Lord Duckhunter

I wrote amongst Hamas controlled Palestine. The relevance is you’re trying to claim that Hamas wouldn’t murder Jews once they got everything they wanted. If Isreal didn’t exist or went back to its 1948 borders, Hamas would still murder jews. Which is the exact reason Isreal will never ever give up control of the West Bank.

I see Pep was blowing smoke up Brightons arse like he used to do with us…. After he picked up the 3 points.

If he did that Noddy Klopp impression, or beating his fucking chest, then sign me up.

Do you seriously believe Hamas would stop murdering Jews if Isreal ceased to exist? If you think they’ll start living normal lives & accept Jews living amongst them in peace and harmony, you’re deluded. Isreal could have decimated Gaza in 2005, it didn’t it, withdrew and left it to the Palestinian’s. If Hamas could decimate Isreal, it would. No fucking doubt about it. Jews can’t live peacefully in a Hamas controlled area, 21% of Israeli population is Arabs or non Jews. They even have a Muslim cabinet minister, I’d love to see how long a Jew would last in the Hamas leadership team. Harold Macmillans Night of the long knives would be taken literally before his first cabinet meeting broke for coffee.

Exactly right. But the problem with a 2 state solution is the West Bank. We pretty much had a 2 state situation prior to 7/10, but it obviously didn’t include The West Bank. Gaza, for all intent and purposes is a Palestinian state, so the real dispute is The West Bank. Isreal will never give it up, will never weaken its resolve to control it, because of it’s importance militarily. Palestinian’s consider it as their land just as much as they do Gaza, so The West Bank issue contaminants Gaza because the Israelis left Gaza years ago. In a perfect world we’d probably be looking at the sort of fudge that gave us peace in Ireland. An Israeli state, a Palestinian state in Gaza, and Ulster type fudge secured by the UN in The West Bank. But it’ll never happen in a million years, not a fucking hope in hell.

It’s been one big blob since Maggie. Blair, Cameron, Sunak, May, Boris, Major could have been in the same party. Brown was probably the exceptions, but he came at the wrong time

Hurst the only one left now.

What?? Am I reading this correctly, you think Hamas don’t want to destroy Isreal & murder every Jew in the Middle East?

Seeing as the Brexit party & before that UKIP, both proposed PR & both were against FPTP. Added to the fact Reforms leader has spoken out constantly against FPTP, I don’t think your comment is quite as clever or funny as you thought it was.

The problem Isreal has got is keeping their citizens safe whilst allowing Palestinians to build the society they (as in Palestinian’s) want in Gaza. There was a window of opportunity when they withdrew in 2005 but the major players in the region didn’t take it. Had oil rich Arab states, The US, and particularly Egypt put their weight behind it, infrastructures could have been put in place which didn’t need reliance on Isreal. It could be a beautiful part of the world, living beside Isreal in a similar way the Egyptians do in Sinai. Instead of that the major players bunged it a bit of money, let Iran gain an unhealthy influence and let Isreal remain the bad guys. Pony like “open prison” doesn’t help because countries have the right to forcefully defend their borders. As we have seen, they actually need to forcefully defend their borders a bit more rigorously then the actually have been. Hamas incarcerated Palestinians in that “open prison”, not Isreal. The real complication is The West Bank. Isreal will never give up occupancy as it’s important militarily, their mindset (which I agree with) is, if they give that up the nation will always be in danger and it’s importance to Isreal actually continuing to exist can not be over stated. Long at a map of 1948, and it’s madness that Britain and others gave Isreal the border it did with Jordan. So when people talk about a 2 state solution, it’s simply not going to happen if it includes The West Bank. It’s really a 3 state (or area) solution that is needed. Isreal, Gaza & West Bank, and god knows what West Bank solution will be acceptable to both sides.

He’s certainly silenced a few critics the past couple of weeks, really sorted it out….I don’t know what it is, maybe a new shampoo or moisturiser, perhaps he’s changed stylist, long my it continue.

Do you think Hull supporters would want to swap keepers?

Dear god If you write things like this, then it is. If you wrote, I don’t like what the Israelis are doing in Gaza, then it is not. It’s not my definition of anti semitism it’s the international definition accepted by dozens of countries, dopey.

Once maybe, twice perhaps, over a dozen times? Blaming Jews for the actions of Israel is anti semitic. He’s done this over and over and not just in this thread. Despite people on his side of this debate pointing it out to him, he still does it. So I’m afraid it is a question of dopey or anti semitic. If I was constantly saying Blacks instead of Haiti, I’m sure you wouldn’t be giving me the benefit of the doubt or making excuses.

What a load of old pony.

You are either that dopey, or you’re anti semitic. Which is it?

Was this no excuses pony before or after he claimed Rotherham was a freak result & Statto called to say we’d win it 98 times out of 100?

I missed this gem from earlier 😂 What did he expect the definition to mention, Hindus? Mormons? Fucking atheists? Is he really that dopey?

Lego head is the David Brent of managers. He hasn’t reinvented the wheel, he hasn’t devised some new tactical innovations that are so specialist it takes weeks for professionals to learn. He’s making excuses wrapped up in pony management waffle.

In English?

O Sullivan was a remainer.

You’re still struggling aren’t you. You are comparing Putin & Russians to Netyanau & “Jews”. Not Israelis, but Jews. If The Nigerian government started bombing South Africa and I wrote that I didn’t blame The Blacks, but their Government. What would you call me?

The fact that anybody thinks there can be impartiality is laughable and naive. It’s not a question of “here’s a Tory, here’s labours side”. Everything from running orders, guests, commissioning, scheduling is the subject to somebodies bias. Rod Liddle a man of the left & former BBC man spells it out. It’s over, gone. It’s unsustainable. The only debate is what replaces it.

So are you saying that The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism isn’t “grown up”, that the 20+ countries that accept & use this definition shouldn’t do so . They should just use the “Cambridge dictionary “ as that’s the grown up version. That’s a pretty ridiculous claim even for you. To help with your education & help you gain some understanding that your “hate or strong dislike of Jews” definition belongs in a year 6 lesson and not in a serious discussion. Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to: Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews. Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Why does it need to be one of those options? Still charge a licence fee. If it’s a good as it’s supporters make out most people will still pay. The ones that don’t or don’t want to, can lose access the service, rather than be put in prison. You could even have voluntarily top ups, so you good people who think it’s brilliant could pay a bit extra to ensure it remains so.