85 1 min 13 yrs

Tony Blair built his political reputation by betraying democracy and talking to IRA terrorists. This was called making peace.  Now he returns to old tricks..

“Hamas must somehow be brought into the Middle East peace process because the policy of isolating Gaza in the quest for a settlement will not work, Tony Blair has told The Times. The former prime minister implicitly criticises the strategy followed by the Bush Administration and Israel of focusing all peace and reconstruction efforts on the West Bank. “It was half of what we needed,” he said.”

Yes – let’s sit down with the Hamas vermin, hold hands, sing Kumbaya and all will be well. Tony doesn’t get it. Hamas aren’t interested in a dialogue with the Jews – they want to exterminate them. There is NOTHING to discuss. Soft power, appeasement, will not work.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

85 thoughts on “DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN..

  1. Off topic I know David, but, late night through to early morning blogs.

    Just one question.

    On average, how many hours do you sleep?

  2. "About five"

    Just, allegedly, like the infamous Iron Female eh?

    Sleep patterns + Free market economic principles = …

    ;0]

  3. Oddly enough, before my diabetes, I slept longer but now I find I just don’t need it any longer.

  4. >>but now I find I just don’t need it any longer.<<

    Sleeping is also a habit. You aren’t that old that you can get by with 5 hrs, David. Get your rest.

    Back to topic

    "Hamas aren’t interested in a dialogue with the Jews"

    And the Israelis aren’t interested in dialogue with Hamas. But both are elected. Wishing it were someone else does no good. The reluctance of Hamas to recognise Israel is no more stupid than the reluctance of Israel to recognise Hamas.

  5. THIS IS A DISTURBING VIDEO….SEE WHAT HAMAS DOES TO THEIR BROTHER FATAH ARABS:

    http://www.thecooljew.net/2009/01/warning-disturbing-video-hamas-kill.html

    The person who uploaded this video states:

    This is hard to watch. Maybe if some people who are still convinced that Israel is unjustified in going into Gaza, this will show them why. Now, not to make a mistake, the Fatah is a terror organization as well, and both are our enemies and want our Land. Both murder Jews in terror attacks. However, the reason I am showing this video is to show the savageness of these Monsters, because if they do this to their own Arab brothers, just think what they would do to the us!

    CAN ANYONE DISAGREE WITH THEM?

  6. William:

    Interesting video. I saw a fellah wearing a white djellebah jerking about as though he’d been shot. He did it twice in synch with the gunfire. But no blood. In fact not a single drop of blood to be seen anywhere in the vid. Poor show, tsk.

    Obviously the poor lads couldn’t afford blood-squirting sfx. No problem. This video explains how to do it for only $15.

  7. >>Maybe if some people who are still convinced that Israel is unjustified in going into Gaza, this will show them why.<<

    So to stop Hamas and Fatah killing individual members of the other organisation, Israel is entitled to go in and kill 400 children. Yeah.

  8. You can clearly see the red of blood splatter and shredded brain fly up when the jihadist murderer moves in closer to finish the poor sods off on the left side of the wall. I’m sure pretending that this is fake makes it easier to support these sub-humans.

  9. 400 children, hmm yeh whatever. What kind of retard names their kid Noel anyway? I guess it’s better than leprechaun language names like Padraig.

  10. James:

    Are you sure we’re watching the same vid? Maybe you can explain the absence of blood on white clothing. I just read the comments and someone else remarks on the lack of "blood or bleeding".

    And how do we know who these people are? There are way too many fake vids in circulation. Hard to keep up.

    Oh and by "sub-humans" do you mean Untermenschen?

  11. No, I mean these sub-humans that kill human beings as if it were part of their daily routine, like walking the dog.

  12. "There is NOTHING to discuss. Soft power, appeasement, will not work."

    It worked in NI! I agree that the Middle East is a more complex situation but the status quo is unacceptable.

  13. Anonymous:

    You’re a voice of reason. Although David Vance never stops reminding us he’s against power-sharing in Northern Ireland, one can’t fail to notice that it’s worked. We have peace here. That’s what counts. No more children being blown to bits, as in Gaza. Sometimes one has to compromise for the greater good.

  14. Fighting for peace hasn’t really worked terribly well so far has it? All this macho talk of killing all Hamas fighters is nonsense, you can’t do it, any more than the British Army and government could kill all IRA gunmen.
    The only conceivable solution is a political, not a military, one. And that mean, however unpalatable, talking. As Irish Barry has pointed out – it works.

  15. Jaz,

    You are right of course, but our view does not go down well on this blog or on David’s other one.

  16. Classy comment at 11.15am James H. You really demolished Noel’s argument with that brilliant riposte didn’t you ?

  17. Colm, you are correct, it was a ridiculous comment by Mr. H, but the original comment was on that level as well.

  18. >>Each got progressively worse.<<

    Pontificates the man who justifies military action that killed 400 children in response to a situation where nobody was being killed.

    As long as their not his bairns, or even American or Jewish ones, of course.

  19. Mahons

    Whatever you might think of Noel’s opinions he didn’t resort to the sort of idiotic childish dig at someone’s name as James did.

  20. LOL

    oh and why did that man in the picture borrow his wife’s niqab, son’s ninja head tie and what’s with the white gloves..very 1930’s. The one behind him forgot to cut out a mouth hole for himself. Bet that’s uncomfortable

  21. Noel the only reason that the 8000 missiles fired into Idrael didn’t kill a lot of people is because they are the gang that can’t shhot straight, not from lack of trying to kill people

  22. I think David’s point is that Israel has a more successful approach to ending terrorism than the UK. Perhaps the Quartet should have appointed him instead.

  23. Colm – If you don’t agree with Noel he writes that you support killing children. That is idiotic and childish enough for me.

  24. Mahons

    But even a comment like that however disagreeable you might fnd it is based within the argument of the consequences of political/military support. What purpose did James have in mocking Noel’s name.

  25. Colm – OK. By that light then I feel that Noel’s support for Hamas led to Israel’s raction which resulted in the death of children thus making Noel an accessory to the death of Palestinian children AND his support for Hamas and their intention to destroy Israel means Noel wants all Israeli children dead. How grown-up.

    And I did say Mr. H’s comment was lacking.

  26. Irish Barry,

    Do not misrepresent me. I oppose power-sharing WITH TERRORISTS. I note you omitted those last two words in your 11.43am.

    Jimmy Sands,

    Israel is certainly better at killing terrorists than was the case here in NI. The recent operation netted over four hundred of them. I’m sure you, like me, would have been delighted to see the British Army kill 400 IRA terrorists.

  27. >>If you don’t agree with Noel he writes that you support killing children.<<

    That’s another lie – well actually two for the price of one.

    1) Many people don’t agree with me and I don’t say they support killing children.
    2) I never said you support it either, and your claim that I did is a rather transparent attempt at wriggling out of the moral sewer you’ve slid into on this issue.

    I said, as you well know, that you support a military action that includes the killing of children. You said it explicitly enough yourself, and I’ll quote the exact passage if you attempt to deny it again.
    But we’ve also been through this many times before, and it’s a bit silly of you now to pretend the argument is about something else.

    (although knowing your reading skills, there is a good chance you actually can’t see the difference between supporting something and supporting something that includes it. In that case I can only say you’ll surely at least be able to find some 7-yr-old walking outside your law office to explain it to you.)

    >>I feel that Noel’s support for Hamas led to Israel’s raction which resulted in the death of children thus making Noel an accessory to the death of Palestinian children AND his support for Hamas and their intention to destroy Israel<<

    Lies won’t help you at this stage in the debate. I don’t support Hamas, I believe Israel should, and can, live in peace and security. I’ve said and shown all this on this site to the point of monotony.

    Although with `Noel’s support for Hamas leading to Israel’s "raction"’ you are not much further from the truth than the official version:
    The claim that Hamas rockets led to the recent Israeli onslaught was, and was admitted by an Israeli spokesman to be, entirely bogus. It was meant merely to fool people like you. So why not go the whole hog (no insult to my Muslim or Jewish friends) and claim it was Noel’s support on ATW that was the last straw for Israel.

  28. Noel – If I find a 7 year old walking outside my office I’ll warn him or her that the policies you advocate will likely result in their death.

  29. >>Please stop advocating policies that lead to the death of children.<<

    Mahons, you cheered on a bombing and artillery offensive that killed 400 children in 3 weeks (much more than were killed by Palestinians in their 60 years of resistance).
    Would you have also found it so agreeable if your children were among the victims, or was it only acceptable because the dead and maimed kids were Arabs?

  30. Hardly comparable, Colm. He generally stood his ground with Patty. I think a glance over the last half dozen comments will show that he is now in full retreat!

  31. David:

    "Do not misrepresent me. I oppose power-sharing WITH TERRORISTS. I note you omitted those last two words in your 11.43am."

    No misrepresentation intended. I thought in the context the words "with terrorists" would be superfluous. Sorry.

  32. Noel – I fully support Israel’s hammer blow upon Hamas, though, like the hammer blow we leveled on your German neighbors a few decades ago (which I would have supported had I been of age) I would obviously prefer no innocents be harmed.

    I don’t find war agreeable, rather it is quite hearbreaking.

    And I don’t want any dead children, be they Arab or Israeli.

    I think your sorrow at the setback to Hamas is clouding your vision.

  33. >>I don’t find war agreeable, rather it is quite hearbreaking.<<

    Yet you welcomed this "war" on Gaza (your phrase), even when you knew that it was in response to a situation where nobody was being killed and that it was killing hundreds of innocent children!

    What’s more, the few rockets being fired at Israel had fallen from several hundred a month (before the Hamas-Israel ceasefire) to 2 a month in the period prior to the Israeli attack. And, contrary to received wisdom in ATW world, these were most probably not being fired by Hamas. as Israeli spokesman Regev himself admits.
    In fact, even Phantom provided evidence that Hamas was trying to stop these mavericks.

    Your WWII analogy is worthless for these reasons alone. If Israeli civilians were being killed by Hamas rockets and the Israeli response inadvertently killed a few kids, I would have no quarrel with you. But nobody with an ounce of humanity could contend that a relatively quiet situation where there were no deaths (in fact, one of the most peaceful periods the area had enjoyed in years) justifies a massive onslaught that kills about 700 civilians, more than half of them children.

    In fact, the only rationale behind such support is that the lives of these innocents are worth less than the comfort of Israelis living near the border.

  34. Noel – I welcome the war on Hamas, not "on Gaza". I’ve consistently shown more regard for its civilian population than you’ve demonstrated for Israel’s.

    Again thousands of innocent children died in Allied raids over Germany, I wish that wasn’t so, but it is. But I don’t wish the Allies had stopped because of it.

    Israel doesn’t need your "support".

  35. Noel:

    Thank you the link. Did you see the comment posted there an hour ago?

    "While the media widely reported that Israels three-week-long massacre of Palestinians begun on Dec. 27th was a reaction to Palestinian rockets, the fact is that Israel had initiated the violence by breaking the truce on Nov. 4th by killing six Palestinians and injuring another six, and on Nov. 5th by killing yet another Palestinian. Only after this Israeli violence, and its continued suffocating closure of Gaza, another extremely significant truce violation, did Hamas rocket fire resume."

    Someone’s been lying to us, don’t you think?

  36. Noel,

    Vis-a-vis Hamas trying to prevent rocketws being launched…

    Actually, Jeremy Greenstock said the very same thing about a week ago on Today…

    The analogy is pretty solid with, as I know you’ll know, the ‘interruption’ during the late ’90’s by the Provo’s of bombing missions conducted by C.I.R.A. and R.I.R.A. etc. (Were McGlinchey’s gang still active during this period? I haven’t been back for a long time…)

    I’m fond of a lot of the folk who contribute to this site who make it but I do think that the analogy to WWII stinks…

  37. Analogies usually stink because no 2 situations , particularly 60 years apart can be identically compared.

  38. "It’s your fault, no it’s your fault, no you broke the ceasefire, no you broke the ceasefire etc, etc."

    I would wager, with my unassailable belief in the good in human nature, that the majority of Israelis & Palastinians just want to get on with their normal lives unhindered.

    Through negotiation, hopefully the radicals can be sidelined and the more moderate can gain control, on both sides.

    Is this too much to ask for? At this moment, both side’s position appears non-negotionable. Many on this blog arguue that this is the case. This is called an impasse.

    Cop on to yourselves and swollow your pride!

  39. Anonymous

    We all here have the luxury of being able to debate the pros and cons of the situation in the ME without having to experience it.

  40. "We all here have the luxury of being able to debate the pros and cons of the situation in the ME without having to experience it."

    And bears shit in the woods. What’s your point?

  41. "We all here have the luxury of being able to debate the pros and cons of the situation in the ME without having to experience it."

    Are you seriously suggesting that only those who have personal experience of the conflict can express their opinion on the way foreward?

  42. No not at all.Did I say that. Simply making the point that those where who who don’t want moderate compromise don’t have to live with the consequences of promoting the extremse.

  43. William. RE: Execution video.

    I saw that on another website about a year or so ago, but it had an entirely different header.
    Then, from what I can remember, it was from Iraq, taken during the time of Saddam Hussein’s reign.
    It was posted as an execution of homosexuals. The victims are lain in THAT position as the ultimate humiliation.
    This seems far more likely as one would not normally try to kill someone cleanly by shooting them at that absurd/reversed angle.

    Then again, nothing is ‘normal’ in Muslim states.

  44. "No not at all.Did I say that. Simply making the point that those where who who don’t want moderate compromise don’t have to live with the consequences of promoting the extremse."

    Sorry?

  45. >>Again thousands of innocent children died in Allied raids over Germany,<<

    As I said, that comparision is useless.
    The Nazis had started the war, had occupied their neighbours’ lands, had started carpet bombing and murdering of civilians.
    In the last "war" in Gaza, it was Israel who started the killings, Israel broke the ceasefire, Israel is occupying its neighbour’s land.

    Thousands of children were indeed killed in Allied raids over several years, but well over a thousand children were being murdered EACH DAY by the Nazi war machine as long as that war continued.

    Before Israel attacked Gaza, NOBODY was being killed.

    And this is the central point (which I’m now repeating for about the 27th time, as you apparently still haven’t been able to grasp it, or at least keep trying to avoid it): It is entirely unjustifiable by any human standard to react to a situation where nobody is being killed by a military offensive that kills hundreds, epecially one that kills hundreds of children.

    I’ll be generous and believe you’d agree with me if it were any other conflict. But because it was Israel doing the killing and Palestinian kids doing the dying, you consider the overall attack "justified". So be it.

  46. Noel

    At the risk of being accused of arselicking you have been magnificent in bringing reality and quality criticism to the whole recent conflict and it’s airing on ATW.

  47. Thanks, Colm. Coming from you, that means something, as I’m sure any neutral person would judge the arguments on their merits the way you do.

    It’s also nice to remember that when all this started at the end of December, almost all on the Go-Israel chorus believed that Hamas was raining rockets on Israel daily and killing Israelis, and that this justified the Israeli response.
    It says a lot for them that when this, the mainstay of their argument, was eliminated by my learned Irish friends and me*, they carried on regardless and thought up some other excuses.
    In the end, Phantom seemed to be saying that even Palestinian kids throwing stones justified the response, and Ross actually came up with the absurdity that Israeli would, if necessary, even have killed 400 Jewish kids to solve this "problem"!

    * One thing that’s been occupying me recently is how (and why) the standard position among Irish people of Nationalist background seems to be sympathy primarily for the Palestinians (are there any exceptions? apart from O’Dwyer, but he’s more or less an exception everywhere), whereas the standard position among our American friends and Irish of Unionist backgrond is sympathy primarily for Israel.
    (exception here is our old friend Madradin, who deplored terrorism but was no slouch when it came to deploring Israel’s actions too)

  48. " Ross actually came up with the absurdity that Israeli would, if necessary, even have killed 400 Jewish kids to solve this "problem"! "

    To be precise I answered your hypothetical question about whether Israel would behave in exactly the same way if it were Jews doing what Hamas is doing. I’m not sure why you find the answer so surprising, I realise that many opponents of Israel’s actions consider that Israel regards the Palestinians as sub human but do you really think that supporters think that Israel is only acting as it is because it regards Arabs as less worthy of life?

    It’s not as if a history of warfare shows that countries are more gentle with ethnically similar enemies. I’d be willing to bet that Arab regimes have been far more ruthless when crushing Palestinian armed groups than Israel has.

  49. >>I’d be willing to bet that Arab regimes have been far more ruthless when crushing Palestinian armed groups than Israel has.<<

    It’s hard to know, Ross, where to start with that comparision.
    First, the govt of Israel is committed like few other govts in the world to protecting its people – indeed obsessively so, as everyone who knows Israel will agree. The whole ethos of the Jewish state is NEVER AGAIN, that every one of its people is precious and nobody should dare harm a hair on their heads. It’s beyond ridiculous to suggest that any Israeli govt would allow its forces kill 400 Jewish Israeli children trying to get rid of what was in national terms little more than a dangerous nuisance.

    Jewish Israel has a national cohesion that’s entirely absent in any of its Arab neighbours, all of which are beset by tribal and sectarian differences and conflicts. Besides, almost all Arab governments are made up of scoundrels and feel no sense of responsibility for their people, never mind for those of other Arab countries.

  50. And with that last comment, Noel proves a willingness to direct criticism exactly where it is merited and not just to adopt a simplistic ‘my side right or wrong’ attitude so prevalent amongst some here.

  51. "The whole ethos of the Jewish state is NEVER AGAIN, that every one of its people is precious and nobody should dare harm a hair on their heads."

    Not to the point when they would put up with a terrorist threat. When it faced such a threat from Jewish terrorists it was pretty ruthless about suppressing it by bombing the Atalena, killing a couple of dozen of the Irgun before they had even used the weapons they were smuggling.

  52. "I’m sure you, like me, would have been delighted to see the British Army kill 400 IRA terrorists."

    Actually that’s where we differ. I never wished for the death of any human being. I wanted them arrested, tried and imprisoned. You would prefer they were killed, a preference ironically shared no doubt by those who recruited them. I’ve no doubt that Israel’s approach satisfies a primitive craving for vengeance but it’s plainly not achieving anything else.

  53. The Lebanese border calmed down greatly after that war.

    The Gaza border may calm down after this.

    Let’s see what is achieved. The answer will not come today.

  54. Ah Noel – missed that bon mot regarding my enthusiasm for the death of children. Suffice to say, it is absurd.

  55. >>missed that bon mot regarding my enthusiasm for the death of children. <<

    Mahons, I honestly don’t know how someone like you can make such mistakes in simple reading tasks. I never said you have "enthusiasm for the death of children", or anything similar.
    I’ve explained to you often enough what I meant on this thread. The others seem to have no problem understanding it, why not you?

  56. >>I am happy with the one I have, it gets the job done.<<

    By the way, are you referring here to Alison?

  57. Noel – Perhaps because I am more conscious of what is intended by the comment.

    I’ll attribute the unfortunate Alison remark to what must be a late hour for you.

    Come, join me on a non-Israel-Gaza thread where we aren’t at such loggerheads.

  58. Noel – Perhaps because I am more conscious of what is intended by the comment.

    I’ll attribute the unfortunate Alison remark to what must be a late hour for you.

    Come, join me on a non-Israel-Gaza thread where we aren’t at such loggerheads.

  59. >>I am more conscious of what is intended by the comment<<

    You don’t know what’s intended. And if I did intend something, you can take my word that I’d say it. I meant exactly what I said, no more.
    Even I’m getting slightly fed up with this topic.
    To be honest, I am quite suprised, and disappointed, that someone like you could take the position you did on this, that you could support – and I’m now saying this really for about the 28th time – a military response to a situation where nobody was being killed that you knew was leading to the (albeit regrettable) deaths of several hundreds of innocent people.
    (and as it now turns out, the situation has now already returned to where is was before, as I’d said it would . Only now far more rockets are falling on Israel than before Israel’s attack. Those 400 kids will stay dead, though)

    Thanks for the welcome offer. But have to go now. Night shift again.

    By the way, that Alison remark was wrong. I thought for a fleeting moment you were talking about your supporters here! And I complain about people misreading things! (Believe it or not, I didnt know that phrase Realist used. just looked it up now.)

  60. Noel – Well you’ve accepted Hamas figures so I view them with the destain I view all of their claims.

    You’ll have to reamin disappointed.

  61. >>Well you’ve accepted Hamas figures <<

    I more or less accept the figures of the UN and Red Cross; they may be out, but not too far out.

    What are your figures?

Comments are closed.