British MPs vote to recognise Palestinian state

[Beelzebub]

Ah, Kondor:

Are you seriously suggesting the link I posted was not utterly clear that this was a local council?
Did you not see the link which said: "- Gwynedd Council agrees Israel trade embargo"

" GWYNEDD COUNCIL " ?

You are were not blessed with a lot of smarts, were you Kondor?

 

[Indofred]

[
Its not hatred that would be behind it but the safety and security of the majority of the people. There is nothing in International law that stops a nation from repatriating foreign nationals who they see as a danger to the nation. The other option is to place them in prison camps until all hostilities have ceased between islam and the west

Stuff all Muslims in prison in case they commit a crime.
Tell me, are you a fucking idiot for a living, or is it just a hobby?

PS - The west started all modern wars against Muslims/Muslim countries.
So fuck you, idiot.

A good start would be to kill all the "Extremist Muslims" among us. We know what they are about.

Does that mean you wish to kill me?
Quite how a death thread works as a valid argument, I'm unsure.
Would you like to explain?

 

[Indofred]

Israel and the US want the world to believe no one cares abut Palestine. Big style wrong.

Atually, noone cares about palistanians, the latter are just convenient dumbass idiots ready for use.

It seems most of the world sees the truth - just the idiots don't seem to realise they're on a loooooooser.

Ah ... the board's self-described "Extremist Muslim" now thinks he speaks for the world. It's amazing what the small Muslim mind can conjure.

Perhaps you'd care to comment on the map.

 

[Kondor3]

Ah, Kondor:

Are you seriously suggesting the link I posted was not utterly clear that this was a local council?
Did you not see the link which said: "- Gwynedd Council agrees Israel trade embargo"

" GWYNEDD COUNCIL " ?

You are were not blessed with a lot of smarts, were you Kondor?

I am not suggesting that at all - you may wish to revisit the sequence to find supporting narrative.

What I AM suggesting is that your announcement in the first post in that series, which declares...

"A trade embargo has been imposed from Britain on all future trade with Israel, due to the disproportionate violence this summer by Israel on Gaza..."

...is largely disingenuous in its construction, but, being a fan of the Palestinians, and BDS, it is in your agenda's best interests to pitch it that way.

It would have been far more honest to construct that sentence as something similar to...

"A trade embargo has been imposed by a regional (township, county) -level governing council in the UK (Wales), on all future trade with Israel..."

For every person that clicks on a supporting link, there are probably another 4 or 5 (call it 4, just for grins) that bypass the links under most circumstances, just because nobody has the time to read all of everyone else's supporting links, unless there's a conflict, and the reader is sufficiently interested to pursue the thing.

For those four-out-of-five drive-by readers, the initial labeling is everything.

Few people (at least, in the US) even know what 'Gwynedd' is, or have even heard of it before, and even fewer care - that's background noise for your average drive-by reader.

Chances are good that that only one reader out of five would have even bothered to click on the link, and that most of those might have caught-on that this trade ban was only local-yokel stuff rather than a nationwide initiative, as your deficient initial label would lead most folks to believe, without digging further.

Four times out of five, folks will simply take the word of the poster, that the link says what it does, and only dig deeper if (1) they find the poster's summary to lack credibility, or (2) they strenuously disagree with it, or (3) they need more detail, attributable to simple curiosity, or in order to contribute something substantive to the conversation...

The way your original incident-label was worded, four out of five drive-by readers would most likely assume that the UK-at-large - as a whole - had imposed such a trade ban.

Such a false assumption was worth counterpointing, but it made more sense for such clarification to come from the original poster in the series, rather than someone who objected to the false assumption that those four-out-of-five would have otherwise conjured while noting it and zooming past it.

You (after a little nudge) did a fine job of 'outing' the nature of the trade-ban for the local-yokel pissant incident that it actually was.

Rather like a circus flea - damned-near invisible, and virtually meaningless, after all.

I'm sure that those four-out-of-five drive-by readers are glad that you eventually remedied your own earlier lack of clarity and that you remedied or negated any suspicion or possible accusation of disingenuous labeling.

Well done.

As to 'smarts', well, you may be right - I can be dumb as a box of rocks sometimes - the wife has told me so on more than one occasion.

But, in the narrow context of our little series here, I am content.

Next slide, please.

 

[Beelzebub]

Ah, Kondor:

Are you seriously suggesting the link I posted was not utterly clear that this was a local council?
Did you not see the link which said: "- Gwynedd Council agrees Israel trade embargo"

" GWYNEDD COUNCIL " ?

You are were not blessed with a lot of smarts, were you Kondor?

I am not suggesting that at all - you may wish to revisit the sequence to find supporting narrative.

What I AM suggesting is that your announcement in the first post in that series, which declares...

"A trade embargo has been imposed from Britain on all future trade with Israel, due to the disproportionate violence this summer by Israel on Gaza..."

...is largely disingenuous in its construction, but, being a fan of the Palestinians, and BDS, it is in your agenda's best interests to pitch it that way.

It would have been far more honest to construct that sentence as something similar to...

"A trade embargo has been imposed by a regional (township, county) -level governing council in the UK (Wales), on all future trade with Israel..."

For every person that clicks on a supporting link, there are probably another 4 or 5 (call it 4, just for grins) that bypass the links under most circumstances, just because nobody has the time to read all of everyone else's supporting links, unless there's a conflict, and the reader is sufficiently interested to pursue the thing.

For those four-out-of-five drive-by readers, the initial labeling is everything.

Few people (at least, in the US) even know what 'Gwynedd' is, or have even heard of it before, and even fewer care - that's background noise for your average drive-by reader.

Chances are good that that only one reader out of five would have even bothered to click on the link, and that most of those might have caught-on that this trade ban was only local-yokel stuff rather than a nationwide initiative, as your deficient initial label would lead most folks to believe, without digging further.

Four times out of five, folks will simply take the word of the poster, that the link says what it does, and only dig deeper if (1) they find the poster's summary to lack credibility, or (2) they strenuously disagree with it, or (3) they need more detail, attributable to simple curiosity, or in order to contribute something substantive to the conversation...

The way your original incident-label was worded, four out of five drive-by readers would most likely assume that the UK-at-large - as a whole - had imposed such a trade ban.

Such a false assumption was worth counterpointing, but it made more sense for such clarification to come from the original poster in the series, rather than someone who objected to the false assumption that those four-out-of-five would have otherwise conjured while noting it and zooming past it.

You (after a little nudge) did a fine job of 'outing' the nature of the trade-ban for the local-yokel pissant incident that it actually was.

Rather like a circus flea - damned-near invisible, and virtually meaningless, after all.

I'm sure that those four-out-of-five drive-by readers are glad that you eventually remedied your own earlier lack of clarity and that you remedied or negated any suspicion or possible accusation of disingenuous labeling.

Well done.

As to 'smarts', well, you may be right - I can be dumb as a box of rocks sometimes - the wife has told me so on more than one occasion.

But, in the narrow context of our little series here, I am content.

Next slide, please.

TL;DR.

Since you insist on posting mindless - dare I say it? - drivel, you need to be more concise Kondor.

 

[Kondor3]

Ah, Kondor:

Are you seriously suggesting the link I posted was not utterly clear that this was a local council?
Did you not see the link which said: "- Gwynedd Council agrees Israel trade embargo"

" GWYNEDD COUNCIL " ?

You are were not blessed with a lot of smarts, were you Kondor?

I am not suggesting that at all - you may wish to revisit the sequence to find supporting narrative.

What I AM suggesting is that your announcement in the first post in that series, which declares...

"A trade embargo has been imposed from Britain on all future trade with Israel, due to the disproportionate violence this summer by Israel on Gaza..."

...is largely disingenuous in its construction, but, being a fan of the Palestinians, and BDS, it is in your agenda's best interests to pitch it that way.

It would have been far more honest to construct that sentence as something similar to...

"A trade embargo has been imposed by a regional (township, county) -level governing council in the UK (Wales), on all future trade with Israel..."

For every person that clicks on a supporting link, there are probably another 4 or 5 (call it 4, just for grins) that bypass the links under most circumstances, just because nobody has the time to read all of everyone else's supporting links, unless there's a conflict, and the reader is sufficiently interested to pursue the thing.

For those four-out-of-five drive-by readers, the initial labeling is everything.

Few people (at least, in the US) even know what 'Gwynedd' is, or have even heard of it before, and even fewer care - that's background noise for your average drive-by reader.

Chances are good that that only one reader out of five would have even bothered to click on the link, and that most of those might have caught-on that this trade ban was only local-yokel stuff rather than a nationwide initiative, as your deficient initial label would lead most folks to believe, without digging further.

Four times out of five, folks will simply take the word of the poster, that the link says what it does, and only dig deeper if (1) they find the poster's summary to lack credibility, or (2) they strenuously disagree with it, or (3) they need more detail, attributable to simple curiosity, or in order to contribute something substantive to the conversation...

The way your original incident-label was worded, four out of five drive-by readers would most likely assume that the UK-at-large - as a whole - had imposed such a trade ban.

Such a false assumption was worth counterpointing, but it made more sense for such clarification to come from the original poster in the series, rather than someone who objected to the false assumption that those four-out-of-five would have otherwise conjured while noting it and zooming past it.

You (after a little nudge) did a fine job of 'outing' the nature of the trade-ban for the local-yokel pissant incident that it actually was.

Rather like a circus flea - damned-near invisible, and virtually meaningless, after all.

I'm sure that those four-out-of-five drive-by readers are glad that you eventually remedied your own earlier lack of clarity and that you remedied or negated any suspicion or possible accusation of disingenuous labeling.

Well done.

As to 'smarts', well, you may be right - I can be dumb as a box of rocks sometimes - the wife has told me so on more than one occasion.

But, in the narrow context of our little series here, I am content.

Next slide, please.

TL;DR.

Since you insist on posting mindless - dare I say it? - drivel, you need to be more concise Kondor.

Yes, in your position, after that sequence, I would hide behind distraction, as well. Have at it, for all the good it will do you. Better luck next time.

 

[SAYIT]

[
Its not hatred that would be behind it but the safety and security of the majority of the people. There is nothing in International law that stops a nation from repatriating foreign nationals who they see as a danger to the nation. The other option is to place them in prison camps until all hostilities have ceased between islam and the west

Stuff all Muslims in prison in case they commit a crime.
Tell me, are you a fucking idiot for a living, or is it just a hobby?

PS - The west started all modern wars against Muslims/Muslim countries.
So fuck you, idiot.

A good start would be to kill all the "Extremist Muslims" among us. We know what they are about.

Does that mean you wish to kill me?
Quite how a death thread works as a valid argument, I'm unsure.
Would you like to explain?

No prob. I do indeed wish to see all "Extremist Muslims" have their death wish granted but it doesn't mean I wish to kill them.

 

[SAYIT]

Israel and the US want the world to believe no one cares abut Palestine. Big style wrong.

Atually, noone cares about palistanians, the latter are just convenient dumbass idiots ready for use.

It seems most of the world sees the truth - just the idiots don't seem to realise they're on a loooooooser.

Ah ... the board's self-described "Extremist Muslim" now thinks he speaks for the world. It's amazing what the small Muslim mind can conjure.

Perhaps you'd care to comment on the map.

Nice map.

 

[Indofred]

No prob. I do indeed wish to see all "Extremist Muslims" have their death wish granted but it doesn't mean I wish to kill them.

Ah, you want someone to do your dirty work for you; the action of a coward.
I'm probably the only person on this forum that has actively contributed to the death of a real terrorist; not someone defending a country you invaded.

 

[toastman]

No prob. I do indeed wish to see all "Extremist Muslims" have their death wish granted but it doesn't mean I wish to kill them.

Ah, you want someone to do your dirty work for you; the action of a coward.
I'm probably the only person on this forum that has actively contributed to the death of a real terrorist; not someone defending a country you invaded.

Look folks, we got ourselves a tough guy.

What country did Lipush invade BTW? Or Jews for that matter?

 

[Beelzebub]

No prob. I do indeed wish to see all "Extremist Muslims" have their death wish granted but it doesn't mean I wish to kill them.

Ah, you want someone to do your dirty work for you; the action of a coward.
I'm probably the only person on this forum that has actively contributed to the death of a real terrorist; not someone defending a country you invaded.

Look folks, we got ourselves a tough guy.

What country did Lipush invade BTW? Or Jews for that matter?

Were you that baggage handler in Glasgow who gave the suicide bomber a kicking as his incendiary took hold?

 

[Indofred]

Were you that baggage handler in Glasgow who gave the suicide bomber a kicking as his incendiary took hold?

You have to hand it to that guy.
The suicide bomber has just popped his firework, got out of his car, covered in flames, and the Glasgow fellow smacked him in the mouth.

Fantastic.

 

[Indofred]

What country did Lipush invade BTW? Or Jews for that matter?

Palestine.

 

[Beelzebub]

Were you that baggage handler in Glasgow who gave the suicide bomber a kicking as his incendiary took hold?

You have to hand it to that guy.
The suicide bomber has just popped his firework, got out of his car, covered in flames, and the Glasgow fellow smacked him in the mouth.

Fantastic.

I looked it up after commenting. It seems the chap might be a bit of a Walter Mitty. Others seem to have done more, but just not said so to the cameras. One bloke got a broken leg in the fight. Hopefully from kicking too hard.

 

[Indofred]

Were you that baggage handler in Glasgow who gave the suicide bomber a kicking as his incendiary took hold?

 

[Indofred]

I looked it up after commenting. It seems the chap might be a bit of a Walter Mitty. Others seem to have done more, but just not said so to the cameras. One bloke got a broken leg in the fight. Hopefully from kicking too hard.

Bit hard to argue with that.
As Billy put it, bring terror to Glasgow is a rare waste of time - I've been there, so I can assure posters the silly fucking terrorists would have no hope.
Survival would be fucking dangerous after any attack - as that silly bastard doctor found out.

 

[Phoenall]

So, you claim that Israel has destroyed many mosques. And you get your info from a site called Islamweb. Might as well call it liarweb since Muslims are the kings of lying and deception

So Toasty, do you say that Israel didn't destroy lots of Mosques or just that you don't like the source of information. Which incidentally is a Haaretz report.

Which allows anyone to publish their views because they have a disclaimer on the page. So this allows them to place the blame for any libels at the feet of the authors. The reason you like Haaretz so much is it publishes so much ANTI SEMITIC material

 

[Phoenall]

A trade embargo has been imposed from Britain on all future trade with Israel, due to the disproportionate violence this summer by Israel on Gaza.

“Following the latest attacks by the Israeli State on the territory of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip, this council calls for the suspension of trading with Israel and condemns the over-reaction and savageness used.

“Furthermore, we confirm and underline this Council’s decision not to invest in Israel or that country’s establishments."

- Gwynedd Council agrees Israel trade embargo

Disingenuous to claim by inference that ALL OF BRITAIN has placed a trade embargo on Israel when in reality it is a jumped up ultra left wing council that have done so. The population of the SMALL community will have something to say about this at the next council elections and will vote out every left wing lunatic for costing them even more money.

 

[Beelzebub]

Bloody good story of course. But maybe overdone.

If you want a real story of an unintentional hero, try this one, when you have time:
History Travel Arts Science People Places Smithsonian

I looked it up after commenting. It seems the chap might be a bit of a Walter Mitty. Others seem to have done more, but just not said so to the cameras. One bloke got a broken leg in the fight. Hopefully from kicking too hard.

Bit hard to argue with that.
As Billy put it, bring terror to Glasgow is a rare waste of time - I've been there, so I can assure posters the silly fucking terrorists would have no hope.
Survival would be fucking dangerous after any attack - as that silly bastard doctor found out.

 

[Phoenall]

A trade embargo has been imposed from Britain on all future trade with Israel, due to the disproportionate violence this summer by Israel on Gaza.

“Following the latest attacks by the Israeli State on the territory of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip, this council calls for the suspension of trading with Israel and condemns the over-reaction and savageness used.

“Furthermore, we confirm and underline this Council’s decision not to invest in Israel or that country’s establishments."

- Gwynedd Council agrees Israel trade embargo

On it's own it's an empty gesture, but if other councils follow suit...the General Election is not that far away.

They wont this close to an election as that could sway how people vote, lets just say that the electioneering has not started yet and they jogging of peoples memories will bring about an upset for Labour.