Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:16 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

aren't responsible for what your product does.

never seen Cadbury been accountable for obesity, or BMW for speeding.....

it's not the product that kills people, it's how it's used.

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:19 pm  

Dally wrote:

But people are bemoaning the implementation of Israeli government policy by Israeli troops (who are also risking their lives and getting killed). German soldiers in WW2 "were only doing their job and obeying orders" but people in this country say they should have disobeyed orders. If Iraq was felt to be an illegal war (which it largely was) why did British troops just do what they were ordered rather than refuse? Can't you see the double standards that prevail in British (and each country's own) press and public opinion. That was my point. People are outraged except when its their people who are committing the slaughter. Then it's OK by most people. Sickening hypocrisy.

By the way, I don't drive home you silly individual.

At least Iraq is a safer more secure country for the ten of thousands of innocents we slaughtered.
Oh, wait on a minute..........................................................................................................

Wear your Help for Heroes wristbands with pride, no really!

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:25 pm  

Hillbilly_Red wrote:

as to the snide comment (what! FA sarcastic?) from FA: you made a comment that wars and political violence could be reduced if people did not believe in an afterlife which would reward them for these actions. I pointed out that the Tamil Tigers were atheistic suicide bombers. Disproving your view.

How utterly stupid. Your proposition seems to be that if you can provide an example of "atheist suicide bombers", (why did you introduce suicide bombers, btw?) this "disproves" an argument that eliminating religion would reduce wars and violence? Do you believe what you proposed there is actually a valid argument?

Just to pick one single current example, would Sunnis kill Shias for being Shias, or Shias kill Sunnis for being Sunnis, if from midnight they suddenly were of no religion, or is that too hard a question for you?

Btw the Black Tamils were hardly atheists. From what I have read, they were mostly Hindu, and therefore many would certainly have believed in an afterlife; but those suicide bombers were mostly selected and brainwashed from an early age and their motivations were rooted in that brainwashing. Al Jazeera did a good report on these which I suspect will be available on YT if you want to learn something. A brainwashed worldview and ideology is to me largely indistinguishable from "religion", it is surprisingly easy to indoctrinate people even into the extreme, eg a bunch of seemingly intelligent and educated people mostly agreeing to die for Charlie Manson's crazy views.

"Hillbilly_Red wrote:

Oh, also read the Bible or Koran: both strongly emphasise punishment for those who shed innocent lives; a point ignored by many who preach their view of religion.

How breathtakingly naive. All religious killers always find perfect justification for the vilest massacres and abominations directly from their interpretation of those books. Whoever is "interpreting" the book easily finds you guilty for something or other, and then you have to die. Or are you arguing that the hundreds of thousnads of religious killings are all of "guilty" lives?

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Thu Jul 31, 2014 6:04 pm  

Standee wrote:

never seen Cadbury been accountable for obesity, or BMW for speeding.....

it's not the product that kills people, it's how it's used.

"I have here a beautiful hand-made Qassam rocket, to you, £50 cash, no vat, no invoice, no questions asked, it'll make a lovely conversation piece for your mantlepiece or the middle of your dining table and can be decorated by your children with poster paint in a myriad of designs, serving suggestion shown on box. PS, don't hit the base too hard with, for example, a hammer and nail, or be tempted to drill through the case to find out whats inside it because even we don't know, please dispose of carefully and under no circumstances throw it over your neighbours fence".

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:44 pm  

Euclid wrote:

Surely you realise by now that the actual experience of people in living and working in Gaza (or anywhere else, for that matter) counts for nothing in the minds of a number of regular keyboard warriors here who prefer to get the information that feeds their views from newspapers/TV/Facebook/twitter. What on earth would your contact know compared to them?

Indeed! This is my whole point. 99.9% of people
Take what they read in the main stream media as fact when the reality is, it's best to keep an open mind. One prominent msnbc (now NBC news) reporter actually lost their Job early in the conflict due to them wanting to air an anti isreal report. Search Russell brands you tube show "trews" the one with the fox presenter who interviews someone from the West Bank

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:08 pm  

Whilst on the subject of media, it frequently annoys me how the media "show" moves from spot to spot and then almost completely ignores and forgets about the places they've just been to or other places.

Recently, with events in the Middle East & Africa, has been a perfect example of how the media report and often over-report from one place with almost total disregard to others. I can only assume because they've got themselves setup there so they'll use the situation as much as they can.

For instance we had the world's media in Libya during the conflict. Then Gaddafi was killed, then virtually nothing for years.
The same for Iraq, media crawling the place during the "insurgency" then nothing, despite plenty of Iraqis still dying.
The same is true for Syria, Ukraine, Israel-Palestine, Iran, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia and I'm sure there are others too.

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Fri Aug 01, 2014 5:41 am  

When this conflict first started, Anonymous organised a demonstration in London. Over 10,000 people turned up. At the exact same moment that the demonstration reached Downing Street, do you know what the BBC did? Interview Tony Blair with his pro Israel views! You couldn't make it up! The next Anonymous demonstration attracted over 100,000 people but again, not one mention on the BBC yet in the past, the BBC has reported on the likes of fox hunting demos attracting around 5.000 people. Why is that?

#gazaunderattack
@youranonnews

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Fri Aug 01, 2014 7:21 am  

Him wrote:

Whilst on the subject of media, it frequently annoys me how the media "show" moves from spot to spot and then almost completely ignores and forgets about the places they've just been to or other places.

Recently, with events in the Middle East & Africa, has been a perfect example of how the media report and often over-report from one place with almost total disregard to others. I can only assume because they've got themselves setup there so they'll use the situation as much as they can.

For instance we had the world's media in Libya during the conflict. Then Gaddafi was killed, then virtually nothing for years.
The same for Iraq, media crawling the place during the "insurgency" then nothing, despite plenty of Iraqis still dying.
The same is true for Syria, Ukraine, Israel-Palestine, Iran, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia and I'm sure there are others too.

In the lazy, cut-price age of global communications (but at a cost on an accountants spreadsheet) the news media are spoon-fed "news" stories by whoever is the most powerful interested party, as soon as that party's goal has been achieved then the news feed stops and everyone moves on.

Which is precisely what makes the newspapers bleating about "investigative journalism being damaged by Leveson" so laughable, they wouldn't know what "investigative journalism" meant until they looked it up in a Thesaurus or happened to trip up upon some Pilger documentaries from the 1970s on Youtube.

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Fri Aug 01, 2014 9:46 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

they wouldn't know what "investigative journalism" meant until they looked it up in a Thesaurus or happened to trip up upon some Pilger documentaries from the 1970s on Youtube.

John Waite on Radio 4's Face The Facts is pretty good too.

But true to form, the BBC are axing the prgramme in 2015 due to budget cuts

Re: Israeli war crimes continue : Fri Aug 01, 2014 10:04 am  

Lebron James wrote: When this conflict first started, Anonymous organised a demonstration in London. Over 10,000 people turned up. At the exact same moment that the demonstration reached Downing Street, do you know what the BBC did? Interview Tony Blair with his pro Israel views! You couldn't make it up! The next Anonymous demonstration attracted over 100,000 people but again, not one mention on the BBC yet in the past, the BBC has reported on the likes of fox hunting demos attracting around 5.000 people. Why is that? #gazaunderattack @youranonnews You mean they offered a balanced view, as per the BBC Charter? Coverage of a pro-Gaza protest and then a pro-Israeli stance? You couldn't make it up. Shocking. I assume in your mind reaching Downing Street and cutting to Blair was symbolic and planned and probably clear evidence of a Zionist plot? No mention of Gaza protests? Thousands march through London over Gaza crisis Gaza conflict: Berlin protests show dividing lines Hundreds join Belfast Gaza protest Anti-Israeli protest on the streets of Edinburgh Protesters join rally for Gaza Policing of violence at Cardiff Gaza protest 'poor' They're even reporting on your lot protesting on their reporting. Manchester protesters march against BBC coverage and Gaza bombings 'Bristol Friends of Gaza' protest camp outside BBC I have no problem with a person taking a firm stance on this issue, even an unbalanced one such as yours. But the obsession with BBC reporting is ridiculous and slightly baffling given the BBC has a clear public duty to deliver unbiased reporting - and that includes the pro-Israel stance. FWIW, I've seen several Israeli officials being grilled pretty harshly by BBC reporters, and I'm seeing almost blanket coverage of the carnage in Gaza. I'm not sure what about this is unacceptable.

Lebron James wrote: When this conflict first started, Anonymous organised a demonstration in London. Over 10,000 people turned up. At the exact same moment that the demonstration reached Downing Street, do you know what the BBC did? Interview Tony Blair with his pro Israel views! You couldn't make it up! The next Anonymous demonstration attracted over 100,000 people but again, not one mention on the BBC yet in the past, the BBC has reported on the likes of fox hunting demos attracting around 5.000 people. Why is that? #gazaunderattack @youranonnews You mean they offered a balanced view, as per the BBC Charter? Coverage of a pro-Gaza protest and then a pro-Israeli stance? You couldn't make it up. Shocking. I assume in your mind reaching Downing Street and cutting to Blair was symbolic and planned and probably clear evidence of a Zionist plot? No mention of Gaza protests? Thousands march through London over Gaza crisis Gaza conflict: Berlin protests show dividing lines Hundreds join Belfast Gaza protest Anti-Israeli protest on the streets of Edinburgh Protesters join rally for Gaza Policing of violence at Cardiff Gaza protest 'poor' They're even reporting on your lot protesting on their reporting. Manchester protesters march against BBC coverage and Gaza bombings 'Bristol Friends of Gaza' protest camp outside BBC I have no problem with a person taking a firm stance on this issue, even an unbalanced one such as yours. But the obsession with BBC reporting is ridiculous and slightly baffling given the BBC has a clear public duty to deliver unbiased reporting - and that includes the pro-Israel stance. FWIW, I've seen several Israeli officials being grilled pretty harshly by BBC reporters, and I'm seeing almost blanket coverage of the carnage in Gaza. I'm not sure what about this is unacceptable.