MP makes IDF Nazi 'link'...

Friday, 16 January 2009

MP makes Israeli troops Nazi link

A prominent Jewish MP has compared the actions of Israeli troops with Nazis
who forced his family to flee Poland.

Sir Gerald Kaufman, MP for Gorton in Manchester, drew the parallel during a
Commons debate on the Gaza conflict.

Some members of the Jewish community - including his fellow MPs - have
questioned the comments.

Louise Ellman MP, of the Labour Friends of Israel group, said the "dreadful"
war in Gaza was not comparable to German actions in World War II.

Sir Gerald, who was brought up as an orthodox Jew and Zionist, told MPs: "My
grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town .. a German
soldier shot her dead in her bed.

"My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering
Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza."

Read more: http://news. bbc.co.uk/ 2/hi/uk_news/ england/manchest er/7834487. stm

Fair enough source?

From a man that has good rep?

Thoughts?

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Friday, 16 January 2009

MP makes Israeli troops Nazi link

A prominent Jewish MP has compared the actions of Israeli troops with Nazis
who forced his family to flee Poland.

Sir Gerald Kaufman, MP for Gorton in Manchester, drew the parallel during a
Commons debate on the Gaza conflict.

Some members of the Jewish community - including his fellow MPs - have
questioned the comments.

Louise Ellman MP, of the Labour Friends of Israel group, said the "dreadful"
war in Gaza was not comparable to German actions in World War II.

Sir Gerald, who was brought up as an orthodox Jew and Zionist, told MPs: "My
grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town .. a German
soldier shot her dead in her bed.

"My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering
Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza."

Read more: http://news. bbc.co.uk/ 2/hi/uk_news/ england/manchest er/7834487. stm

Fair enough source?

From a man that has good rep?

Thoughts?

I was asking myself, why don't people respond to a lot of Steve's new threads? Particularly the ones relating to Israel.

This is NOT a dig because the thread starters are thought provoking and I gather that is the aim of them!

I came up with 4 possible answers,

1. Too many new threads! (Can't keep up with them!)
2. Repetitive nature of the threads! (probably necessary to cast a wider net)
3. Broken links! (If the link to an article does'nt work most people will move on.)
4. No one cares about the subject.

and a possible solution (or two).

1. One of the mods can roll all of the threads relating to Israel into one sub-forum with only one thread in it where any new topics/links/articles can be posted into the thread without the need to start a new one.
2. check links to make sure they work before posting them.

p.s. If anyone is looking for threads they haven't responded to, on the home page, click on the "View Unanswered Posts" link!

Here's an additional thought.

1) Avoid the one's that make them uneasy.

Either way mate, I am not really bothered. I try to start a diverse range of threads. I have managed to get some new members for this place. Those members are posting. That's about as much as I can do for a forum.

Let me see if I can offer up a little perspective here...

This is a legitimate story... from a credible media outlet... that reported the views expressed by a real person... a person who happens to be Jewish... who opposes the actions taken by Israel against the Palestinians in Gaza.

I don't dispute one word of that story. I believe it was reported accurately, and without any hint of underlying anti-semitism or terrorist propaganda. In other words, it's a credible story.

Are we in agreement so far Steve?

Good

Remember last summer Steve, when the hot topic of discussion was the presidential race? Even though you are a liberal politically, and I am a conservative, we were both opposed to Barack Obama becoming the next president. The reason I bring this up, is because that opposition you had for Obama, a liberal politician, opened your eyes to something that had always been there, but until then, you had never really seen. That something was the liberal bias that exists is the media... Remember how they trashed McCain and Palin at every opportunity, yet refused to investigate or report on all the shady friends and associates Obama had throughout his life? Remember how many times him and Biden stuck their feet in their mouths in public, but you never heard a word about it on TV or in newspapers? Well, I think I've made my point here...

You still with me Steve?

Good... Now to bring my point home.

When it comes to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, liberals and conservatives tend to lean in slightly different directions overall. According to the polls I saw a few weeks ago, around 2 in every 3 conservatives agree with Israel's actions against Hamas, while only a third of liberals feel the same. It's clear that the more conservative a person is, the more likely it is they will agree with Israels decision to fight back. While the more liberal a person is, the more likely they are to oppose Israels response. Liberals are anti-war by nature, and believe that military action can always be avoided. That also explains why Liberals also tend to be against countries that are strong militarily, and in support of those who don't have military might. The point I'm making is, the conflict over there may be a war to them, but to everyone else in the world, it's a political issue.


Now if you didn't already know Steve, the BBC is probably the most liberal biased media outlet in the english speaking world, as their own internal study 2 years ago revealed. The story you posted from them, although accurate, was not published because it was important news that the public needed to know about. It was published to push an agenda... their agenda... a liberal agenda. By publishing that story, and others like it, they create the illusion that opposition to Israel among Jews world wide is much greater than it really is, which fits very well with their liberal agenda. I mean who better to parade around in opposition to Israel, than a Jew?


The fact is, a very tiny minority of Jews in the world see things the way the man in your article did. So small in fact, that they are hardly worth mentioning at all. The BBC is just trying to sway public opinion toward their own personal beliefs by making people believe more opposition exists than really does.

That's why articles like this aren't really worth discussing... It's just one man's opinion and doesn't represent anything close to overall public opinion among Jews.

Having been unable to canvass the view of all Jews, I couldn't fairly say.

I would think that it amounts to more than just a tiny minority, though.

The 'liberal' BBC.



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5568735.ece



BBC scuppers TV fundraising appeal for Gaza victims


A nationwide appeal for money to help the Gaza relief effort has been denied free television airtime because the BBC fears that it would damage confidence in the corporation’s impartiality.

A 46-year-old agreement with overseas aid charities guarantees them a two-minute prime-time slot to broadcast appeals. But the BBC said that the risk of compromising confidence in its fairness, coupled with “question marks” about aid getting through, had led to its decision not to go ahead with this one.

The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) announced its national appeal for Gaza yesterday, saying that the devastation after Israel’s three-week offensive was so great that the leading aid charities felt “compelled to act”. The committee, which is made up of the 12 biggest aid charities, including the British Red Cross and Save the Children, co-ordinates fundraising during international emergencies to maximise the impact of their efforts.

The big advantage of a DEC appeal is the free airtime given to it by the major broadcasters. The agreement dates back to 1963, when big aid charities first came together for a joint appeal, and has the approval of broadcasting regulators. Under its terms the main broadcasters get together and agree what footage to use, and often provide the spokesman for the appeal. The script is agreed and then signed off by the DEC.



In the case of the Gaza appeal, talks stalled on Wednesday when the broadcasters could not reach an agreement. The broadcast would have have highlighted the plight of thousands of victims, including many children, who are homeless and without food, power and water.

By convention, if all broadcasters do not agree to carry the appeal, none does. A national appeal from the DEC would normally raise about £10 million, but without the broadcasts the total is certain to be lower.

The BBC is highly sensitive about its coverage of the Middle East, which Israel has alleged to have shown pro-Palestinian bias . The corporation has even held an inquiry into its own coverage.

Last night the BBC denied it was to blame for preventing the appeal broadcasts going ahead. Sources at the corporation insisted that it was not the only broadcaster that did not want to screen it, suggesting that BSkyB — in which News Corporation, parent company of The Times, has a 39.1 per cent stake — was also against it and that ITV was “on the fence”.

The BBC statement said: “Along with other broadcasters, the BBC has decided not to broadcast the DEC’s public appeal to raise funds for Gaza. The BBC decision was made because of question marks about the delivery of aid in a volatile situation and also to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC’s impartiality in the context of an ongoing news story. However, the BBC will, of course, continue to report the humanitarian story in Gaza.”

Sky immediately denied that it had also had reservations. “We were considering this request internally when the DEC contacted us to let us know that the BBC had decided not to broadcast the appeal at this time. As, by convention, if all broadcasters do not carry the appeal then none do, the decision was effectively made for us,” a spokesman said.

Brendan Gormley, chief executive of the DEC, told The Times that he was saddened that the appeal would not be broadcast as it meant thousands of potential donors would not be reached. “We deeply regret this decision if it means our message doesn’t reach those who may want to give to a DEC appeal.

“We will soldier on but we recognise it will be much more of a struggle now to reach donors,” he said.

He questioned the BBC’s suggestion that it might not be possible to get help through to those who needed it. British charities were already on the ground and delivering aid, and one of the criteria that had to be met before the committee’s trustees allowed a national appeal to go ahead was firm evidence that aid was reaching its targets.

“Agencies are already providing food, drugs and blankets as well as delivering clean water. But we will soon reach the limit of what we can do, without more money.”

ITV confirmed that an agreement could not be reached by broadcasters. “The DEC did ask broadcasters if they could support the appeal. We assessed the DEC’s request carefully against agreed criteria and were unable to reach the consensus which is necessary for an appeal,” a spokesman said.

Several aid charities announced their own appeals as soon as the conflict began, although these will now give way to the DEC appeal. Islamic Relief, a DEC member, has managed to raise £2 million, although other charities have struggled to get beyond tens of thousands of pounds.

Here's the corrected link to "MP Makes Israeli Troops Nazi Link" for those who want to visit:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/7834487.stm

Hot

We had an IRA bomb in Manchester which destroyed much of the centre - we didn't send troops over to Belfast to murder 1,000 Catholics

Sir Gerald Kaufman


*Applause*

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:We had an IRA bomb in Manchester which destroyed much of the centre - we didn't send troops over to Belfast to murder 1,000 Catholics

Sir Gerald Kaufman


*Applause*

Steve... You are unbelievable.

You ignore the fact that half of the people killed were Hamas terrorists.
You ignore the fact that Israel targeted terrorists and rocket launchers, not civilians.
You ignore the fact that Hamas launched attacks from schools and hospitals.
You ignore the fact that Hamas uses women and children as human shields.

Next time Steve, think before you post something so glaringly ignorant of the facts. Unless of course, you feel that intellectual honesty will not serve your purpose.

Grim17 wrote:

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:We had an IRA bomb in Manchester which destroyed much of the centre - we didn't send troops over to Belfast to murder 1,000 Catholics

Sir Gerald Kaufman


*Applause*

Steve... You are unbelievable.

You ignore the fact that half of the people killed were Hamas terrorists.
You ignore the fact that Israel targeted terrorists and rocket launchers, not civilians.
You ignore the fact that Hamas launched attacks from schools and hospitals.
You ignore the fact that Hamas uses women and children as human shields.

Next time Steve, think before you post something so glaringly ignorant of the facts. Unless of course, you feel that intellectual honesty will not serve your purpose.

Unbelievable?

For what? Appluading a comparison made by a man who knows far more than you and I combined?

As to the rest, know what, I am bored going over this, again and again.

Suffice to say, your statements are mendacious to say the least, but never let that get in the way of a good story.

Personally, I am bored having to correct it.

Drag David Christie over.

I am sure he will oblige you.

Me?

I am going to take it easy today.

One of the mods can roll all of the threads relating to Israel into one sub-forum with only one thread in it where any new topics/links/articles can be posted into the thread without the need to start a new one.

Spendid idea...I made that suggestion early on...That will keep the board clean and all those interested will have their own place on the board...just not all over it.

I would be cool with that.

To be honest, I would prefer to see a broader political debate anyway, not just subjects that were exclusive to the Middle East or the US.

catch-22 wrote:
One of the mods can roll all of the threads relating to Israel into one sub-forum with only one thread in it where any new topics/links/articles can be posted into the thread without the need to start a new one.

Thanks for that, C.

peregrine wrote:Spendid idea...I made that suggestion early on...That will keep the board clean and all those interested will have their own place on the board...just not all over it.

We are already working on things like that and other things, too!

Still say we need new members who have come from other places. We have done okay, so far, with about 40, and I have managed to get a couple on, but if everyone could do the same, we would really add to the board, imo.

Good point. But not to worry; all in good time. We were just born, the rent is free and we're not going anywhere.

It just seems like a long time if you're always here. Sometimes stepping away now and again for a breath of fresh air does a body good.

I know.

But I am addicted to you.

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
I know. But I am addicted to you.

I lie. But you're interesting.

I lie. So are you.

Steve is a liar. See his above post.

Ditto Valerie.

She conceded it.

And first, as well.

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Ditto Valerie.

She conceded it.

And first, as well.

Steve ditto'd me and says I was first.
I am original and Steve is a poseur.

So OK, you both know the rules of the game so let's keep it a clean fight now. And now both of you go to your corner and at the sound of the bell come out fighting.

I'm a lover not a fighter.

I'm not honest. You're not a loser.

Peregrine wrote:One of the mods can roll all of the threads relating to Israel into one sub-forum with only one thread in it where any new topics/links/articles can be posted into the thread without the need to start a new one.

Spendid idea...I made that suggestion early on...That will keep the board clean and all those interested will have their own place on the board...just not all over it.

Qudos, Peregrine. This is one of the biggest problems on the scam site. Once the first few shots are fired, the thread usually dies and just rots. One big long political thread could be interesting, or at least sub-folders. One for Isreal, one for US, one for UK etc. etc. Any sub-forums which spill over to another (e.g. UK Rabbi criticizes Israeli Zionists and gets attacked) could be started in the UK sub-forum and could easily be linked by a member to any of the other sub-forums.

I'm following your series of avatars, btw. How many are there? Are they your own work?

Grim17 wrote:

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:We had an IRA bomb in Manchester which destroyed much of the centre - we didn't send troops over to Belfast to murder 1,000 Catholics

Sir Gerald Kaufman


*Applause*

Steve... You are unbelievable.

You ignore the fact that half of the people killed were Hamas terrorists.
You ignore the fact that Israel targeted terrorists and rocket launchers, not civilians.
You ignore the fact that Hamas launched attacks from schools and hospitals.
You ignore the fact that Hamas uses women and children as human shields.

Next time Steve, think before you post something so glaringly ignorant of the facts. Unless of course, you feel that intellectual honesty will not serve your purpose.

Grim, your selective criticism of Hamas and blind ignorance (not to mention your short-term memory) is equally unbelievable.

Here we go again.....in order....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict

According to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, 4,336 Gazans were wounded and 1,284 killed with 894 of the killed civilians, including 280 children and minors, age 17 and under, as well as 111 women. Of the remaining 390 dead, 167 were members of Hamas' civil police and 223 were combatants. An unknown number of Hamas commanders killed in "non-combat situations" were included in the count by the PCHR research team. The World Health Organization reported that 16 health personnel were killed and 22 injured while on duty over the course of the offensive. UNRWA reported that 5 of its staff members, 1 Job Creation Programme (JCP) beneficiary, and 3 contractors were killed, while 11 staff members, 2 JCP beneficiaries and 4 contractors injured. The World Food Programme reported 1 contractor killed and 2 injured.
1284 killed
894 civilians (280 under 17 years of age and 111 women)
390 Hamas fighters (167 police and 223 Hamas combatants)
*****************************************

http://www.merip.org/mero/mero010709.html

After a week of sustained aerial and naval bombardment encompassing the length and breadth of the Gaza Strip, Israel on January 3 escalated its unprecedented onslaught with artillery barrages and a ground invasion. As expected, this new phase produced an immediate and horrific increase in casualties, particularly among Palestinian civilians, in both absolute and proportional terms................In a number of cases, entire families were wiped out in neighborhoods transformed into free-fire zones.
**************************************************

On January 6, hours after three cousins were killed when Israel bombed the UN-run Asma Elementary School in Gaza City, 46 Palestinian civilians were killed and 100 wounded when Israel shelled the al-Fakhoura school -- also operated by the world body -- in the Jabalya refugee camp. “Shortly after,” the Financial Times reported the following day, “the Israeli military e-mailed journalists a link to a YouTube video purportedly showing militants firing mortars from a UN-run school in Gaza -- but it was dated October 2007.” Protesting “the complete absence of accountability” and calling for an independent investigation into the bloodbath, the UN was, according to the Guardian, “particularly incensed over targeting of the schools, because Israeli forces knew they were packed with families as they had ordered them to get out of their homes with leaflet drops and loudspeakers. It said it had identified the schools as refugee centers to the Israeli military and provided GPS coordinates.”
*********************************************

http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/01/amnesty-international-says-israeli-soldiers-used-gaza-civilians-as-human-shields.html

The report makes clear that the IDF were occupying and fighting from Palestinian civilian homes, either after civilians had fled or had been expelled, or even while they were barred fleeing. "In most cases, the families had fled or were expelled by the soldiers. In some cases, however, the soldiers prevented the families from leaving, using them as 'human shields'." Finally, the report has more on the messages left behind by the IDF. One read "We came to annihilate you" in Hebrew.

Are you sure you don't work for the Israeli Ministry of Misinformation?

If he doesn't, he should send in an application. I am sure they would welcome his tenacity an mendacity.

That's some first class propaganda there Catch... From some really credible sources. lololololol

I could spend all day shooting down most of it, but why should I bother. I've done it before on the other board, yet you all always ignore the truth and fall back on the same bullshit over and over again.

Hamas = Terrorist

Hamas kills innocent people by design. They use there own people as human shields. They torture people and have sworn the destruction of Israel.

Accept it.

More over simplified party line pulp.

Grim17 wrote:Let me see if I can offer up a little perspective here...

This is a legitimate story... from a credible media outlet... that reported the views expressed by a real person... a person who happens to be Jewish... who opposes the actions taken by Israel against the Palestinians in Gaza.

I don't dispute one word of that story. I believe it was reported accurately, and without any hint of underlying anti-semitism or terrorist propaganda. In other words, it's a credible story.

Are we in agreement so far Steve?

Good

Remember last summer Steve, when the hot topic of discussion was the presidential race? Even though you are a liberal politically, and I am a conservative, we were both opposed to Barack Obama becoming the next president. The reason I bring this up, is because that opposition you had for Obama, a liberal politician, opened your eyes to something that had always been there, but until then, you had never really seen. That something was the liberal bias that exists is the media... Remember how they trashed McCain and Palin at every opportunity, yet refused to investigate or report on all the shady friends and associates Obama had throughout his life? Remember how many times him and Biden stuck their feet in their mouths in public, but you never heard a word about it on TV or in newspapers? Well, I think I've made my point here...

You still with me Steve?

Good... Now to bring my point home.

When it comes to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, liberals and conservatives tend to lean in slightly different directions overall. According to the polls I saw a few weeks ago, around 2 in every 3 conservatives agree with Israel's actions against Hamas, while only a third of liberals feel the same. It's clear that the more conservative a person is, the more likely it is they will agree with Israels decision to fight back. While the more liberal a person is, the more likely they are to oppose Israels response. Liberals are anti-war by nature, and believe that military action can always be avoided. That also explains why Liberals also tend to be against countries that are strong militarily, and in support of those who don't have military might. The point I'm making is, the conflict over there may be a war to them, but to everyone else in the world, it's a political issue.


Now if you didn't already know Steve, the BBC is probably the most liberal biased media outlet in the english speaking world, as their own internal study 2 years ago revealed. The story you posted from them, although accurate, was not published because it was important news that the public needed to know about. It was published to push an agenda... their agenda... a liberal agenda. By publishing that story, and others like it, they create the illusion that opposition to Israel among Jews world wide is much greater than it really is, which fits very well with their liberal agenda. I mean who better to parade around in opposition to Israel, than a Jew?


The fact is, a very tiny minority of Jews in the world see things the way the man in your article did. So small in fact, that they are hardly worth mentioning at all. The BBC is just trying to sway public opinion toward their own personal beliefs by making people believe more opposition exists than really does.

That's why articles like this aren't really worth discussing... It's just one man's opinion and doesn't represent anything close to overall public opinion among Jews.

Most of the Jews I've ever known are bleeding heart liberals...so given that the majority of Jews vote democrat. Wouldn't they then hold the politicaly left leaning that war is bad and should be avoided. As well, wouldn't that also tend for them to have more compassion towards Palestine, and cancel out that opinion that the majority of Jews agree with Israels policies...?

There is widespread anger at Israel, and it does not come from Arabs and 'Nazis', but Orthodox Jews, Jewish writers, academics, and Rabbi's, who say that the state of Israel itself violates the teachings of the Torah.

Israeli Jews (and Grim ), they may well argue different.

That is what happens when you have a 'homeland' for a religion, be that Jews or anything else.

You cannot base policy and a nation on a religion, without it going wrong.

Grim17 wrote:That's some first class propaganda there Catch... From some really credible sources. lololololol

I could spend all day shooting down most of it, but why should I bother. I've done it before on the other board, yet you all always ignore the truth and fall back on the same bullshit over and over again.

Hamas = Terrorist

Hamas kills innocent people by design. They use there own people as human shields. They torture people and have sworn the destruction of Israel.

Accept it.

ROFL!!! This coming from a member who doesn't bother to acknowledge the long list of UN Resolutions condemning Israel's history of flagrant violations, nor the disregard of the human rights of their neighbors. Oh, and let's not forget that Israel obtained their nuclear weapons without signing the NPT, therefore, they acquired them illegally. And yet, not a word of criticism will escape Grim's lips, nor will his fingers tire from typing from the safe confines of his decrepit trailer in that classy mobile home park.

This is why the Western media is so successful at deceiving gullible lemmings like Grim and his goose-stepping ilk. The retaliation is always seen, but the instigator usually goes unnoticed.

How many years has Israel been instigating and prodding at the Palestinians? Too many decades.

It doesn't matter what Israel does, it will always have Grime's blessing and seal of approval. Humanity as a whole can fall into the abyss as long as Israel, oh sacred Israel, remains unscathed.

Israel could nuke an entire nation, and you can be rest assured that the next day, there would be a certain person on here, just waiting to defend it, fella.

Grim17 wrote:That's some first class propaganda there Catch... From some really credible sources. lololololol

What's wrong with them? Do you have any that disputes the accuracy of them? I'd love to see them!

Grim17 wrote:I could spend all day shooting down most of it, but why should I bother. I've done it before on the other board, yet you all always ignore the truth and fall back on the same bullshit over and over again.

You could spend 3 weeks looking but you could'nt discredit any of them. Not one!

catch-22 wrote:

Grim17 wrote:That's some first class propaganda there Catch... From some really credible sources. lololololol

What's wrong with them? Do you have any that disputes the accuracy of them? I'd love to see them!

Grim17 wrote:I could spend all day shooting down most of it, but why should I bother. I've done it before on the other board, yet you all always ignore the truth and fall back on the same bullshit over and over again.

You could spend 3 weeks looking but you could'nt discredit any of them. Not one!

Well that's 3 days gone. Only 18 days left Grim!

It's a useless endeavor. No matter what I post, the Hamas apologists will still ignore it.

Terrorists have proven to be incapable of reasonable thought and rational behaviour... Unfortunately, most of their supporters (and you know who your are) are exactly the same.

Grim17 wrote:It's a useless endeavor. No matter what I post, the Hamas apologists will still ignore it.

Terrorists have proven to be incapable of reasonable thought and rational behaviour... Unfortunately, most of their supporters (and you know who your are) are exactly the same.

Sorry to hear you have given up!

Oh well!

Btw, no one is ignoring you. They just don't believe you. Besides, it's you who is doing most of the ignoring, here!

I'll bet there's one here who is ignoring me... I mean after his tantrum a few days ago, I don't expect him to be man enough to address me anymore. Running and hiding is his MO.

Grim17 wrote:I'll bet there's one here who is ignoring me... I mean after his tantrum a few days ago, I don't expect him to be man enough to address me anymore. Running and hiding is his MO.

You should know. You're an expert in that field.