Johnny Bognor

..but you don't disagree that criticism from the lovable left is a tad hypocritical?

No the British governement are allowing arms sales to Israel and could stop it....NOW! http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/clegg-liberal-democrats-israel There you go again....blame Thatcher. ...and you accuse me of harping back to the past.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2006/04/mil-060406-irna02.htm QUOTE: "The British government insists that its official criteria include not approving arms sales to countries where it may be used for external aggression or internal repression." The lovable left are still arming Israel. Perhaps all of the lovable left on here should stop wasting time in this debate and lobby the lovable left Government to stop supplying arms that are being used to kill civilians. Just a thought

Not at all. We are all sat here criticising the Israelies when our nation has killed and enslaved more people than any dictator you care to mention. It is also a tad hypocritical when we sit here in our cosy houses on our laptops and criticise a nation that we (well the post war Labour government) helped set up. ...and considering the lovable left are supplying arms and military equipment to the Israelies currently, the lovable left have a lot to answer for IMO Oh...and as the lovable left went into Iraq to dispose of Saddam (yeah, right), and as they are so lovable and caring, when are they going into Zimbabwe? Oh yeah, they're not. Sounds more like a selective kind of love than a general love for all humanity.

No the far right Nazis are also criticising Israel too. Unlikely bedfellows don't you think?

Not at all - I was drawing comparisons between two publications that aren't exactly telling the whole truth. You may ask why I am bringing the Labour party into the equation. The lovable left are here criticising the Israelies for 500 civilian deaths, when the Labour party (and those who funded them or voted for them) are responsible (directly or indirectly) for approximately 100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq during an illegal war. I hope the sympathy shown here is outweighed by the guilt felt for the Iraqi people. I think the left have no case in criticising Israel, as it is.......well, hypocritical.

There is more truth in the Bible than in your average Labour party manifesto (which is full of just myths and fairytales)

I see your point, but Hamas combatants purposely wear civilian clothes (instead of military uniforms), shoot missiles from near schools and hospitals, and deploy children to play around their missile launching sites - they aren't exactly operating in the "innocents" best interests.

To be fair the Romans gave them a hard time BC, so they have been persecuted for well over 2000 years. Who are we to lecture them when we invaded Iraq (causing many more deaths to innocents), but that was OK because it was a Labour government? Anyone being killed is horrific, but I do not see how this can be equal. Deliberate mass murder is quite different to collateral damage. Having said this I do think the Israelies have gone too far, but as has been stated earlier, Hamas deliberately base their military operations in and around civilian areas, so Hamas are as much to blame for innocents being killed as the Israelies IMO - so any criticism laid at the door of the Israelies can also be laid at the door of Hamas (who specifically and deliberately target civilians - if anything, comparisons with German troops are more akin to Hamas.)

Let's hope they try to copy our boardroom - perhaps there is somwhere for Lowe to go afterall (Stoke is a bit closer to WH Irelands offices too)

I disagree Jas. During the last round of protests (swing lowe, flyby's and the like) we won 7 of the remaining 8 games of the season and in fact had our best run in many a year. Conclusion - it had no effect on the team whatsoever. I have stated before, that protests directed at Lowe takes pressure off the team and so you could argue that it would be good for the kids.

I am sure they are as accurate and incisive as one another

I only thought you read the Guardian

Indeed. Over 5,000 rockets have been fired into Israel over the last 3 years. I challenge anyone to name a country that would take 5,000 rockets without response. These rockets are also more sophisticated than some are making out - well they would be as the Iranians are supplying them. As for civilian casualties, I do feel for the innocent Palestinians, but when Hamas build their launch sites and command posts amoungst schools, Mosques and more populated areas, then the blame for these casualties lies closer to home. The innocent Palestinians are effectively being used as Human Shields with the purpose of inciting other Arab nations to "intervene".

Indeed, I saw that too, but he still took his time - I think he had to finish his holiday first..... Nothing like getting your priorities right

Spot On

So the domination of Eastern Europe by the loveable left was all Churchills fault? Come on, he had no option but to agree, Britain were bankrupt and battle-weary and in no position to disagree. As it was, the Labour government of the 1920's was the first government to recognise socialist Russia. Well as the loveable left didn't exist until the early 1900's, they weren't a credible alternative - which is pretty much the case since the early 1900's. ... and Churchill wasn't? The communists in Britain were more concerned with their own internal political gains during the war than fighting the Nazis. I'm glad you've cleared that up, as I was under the misconception that a Labour government sent British troops in (many who lost their lives) - it must have been media lies. Anyways, where is Blair in all of this - his silence is deafening?

But if you only have "home made fireworks", don't fire them at someone who has ones that cost tens of thousands of dollars. Just a thought.

I'm just trying to find the lovable left... It's not the left that enslaved most of Eastern Europe for 5 decades.... It's not the Left that stood by and watched Hitler invade other countries.... It's not the left that invaded Iraq illegally.... So which one is it?

Ah, but how many of the lovable left and sympathetic amoungst us put him in power. Is the sympathy from the left really hiding feelings of guilt? Anyway, politics aside, where is he????? Nice little earner if you ask me. Become Middle East Peace Ambassador, go AWOL when the **** hits the fan and pick up a couple of million squid in the process.

.....and where is the beloved one of the Left during all of this? You know, the one who has done more (bar Bush) than anyone to destablise the region. You know, the one who is now Peace Ambassador to the Middle East. You know, the one who has been on holiday during the crisis. So much for he lovable Left. You couldn't make it up!

What? The same left of centre party that illegally invaded iraq or the left of centre party that couldn't stand up to Hitler?

The land doesn't belong to Palestine as they took it from someone else.... There is a myth hanging over all discussion of the Palestinian problem: the myth that this land was "Arab" land taken from its native inhabitants by invading Jews. Whatever may be the correct solution to the problems of the Middle East, let's get a few things straight: § As a strictly legal matter, the Jews didn't take Palestine from the Arabs; they took it from the British, who exercised sovereign authority in Palestine under a League of Nations mandate for thirty years prior to Israel's declaration of independence in 1948. And the British don't want it back. § If you consider the British illegitimate usurpers, fine. In that case, this territory is not Arab land but Turkish land, a province of the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years until the British wrested it from them during the Great War in 1917. And the Turks don't want it back. § If you look back earlier in history than the Ottoman Turks, who took over Palestine over in 1517, you find it under the sovereignty of the yet another empire not indigenous to Palestine: the Mamluks, who were Turkish and Circassian slave-soldiers headquartered in Egypt. And the Mamluks don't even exist any more, so they can't want it back. So, going back 800 years, there's no particularly clear chain of title that makes Israel's title to the land inferior to that of any of the previous owners. Who were, continuing backward: § The Mamluks, already mentioned, who in 1250 took Palestine over from: § The Ayyubi dynasty, the descendants of Saladin, the Kurdish Muslim leader who in 1187 took Jerusalem and most of Palestine from: § The European Christian Crusaders, who in 1099 conquered Palestine from: § The Seljuk Turks, who ruled Palestine in the name of: § The Abbasid Caliphate of Baghdad, which in 750 took over the sovereignty of the entire Near East from: § The Umayyad Caliphate of Damascus, which in 661 inherited control of the Islamic lands from § The Arabs of Arabia, who in the first flush of Islamic expansion conquered Palestine in 638 from: § The Byzantines, who (nice people—perhaps it should go to them?) didn't conquer the Levant, but, upon the division of the Roman Empire in 395, inherited Palestine from: § The Romans, who in 63 B.C. took it over from: § The last Jewish kingdom, which during the Maccabean rebellion from 168 to 140 B.C. won control of the land from: § The Hellenistic Greeks, who under Alexander the Great in 333 B.C. conquered the Near East from: § The Persian empire, which under Cyrus the Great in 639 B.C. freed Jerusalem and Judah from: § The Babylonian empire, which under Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. took Jerusalem and Judah from: § The Jews, meaning the people of the Kingdom of Judah, who, in their earlier incarnation as the Israelites, seized the land in the 12th and 13th centuries B.C. from: § The Canaanites, who had inhabited the land for thousands of years before they were dispossessed by the Israelites.

Dear Mike, I think you are doing a fantastic job and are the best thing since sliced bread. Sorry I didn't send the letter to you prior to the AGM, but as you weren't going to be there, I thought I would post it here instead (also saved a few bob on the postage). Good to see Rupes got his in time. Yours Sincerely Anon

ah, but once the ban is implemented there would be no more death ever! Anyway, I didn't say kill anyone, just ban them. Put them in a massive Space craft and cut them adrift into space, therefore erradicating all death in the world. On a serious note, IBM are already running trials with insurance companies that monitor the way you drive and are determining how agressive your driving style is....for example if you accelerate hard or break hard, or your average speeds are deemed high, then your insurance premium will reflect this. I think the concept of insurance being priced on the way you drive is here to stay...as it is more indicative of the risk they are taking.