Obama once again showing America is Israel's lapdog.

[Park Life 71]

Read back my friend.

Too tired.

[Rayvin 5223]

It's a government organ with nice pastel colours and mood lighting for the Islington crowd. The Govt choosing the Dir Gen is the give away. However compared to the trash dished up in many other countries it isn't so bad in comparison.

 

Agree.

[Dr Gloom 21924]

I've admired your responses in this thread. Time and time again various individuals have threatened to insert their manhood into your little hole, but you've pushed them away, one after the other. Fair play. And you'd know where I stand with this issue.

Whose manhood has been inserted where now?

[Dr Gloom 21924]

 

That's actually the central point of that link though - that the right wing say that in order to police it, while the left generally accepts the BBC's position because they don't want to lose it.

 

The fact that the bias is demonstrably in favour of the right wing (with respect of the information put forward in that link) suggests to me that the BBC is at the very least, pro-establishment.

Apologies, on a train with dodgy internet and didn't open link. Just replied to the general point that some say the beeb is left leaning.

[Ken 119]

Too tired.

Morning for you isn't it?

 

No, nothing out of the ordinary or controversial. I just said Israel should never had existed in the first place. It shouldn't have. It is absurd. Nor should it be so heavily armed as it is.

[Ken 119]

Whose manhood has been inserted where now?

Anybodys in your anal cavity

[Park Life 71]

Morning for you isn't it?

 

No, nothing out of the ordinary or controversial. I just said Israel should never had existed in the first place. It shouldn't have. It is absurd. Nor should it be so heavily armed as it is.

Good. I won't have to drag you over the hot coals.

 

It was primarily us who caved and set up Israel..It was initially South Africa and us that helped them get the bomb and then American and European Jews started piling in there and money came from everywhere to build it up...The local arabs being primarily lazy and crap at war had a couple of go's at it and got slapped down by Israeli advantage in technology and better more motivated fighters. Those two first wars was imo what made Israel ultra paranoid. Arabs are generally crap at war and make flaky soldiers. Persians however is a different kettle of fish.

 

Early on it was like a huge American aircraft carrier and gave comfort to the Yanks in that Syria and Egypt were Russian proxies at the get go (along with all that crap war equipment with the exception of good anti-tank rockets). Israel in a matter of a week lay waste to most of the Syrian armour and knocked out their whole expensive Russian SAM sites)....iirc it was only Washington that halted their advance.

 

The problem the Arabs have is that the really rich Arabs don't give a fuck about the rest (Saudi etc) and in some ways have accelerated the decline of sensible Islam into generally more extreme versions across the middle east...History however teaches us that over time numbers will overcome technology even if you just go by birthrates. African North/South/Western/Christian legacy conflicts have generally gone that way...Eritrea, Nigeria, Angola, Congo et al...

 

The Palestinian/Arab birthrate in the area is twice that of Israel and they age strata is 10 years younger. There is no debate that it will over the next decade or two be an Arab majority over the whole Israeli hinterland. The Jews know this hence the water and food stealing and the diets they have implemented on Palestine. In the long game Isreal will have to come to the table.

Edited August 2, 2014 by Park Life

[PaddockLad 17274]

In the long game Isreal will have to come to the table.

 

Dont know if Obama is just grandstanding with his tough-ish comments but I think he wants that tomorrow if not earlier, if only to prevent more bloodshed. The pro Israel lobby in the US will probably shoot him if he takes steps to force the issue now though. Perhaps he knows now is the big chance to try to move on this, when the world is set against Israel. Fuck knows how you'd even start like but the first move has to come from the US by drastically cutting their 3billion p.a. in aid grants it currently gives to Israel which they spend on weapons currently targeting schools containing women and children.

[NJS 4386]

Watched The Daily Show last night (Thursday's edition) and the cease fire coincided with Israel running out of ammo and having to ask the US for a refill which was granted immediately.

[Kid Dynamite 7030]

Plenty on the right would argue the beeb is dominated by namby pamby liberal do gooders. The fact that both sides debate it suggests to me the beeb has tone and balance just about right.

The BBC has ignored the destroying of the NHS for years

[Ken 119]

Good. I won't have to drag you over the hot coals.

 

It was primarily us who caved and set up Israel..It was initially South Africa and us that helped them get the bomb and then American and European Jews started piling in there and money came from everywhere to build it up...The local arabs being primarily lazy and crap at war had a couple of go's at it and got slapped down by Israeli advantage in technology and better more motivated fighters. Those two first wars was imo what made Israel ultra paranoid. Arabs are generally crap at war and make flaky soldiers. Persians however is a different kettle of fish.

 

Early on it was like a huge American aircraft carrier and gave comfort to the Yanks in that Syria and Egypt were Russian proxies at the get go (along with all that crap war equipment with the exception of good anti-tank rockets). Israel in a matter of a week lay waste to most of the Syrian armour and knocked out their whole expensive Russian SAM sites)....iirc it was only Washington that halted their advance.

 

The problem the Arabs have is that the really rich Arabs don't give a fuck about the rest (Saudi etc) and in some ways have accelerated the decline of sensible Islam into generally more extreme versions across the middle east...History however teaches us that over time numbers will overcome technology even if you just go by birthrates. African North/South/Western/Christian legacy conflicts have generally gone that way...Eritrea, Nigeria, Angola, Congo et al...

 

The Palestinian/Arab birthrate in the area is twice that of Israel and they age strata is 10 years younger. There is no debate that it will over the next decade or two be an Arab majority over the whole Israeli hinterland. The Jews know this hence the water and food stealing and the diets they have implemented on Palestine. In the long game Isreal will have to come to the table.

The Israelis have all the arable land and free access to all the clean water they want. That was my understanding of it. If Israel decided to wipe out Gaza or any other region they could. Modern tech beats anything in this day and age imo.

[Park Life 71]

Not if the high breeders live with you and all around you. Military tactics bear testament to it. America getting overwhelmed in Vietnam and Iraq. Stand up warfare I'd agree with you, but asymmetric will favour the Palestinians and their allies over the long term. They just need to keep out breeding the ageing Israeli Jewish population.

Edited August 2, 2014 by Park Life

[Rayvin 5223]

The BBC has ignored the destroying of the NHS for years

 

That's a good example actually, thanks. That's exactly the sort of thing I meant with the 'bias by omission' line.

[wykikitoon 20150]

Can anyone recommend any good books which tell you about the history of Isarel and Gaza etc?

[The Fish 10857]

I can think of one Good Book

 

[wykikitoon 20150]

I can think of one Good Book

 

 

[RedfernMag 0]

There's nothing even vaguely left wing about the BBC or The Guardian. Left wing politics in it's historical form is dead, we now live in an age of neoliberalism. Whatever position the BBC or Guardian (or Labour party) take is defined by their existence within this neoliberal sphere where the old notions of a left/right have ceased to exist.

 

The exit for humanity out of the horror of neoliberalism (if there is one) will not be political.

Edited August 3, 2014 by RedfernMag

[Rayvin 5223]

Fair point, but I do think the left wing has morphed a bit in terms of goals. The Guardian for instance has a hugely pro-feminist agenda, that I can't think is anything other than left wing. Does neoliberalism align itself with the advancement of feminism?

[Park Life 71]

Fair point, but I do think the left wing has morphed a bit in terms of goals. The Guardian for instance has a hugely pro-feminist agenda, that I can't think is anything other than left wing. Does neoliberalism align itself with the advancement of feminism?

Feminism from day one was a total invention of the rulers. They noticed women weren't paying tax.

 

Once the breeding phase after the wars was over they started with getting women out the house, spinning slyly against family values and so on...They also noticed that women were frugal in the family setting and actually protected the family budget...There was a big switch from selling to men (the magpie in the nest attracted to shiny stuff) to selling to women (This continues unabated).

Edited August 3, 2014 by Park Life

[Park Life 71]

There's nothing even vaguely left wing about the BBC or The Guardian. Left wing politics in it's historical form is dead, we now live in an age of neoliberalism. Whatever position the BBC or Guardian (or Labour party) take is defined by their existence within this neoliberal sphere where the old notions of a left/right have ceased to exist.

 

The exit for humanity out of the horror of neoliberalism (if there is one) will not be political.

Agreed. There are some occasional sops to a vague panseyesque notion of leftyism, but these are carefully packaged as emotional tracts rather than critique. The historical left put its hope in the hyper legislative machinery of the EU but too late realised it was there to protect big business.

 

Less we forget it was a full on left wing conspiracy to flood the UK with cheap labour and undercut community identity (the greatest weapon against the common rights of the working class labour). This erased collective bargaining power and the sense of entitlement of indigenous workers who were wholly disenfranchised and cut adrift.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz3N8vLYOWw

Edited August 3, 2014 by Park Life

[Rayvin 5223]

Feminism from day one was a total invention of the rulers. They noticed women weren't paying tax.

 

Once the breeding phase after the wars was over they started with getting women out the house, spinning slyly against family values and so on...They also noticed that women were frugal in the family setting and actually protected the family budget...There was a big switch from selling to men (the magpie in the nest attracted to shiny stuff) to selling to women (This continues unabated).

 

I fully agree - but for the women involved in it, it's definitely a left wing activity.

[RedfernMag 0]

Fair point, but I do think the left wing has morphed a bit in terms of goals. The Guardian for instance has a hugely pro-feminist agenda, that I can't think is anything other than left wing. Does neoliberalism align itself with the advancement of feminism?

 

Advancement? interesting word. Capitalism has basically co-opted Feminism and is selling it back minus it's actual essence*, wanna buy a vibrator? a Sex in the City DVD? See the pink pound and gangsta rap as other examples.

 

*I can't think of a better word/description right now :-)

Edited August 3, 2014 by RedfernMag

[RedfernMag 0]

Agreed. There are some occasional sops to a vague panseyesque notion of leftyism, but these are carefully packaged as emotional tracts rather than critique. The historical left put its hope in the hyper legislative machinery of the EU but too late realised it was there to protect big business.

 

Less we forget it was a full on left wing conspiracy to flood the UK with cheap labour and undercut community identity (the greatest weapon against the common rights of the working class labour). This erased collective bargaining power and the sense of entitlement of indigenous workers who were wholly disenfranchised and cut adrift.

 

 

 

The EU has only existed since what, the fifties? There's a fair bit of history before that unless you equate the history of the left with the Social Democratic form.

 

I hope your second paragraph was a wonderful example of irony! we should all know Capitalism knows no borders.

 

The last vestige of 'community identity' in the UK was destroyed by Margaret 'there is no such thing as society' Thatcher .

Edited August 3, 2014 by RedfernMag

[ChezGiven 0]

Not sure about this BBC bias angle either. Wor kid was making the same point the other day about a protest for Palestine in Central London that he said they hadn't been covered. I then read the same thing in the Guardian comments section to which someone replied with 4 separate links to stories on the BBC website covering the protest. It made me wonder why I heard this from 2 different sources when it was wrong and I concluded that both people were probably reading the same websites that claim the BBC are part of the global power networks conspiring to control us.

 

I also think the BBC covers health issues very comprehensively. I don't agree that the BBC are biased, their correspondents are very well informed. It's difficult to prove though, either way.

[Park Life 71]

 

The EU has only existed since what, the fifties? There's a fair bit of history before that unless you equate the history of the left with the Social Democratic form.

 

I hope your second paragraph was a wonderful example of irony! we should all know Capitalism knows no borders.

 

The last vestige of 'community identity' in the UK was destroyed by Margaret 'there is no such thing as society' Thatcher .

Thatcher and Reagan were the siren call for the beginnings of neo-liberalism and infact it synchronised with the movement of the means of production abroad ie China etc...And the first signs that the postwar boom and the balance between capital and state started to be eroded. Capitalism was in a quandary in the West in that expectations had become really high amongst the masses and they knew it could never be fulfilled and go on in that way...Capital started clawing back stuff an reductive war against the state by both the left (quietly) and the right (openly).

 

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/09/the_world_according_to_milton_friedman_partner/

 

Capitalism indeed has no borders till we look at tariffs and legislation the oft used tools of the EU and the U.S. There has never been a free market. That's a myth.

 

It was when the early EU and Delors courted the unions that a very pro-EU Thatcher started to change her mind...And consequently got wiped out. Thatcher might have started the process but Blair and the EU will finish it.

 

The war is as much about identity as it is economic expansion. If you don't know who you are it becomes harder to find your enemy. My contention is that after the post war boom the left has been in bed with Capital as much as the right. As you said earlier in the thread there is no more left.

 

Democracy has been a holding mechanism for Capitalism in so much as that it has never really been a threat to it. We are moving fast to a phase when that itself will be erased. They are preparing for the post-democratic era. Austerity is the stalking horse for it.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Park Life