Harry's Place

More than that, Abdullah says in his CiF piece:

“I am absolutely opposed to any attack or violence directed against innocent persons of any faith or no faith anywhere in the world.”

while the Declaration says:

regard everyone standing with the Zionist entity, whether countries, institutions or individuals, as providing a substantial contribution to the crimes and brutality of this entity;

…so which Jews does Abdullah consider as “innocent persons of any faith”, and which as “standing with the Zionist entity”?

What I’d like to ask him – no point in doing so on CiF of course – is:

What is this “Islamic Nation” and on what legal basis is its “sovereignty” established?

Could he draw us a map of where “Muslim waters” are, with appropriate citations from the International Convention of the Law of the Sea?

How does he relate his allegiance to “the Islamic Nation” to his acknowledged position as a British citizen?

(Incidentally, if he was not born a British citizen but acquired citizenship through naturalisation, he will have sworn a formal oath of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen before a British consular official.)

What the hell is this ‘Islamic nation’ garbage?

Until this useless government challenges this kind of nonsense language, these groups will continue to be dominated by the likes of this anti-semite Abdullah, lusting for power and dominion over Muslims everywhere.

We shouldn’t even be talking of a ‘Muslim community’. There are Muslim communities, as there may be Christian or Buddhist communities, but the encouragement of monolithic religious entities is the road back to the dark ages.

I don’t know where this Islamic Nation is, but I sure as hell wish they’d go and live there.

“What I’d like to ask him – no point in doing so on CiF of course”: Oh go on, do it anyway.

I believe there are indeed Palestinian territorial waters – 20 mile zone off the coast originally set aside for fishing – although in practice access to this area is militarily controlled by the Israelis. (Oil reserves are in this area, too.)

So is Abdullah claiming he only signed a hypothetical declaration and would withdraw his support if actual action took place in the area, involving the British Navy?

but the encouragement of monolithic religious entities is the road back to the dark ages

What, like the ‘Zionist’ nomenclature as used by the usual suspects?

He can’t even lie convincingly. He says of Paragraph 7:

The paragraph does not suggest in any way how to react to those who support Israel.

Yes it does: the position towards him is the same as towards this usurping entity.

I am the slurping entity.

Fabian – that’s right: I remember once ending an argument with an incorrigible Hamasnik by saying “Well, I support Israel because you can get a drink and a shag there. End of story.”

An excellent article.

old labour, the government is challenging this crap, that’s the whole point.

Cipriano, that is a powerful argument, I wish I had thought of it

Cipriano you can’t (or might not) get a shag there if you are a Palestinian from inside the green line who married another Palestinian from outside it.

a -

Well you could, but it wouldn’t necessarily be with the person you were married to.

Odd to see Daud link to Harry’s Place in the article :D

Islamic Nation, Jewish State, Christian Country, God-fearing Country, God’s Own Country, God’s Chosen People, the Elect, Hindu Culture, Secular State, People’s State, People’s Republic.

All shit.

Never mind lads; it seems that there are those, like Abdullah, who talk and those who do:

‘Israel operates everywhere’
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3692896,00.html

‘IAF struck arms convoy in Sudan’
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3692507,00.html

Will someone please pass the link on to Tehran?

“What the hell is this ‘Islamic nation’ garbage?2

Well I would agree. The nation state may be an artifice, and while it has its detractors, it can be an effective way of establishing a collective identity that people can identify with. There are quite a few contributors here…including the charming K Rondstadt ,who seem to think that it can only be a negative thing.In the meantime, the general drift of the Left encourages concepts such as the “Islamic nation” because they are often hostile to the nation state but encourage other collective identities which are based on ticking those boxes that reinforce multi-culturalism ….Which leads to Balkanisation, hence the current attempts to close the stable door after the horse has bolted , by talking about “community cohesion”, and Gordon Brown’s attempt to re-establish a” British ” identity.

Harry’s Place hits the jackpot again!

Well done!

A green party definition of Islamic Region

http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/greenparty_islamicregion-l

You guys are even on MPAC now.

http://forum.mpacuk.org/showthread.php?t=41557

Thank you, shakeel: I’ve just seen “no one can deny that this entire MCB breakup has been orchestrated by the zionists and that link to harry’s place is more than proof enough”.

So far today, we’ve established complete control over a member of the Cabinet, and also orchestrated the break-up of an Islamist front organisation.

Well I never. Keep up the good work, chaps and chapesses!

z – Thank you for the link to the Green Party’s definition of the Islamic Nation. I can imagine the Greens would be quite supportive, as an Islamic Nation is unlikely to do much damage to the environment by virtue of being completely incapable of putting any industry together…

Linda’s ignorant whining: all shit.

>>> In the meantime, the general drift of the Left encourages concepts such as the “Islamic nation”

Just as once upon a time, many on the Left encouraged the concept of a “Jewish state”, rather naively assuming that the Kibbutzim and the history of Jewish persecution made it somehow progressive.

The SWP which used to destroy entire forests with its “Never Again” holocaust leaflets but now conveniently forgets that Jews were murdered by the Nazis as they try to recruit young muslims.

Yes, the nation state is today universally reactionary and an obstacle to a truly human community.

Here is a principled position.

http://en.internationalism.org/2009/wr/322/antisemitism-islamophobia

Hang on. By “Muslim waters” one can only assume that Abdullah is referring to waters which are part of the territory of Gaza Strip, no? Gaza has a port, one can only assume that this is because it has access to the sea.

The waters around Gaza Strip do not belong to Israel, nor to Britain, and if warships from Israel or Britain enter those waters without permission (Israel does so frequently) from the freely elected Hamas government, is that not an act of war?

islamic waters : se a discussion on Al-Jeezera : To discuss this issue, the programme interviews live via satellite from Istanbul Dr Muhsin al-Awaji, Saudi member of the International Union of Muslim Scholars and founding member of the Al- Quds International Foundation.

Finally asked about the way Muslims can respond to the presence of foreign warships in “Muslim waters” as mentioned in the statement, he says: “The response is primarily left to our Palestinian brothers. They know better than others how to respond. In our statement, we considered anyone who participated in this crime a criminal and aggressor. Our campaign calls for resisting aggression. Therefore, all the ships which came to tighten the siege on our people in Gaza will be viewed like the Zionist ships. Therefore, all conferees, including Hamas’s representatives, considered the NATO warships that came to the Palestinian territorial waters hostile ships just like the Zionist ships.” Concluding, he praises Hamas for “repelling this aggression and lifting this injustice” and for making “every Muslim and Arab” citizen feel “proud” of what has been achieved.

Sorry for the lenght of the link
http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:jjr5OzSUCmsJ:fiservsw.portalvault.com/default.aspx%3FpageMode%3Dcontrol%26pageModeType%3DNewsArticleControl%26pageModeParam%3D%26storyId%3D126670175+muslim+waters&cd=39&hl=da&ct=clnk&gl=dk

“the freely elected Hamas government”

There is no such thing, and I do wish people would stop making this absurd claim.

So far today, we’ve established complete control over a member of the Cabinet, and also orchestrated the break-up of an Islamist front organisation.

Well I never. Keep up the good work, chaps and chapesses!

BTW, is it next week we’re taking MPAC UK down or is it MAB next?

“Stealth and Shtumm” is the way to do it. Its the Chassidic Ninja motto.

“Get me the editor of the Daily Mail, have I got a story for you…”

Lucy Lips and the rest of the decentniks might do well to not get too close to Hazel Blears.Hazel “diminutive beacon of self-satisfaction” Blears has the potential to embarrass even the pathologically shameless.

” is that not an act of war?” No.
just a thought, but not a thought worth pursuing. Gaza is not a sovereign state by any international law criteria.

“Just as once upon a time, many on the Left encouraged the concept of a “Jewish state”, rather naively assuming that the Kibbutzim and the history of Jewish persecution made it somehow progressive.”

It’s none of the “Left’s” f*** business whether Israel is or isn’t “progressive”. It’s only the business of Israel’s citizens *)

*) For the benefit of the usual idiots: yes, provided it does not violently oppress women & gays etc etc like the “Left’s” favourite fascist states.

“Yes, the nation state is today universally reactionary and an obstacle to a truly human community”

Oh, finally the penny dropped. All is now clear. Linda is about 12, and has discovered the dream of universal brotherhood if we only listened to her and learned to get along with each other.

Linda, humans are tribal. Live with it.

Thanks for that elucidation. It seemed to me that the Istanbul Declaration was not referring to established territorial waters under the currently obtaining international conventions, but to “Muslim waters” belonging to some entity called “the Islamic Nation”, which claims “sovereignty”. In other words, they are making this up as they go along.

And I just love “Concluding, he praises Hamas for “repelling this aggression and lifting this injustice” and for making “every Muslim and Arab” citizen feel “proud” of what has been achieved”.

And so: Hamas won the war, the injustice has been lifted, and achievements have been made of which all Arabs and Muslims can feel proud. So what are they still whingeing for, then?

Smart, will you never learn to keep quiet? What did we teach you in Jewish Subversion 101?

Very, very good HP, when the CIF Marcel D́eat/Henri De Man clones start referring to HP as a ‘Zionist’ Pro war website they must be really starting to panic, wonderful work.

Whatever do you mean, Cipriano? You and I are still alive, innit? That’s good enough for a whinge.

“Humans are tribal.”

Hitler was right then?

“the freely elected Hamas government”

I always answer this with Okay, the Palestinians are responsible for the actions of Hamas (rocket attacks, suicide bombings, call to genocide) since they elected them.

Stan

Someone – yes, and I at least am drinking forbidden alcohol and have a pork roast in the oven.

The jihad continues.

“Humans are tribal.”

Which particular tribe do you belong to, Someone?

HP, want a little exclusive from me.

Israel & White phosphorus. How Guardian tried it on.

Guardian photo http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/25/israel-white-phosphorus-gaza “Bastards using white phosporus during daytime”

Same photo http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/03/during-its-war.html “Hey look, its night-time”

Now why would the Guardian lighten the photo?

The waters around Gaza Strip do not belong to Israel, nor to Britain, and if warships from Israel or Britain enter those waters without permission (Israel does so frequently) from the freely elected Hamas government, is that not an act of war?

Nope! Gaza isn’t a recognised sovreignty under international law and so it cannot claim territorial waters.

“Garlasco says the Israeli Defense Forces were more than careless with WP, however. Troops repeatedly targeted Hamas hideouts in crowded urban areas where civilians would almost certainly get caught in the cross-fire.”

Thanks for posting this SmartCookie. More evidence that Israel is run by war criminals.

Yes, the nation state is today universally reactionary and an obstacle to a truly human community.

There is a human community, and whether French or Senegalese or Dutch or Argentinian they’re happy with nation states, and think you’re a nutter.

Stan – “the Palestinians are responsible for the actions of Hamas (rocket attacks, suicide bombings, call to genocide) since they elected them.”

Collective punishment is illegal under international law, but as you take that line, perhaps you think it is fine for certain people to bomb the UK being as we initiated an illegal war of aggression and occupation?

I see Ronstadt. Hamas embeds terror cells among Gaza’s civilian population, but you accuse Israel of committing war crimes because someone accuses the IDF of being “careless” with white phosphorous and having the temerity to root them out where they hide themselves instead of dropping a bomb on their hideouts, something the IDF has been faulted for in the past.

ami – you assert that Gaza is not a sovereign state under international law I respectfully direct you to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 43/177 which “Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988″. Gaza is part of Palestine, is it not?

Regardless of if you agree that Palestine is a state, we will, I’m sure, agree that Israel and Britain are. In such a case then, should they not adhere to international law and the resolutions of the UN, like, I don’t know, lifting the illegal air land and sea siege around Gaza and allowing Gaza to function?

“being as we initiated an illegal war of aggression and occupation”

No, we didn’t.

“There is a human community, and whether French or Senegalese or Dutch or Argentinian they’re happy with nation states”

And your evidence is?

I never heard anyone say “I’m happy with nation states”. Just like I never heard anyone say “I’m happy with politicians”.

“I see Ronstadt. Hamas embeds terror cells among Gaza’s civilian population, but you accuse Israel of committing war crimes”

Yes the British Army likewise embedded itself among the civilian population of Northern Ireland.

That does not absolve the IRA of murder.

Daud Abdullah has an open invitation to put his case to the electorate. This afternoon, as part of an ongoing chain of events, the following was sent to info@stalinsociety.org.uk; info@fpp.co.uk; admin@mcb.org.uk; oliver.kamm@thetimes.co.uk; peter@petertatchell.net:

“A Stalin Society member, David Irving, Daud Abdullah (we do have some Muslims here, even if not very many), Oliver Kamm, Peter Tatchell or (since he already seems to be a candidate elsewhere) someone who shares the full range of his views, and (if they bother to put her up, rather than giving Kamm a clear run) a New Labour candidate whose only political opinion is her support for partial birth abortion.

So, a gulag-denier, a Holocaust-denier, a Sharia supporter, a Bush-loving warmonger, someone who wants to lower the age of consent to 14 or even younger, and a baby-murderer. All each other’s moral equals, of course.

Plus me. A passionate opponent of all of the above.

Go on. Let’s make North-West Durham the most interesting parliamentary contest in England, at least, for generations. What is stopping you? The Soviet Union collapsed so quickly that much of its money cannot have been spent to this day, and must still be languishing in some London bank account. David Irving is loaded. So are the Saudis. So was Kamm even before the City was bailed out by the rest of us, not to mention that he would be the candidate of the Likud Lobby. And someone must be paying for Peter Tatchell.

I say that there is a ninety per cent chance that none of you could collect enough signatures to get onto the ballot paper. A ninety-five per cent chance that you would all lose your deposits. And a one hundred per cent chance that you would all together take fewer votes than I. Try and prove me wrong. Go on. I dare you.

After all, what are you afraid of…?”

What, indeed?

He’s even dimmer than Bungle.

Yes the British Army likewise embedded itself among the civilian population of Northern Ireland.

No it didn’t.

K Ronstadt
26 March 2009, 6:42 pm

“I see Ronstadt. Hamas embeds terror cells among Gaza’s civilian population, but you accuse Israel of committing war crimes”

Yes the British Army likewise embedded itself among the civilian population of Northern Ireland.

That does not absolve the IRA of murder.

What are you telling us, Ronstadt? Did the British Army embedded itself among the civilian pop of Northern Ireland and use their position to attack southern Ireland did they?

Do you at all understand the concept of necessary force or what murder is? (killing and murder aren’t the same as one requires premeditated intent)

Just a thought -so if, as you claim, Palestine is a recognised sovereign state which includes Gaza, then why the hell are they still bombing us?

Question: if Gaza is to be regarded as a nation-state or a legitimate political entity doesn’t really matter with regard to the blockade.

It is a political entity whose “freely elected” government is sworn to destroy its neighbor along with the said population of that neighbor.

What on earth would compel the threatened party to allow such an entity to “function normally”?

Does this mean, function normally as in acquire a B-52? Or what? Better rockets maybe? Some tanks?

Given the open threat to the people of Israel they would have to be suicidal to allow such a probability.

This is sad because the issue of “collective punishment” does apply and people who have no desire to inflict harm suffer because of blockades but as long as the philosophy of the “freely elected” party in charge remains genocidal and destructive how should reasonable people proceed?

Nobody has an answer to that one.

So we’re left blaming the threatened state/people of Israel for imposing security measures and trying to stop assaults on its citizens, assaults which are then defended as “legal” because the government of Gaza was “freely elected” and/or because it is “occupied” and/or because it is a state already – which is it?

Does it matter as long as the rockets fall and the threats are constantly reiterated?

Personally I think military action should be avoided if at all possible but nobody has had a better idea – claiming that “ending the occupation” would solve everybody’s problems is ridiculous in light of events plus the openly genocidal statements of Hamas and the demands that Israel accept an influx of millions of people hostile to its own citizenry and ideals.

So why is Israel supposed to open borders and allow the free shipment of arms and people sworn to destroy her population and existence? Would the English simply have opened the doors to the Spanish Armada?

Finally, as far as the issue of nation-states is concerned: what other system provides the necessary degree of democratic control combined with security and commonalities of language, custom and tradition?

Local systems like city-states can’t protect against outside enemies plus they lack the economic heft of larger entities – and empires or “unions” like the EU are too big to provide democratic input and control or – they aren’t democratic to begin with.

The ideal of workers linked transnationally was lovely but citizens of ANY class can’t seem to get along all that peacefully in urban neighborhoods even in places like Britain or the US, or in a tiny region the size of Lebanon so how is the Internationale supposed to function?

How would a global government adequately represent individuals or minorities when entire genders are oppressed in much of the world and certain minorities keep getting brutalized the point of near-extinction? All we have to do is look at the UN -

So on a practical level – does anybody have a better idea than democratic nationstates?

From a french report a couple a years ago, you can find this comment : Obin’s investigators also found that most Muslim students refuse to participate in sports such as swimming, “the girls out of modesty, the boys because they do not want to swim in girls’ water or non-Muslim water
Could be that Daud Abdullah’s intentions is to secure the swimming rights of Gaza’s male population ?

Justathought,
Clearly you consider Gaza to be a legal entity, with a freely elected government. That’s okay. I can fully recognize that view.
When a country is at war, its population is going to suffer. There are no two ways about it.
The Palestinians, and Gazans in particular chose to elect a party that has in its very charter a call to genocide (see article 7 below).
They are suffering the from the genocidal actions of their elected government, just as American citizens have suffered from the idiotic actions of the elected government of George Bush.

Under your interpretation of international law, a country would never be able to defend itself, as any action against an aggressor country would result in your interpretation of “collective punishment.” Britain would not have been able to fight the Nazis, despite the bombing of London, because the act of war against Germany was collective punishment of the Germans.

People have a very condescending attitude towards the Palestinians. I don’t. I consider them responsible for their actions.
Below outlines the genocidal intent of Hamas. There are no contortions of logic anyone can do. If you support Hamas you are supporting an organization that calls for the extermination of the Jews. The Palestinian people know this.

Note, the Islamic Resistance Movement is the formal name for Hamas.

Article 7 of the Hamas charter
The Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to implement Allah’s promise, whatever time that may take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: “The Day of Judgment will not come about until the Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them), until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: Oh Muslim! Oh Abdullah!, there is a Jew behind me, come on and kill him. Only the Gharqad tree would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.”

I think there are Palestinian territorial waters, heavily patrolled militarily by the Israelis, but these are not specificially Gaza territorial waters as Gaza is not officially an independent state.

K Ronstadt – can you explain your understanding of the term “embedding” as it relates to

1. British troops and the civilian population of Northern Ireland
2. Hamas security forces and the civilian population of Gaza

Stan,

How does one get hold of a Gharqad tree? I’d like to put a few in my back garden.

Yes the British Army likewise embedded itself among the civilian population of Northern Ireland.

No it didn’t.

You are a mendacious clown, Macpherson. Anyone who knows anything about the British Army in the Six Counties knows that they built a notorious observation post, a prime target for the Republican Movement, on the top of Divis flats. They built it there precisely so as to dissuade the IRA attacking it.

Let’s accept that it might be illegitimate for British ships to enter Gazan territorial waters to stop arms smuggling to Hamas. Let’s look at the relevant paragraph in the light of this concession.

The obligation of the Islamic Nation to regard the sending of foreign warships into Muslim waters, claiming to control the borders and prevent the smuggling of arms to Gaza, as a declaration of war, a new occupation, sinful aggression, and a clear violation of the sovereignty of the Nation. This must be rejected and fought by all means and ways.

Nope, it’s still fucking awful.

Voice of Reason doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of ‘likewise’.

>> You are a mendacious clown, Macpherson.

And you are an established troll who returns under different names whenever one is ridiculed.

>> Anyone who knows anything about the British Army in the Six Counties knows that they built a notorious observation post, a prime target for the Republican Movement, on the top of Divis flats. They built it there precisely so as to dissuade the IRA attacking it.

One incident? If you are able to limit similar Hamas acts to only one, you’ll have a point.

Daud Abdullah’s defence is very weak but revealing for those with the patience to dissect the language and logic behind the Istanbul Declaration and his Guardian article.

He writes,

“( Blears ) latest claim as stated in a letter on her behalf to our secretary-general and published in the Guardian today is that I signed a document “advocating attacks on Jewish communities all around the world”. She had not raised this allegation before yesterday and it is entirely untrue”.

Whether or not she raised it before yesterday might indicate political expediency because of Contact 2 but that in itself does not have any necessary bearing upon its truth.

Clearly, Abdullah has not directly advocated the two things that Blears has accused Abdullah of doing which are,

1) Supporting attacks on Jews ‘anywhere in the world’ .

2) Supporting attacks on British troops at this moment.

The key really, though, is in a close reading of the Istanbul Declaration that Abdullah signed and the following two articles,

“7. The obligation of the Islamic Nation to regard everyone standing with the Zionist entity, whether countries, institutions or individuals, as providing a substantial contribution to the crimes and brutality of this entity; the position towards him is the same as towards this usurping entity”.

“8. The obligation of the Islamic Nation to regard the sending of foreign warships into Muslim waters, claiming to control the borders and prevent the smuggling of arms to Gaza, as a declaration of war, a new occupation, sinful aggression, and a clear violation of the sovereignty of the Nation. This must be rejected and fought by all means and ways”.

Abdullah claims on art 7 in the Guardian that,

“The paragraph does not suggest in any way how to react to those who support Israel”.

That weak defence would depend on how ’supporters of Israel’ are defined, as to state that all those ’standing with the Zionist entity’ are targets could mean anyone the signatories define as aiding Israel or by being a citizens of it.

It could even mean anybody living withing a state that does not take an explicit stance against Israel because the text insinuates that Israel as an ‘entity’ ( i.e not a specific nation state ) is an enemy by its very existence.

An ‘entity’ is a thing that exists-anyone considered to support Israel’s existence from the Gaza invasion back even to its very foundation is thus implicated in the crime of it being a state on Palestinian soil.

That’s precisely why Abdullah can claim that there is no suggestion in detail about how opponents of Israel can ‘react’ or who and why and when the targets could and might consist of.

For the the text Abdullah has signed is intentionally and conveniently ambiguous enough to justify at a later time what he wants unless the language is peeled back forensically to yield its underlying meaning and logic.

That becomes clear when Abdullah’s weak sophistry in trying to exculpate himself from having signed a document that could justify terrorism not only against civilians in Israel and Britain but also Palestine.

The banal weasel logic in his justification for paragraph 7 is apparent here,

“it refers to those who support Israeli crimes in general including Arabs and Muslims, as was clear from other parts of the statement which criticised the Arab regimes more than anyone else”.

Now that could mean any Palestinian who did not support Hamas, as it is known that Hamas poses as the unique guarantor of the will of all Palestinians against Israel. Ergo, those who oppose it ought to be executed.

Now that assertion is supposed to reassure this audience of British people that it is really not about them; yet those who see Hamas as heroic resistance fighters might want to take stock of that threat.

That makes a mockery of his 5 claims in his defence,

“1) One of the reasons I joined the demonstrations against the war in Iraq was to prevent the sacrifice of young soldiers in an illegal war”.

Given that Abdullah seems to think that the lives of any Arab who opposes Hamas is expendable, it is clear that his aching concern for British soldiers is just mere insincere PR. It’s a cheap gesture.

“2) Unlike his predecessor, prime minister Brown has promised that any such future intervention would only be carried out after it is endorsed by parliament. All the assertions made by the secretary of state are based on conjecture and totally hypothetical scenarios”.

As it should be, but the text of paragraphs 7 and 8 are deliberately couched in a language that could be used to justify terror in the event of the ‘hypothetical scenarios’ that are implicitly allowed for in the wording on the declaration.

Only a crude minded dolt could fail to understand that anybody with any understanding of law, logic and language would fail to see through that. Which is why the following claim is almost wholly a nonsensical piece of drivel,

“3. I am absolutely opposed to any attack or violence directed against innocent persons of any faith or no faith anywhere in the world. To claim that I call for attacks on Jewish communities throughout the world is completely false and an inflammatory and malicious assault on my beliefs, words and actions”.

That is evidently negated by signing a text calling for attacks on ‘the Zionist entity’ which, in practice and by the implication of the language used, could extend from Tel Aviv to Golders Green to New York. In fact, anywhere where the metaphysical ‘entity’ of ‘Zionism” is believed to a presence.

Personally, no person should care what Abdullah decalres as an individual on this matter: the evidence is in the document he signed and uses in his own defence.

The term ‘innocent persons’ is entirely subjective: to oppose attacks on ‘innocent persons’ would mean opposing Hamas.

But because it doesn’t, it means those who oppose Hamas or are considered to aid the enemy i.e the Zionist entity’ , as loosely defined as that is, are guilty. And thus worthy of death.

So there is nothing ‘inflammatory’ nor ‘malicious’ about drawing attention to the fact declaring war on that some ‘Zionist entity’ necessarily implies attacking Jwes, Muslims or Christins who are depicted as serving it i.e making a ‘contribution’.

The equivalent would be if a supporter of Israel signed a document calling on all those who made a ‘contribution’ towards the Islamic Nation is an ‘Act of War’ which can be resisted by violence in ’self defence’ in whatever country they happen to be in.

That contradicts the specific invocation only to ‘resist’ Israel on Palestinian soil that is claimed here,

“4. The Palestinians have the right to resist Israel’s illegal occupation, a right supported by international law and the Charter of the UN. In the same way as it is a common British value to respect international law and support justice and freedom of oppressed people, I, along with the Muslim community and large sections of the wider British society, support the rights of the Palestinian”.

As the ‘Zionist entity’ could well exist beyond the borders of Israel in the existence of those who make any kind of contribution to it as individuals or as part of institutions would be considered legitimate targets.

That negates the point of claim 5 that the MCB defends the ‘independence’ of institutions to support the causes they so choose,

“5. If anything good is to emerge from this saga it should be the affirmation of the independence of MCB. However much Hazel Blears may dislike or disagree with its views she should respect this independence and deal with its representatives as equal citizens, just as it deals with the representatives of other communities”.

For if the logic of paragraphs 7 and 8 that Abdullah signed are looked at, those who support ‘institutions’ that promote the ‘Zionist entity’ would be treated not as ‘independent’ but an enemy of some ‘Islamic nation’ subject to war then that overides the laws and democratic procedures of nation states.

That would justify the exclusion of the MCB from any important role in British politics.

“Anyone who knows anything about the British Army in the Six Counties knows that they built a notorious observation post, a prime target for the Republican Movement, on the top of Divis flats. They built it there precisely so as to dissuade the IRA attacking it.”

ON TOP OF – is that embedding? Surely too the British Army were the occupying force in Northern Ireland.

A more accurate comparison would be if the IRA had concealed its armed militia among the civilians in their schools and homes abd hospitals etc, to launch missiles at the British forces and onto the British mainland. Or have I misunderstood the definition of embedding?

aoodalnaMNcehcools siethco ethewuy

Karl – dead right. But the only really relevant point is that these people are always talking fruitcakespeak when they’re in fruitcakeland and democraticspeak when they’re back here, and hoping no-one will notice. Well, we can, and Abdullah got flayed alive on Al-Grauniad’s “comment is free” today.

If the Gharqad tree is only “one of the trees of the Jews”, why are the other Jewish trees (a concept I love, btw) not also protecting the Jews?

BTW, they’re ahead of you: a Jordanian academic called Khaled al-Qudha said in 2005: “The Jews know this, and that’s why they plant a lot of Gharqad trees.” It’s boxthorn, apparently.

Thanks, Marcus. Will be down the garden centre tomorrow, Given how many Islamist fuckwits there are in Lancashire, the local Jews may be glad of them.

PS – I came across this:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080513013454AApJOC1

“You think you’ll be getting virgins? Oh no, not for you. You ignored the tree. You’ll get crack whores.”

I wonder what female martyrs get? Gang-banged by 72 fumbling fifteen-year-olds who don’t have the first clue?

Cipriano, it’s come up at various points on discussion threads here. In many cases, they get redemption and a way out of the shame of their histories of being sexual abused.

See, for instance, this stomach churning case in which a Lilith was grooming rape victims. So useful are they that there’s the suggestion their rapes had been specially arranged.

Evil. Absolutely evil.

Alec – yes, I’ve seen that one. Zero tolerance for all of them and for their pestilential culture.

Alec- incidentally, I thought we did quite well on CiF today. Let’s carry on verbally battering the buggers till they don’t dare show their faces any more.

I never heard anyone say “I’m happy with nation states”.

No one seems in a hurry to get rid of them. In fact, in every decade more come into being. As for multinational states like the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, most of the nations in those countries that weren’t top of the heap couldn’t wait to get out.

Cipriano,

“I’d like to put a few in my back garden.”

That’s a good idea. But, maybe this is all a ploy by Hamas. They might have a side business as the only sellers of Gharqad trees. They publicize their charter and voila, they make millions selling trees to Jews.

Stan

Yes the British Army likewise embedded itself among the civilian population of Northern Ireland.

It did, actually. Occupying several primary schools (my own included) after Operation Motorman in 1972. Children were expected to go to school inside an army base. Most parents refused to do that.

Anybody who walked up Lenadoon Avenue in the 1970s would know all about embedded troops too as they (the British army) put snipers and observation posts in the top floors of the flats there too – as well as turning a children’s playground and GAA pitch in the centre of Andersonstown (about a mile away) into a military fort which stood there for about 15 years.

As has been said it doesn’t excuse IRA murder. But Alec, less of the reflexive response next time when you plainly haven’t got a clue what you are talking about.

Cipriano you can’t (or might not) get a shag there if you are a Palestinian from inside the green line who married another Palestinian from outside it.

Couldn’t you just keep another wife inside the green line?

“…… and the day shall come when the child will call out “O IDF, there is a Hamas fighter with an AK-47 hiding behind me”, for the child is the preferred hiding place for the Palestinian Terrorist…..”

K Ronstadt, the embedding of the British Army in civilian areas in NI still involved them wearing uniforms to give the local equivalent of the islamofascist militia clearly identifiable targets.

Slan, yes, I can understand the aggravation and obstruction involved in having the army in nationalist areas in NI. But they had a responsibility to be there and end the use of those areas as the safe havens for republican violence, regardless of the chicken-and-egg argument about resentment, abuse and harassment by the locals and the troops involved. School buildings were used because the large number of troops involved had to be billeted somewhere in those areas with the relevant facilities; nobody has ever suggested the army forcibly occupied civilian houses in order to fire rockets into nationalist neighbourhoods. And when the British did enter those ‘No-Go’ areas in Motorman, it was without the level of violence and casualties associated with ‘Cast Lead’, despite the scale of the operation involved.

And as for the Divis OP, anywhere the army used in a densely-populated urban republican neighbourhood would involve some measure of risk. The visibility involved was more of a factor than the presence of locals, as it involved evacuating civilians from the top floors of the flats and constant helicopter re-supply. Both of whch were a lot of trouble to take if the primary aim had been simply to expose the locals to collateral casualties from IRA attacks on the army. When it came to that, none of the NI paramilitaries had much trouble murdering civilians en masse quite independently of British army activity.

Perhaps even more relevantly for the K Ronstadt analogy, the Army in NI did not respond to the IRA mortaring of the Newry nick by launching a couple of armoured brigades with air and artillery support to clear the local quasi-gangster part-time-smuggling fascist terrorists out of Dundalk. Nor do I recall demolishing the houses from which the IRA had held the occupants hostage in order to launch sniper and RPG attacks on the army. So I think the nature of what the IDF have done in Gaza and British Army in NI are significantly different, even if the rhetoric of otherwise rational Irish nationalists from the time wouldn’t indicate that.

Smart Cookie [5.54pm] talks about bringing down MPACUK next week. Some hope! A couple of years ago, after reading about Bukhari’s confession of being temporarily misguided enough to send money to the imprisoned holocost denier, denying fervently that he was not, absolutely not, a Jew-hater, I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and visit his site. I stayed with it for about a year and even tried posting now and again. I even congatulated him on his campaign to get women admitted to some weird male dominated mosques in parts of tribal Lancashire.

If he’s not a Jew-hater, he keeps strange company, going by the contributors to his site. I was bracketed by turns as an atheistic Zionist, a Christian Zionist, a right wing Zionist, a left wing Zionist, the only abiding element was that I was not – perish the thought – a Jew-lover, but a Zionist. something apparently that needs no further explanation for MPACUK types.

Eventually, I gave up. You’ll have a hard time Smart Cookie, bringing that mind-set down. Impervious I think is the word.

I am still confused.

In Northern Ireland the British Army was an occupying force and indeed commandered certain buildings to use for its troops. The army wore battle fatigues, clearly marked the locations used etc.

Embedding in Hamas terms means taking up secret residence in the cellars of seized houses and the like occupied by civilians and using these locations to attack the Israelis and frustrate them from retaliation because of the fear of civilian casualties.

“Do you at all understand the concept of necessary force or what murder is? (killing and murder aren’t the same as one requires premeditated intent)”

Yes. Dropping bombs on densely populated urban areas is MURDER and the leaders of Israel are MURDERING SCUMBAGS.

Clear now?

The Gharqud tree is a member of the Nightshade family (Lycium), does anyone know if it’s sufficient to shelter behind the European version of this family on the Day of Judgement?

Eventually, I gave up. You’ll have a hard time Smart Cookie, bringing that mind-set down. Impervious I think is the word.

I know for a fact they have been investigated for antisemitism and were forced to go to a registration or pre-mod for commenting. At one time the comments were overtly antisemitic and were removed before the police got around to reading the site.

They are close to incitement to religious attacks IMHO and I believe we will get them. (Of course, they will pick this up and then say I am part of a Zionist conspiracy to destroy MPAC UK).

The Bukhari’s will eventually go the same way as Abdullah.

“What was the date on that cheque to Irving, Asghar?” Was it before or after the Judge called Irving an “Antisemite & Racist”.

K R Constadt sounds just like my old friends at MPACUK. When Muslims kill Jews that’s OK. Normally, when Muslims kill Muslims, as Iranians killing Iraqis, or vice-versa during that war – you know the one I mean [or, actually, did that war happen at all?] – that’s more problematic. Or, when garbed females, or men garbed as females, blow up vegetable stalls in Iraqi street markets – and send the women and children shopping there to the next world – that’s also OK.

If it’s not OK, Konstadt, what will Allah have to say to them when they reach the seat of judgement? They’ll certainly need your swinish one-sided advocacy if your free.

Yes. Dropping bombs on densely populated urban areas is MURDER and the leaders of Israel are MURDERING SCUMBAGS. Linda.

Those bombs were a reaction to Hamas’ rockets. Had those rockets not been fired into Israeli towns, the IDF would have never invaded Gaza.

The Israelis have every right to defend themselves.

That said, I find you to be a piece of shit.

I would just like to point out the sheer idiocy of labelling a declaration, on the part of Muslims, complaining of religious colonisation and imperialism “The Istanbul Declaration”

The waters of The Bosphorus are ‘Orthodox’, are they not?

A bit like complaining about the fat content in milk, all the while whaling out on a ten-pound box of chocolates.

Oh well, some muslims are condemned to a life time of hypocrisy owing to their complete lack of irony.

Yes. Dropping bombs on densely populated urban areas is MURDER and the leaders of Israel are MURDERING SCUMBAGS.

No. Had you said “killing” you would have been factually correct – regardless of the issue of whether bombs were dropped willy-nilly as you imply. Instead, you had to guild the lilly by using the legally-precise term “murder”.

Justify.

Quite what this has to do with calls for attacks on British service personnel, at this or some future juncture in time, and designated civilian targets, I’m not sure. Then again, you are a Jew-obsessed tosser.

(Incidentally, anyone else think Voice is Zin? I haven’t seen TheWhiney for a while, either. You’d expect his to have been going into full damage-limitation mode on this.)

“K Ronstadt – can you explain your understanding”

Category error.

“I never heard anyone say “I’m happy with nation states”.”

You have now.

“Incidentally, anyone else think Voice is Zin?”

No, I don’t. Zin spends his time in a sharp fat-cat suit glad-handing other fat-cats in the City while keeping Marx and Lenin well hidden away at the bottom of his cerebellum. Whereas Voice is obviously a sad little tosser with zero social skills who doesn’t get out much and couldn’t glad-hand a wheelie bin.

‘The One’ has just finished speaking at an important press conference.

You should all go to see what changes are on the way in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The wrapping is completely different but you won’t need a pen and paper.

WELL DONE DAUD!!

well done!