Israel

[hypochondriac]

3 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Are you aware of the political and ethnic bias that attaches to the Cradle ?

A selection of summaries from it's current front page;

"Washington needs to win its Gazan war against Iran because it failed to win its Ukrainian war against Russia. "

"As the west's support for Israel's Gaza war becomes indefensible, Moscow aligns itself with the global majority in defense of Palestine."

"The only country that could possibly distract the west from Ukraine is Israel. But the US and its allies are walking into an existential trap if they think a West Asian victory will be more easily won than a European one."

 

I am not merely dismissing the Cradle article, but as I said above, you need to consider the vested interests.

Indeed I would have thought that was obvious but not to him. See how he writes hundreds of words and devotes about three of them referring to the actions of Hamas and even then it's some cursory condemnation designed to allow him to get back to the Jewish conspiracy theories as quickly as possible. Little Owen Jones does exactly the same as far as I can see. Soggy should love him given that he's gay and loves the guardian. 

[hypochondriac]

3 hours ago, whelk said:

Wonder what other racist websites are brainwashing him?

The canary and skwawkbox have to be in there somewhere along with Novara media. 

Edited 21 November, 2023 by hypochondriac

[Lord Duckhunter]

16 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

I agree given the amount of dissemination from both sides, that is why I said that I didn’t know if the infirmation about the tunnel had been verified. The Israel police confirmed that there were casualties from “friendly fire” so I am assuming that is verification?

I don’t know why you went all MLG by my use of the word “many”. No figure was given (and I misused earlier when talking about the numbers as 200 have already been identified as Hamas - the point I meant to make is that we will probably never know how many deaths were down to Hamas or “friendly fire”) so when I said “many of the casualties” the “many” came from an assumption that as the vast majority of the crowd at the festival were Israelis or foreigners and the terrorists mingled with the crowd to make it difficult for the IDF to target them, any firing into the crowd was likely to cause more than a few casualties. It also transpired that the IDF fired artillery  shells into the crowd too. So, we have 1200 Israelis and Foreigners, plus 200 terrorists killed and some 3,400 wounded with a helicopter, artillery and automatic weapon fire raking the area, is it really a stretch to assume that “many” of the casualties were caused by friendly fire? 

I didn’t say it wasn’t. Pointing out that a percentage (is that ok Badger) of the casualties were caused by the IDF themselves does not absolve Hamas of responsibility for the attack and I have never said that. It is also not unreasonable to suggest that the hostages face greater danger from the IDF given that it is the interests of Hamas to keep them alive and the IDF have shown no interest in showing discretion at who they shot at.

If you read the article from The Cradle I posted earlier, the Israeli police confirmed that the IDF had shelled a police station in which Hamas were holding a number of Israeli police hostage rather than negotiate for their release, killing everyone inside. They then bulldozed the police station flat (why would you do that?). They also confirmed that IDF tanks shelled a house where Hamas were holding civilians hostage rather than negotiate with the terrorists. Everyone inside was killed including a 12 year old girl.

What was that we were told about how careful they were going to be with civilians? These were on their own side!

As for Duckhunter’s comments, from the start I have called out the killing of civilians by both sides as wrong but as we know from his own post, his definition of antisemitism is criticising a Jew. So yes, I criticise Netanyahu and the ghouls he governs with for the butchery of innocent civilians on pretty much every day from 7th October. It is his usual deflection tactic. He can’t defend the indefensible although he clearly doesn’t have a problem with it, so he defects. I have an issue with any civilians being killed from either side of the divide, he clearly has no issue with the butchery of women, children and babies as long as they are Palestinian. Now that Whelk, is “nasty”. 
 

https://new.thecradle.co/articles-id/13111

No ethnic cleansing here -

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/likud-minister-suggests-world-should-promote-voluntary-resettlement-of-gazans/

[sadoldgit]

19 hours ago, egg said:

The cradle article said that Israeli forces killed "some". You embellished that to say "the Israeli authorities now accept that many of the casualties at the Nova festival were caused by indiscriminate firing into the escaping crowd by Israeli Apache helicopters". That's a hell of a stretch, and somewhat denies what Hamas did that day. 

That article said “some”. There are other articles which use different words from various eye witnesses which made it sound more than a few. I have already explained my use of the word “many”. It is not rocket science to deduce that it you fire shells and spray a large crowd of people with machine gun fire from a helicopter, there are going to be lots of casualties. The majority of the crowd were civilians. As they say in the US, you do the math. If you honestly think that, by some miracle, the indiscriminate firing at a crowd of people didn’t hit more than a few civilians and managed just to pick out terrorists, fair enough. Chose your own word and we will use that if that makes you happy.Given that the IDF showed no restraint elsewhere that day and deliberately fired on civilians as well as terrorists, I don’t see why you are making such a big deal over a word that no one can quantify anyway. Just so that I know for future reference, am I allowed to use the word “many” when referring to the number of innocent civilians killed since 7th October?

I am not denying what Hamas did that day. I was pointing out that there were deaths and injuries to civilians caused by the approach used by the IDF too, something that isn’t get much main media attention. This is relevant because of the claim made in the early days that care would be taken to minimise the number of civilian casualties to Palestinians. It has been shown that from day 1 they had no problem with firing on their own people, so any claims that they have taken care to minimise deaths of non Hamas people in Gaza (and the West Bank) was and is clearly bollocks.

Can we move on now or do we have to play forum semantics some more?

So, a recent poll of Israeli Jews shows that Netanyahu scored less than 4% when it when it came to decision making and giving information. He is clearly deeply unpopular (if you don’t like the word deeply feel free to use another of your choice) in Israel and in Jewish communities outside of Israel. If you look at his quotes and those of some of his government colleagues, the present administration has issues over the two state solution and have an often stated hatred towards Palestinians (there are plenty of examples on line so don’t bother asking me for proof). Hamas is one issue, but until Netanyahu and his cronies are removed the chance of a long term peaceful settlement look unlikely. I am deeply sorry to criticise some Jewish people again, but given they are also being criticised by other Jews, I am in good company.

*** I have since read another report which mentions “a number of casualties”. Let’s all pretend that I said a “number” rather than “many” and perhaps we can all move on with our lives?

 

Edited 21 November, 2023 by sadoldgit
Added text

[Lord Duckhunter]

24 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

That article said “some”. There are other articles which use different words from various eye witnesses which made it sound more than a few. I have already explained my use of the word “many”. It is not rocket science to deduce that it you fire shells and spray a large crowd of people with machine gun fire from a helicopter, there are going to be lots of casualties. The majority of the crowd were civilians. As they say in the US, you do the math. If you honestly think that, by some miracle, the indiscriminate firing at a crowd of people didn’t hit more than a few civilians and managed just to pick out terrorists, fair enough. Chose your own word and we will use that if that makes you happy.Given that the IDF showed no restraint elsewhere that day and deliberately fired on civilians as well as terrorists, I don’t see why you are making such a big deal over a word that no one can quantify anyway. Just so that I know for future reference, am I allowed to use the word “many” when referring to the number of innocent civilians killed since 7th October?

I am not denying what Hamas did that day. I was pointing out that there were deaths and injuries to civilians caused by the approach used by the IDF too, something that isn’t get much main media attention. This is relevant because of the claim made in the early days that care would be taken to minimise the number of civilian casualties to Palestinians. It has been shown that from day 1 they had no problem with firing on their own people, so any claims that they have taken care to minimise deaths of non Hamas people in Gaza (and the West Bank) was and is clearly bollocks.

Can we move on now or do we have to play forum semantics some more?

So, a recent poll of Israeli Jews shows that Netanyahu scored less than 4% when it when it came to decision making and giving information. He is clearly deeply unpopular (if you don’t like the word deeply feel free to use another of your choice) in Israel and in Jewish communities outside of Israel. If you look at his quotes and those of some of his government colleagues, the present administration has issues over the two state solution and have an often stated hatred towards Palestinians (there are plenty of examples on line so don’t bother asking me for proof). Hamas is one issue, but until Netanyahu and his cronies are removed the chance of a long term peaceful settlement look unlikely. I am deeply sorry to criticise some Jewish people again, but given they are also being criticised by other Jews, I am in good company.

[The Kraken]

[whelk]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

** I have since read another report which mentions “a number of casualties”. Let’s all pretend that I said a “number” rather than “many” and perhaps we can all move on with our lives?

You seem to want to make it about splitting hairs where it is clear to all that your posts are far more than about clumsy language. And you seem to be getting worse.

[egg]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

That article said “some”. There are other articles which use different words from various eye witnesses which made it sound more than a few. I have already explained my use of the word “many”. It is not rocket science to deduce that it you fire shells and spray a large crowd of people with machine gun fire from a helicopter, there are going to be lots of casualties. The majority of the crowd were civilians. As they say in the US, you do the math. If you honestly think that, by some miracle, the indiscriminate firing at a crowd of people didn’t hit more than a few civilians and managed just to pick out terrorists, fair enough. Chose your own word and we will use that if that makes you happy.Given that the IDF showed no restraint elsewhere that day and deliberately fired on civilians as well as terrorists, I don’t see why you are making such a big deal over a word that no one can quantify anyway. Just so that I know for future reference, am I allowed to use the word “many” when referring to the number of innocent civilians killed since 7th October?

I am not denying what Hamas did that day. I was pointing out that there were deaths and injuries to civilians caused by the approach used by the IDF too, something that isn’t get much main media attention. This is relevant because of the claim made in the early days that care would be taken to minimise the number of civilian casualties to Palestinians. It has been shown that from day 1 they had no problem with firing on their own people, so any claims that they have taken care to minimise deaths of non Hamas people in Gaza (and the West Bank) was and is clearly bollocks.

Can we move on now or do we have to play forum semantics some more?

So, a recent poll of Israeli Jews shows that Netanyahu scored less than 4% when it when it came to decision making and giving information. He is clearly deeply unpopular (if you don’t like the word deeply feel free to use another of your choice) in Israel and in Jewish communities outside of Israel. If you look at his quotes and those of some of his government colleagues, the present administration has issues over the two state solution and have an often stated hatred towards Palestinians (there are plenty of examples on line so don’t bother asking me for proof). Hamas is one issue, but until Netanyahu and his cronies are removed the chance of a long term peaceful settlement look unlikely. I am deeply sorry to criticise some Jewish people again, but given they are also being criticised by other Jews, I am in good company.

*** I have since read another report which mentions “a number of casualties”. Let’s all pretend that I said a “number” rather than “many” and perhaps we can all move on with our lives?

 

It's not semantics. You referred to an article, but deliberately misquoted it. You may not have "denied" what happened on 7/10, but you went out of your way to minimise what Hamas had done by inflating the size of the finger to be pointed at Israel. You're doing yourself no favours here. 

[The Kraken]

I think we’ve gotten to the point where the mask has not just slipped, it’s pretty much fallen off.

[hypochondriac]

39 minutes ago, egg said:

It's not semantics. You referred to an article, but deliberately misquoted it. You may not have "denied" what happened on 7/10, but you went out of your way to minimise what Hamas had done by inflating the size of the finger to be pointed at Israel. You're doing yourself no favours here. 

Absolutely and that's coming from you who I'm sure you would agree is not pro Israel.

[hypochondriac]

Even if we were to agree with the idea that in the confusion and the general horror that Israeli forces killed some of their own people, how do you jump from that to saying they had no problem with firing on their own people? I'm sure they wrre doing their best to kill the enemy in appaling circumstances but you're making out like the IDF took it as a good opportunity to slay some of their own. 

The reality is soggy is just desperate to minimise the actions of Hamas on that day and by equating the actions on that same day he's trying to remove some responsibility from Hamas. Let's be very clear - Hamas is responsible for the death that occurred in Israel on that day. Some Israeli forces may have accidentally killed some of their own people but it was the actions of Hamas that caused the to do so. We all know why you are trying to downplay it. I now await the obligatory one sentence "condemnation" of Hamas followed by a 500 word essay on the evils of the Jews and links to Jewish conspiracy sites. But you're not antisemitic. 

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, egg said:

It's not semantics. You referred to an article, but deliberately misquoted it. You may not have "denied" what happened on 7/10, but you went out of your way to minimise what Hamas had done by inflating the size of the finger to be pointed at Israel. You're doing yourself no favours here. 

Seriously egg? I honestly thought that there was some hope for you but you have slipped back into usual suspect mode. What a shame.

Ok, you are like a dog with a bone so here we go for the last time.

I did not refer to that particular article or deliberately misquote it. Why would I when it is very clear it used a different word and knowing that the usual suspects go over everything with a fine tooth comb trying to find comebacks?

If you look back at my previous posts you will see that I said looked at a number of different reports.  I found The Cradle article on another forum along with some other quoted articles and posts copied from Twitter. They were all fairly vague but the eye witness reports gave the impression that that we weren’t just talking about a few casualties. I used The Cradle article in my post because I knew certain posters  would call me a liar and that not only supported the claim but it also detailed other deliberate strikes against civilian hostages taken by Hamas. It wasn’t my only source material. Understand?

I didn’t go out of my way to do anything and you will not find one word of any of my posts where I “minimise” what happened on that day. You are just doing what the others do, twisting something to suit your argument.

Not once have I minimised any terrorist attack. I have always posted against any extremist activities. I don’t condone the actions of Hamas but if you want to interpret what I have said that way, then that is down to you.

If you can be bothered, go back and read what I have said. If Hamas had continued their murderous attacks on civilians every day since 7th October I would be posting against that too, but they haven’t. I am posting against the claims that the IDF, at the behest of the Israeli government are using proportionate force since 7th October and that this isn’t defence, it is revenge. That has absolutely nothing to do with any attempt to play down what happened on 7th October, unless you are so polarised in your support for Zionist ideology and hatred for Muslims that you can’t see the wood for the trees. Even if Hamas had only killed 50 civilians that day it would have been a horrendous attack. Why do you have to use semantics (can you give me a figure difference between “some” “many” “ and “a number” when no one has a clue what the number is nor are we likely ever to know so we are talking in abstracts anyway? I know why, because you are trying to pretend that I had another (and different) motive.

This thread is going the way of so many others which is a shame as, for a while, it was half decent. For that reason l’ll leave you to it as the usual suspects can smell blood and it will only get worse.

Believe what you want, but this is my take on things -

There is barely a fag paper between the butchery carried out by Hamas on 7th October and the consistent butchery that has been carried out by the IDF pretty much every day since.

Peace will only ever be achieved when both sides of the conflict accept the two state solution, Israel withdraws from the occupied territories and all of the Arab nations accept that Israel has the right to exist in peace alongside the other nations in the ME. Strict boundaries need to be agreed by all sides, adhered to and policed by a peace keeping force from the UN. Immediate and heavy sanctions need to be implemented on any side breaking the peace accord with no veto allowed through the UN’s security council.

I don’t see anything controversial or that can be twisted to show antisemitism, but I am sure it will happen anyway.

Keep working on it egg. I’m sure you will get there eventually, despite this recent set back 😉

👋

 

 

 

[The Kraken]

What a wanker you are.

[CB Fry]

 

The "ho ho ho, SOG is just winding you up for a big old giggle ho ho ho you fell for it" brigade will be along any minute.

[egg]

11 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Seriously egg? I honestly thought that there was some hope for you but you have slipped back into usual suspect mode. What a shame.

Ok, you are like a dog with a bone so here we go for the last time.

I did not refer to that particular article or deliberately misquote it. Why would I when it is very clear it used a different word and knowing that the usual suspects go over everything with a fine tooth comb trying to find comebacks?

If you look back at my previous posts you will see that I said looked at a number of different reports.  I found The Cradle article on another forum along with some other quoted articles and posts copied from Twitter. They were all fairly vague but the eye witness reports gave the impression that that we weren’t just talking about a few casualties. I used The Cradle article in my post because I knew certain posters  would call me a liar and that not only supported the claim but it also detailed other deliberate strikes against civilian hostages taken by Hamas. It wasn’t my only source material. Understand?

I didn’t go out of my way to do anything and you will not find one word of any of my posts where I “minimise” what happened on that day. You are just doing what the others do, twisting something to suit your argument.

Not once have I minimised any terrorist attack. I have always posted against any extremist activities. I don’t condone the actions of Hamas but if you want to interpret what I have said that way, then that is down to you.

If you can be bothered, go back and read what I have said. If Hamas had continued their murderous attacks on civilians every day since 7th October I would be posting against that too, but they haven’t. I am posting against the claims that the IDF, at the behest of the Israeli government are using proportionate force since 7th October and that this isn’t defence, it is revenge. That has absolutely nothing to do with any attempt to play down what happened on 7th October, unless you are so polarised in your support for Zionist ideology and hatred for Muslims that you can’t see the wood for the trees. Even if Hamas had only killed 50 civilians that day it would have been a horrendous attack. Why do you have to use semantics (can you give me a figure difference between “some” “many” “ and “a number” when no one has a clue what the number is nor are we likely ever to know so we are talking in abstracts anyway? I know why, because you are trying to pretend that I had another (and different) motive.

This thread is going the way of so many others which is a shame as, for a while, it was half decent. For that reason l’ll leave you to it as the usual suspects can smell blood and it will only get worse.

Believe what you want, but this is my take on things -

There is barely a fag paper between the butchery carried out by Hamas on 7th October and the consistent butchery that has been carried out by the IDF pretty much every day since.

Peace will only ever be achieved when both sides of the conflict accept the two state solution, Israel withdraws from the occupied territories and all of the Arab nations accept that Israel has the right to exist in peace alongside the other nations in the ME. Strict boundaries need to be agreed by all sides, adhered to and policed by a peace keeping force from the UN. Immediate and heavy sanctions need to be implemented on any side breaking the peace accord with no veto allowed through the UN’s security council.

I don’t see anything controversial or that can be twisted to show antisemitism, but I am sure it will happen anyway.

Keep working on it egg. I’m sure you will get there eventually, despite this recent set back 😉

👋

 

 

 

Jesus wept. 

[badgerx16]

19 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I did not refer to that particular article or deliberately misquote it.

I suppose I can now claim my membership badge for the Pile On Crew.

You posted this;

"It appears now that the IDF killed many innocents civilians themselves in the Hamas attack of 7th October.

https://new.thecradle.co/articles-id/13111"

The article says this;

"An Israeli police investigation into the Hamas attack on the Nova music festival near the Gaza border on 7 October revealed that an Israeli attack helicopter killed some of the attendees, Haaretz reported on 18 November. "

 

Stop digging !

[Turkish]

5 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

That article said “some”. There are other articles which use different words from various eye witnesses which made it sound more than a few. I have already explained my use of the word “many”. It is not rocket science to deduce that it you fire shells and spray a large crowd of people with machine gun fire from a helicopter, there are going to be lots of casualties. The majority of the crowd were civilians. As they say in the US, you do the math. If you honestly think that, by some miracle, the indiscriminate firing at a crowd of people didn’t hit more than a few civilians and managed just to pick out terrorists, fair enough. Chose your own word and we will use that if that makes you happy.Given that the IDF showed no restraint elsewhere that day and deliberately fired on civilians as well as terrorists, I don’t see why you are making such a big deal over a word that no one can quantify anyway. Just so that I know for future reference, am I allowed to use the word “many” when referring to the number of innocent civilians killed since 7th October?

I am not denying what Hamas did that day. I was pointing out that there were deaths and injuries to civilians caused by the approach used by the IDF too, something that isn’t get much main media attention. This is relevant because of the claim made in the early days that care would be taken to minimise the number of civilian casualties to Palestinians. It has been shown that from day 1 they had no problem with firing on their own people, so any claims that they have taken care to minimise deaths of non Hamas people in Gaza (and the West Bank) was and is clearly bollocks.

Can we move on now or do we have to play forum semantics some more?

So, a recent poll of Israeli Jews shows that Netanyahu scored less than 4% when it when it came to decision making and giving information. He is clearly deeply unpopular (if you don’t like the word deeply feel free to use another of your choice) in Israel and in Jewish communities outside of Israel. If you look at his quotes and those of some of his government colleagues, the present administration has issues over the two state solution and have an often stated hatred towards Palestinians (there are plenty of examples on line so don’t bother asking me for proof). Hamas is one issue, but until Netanyahu and his cronies are removed the chance of a long term peaceful settlement look unlikely. I am deeply sorry to criticise some Jewish people again, but given they are also being criticised by other Jews, I am in good company.

*** I have since read another report which mentions “a number of casualties”. Let’s all pretend that I said a “number” rather than “many” and perhaps we can all move on with our lives?

 

You surely don’t believe what you post do you?

[whelk]

So can we conclude the usual suspects is everyone but SOG? So basically everyone who isn’t an antisemitic zealot.

[whelk]

8 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

I suppose I can now claim my membership badge for the Pile On Crew.

It is hard not to. I used to be more sympathetic but his posts on this thread have fully exposed him as far from being the daft left leaning liberal. As others have said the mask has slipped.

Edited 21 November, 2023 by whelk

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, whelk said:

So can we conclude the usual suspects is everyone but SOG? So basically everyone who isn’t an antisemitic zealot.

It appears that even those highly critical of the Israelis are recoiling in horror at the content of his latest posts. 

[AlexLaw76]

Good to see more people are discovering what a dreadful person he appears to be

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Good to see more people are discovering what a dreadful person he appears to be

Worth bookmarking this thread, the Ched Evans one and the terrorist one for when posters inexperienced with the history try to understand why soggy provokes the reactions he does. He really is a nasty piece of work. 

[Turkish]

7 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Good to see more people are discovering what a dreadful person he appears to be

Been saying it for a long, long time. A very nasty, bitter spiteful person. It was obvious and now he’s outed himself yet again. 

[Turkish]

14 minutes ago, whelk said:

So can we conclude the usual suspects is everyone but SOG? So basically everyone who isn’t an antisemitic zealot.

When you think the problem is everyone else is usually isn’t. 

[Turkish]

53 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Seriously egg? I honestly thought that there was some hope for you but you have slipped back into usual suspect mode. What a shame.

Ok, you are like a dog with a bone so here we go for the last time.

I did not refer to that particular article or deliberately misquote it. Why would I when it is very clear it used a different word and knowing that the usual suspects go over everything with a fine tooth comb trying to find comebacks?

If you look back at my previous posts you will see that I said looked at a number of different reports.  I found The Cradle article on another forum along with some other quoted articles and posts copied from Twitter. They were all fairly vague but the eye witness reports gave the impression that that we weren’t just talking about a few casualties. I used The Cradle article in my post because I knew certain posters  would call me a liar and that not only supported the claim but it also detailed other deliberate strikes against civilian hostages taken by Hamas. It wasn’t my only source material. Understand?

I didn’t go out of my way to do anything and you will not find one word of any of my posts where I “minimise” what happened on that day. You are just doing what the others do, twisting something to suit your argument.

Not once have I minimised any terrorist attack. I have always posted against any extremist activities. I don’t condone the actions of Hamas but if you want to interpret what I have said that way, then that is down to you.

If you can be bothered, go back and read what I have said. If Hamas had continued their murderous attacks on civilians every day since 7th October I would be posting against that too, but they haven’t. I am posting against the claims that the IDF, at the behest of the Israeli government are using proportionate force since 7th October and that this isn’t defence, it is revenge. That has absolutely nothing to do with any attempt to play down what happened on 7th October, unless you are so polarised in your support for Zionist ideology and hatred for Muslims that you can’t see the wood for the trees. Even if Hamas had only killed 50 civilians that day it would have been a horrendous attack. Why do you have to use semantics (can you give me a figure difference between “some” “many” “ and “a number” when no one has a clue what the number is nor are we likely ever to know so we are talking in abstracts anyway? I know why, because you are trying to pretend that I had another (and different) motive.

This thread is going the way of so many others which is a shame as, for a while, it was half decent. For that reason l’ll leave you to it as the usual suspects can smell blood and it will only get worse.

Believe what you want, but this is my take on things -

There is barely a fag paper between the butchery carried out by Hamas on 7th October and the consistent butchery that has been carried out by the IDF pretty much every day since.

Peace will only ever be achieved when both sides of the conflict accept the two state solution, Israel withdraws from the occupied territories and all of the Arab nations accept that Israel has the right to exist in peace alongside the other nations in the ME. Strict boundaries need to be agreed by all sides, adhered to and policed by a peace keeping force from the UN. Immediate and heavy sanctions need to be implemented on any side breaking the peace accord with no veto allowed through the UN’s security council.

I don’t see anything controversial or that can be twisted to show antisemitism, but I am sure it will happen anyway.

Keep working on it egg. I’m sure you will get there eventually, despite this recent set back 😉

👋

 

 

 

The arrogance of this post is staggering. You really have outed yourself. Me mr me me. And you had the nerve to once say I thought this forum was all about me. Embarrassing 

Edited 21 November, 2023 by Turkish

[Weston Super Saint]

30 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Worth bookmarking this thread, the Ched Evans one and the terrorist one for when posters inexperienced with the history try to understand why soggy provokes the reactions he does. He really is a nasty piece of work. 

Nah!

He's the greatest wind up on the innernetz.

[Tamesaint]

3 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Nah!

He's the greatest wind up on the innernetz.

Glad to see that you now agree. 

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, Tamesaint said:

Glad to see that you now agree. 

It's clear for all to see.

Only a thickie would think otherwise.

Thanks for letting us all know.

[The Kraken]

1 hour ago, CB Fry said:

 

The "ho ho ho, SOG is just winding you up for a big old giggle ho ho ho you fell for it" brigade will be along any minute.

 

27 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

He's the greatest wind up on the innernetz.

 

24 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Glad to see that you now agree. 

Didn’t take long for one of them tbf.

 

Edited 21 November, 2023 by The Kraken

[Turkish]

 Tamesaint yet again leaping to SOGs defence shortly after he has posted. Doing the whole, it’s all a wind up act. 
 

what’s interesting is that Tamesaint and Soggy joined this forum within a day of each other on 20th and 21st November 2006. Might just be an extraordinary coincidence of course that here they are 17 years on rushing to support each other 

happy 17th saintsweb anniversary SOG, too bad you made yourself look a right tit on your special day. Happy 17th anniversary for yesterday Tamesaint. 😄

Edited 21 November, 2023 by Turkish

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

When you think the problem is everyone else is usually isn’t. 

[The Kraken]

44 minutes ago, Turkish said:

 Tamesaint yet again leaping to SOGs defence shortly after he has posted. Doing the whole, it’s all a wind up act. 
 

what’s interesting is that Tamesaint and Soggy joined this forum within a day of each other on 20th and 21st November 2006. Might just be an extraordinary coincidence of course that here they are 17 years on rushing to support each other 

happy 17th saintsweb anniversary SOG, too bad you made yourself look a right tit on your special day. Happy 17th anniversary for yesterday Tamesaint. 😄

That was just switchover day from saintsforever. I’m a 20 Nov 2006er too. So is Fried. Westo too.

Either that, or maybe we’re all Soggy 

[Turkish]

14 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

That was just switchover day from saintsforever. I’m a 20 Nov 2006er too. So is Fried. Westo too.

Either that, or maybe we’re all Soggy 

Ah interesting, I’m definitely not soggy as I didn’t join until May 2007. Why was Sog a day late I wonder 🤔 I shall be monitoring yours and the other usual suspects future posts with interest though. Well I would do if you weren’t all on ignore 

Edited 21 November, 2023 by Turkish

[hypochondriac]

46 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

That was just switchover day from saintsforever. I’m a 20 Nov 2006er too. So is Fried. Westo too.

Either that, or maybe we’re all Soggy 

I was also 20th November which means that I too am potentially soggy. Although that seems unlikely given that it's exhausting and time consuming enough being an insufferable prick on just the one account. There's no way I'd be able to craft 500 word essays with such pomposity on a second one. 

[Tamesaint]

3 hours ago, Turkish said:

 Tamesaint yet again leaping to SOGs defence shortly after he has posted. Doing the whole, it’s all a wind up act. 
 

what’s interesting is that Tamesaint and Soggy joined this forum within a day of each other on 20th and 21st November 2006. Might just be an extraordinary coincidence of course that here they are 17 years on rushing to support each other 

happy 17th saintsweb anniversary SOG, too bad you made yourself look a right tit on your special day. Happy 17th anniversary for yesterday Tamesaint. 😄

"Leaping to his defence". "Rushing to support". 😁😁😁😁

I responded to Piggy's sarcastic comment. If you consider that to be leaping to someone's defence please do not ever try to defend me. 😁

As to anniversary dates.... Well what an exciting life you must lead if trawling through a"mong board's" members's joining dates is how you spend your time. Perhaps you should try and move on to watching paint dry or something a little more interesting. 

 

 

 

[Weston Super Saint]

8 hours ago, Turkish said:

 Tamesaint yet again leaping to SOGs defence shortly after he has posted. Doing the whole, it’s all a wind up act. 
 

what’s interesting is that Tamesaint and Soggy joined this forum within a day of each other on 20th and 21st November 2006. Might just be an extraordinary coincidence of course that here they are 17 years on rushing to support each other 

happy 17th saintsweb anniversary SOG, too bad you made yourself look a right tit on your special day. Happy 17th anniversary for yesterday Tamesaint. 😄

It's all a cyber interpretation of the usual suspects movie.

We're all Soggy's alternative logins.  That's what makes it the greatest wind up in the history of the innernetz.

It's only you and MLG that aren't part of the ruse, so to make it an authentic greatest wind up in the world, we have to put our own alter egos on ignore every now and then.  Which is weird but hey ho.

Don't know where Tamesaint comes into it though - think it might be a random bot that got broken and stuck in a loop.

[rallyboy]

As a football forum of like-minded people, how on earth did we get from the ref was shit, Fuller is terrible and we need more width, to here?

[Weston Super Saint]

13 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

As a football forum of like-minded people, how on earth did we get from the ref was shit, Fuller is terrible and we need more width, to here?

Bazunu

[whelk]

41 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

As a football forum of like-minded people, how on earth did we get from the ref was shit, Fuller is terrible and we need more width, to here?

There is a reason the forces don’t allow discussing politics or religion. Football less emotive……mostly.

[Fan The Flames]

1 hour ago, rallyboy said:

As a football forum of like-minded people, how on earth did we get from the ref was shit, Fuller is terrible and we need more width, to here?

We all wanted to play at the highest level possible and showcase our talents on a bigger stage.

[Fan The Flames]

So a ceasefire will start shortly, is this the start of finding a solution or the false dawn?

[egg]

9 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

So a ceasefire will start shortly, is this the start of finding a solution or the false dawn?

It's a start at least, but let's see if both sides deliver. The big issue I can see is the release of the kidnapped Israeli's - Israel will surely want to know where they jack in the box from.  

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

It's a start at least, but let's see if both sides deliver. The big issue I can see is the release of the kidnapped Israeli's - Israel will surely want to know where they jack in the box from.  

I wonder if Hamas had just released the hostages a few weeks ago, if this ceasefire that certain people have been out on the streets calling for could have happened a heck of a lot sooner. 

[Fan The Flames]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I wonder if Hamas had just released the hostages a few weeks ago, if this ceasefire that certain people have been out on the streets calling for could have happened a heck of a lot sooner. 

The IDF had two objectives - free the hostages and destroy Hamas. A ceasefire weeks ago wouldn't have helped achieve the latter, so I doubt it. I guess your point is that Hamas are OK with endangering ordinary Palestinians, which is true, this is what religiously motivated movements can do, they put ideology and their goals above everything else. But many ordinary Israelis are also critical of their governments response to the attack for not putting their hostages first. 

[hypochondriac]

18 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

The IDF had two objectives - free the hostages and destroy Hamas. A ceasefire weeks ago wouldn't have helped achieve the latter, so I doubt it. I guess your point is that Hamas are OK with endangering ordinary Palestinians, which is true, this is what religiously motivated movements can do, they put ideology and their goals above everything else. But many ordinary Israelis are also critical of their governments response to the attack for not putting their hostages first. 

Well we don't really know do we but it certainly would have put the pressure on the IDF and I expect the neutrals would have been a heck of a lot more supportive of a ceasefire much earlier had it happened. Clearly the lions share of the responsibility for there not being a ceasefire sooner lies with the terrorists. What would an effective response have been that put the hostages first in your mind? 

Edited 22 November, 2023 by hypochondriac

[Fan The Flames]

We don't know what negotiations were happening early on, who had what red lines etc, so we don't know why or because of who this ceasefire didn't happen sooner.

It's not for me to answer about the response, all I can say is if my family were kidnapped I wouldn't want my army smashing the place up and killing people.

[whelk]

I am intrigued how you negotiate with someone who boasts about, celebrates and talks about wanting to do 7/10 again.

although strong evidence 98% of Israel’s casualties were caused by IDF helicopter attacks.

[Lighthouse]

32 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

We don't know what negotiations were happening early on, who had what red lines etc, so we don't know why or because of who this ceasefire didn't happen sooner.

It's not for me to answer about the response, all I can say is if my family were kidnapped I wouldn't want my army smashing the place up and killing people.

I would say that without that, there’s no incentive for Hamas to negotiate anything and the hostages would be in more danger.

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I would say that without that, there’s no incentive for Hamas to negotiate anything and the hostages would be in more danger.

Yeah should go to UN and put a resolution in. Do things civilised and be completely ineffective 

[badgerx16]

29 minutes ago, whelk said:

Yeah should go to UN and put a resolution in. Do things civilised and be completely ineffective 

Why would Israel expect anybody else comply with a UN resolution ?