ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The point I was making was that both sides are claiming to have "proof" or "irrefutable data" as to what happened which are directly contradictory. We can't make a judgement as who is right unless they produce the evidence for it to be examined:https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/04/13/after-france-claims-proof-chemical-attack-was-assad-russia-says-irrefutable-data
Can't you send the pamphlets back to Head Office so they can be recycled to newer members (we've got enough back issues there)?. The Party has enough money to pay the postage.
Not to mention us. The term "state capitalism" was in use even before the First World Slaughter, as by Kropotkin, Wilhelm Liebknecht and, again, us (even before Cliff was born):http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1910s/1910/no-68-april-1910/evolution-and-state-capitalism
Bakground information:https://in.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-chemicalweapons/factbox-chemical-weapons-inspectors-how-do-they-work-idINKBN1HK17A?rpc=401&Let's see what they come up with.
Interesting take on the situation by a former Sea Lord:http://talkradio.co.uk/news/former-naval-chief-syria-chemical-attack-could-be-propaganda-18041325517After Russia's cock and bull stories about the Salisbury incident now it's NATO's turn to come up with one about the Douma incident:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/12/syria-attack-experts-check-signs-nerve-agentSecret agents smuggling bodies through enemy lines and over the border to be examined by doctors in Jordan. They'll have to do better than that in their bid to show that a nerve gas as well as chlorine was involved.
Here's what the Socialist Standard said at the time:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1920s/1923/no-224-april-1923/socialism-and-fascisti
Whoever invented it, Tony Cliff is still saying it from beyond the grave:https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/neither-washington-nor-moscow-nor-more-war-in-syria,11397
This is supposed to be a criticism of him !http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43737547?intlink_from_url=&link_location=live-reporting-story
An opinion poll says most people in Britain are against it:https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2018/04/12/breaking-theresa-mays-plan-to-bomb-syria-just-hit-some-serious-turbulence/
Quote:By almost two to one, British people oppose bombing Syria, according to a survey by YouGov released on 12 April.But when has that made much difference to a government bent on war?Footnote: even the Ludwig von Mises Institute is against it:https://mises.org/wire/against-war-syria
A LibDem puts the case against bombing Syria:https://www.libdemvoice.org/taking-action-against-syria-is-not-liberal-interventionism-57182.htmlMeanwhile some Labour MPs, including its Deputy Leader no less, are clamouring for Syria to be bombed:https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/labours-tom-watson-backs-missile-12859462
Quote:In other words Zionism could be construed as a form of racismYou can't say that or you'll be done for anti-semitism. Here's the official government definition of anti-semitism:https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/a-definition-of-antisemitism
Quote:However, for those seeking a definition of antisemitism, the UK’s College of Policing does include a working definition of antisemitism in their guidance to police forces in the UK. The full guidance is available from their website here and the definition is reproduced in full here:(…)Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.Safer to say that Israel is a sectarian endeavour.
More here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_IsraelApparently, the same applies to Israeli subjects who are Muslims and Christians. They can't marry outside their religion either. Israel is continuing to apply the situation that existed under the Ottoman Empire except that it is Jews not Muslims who are the top dogs. So Israel is a backward country in this respect, though not as bad a Apartheid South Africa as sexual relations between people of different religions don't seem to be illegal. It's a sectarian State.
alanjjohnstone wrote:https://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2012/10/jewish-history.htmlA useful read from my personal blog Mailstrom of an article by Schlomo Sand, professor of history at Tel Aviv university.Is this true:
Sand wrote:Israel is a state which forbids marriage between a ‘Jew’ and a ‘non-Jew’,It can't be, can it? Is Israel really that bad?
bbc wrote:Mr Gabbay says the policies of Israel's opposition party and the ruling coalition government were "aligned" when it came to the "security of our citizens and the actions of our soldiers" and Mr Corbyn had shown "hatred" of the government's policies in these areas.Here is a prime example of someone using the new, invalid extension of the meaning of anti-semitism to mean not just "hatred of Jews" but "hatred of policies of the government of Israel". The Israeli Labour Party is of course a Zionist outfit.
The word Semitic in relation to "race" (or "ethnicity" as you have to say now) is just as unscientific as Aryan in the same context. Both in fact orginated at the same time, when the the facts about "race" were not yet known and prejudices about it widespread, even mainstream.The only scientific use of the two terms is in relation to language and, here, the irony is that the European Jews who went to Palestine as colonists under the Zionist project spoke a dialect of German, a non-Semitic languague (Aryan, in fact). And the Jews that came to Palestine after the state of Israel was set up spoke Arabic (which is a Semitic languague). They were in fact Arabs whose religion was Judaism just as most of the Christians of the area are Arabs whose religion is Christianity.
