Comments on: Interpal’s Ibrahim Hewitt

By: Nearly Oxfordian

Nearly Oxfordian — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:51:18 +0000

Never say ‘Too late’ – and don’t stop just when you are agreeing with me ;-)

By: matzvar

matzvar — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:47:52 +0000

lynne t
probably won’t read this – bit late – but i take that confirms my point?
otherwise agree with nearly oxfordian on this matter
could say more – stop now (bit unfair to get the last word by sneaking up late..)

By: Lynne T

Lynne T — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:01:10 +0000

Matzvar:

The connection isn’t purely money. Oil money fuels it, but there’s an intense rivalry between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran to claim leadership of the Muslim world. Believe me, all the money Saudi has poured into dawa, mosques and majids around the world over the last 30 years or so ain’t done out of piety or generosity of spirit. It’s to maintain the old House of Saud – Wahhabi order at home and keep 4,000+ princes living like princes. And that order is being seriously threatened by the loathed fundamentalist Shia “republic” next door.

By: Nearly Oxfordian

Nearly Oxfordian — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:58:59 +0000

Pisa,
I am an atheist Jew who lived in Israel for decades, who knows Israel backwards and whose Hebrew is every bit as good as his English. I don’t need your patronising sneering about my supposed ignorance concerning Mandate history etc.
Yes, British foreign policy has gone through various shades of pro-Arabism over the last 90 years (I yield to nobody in my detestation of the FCO’s underlying antisemitism, of which I assure you I know a thing or three). But 90 years is a long time, governments come and go, and so do agendas and policies.
The idea that war is in the interests of Britain – a country I suspect I know more about than you do – is ludicrous. Britain needs stability in order to ensure trade. A war in the Middle East ‘destabilises’ oil prices (surprisingly, usually upwards), for one thing: that is disastrous for Britain.

By: Pisa

Pisa — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:48:35 +0000

Matzvar
I live in Israel. I believe I know a lot more about Israel than you do. Including that mythical link between Israel and the rest of the Middle East, since we are in the Middle East, at least we were here last time I checked. And no, I never said that arab and muslim countries claim that UK is in it for the money. If you don’t understand simple statements in english, please say so. To me it looks like you believe I’m some kind of anti-zionist anti-british lost in far-left conspiracy theories. Now I’m really becoming hysterical!

I am a zionist, atheist jew, living in Israel. I voted Likud. I am outraged at your country’s attitude and double standards when it comes to Israel. At this point, the only explanation I can see for your country’s anti-Israel and pro-Hamas position is that it serves somehow british interests in the Middle East (again, Israel is in the Middle East, I just looked out the window to check). If you – and NO – would kindly open a history book on the british mandate in Palestine, you’ll see that your country’s position has been pro-arab/muslim then – for example, the arabs in Palestine were allowed by the british administration to bear arms, while for the jews it was forbidden – and it still is.

My point about MEMRITV is that it shows you how the arab/muslim world really looks like – in its own words. They have a very useful search function, you can search for, I don’t know, maybe Israel? See how it’s linked?

By: matzvar

matzvar — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:15:38 +0000

btw: i have signed up to memri – so your argument is because “the arab and muslim world in its own words” claims we’re in it for the money that’s true?
and also: memri has loads of stuff from arab and muslim progressives who are all in favour of discarding the “oh it’s all organised from outside” nonsense

By: matzvar

matzvar — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:12:35 +0000

“money flowing into british hands”: where is that money (i mean that flowing out of israel and palestine – try to stay on topic, will you)? if it’s not from there – how does it explain why britain wants to have war there? (doubly so: if it were from there: why don’t they want “stabililty” rather than war???) if you’ve got a conspiracy theory (sorry: i should say “an anti-imperialist analysis of faction within state-monopolist capital”), please offer it in full and not in mystical hints.

and your “explanation” (it *is* rambling) doesn’t get valid only there is no other valid explanation (i simply don’t believe that britain has an interest in “keeping the conflict going” – not making an unlikely claim i don’t need to argue for it – it’s called “logic” and is a mean tactics employed by zionist pigs to confuse the simple folks)

By: Pisa

Pisa — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:01:18 +0000

Matzvar and Nearly Oxfordian
You both reject my “ramblings” – so let’s hear your explanations for UK’s policy regarding Israel and the Middle East, and the homegrown islamic charities.

Or is any explanation of UK’s foreign policy hysterical?

“i do see the oil money connection (i do have to pay fuel bills, you know) – but you need to be a fantasist of, well, your own callibre to see the link to Israel..”

Sign up for MEMRITV. Maybe you’ll understand why I see the link to Israel. Arab and muslim world in its (it’s?) own words. And for the third time – I was talking about oil money flowing into british hands, not out of them.

By: Nearly Oxfordian

Nearly Oxfordian — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:35:06 +0000

Oh dear, the great research student johng thinks that this is a ‘peace’ rally. Our educational institutions are in a worse mess than I suspected.

By: Nearly Oxfordian

Nearly Oxfordian — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:33:35 +0000

British politicians seem to more interested in keeping conflicts going on in the Middle East

That’s hysterical ramblings. Look up those words in a dictionary in case of difficulty.