communes and leave those who don't want to be a part of it alone.

builder man said...

To The System Works. How can you know
what the Popular front would have done? Are you psychic? It was NOT
communist but a diverse group, 'a
coalition between leftist republicans
and workers organisation and Galician
and Catalan NATIONALISTS.' Link:
Popular Front Wikipedia. LOOK at their MANIFESTO. 1. Release of political prisoners. 2. Independent
Judiciary. 3. Police Restraints. 4.
Rights of citizens.5. Political
MODERATION.6. Protection of small
businesses 7. Opposition to class
based society. 8.Democratic liberties assured.9. Regional autonomy.Not quite the picture you paint is it? It's clear you prefer
a brutal dictatorship to democracy
if it agrees with you and i can
understand why you support the
brutal Israeli occupation in Palestine.

The System Works said...

builder man: I'm not psychic, but I know about the executions of church men and political dissenters ('reactionaries' is what they call someone who dissents from Communism) by the Republicans. It would no doubt have continued had they won, just as Franco's atrocities did. The Soviet Union would have been keen to make Spain into a handy outpost.

I'm all for Basque and Catalan independence by the way. I'm not in favour of occupying the Arab territories either, but feel mutual recognition of national aspirations is as important as territorial exchange.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, more of your obfuscation. You most certainly did say the communist government was better than what was there before: “The gov. was not a democracy but at least girls went to school and women graduated from uni.” In fact prior rulers had attempted to improve the lot of women too.

The only obfuscation on Israel’s military is what pro-Palestinians state by making out it is the fourth largest military in the world. It is a load of nonsense. Israel spending its money on its military is its own business. Neither is moaning about Israel’s nuclear weapons of relevance. Israel has never threatened another state with annihilation, unlike that of its enemies. It is clearly supposed to be a deterrent. In fact even its Arab enemies thought it wouldn’t have the bottle to use them in 1973.

Of course some conspiracy theories are true. I remember a list on one site extremist neo-Nazi site that listed the Dreyfuss Affair at the top before lunging into nonsense. You do more of the same here by mingling truth with nonsense. The truth is that almost all are questionable. I was talking about conspiricism, where people reach for theories about control of the world to explain all manner of major events, and even minor ones. It clearly describes your beliefs.

Israel's attack on Egypt was likely in collusion with UK and France. So what? The Lavon Affair looks like it was a conspiracy but this was because Egypt had recently become a military dictatorship and Israel was afraid there would be another co-ordinated effort to destroy the country. Both countries were still at a state of war at the time, after Egypt invaded just eight years earlier, and Egypt was involved in intermittent attacks on Israel via Gaza with the Feyadeen from the early 50’s. Put it in its context.

It hasn’t been shown that this was the reason France had assisted Israel with building two reactors but even if it is true it’s hardly a “conspiracy” as governments frequently work together and co-operate.

I don’t know what Ben Gurion proposed re. Jordan but again so what? The Arabs wanted Israel annihilated – their consistent stance for decades. BTW Ben Gurion has been misquoted to an absurd extent. That liar Ben White who you probably agree with was caught with his pants down recently.

If you infer that Jooz had such a massive influence (hence Israel having the same after only eight years after the British Mandate), then there would be no explanation for the British giving up 78% to Jordan, frustrating Israel’s foundation as a Jewish state for three decades (contrary to the clear wording of the Mandate text), and even doing so at the UN. Your bigotry which leads you to see Jooz as behind everything leads you to ignore the reality that Egypt was threatening Britain’s powerful influence in the Middle-East. This is what led Britain to take up hostilities, and opportunistically work with Israel.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, re. your comment to Paul, it is an absurdity to suggest Sissons altered his book simply for serialisation in the Daily Mail. The fact is that he kicked the BBC savagely in the extract that was reproduced. He actually claimed that they discriminate according to their employees beliefs which I imagine is a highly illegal act in Britain. If it’s untrue it would have resulted in a devastating response.

By the way you need to understand what a link is. It is the HTTP address found at the top of a browser. You have oddly been repeatedly quoting sources and not linking to it properly in your responses to me.

Similarly its funny that you appear to suggest the suppressed report by the BBC included a study taken in that included a 2006 study which stated it was pro-Israel. One “Steven Sugar” actually brought the BBC to court because it was widely believed the report stated generally that the BBC was anti-Israel. In the article http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/bbc-bids-to-suppress-study-on-middle-east-bias-774282.html you misquote the actual sentence which is “In 2006, however, a study for the BBC governors led by Sir Quentin Thomas, the president of the British Board of Film Classification, found that the BBC's coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict implicitly favoured the Israeli side.” But then contradicted itself, I quote from the article that quotes it: “Overall, the study concluded there was "little to suggest deliberate or systematic bias" in the coverage of the conflict. "On the contrary, there was evidence of a commitment to be fair, accurate and impartial," it said.” Why would an older report from 2004 include another study from 2006 that was made public without any fuss? The latter study was commissioned after the suppressed text http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-444074/BBC-pays-200-000-cover-report-anti-Israel-bias.html and was laughed at in Newsrooms across the country http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000724.html according to Martin Walker. I was harsh in my comments to you but here there is no explanation other than you trying to mislead us.

The refusal to broadcast the Gaza appeal is a non-issue. It was clearly done because it would have been seen as compromising impartiality over a contested issue. The same thing happened in Ireland when a Trocaire charity advert that was pro-Palestinian was removed. Mark Thompson’s meeting with Ariel Sharon in 2005 appears to have been done to placate more than anything else or as he stated “build bridges with Israel” after a lot of criticism but it was meaningless as they continued to err seriously on the anti-Israel side, e.g. they broadcast pretty much as fact the Hamas figures of 300 children dying in the Gaza war within a week of the land invasion which was total bull. In fact it isn’t mentioned that Thompson also met Abbas http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1293708/The-BBC-s-DG-man-400m-divorce--strange-incident-Drones-restaurant.html during the same visit so its more obfuscation.

Wrong, the BBC is seen as increasingly discredited as is the Guardian. It is people like yourself that make Israel’s brand “toxic”. By the way I have heard the old Reithian philosophy. It was very much a highly patronising victorian approach of teaching the ignorant. Oh and what you call an “incesteous [sic?] mutual admiration society”, if such a thing was possible (as I sincerely hope we are not related), let me tell you dear boy you’re wrong again, I stress that any feelings of admiration are all on your part.

builder man said...

To The System Works. Stalin was very suspicious of the National Front and sent his agents in to watch them. After the war many went
to the USSR and Stalin sent them to
the gulags. Yes there were attacks
on the Catholic Church and its
supporters but these were mostly
random and retaliatory, NOT organised by the Front.The Catholic
Church has been one of the most evil organisations in history.My mum was a devout Catholic, and I was brought up in the faith,even to
the level of altar boy! I wasn't sexually abused but the continuous
indoctrination of putting fear into
a child with nonsense like Limbo,
Purgatory and Hell amounted to
psychological abuse.The only Catholics I respect are those priests in S.America who went against the hierarchy and actually
stood up and died for the teachings
of the prophet. The Popular Front
was a broad coalition, and once the
Church, renowned for interfering in
politics, especially in Catholic countries like Spain and Ireland,
agreed to proper reforms like seperation of Church and State, then it is most likely that matters
would have settled down and, like
Yugoslavia, would not have adopted
a Stalinist tyranny.That scenario is at least as likely as your unfounded predictions. I am heartened that you recognise
genuine Palestinian aspirations.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I conceded your point on Israeli hierarchy, so I do
wonder if you actually read these posts. Israel's state papers of 1973 indicated contemplation 'in
extremis' of the use of their nuclear weapons. Israel is already
slowly annihilating the Palestinian
State. You obviously resent the truth of Israel's conspiracies. I said MOST theories are questionable
but SOME are true and provided the
facts to back them up. So I'll ignore the rest of the nonsense after that. I'm glad that you agree
the BBC is 'fair, accurate and impartial.'The Reithian philosophy
might well be patronising but are
you suggesting that we do not need
more information and education in
this world? Would not Islamic suicide bombers and Jewish fundamentalists benefit all of us
after more, a lot more, education?
Try this one. 'I want everybody to
be smart. As smart as they can be.
A world of ignorant people will be
too dangerous to live in.' -Garson
Kanin, Actor, Writer, Musician,
Renaissance Man and American Patriot.
.'

builder man said...

WHAT I LEARNED FROM THE BBC TODAY.
The Drake Equation. BBC4.
Is there intelligent life out there? Er..No. More importantly, from out there can they see intelligent life on Earth? The waves from Fox News have just reached them. Oh dear.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, you conceded the point on the size of the Israeli military, not hierarchy, which if you read my reply you would see that I clearly understood that point. You also said you didn’t have enough time to write more of your posts yet here you are with more of your blather. Moshe Dayan believed all was lost during the early stages of the 1973Yom Kippur war, with some justification as the Arabs had made great gains before the US airlift saved Israel, and said a nuclear strike should be contemplated. However, my point is that they never threatened another state despite the fact that they have had nuclear weapons for neigh on fifty years. By contrast Iran is threatening others before they even have them yet you have turned yourself inside out to defend Iran. It is also bullshit that Israel is “slowly annihilating the Palestinian State”. There is no such state. There are a people however, and they have multiplied since Israel took the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. In less than fourty years, the population went from one million under Jordan to around 4 million by 2005, before Israel left Gaza, a fourfold increase which clearly indicates access to far better living conditions. This is borne out by the facts. For example, the West Bank has a better life expectancy than Syria: 75 years versus 71 years.

The neo-Nazi far-right has spread anti-Semitic conspiracism about Jews, and especially with respect to Israel. I debunked your bullshit proof that Britain was suddenly involved with israel eight years after the civil war. I don’t “resent the truth of Israel's conspiracies”. There is no truth to the Zionist World Government conspiracy that you invoked repeatedly. It is a fanciful theory that Hitler and company used to commit genocide. You provided no such facts to back up your central contention to the above. You merely cited one that is widely accepted today. As I said already, that is a profound obfuscation because of course there have been and will be conspiracies. It is a fact of History. It is however, quite another thing to be a conspiracist loon who believes we are under the control of great hidden powers.

Your ability to read is failing you dear boy. I quoted a passage that stated the BBC is 'fair, accurate and impartial.' From a study the BBC themselves commissioned. Then I disagreed with it.

The Reithian philosophy is intensely patronising. Obviously, there are plenty of ways in which information and knowledge can be shared without adopting such a patronising credo. Oh and FYI, the leftist nonsense about Islamic fundamentalism being born out of ignorance is a nonsense that has been debunked. Many of the most extreme individuals who committed terrorist acts were well educated.

Ted Leddy said...

Builder Man and TSW

I want to weigh in on the debate about the Spanish Civil War. I have thought about this before. In some ways I think it was a basic choice between Fascism and Communism in which case TSW is right and a Republican victory would have resulted in a Spain as dictatorial as Francos. There were many democrats on the Republican side but in most left wing revolutions the communists eat up the left wing democrats in the early days.

However I think the situation was untypical in Spain. The majority of 1930's Spanish leftists were nothing like the Bolsheveks. And given how the extreme right was spreading across the continant I think the democratic world was right to support the Republican government. I also think it is appropriate that those who fought in the international brigades be honoured for their sacrifice. Thankfully Franco kept Spain out of the war so the "which side would have been worse" debate is largely irrelevant. .

builder man said...

WHAT I LEARNED FROM THE BBC TODAY.
Bells on Sunday Radio 4.
From St. Lawrence Jewry, Official
Church of the Lord Mayor of London.But why Jewry? It was first
built in 1136 in the Old Jewish
Quarter when they encountered anti-Semitism less than 100 years after coming to England. At least the name prevailed.Blitzed in WW2 they melted down the fragments of the bells and cast anew.I was in the Medway Towns during the Blitz and it was heavily bombed because of the nearby dockyard. Us kids would
spend the nights in a concrete air
raid shelter in the garden.For us
it was a big adventure but thousands around us were killed,
badly injured and made homeless.
That was what made the equivalence
by Netanahu to Hamas rockets so
offensive. I'm not downplaying the
pschological damage but why not
evacuate the children like we did
if he sees this conflict as like
WW2?

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I have not defended Iran's actions and I work to increase
democracy there through peaceful OPPOSITION. What I did say was that
to attack Iran on the basis of an
imperfect translation would be unwise and only benefit the israeli
right wing and Ahmadinajad himself.
There is a demographic 'threat' to Israel but in all countries increases in population since WW2
are due to technology and better
health care -not Israeli munificence. All the more reason to
encourage Israel to make a just settlement with the Palestinians NOW. The collusion of Israel with France and the UK in 1956 is well documented. I have never even
mentioned a 'Zioist World Gov.',
just that Israel is a big player on
the world scene and gave you proof
of that.The conspiracy theories are
all yours. The BBC study quoting its
impartiality was included by you as a riposte to the idea that the
BBC favoured Israel. You can't have it both ways. Your idea of education is obviously different
from mine and, I would suggest, far
more limited.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, blithely stating you have not defended Iran's actions will not make it so. I must yet again remind you of the fact that you relativised the Basji, after I mentioned Ahmadinajad’s role in training these unfortunate children to commit suicide. In response you excused Iran's use of children as martyrs by stating above that nations do extreme things, and asserted that if Germany invaded Britain, the British would use nerve gas which would harm their own populace. A pathetic sickening reply by all accounts from a hypocrit that continually demonises Israel, pretending it faces no real threats.

Here you are as well excusing the four-fold increase in the Palestinian population, by all accounts a dramatic rise. Please have the decency not to obfuscate, I won’t let you away with it. This was an increase, not since World War Two but since 1967, after which the population dramatically increased.

If the “collusion of Israel with France and the UK in 1956 is well documented” then why mention it in detail. They worked together with a common cause. So what? It’s far from a conspiracy theory today, yet you cited it as proof that conspiracy theories are true. You also cited after I criticised you for citing the anti-Semitic conspiracist website globalresearch.ca which you used to suggest Israel has super-powerful tentacles all over the world. You also used the 1956 event to suggest Israel/Jews had a lot of influence in Britain because they were in a state of conflict a few years earlier. That’s why I cited the ZOG or “Zionist World Government” conspiracy theory when you uttered that nonsense and talked about “Zionist controlled America” which is exactly the same lingo neo-Nazi’s likes David Duke use.

Pure obfuscation on your part re. the BBC. Your dishonesty knows no bounds, and at this stage I’m sorry to say it seems you really have no shame. I quoted that line because you took part of the same line from the same article to mislead myself and others into thinking that the 2006 study, which gave their coverage a more positive appraisal, was included with the report the BBC suppressed. I quote you thus: “The BBC's suppressed Balen report includes a study taken in 2006 that concluded:'The BBC's coverage implicitly favoured the ISRAELI side.'” – an outright lie. You removed the initial part of the sentence which makes it clear this was a 2006 study rather than part of the suppressed 2004 report. The 2006 study was criticised as having a limited scope, and a problematic methodology. It was seen as an effort to improve their reputation after they decided not to publish the far more comprehensive report.

Oh you are getting bitchy now by suggesting I have a more limited education then yours lol! I like it. The claws are coming out at last. BTW I knew you couldn’t keep away from replying to me even when you said you didn’t have time to reply any more. You are the sort who always has to have the last word as on Eirael. I made a conscious decision not to give you that pleasure this time so on to the next 100!

builder man said...

To Rob Harris.Iran.Continuing to make
unsubstantiated allegations is a
waste of time. Palestinian population
growth has always been high for cultural reasons e.g. women not working. Infant mortality is still higher than Israel's. For a definitive study go to www.fafo.no/pub/rapp/353/353.pdf.
When collusion allegations were made,
they were dismissed as absurd 'conspiracy theories'. I remember
personally being involved in the arguments at the time. My point is that they turned out to be TRUE.
I think if you listened and watched
the BBC more you MIGHT change your mind. I didn't suggest that YOU were less educated than me. As I left school at 14 that's unlikely. I said that your IDEA of what education is may be limited.Someone
who commits a suicide bombing hasn't fully committed to the rest
of humanity which is what a TRUE
education is all about.(Try the BBC
again!)A few A levels and a media course at uni is not the epitome of
education.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, re. your excusing the Basji of Iran, it is certainly not unsubstantiated. Here is what I said when you were dismissing the signficance: “During the Iran-Iraq war Iranian children were trained to walk over landmines in order to protect Iran's limited military resources. These children were called the Basij, which was a newly invented concept of child martyrdom. Tens of thousands of children as young as twelve were killed and their families financially compensated. Ahmadinejad was a Basji instructor, apparently quite a well known fact in Iran…” to which you replied in the post immediately below starting “To Rob Harris”: “Child soldiers are as old as warfare itself and countries often behave desperately when they are under attack and fearful for their survival. Britain would have used anthrax to deter a Nazi invasion in WW2 even though it would have affected our own population.” Thus what I said about you relativising the appalling ugliness of Iran inventing a type of child martyr to protect their limited military infrastructure by drawing wild parallels is entirely true. It is a reflection on your sad character that you will legitimise or at least minimise such appalling acts that scrape the very barrel of depravity for one reason: they are Israel’s sworn enemy.

More obfuscation re. the increase in the Palestinian population. Population growth was not always high, rather it was largely static through the 1950’s and 1960’s under Jordan after some initial growth. For any population to swell fourfold in less than four decades is a remarkable thing, rarely achieved elsewhere. In Britain from roughly the same period (1971 to 2008), the populace went from 55.9 million to roughly 60 million http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom and yes Israel’s mortality rate is lower than the Palestinian equivalent but the PA has largely had control over health infrastructure since the mid 1990’s, and it is no worse than surrounding Arab countries as with other important statistics such as life expectance which can be better. It kicks out the that Israel is committing a genocide. The point made when you stated Israel was exterminating the Palestinian state.

It was obvious that Britain, France and Israel were working together toward a common objective in Egypt on the ground and at the UN, which went against American policy. It would have only been seen as a big secretive conspiracy to the hopelessly naive. At the time Egypt was committing to an unofficial proxy war with Israel via the Fedayeen, and admitted as much publicly. They also closed the Suez Canal, and interfered with Israeli shipping against maritime law, with Britain and France displeased at the nationalisation of the Canal so they worked toward a common purpose. Big fucking deal.

Again you fail to grasp basic points I have made repeatedly. I did say conspiracies go on and have occurred in the past. However, conspiracists see conspiracy in virtually everything, even the water they drink. It is a bizarre experience talking to such people on forums. You have a very similar stance talking about Israel’s immense influence internationally, Zionist controlled America and Britain etc.

What does BBC really stand for? British Brain Control, or perhaps Biased Broadcasting Company? You like the BBC because it agrees with your stance politically. I dislike it because it is biased on a range of issues. It does make some good programmes however so I won’t say its all bad but certainly not a fitting source for news or political documentaries. Suggesting my idea of education is limited is to infer that my education is also limited since having an education would include understanding of said topic. Neither does it follow that a suicide bomber hasn’t received a good education, that’s philosophy.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I support the OPPOSITION in Iran to all these dreadful events which are precipitated by the actions of us in the West supporting wars that suit us. Do you condemn the West's
support for Iraq? Or is that another question you won't answer -
as with what are Israel's boundaries? I said that suggestions
of genocide by Israel are UNFOUNDED.I also said that Israel
is annilihating the Palestinian
STATE, not the people, though as
GOLDSTONE reported, it is careless
of their welfare. Remember the picture circulated amongst the IDF
of a pregnant Arab woman- 1 shot, 2
kills. Israel is doing all it can to prevent a Palestinian State.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, I don’t care if you state that you support groups that make you look like a humanitarian or not. A true humanitarian would not relativise the horror of creating a new class of child martyr to walk over land mines.

Your leftist blame-the-West-for-everything stance won’t do you any favours when it comes to hypocrisy either. You stated on the “Arab Spring” post “Afghanistan. The US sent billions of dollars to the extremist mujahadeen and marginalised the moderates.” even after I had reminded you of the immense atrocities the USSR had committed there. They pushed 1/3 of the population out of the country, and killed 1.5 to 2 million. If the US hadn’t aided Afghani’s these people would have potentially been ethnically cleansed even to this day. The truth is that Afghan society wasn’t ready for Western values. Prior to that period baby steps were being taken to improve the lot of women for example. However, when liberal values were forcefully pushed on them by a puppet Soviet government, it rapidly led to open revolt, and a great deal of reactionism. That is a primary origin of extremism in Afghanistan.

Of course I disliked the US/UK war in Iraq. I disagreed with it at the time. I also disagreed with Blair and Clinton going into Kosovo in 2000 when it wasn’t as fashionable. I’m also of two minds whether they should have even gone into Afghanistan. As I already told you repeatedly, I support a two state solution roughly in line with Resolution 242 but with a united Jerusalem as the PA have stated openly they would desecrate Jewish sites as Jordan did previously, and Israel has shown it is the only power that can maintain a just balance between the three faiths.

As already explained, I made the point that there is no state to annihilate but that there is a Palestinian people, and by all accounts they don't do too badly given it is a conflict situation. The Palestinians annihilated any Palestinian state. Arafat walked away from a deal giving him 91% of his territorial demands. Abbas walked away from a deal giving him virtually 100% of the land he demanded with some land swaps. The Palestinians themselves are refusing to compromise because they simply can’t after continually inciting their population to act against Israel for decades.

The Goldstone report is hopelessly flawed. Three of its four members expressed strong prejudice toward the Israel beforehand. They had Hamas lead them by the nose in Gaza, and conducted interviews in public making any comments that would reflect negatively on Hamas impossible. They accepted evidence from Palestinian sources uncritically and without any query - there are plenty of sources routing this testimony. The UN condemned Israel in the official wording for the mission before anyone even stepped foot in the area! Its mission to investigate Hamas as well as Israel was just a milksop to Goldstone personally as the original UN wording only condemning Israel was then passed.