Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Toulouse Murders

French Police escort Children from the scene of the shooting outside the Ozar Hatorah school in Toulouse.

Like every normal human being my stomach turned at the news that a man opened fire at a Jewish school in Toulouse killing three children and one adult. It is very rare in the field of human conflict that a sane person can aim a gun at three year old "enemy" and pull the trigger. Such savagery could only be inspired by the most depraved of ideologies which can only be either Nazism or Islamic fanaticism. Of course this incident is likely to cause associated controversies. I believe Baroness Catherine Ashton has already been accused of making irresponsible comments comparing the deaths of the Jewish Children in Toulouse to Palestinians in Gaza. I don't have the energy for engaging in a discussion about that right now. But there is something I want to say that is uniquely important given that at the time of writing, the culprits and their ideology remains unidentified. Why is everybody on the left hoping that it turns out to be the Nazis and why do people on the right want it to be the Muslims? Surely nothing additional needs to happen for reasonable people to recognise the perversion of Jihadists and Neo Nazis.


Robert J. Avrech said...


This massacre does not have the DNA of IslamoNazis. The killer did not shout “Allahu Akhbar” as he killed. Nor has any Islamist group taken responsibility. And they usually do because they are proud of murdering Jewish children.

In fact, this looks to be the work of one of a number of French paratroopers who were drummed out of the service because of their Nazi ideology.

Robert J. Avrech said...


—the French authorities disagree with me:


Robert J. Avrech said...

Completely and outrageously off-topic. I thought you should know that the world's greates Irish dancer is... Jewish.


builder man said...

Ashton was extremely foolish to attempt to comment on this horrendous
crime, knowing how her words would be
used for Israeli propaganda purposes,
including on this blog. She was lamenting the loss of ALL innocent lives, as any decent human being would. The killer here was beyond human feelings in the way he killed, but wearing a uniform, like the US sergeant in Afghanistan, or the IDF in this account by Gideon Levy, does not excuse the behaviour
and a moral equivalence is justified.
THE CHILDREN OF 5767. 'In this year
(2007), 92 Palestinian children were killed by the Israelis. They came under live fire, some of which
was deliberately aimed at them...'
- Haaretz 28/9/2007.

Ted Leddy said...


It did occur to me that if the culprits were these former soldiers then surely they could be identified and tracked down quickly. We will know soon enough. I know we all give out about the French but I believe their intelligence and anti terrorism services are top class.

Great story about the Jewish Irish dancer. More success to him. A couple of months ago I attended an Israeli film and culture event in Dublin. I watched from the front row the performance of Yair Verdiger who I believe has an Irish dancing school in Tel Aviv. I'm told Irish dancing has become quite popular in Israel. Below is his performance that day (not filmed by me).


Ted Leddy said...

Builder Man

A few points.

If Ashton was attempting to express her sorrow at how children get caught up in war and hatred then her remarks were appropriate.

But you simply cannot compare an act where a man who is racially motivated puts a gun to the head of a 3 year old and pulls the trigger, with instances where civilians get caught up in urban warfare. Not unless you think that the British airmen of bomber command where as bad as the Nazis.

To do so in this case is an attempt to blame Jews for crimes committed against them. It is in my view a trait of anti semitism.

Robert J. Avrech said...


Well, it looks like the butcher of Toulouse fits the MO we all had in our minds with the standard laundry list of jihadi grievances...

Off-Topic: Indeed, Irish dance is quite popular in Israel. A friend who is an enthusiast confides that much of the appeal lies in wearing a kilt, which, let's face it, is very cool.

Completely Off-Topic: Please remind me of the name of the John Mills WWII film that you told me about a few years ago, something to do with beer.

Ted Leddy said...


Interesting how a French man of Alergian descent could claim that he gunned down Jewish children because he's angry at Israel's treatment of Palestinians. The only issue here that should be entertained is that Islamic fanaticism is motivated by Jew hatred and not an alleged grievance.

The movie is called "Ice Cold in Alex". I remember you telling me that you don't drink beer. After watching this classic, you will definitely want one. You can read about it in my "greatest war movies" tag on the right.

Robert J. Avrech said...


Thanks so much. I'm preparing a new blog on war movies and I finally want to screen “Ice Cold Alex” and write about it.

Terrorists speacilize in grievances. I recently wrote a post about three movies that deal with true life terrorists: “United Red Army,” “The Baader-Meinhof Complex” and “Carlos.” Each film details the terrorists grievances and one quickly relaizes that grievances are as meaningful as their brain-dead Marxist platitudes.

Have you seen any of these films? I'm curious to hear your reaction.

Rob Harris said...

Ted, it would seem that the liberal media is going into apologist mode over the Muslim identity of this terrorist:
http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/toulouse-killer-is-muslim-terrorist-so.html – a sickening response but one that is to be expected. Its astonishing how the same people used the Anders Behring Breivik massacre last year to vent at out at critics of Islam like Robert Spencer as if they were responsible for the actions of a psychotic.

Its interesting how Ashton echoed the sentiments of the murderer. She has consistently struck a shrill note with regard to Israel, even by European Union standards, which are unpleasant enough. It is appalling that so many are comparing Israel/Palestine to Syria where they are shooting people en masse, for merely protesting whilst in Israel they are targeting terrorists that are a danger to civilian life. Its pretty comical for the murderer of three-year olds to talk about the death of Palestinian children when they’re radicalised by that society and repeatedly put in harms way. The less fortunate ones have bombs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPU4UN03t7E strapped to their bodies.

By the way some articles in the media are mentioning the August 1982 gun and grenade attack on a Jewish Restaurant in the Jewish quarter of Paris that left 6 dead and 22 wounded in relation to the recent attack. The media describes the incident as a terrorist attack, sufficienty descriptive wording for once but they neglect to mention that it was strongly associated with the famous Palestinian extremist Abu Nidal http://www.nytimes.com/1982/08/11/world/plo-foes-linked-to-attack-in-paris.html at that time.

builder man said...

To Ted Leddy. If you read the Levy article in full, he instances cases
of deliberate murder by the IDF and a
callous disregard for Palestinian
children's lives. If you wish to be
an apologist for those crimes, that puts you in the same place as the French murderer and Kony who you claim to be the most evil person on earth. I hope you don't wish to be there and will condemn the IDF and others in Israel when these crimes
are committed, as I have done for the PLO or Hamas or whoever. It seems that the French murderer is
an Algerian Moslem who was protesting against the deaths of Palestinian children. Of course my original condemnation of callous inhumanity stands. An analogy with a World War is not appropiate. A much closer analogy is the British
Govs. war on the IRA,much of it unsavoury (extra judicial etc.) and
Bloody Sunday now admitted as a crime. But they did not bomb Derry and demolish the homes of terrorists or corral the Catholic
pop.into ghettos with no freedom of
movement. No civilised gov. could go that far which makes Isreal an uncivilised gov. When sense prevailed the British put the terrorists, who five minutes before
were blowing up our kids, into gov.
with power over their victims. No
revenge, but a pragmatic quest for
peace with justice for genuine grievances. The ex terrorist now has wider responsibilities and that
changes everything. What is plain from Israel's history is that it does not want a just peace with the
Palestinians and is
prepared to accept the murder of these little children and other atrocities rather than make the comprimises for peace that the
international community asks for.
Smears of anti-semitism are pathetic. It is because we do not want to see any more Jewish children as victims that we make this case for decency and justice.
The anti-Semites are those whose main concern is territorial conquest.

Rob Harris said...

Ted, leaving aside Builder's dishonest assessment of the peace process in Northern Ireland, and the fact that Britain sat back whilst the Ulster government gerrymandered the vote out of Catholic hands, anyone who quotes Gideon Levy, who has even been repeatedly called out on very overt http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=6&x_article=1948 lies, is only seeking one response.

Robert J. Avrech said...

Builder Man:

That you quote Levy, a known liar, speaks volumes about your ideology.

I repeat: The IDF has never, ever targeted children. In fact, the IDF has the best record in the world of avoiding civilian casualties.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. What I commended was
the ability of the Brit. Gov., far too belatedly, but at last to acknowledge the gerrymandering in Ulster and recognize the genuine grievances of Catholics. If you and others could show the same intelligence on Palestine, then there
would be peace and no more innocent children's
wasted lives. Do you prefer the intransigence and the deaths of Jewish children then?

builder man said...

To Robert J. Avrech. As to my ideology, I have stated before on this blog that I regard the Jews as a
gifted people who have enriched the
world in every sphere of human endeavour. You obviously fall into that category. That does not mean you are right about everything. Gideon Levy is a brave journalist who lives and works in the region. I would guess that you do not. (Correct me if I am wrong.) He fearlessly reports with a peace agenda foremost in his mind. I would guess that you do not. (Correct me if I am wrong). As an impartial Anglo Saxon, if I had to choose a liar between the two of you, it's a no brainer.

Ted Leddy said...


I have only seen “The Baader-Meinhof Complex” from your list. I thought it was excellent. I have only seen it once in the cinema so my memory isn't great. But my one lasting memory is of how the movie demonstrates the absurdity of the Marxist Islamist alliance. The far left claim to care most about gender rights, workers, proletariat ect. But there is perhaps no greater violater of these causes than the Islamist. The scenes with the Baader Meinhof gang trainig with the PLO demonstrated this in a simple and humorous way. They just didn't get on with each other. And if I remember correctly the PLO were horrified by the "sexual liberation" element of their revolution. I have known many leftist who have come to recognise that Islamic fanaticism has much in common with extreme right wing politics. Perhaps this movie might nudge some people on to realise this.

Rob Harris said...

Builder, the British government did little to help the Catholics in Northern Ireland until it was far too late – namely when the troubles broke out. I have recognised that the Palestinians should a state of their own but only at a time when they are willing to live as responsible neighbours to Israel – otherwise interstate war will replace isolated acts of terrorism – the former most likely more costly in terms of life worse than the latter. The same happened in Northern Ireland – Sein Fein proved for several years that they would act peaceably, and made peace through genuine compromise by leaving aside their ultimate aim - a united Ireland. I realise I am talking to the proverbial wall here and will get a senseless “Jooz want war not peace” answer but that is my position – accept it or not (the latter most probably).

It’s a rather twisted to blame the killing of those Jewish children in France on Israel. We have heard time and time again that fanatics flatly refuse to accept Israel’s existence whether there is peace or not.

Ted Leddy said...


It think the nature of the attack on school chldren has made some normally anti Israel commentators reluctant to jump on the usual blame Israel bandwagon. I must confess I didn't actually know who Gideon Levy was so I'm only reading up on him now.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. As far as I know, Sinn Fein/IRA have disavowed violence as a
means to their objective of a United
Ireland. The objective (legitimately)
remains. Hamas would do likewise. I agree that all govs. have to be pushed into doing the sensible and just thing. That certainly applies to
the Israeli gov.and is why I make my
modest contribution to that end.If you genuinely want peace you should do the same.Israel's security could
easily be guaranteed for the period until civilisation returns to the region. We all know that Israel has never countenanced a VIABLE Palestinian State. I have never blamed Israel for the French killings - they are the appalling acts from a deranged mind.But Israel maintains the atmosphere where a deranged mind takes comfort- the daily abuses of the
Palestinians legitimate aspirations
-their hopes for a future on their own land. Many fanatics refuse to accept the existence of Palestine. The recipe for peace, and this is why Ireland is an important analogy,
is to isolate the fanatics, who unfortunately in this case include the present Israeli gov.

Ted Leddy said...

Builder Man

If I believed the IDF deliberately targeted women and children I would most certainly say so and condemn it strongly. I would never disregard fact or truth because it doesn't suit my view.

The reason I believe the Irish and Palestinian comparison is invalid is because the IRA never had an agenda outside the 6 counties. All they wanted (and still want) is a United Ireland. I don't believe the same can be said about Palestinian militant groups. Frankly, I don't believe they would be content with the entire West Bank as I believe most of them only want it because it would enable them to take on the rest of Israel.

I believe the comparison with WW2 is valid for the following reasons. Allied planes killed more civilians in Western Europe than occupying German roops did. But in my mind there is absolutely no doubt who the bad guys were. Similarly I think it is wrong to compare the actions of the Toulouse terrorist with those of the IDF.

builder man said...

To Robert J. Avrech. At www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/4279102/Bullets-in-the-brain-shrapnel-in-the-spine-the-terrible-injuries-suffered-by-children-of-Gaza.html. you will find an article from a Conservative newspaper that counters your view of the IDF.The army T shirts showing a pregnant Arab woman - 1 shot, 2 kills also indicate a
mindset and of course the testimonies from Breaking the Silence give the unvarnished truth.
It is an OCCUPATION ARMY so it would be surprising if there were
not instances of brutality. I acknowledge that there is a conscience present otherwise that
org. would not exist. But to pretend it is a moral army I think
pays more heed to your literary strengths than reality, i.e.- myth and fantasy.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, Sinn Fein/IRA have done more than disavow “violence as a means to their objective of a United Ireland.” The armed struggle was central to the aim, and making peace, whilst going into a democratically elected Northern government, was a defacto compromise on their singular policy – a policy which had defined them since their inception where they separated from the original IRA.

Hamas would not do likewise. You have bent over backward to defend Hamas on this forum, pretending they are reasonable folks willing to talk peace with Israel whilst pretending to criticise them. Its little more than twisting your stance to suit whatever argument is best placed to win at the time. You legitimised them by describing them as “resistance” several times such as in this comment: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5196501208153315029&postID=9005770035853038723 the same organisation that swore to take the jihad to Jews across the world, just as happened in France.

I never said all governments have to be pushed into doing the sensible and just thing. Some do it voluntarily. The British State stood over a regime in Northern Ireland that systematically deprived Catholics of any democratic rights and pushed them into genuinely deprived conditions.

Don’t talk to me about peace. You are the one who sides with those who glory in the butchering of civilians, who hand out sweets when six-month old babies are mutilated in their cot (the Fogel family). There cannot be a guarantee of security “until civilisation returns to the region”. The international community has systematically failed to provide security for Israel both in the Sinai and Lebanon.

You claim that “We all know that Israel has never countenanced a VIABLE Palestinian State.” – don’t profess to speak for anyone else, certainly not me. Israel was committed to peace since Oslo. It maintained talks with the PLO whilst they were turning a blind eye to Hamas blowing up school children during that time. Barak offered 91% of demanded territory at Camp David but Arafat walked out over the Haram. Olmert offered 98% but again Abbas walked out. Time to change this tired tune.

You inferred blame on Israel for the French killings when you stated “Do you prefer the intransigence and the deaths of Jewish children then?” and “or the IDF in this account by Gideon Levy, does not excuse the behaviour and a moral equivalence is justified.” – thus you come close to justifying the killings because they are in response to other alleged killings (backed up by the views of a proven liar).

You have proven repeatedly that you don’t understand the conflict in Ireland because I have taken you don’t repeatedly on that issue. Thus you are unable to make any meaningful analogies with Palestine.

Rob Harris said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rob Harris said...

Ted, if you can check out the link I sent re. Levy as it cites articles he wrote. He's well known for having quite an imagination when it comes to defaming the place.

My point about blaming Israel was more in response to Builderman that about commentators generally - see comment above. However, another interesting question involves moral responsibility for the attack with pro-Palestinians and the media peddling intensive attacks that resemble blood libel http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/blood-libel-2-0/ which surely contributes to the violent response of the terrorist in France. It is also interesting that parts of the French media collaborated with the Palestinaians for years - it was uncovered with the Al Dura case. Although the case was proven to be falsified by Pallywood, and used to incite hatred and violence all over the Islamic world, rags like The Guardian and Haaretz unbelievably continue to claim it has some truth! Time for some responsibility.

builder man said...

To Ted Leddy.On the IDF, I refer you to my reply to Robert Avrech. I don't see how a Pal. State in the West Bank
would make any diff. to Israel's security or, as the recent tragic events have shown, the security of Jewish people. The status quo is the most dangerous position for all. I have, through others, contacts in the
West Bank and I can assure you that all most Palestinians want is to have a peaceful future on their own land, that being the international
consensus of West Bank and Gaza with E. Jerusalem as its capital. The Israeli Gov. will not accept this. The analogy, indeed example of Ireland is exact, because it is
about SHARING of power, something
Israel will not do. The Brits. and Irish Govs. and political parties were successful because of this. As
with Ireland a lot of advice/imposition will be necessary
from an impartial power. With Ireland it was the US. Why can't it do it in Palestine? We all know the
answer to that, so intelligent and informed public opinion must suffice at the moment. The one hope in the US is a 2nd term Obama, free of Zionist pressure, and that is why all the right wing freaks there
so hate him. As Chief Seattle said:
'Everything is connected.'

builder man said...

To Rob Harris. I do NOT side with Hamas. I have criticised them many times, including agreeing with Goldstone that the rocket attacks are
a crime against humanity. What I have
suggested is that they could be a partner for peace in spite of that. They have offered a long term truce,
including recognising Israel. They
negotiated the Shalit release.
Mo Mowlem recalled her repugnance at
having to deal with the IRA who had blown up little English kids with
bombs in litter bins etc. But it had to be done in the pursuit of peace. 91% and 98% are Israeli figures and not reality. I work in
my small way to stop all the bloodshed and condemn the violence and grieve for all the innocent victims. You appear to take the Israeli gov. view that it is a price worth paying if it means not
making comprimises, even though those comprimises are just and would lead to peace.

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, you have most certainly sided with Hamas on a number of occasions, and even made those assertions where it is not an issue of discussion. I have dealt with numerous pro-Palestinian like you who play games by criticising them at times but always singling out Israel for the real butt of their ire, and often minimising or failing to address the serious problems that the presence of Hamas poses to real peace in the region. What you say is just as revealing as what you don’t say. On this blog you have repeatedly blamed Israel for the failure to achieve peace whilst misrepresenting Hamas’ intent, and portraying them as a reasonable organisation. They have never offered to recognise Israel. That was put about a while back by people like Carter only for it to be furiously refuted by Hamas themselves.

The long term truce was a crock of shit to merely reinforce Hamas’ power, whilst Israel had to make all the sacrifices they ought to be making for peaceful co-existence but without any of that. Neither did Hamas negotiate with Israel. They negotiated with Egypt acting as an intermediary with Israel. The IRA never targeted children, and never incited mass genocide against the British people or the State. The IRA gave warnings to minimise civilian casualties. I dislike the IRA a great deal, and believe Sein Fein have no place in politics in the Republic but they are as akin to Hamas as chalk is to cheese.

The 91% and 98% are Israeli figures AND reality. So much of what Israel says IS reality, e.g. the casualties in Gaza that Hamas eventually provided grudgingly after criticism match those of Israel not the so-called human rights organisations and the UN. By contrast so much the Palestinians say is lies, recently Israel’s “partner-for-peace”, Abbas was at a summit denying there were ever Jews in Israel.

Don’t pretend you are the only one here wanting to see compromise. I want compromise too as does everyone else here who supports Israel. Compromise has to come from both sides, not one as you want.

You do nothing to stop “the bloodshed and condemn the violence and grieve for all the innocent victims.” If anything you do the opposite because you defend the indefensible, and offer a tacit apologism for the butchers who celebrate the massacre of innocents with a depravity that even the worst in the IRA would find unacceptable. You intentionally look the other way at the worst excesses of these groups Israel is supposed to make peace with. This point was made by Patrick Kielty, the Northern Irish presenter, when he called republican “gentleman terrorists” in contrast to Islamists.

builder man said...

To Rob Harris.So you are an apologist
for IRA terrorism. A few facts. The IRA killed nearly 1800 people in its
campaign. Hamas have killed nearly 300 Israelis since 2000. 300 too many
but they have a long way to go to catch up with the IRA. 'Not targeting
children.' Tell that to the parents of the Warrington bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/65524.stm. Little Jonathan Bull was 3 years
old when they picked up the pieces.
'Warnings?' Try the Birmingham pub bombs. I lived around a fervent IRA
supporter, a respectable middle class mother of 4, for 10 years. When I suggested that I accepted the genuine Catholic grievances but
surely that did not warrant the blowing up of kids? Regrettable, she said, but her view was that govs. do not listen until there is
violence. Compare the Catholic grievances with the sufferings of the Palestinians for over 60 years.
The reaction of the IRA, which you
defend, was to kill 1800.Hamas reactions seem very tame by comparison.But there is another big
difference. The IRA had a large support base with FREE ACCESS to it
because its enemy was constrained by int. law. No bombing of their support base or house demolitions or fencing them in. Hamas has an enemy not concerned with international law and bombs indiscriminately. Rather than slandering me, why don't you answer to the basic cause of all the bloodshed? Do you accept the international consensus of a Palestinian State and its boundaries? That is the West Bank,
Gaza and capital in E. Jerusalem.
If, like Israel, you don't, then, like Israel, you don't want peace. It's very simple. By the way, I've
no confidence in any of the Palestinian leaders who are just as corrupt and venal as their Israeli
counterparts. My concern is for the
ordinary decent people of that land
who deserve peace and justice. And in this week of more pointless killing of children, look to the example of the father of Ahmad Al-Khatib, who was shot by the Israelis, and whose organs were donated to Israeli children. Listen
up Ted Leddy and others to his words: 'I have taken this decision because I have a message for the world: that the Palestinian people want peace- for everyone.'

Rob Harris said...

Builderman, it is pathetic to suggest I am an apologist for IRA terrorism. In fact I have lambasted them in writing on many occasions. I am merely stating as a fact that the IRA was not as debased as the equivalent of Hamas. Nor is their ideology remotely as debased as that of Hamas. I cited solid reasons for doing so. By contrast you are the one apologising and trying to whitewash Hamas. You called them “resistance” – exactly the same terminology that extremists in the region describe them as being.

I know IRA killed nearly 1800 people in its campaign. The Loyalists killed a considerable number too, and with British collusion I might add. The British also killed 34 civilians in Dublin and Monaghan in cold blood in 1974, as a warning to the Irish authorities, something Cameron is unwilling to clarify.

The suffering of Catholics under Britain was manifestly worse than anything the Palestinians have been subjected to. It’s a shame about the death of British civilians but a tiny fraction of the suffering the British subjected the Irish to. Dublin had the highest mortality rate of any city in Europe except for post-revolutionary St. Petersburg. The Black and Tans burnt Cork City to the ground. The population went downward at least 2 and a half fold in a seventy year period from the 1840’s to the 1920’s, at a time when world population was exploding. Your people shat on this country for 700 years so a few intermittent terrorist attacks ought to be into perspective, and actually be glad that the blowback you received was minuscule indeed, in contrast to the suffering visited on millions of Irish innocents.

It is a nonsense to suggest Hamas killed under 300 Israelis since 2000. They were a central part of the Second Infifada, which killed over 1,000 Jews. Furthermore, why only date activities from 2000, when they were the ones to actually be responsible for increasing terrorism in the 1990’s during the Oslo talks, killing school children packed into buses. Similarly Gazan jihadists intentionally targeted school buses in an attack last year which luckily only killed one child. I would gladly tell anyone that the IRA didn’t target children because it was a matter of fact - emotional blackmail is not a justifiable argument.

You once again minimise Hamas to the extent that you act as an apologist for it. The British did not respect international law during the conflict in the North. That was a finding. They employed torture and internment. They also fired on unarmed protestors, and engaged in mass cover-up.

Israel does not bomb indiscriminately. The bombing in Gaza two weeks ago resulted in only two civilians dying. The rest were “militants” AKA terrorists. Two young people also died but AFP attested that it was not a result of Israeli actions. That is a remarkable civilian to combat ratio

I have repeatedly told you that I accept a two-state solution. Stop bullshitting and pretending that I think otherwise. Only difference is that they should not get East Jerusalem because they have demonstrated there would be no religious tolerance there for Jews or CHRISTIANS.

You have repeatedly apologised for Palestinian leaders by in effect dismissing or ignoring their behaviour, whilst consistently lay the blame on Israeli leaders. I never slandered you. You apologise for those that celebrate in the slaughter of babies, as you have done in this very thread. That’s a fact.

Paul said...

This discussion has gone more than a bit awry largely due to Builder Bollox and his dishonest intervention. Rob (you're seriously off kilter with some of your stuff on the IRA) but I accept the fact you're responding to a complete nincompoop. Just ignore the fucking guy he repeatedly lies (for instance Israel bombs indiscriminately) he aint worth bothering with.

Rob Harris said...

Hello Paul, I agree – Builderman seems to have Palestinians sitting on his brain as he seems unable to discuss anything else without bringing them up. I noted before that you disagreed with Ted when he referred to similar issues that I did above so perhaps Ted can start some relevant post on the issue in the not to distant future to thrash the issue out. Having said that I imagine you would agree with me with regard to Hamas and the assorted other jihadists out there exhibiting considerably more depravity than the largely secular terrorist groups that emerged in the 1960’s/70’s like ETA and the IRA (bad as the latter are), judging by things you have said in the past. For my own part, I have some British ancestry (hence my surname), and have severely criticised the IRA in the past, e.g. getting into a war of words online with a sort of well known Seinner as a result an article published on Front Page over their links with the Nazi’s during WWII which they haven’t remotely confronted so I don’t sanctify these guys.

The System Works said...

This conversation is bizarrely off point.

Here's the problem as I see it.

French Jewry gave France Michel De Montaigne, Sarah Bernherdt, Proust and the Citroen only to be rewarded with massacres, intimidation and Drancy. The huge, backward Islamic community gives France very little except welfare scroungers.

The older brother of the murderer Mohammed Merah has said he is "proud" of his actions. These Islamic supremacist rodents have been tolerated for far too long, and supported at the expense of the unfortunate taxpayer.

Forget this crap 'dhimmi man' is coming out with about Israel. If we want to have less Mohammed Merahs, the solution is obvious. All Islamists from or entitled to the citizenship of another country should lose their European passports and be sent to whatever hole they belong in, at their own expense if possible.

Its time to get rid of this subversive community of Islamist bloodsuckers. And if I had my way, the dhimmis would be sent along with them.

Ted Leddy said...

Sorry I was absent the last few days and was unable to direct this conversation more closely.

Rob, I will definitely take you up on your suggestion about a post on IRA violence versus Palestinian violence. For the record I think your analysis of IRA violence above is sound. I will qualify in the future.

I'm afraid I agree with Rob on this one, Britain's relationship with Ireland over the centuries was one big consistent kick in the crotch for us.

Rob Harris said...

Ted, just seeing if this comment goes up. I see http://twitter.com/#!/MarkMoloneyDub retweeted “Infant dies due to Gaza power crisis” – Iran’s Press TV’s coverage of the faked Hamas story as confirmed http://blog.camera.org/archives/2012/03/ap_withdraws_story_of_gaza_dea.html by Associated Press - wouldn’t pay any mind to him bitching about the Labour - OIRA connection as if they engaged in any sort of violence even remotely on the scale of the Provos, or a seinner blaming John Bruton and taking him saying “fuck the peace process” out of context:

“Many of Bruton's opponents considered him to be too willing to accommodate unionist demands (in one famous accusation, Albert Reynolds referred to him as "John Unionist"). However, he took a strongly critical position on the British Government's reluctance to engage with Sinn Féin during the IRA's 1994–1997 ceasefire. Bruton complained to a local radio reporter in Cork that "I am sick of answering questions about the fucking peace process", for which he later apologised.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bruton – seems a nonsense to blame him for the RA bombing again.