Work for the UN

by craig on June 17, 2013 10:25 am in Uncategorized

GCHQ and the NSA between them employ tens of thousands of people.  I am bemused by the shock at the “revelation” they have been spying.  What on Earth did journalists think that spies do all day? That includes electronics spies.

Since Katherine Gun revealed that we spy on other delegations – and the secretariat – within the UN building, it is hardly a shock that we spy on other governments at summits in the UK.  For once, the government cannot pretend that the object is to save us all from terrorism, which is the usual catch all excuse.  Nor in the real world is any of the G20 nations a military threat to the UK.  The real truth of the matter is that our spies – GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 – are themselves a large and highly influential interest block within the state.  Lots of people make a great deal of money out of the security state, and this kind of activity is actually simply an excuse for taking money from taxpayers – which is from everyone who has ever bought anything – and giving that money to the “security industry”.

I do not view spying on other governments as quite as despicable as spying on ordinary citizens, which is an unspeakable betrayal of the purpose of government.  Spying on other governments is a game they all play to extort money each to their own security elites.  But I will say that spying on the South African government seems pretty low.  Why?

Interception of diplomatic communications is plainly a gross breach of the Vienna Conventions, even if the forms of communication have changed since they were drafted.  I have never studied the particulars of international law as they relate to spying, but it seems to me an area that in the modern world needs regulation.  There must be room here for the UN to be involved in preparing a Convention to outlaw the interception of international communications, with recourse to the International Court of Justice for those victim of it.

There is more work for the UN on Syria.  We should all be grateful that Russia is holding out against the very dubious western claims that the  Syrian government has deployed chemical weapons.  But while Obama can declare all the red lines he wishes, they do not give any country a right to take action on Syrian soil without UN authority.  That needs to be restated, strongly.  There is no basis at all for the continued and massive Israeli attacks on Syria - they are absolutely illegal.  Israeli strikes have definitely killed more people than the alleged deaths from chemical weapons.  Can someone explain to me why that is not a red line?

The UN Secretary General should be speaking out, and the UN Security Council should be meeting, to discuss the Israeli attacks on Syria.  The system of international law has broken down irretrievably.

Tweet this post

1,072 Comments

1 4 5 6

  1. “June must be proud that these many numbers of ziofuckwits have been targeting her, alas she takes this negative attention the wrong way, she ought to be pleased to know that she is hitting the mark so effectively that a whole squadron of the ziofuckwit keyboard warriors are assigned to suppress her fire and passion.” Fedup

    Well, it seems to be brought up almost gratuitously on every single thread, regardless. Which, one could argue, simply allows the “ziofuckwit” keyboard “squadrons” to pile in repeatedly. It’s a bit like someone always mentioning ’9/11′. It begins to have a sort of talismanic effect.

  2. I am critiquing the ontology suggested by the statement.

    The semantics of death and dispossession are in fact death and dispossession, and let us not get too grandiloquent with a view to lessen the degrees of primordial evil so manifest and on display. This would be classed as evil by any standards.

    As the Afrikaans’ narrative of Cain and Abel that held the murderous Cain’s offspring were cursed to remain blackened face Kaffirs! The current life and death struggle of Palestinians that is so dismissively portrayed as a “political struggle”, in fact is heavily reliant on the Bible as a land registry record. Further, as any puerile fascist doctrine will resort to; “Archaeology” and “genetics” (racial purity) science is called upon to validate the evil conduct of thieving, and murdering lowlifes as a natural consequence of the birth of a nation!

    Fact is parasitic entities as a matte of course, affect the behaviour of the organisms these invade and feed upon. The parasitic ziofuckwits have infected and affected various systems, with changes thereof in the interactions of these systems with the world at large culminating in varying results. However the trend of these results all lean into one aim; the legitimisation of an illegitimate and parasitic entity as in zionistan.

    The fact that, the deaths and suppression of innocent people of Palestine is being classed as a mere “political struggle” itself is a manifest and desirable behavioural norm from the point of view of the infectious parasitic ziofuckwits.

    Ask a Palestinian child whose hunger pangs is stopping him/her from going to sleep for a temporary respite from the theocratic apartheid they find themselves in to define evil. Only then can we sanguinely debate the merits of the application of humanist liberalism to be zionistan, and its intractable appetite for land, chattel, and money of all nations near and far.

  3. You see, it’s no longer possible to have a rational discussion on the subject or even on the nature of comments on the subject and that itself is a reflection of what I was describing. It’s almost like the thought police.

  4. Suhayl at 12.04am

    Bang-on

  5. SS- It’s the words, “elemental”, “good” and “evil”. It is a land dispute.

    halle-fricking- lujah, that’s exactly what this conflict and pretty much all others concern. This view will prove non too popular with some of the ‘hardcore’ present here though no doubt.

  6. “It is a land dispute.”

    No shit Sherlock, that happens to involve a slow genocide, frequent mass murders, daily killings, continuing inhuman oppression, etc, etc, all of which are the opposite of ontology “Good”; now what may that be ?

  7. s/b “of the ontological “Good”;”

  8. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    29 Jun, 2013 - 8:16 am

    The thought has struck me that some of the “regulars” might have been in touch with the moderator privately in order to urge bannings and/or an active deletions policy.

    I know that this is an unworthy thought – perhaps their well-developed sense of paranoia is infectious – but I should be delighted if Jon were to assure us that this has not been the case.

  9. A Node

    As per my comment at 26 June, 8.02am :

    “Certainly, standards should be upheld on this blog to maintain a productive activity and to that extent I once entertained an idea that I had yet to share – one involving setting up a permanently open page titled ‘Code of Conduct’ with comments serving to guide its construction and improvement. It was to contain an enumerated list of principles and dos-and-don’ts that could be tersely quoted by commentators for self- regulation. Given the nature of how things have transpired, I doubt it could ever see the back light of your monitor.”

    Now if you had bothered to do a simple page search, you would have saved us both this pointless game of ping-pong. As you can see, I did indeed make a suggestion that was reasonable, simple, practicable (it could even be started today) but judging by the response, one that was ultimately preordained for the wish-bin.

  10. Suhayl, hysteria has taken over and, as you have observed, rational discussion is not possible. I’ve mentioned several times on this blog that people need to separate their personal preferences from their observations and not attack others in the mistaken belief that their often inceptive observations about political matters represent an expression of approval of a dynamic, arrangement, incident etc.

    This reminds me of another thread on which I commented extensively about my prediction of the development of mom-n-pop eugenics as new technology presents opportunities to people that were never before anticipated. I discussed the proven tendency of parents to attempt to choose attributes of their children including the speculative possibility of sexual orientation. And I went on to explore the social ramifications, including the idea that homosexuality might later be considered a ‘race’ and that homosexuals might see eugenics as a threat that demanded countermeasures such as active reproduction of homosexual children. I think I called it a eugenics war.

    Anyway, I thought the subject matter to be fascinating and full of genuine possibilities that would need to be confronted in the not-too-distant future. Science fiction on the cusp of science fact – I thought. What do you think the reaction was? Apparently, making intelligent, factual observations and logical analyses demonstrated that I was a ‘homophobe’ and that I was advocating gene therapy for annihilation of homosexuality. Thus, hysteria reared its ugly head and an unpleasant, unneccessarily long exchange ensued with absolutely no positive outcome.

    I believe David Hume referred to this as the ‘ought problem’.

  11. Thanks, people. I should say (though it ought not to need saying) that I am pro-Palestinian, have been since… since I was aware of anything, really and that I share Flaming June’s (and others’) anger on the subject. I just think that the tendency towards absolutist/quasi-theological positions and the jettisoning of a dialectical approach actually ends up weakening one’s arguments.

    Jemand, the thing in the news yesterday about triple parenthood is fascinating, isn’t it? We’re entering the world of science fiction! Of course, gene therapy is becoming widespread. There was a time, not so long ago, when ‘test-tube babies’ seemed out there.

    Now, where did I put that mitochondrion…?

  12. “No shit Sherlock, that happens to involve a slow genocide, frequent mass murders, daily killings, continuing inhuman oppression, etc, etc”

    Do my eyes deceive me? This is Macky lecturing Suhayl on Palestine/Israel, right?

    —————————————

    “It was to contain an enumerated list of principles and dos-and-don’ts that could be tersely quoted by commentators for self-regulation.”

    Jemand,
    You did indeed say that. But according to Jon, Craig won’t entertain the idea. So I don’t know where we go from there.

  13. I just think that the tendency towards absolutist/quasi-theological positions and the jettisoning of a dialectical approach actually ends up weakening one’s arguments.

    “absolutist/quasi-theological positions” is adopted by which side?

    Which side has jettisoned any alternative other than the “absolutist/quasi-theological position”?

    These are projections, and nothing less!

    The cup out to stop highlighting the barbaric behaviour of a murderous bunch of lunatics who are drunk on the blood of Palestinians and high on the spoils of plunder is ……. (you fill in as you wish).

    A time comes when silence is betrayal, and those advocating such a silence can only be classed as collaborators in genocide. This blog has kept its independence, because the founder of this blog is a decent soul who has forgone his; rank, benefits thereof, pension, and many other advantages. Hence the freedom of expression that is getting afforded to many people who also hold onto principles of universal human rights, and universal human values.

    Although of late there is a sinister and unsavoury undercurrent to suppress, and diminish this platform so readily available for those of us who have for long opened the windows and shouted out;”I am taking this no more”!

    Those wishing to change the current arrangements of this blog, perhaps ought to learn to scroll passed the comments these find offensive, and challenging to their sensibilities, instead of attempting to change the blog as per their liking. Simply put this blog is not their sitting room to be arranged and rearranged as per their preferences, reflecting their individuality.

    Hats off to Craig for providing this little speakers corner in the cyberspace.

  14. “Now if you had bothered to do a simple page search … “

    Jeez, you’re touchy. You referred to a comment you’d made some 60 hours and over 100 comments previously, I searched back 24 hours then asked for a link, you gave me the wrong one, I ask for clarification, and now you’re having a go at me.

    Let me suggest that this is a pretty good example of how not to have a blog discussion. If you think I’m an idiot, don’t talk to me or else make allowances for my idiocy if you do. Aggressive comments invite aggressive responses, then escalation.

    “Certainly, standards should be upheld on this blog to maintain a productive activity and to that extent I once entertained an idea that I had yet to share – one involving setting up a permanently open page titled ‘Code of Conduct’ with comments serving to guide its construction and improvement. It was to contain an enumerated list of principles and dos-and-don’ts that could be tersely quoted by commentators for self- regulation. Given the nature of how things have transpired, I doubt it could ever see the back light of your monitor.”

    I agree, though for me the list would be pretty short, something like:
    (1) Try and keep on topic, at least for the first 24 hours of a new thread.
    (2) Insulting or inflammatory comments towards other posters run the risk of being deleted without further explanation.

  15. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    29 Jun, 2013 - 11:39 am

    @ Dreoilin

    “So I don’t know where we go from there.”
    _____________

    It’s possible that all this kerfuffle isn’t wholly artificial and perhaps this blog’s equivalent to the “silly season” which newspapers are said to have at this time of year.

    Or, alternatively, an attempt by some to ramp up the normal tensions with a view to forcing the blog owner and/or moderator to reach for his blue pencil with regard to the small group of ‘contrarian’ posters (who are not responsible for the heightened tension but whose removal would no doubt be very welcome to the some). I realise this sounds a little ‘conspiracy-theorist’, but I do find it interesting that attempts at serious debate, including from myself (cf the newest thread), far from being welcomed, have actually stirred up some people to an even greater extent than before.

  16. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    29 Jun, 2013 - 11:53 am

    @ A Node

    “Insulting or inflammatory comments towards other posters…”
    ____________

    and that’s exactly one of the problems, isn’t it: what counts as insulting or inflammatory?

    There is very ample evidence that some posters on here see any attempt to question their viewpoint (whether in terms of accuracy, expression, motivation or relevance) as being either insulting, inflammatory, or both. Take an example : when a certain commenter drops yet another post which just happens to mention, irrelevantly, someone’s religion or someone’s wife’s religion (you know what I mean, I’m sure) and when this is pointed out by another commenter, the latter tends to get a bucket of la merde flung over him (“disrupting, derailing, troll, Hasbara agent, bullying, hounding, stalking”, etc etc etc). Is highlighting someone’s often unpleasant obsession insulting and/or inflammatory?

    Even a definition of unacceptable language isn’t easy. Personally, I don’t especially like being called a c**t but on the other hand “buffoon” seems part of acceptable robust dialogue. Although I guess most people are capable of appreciating whether or not the unacceptable language is being used as a substitute for reasoned argument and rebuttal.

    But to conclude, I don’t think we should all act as if the world’s about to come to an end. It’s only a blog after all, and attendance is not compulsory. It’ll find its balance again in due course.

  17. “attempts at serious debate, including from myself (cf the newest thread), far from being welcomed, have actually stirred up some people to an even greater extent than before.”

    Yes, I saw that Habbabkuk. You’d think they’d have the opposite reaction.
    There’s nowt so queer as folk!

  18. ” Which side has jettisoned any alternative other than the ‘absolutist/quasi-theological position’? ” Passerby, 11:03am, 29.6.13.

    Exactly. If we behave, or adopt hermetic, self-contained conceptual frameworks, as they – Blair, Reagan, the Rapture Mob – do, then what’s the point?

  19. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    29 Jun, 2013 - 12:45 pm

    @ Dreoilin

    Well, I’m glad someone else has noticed that as well, I hereby judge myself not to be suffering from paranoia! :)

    Seriously, though, there could be any number of explanations – if the phenomenon deserves an explanation, of course. I advance three:

    1/. They could be following the line of “we’re going to make Habbabkuk pay”. This would be a variant of the ostracism line.

    2/. The release of frustration in the face of a feeling of impotence. Impotence in the face of the sinister and malign powers that some people feel rule the UK/world: the feeling that nothing they write or do is going to change anything in the real world (as opposed to the virtual world of the blog)and so frustration is exorcised through attacks on me, who is seen as the mouthpiece or representative of those malign powers. And of course that feeling is even accentuated by the realisation that they can never land a knock-out blow on me.

    3/. I’ve forgotten what this one was going to be.

    So : no paranoia, but perhaps the onset of Alzheimer’s. :)

    Have a good weekend.

  20. Silly season indeed! Trying to organise a sensible discussion here is like shepherding cats sometimes ;)

    Righto, thanks for your thoughts everyone. Moderating of any kind (whether it is light touch or not) is a hard job, especially given the unpleasant dynamics we’ve seen over the last year or so – in my case it means I am working at something for free whilst not being rewarded by enjoyable participation.

    Villager: you and I had some good discussions on the old Assange threads, but it rather went downhill from there, and I don’t know why. Your tone towards me is often snide and sarcastic, even though your frequent appeals to moderator give me a disproportionate amount of work. Moderators do have to be a bit bulletproof, but nevertheless, if you abuse them, don’t expect them to jump to your instructions (I should think that advice would apply on all forums).

    I’ve traditionally taken a dim view of sock-puppetting, but moderation is more about judgement than science. I’d already deleted a few posts, and in that situation, remaining edge-cases may end up left standing. The puppet was mocking Habbabkuk, whose, err, concentration on Mary has been the subject of, in my view, legitimate recent commentary.

    Jemand, I am sorry to hear it is genuinely your view that I am “Stalinist”, that I am “bullshitting”, and that I am really here to build a pro-Craig comments section. That nonsense is not in keeping with some of your excellent commentary elsewhere, but I might venture to say that it’s not written in the spirit of cooperation that this blog is presently lacking. If I am wishing to “shape” anything, it’s encouraging more discussion and less bickering – are you on board?

    Since moderation requires judgement, unfortunately not all mod decisions will be popular (or correct even, since it is done by humans). I cannot overstress how much deletions are not personal, even though they feel like it (I post elsewhere where I am not a moderator, so I am only too familiar with how it feels).

    I fully agree with the points made earlier about the “ziofuckwit” shutting down of discussions. Israel/Palestine is hugely complex, and discussion ought to be treated as such. Fedup/Passerby, if you can join in to that debate when it happens, it would be appreciated.

    Having separate threads for moderation or news items isn’t a bad idea. I’ll see what can be done, but again, this isn’t my blog, so I can’t just go reorganising stuff on a whim!

    Habbabkuk, you ask whether people are in touch with mods off the board. In general, no – there have been one or two exceptions where an enormous fight has occurred, and I’ve needed to soothe some bruises out of the limelight.

    A_Node, good suggested posting guideline. I sent something similar to Craig a while back, it may yet come to fruition!

    ***

    A final thought, which might help. We probably have around 30 regulars, and at a wild guess, 100 semi-regulars who comment infrequently. I don’t have access to the hit statistics, but I think this represents a single-figure percentage of the people who actually visit the blog without commenting. Thus, we are a very small group of people wanting some liberal discussion on the internet.

    Meanwhile, whilst we might be in need of a basic set of guidelines from our benevolent host, it isn’t particularly important in the scheme of things. Writing a book, looking after a family, speaking at meetings on the Scottish question and foreign policy, going to Africa etc, are all much more pressing upon Craig’s time.

    Thus, whilst I do hope we can get some good discussions going again, perhaps we also need to take it a little less seriously. Let’s have some humour, fresh bread from Nevermind, tea expertly brewed by Suhayl! Computer turned off, and music turned on!

  21. “and that’s exactly one of the problems, isn’t it: what counts as insulting or inflammatory”

    … and that’s exactly why I phrased it as I did …

    “Insulting or inflammatory comments towards other posters run the risk of being deleted without further explanation.”

    Ultimately, the (unpaid, overworked, unsung) mod has to police this rule, so it needs to be as easy for him as possible. If very specific guidelines were spelt out, certain people would delight in pushing the boundary, and if their comment were deleted, they’d complain in the most nitpicking fashion why they believed they were on the right side of the line. Keep the definition vague, and make it plain that it’s up to the mod to judge and that no explanation will be given. If you can’t make your debating point without crossing that line, you’re in the wrong forum. If you’re not sure exactly where the line is, then just play safe and avoid ALL insulting language. People will soon learn to police themselves otherwise their brilliant comments will disappear before the adulating masses can read them.

    Voila, we have empowered the mod without burdening him.

  22. Our comments were posted simultaneously, Jon.
    Thanks for your patience with us.

  23. “ziofuckwit” shutting down of discussions. Israel/Palestine is hugely complex, and discussion ought to be treated as such.

    Apparently the use of obscenities such as;”ziofuckwit” is causing some dismay, and it is perceived to be shutting down debates. As the obscenity of “zionism” has taken hold, it seems there actually can be some accommodation with the rabid racist, legitimizing their murder and plunder fest through the zionist doctrinal imperatives, that are an abomination and aberrations of all that which is good, and human.

    The notion of turning the other cheek has been the modus operandi of any attempt in highlighting the barbarous nature of the slow genocide of the Palestinians. This slow genocide and its corrosive effects, peddled by the sinister forces involved in that slow genocide have universalized this “holy” war on Palestinians, and extended this “holy” war to engulf the whole of the Muslim population, as proven by these being targeted across the planet.

    Fact is whilst there have been debates on the subject of the occupied Palestine the ziofuckwits have made hay and carried on the slow genocide whilst selling their coercive and repressive technologies across the planet to all those powers be, who find their tenuous grip on power compels them to avail themselves from such proven and tested technologies of oppression.

    The fact that all here and elsewhere talk about “complexities” is in fact further sign of the acceptance of the ziofuckwits narrative. What complexities are there to be addressed?

    A- The complexity of making land theft, a desirable and honourable means of acquisition of the lands in mind?

    B- The complexity of mass murder of the unarmed Palestinians, to be made acceptable and justified?

    C- The complexity of kidnap, detention, torture, and oppression on industrial scales to be accepted and made normal conduct of an occupying power?

    D- The complexity of turning Gaza into an open air concentration camp, that is cut off form the rest of the world and is under a decade long siege?

    The truth is there are no complexities! The solution is simple, one state for Palestinians and Jews alike, that adheres to the universal human rights charter. As simple as that. A state that does not have Jews only roads, Jews only swimming pools, schools, buses, …..
    What are the complexities which have always hid the culprits in the land theft and afforded the perpetrators of the slow genocide to get away with murder in the literal sense?

    We all know that the current political and financial imperatives dictate the existence of such an inhumane and ghastly state as that which has set itself up in the shitty little strip of land. Further, the support structures set in place to shield this bastard entity has yielded many anomalies, included the wrong side up morality that holds zionist must be engaged with and guided to the righteous path.

    Fact that White Supremacist in South Africa would not have yielded without the total revulsion of the world, is a postulate that obtains considering the events passed. Therefore to find the Judaic Supremacists being given a free get out of jail card, gives rise to the question; are you fucking shitting me?

    I appreciate that you spend your free time to moderate this board, and I thank you for your efforts and time. However, I find it difficult to see the upended imperatives that holds ziofuckwit as an obscenity! Whilst in reality it is the zionism itself which is the obscenity.

    =============

    If we behave, or adopt hermetic, self-contained conceptual frameworks, as they – Blair, Reagan, the Rapture Mob – do, then what’s the point?

    Hermetic? There is a great deal of projection underway, is the author aware of this point?

    Although it is understood that, the zioufuckwits and their supporters are ensconced in a hermetic group think bubble. However, it is suggested to engage with these and debate. Are these not divergent conceptual frameworks? For any convergence to obtain there ought to be an adherence to the universal human rights, ie a Jew is equal; to a Palestinian, to an Arab, to a Muslim, to a Black, to a Chinese, to a Christian, so forth.

    Without any such an adherence, in practice, and not in lip service, there can be no dialogue with these Supremacists. world must disengage, and isolate these supremacists through holding to principles of universal human rights, and abhorring the obscenity of zionism!

  24. Nice speech, Passerby (3:06pm, 29.6.13). I agree with key parts of the substance of it. But it’s not really about the substance, is it? Is it not about the use of language to exert control?

    Might it not be time to ask whether perhaps shouting loudly from the high moral ground, not at those who support and buttress the system of oppression which you rightly condemn but at those who share your condemnation of it (but who may not share your screaming down of anyone who does not shout in absolute pitch with you), renders any greater potency to those elements. I would argue that it risks doing quite the opposite.

    My original critique of Flaming June’s use of “elemental”, “good” and “evil” in this context relates to the danger of approaching political matters in theological terms and to the interpolation of this subject into every thread.

    So there are three points here. One refers to the almost eschatological use of language, one, the seeming need to distill every thread through the lens of the Levantine conflict and the third, to the seeming quest for purity and absolute unity.

    It could be argued that these features reflect a mode of thought which does not permit engagement even with those who share broadly the same view of the Levantine situation. That is what is happening here. That system of thought then may come to applied more widely, to other matters as well. It requires only that we bow to those who iterate. It requires that we close off thought. These qualities belong to the cult, rather than the discussion forum.

  25. @Jon, acknowledged, under contemplation.
    . . . . .

    @Suhayl re mitochondrial gene therapy creating three parents as per reports. 

    Yes, exactly sci-fi becoming sci-fact. I was only just discussing this very topic a few hours ago today. What I explored was the possibility that mt-dna splicing might cause serious problems for Jewish identity. As you’d know, ‘Jewishness’ is (for strict adherents) supposed to be martrilineal and in the absence of a reliably documented genealogical history, mt-dna can be used to confirm whether someone is genetically ‘Jewish’. 

    If Jewish mt-dna is donated or harvested and supplied to parents who have no identification with Jewishness, then how is the child to be considered by those who care about Jewish identity? And consider the inheritence of the mt-dna through several generations where family history becomes obscured over time. How will the Jewish community treat mt-dna as solid evidence of Jewishness? Keep your eye out for discussion by Jewish news groups.

    In a broader view, what we might also be witnessing is the obfuscation of genetic history. Currently, dna in humans represents a wealth of history that, when analysed properly, tells us stories about the migration of our ancient ancestors throughout the globe and our own personal ethnic heritage. This might be at risk if genes are artificially mangled into our individual genomes.

    I’ve only just considered this but you can expect more concerns being raised.

  26. PPE = personal protective equipment?

  27. It’s quite a thought. On the other hand, Jemand, we all – those who are descended from the small band that left Africa during the Ice Age – are thought to be the children of four people; two women and two men. So… mix me up, throw me down, shake me round and round and round!

    Habbabkuk (btw, what does the pseudonym mean, if I may enquire? I know ‘Habbakuk’, but is this some strange melange of doner kebab and Biblical figure, or else Biblical figure-with-speech impediment?), let us have some sympathy for Iblis. He can’t help being a friend of Ed Balls.

  28. it’s no longer possible to have a rational discussion

    Backing down is not the answer. On one hand June’s position is generating a barrage of bullshit fired by the ziofuckwit keyboard warriors targeting her and this blog. On the other there is a “rational” debate to be held on the subject. How long should the world ought to be forced to accept the evils of zionism as the only alternative that is to be applied to the problems that this evil doctrine has created in the first place?

    it seems to be brought up almost gratuitously on every single thread, regardless. Which, one could argue, simply allows the “ziofuckwit” keyboard “squadrons” to pile in repeatedly.

    Gratuitous mass murder of Palestinians somehow going unnoticed by the corporate media, and its mention on this blog and elsewhere is being challenged not only by the assigned keyboard offence brigades, but evidently it is also becoming unpalatable to those whom purportedly support the Palestinians’ cause.

    it’s no longer possible to have a rational discussion on the subject or even on the nature of comments on the subject and that itself is a reflection of what I was describing. It’s almost like the thought police.

    Could you point to any juncture in the wretched history of decimation of the Palestinian people, at the hands of the ziofuckwits when there was any possibility of a rational discussion?

    Also whilst you are searching for the nodes of rationality, could you also clarify, since when the thought police have been inoperative with respect to any matters dealing remotely with a particular religious group which evidently enjoys a special dispensations and is not to be held to account under any circumstances?

    It is all too easy to capitulate and tarry along the valley of pretensions, with the aim of discussing and debating the apparently “complex”, and “emotional” matters concerning the current (which has been thus for the last seventy years) “troubles” in the mid east. However the question begging an answer remains: Why is the slow genocide is still on going?

    Finally the theocratic regime in zionistan considers all those from without and outside their faith to be animals in a human guise, yet we the animals find ourselves directed to be the all forgiving saints, and intellectuals to forgive and endeavour to accommodate the calls upon us made by those whom have branded us animals, and for us all to engage and discuss and debate rationally the ongoing land theft and mass murderfest. This contention can only be classified as; inane optimism!

  29. I thought it was Passerby who was “in discussion” with Suhayl. Now it appears that it’s Fedup. And they accuse others of having tag-teams?????

    LMAO

  30. “… ziofuckwit keyboard warriors…” Fedup, 6:19pm, 29.6.13.

    You see, this is what I mean. Language is either effective or ineffective. ‘Ziofuckwit’ was a clever neologism, which, if used judiciously and strategically, could have an impact and also connote a lacerating humour. But if used constantly in the manner of those old Far Left groups who used to scream, “Revisionist!!” or “Bukharinite Rightist!!”, or “Trotskyite Divisionist!!” at anyone who did not accede to their particular version of the Church of Communist Revolution’s current hymnal, it tends to lose its power and comes to be a barrier to discourse and and excuse for not having to engage or even think. Everything just becomes a rant, a slogan, a kind of advert sauce: !51 Varieties!

  31. In other words, Fedup and Passerby, please take it easy, guys. I’m not your enemy! Play some troubadour music, or a couple of happy flamencos. Eat, drink and be mellow, there’s a good fellow.

  32. The only guy with a more hilarious name than Ed Balls is a chap called Willie Stroker. He is something in cattle, it seems.

    http://www.allowdale.com/docs/Irish-Hereford-Journal-2012.pdf

  33. Habbabkuk, on a thread that has morphed into discussing how we can get on better, another barely-concealed sideswipe at Mary is, um, not ideal – deleted. Would you try reducing the frequency of that theme, and discuss something with someone who wishes to debate with you? Thanks.

  34. Passerby/Fedup, I’m not objecting to the language in ziofuckwits itself. As Jemand would say, this site isn’t intended for family consumption. However, I think the approach of angry shouting isn’t working, and it isn’t conducive to debate.

    I’ve done this merry dance with you many times, so I won’t say much more. Suffice it to say that people disagreeing with you are not necessarily paid by Israel to do so, and if you can explain your views more clearly in less words, I think it would be helpful.

  35. “Willie Stroker. He is something in cattle, it seems.”

    LOL!

    Maybe he’s a vet?

  36. Oh no, scratch that. Willie Strokers have nothing to do with AI. Silly me. It’s all online now anyway.
    http://www.sligoai.com/

  37. @Dreoilin. 7 59pm

    More likely to be the AI man.

  38. Yes, that’s what I was originally getting at. But see me at 9.26pm.
    And maybe we should change the subject … :)

  39. There was a GP in the south-west of Scotland named, Donald Duck. He’d been named before the cartoon character had been invented. And I know someone who claims to know of someone called, Annette Curten. I’m not sure, though, whether that latter one is an urban myth. Perhaps her son was called Sasha.

  40. Btw, speaking of GCHQ, NSA et al, may I strongly recommend the excellent and well-researched essay by one of our fellow-contributors here, Roderick Russell, in the current (no. 65) issue of ‘Lobster’ magazine.

    http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster65/lob65-canadian-spy-agency.pdf

  41. Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    29 Jun, 2013 - 10:47 pm

    Jon; by now, my patience quotient would have been exceeded.

  42. The rule is simple.

    I’m here to talk about the world not not to be talked about.

    If someone doesn’t abide by my rule I flame them if I feel like it, if Jon wants to delete my flame I don’t mind, by that time it’s done it’s job.

    The internet is a big place with not much in the way of border controls as yet and if the time comes that this blog isn’t to my liking I’ll just wander off and find somewhere else that is.

    The only problem with freedom is the people who can’t handle it. After all the trouble caused by people laying claim to pieces meatspace they have to go laying claim to pieces of cyberspace.

  43. Dreoilin

    10:20 pm

    “But see me at 9.26pm.”

    I suppose I should be thankful it’s only egg on my face.
    That’ll learn me not to post whilst on flying visits to old threads.

  44. Just to polish everyone’s paranoia. Yet there is reason to be paranoid. Social media websites like Facebook are full of people – sometimes, I think, retired people – constantly pumping out pro-US propaganda, who, one suspects, are doing a job, trying to mould attitudes. Nice little earner if you’ve time on your hands! This one, below, is probably just the tip of the iceberg.

    http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/us-military-thugs-with-keyboards-to.html

  45. This account is particularly interesting. It seesm to accord quite well with my experiences of various groups dealing with (broadly) ‘Islam’ and the West or political groups, etc. similar, on Facebook.

    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/pay-for-comments-confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-internet-shill_102012

  46. Mind you, one suspects that most of these people probably work from home. The linked to above tale seems a little too polished, too much like a short story. Who knows? Nonetheless, I’m sure there’ll be a ‘black’ or ‘grey’ budget for such things.

  47. Suhayl Saadi 30 Jun, 2013 – 8:24 am

    ” This one, below, is probably just the tip of the iceberg.”

    The article you link to says: ” Now it’s official: the US government has awarded a contract to a company in California to create software to manage “online personalities”. ”

    I’ve seen this story before. It seems to reappear, possibly as a cover.

    It is barely believable the US government is contracting a company to build the described software because such software is old hat and widely available. It is commonly used by internet marketeers. Presumably the US government are really ordering something quite different.

  48. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    30 Jun, 2013 - 9:02 am

    @ Jon (Mod) – your admonition at 19h32 yesterday:

    “Habbabkuk, on a thread that has morphed into discussing how we can get on better, another barely-concealed sideswipe at Mary is, um, not ideal – deleted. Would you try reducing the frequency of that theme, and discuss something with someone who wishes to debate with you?”
    ____________

    I take it that you’re referring to my pastiche of a typical Mary post?

    I think it was rather well done, actually and am sorry to see that it’s gone. Just two observations on what you say:

    1/. On the “frequency of that theme” : figures once produced by Glenn_UK showed that Mary is one of the most frequent contributors to virtually every thread; it therefore seems evident that responses to her from people like me who wish to question either the content, implications and relevance of her posts are likely to be more frequent in consequence.

    2/. I’m probably misreading you, but your post could be taken to mean that one should only comment if one knows – or at least has reasonable grounds for suspecting – that the addressee of one’s posts would be willing to enter into a discussion. This would of course be rather limiting, wouldn’t it? You’ll have noticed that Mary (and certain others, for that matter) never responds substantively to any challenge to, or questioning of, what she writes (for that matter, and subject of course to correction, I don’t think she’s ever engaged in discussion with anyone on anything on this blog); the implication of your advice in this concrete case would therefore be that I should never respond to any post from Mary. In essence, self-censorship imposed through the behaviour of someone else.

    On a more practical note, I do urge you to think closely about the suggestion from Dreoilin to create a permanent kind of “Latest news” thread or whatever you might like to call it. Apart from the call on the moderator’s time (which is a legitimate argument of course *) but I cannot see one good objection to this, only advantages.

    By the way, you spoke a good deal of good sense in your longer post at 12h51 yesterday and I agree especially with what you said in the last two paragraphs.
    _________

    * although if all acted in good faith (perhaps a big if) you would probably have little extra to do)

  49. Good point, Phil (8:53am, 30.6.13). Yes, there does seem something slightly artificial about the account. I suspect you are correct. I think it likely that most of these people are home-based. Ah well, we should expect it. There it is.

  50. Regarding a “Latest News” thread, it should be borne in mind that it will need to either grow endlessly (with possibly attendant technical issues) or be automatically pruned resulting in permanent loss of commentary, some of which might be considered valuable.

    Is it possible to implement a news thread that has dated archives?

    For example -

    Latest News

    2013 June
    2013 May
    2013 April
    . . .
    2012 Dec
    2012 Nov

    This would provide a solution to an existing problem that has become increasingly divisive.

  51. .. or increasingly polarising and antagonistic.

  52. “… I don’t think she’s ever engaged in discussion with anyone on anything on this blog)…” Habbabkuk, 9:02am, 30.6.13.

    She has engaged in discussion with others. Mary has been posting here for years, she’s a good egg. She has her views and her style. I often agree with her and sometimes do not. But might it be best not to focus on one person? If someone annoys you, might it not be best simply to ignore them?

    Btw, you’ve not told us the provenance of your pseudonym. Give us a clue, won’t you? :)

  53. Blimey Jon what a rubbish time you must be having. Well done mate.

  54. The blog’s gone through times far worse than anything that’s happened recently. If something works, why fix it? Al Hilli thread still going on… and on. Micro-discourses, parallel cyber-time. The advent of a new regular poster and some degree of fractiousness ought not to suggest the need for structural change. Up to CM, obviously. S’always been like this, from time-to-time. Roll with the waves! What we need are some fish recipes. Where’s the fish man? Anyone seen his trident?

  55. Suhayl Saadi 30 Jun, 2013 – 9:28 am
    “I think it likely that most of these people are home-based.”

    But unexpectedly the two most credible witness tesimony I’ve heard both describe teams in rooms. Perhaps the togetherness engenders loyalty.

  56. “What we need are some fish recipes. ”

    No fish threads please, I codn’t cope with people carping on about fish, they talk a load of pollocks it gives me a haddock.

  57. you need more sole, fred.

  58. @ Suhayl Saadi 11.05am

    If something works, why fix it?

    Totally agree, mate. I enjoy the contributions of entertaining and intelligent contrarians. It stops me from being amazed at how right I am on every subject. My favourite poster used to be AngrySoba. I even liked Larry from St. Louis, although most people didn’t seem to.

  59. If it “works” don’t fix it. We’d still be driving Tin Lizzies and communicating via a monthly news letter if that philosophy were widely practiced.

  60. Habbabkuk:

    At 29 Jun, 2013 – 11:53 am, you asked me a question

    At 29 Jun, 2013 – 12:51 pm, I replied.

    At 30 Jun, 2013 – 9:02 am, you ignored my reply whilst perfectly demonstrating my point …

    “… If very specific guidelines were spelt out, certain people would delight in pushing the boundary, and if their comment were deleted, they’d complain in the most nitpicking fashion why they believed they were on the right side of the line …”

  61. Fred and Technicolour

    seas

    http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/fish%20puns

  62. @A Node

    Your link serves no poipoise.

  63. What’s with all the repeated suggestions about how to run this blog. It is almost as if attention has turned onto the mod.

    Chin up mate. It may be war.

  64. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    30 Jun, 2013 - 12:52 pm

    @ Node :

    You’re on the wrong track. Re-read the 3 posts you mention, carefully.

  65. Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    30 Jun, 2013 - 1:05 pm

    @ Suhayl:

    ““… I don’t think she’s ever engaged in discussion with anyone on anything on this blog)…” Habbabkuk, 9:02am, 30.6.13.

    She has engaged in discussion with others.”
    ____________

    Well, it’s true that I’ve only been visiting for the last nine months or so, but I haven’t seen a single example – despite having challenged her (and anyone else who might want to help her) to give a couple.

    And don’t forget that the mask has slipped at least once, when she said that she was here to post “information” but not to discuss or dialogue. Out of her own mouth.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Re my handle , good Lord, why ask me for an explanation when a number of the Eminences have offered one. The one I especially liked said that I was an Orthodox Jew (or something like that)and had therefore chosen a Biblical name; but since Orthodox Jews were not allowed to write the name of the Lord or his prophets, I had got round that problem by inserting an extra “b” into the name.

    I will leave you to judge the mental balance of the poster who wrote that :)

  66. Jon:

    Thank you for a reply finally — it actually did feel like wrenching candy from a baby. Call it snide, sarcastic or whatever you will Jon, that is not the intent. I simply call it as it is.

    “The puppet was mocking Habbabkuk, whose, err, concentration on Mary has been the subject of, in my view, legitimate recent commentary.”

    Very strange indeed that you should put your “Good Housekeeping” approval to that behaviour. It now sets a precedent that if anyone wants to mock another poster they are allowed to sock puppet. Would not a timely and gentle intervention from you at the roots have been more legitimate and appropriate? Mary was no angel either continuing to call H a troll. One or two others now have taken over the baton.

    Please recognise that we had no ‘big deal’ issue with silly Sophie, it was when she also started posting as Kibo Noh when the puppeting began and, further, did not receive any prompt attention/comment from you, good bad or ugly, despite it being flagged. In the end the schizophrenic ‘narrative’ (favourite word of the puppet) broke down, but the chronology is important to your ‘justification’.

  67. Deleted a couple from Villager and Kibo. Deleted one each from Habbabkuk/Node – I think you might just have to agree to disagree. Please keep it civil and constructive folks.

  68. :)

  69. “I haven’t seen a single example.” Habbabkuk.

    There’s one from today on the ‘Racism/visa/bond, etc.’ thread, where she engages with me. Anyway, why are you so fixated? It must be love, perhaps a sort of idealised troubadour romance, forever blessed and blighted by non-consummation. The blog has become a love court. Mariolatry? Perhaps the Lady Eleanor will make an appearance.

    Better than the double-b (echo of Beelzebub), or watching one’s ps and qs…

    Kabbalarian.

    Habbab: Affable, loving. Kuk: Nigella. Colonel-in-Chief of the CGC, the Culinary Gastrointestinal Complex, paragon of the Chocolate Dominatrix. Food for thought.

    Not to be confused with Hadad: Syrian fertility god.

    I once passed by a ground floor flat in Edinburgh, near Leith Walk, that had a larger-than-life figure of a grey-bodied, bull-headed man painted over the entire surface of the (inner) wall of the sitting-room and the figure, ’666′ over the front door. The lights were always on inside. It were as though it was inviting one to enter. I don’t know whether it’s still there.

    Perhaps it was never really there.

  70. Nice speech, Passerby (3:06pm, 29.6.13). I agree with key parts of the substance of it. But it’s not really about the substance, is it? Is it not about the use of language to exert control?

    A cynical opening, questioning the “substance” and asserting the underlying desire for “control”. Curmudgeon would reflect; is this not an attempt in sophistry?

    The simple fact contended; world must stigmatize zionism, and stop pandering to the ziofuckwits and debate on their terms of reference. The current plutocratic arrangements are sufficiently comfortable with the situation as it is. Therefore it behoves the wider world ie we the people to stop playing the game as per the status quo, and start clearly and unequivocally abhorring zionism at every opportunity, and counter the ziofuckwits arguments, with one simple message; “zionism is repugnant”!

    - – - – -

    ….. I think the approach of angry shouting isn’t working, and it isn’t conducive to debate.

    Although there are those whom would contend reaming cool and collected in the face of the repugnant ziofuckwits crimes against humanity, compounded with their crimes against peace, cannot be a rational and logical response.

    However, stigmatizing the abhorrent and deviant construct of zionism ought to be the first step in fighting this abominable framework of hate and oppression.

    I’ve done this merry dance with you many times, so I won’t say much more. Suffice it to say that people disagreeing with you are not necessarily paid by Israel to do so, and if you can explain your views more clearly in less words, I think it would be helpful.

    Recollecting that our debate of the Caterpilar that fed itself to a frog” was going south, and which was left up in the ether without any conclusion. Robust debate ought not be mistaken for acrimony and enmity.

    The contention that ought to have been reached then was; the proven techniques/methods/algorithms of the parasites in hijacking the brains of their victims and inducing their victims to behave in the most bizarre fashions, and counter to the victims most basic instincts.

    To enter debate with ziofuckwits and discuss the problems caused by their repugnant doctrine, on their terms is akin to the caterpillar feeding itself to the frog. For none can enter a dialogue with these racists, supremacists with a view to resolving the problems caused through their racism and claim to their superior/master race. The fact that current thrust of the corporate media, based on corporate and plutocratic imperatives all lean in the direction of whitewashing the crimes against humanity committed by the ziofuckwits, should not somehow compel us to tolerate this repugnant and murderous framework of hate.

  71. @Fedup.11 06pm

    “No it all began with the Spanish American war.”

    Beginnings eh?

    If you haven’t come across these you might find them worth a read as the nights draw in.

    Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee by  Dee Brown 
    A history of Native Americans in the American West in the late nineteenth century that expresses a Native American perspective of the injustices and betrayals of the US government.

    A People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn. A romp through American history through the eyes of the common people rather than political and economic elites.

    Pdfs of both available for free download.

    And I haven’t got near Herodotus yet!

    …………….

    Re Caterpillar and Frog post, 11 45pm on UN thread.
    Clarity with Passion.

  72. “Although there are those whom would contend reaming cool and collected in the face of the repugnant ziofuckwits crimes against humanity, compounded with their crimes against peace, cannot be a rational and logical response.” Passerby, 1:45pm, 1.7.13.

    Passerby, okay, so then you are suggesting that you are being irrational and illogical? Look, you’re shouting at me, not at some “ziofuckwit”. It’s a waste of energy.

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos