Israeli embassy official filmed on how to 'take down' Sir Alan Duncan & British pro-Palestinian MP's - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14762756
America protects these Islamist activists, under the pretext of human rights. Adding to that the Christian copts were in Egypt before the Muslim invasion. Today they force them to leave just as they did with the Jews in the 50's. America was build on Christianity but they have no qualm to relocate in America and talk against the Christians of Egypt.
#14762817
America protects these Islamist activists, under the pretext of human rights. Adding to that the Christian copts were in Egypt before the Muslim invasion. Today they force them to leave just as they did with the Jews in the 50's. America was build on Christianity but they have no qualm to relocate in America and talk against the Christians of Egypt.

The Israelis are acting in their own interests, and the Muslims are acting in their own interests. How dare they?! >:

[/thread]

:roll:
#14763850
Rich wrote:I think its time to recognise that its is not Jews that are abnormal, but we Gentile Europeans. Look at the the Sikhs, the Hindus, the Han, the Japanese or even the Zulus. Do they feel ashamed about their successes like we White people?

Lets stop worshipping Semitic Gods. And lets up root the vile ideology of Semitism. The evil lie that the creator of the universe spoke to humanity in a Semitic language. And if Europeans must worship Jesus, let it be a blue eyed, blonde Jesus.
No we don't feel ashamed cause whatever crimes those groups committed was nothing compare to western europeans. When Hitler tried to eradicate Poles,Serbs, Russians etc, it was like watching a white prequel to Rwandan Genocide. LOL, I rather you people be worship Odin than "white" Jesus.
#14764459
noir wrote:Arab lobby.


Saying random words doesn't make what you're saying - whatever it is - become true, simply by that.

Still, I expect nothing less from zionists....y'all ain't even trying anymore, which is :lol:
#14850043
Political Interest wrote:Zionists were never real friends of the English.


So you would side with countries like Zimbabwe and Pakistan instead? What benefit was there from abandoning Rhodesia or Hong Kong? Why betray allies in favour of hostile nations? Is it for a brief moment of a moral fuzzie feel good glow? The problem is that the UK will end up isolated from sympathetic nations and have to cope with hostile nations all alone. In fact the UK is very close to that now.

Britain wants to realign with old British settler nation’s, Canada, Australia and NZ. But the UK gave up on them in favour of the EU. But those countries have long since gone their own way. Now Britain is left out in the cold. I think this well illustrates he importance of looking after friends like Israel rather than sucking up to popularist sentiment on Arab street.



Foreign agents should not be trying to infiltrate a European state. This illustrates that for all the noises they make about immigration into Europe the Israelis are out for themselves.

Netanyahu has already threatened my country. Who is he to tell us what to do? And why should we alienate the whole Islamic world in which our Christian brothers and sisters reside just for the sake of one small state in the Middle East?



Well, if Britain’s didn’t send NGOs to cause trouble in Israel, I ‘m sure you would have a good arguement. But you can’t complain given that track record of moral universalist inspired interference in another state’s internal affairs.
#14850058
foxdemon wrote:So you would side with countries like Zimbabwe and Pakistan instead? What benefit was there from abandoning Rhodesia or Hong Kong? Why betray allies in favour of hostile nations? Is it for a brief moment of a moral fuzzie feel good glow? The problem is that the UK will end up isolated from sympathetic nations and have to cope with hostile nations all alone. In fact the UK is very close to that now.


What do Zimabwe and Pakistan have to do with Israel? One is an African country and the other is an Asian country. Maybe you can explain to me why the UK should side with Israel and alienate the entire Arab and Islamic world.

And what do you mean by sympathetic nations? Sympathetic in what sense and to what end? You do realise that you can conduct trade even with countries that don't like you, do you not?

As for Rhodesia and Hong Kong, what was the point? Rhodesia was an African country and belonged to the indigenous people there. And Hong Kong, what benefit was there in keeping Hong Kong?

foxdemon wrote:Britain wants to realign with old British settler nation’s, Canada, Australia and NZ. But the UK gave up on them in favour of the EU. But those countries have long since gone their own way. Now Britain is left out in the cold. I think this well illustrates he importance of looking after friends like Israel rather than sucking up to popularist sentiment on Arab street.


It is possible to make new friends. And what is the actual benefit of being close to Israel? Why not be close to Iran instead?

And why should I side with Israel when the foundation of Israel resulted in the expulsion of the indigenous Palestinian population, 30% or so of whom were my co-religionists.

foxdemon wrote:Well, if Britain’s didn’t send NGOs to cause trouble in Israel, I ‘m sure you would have a good arguement. But you can’t complain given that track record of moral universalist inspired interference in another state’s internal affairs.


If the Israelis want to have their country in the Middle East they should not expect the West to give them a blank check to do whatever they please at the expense of the Palestinians. Israel was founded at gun point and I don't understand why an ostensibly Christian country like England should have favoured the Zionists over the Palestinians, a large number of whom were Christians.

As far as I'm concerned Zionist Jews chose to have that country in the Middle East and they are on their own. If they want to pursue this project then it is their business. But do not expect Europe and America to fund and apologise for it. If Israeli can't hold out against a situation they themselves have put themselves in then that is their problem.
#14850235
Political Interest wrote:What do Zimabwe and Pakistan have to do with Israel? One is an African country and the other is an Asian country. Maybe you can explain to me why the UK should side with Israel and alienate the entire Arab and Islamic world.



I think Zimabwe is a good day sample to choose. What happened to white Rhodesians when Britain withdrew support? What do you think will happen to Israelis under a Palestinian regime?

Strangely enough the Israelis have managed to build diplomatic ties with major Arab countries. So it is only Arab popularist you would be alienating. So why support popularist? Would you support neo-Nazis just because you wanted to be seen to support Western countries and they are vocal and demanding?


And what do you mean by sympathetic nations? Sympathetic in what sense and to what end? You do realise that you can conduct trade even with countries that don't like you, do you not?


Countries you can really on when the chips are down. Maybe you don’t understand.

As for Rhodesia and Hong Kong, what was the point? Rhodesia was an African country and belonged to the indigenous people there. And Hong Kong, what benefit was there in keeping Hong Kong?


I mentioned how British moralists abandoned Rhodesia to its fate above. Hong Kong was also abandoned when it was convenient. You realise how many liberal Chinese you left to the Communists, don’t you?



It is possible to make new friends.


Not with your nation’s track record of abandoning friends when ever it is convenient.



And what is the actual benefit of being close to Israel? Why not be close to Iran instead?



Because Israel is not your enemy whereas Iran is. If I might bring up Pakistan and Zimbabwe again, do you really think these nations are going to be sympathetic to Britain? You see what I mean by isolation? Abandon friendly nations (remember the listed nations in my first post) then expect nations you colonised or exploited to be your friends. Honestly, how realistic is your position?


And why should I side with Israel when the foundation of Israel resulted in the expulsion of the indigenous Palestinian population, 30% or so of whom were my co-religionists.


Do you think you mean anything to those 30%? And what of the other 70%?


If the Israelis want to have their country in the Middle East they should not expect the West to give them a blank check to do whatever they please at the expense of the Palestinians. Israel was founded at gun point and I don't understand why an ostensibly Christian country like England should have favoured the Zionists over the Palestinians, a large number of whom were Christians.


Your desire to interfer in other nation’s business is evidence of latent imperialism. Have you considered the idea of the British minding their own business?

As far as I'm concerned Zionist Jews chose to have that country in the Middle East and they are on their own. If they want to pursue this project then it is their business. But do not expect Europe and America to fund and apologise for it. If Israeli can't hold out against a situation they themselves have put themselves in then that is their problem.


Now you claim to speak for the US and all of Europe. The British are suffering from empire hang over syndrome, struggling to come to terms with the reality that they aren’t the most powerful people in the world anymore. Possibly this would explain the desire to interfere in other places with NGOs and high browed moralistic policies. It makes them feel important.

By adopting a more benign attitude to Israel, you have the chance to turn away from the self destructive mindset too many British have been stuck in for the last few generations.
#14850246
skinster wrote:All the complaints for this 4-part undercover documentary were dismissed by Ofcom.


8) 8) 8)


Excellent news and having a brief read of the complaints, Ofcom should have just sent a "lol" response to the complainants. I went past the LFI stall a number of times at the Labour Conference in Brighton, it was empty every time I was there. JLM as well as many other Labour pressure groups are there basically to troll Corbyn and socialist members with cries of antisemitism at every opportunity.
#14850381
foxdemon wrote:I think Zimabwe is a good day sample to choose. What happened to white Rhodesians when Britain withdrew support? What do you think will happen to Israelis under a Palestinian regime?


White Rhodesians were British. Israelis are not British. There is no ethnic or religious kinship. Therefore I do not see why the English should prioritise the situation of Israelis, and why over the Palestinians? What makes a logical choice to support Israel in this instance?

foxdemon wrote:Strangely enough the Israelis have managed to build diplomatic ties with major Arab countries. So it is only Arab popularist you would be alienating. So why support popularist? Would you support neo-Nazis just because you wanted to be seen to support Western countries and they are vocal and demanding?


It is not only popularists that are alienated. When Israel was attacking Gaza in 2014 the British government said that Israel was just defending itself. The whole Arab world notices this because Palestine is obviously an emotional issue for all Arabic speakers and Muslims around the world.

foxdemon wrote:Countries you can really on when the chips are down. Maybe you don’t understand.


Yes, but rely on them how? Israel is a Middle Eastern power and a small country. If the chips are down it is going to take more far more than Israel to save the UK.

foxdemon wrote:I mentioned how British moralists abandoned Rhodesia to its fate above. Hong Kong was also abandoned when it was convenient. You realise how many liberal Chinese you left to the Communists, don’t you?


I am not a liberal and do not believe that liberalism is for export outside the Anglosphere. If others want liberalism they can establish it themselves. That is incidentally the only way that liberalism works, when it has popular support. Chinese liberals must establish liberalism on their own.

foxdemon wrote:Not with your nation’s track record of abandoning friends when ever it is convenient.


That is true. But diplomatic relationships take time. Good relations can be cultivated with any country if both parties are willing to put in the effort.

foxdemon wrote:Because Israel is not your enemy whereas Iran is. If I might bring up Pakistan and Zimbabwe again, do you really think these nations are going to be sympathetic to Britain? You see what I mean by isolation? Abandon friendly nations (remember the listed nations in my first post) then expect nations you colonised or exploited to be your friends. Honestly, how realistic is your position?


In what way is Iran an enemy? It is only an enemy if the Persian Gulf is a British interest and I do not believe that it is. I do not believe the UK has any interests in the Middle East. The British soldiers, money and everything invested there is not worth it.

As for permanent friends and enemies, I do not think it works that way. Good relations are based on the position of each government at a diplomatic level. What happened in the past may influence positions and the disposition of certain countries towards others, but they do not dictate them entirely. You mention Pakistan, but in what way is Pakistan hostile to the UK? And I mean at the official level, not at the population level.

foxdemon wrote:Do you think you mean anything to those 30%? And what of the other 70%?


Probably not. But do I mean anything to anyone outside of Europe and the Anglosphere?

foxdemon wrote:Your desire to interfer in other nation’s business is evidence of latent imperialism. Have you considered the idea of the British minding their own business?


But that is exactly what I am suggesting. I want the UK to let the Islamic world mind it's own business and not favour any particular country there over another. But you insist on favouring Israel.

foxdemon wrote:Now you claim to speak for the US and all of Europe. The British are suffering from empire hang over syndrome, struggling to come to terms with the reality that they aren’t the most powerful people in the world anymore. Possibly this would explain the desire to interfere in other places with NGOs and high browed moralistic policies. It makes them feel important.


Are you seriously trying to tell me that the UK is somehow meddling in Israeli affairs?

foxdemon wrote:By adopting a more benign attitude to Israel, you have the chance to turn away from the self destructive mindset too many British have been stuck in for the last few generations.


Aside from the US the UK is probably one of the most pro-Israel countries in the world. Are you seriously suggesting that the UK is somehow anti-Israeli?
#14850386
demima wrote:Excellent news and having a brief read of the complaints, Ofcom should have just sent a "lol" response to the complainants.


:D

demima wrote: I went past the LFI stall a number of times at the Labour Conference in Brighton, it was empty every time I was there. JLM as well as many other Labour pressure groups are there basically to troll Corbyn and socialist members with cries of antisemitism at every opportunity.


Indeed.

Jonathan Cook wrote a couple of articles recently on Corbyn, the Labour conference, JLM etc. You can read those here and here.
#14851649
Political Interest wrote:White Rhodesians were British. Israelis are not British. There is no ethnic or religious kinship. Therefore I do not see why the English should prioritise the situation of Israelis, and why over the Palestinians? What makes a logical choice to support Israel in this instance?


Are you saying Britain doesn’t have a Jewish tradition?


It is not only popularists that are alienated. When Israel was attacking Gaza in 2014 the British government said that Israel was just defending itself. The whole Arab world notices this because Palestine is obviously an emotional issue for all Arabic speakers and Muslims around the world.


The British government adopted the right position. I see no reason for the UK to give in to political pressure from a group that had scant regard for either Israeli lives or the future of the UK. When Arabic speakers and a Muslim’s around the world start caring about what happens to you, then maybe you would have an argument.


Yes, but rely on them how? Israel is a Middle Eastern power and a small country. If the chips are down it is going to take more far more than Israel to save the UK.


Britain is a small country, historically noted for the export of wool before they started preying on Spanish Galleons. Sure we ignore Britain?

I am not a liberal and do not believe that liberalism is for export outside the Anglosphere. If others want liberalism they can establish it themselves. That is incidentally the only way that liberalism works, when it has popular support. Chinese liberals must establish liberalism on their own.


The residents of Hong Kong lived under your rule. They had become accustomed to British norms and values. To abandon them is comparable to adopting a child, getting them settled in your home, then throwing them out on the street when it suits you. You are simply trying to justify shirking responsibility.

That is true. But diplomatic relationships take time. Good relations can be cultivated with any country if both parties are willing to put in the effort.


But there’s the problem. What makes you think those other parties will want to put in the effort? You are relying on goodwill despite there being a great deal of ill will in the world toward the UK.


In what way is Iran an enemy? It is only an enemy if the Persian Gulf is a British interest and I do not believe that it is. I do not believe the UK has any interests in the Middle East. The British soldiers, money and everything invested there is not worth it.


If they are not your enemy, why had the UK been patrolling the Gulf? Oh, and those marines taken hostage a few years back. What was that about? It is not evidence of friendly relations.

As for permanent friends and enemies, I do not think it works that way. Good relations are based on the position of each government at a diplomatic level. What happened in the past may influence positions and the disposition of certain countries towards others, but they do not dictate them entirely. You mention Pakistan, but in what way is Pakistan hostile to the UK? And I mean at the official level, not at the population level.


So you admit at the population level, Pakistanis aren’t that favourably deposed toward Englishmen. So why waste your time trying to be nice to people who hate you?

@skinster correct me if I am wrong about Pakistanis animosity toward the English.



But that is exactly what I am suggesting. I want the UK to let the Islamic world mind it's own business and not favour any particular country there over another. But you insist on favouring Israel.


So you would dump the BDS movement and pro immigrant NGOs operating in Israel?


Are you seriously trying to tell me that the UK is somehow meddling in Israeli affairs?


See above.


Aside from the US the UK is probably one of the most pro-Israel countries in the world. Are you seriously suggesting that the UK is somehow anti-Israeli?


And why shouldn’t it be? You may as well stick with the US and Israel. Hoping for countries like Pakistan to replace your allies is wishful thinking.
#14851655
foxdemon wrote:Are you saying Britain doesn’t have a Jewish tradition?


Yes, that is what I am saying.

In what way does Britain have a Jewish tradition?

foxdemon wrote:The British government adopted the right position. I see no reason for the UK to give in to political pressure from a group that had scant regard for either Israeli lives or the future of the UK. When Arabic speakers and a Muslim’s around the world start caring about what happens to you, then maybe you would have an argument.


Since when do Israelis care about the UK? Fanat Zionist lunatics attacked the King David Hotel. And then they captured and murdered two British servicemen.

foxdemon wrote:Britain is a small country, historically noted for the export of wool before they started preying on Spanish Galleons. Sure we ignore Britain?


Denmark and Estonia are also small countries. They still manage to live well.

foxdemon wrote:The residents of Hong Kong lived under your rule. They had become accustomed to British norms and values. To abandon them is comparable to adopting a child, getting them settled in your home, then throwing them out on the street when it suits you. You are simply trying to justify shirking responsibility.


I see. So a venture of the British mercantile class in the 19th century becomes a long term burden that the entire British people must have for the entirety of their lives. When the Chinese say that Hong Kong is their land then it is British imperialism. When the English say that they do not want Hong Kong anymore, it is shirking responsibility. What is the solution?

foxdemon wrote:But there’s the problem. What makes you think those other parties will want to put in the effort? You are relying on goodwill despite there being a great deal of ill will in the world toward the UK.


This conversation is about Middle Eastern countries. As far as I am concerned the UK does not need close friends in the Middle East.

foxdemon wrote:If they are not your enemy, why had the UK been patrolling the Gulf? Oh, and those marines taken hostage a few years back. What was that about? It is not evidence of friendly relations.


I cannot understand why the UK is patrolling the Persian Gulf. Tehran has a long way to go before it reaches the English Channel. I do not think we are going to ever see an Iranian Empire reaching Europe. Iran's hostility to the UK might have something to do with the UK having military bases and ships in the heart of the Middle East and constant meddling in Iranian internal affairs. I do not think Europeans would take kindly to Iranian or Saudi ships and military bases in the North Sea.

foxdemon wrote:So you admit at the population level, Pakistanis aren’t that favourably deposed toward Englishmen. So why waste your time trying to be nice to people who hate you?


No, they are not favourable, but why should they be? And what does it mean at a diplomatic level. Unless Pakistan is going to become a major military partner of the UK there is no need for good will. Pakistan is basically a trading partner for the UK. There's no actual strategic need for a close relationship.

foxdemon wrote:So you would dump the BDS movement and pro immigrant NGOs operating in Israel?


Yes. But I was not aware the UK supported them at an official level.

foxdemon wrote:And why shouldn’t it be? You may as well stick with the US and Israel. Hoping for countries like Pakistan to replace your allies is wishful thinking.


Pakistan is not really what I had in mind. I was thinking more Russia and Germany.
#14851691
Political Interest wrote:Yes, that is what I am saying.

In what way does Britain have a Jewish tradition?




Seriously?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_England


Since when do Israelis care about the UK? Fanat Zionist lunatics attacked the King David Hotel. And then they captured and murdered two British servicemen.


That was addressed earlier in this thread.

Denmark and Estonia are also small countries. They still manage to live well.


But should you ignore them because they are small?


I see. So a venture of the British mercantile class in the 19th century becomes a long term burden that the entire British people must have for the entirety of their lives. When the Chinese say that Hong Kong is their land then it is British imperialism. When the English say that they do not want Hong Kong anymore, it is shirking responsibility.


Hong Kong is a wealthy city. It is hardly a burden. And yes, Britain took the easy way out. If you betray those who believe in you, what can you reasonably expect from the ‘new friends’ you mentioned?


What is the solution?


Something other than throwing them to the wolves?


This conversation is about Middle Eastern countries. As far as I am concerned the UK does not need close friends in the Middle East.


Well, that is easily arranged. So these ‘new friends’ would be located somewhere else in the world?


I cannot understand why the UK is patrolling the Persian Gulf. Tehran has a long way to go before it reaches the English Channel. I do not think we are going to ever see an Iranian Empire reaching Europe. Iran's hostility to the UK might have something to do with the UK having military bases and ships in the heart of the Middle East and constant meddling in Iranian internal affairs. I do not think Europeans would take kindly to Iranian or Saudi ships and military bases in the North Sea.


The idea behind patrolling the Gulf is about preventing oil supplies being disrupted. It does highlight a problem the UK has. You need resources. What will you do if all those not so friendly countries decide to cut off your supply of resources?


No, they are not favourable, but why should they be? And what does it mean at a diplomatic level. Unless Pakistan is going to become a major military partner of the UK there is no need for good will. Pakistan is basically a trading partner for the UK. There's no actual strategic need for a close relationship.


OK, so Pakistan isn’t one of the ‘new friends’. So which countries do you have in mind?



Yes. But I was not aware the UK supported them at an official level.



Pakistan is not really what I had in mind. I was thinking more Russia and Germany.[/quote]
#14851702
@skinster

https://www.algemeiner.com/2017/08/07/al-jazeera-the-terrorist-propaganda-network/

Shocking! :eek:

Al Jazeera is a front for Quatri intellence and supports the Brotherhood. Anti-Israeli activities in the UK are apparently related to terrorist support networks. Should that surprise anyone?


On a related subject, skinster, do you like the English?
#14851726
Al-Jazeera is indeed Qatari and I don't agree with all their output, but as far as this documentary is concerned - the OP - it did a good job. I also look forward to their documentary on the Israeli lobby. As for accusations of terrorism or supporting terrorism, that'd be a bit more convincing if you weren't shilling for a state built by terrorism, which continues to be a terrorist state to this day.

As for the English, of course, I love the English, we're amongst the funniest people ever and I don't care what you say, it'll never stop being true! 8)
Right Wing Marxism?

But those were fully developed economies, with ce[…]

Because it showed Moore’s moral strength, by resi[…]

Except Roy Moore literally said that. He said th[…]

Is Contraception Murder?

Have a good one. You Too 8)