Israel & Palestine

[Billy_Dean]

ilw

This is the point where i started laughing and only skim read the rest of the article
As far as i can tell,
1st section: funny
2nd section: there to lend credibility to the article
3rd section: conspiracy theory
4th section: A strange mix, I reckon some of thats true, but i also reckon some of its not
etc

I despair at you sometimes ilw, you read the first part, skim the rest, have no contradictory argument, and expect a sensible discussion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@ JP & Clocko.

I see we've got two of the Marx brothers together now. You two really are desperate for attention, aren't you? Should I feel flattered?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@28 September 2003 - 19:22
ilw

This is the point where i started laughing and only skim read the rest of the article
As far as i can tell,
1st section: funny
2nd section: there to lend credibility to the article
3rd section: conspiracy theory
4th section: A strange mix, I reckon some of thats true, but i also reckon some of its not
etc

I despair at you sometimes ilw, you read the first part, skim the rest, have no contradictory argument, and expect a sensible discussion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@ JP & Clocko.

I see we've got two of the Marx brothers together now. You two really are desperate for attention, aren't you? Should I feel flattered?

Is this the best you can do.

You try to point people towards the propaganda that you believe and promulgate. When others point this out you describe us as the Marx Brothers. Is this some sort of political freudian slip.

Why are you trying to get people to read this drivel you point them at. I take it recruitment is slow in real life.

[ilw]

sorry billy if the article is long and from the part i read carefully shows little sign of quality content i skim, but my skimmings pretty good i think i caught most of the salient points. That website you pointed out is a conspiracy theory website (imo) its content is a mixture of fact, fiction and propaganda. Like many tabloid newspapers its written to reinforce the preexisting views / leanings of its readers and i hate reading crap like that, the world would be a lot better off if there were no Daily Mail, Mirror, Sun etc newspapers. Imo people who read them for anything but the sport section and maybe the tv guide aren't bothering to look outside their prejudices.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by ilw@28 September 2003 - 19:39
sorry billy if the article is long and from the part i read carefully shows little sign of quality content i skim, but my skimmings pretty good i think i caught most of the salient points. That website you pointed out is a conspiracy theory website (imo) its content is a mixture of fact, fiction and propaganda. Like many tabloid newspapers its written to reinforce the preexisting views / leanings of its readers and i hate reading crap like that, the world would be a lot better off if there were no Daily Mail, Mirror, Sun etc newspapers. Imo people who read them for anything but the sport section and maybe the tv guide aren't bothering to look outside their prejudices.

Not just any conspiracy theory website mate. Lyndon Larouche's, that well know tax fraudster, ex con and fascist cult leader.

[Billy_Dean]

You try to point people towards the propaganda that you believe and promulgate. When others point this out you describe us as the Marx Brothers. Is this some sort of political freudian slip.

That's rich, coming from someone who confesses to being a catholic. Haha!

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@28 September 2003 - 19:52

You try to point people towards the propaganda that you believe and promulgate. When others point this out you describe us as the Marx Brothers. Is this some sort of political freudian slip.

That's rich, coming from someone who confesses to being a catholic. Haha!

I don't confess to being a Catholic, I state that I am.

What does Mr Larouche think of us, or will I find out for myself.

[ilw]

holy shit you pay for that site
I assumed subscribe meant having to enter an email address and all that stuff, but you actually have to pay real money and not only that its $60 thats $10 more than you'd pay for Newscientist, which is actually worth reading. Plus i don't see a student discount Or is school bullshit :-"

[Rat Faced]

The SAS are not unusual to be out of the normal "Operational Command" structure of the British Army.

I was myself.... my unit was "part" of 15 Infantry Brigade, 2 Div. For admin/logistic reasons, but not "operationaly"...I was outside the "Operational Command" structure.

The fact is that ANY unit that is more likely to be used outside of the "administrative" larger unit than within it is outside the "operational command" structure.

In my case.

1st Arty Brigade consists of units that are more likely to be used/deployed as part of the ARC...therefore all the units in it are "administratively" part of the Division/Brigade within whose boundaries they are located for logistical reasons...however are NOT within those parameters for operational purposes. My unit was under the "Operational Command" of whoever the Government decided we were, however NEVER as part of the Division/Brigade we appear as on paper, as our apparatus was pitched at a higher level than "Division" or "Brigade".


The SAS are no different.

Due to their unique abilities and role, its a little pointless putting them under the control of the Division/Brigade which, logistically/administratively speaking, they come under.


If you had spent time in the forces then you would know that ALL British Forces owe allegiance to the Royal Family, and NOT the Government. The Government however pays them.

Its been this way since the civil war, allegiance is to the Royals...practicality is to Parliament. It was designed this way as a way to overcome any future civil war (It was set up at a time when an "Oath of Allegiance" meant a lot more than it does today)

[Billy_Dean]

I don't confess to being a Catholic, I state that I am.

Are you? You'd know all about fascist propaganda then?

Early in the 20th century, the Catholic Church still considered democracy an offense against the God-given order (monarchy) and subsequently aligned itself with the facist regimes in Spain, Croatia, Germany and Italy. The Vatican's infatuation with facism came to an abrupt end in May 1945, when it became apparent that further support of facism would be inexpedient and a tactical commitment to democracy was now required.

This is fun, the catholic church has enough skeletons to keep me amused for months.

We may even get to talk about the institutionalised sexual abuse of children, ignored by clergy and lay people alike.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@28 September 2003 - 20:20

I don't confess to being a Catholic, I state that I am.

Are you? You'd know all about fascist propaganda then?

Early in the 20th century, the Catholic Church still considered democracy an offense against the God-given order (monarchy) and subsequently aligned itself with the facist regimes in Spain, Croatia, Germany and Italy. The Vatican's infatuation with facism came to an abrupt end in May 1945, when it became apparent that further support of facism would be inexpedient and a tactical commitment to democracy was now required.

This is fun, the catholic church has enough skeletons to keep me amused for months.

We may even get to talk about the institutionalised sexual abuse of children, ignored by clergy and lay people alike.

Having now read the material on this facist you follow, or at least some of it, I now see that you are using classic deflection.

You cannot defend your position, so you sling mud at the Catholic Church, pathetic.

Perhaps you should re-read the manipulative techniques.