Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

The New Leader of the Labour Party


Numero Veinticinco
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Ok yep so not only did he not deny Israels right to exist there he also denounced anti-semitism. 

 

But lets not let the truth get in the way eh SD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:


You think the U.K. had a claim to the North of Ireland before the Irish? 

No.

 

My point was a general one. Before the establishment of either state, there were likely people there, and most probably ones with little genealogical link to much of the present populations. 

 

Dibs on any land is largely about the when, rather than the who, with regards establishing the law of modern ownership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

No.

 

My point was a general one. Before the establishment of either state, there were likely people there, and most probably ones with little genealogical link to much of the present populations. 

 

Dibs on any land is largely about the when, rather than the who, with regards establishing the law of modern ownership.

The dinosaurs owned the fucking lot. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

No.

 

My point was a general one. Before the establishment of either state, there were likely people there, and most probably ones with little genealogical link to much of the present populations. 

 

Dibs on any land is largely about the when, rather than the who, with regards establishing the law of modern ownership.


I agree with that, but for Stronts to try and claim “the Republic of Ireland laid territorial claim to a piece of the UK” is disingenuous at best and outright bullshit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:

I agree with that, but for Stronts to try and claim “the Republic of Ireland laid territorial claim to a piece of the UK” is disingenuous at best and outright bullshit. 

 

Northern Ireland is part of the UK, and the Republic of Ireland laid claim to it until recently. That's just a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I'm really not ignoring anything, but those things have no bearing on the current legal status of Northern Ireland as it stands, now, at this moment in time.


It’s exactly ignoring history and context and you know it. 
 

It was a fucking shit comparison anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

What bearing does history have upon the legal situation?

How is it relevant to Israel/Palestine? 

 

As for Corbyn and your A/B/C nonsense. He did not at any point deny Israels right to exist. How it exists is a different matter altogether. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Maybe I'm just odd for thinking that if A is complaining about B supporting C, that strongly implies that A does not support C.

No, he doesn't quite do that.

He is describing the bias, which is along the lines of, Israrl is a democracy, has a right to exist, has security concerns. This does not directly imply the speaker thinks Israel is not a democracy, has no right to exist or no security concerns, but that these are the arguments used, presumably in reporting, presumably to avoid condemning Israel etc. Too many things are implied here and it's too short to be used as a proof.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I don't believe I specifically said it was. I was giving it as an example of ethnic nationalism.

Well I suppose in 1969 Catholics were burnt out of their homes by Protestants whilst Palestinians are being shot and burnt in their homes/blown up on beaches so yeah I can see the comparison. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bjornebye said:

Well I suppose in 1969 Catholics were burnt out of their homes by Protestants whilst Palestinians are being shot and burnt in their homes/blown up on beaches so yeah I can see the comparison. 

 

It's funny, because there are parallels between the original inhabitants of the land being supplanted by settlers, who then lay claim to big chunks of the land, but you're studiously missing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...