Go Mossad! :Joos
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/17/uk-israeli-ambassador-dubai-killing
Quote
UK calls in Israeli ambassador as Dubai killing row escalates
Relations in Tel Aviv now in 'deep freeze', say British officials
* Julian Borger
* guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 17 February 2010 21.45 GMT
* Article history
Britain tonight fired the first shot in a potentially explosive diplomatic row with Israel by calling in the country's ambassador to explain the use of faked British passports by a hit squad who targeted a Hamas official in Dubai.
The Israeli ambassador has been summoned to the foreign office to "share information" about the assassins' use of identities stolen from six British citizens living in Israel, as part of the meticulously orchestrated assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh.
Britain has stopped short of accusing Israel of involvement, but to signal its displeasure, the Foreign Office ignored an Israeli plea to keep the summons secret. "Relations were in the freezer before this. They are in the deep freeze now," an official told the Guardian.
Gordon Brown yesterday launched an investigation into the use of the fake passports, which will be led by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca). The British embassy in Tel Aviv is also contacting the British nationals affected in the plot, "and stands ready to provide them with the support that they need", the Foreign Office said in a statement last night.
"The British passport is an important part of being British and we have to make sure everything is done to protect it," Brown told LBC radio yesterday.
Israel's foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, insisted that there was no proof that the Mossad was involved in Mabhouh's killing in a Dubai hotel last month, but added that Israel had a "policy of ambiguity" on intelligence matters.
However, there were calls in Israel for an internal government enquiry into whether the Mossad was responsible for identity theft against dual nationals, and criticism of its chief, Meir Dagan, for what critics described as a clumsy operation that risked alienating European allies.
"What began as a heart attack turned out to be an assassination, which led to a probe, which turned into the current passport affair," a columnist, Yoav Limor, wrote in Israel Hayom, a pro-government newspaper. "It is doubtful whether this is the end of the affair."
Israel's ambassador to London, Ron Prosor, will meet Peter Ricketts, head of the diplomatic service and the permanent under-secretary at the Foreign Office.
Yesterday more details emerged about the assassination plot.
• The Guardian learned that a key Hamas security official is under arrest in Syria on suspicion of having helped the assassins identify Mabhouh as their target.
• Reports that the hit squad could have been bigger than the 11 suspects named by the Dubai police appear to have been confirmed by surveillance pictures showing other possible accomplices, including a second woman.
• Authorities in Vienna have begun an investigation into whether Austria was used as a logistical hub for the operation, after seven of the mobile phones used by the killers had Austrian SIM cards.
• Three of the killers entered Dubai with forged Irish passports that had numbers lifted from legitimate travel documents.
It is not the first British-Israeli row over the misuse of British passports. British officials are particularly angry because the Israeli government pledged that there would be no repeat of an incident in 1987, in which Mossad agents acquired and tampered with British passports.
Lieberman said he believed that relations with Britain would not be damaged. "I think Britain recognises that Israel is a responsible country and that our security activity is conducted according to very clear, cautious and responsible rules of the game. Therefore we have no cause for concern," he said.
However, the former Liberal Democrat leader Menzies Campbell, a member of the Commons foreign affairs committee, welcomed the decision to confront the Israeli government directly. He said: "The Israeli government must come clean on what it knew and when it knew it."
France yesterday also claimed that the French passport used by one of the assassins had been forged. A source close to the French intelligence services told Reuters a French passport which Dubai said had been used in the operation had a valid number but incorrect name. "It was a very good fake," the source said.
Hamas, meanwhile, vowed vengeance for Mabhouh's assassination. At a memorial rally in Gaza, masked and armed Hamas militants vowed that the movement's armed wing, Izz-el Deen al-Qassam, "will never rest until they reach his killers".
:Joos
Surely this is a Mossad operation. I think it's very poor form on Israel's part.
Huh. The British government seems more angry about this, then when say, the Russians assassinated a British citizen in Britain.
Israel is acting like an international outlaw once again. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Razgovory on February 17, 2010, 09:05:17 PM
Huh. The British government seems more angry about this, then when say, the Russians assassinated a British citizen in Britain.
:blink: I think you've just not been paying attention. Anglo-Russian relations still haven't really recovered. Though it pre-dates that (really it starts with Britain offering refuge to an oligarch unpopular with the Kremlin and a Chechen leader). But our relations are incredibly poor. Diplomats have been expelled, the British Council's been shut down for 'spying', the Foreign Secretary visited Tbilisi during the war and declared Britain's 'solidarity' with the Georgian people. Hell, I think the Russians have started long-range surveillance flights near British territory and the RAF is regularly scrambled to show the flag.
Edit: Reading about the immediate aftermath to the Litvinenko murder several Russian diplomats were expelled, the ambassador was summoned, the highest level of the government went on the record about it, visa regulations for Russian citizens were tightened (and the number made available restricted) and of course there was a police investigation and extradition request of a Russian citizen. Indeed the Russian Foreign Ministry said that Britain seemed to be risking relations with Moscow for the 'sake of one man'.
Israelis assanated him? How barbaric. :o
Real classy, Israel. I understand why the Brits are fucking pissed.
The jews should have abducted a ship-load of british navy sailors. The Brits would be begging them to be kind and release them, or else they would be forced to ask again.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 17, 2010, 08:16:28 PM
Go Mossad! :Joos
:blink:
Assuming Mossad did it:
I'm all for killing Hamas guys and other crazy mohammedeans but Mossad doesn't really deserve praise for the way they handled the operation.
As for the Uk's outrage...meh who cares.
They're doing it as a favor to Ireland.
If the headline says Ireland pissed off, no one would give a shit. :P Besides that, the Irish are just as bad as the Palestinians..
Quote from: Jaron on February 18, 2010, 04:00:59 AM
the Irish are just as bad as the Palestinians..
Agreed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boO4RowROiw
I'm all with the Brits on this. This is fucking disgraceful (I am not talking about killing some Hamas dude but stealing the identities of British citizens to carry out the deed). Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 17, 2010, 09:14:34 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 17, 2010, 09:05:17 PM
Huh. The British government seems more angry about this, then when say, the Russians assassinated a British citizen in Britain.
:blink: I think you've just not been paying attention. Anglo-Russian relations still haven't really recovered. Though it pre-dates that (really it starts with Britain offering refuge to an oligarch unpopular with the Kremlin and a Chechen leader). But our relations are incredibly poor. Diplomats have been expelled, the British Council's been shut down for 'spying', the Foreign Secretary visited Tbilisi during the war and declared Britain's 'solidarity' with the Georgian people. Hell, I think the Russians have started long-range surveillance flights near British territory and the RAF is regularly scrambled to show the flag.
Edit: Reading about the immediate aftermath to the Litvinenko murder several Russian diplomats were expelled, the ambassador was summoned, the highest level of the government went on the record about it, visa regulations for Russian citizens were tightened (and the number made available restricted) and of course there was a police investigation and extradition request of a Russian citizen. Indeed the Russian Foreign Ministry said that Britain seemed to be risking relations with Moscow for the 'sake of one man'.
Don't waste your breath on responding to Raz's inane trolls.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:20:47 AM
I'm all with the Brits on this. This is fucking disgraceful (I am not talking about killing some Hamas dude but stealing the identities of British citizens to carry out the deed). Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
Mossad's pulled shit like this since the beginning, we weren't that close to them in the 50s.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:21:37 AM
I'm all with the Brits on this. This is fucking disgraceful (I am not talking about killing some Hamas dude but stealing the identities of British citizens to carry out the deed). Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
Don't waste your breath on responding to
Raz's Marti's inane trolls.
Quote from: Octavian on February 18, 2010, 03:55:57 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 17, 2010, 08:16:28 PM
Go Mossad! :Joos
:blink:
Assuming Mossad did it:
I'm all for killing Hamas guys and other crazy mohammedeans but Mossad doesn't really deserve praise for the way they handled the operation.
As for the Uk's outrage...meh who cares.
It does seem particularly clumsy for a Mossad operation. Given the method of assassination, I don't see why an 11 man (or larger) team was needed. Admittedly, I am talking about this as an amateur, but bunching up that way in the corridor looks dreadfully unprofessional.
I wonder if this could be a Fatah Op with a dual goal. Kill the Hamas man and frame the Israelis...
OK, that's a bit paranoid. Still seems clumsy though.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 07:58:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:21:37 AM
I'm all with the Brits on this. This is fucking disgraceful (I am not talking about killing some Hamas dude but stealing the identities of British citizens to carry out the deed). Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
Don't waste your breath on responding to Raz's Marti's inane trolls.
What's so trollish about my post? The usage of British passports and identity theft by Mossad has been called "outrage" by David Milliband. How is my post different from that sentiment?
Next time, use Canadian passports. We won't care.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 08:20:56 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 07:58:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:21:37 AM
I'm all with the Brits on this. This is fucking disgraceful (I am not talking about killing some Hamas dude but stealing the identities of British citizens to carry out the deed). Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
Don't waste your breath on responding to Raz's Marti's inane trolls.
What's so trollish about my post? The usage of British passports and identity theft by Mossad has been called "outrage" by David Milliband. How is my post different from that sentiment?
You have become: The Polack Tim.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 08:20:56 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 07:58:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:21:37 AM
I'm all with the Brits on this. This is fucking disgraceful (I am not talking about killing some Hamas dude but stealing the identities of British citizens to carry out the deed). Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
Don't waste your breath on responding to Raz's Marti's inane trolls.
What's so trollish about my post? The usage of British passports and identity theft by Mossad has been called "outrage" by David Milliband. How is my post different from that sentiment?
Histrionics. Also, one should avoid agreeing too closely with David Milliband.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 08:20:56 AM
What's so trollish about my post? The usage of British passports and identity theft by Mossad has been called "outrage" by David Milliband. How is my post different from that sentiment?
Quote from the Polack antisemite:
QuoteFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
All antisemitic statements are, by definition, trolls (just like all the other types of racist ranting).
I know you are going to try to weasel out of the tag of antisemite, but frankly wish you wouldn't bother. You won't convince anybody and will just spam the thread with more vapid bullshit. An intellectually honest person would acknowledge the clear fact that they are antisemetic and vow to do something about it. I rather doubt that that describes you, though.
MI6 has never used forged passports? Hmm . . .
UK response seems a tad on the hysterical side. If this is an "outrage" what descriptors are left when something really serious happens?
Two early casualties of this affair:
+ Mossad reputation for operational competence and plausible deniability
+ British reputation for calm understatement.
Mart is just mad we have jew fuckbuddies, while they killed theirs off.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 18, 2010, 09:59:42 AM
MI6 has never used forged passports? Hmm . . .
UK response seems a tad on the hysterical side. If this is an "outrage" what descriptors are left when something really serious happens?
Two early casualties of this affair:
+ Mossad reputation for operational competence and plausible deniability
+ British reputation for calm understatement.
Nobody in the Govt has described this as an "outrage".
If you strip out the journalistic spin there's not much there at all. The reporter has written this up as if it's very serious on the basis, from what I can gather, of a single unnamed "official". It might be serious, but I wouldn't assume so on the basis of this report. Sadly, British journalists hype up everything these days in a desperate attempt to get attention.
Incidentally, I think there is a distinction between using false passports and identity theft.
A slightly less hysterical article from the Times. Despiter what Milliband says, he obviously is just going to go through the motions and hope the story just dies down. Hence the investigation to kick the whole thing into the long grass.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7031988.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 18, 2010, 09:59:42 AM
MI6 has never used forged passports? Hmm . . .
UK response seems a tad on the hysterical side. If this is an "outrage" what descriptors are left when something really serious happens?
Two early casualties of this affair:
+ Mossad reputation for operational competence and plausible deniability
+ British reputation for calm understatement.
There is a difference between forging passports and actually using names and identities of existing innocent British citizens.
It's absolutely amazing to what lengths you will always go to defend your Israeli buddies. They can do no wrong, can they?
Quote from: Gups on February 18, 2010, 10:22:52 AM
Nobody in the Govt has described this as an "outrage".
Are you saying the UK foreign secretary is not in the govt?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8521246.stm
QuoteDavid Miliband vows to "get to the bottom" of how the alleged killers of a Hamas leader used fake UK passports in what he calls an "outrage"
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 09:47:56 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 08:20:56 AM
What's so trollish about my post? The usage of British passports and identity theft by Mossad has been called "outrage" by David Milliband. How is my post different from that sentiment?
Quote from the Polack antisemite:
QuoteFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
All antisemitic statements are, by definition, trolls (just like all the other types of racist ranting).
I know you are going to try to weasel out of the tag of antisemite, but frankly wish you wouldn't bother. You won't convince anybody and will just spam the thread with more vapid bullshit. An intellectually honest person would acknowledge the clear fact that they are antisemetic and vow to do something about it. I rather doubt that that describes you, though.
Wow, what a load of bullshit. Being angry at Israel for putting lives of citizens of a friendly country in danger makes one an antisemite now?
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:34:02 AM
Quote from: Gups on February 18, 2010, 10:22:52 AM
Nobody in the Govt has described this as an "outrage".
Are you saying the UK foreign secretary is not in the govt?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8521246.stm
QuoteDavid Miliband vows to "get to the bottom" of how the alleged killers of a Hamas leader used fake UK passports in what he calls an "outrage"
My mistake. I was only going by the article in the OP.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:38:22 AM
Wow, what a load of bullshit. Being angry at Israel for putting lives of citizens of a friendly country in danger makes one an antisemite now?
Wow, what stupendous lack of reading ability! Being unable to even
distinguish between Israelis and Jews is, indeed, antisemitic. If one is angry at the actions of the Israeli government, one does not launch a diatribe against "fucking Jews" unless one is antisemitic.
Yes, the whole thing is an outrage. Protestors are flooding Whitehall and Trafalgar Square as we speak.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:31:50 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 18, 2010, 09:59:42 AM
MI6 has never used forged passports? Hmm . . .
UK response seems a tad on the hysterical side. If this is an "outrage" what descriptors are left when something really serious happens?
Two early casualties of this affair:
+ Mossad reputation for operational competence and plausible deniability
+ British reputation for calm understatement.
There is a difference between forging passports and actually using names and identities of existing innocent British citizens.
It's absolutely amazing to what lengths you will always go to defend your Israeli buddies. They can do no wrong, can they?
If you are going to fake a passport, then you might as well use a real name with the real passport number. The Brits are right to be furious about it, the passport is the Property of the Government that issued to it.
While I usually defend my Israeli buddies to the hilt, I don't think they should be going around killing people in hotel rooms or small cafés in Lillehammer. While he probably deserved being murdered, Israel could legally and legitimately kill him by bombing the capital of country Israel is at war with.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 10:41:18 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:38:22 AM
Wow, what a load of bullshit. Being angry at Israel for putting lives of citizens of a friendly country in danger makes one an antisemite now?
Wow, what stupendous lack of reading ability! Being unable to even distinguish between Israelis and Jews is, indeed, antisemitic. If one is angry at the actions of the Israeli government, one does not launch a diatribe against "fucking Jews" unless one is antisemitic.
It's quite clear from both the context of my post and its content that I was speaking about the Israelis, and more precisely, of the Israeli government. It is a figure of speech that is ubiquitous on Languish; people talk about "Americans" when they are talking about the US government doing something; the Falklands thread is full of voices against the "Argies" and it is quite normal to talk about "Russians" or the "Chinese" when criticizing the governments of these countries (for example Raz does it in this very thread, but I don't see you accusing him of Russophobia either).
In this context, only someone operating at an extreme level of intellectual dishonesty or an extreme mental disability could interpret my post as talking about Jews, as an ethnic group.
Quote from: Gups on February 18, 2010, 10:22:52 AM
Nobody in the Govt has described this as an "outrage".
The Martinus Post quoted Milliband as using those words.
I may have erred in assuming the accuracy of that particular press outlet. :)
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:20:47 AMFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
And what would happen if their American fuckbuddies weren't there to protect them?
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:31:50 AM
There is a difference between forging passports and actually using names and identities of existing innocent British citizens.
It's absolutely amazing to what lengths you will always go to defend your Israeli buddies.
Surely it's not "amazing". "Disappointing" should suffice.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:44:56 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 10:41:18 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:38:22 AM
Wow, what a load of bullshit. Being angry at Israel for putting lives of citizens of a friendly country in danger makes one an antisemite now?
Wow, what stupendous lack of reading ability! Being unable to even distinguish between Israelis and Jews is, indeed, antisemitic. If one is angry at the actions of the Israeli government, one does not launch a diatribe against "fucking Jews" unless one is antisemitic.
It's quite clear from both the context of my post and its content that I was speaking about the Israelis, and more precisely, of the Israeli government. It is a figure of speech that is ubiquitous on Languish; people talk about "Americans" when they are talking about the US government doing something; the Falklands thread is full of voices against the "Argies" and it is quite normal to talk about "Russians" or the "Chinese" when criticizing the governments of these countries (for example Raz does it in this very thread, but I don't see you accusing him of Russophobia either).
In this context, only someone operating at an extreme level of intellectual dishonesty or an extreme mental disability could interpret my post as talking about Jews, as an ethnic group.
I'm a lovable scamp when I do it.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:44:56 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 10:41:18 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:38:22 AM
Wow, what a load of bullshit. Being angry at Israel for putting lives of citizens of a friendly country in danger makes one an antisemite now?
Wow, what stupendous lack of reading ability! Being unable to even distinguish between Israelis and Jews is, indeed, antisemitic. If one is angry at the actions of the Israeli government, one does not launch a diatribe against "fucking Jews" unless one is antisemitic.
It's quite clear from both the context of my post and its content that I was speaking about the Israelis, and more precisely, of the Israeli government. It is a figure of speech that is ubiquitous on Languish; people talk about "Americans" when they are talking about the US government doing something; the Falklands thread is full of voices against the "Argies" and it is quite normal to talk about "Russians" or the "Chinese" when criticizing the governments of these countries (for example Raz does it in this very thread, but I don't see you accusing him of Russophobia either).
In this context, only someone operating at an extreme level of intellectual dishonesty or an extreme mental disability could interpret my post as talking about Jews, as an ethnic group.
Maybe you should remember that "Israel", "Israeli" and "Jew" are not synonymous. Nobody would have complained if you had said "fucking Israelis" instead of "fucking Jews".
Your examples are not comparable at all, even in the case of using "American" in English for inhabitants of the "United States of America". As you must realise, there's not really another short form of that in English other than the more pejorative term, "Yanks".
Or to be precise:
Argentina - "Argies"
Russia - "Russians"
China - "Chinese"
United States of America - "Americans"
Israel - "Israelis" NOT "Jews".
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on February 18, 2010, 10:49:13 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:20:47 AMFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
And what would happen if their American fuckbuddies weren't there to protect them?
They would be thrashed by angry Arabs, just like they were in 1948. 1956 and 1967.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 11:11:02 AM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on February 18, 2010, 10:49:13 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:20:47 AMFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
And what would happen if their American fuckbuddies weren't there to protect them?
They would be thrashed by angry Arabs, just like they were in 1948. 1956 and 1967.
:huh: Looks like someone should read up on Israeli history.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 11:09:14 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:44:56 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 10:41:18 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:38:22 AM
Wow, what a load of bullshit. Being angry at Israel for putting lives of citizens of a friendly country in danger makes one an antisemite now?
Wow, what stupendous lack of reading ability! Being unable to even distinguish between Israelis and Jews is, indeed, antisemitic. If one is angry at the actions of the Israeli government, one does not launch a diatribe against "fucking Jews" unless one is antisemitic.
It's quite clear from both the context of my post and its content that I was speaking about the Israelis, and more precisely, of the Israeli government. It is a figure of speech that is ubiquitous on Languish; people talk about "Americans" when they are talking about the US government doing something; the Falklands thread is full of voices against the "Argies" and it is quite normal to talk about "Russians" or the "Chinese" when criticizing the governments of these countries (for example Raz does it in this very thread, but I don't see you accusing him of Russophobia either).
In this context, only someone operating at an extreme level of intellectual dishonesty or an extreme mental disability could interpret my post as talking about Jews, as an ethnic group.
Maybe you should remember that "Israel", "Israeli" and "Jew" are not synonymous. Nobody would have complained if you had said "fucking Israelis" instead of "fucking Jews".
Your examples are not comparable at all, even in the case of using "American" in English for inhabitants of the "United States of America". As you must realise, there's not really another short form of that in English other than the more pejorative term, "Yanks".
Or to be precise:
Argentina - "Argies"
Russia - "Russians"
China - "Chinese"
United States of America - "Americans"
Israel - "Israelis" NOT "Jews".
Ok. I thought they can be used interchangeably (I mean, Jews can mean both Israelis and people of Jewish ethnicity, depending on the context). Notice that Tamas made the same mistake (assuming this is a mistake). In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Sloppy of Mossad to drop him in an international hotel with full CCTV but otherwise, good job.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
...
Quote from: The Brain on February 18, 2010, 11:15:40 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 11:11:02 AM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on February 18, 2010, 10:49:13 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 06:20:47 AMFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
And what would happen if their American fuckbuddies weren't there to protect them?
They would be thrashed by angry Arabs, just like they were in 1948. 1956 and 1967.
:huh: Looks like someone should read up on Israeli history.
I assume you are being sarcastic. Lord knows I was. ;)
See Marti when you call someone a fucking dirty jew on languish you are talking about Malthus/ Joan Minsky Movement/Rasputin etc...
If you say fucking dirty Israeli you mean siege
get it?
got it?
good!
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 09:47:56 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 08:20:56 AM
What's so trollish about my post? The usage of British passports and identity theft by Mossad has been called "outrage" by David Milliband. How is my post different from that sentiment?
Quote from the Polack antisemite:
QuoteFucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them.
All antisemitic statements are, by definition, trolls (just like all the other types of racist ranting).
I know you are going to try to weasel out of the tag of antisemite, but frankly wish you wouldn't bother. You won't convince anybody and will just spam the thread with more vapid bullshit. An intellectually honest person would acknowledge the clear fact that they are antisemetic and vow to do something about it. I rather doubt that that describes you, though.
Is using ethnic slurs trolling? :)
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 11:37:46 AM
get it?
got it?
good!
Just watched the movie again last weekend. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
Ok. I thought they can be used interchangeably (I mean, Jews can mean both Israelis and people of Jewish ethnicity, depending on the context). Notice that Tamas made the same mistake (assuming this is a mistake). In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Only about 75% of Israel proper's inhabitants are Jews; I am surprised that Polish uses the same term for both Jews and for Israelis.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
"Zionists"?
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 11:37:46 AM
See Marti when you call someone a fucking dirty jew on languish you are talking about Malthus/ Joan Minsky Movement/Rasputin etc...
If you say fucking dirty Israeli you mean siege
get it?
got it?
good!
Why was my name not capitalized like the other guys?
Racist!!!!!1111
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Bullshit.
Quote from: Siege on February 18, 2010, 12:45:49 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Bullshit.
Intriguingly, an online English-Polish dictionary comes up with "Izraelski" for Israeli, and either "zyd" or "Izraelita" for Jew.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 10:44:56 AM
It's quite clear from both the context of my post and its content that I was speaking about the Israelis, and more precisely, of the Israeli government. It is a figure of speech that is ubiquitous on Languish; people talk about "Americans" when they are talking about the US government doing something; the Falklands thread is full of voices against the "Argies" and it is quite normal to talk about "Russians" or the "Chinese" when criticizing the governments of these countries (for example Raz does it in this very thread, but I don't see you accusing him of Russophobia either).
The weaseling begins! :bleeding:
The difference between blaming the actions of the Russian government on "Russians" and blaming the actions of the Israeli government on "Jews" is crystal clear, and everybody here can see it. I asked that you not bother weaseling, but you cannot help it, can you?
QuoteIn this context, only someone operating at an extreme level of intellectual dishonesty or an extreme mental disability could fail to recognize interpret my post as talking about Jews, as an ethnic group.
Fixed. It is funny how antisemitics squirm.
Quote from: Siege on February 18, 2010, 12:44:09 PM
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 11:37:46 AM
See Marti when you call someone a fucking dirty jew on languish you are talking about Malthus/ Joan Minsky Movement/Rasputin etc...
If you say fucking dirty Israeli you mean siege
get it?
got it?
good!
Why was my name not capitalized like the other guys?
Racist!!!!!1111
what can i say , must be my sephardic heritage coming out.
:P
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 12:58:45 PM
Intriguingly, an online English-Polish dictionary comes up with "Izraelski" for Israeli, and either "zyd" or "Izraelita" for Jew.
Interestingly enough, in Russian, "zyd" is a very derogatory slur for Jews.
Quote from: DGuller on February 18, 2010, 01:10:33 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 12:58:45 PM
Intriguingly, an online English-Polish dictionary comes up with "Izraelski" for Israeli, and either "zyd" or "Izraelita" for Jew.
Interestingly enough, in Russian, "zyd" is a very derogatory slur for Jews.
Probably started Russian. Not enough consonants to be polish :P
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Siege on February 18, 2010, 12:45:49 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Bullshit.
Intriguingly, an online English-Polish dictionary comes up with "Izraelski" for Israeli, and either "zyd" or "Izraelita" for Jew.
That's what I thought. Martinus is full of shit.
Every language I know of, have separate terms for jews and israelis.
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 11:37:46 AM
See Marti when you call someone a fucking dirty jew on languish you are talking about Malthus/ Joan Minsky Movement/Rasputin etc...
If you say fucking dirty Israeli you mean siege
get it?
got it?
good!
Danny Kaye = zhid.
Quote from: Siege on February 18, 2010, 01:21:45 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Siege on February 18, 2010, 12:45:49 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Bullshit.
Intriguingly, an online English-Polish dictionary comes up with "Izraelski" for Israeli, and either "zyd" or "Izraelita" for Jew.
That's what I thought. Martinus is full of shit.
Every language I know of, have separate terms for jews and israelis.
Actually, that wasn't my point. I was surprised that Polish had two apparently legitimate, non-derogatory words for "Jew" - English doesn't, after all.
Russian is not the only language where "Zyd" is a derogatory term for "Jew"; I'm fairly sure it spread to American English as well. I suspect that "zyd" started to fall out of general usage in Poland after WWII, although Martinus would have to confirm that.
be patient with Martinus, he comes from a culture which is full of antisemitism right down to its very roots. Only the ukrainians can overtake the Polacks in this regard, the Hungarians might equal them, but surely can't overtake them, and that IS saying something.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 01:38:33 PM
Actually, that wasn't my point. I was surprised that Polish had two apparently legitimate, non-derogatory words for "Jew" - English doesn't, after all.
It is true that English does not have only two non-derogatory words for Jew*, but I fail to understand how this relates to Polish only having two.
Of course, i don't understand how speaking an antisemitic language (even were that true) somehow makes the reference to the "fucking Jews" as those behind the Israeli government's objectionable actions more acceptable. In the non-antisemitic world we distinguish between Jews and Israelis - bu, then we have actual jews living amongst us, so it is harder for us to imagine that all Israelis are Jews and vice-versa.
[/quote]Russian is not the only language where "Zyd" is a derogatory term for "Jew"; I'm fairly sure it spread to American English as well. I suspect that "zyd" started to fall out of general usage in Poland after WWII, although Martinus would have to confirm that. [/quote]
Not "zyd," but "yid" in English.
* I can think of Hebrew, Jew, and Israelite off the top of my head, and am sure there are more.
Has anyone goofed on Tim for "assanation" yet? If nobody's got it covered, I'll throw something together.
Mart, perhaps you should take a break and fix whatever problems you are having. You keep asking to be spanked in the past few days.
Quote from: Caliga on February 18, 2010, 02:57:14 PM
Has anyone goofed on Tim for "assanation" yet? If nobody's got it covered, I'll throw something together.
Mocking Tim for spelling errors is so 00s. :yawn:
I feel like you can do a lot with "assanation", though. :)
Quote from: Caliga on February 18, 2010, 03:00:53 PM
I feel like you can do a lot with "assanation", though. :)
Note that it takes two asses to make an assassination?
Quote from: Tamas on February 18, 2010, 02:08:26 PM
be patient with Martinus, he comes from a culture which is full of antisemitism right down to its very roots. Only the ukrainians can overtake the Polacks in this regard, the Hungarians might equal them, but surely can't overtake them, and that IS saying something.
I know of at least *one* Ukranian who is not anti-semitic ... :lol:
Quote from: Caliga on February 18, 2010, 03:00:53 PM
I feel like you can do a lot with "assanation", though. :)
The sort of misspelling that would go with a porn movie title. ;)
Quote from: Caliga on February 18, 2010, 02:57:14 PM
Has anyone goofed on Tim for "assanation" yet? If nobody's got it covered, I'll throw something together.
Yeah, I think so.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 02:50:46 PM
It is true that English does not have only two non-derogatory words for Jew*, but I fail to understand how this relates to Polish only having two.
The point was English only has one, universal, term. I know you have mentioned Hebrew and Israelite, but neither of these terms are as generic as Jew is. Hebrew is generally used to refer to either the language or the population of ancient, not modern, Israel. Israelite is also a limited term in English, referring to ancient, not modern, Israel.
For example, you seem to automatically use Jew and Jewish when referring to the faith, and Israel and Israeli when referring to the nation, as far as I can recall from your posting.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 02:50:46 PM
Of course, i don't understand how speaking an antisemitic language (even were that true) somehow makes the reference to the "fucking Jews" as those behind the Israeli government's objectionable actions more acceptable. In the non-antisemitic world we distinguish between Jews and Israelis - bu, then we have actual jews living amongst us, so it is harder for us to imagine that all Israelis are Jews and vice-versa.
Yes, we do distinguish between the two, quite rightly. I was just giving Martinus an option to explain his words in case there was a language difficulty (English is not his first language, after all.) This had the benefit of adding to my knowledge of Polish, and by inference, the social history of Poland post WWII. He may indeed be anti-semitic, as his original words would indicate. Or he may be having trouble with a foreign language, as his latter words claim.
And I'd still like to know from Martinus if I am right and if Polish is trying to remove the original "zyd" from its vocabulary because of the anti-semitic overtone of the word.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 02:50:46 PM
Not "zyd," but "yid" in English.
Thanks. It was frustrating me not finding the equivalent English version in the online dictionaries. I don't know how my mind blanked on that one. I did find "Zhid" though, which is an American form of it after I'd made the original post.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 03:19:07 PM
The point was English only has one, universal, term.
The point is that it has several, though obviously "Jew" is more widely used.
QuoteI know you have mentioned Hebrew and Israelite, but neither of these terms are as generic as Jew is. Hebrew is generally used to refer to either the language or the population of ancient, not modern, Israel. Israelite is also a limited term in English, referring to ancient, not modern, Israel.
The English words "Hebrew" and "Israelite" are listed as synonyms for "Jew" in any number of dictionaries. Your claim for two Polish words came from dictionaries. By the standard of dictionaries, English has at least three such words, and Polish (apparently, according to your claim) two.
QuoteYes, we do distinguish between the two, quite rightly. I was just giving Martinus an option to explain his words in case there was a language difficulty (English is not his first language, after all.) This had the benefit of adding to my knowledge of Polish, and by inference, the social history of Poland post WWII. He may indeed be anti-semitic, as his original words would indicate. Or he may be having trouble with a foreign language, as his latter words claim.
I think the words "fucking Jew" speak for themselves. Martinus has used the word "Israeli" correctly many times in on this board, and ditto for "Jew." He has never used "Jew" for Israeli except in anger.
QuoteThanks. It was frustrating me not finding the equivalent English version in the online dictionaries. I don't know how my mind blanked on that one. I did find "Zhid" though, which is an American form of it after I'd made the original post.
Never heard of "zhid" in English before. Where have you seen it used?
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 03:40:44 PM
The English words "Hebrew" and "Israelite" are listed as synonyms for "Jew" in any number of dictionaries. Your claim for two Polish words came from dictionaries. By the standard of dictionaries, English has at least three such words, and Polish (apparently, according to your claim) two.
I wasn't using a synonym dictionary but a translation dictionary. Working it the other way would only have produced "Jew", not the other, more specialised terms that the English language has. I would have to say you are being deliberately obtuse here.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 03:40:44 PM
I think the words "fucking Jew" speak for themselves. Martinus has used the word "Israeli" correctly many times in on this board, and ditto for "Jew." He has never used "Jew" for Israeli except in anger.
To be honest, I thought his comment was anti-semitic too. I checked that online translation dictionary because I found his explanation unlikely. But there it was, our generic term "Jew" had two options, one of which was virtually identical to the Polish term for our "Israeli".
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 03:40:44 PM
Never heard of "zhid" in English before. Where have you seen it used?
It rang a bell, so I can't say where I originally heard it, but a quick internet search brings up some interesting sites, most demonstrably.
http://vengefulzhid.blogspot.com/
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 12:08:23 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AM
Ok. I thought they can be used interchangeably (I mean, Jews can mean both Israelis and people of Jewish ethnicity, depending on the context). Notice that Tamas made the same mistake (assuming this is a mistake). In Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
Only about 75% of Israel proper's inhabitants are Jews; I am surprised that Polish uses the same term for both Jews and for Israelis.
Doesn't the Israeli declaration of independence refer to Israel as the "Jewish state" or "the state of the Jews"?
Quote from: Tamas on February 18, 2010, 02:08:26 PM
be patient with Martinus, he comes from a culture which is full of antisemitism right down to its very roots. Only the ukrainians can overtake the Polacks in this regard, the Hungarians might equal them, but surely can't overtake them, and that IS saying something.
LOL it's so fucking funny considering you also call Israelis "Jews" in your very post in this thread. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:01:20 PM
Doesn't the Israeli declaration of independence refer to Israel as the "Jewish state" or "the state of the Jews"?
It also includes this passage -
QuoteWE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.
This passage rather negates the concept of Israel solely being a state for the Jews. And, of course, several Arab tribes did fight for the Israelis and live in Israel to this day as full citizens. About the only thing I am aware of that differentiates them from the Jewish population is that military service is not compulsory. A number of sitting Knesset members are Arabs.
English is quite careful to differentiate between Jews as a people following a particular religion, and Israelis as citizens of Israel.
I wish people were slightly less hostile here.
The word "Zyd" is the closest equivalent to "Jew". It is definitely not a derogatory word in Polish and is used by all Jewish cultural, political etc. organisations that operate in Poland. Considering it derogatory is completely misguided.
It is used to denote both a person of Jewish religion or ethnicity, and a national of Israel. There is also a word "Izraelczyk" which means only an Israeli national but is used more rarely. Israel is often referred to (including in official lingo) as the "Jewish State".
I thought the usage in English was similar. The usage of the word "Jews" to denote Israelis, by Tamas, earlier in this thread, for some reason did not meet with this kind of reaction as my usage did, which I don't get. So go fuck yourself, everyone.
You could just say you are sorry.
Quote from: garbon on February 18, 2010, 02:57:49 PM
Mart, perhaps you should take a break and fix whatever problems you are having. You keep asking to be spanked in the past few days.
Well, my problem I am having mostly comes from the fact that I am being roasted for something Tamas did in this very thread before me and noone reacted. So yeah, if I am having any issues lately, they come from the hostile shit I put up with on this board. So perhaps I will consider your advice.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:15:40 PM
I wish people were slightly less hostile here.
......
I thought the usage in English was similar. The usage of the word "Jews" to denote Israelis, by Tamas, earlier in this thread, for some reason did not meet with this kind of reaction as my usage did, which I don't get. So go fuck yourself, everyone.
:hmm:
I wonder if I'm being paranoid in thinking I'm too hostile for Martinus but not hostile enough for Grumbler.
Anyway, having reread Tamas' post, he got a pass because his comment was part of a humourous line referencing the British problems with Iran. A joke, in other words. Your line was read as being purely derogatory and hostile to Jews in general, and given the language you employed it is not hard to see why.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 04:21:35 PM
Anyway, having reread Tamas' post, he got a pass because his comment was part of a humourous line referencing the British problems with Iran. A joke, in other words. Your line was read as being purely derogatory and hostile to Jews in general, and given the language you employed it is not hard to see why.
:bleeding:
You're talking about a forum where people regularly use words like "chinaman" or "nigger", and engage in lengthy tirades about genociding the muslims.
Not to mention his past hostility to religious and ethnic groups that aren't him.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:17:10 PM
Quote from: garbon on February 18, 2010, 02:57:49 PM
Mart, perhaps you should take a break and fix whatever problems you are having. You keep asking to be spanked in the past few days.
Well, my problem I am having mostly comes from the fact that I am being roasted for something Tamas did in this very thread before me and noone reacted. So yeah, if I am having any issues lately, they come from the hostile shit I put up with on this board. So perhaps I will consider your advice.
For what it's worth, Marti, I don't care about your virulent antisemitism. :hug:
Quote from: Sahib on February 18, 2010, 04:25:16 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 04:21:35 PM
Anyway, having reread Tamas' post, he got a pass because his comment was part of a humourous line referencing the British problems with Iran. A joke, in other words. Your line was read as being purely derogatory and hostile to Jews in general, and given the language you employed it is not hard to see why.
:bleeding:
You're talking about a forum where people regularly use words like "chinaman" or "nigger", and engage in lengthy tirades about genociding the muslims.
Exactly. If someone cried foul every time someone used a word "Pollack" or "faggot" etc. I could understand this reaction.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 04:25:46 PM
Not to mention his past hostility to religious and ethnic groups that aren't him.
It's funny because I consider (non-Orthodox) Jews my closest allies in bringing forth a secular, non-Christian world. I don't dislike orthodox Jews more than I dislike muslims or catholics, and I don't dislike Israel any more than I dislike other right wing governments engaging in similar actions.
In fact, I'm one of the most vocal critics of Catholics and Poles - both groups that "are me".
So go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted. :)
Quote from: Sahib on February 18, 2010, 04:25:16 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 04:21:35 PM
Anyway, having reread Tamas' post, he got a pass because his comment was part of a humourous line referencing the British problems with Iran. A joke, in other words. Your line was read as being purely derogatory and hostile to Jews in general, and given the language you employed it is not hard to see why.
:bleeding:
You're talking about a forum where people regularly use words like "chinaman" or "nigger", and engage in lengthy tirades about genociding the muslims.
I believe the appropriate thing to remember here is "context is everything." The vast majority of the time those terms are used it is in a clearly humorous or exaggerated fashion.
And the vast majority of posters do not use them anyway.
And what's wrong with "Chinaman" anyway? It is a perfectly legitimate cricketing term for Left arm unorthodox spin.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:32:12 PM
So go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted. :)
Stay classy Martinus. :)
hmm... I think I may have said that exact phrase once or twice before...
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:35:13 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:32:12 PM
So go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted. :)
Stay classy Martinus. :)
hmm... I think I may have said that exact phrase once or twice before...
I am who I am. If I watched my tongue on an internet board full of strangers, where would I get my daily dose of rage relief?
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:35:13 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:32:12 PM
So go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted. :)
Stay classy Martinus. :)
hmm... I think I may have said that exact phrase once or twice before...
"go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted"? Yeah, once or twice, but not very often. :)
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:36:25 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:35:13 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:32:12 PM
So go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted. :)
Stay classy Martinus. :)
hmm... I think I may have said that exact phrase once or twice before...
I am who I am. If I watched my tongue on an internet board full of strangers, where would I get my daily dose of rage relief?
:(
Martinus called me a stranger.
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:38:53 PM
:(
Martinus called me a stranger.
Have you ever shot an Arab?
:D
Ah, Languish.
Anyway ... to my mind the real issue is the morality of ordering assassinations in the first place, and in employing spies and assassins.
Can't see that as any worse that using drones to blow up specific folks your country does not like - something that both the UK and US does.
One you have decided using spies or assassins is okay, using false passports is a mere bagatelle. In the case of Israel, it's a necessity, as most Arab countries won't let folks in on an Israeli passport at all.
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:36:25 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:35:13 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:32:12 PM
So go fuck yourself you miserable piece of shit retarded scum idiot who should have been aborted. :)
Stay classy Martinus. :)
hmm... I think I may have said that exact phrase once or twice before...
I am who I am. If I watched my tongue on an internet board full of strangers, where would I get my daily dose of rage relief?
:(
Martinus called me a stranger.
You got off quite easy then.
And Marty, personally, your comment, -altough I did not care much, certainly not enough to comment- made me slightly sick because it is exactly the first reaction I could expect from my (on varying level) antisemite countrymen.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 04:40:27 PM
:D
Ah, Languish.
Anyway ... to my mind the real issue is the morality of ordering assassinations in the first place, and in employing spies and assassins.
Can't see that as any worse that using drones to blow up specific folks your country does not like - something that both the UK and US does.
One you have decided using spies or assassins is okay, using false passports is a mere bagatelle. In the case of Israel, it's a necessity, as most Arab countries won't let folks in on an Israeli passport at all.
You have to admit. We do have our own unique charm. Everyone might be throwing vicious racial slurs one moment and then jump on someone for being a racist the next. I admit it can be a bit confusing for the observer.
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:50:13 PM
Quote from: Savonarola on February 18, 2010, 04:39:58 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 04:38:53 PM
:(
Martinus called me a stranger.
Have you ever shot an Arab?
:lol:
The Cure... :wub:
Camus rocks harder.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wagner.edu%2Fdepartments%2Flanguages%2Fsites%2Fwagner.edu.departments.languages%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2Fl%2527etranger.jpg&hash=7859dff0edc8ca62030a3405690048c8bb51b57e)
Somehow let this thread get to 7 pages before I saw it. "Assanation" + Marty's antisemitic rant = pure comedy gold.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 04:40:27 PM
:D
Ah, Languish.
Anyway ... to my mind the real issue is the morality of ordering assassinations in the first place, and in employing spies and assassins.
Can't see that as any worse that using drones to blow up specific folks your country does not like - something that both the UK and US does.
One you have decided using spies or assassins is okay, using false passports is a mere bagatelle. In the case of Israel, it's a necessity, as most Arab countries won't let folks in on an Israeli passport at all.
I wouldn't have given a damn if they used Russian passports, for example. I have no problem with Israel killing a member of Hamas (although I will probably be jumped upon for that.)
But Israel has promised in the past not to use our passports, and is also seenby us as something of an ally. What they have done (or appear to have done) is both impolite and offensive. You don't break promises or abuse an ally in this fashion.
Not to mention associating Britain with such an apparently sloppy operation is insulting.
Britain is not an ally, it is merely a tool. You're a fool to think the Jews believe otherwise.
Quote from: Fate on February 18, 2010, 05:29:49 PM
Britain is not an ally, it is merely a tool. You're a fool to think the Jews believe otherwise.
I said "seen by us as something of" not "is" - a perception that comes as much as anything from the current "us against them" attitude the Western world is adopting towards Islam.
Rage Quit in 5...4...3...2....1.......
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 04:36:25 PM
I am who I am. If I watched my tongue on an internet board full of strangers, where would I get my daily dose of rage relief?
Interesting you should be the one whining about hostility.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 05:09:52 PM
I wouldn't have given a damn if they used Russian passports, for example. I have no problem with Israel killing a member of Hamas (although I will probably be jumped upon for that.)
But Israel has promised in the past not to use our passports, and is also seenby us as something of an ally. What they have done (or appear to have done) is both impolite and offensive. You don't break promises or abuse an ally in this fashion.
Not to mention associating Britain with such an apparently sloppy operation is insulting.
Again, seems to me something of a bagatelle. Given that you later state that the "ally" status extends to the entire Western world, that would eliminate using pretty well any convincing false first-world papers - something that I assume most spies and assassins use.
Breaking promises is bad, in the same way that gentlemen do not read each other's mail. Gentlemen also do not use spies and assassins.
As for the sloppiness of the operation - none of the agents were caught and the guy was assassinated, without any innocents killed in the cross-fire. Things could be a whole lot sloppier.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 05:45:44 PM
Quote from: Fate on February 18, 2010, 05:29:49 PM
Britain is not an ally, it is merely a tool. You're a fool to think the Jews believe otherwise.
I said "seen by us as something of" not "is" - a perception that comes as much as anything from the current "us against them" attitude the Western world is adopting towards Islam.
The Jews are clearly part of the "them" rather than the "us." It's not the Palestinians who are selling advanced Western technology to the Chicoms.
Quote from: Fate on February 18, 2010, 06:13:13 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 05:45:44 PM
Quote from: Fate on February 18, 2010, 05:29:49 PM
Britain is not an ally, it is merely a tool. You're a fool to think the Jews believe otherwise.
I said "seen by us as something of" not "is" - a perception that comes as much as anything from the current "us against them" attitude the Western world is adopting towards Islam.
The Jews are clearly part of the "them" rather than the "us." It's not the Palestinians who are selling advanced Western technology to the Chicoms.
That's only because Palestinians haven't yet discovered: Alphabet.
Quote from: Sahib on February 18, 2010, 04:25:16 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 04:21:35 PM
Anyway, having reread Tamas' post, he got a pass because his comment was part of a humourous line referencing the British problems with Iran. A joke, in other words. Your line was read as being purely derogatory and hostile to Jews in general, and given the language you employed it is not hard to see why.
:bleeding:
You're talking about a forum where people regularly use words like "chinaman" or "nigger", and engage in lengthy tirades about genociding the muslims.
:bleeding:
You are talking like the forum was a person.
Some people here do use the words "nigger" and "chinaman" in a highly self-conscious way, but that has nothing to do with Marti's antisemitic remarks. "Genociding the Muslims" is the policy of a poster everyone here recognizes is a whackjob in many respects.
Marti asked why I though the comment "Fucking Jews think they can do anything because their American fuckbuddies will protect them" was an inane troll, and I told him. His moaning and wease4ling don't change the point: his comment was an inane troll.
All that "I didn't know that 'Israel' and 'Jew' meant different things in English" can be shown as a lie by a simple search for his previous use of the terms; he does
not use them interchangeably.
No rocket science here, and no excusing antisemitic remarks because someone else makes comments you don't like.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 05:54:21 PM
Again, seems to me something of a bagatelle. Given that you later state that the "ally" status extends to the entire Western world, that would eliminate using pretty well any convincing false first-world papers - something that I assume most spies and assassins use.
Breaking promises is bad, in the same way that gentlemen do not read each other's mail. Gentlemen also do not use spies and assassins.
As for the sloppiness of the operation - none of the agents were caught and the guy was assassinated, without any innocents killed in the cross-fire. Things could be a whole lot sloppier.
Since I used the "western world against Islam" phrase as a point explaining why they might seen to be as an ally
in Britain, your "bagatelle" comment lacks any substance. Perhaps specifying Russian as an alternative was a mistake, however. Let me be clear then. I would be personally offended if they used British, American, Canadian, Australian or New Zealand passports (due to the intelligence links of the countries in question.) Anyone else is fair game. I am in general offended because they were stupid enough to let themselves be identified.
Breaking promises is as bad in the world of espionage as it is in the world of gentlemen. The KGB and the CIA both understood this even at the height of the Cold War.
As for the sloppiness comment? Apart from actually managing to kill the guy, its difficult to see how much sloppier they could have been. They were caught on camera acting as a very suspicious group, which probably led directly back to the identification of the assassins as entering the country on British passports. If that's not sloppy, I don't know what is.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 05:54:21 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 05:09:52 PM
I wouldn't have given a damn if they used Russian passports, for example. I have no problem with Israel killing a member of Hamas (although I will probably be jumped upon for that.)
But Israel has promised in the past not to use our passports, and is also seenby us as something of an ally. What they have done (or appear to have done) is both impolite and offensive. You don't break promises or abuse an ally in this fashion.
Not to mention associating Britain with such an apparently sloppy operation is insulting.
Again, seems to me something of a bagatelle. Given that you later state that the "ally" status extends to the entire Western world, that would eliminate using pretty well any convincing false first-world papers - something that I assume most spies and assassins use.
Breaking promises is bad, in the same way that gentlemen do not read each other's mail. Gentlemen also do not use spies and assassins.
As for the sloppiness of the operation - none of the agents were caught and the guy was assassinated, without any innocents killed in the cross-fire. Things could be a whole lot sloppier.
I suspect that Israelis weren't bothered by the cameras to much. In fact they might have wanted emphasis the point that if you piss off the Mossad there is no safe place for you.
Anyway, if someone wants to challenge the Brits over adopting double standards when it comes to other nations fucking them other, one should not point to Russia (where the reaction was demonstrably forceful) but the Saudis.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 06:20:19 PM
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 05:54:21 PM
Again, seems to me something of a bagatelle. Given that you later state that the "ally" status extends to the entire Western world, that would eliminate using pretty well any convincing false first-world papers - something that I assume most spies and assassins use.
Breaking promises is bad, in the same way that gentlemen do not read each other's mail. Gentlemen also do not use spies and assassins.
As for the sloppiness of the operation - none of the agents were caught and the guy was assassinated, without any innocents killed in the cross-fire. Things could be a whole lot sloppier.
Since I used the "western world against Islam" phrase as a point explaining why they might seen to be as an ally in Britain, your "bagatelle" comment lacks any substance. Perhaps specifying Russian as an alternative was a mistake, however. Let me be clear then. I would be personally offended if they used British, American, Canadian, Australian or New Zealand passports (due to the intelligence links of the countries in question.) Anyone else is fair game. I am in general offended because they were stupid enough to let themselves be identified.
Breaking promises is as bad in the world of espionage as it is in the world of gentlemen. The KGB and the CIA both understood this even at the height of the Cold War.
As for the sloppiness comment? Apart from actually managing to kill the guy, its difficult to see how much sloppier they could have been. They were caught on camera acting as a very suspicious group, which probably led directly back to the identification of the assassins as entering the country on British passports. If that's not sloppy, I don't know what is.
Seems to me something we will have to agree to disagree on. Once the choice has been made to employ assassins to kill people, seems to me that using false papers is so much less of an issue as to be rather insignificant.
For example, should the UK have used false neutral country passports to sneak assassins in to kill high-ranking Nazis during WW2, I don't think the UK spymasters would have been terribly contrite if that use had been discovered.
If you cannot imagine an operation going more wrong than this, then your imagination is not engaged. I can see lots worse happening.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 06:28:00 PM
I suspect that Israelis weren't bothered by the cameras to much. In fact they might have wanted emphasis the point that if you piss off the Mossad there is no safe place for you.
You do that by killing the guy, not by getting your face plastered over television screens worldwide.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 05:45:44 PM
Quote from: Fate on February 18, 2010, 05:29:49 PM
Britain is not an ally, it is merely a tool. You're a fool to think the Jews believe otherwise.
I said "seen by us as something of" not "is" - a perception that comes as much as anything from the current "us against them" attitude the Western world is adopting towards Islam.
Age, you come and go from Languish, so perhaps you didn't get the memo:
Fate is pure, 100% troll. He is not interested in discussing matters. Instead he posts whatever he thinks will get a reaction.
Please do not bother responding to him.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 06:36:23 PM
Seems to me something we will have to agree to disagree on. Once the choice has been made to employ assassins to kill people, seems to me that using false papers is so much less of an issue as to be rather insignificant.
It's stupid to piss on people you are probably going to have to work with in the near future, let alone break promises in the intelligence game. You seem to disagree with me on this, but then I believe you object to the use of assassins, which I do not.
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 06:36:23 PM
For example, should the UK have used false neutral country passports to sneak assassins in to kill high-ranking Nazis during WW2, I don't think the UK spymasters would have been terribly contrite if that use had been discovered.
Depends on the neutral. We wouldn't have been stupid enough to use American passports in 1939-41, for example, but I doubt we'd have been very contrite about using Portuguese. The main point is that it was pretty stupid using British passports, and then even more imbecilic to be caught using them!
Quote from: Malthus on February 18, 2010, 06:36:23 PM
If you cannot imagine an operation going more wrong than this, then your imagination is not engaged. I can see lots worse happening.
Are you just being an idiot, or are you saying that "sloppy" is an exact equivalent of "lots worse". The operation could have gone worse (if, say, the target had been suspicious or aware enough to shoot), but its difficult to see how they could have carried it out more sloppily except by failing to kill the guy.
Quote from: Barrister on February 18, 2010, 06:49:18 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 05:45:44 PM
Quote from: Fate on February 18, 2010, 05:29:49 PM
Britain is not an ally, it is merely a tool. You're a fool to think the Jews believe otherwise.
I said "seen by us as something of" not "is" - a perception that comes as much as anything from the current "us against them" attitude the Western world is adopting towards Islam.
Age, you come and go from Languish, so perhaps you didn't get the memo:
Fate is pure, 100% troll. He is not interested in discussing matters. Instead he posts whatever he thinks will get a reaction.
Please do not bother responding to him.
Ah, thanks.
I shall endeavour to refrain from countering his misrepresentations and wilful misreadings in future then.
I'm 50% troll, 25% fecal matter and 25% water.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 18, 2010, 06:54:53 PM
I'm 50% troll, 25% fecal matter and 25% water.
Constipated again? :console:
It works like this:
Britain will make angry noises about this because it's part of the game. Mossad agents used fake British passports. As I write this, there are SIS agents out there with fake Lebanese, Chilean, American etc etc passports.
Governments know this is going on and it is all part of the game. But the other part of the game is that if anyone is caught, then a stink is raised, diplomatic measures are taken - in this case, the extreme sanction of demanding the Israeli ambassador comes in for a chat down the road in an office next to the Locarno Rooms.
This is one of those cases where the rule is observed in the breach: we are angry that the Israelis have broken rules in doing this, but at the same time the people in the know, know that this happens. Such is the world of intelligence.
To summate: storm in a teacup.
That was my take on it - the Brits are pissed because that is how they are supposed to react, but they darn well know that it happens, and likely know that British agents have used forged papers of other countries at varies times.
Wait a minute? Are we not supposed to say Chinaman anymore when referring to Chinese people?
Quote from: Neil on February 18, 2010, 07:36:02 PM
Wait a minute? Are we not supposed to say Chinaman anymore when referring to Chinese people?
Chinaman girls.
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AMIn Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
This explains a lot.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 06:50:40 PM
The operation could have gone worse (if, say, the target had been suspicious or aware enough to shoot), but its difficult to see how they could have carried it out more sloppily except by failing to kill the guy.
I suspect your difficulty comes from ignorance. If you actually knew anything about the topic, you could probably imagine many ways in which they could have carried it out more sloppily.
Don't feel bad about it - I don't know much about the topic, either. However, I don't base any argument on the fact that I am too ignorant to imagine much in this scenario, and that would probably be a wise policy for you as well.
Quote from: Viking on February 18, 2010, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AMIn Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
This explains a lot.
Yeah, it also means "subhuman," "devil-worshiper," "murderer of Christ," and "drinker of Christian children's blood."
When you have a language with a total vocabulary of only forty words (plus six grunts that carry specific meanings) you have to make each one go a long way.
:lol:
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 08:12:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on February 18, 2010, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AMIn Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
This explains a lot.
Yeah, it also means "subhuman," "devil-worshiper," "murderer of Christ," and "drinker of Christian children's blood."
When you have a language with a total vocabulary of only forty words (plus six grunts that carry specific meanings) you have to make each one go a long way.
Silly grumbler, you are talking to a Icelander, the last culture that needs an explanation on limited vocab.
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 08:14:53 PM
Silly grumbler, you are talking to a Icelander, the last culture that needs an explanation on limited vocab.
Silly katmai, you assume I read his posts.
Quote from: Viking on February 18, 2010, 08:15:42 PM
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 08:14:53 PM
Silly grumbler, you are talking to a Icelander, the last culture that needs an explanation on limited vocab.
Silly katmai, you assume I read his posts.
Doh!
Forgot about that.
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 08:07:06 PM
I suspect your difficulty comes from ignorance. If you actually knew anything about the topic, you could probably imagine many ways in which they could have carried it out more sloppily.
Don't feel bad about it - I don't know much about the topic, either. However, I don't base any argument on the fact that I am too ignorant to imagine much in this scenario, and that would probably be a wise policy for you as well.
Well, no, I doubt either of us are experts. However, we both have imaginations, we are both reasonably well read, and we are operating with a limited number of ways things could have gone worse if we stick with the way the Israelis seem to have planned it.
I could imagine many ways they could have carried it out more sloppily, but only if I go back to square one and plan the assassination to take place in a different location or by a different method. Even on the assumption that even the Israelis try to avoid mass murder (by blowing up the plane he was on, for example) I can come up with a worse scenario. For example, if they tried to eliminate him with a bomb, that blew up an innocent chamber maid by accident. Or a shooting attempt at a public cafe which hits bystanders and not the target. Or if they do try a shooting, the weapons are intercepted when they enter the country and the operation is rolled up from there.
Once they've picked the location and method they have, there's only one way I can see that it could have gone worse - if the target had been alert enough to put up sufficient of a struggle to compromise their physical escape, perhaps by injuring one of them sufficently that it caused suspicion on their exit, or by making a noise that raised the alarm. It's possible that prematurely alerted authorities might intercept them on the way out of the country even if nothing different happens in the room (if the body is discovered early, perhaps) but that seems fairly unlikely given how quickly they would have arranged to exit the country.
I am curious as to what happened to his bodyguards; I would have assumed he would have some given his position, unless he was trying to travel "under the radar."
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 08:14:53 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 08:12:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on February 18, 2010, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AMIn Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
This explains a lot.
Yeah, it also means "subhuman," "devil-worshiper," "murderer of Christ," and "drinker of Christian children's blood."
When you have a language with a total vocabulary of only forty words (plus six grunts that carry specific meanings) you have to make each one go a long way.
Silly grumbler, you are talking to a Icelander, the last culture that needs an explanation on limited vocab.
Absolutist is an Icelander.
And he damns the whole race.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 10:22:02 PM
And he damns the whole race.
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors. So fuck you.
Quote from: Neil on February 18, 2010, 09:29:26 PM
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 08:14:53 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 08:12:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on February 18, 2010, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AMIn Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
This explains a lot.
Yeah, it also means "subhuman," "devil-worshiper," "murderer of Christ," and "drinker of Christian children's blood."
When you have a language with a total vocabulary of only forty words (plus six grunts that carry specific meanings) you have to make each one go a long way.
Silly grumbler, you are talking to a Icelander, the last culture that needs an explanation on limited vocab.
Absolutist is an Icelander.
I thought he turned out to be a fake Icelander?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 19, 2010, 12:29:50 AM
Quote from: Neil on February 18, 2010, 09:29:26 PM
Quote from: katmai on February 18, 2010, 08:14:53 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 08:12:24 PM
Quote from: Viking on February 18, 2010, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 18, 2010, 11:23:09 AMIn Polish for example, the word for "Jews" and "Israelis" is the same.
This explains a lot.
Yeah, it also means "subhuman," "devil-worshiper," "murderer of Christ," and "drinker of Christian children's blood."
When you have a language with a total vocabulary of only forty words (plus six grunts that carry specific meanings) you have to make each one go a long way.
Silly grumbler, you are talking to a Icelander, the last culture that needs an explanation on limited vocab.
Absolutist is an Icelander.
I thought he turned out to be a fake Icelander?
Yes, he is fake. I exposed him.
This thread is ironic, considering Martinus is secretly Jewish himself.
It's interesting to see where Malthus's loyalties lie in a dispute between his Queen and Israel. :P :showoff:
Quote from: Agelastus on February 18, 2010, 08:33:53 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 18, 2010, 08:07:06 PM
I suspect your difficulty comes from ignorance. If you actually knew anything about the topic, you could probably imagine many ways in which they could have carried it out more sloppily.
Don't feel bad about it - I don't know much about the topic, either. However, I don't base any argument on the fact that I am too ignorant to imagine much in this scenario, and that would probably be a wise policy for you as well.
Well, no, I doubt either of us are experts. However, we both have imaginations, we are both reasonably well read, and we are operating with a limited number of ways things could have gone worse if we stick with the way the Israelis seem to have planned it.
I could imagine many ways they could have carried it out more sloppily, but only if I go back to square one and plan the assassination to take place in a different location or by a different method. Even on the assumption that even the Israelis try to avoid mass murder (by blowing up the plane he was on, for example) I can come up with a worse scenario. For example, if they tried to eliminate him with a bomb, that blew up an innocent chamber maid by accident. Or a shooting attempt at a public cafe which hits bystanders and not the target. Or if they do try a shooting, the weapons are intercepted when they enter the country and the operation is rolled up from there.
Once they've picked the location and method they have, there's only one way I can see that it could have gone worse - if the target had been alert enough to put up sufficient of a struggle to compromise their physical escape, perhaps by injuring one of them sufficently that it caused suspicion on their exit, or by making a noise that raised the alarm. It's possible that prematurely alerted authorities might intercept them on the way out of the country even if nothing different happens in the room (if the body is discovered early, perhaps) but that seems fairly unlikely given how quickly they would have arranged to exit the country.
I am curious as to what happened to his bodyguards; I would have assumed he would have some given his position, unless he was trying to travel "under the radar."
See, it is not so "difficult to see how they could have carried it out more sloppily" after all! :woot:
Going a bit on a tangent from the usual bashing, I read in today's papers that the identities used by the Mossad were those of Israeli nationals of British origin, and some of them are planning to sue.
I wonder how's the usual m.o. for these operations, wouldn't it be better to use randomly generated identities, rather than taking the identities of real existing people?
Quote from: The Larch on February 19, 2010, 07:44:27 AM
I wonder how's the usual m.o. for these operations, wouldn't it be better to use randomly generated identities, rather than taking the identities of real existing people?
The identities of real existing people are in data bases that the authorities you are trying to fool will consult. If you make up identities, you have to somehow get that information into the, say British, passport database.
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 07:31:13 AM
See, it is not so "difficult to see how they could have carried it out more sloppily" after all! :woot:
:sigh:
And I am still left with only one way it could have "gone worse" if you limit yourself to their plan, which is what I said all along. And that option doesn't involve any extra sloppiness in the execution of the plan to that already shown.
Still, glad to have met with your approval... ;)
Quote from: Agelastus on February 19, 2010, 07:53:28 AM
:sigh:
And I am still left with only one way it could have "gone worse" if you limit yourself to their plan, which is what I said all along. Still, glad to have met with your approval... ;)
I recognize that your ability to imagine is feeble, because you know little or nothing about the topic, but want to encourage you where i can. I seems to matter to you for some reason.
QuoteAnd that option doesn't involve any extra sloppiness in the execution of the plan to that already shown.
Since we don't know the plan, we really cannot address the sloppiness with which it was executed. :hug:
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 07:59:34 AMI recognize that your ability to imagine is feeble, because you know little or nothing about the topic, but want to encourage you where i can. I seems to matter to you for some reason.
Other than the fact that you're the guy who posts contrary positions to mine most often, I can't see why that should be... :hmm: :P
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 07:59:34 AMSince we don't know the plan, we really cannot address the sloppiness with which it was executed. :hug:
I think we can see enough about it on the news to be able to posit a reasonable facsimile of it. Which, of course, is basically the whole problem.
Still, in the spirit of Languish... :hug:
Quote from: Agelastus on February 19, 2010, 08:05:20 AM
I think we can see enough about it on the news to be able to posit a reasonable facsimile of it. Which, of course, is basically the whole problem.
You assume that what you see on the TV matches with your guesses as to what was planned and what happened, and then note that "the whole problem" is that you can assume that you can deduce the plan based on what you have seen about it on TV? :lol:
How perfectly circular. Not at all convincing, but one cannot have everything.
At least you recognize that the use of real passport names/numbers isn't "basically" part of "the whole problem."
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors.
In that order? :P
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 10:22:02 PM
And he damns the whole race.
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors. So fuck you.
Really? When did Iceland invade the US?
Quote from: Fireblade on February 19, 2010, 12:42:09 AM
This thread is ironic, considering Martinus is secretly Jewish himself.
I will kill myself if that is true!
Quote from: Malthus on February 19, 2010, 10:20:05 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors.
In that order? :P
Viking's ancestors, yes. They were the ones that traveled in the Short Ships, as distinguished from the other Vikings in Long Ships.
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 10:22:02 PM
And he damns the whole race.
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors. So fuck you.
And now you are all fags.
How the mighty have fallen.
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 10:30:28 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 19, 2010, 10:20:05 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors.
In that order? :P
Viking's ancestors, yes. They were the ones that traveled in the Short Ships, as distinguished from the other Vikings in Long Ships.
:lmfao:
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 10:30:28 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 19, 2010, 10:20:05 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors.
In that order? :P
Viking's ancestors, yes. They were the ones that traveled in the Short Ships, as distinguished from the other Vikings in Long Ships.
:lmfao:
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 09:47:45 AM
You assume that what you see on the TV matches with your guesses as to what was planned and what happened, and then note that "the whole problem" is that you can assume that you can deduce the plan based on what you have seen about it on TV? :lol:
How perfectly circular. Not at all convincing, but one cannot have everything.
You misinterpret slightly. That line was meant to suggest that the fact that we can see any part of the operation on TV is the whole problem. I am sure the Israelis did not intend to carry out an assassination in the glare of such publicity.
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 09:47:45 AM
At least you recognize that the use of real passport names/numbers isn't "basically" part of "the whole problem."
Of course not. Inventing identities probably went out with the Fifties. It's far too easy to cross reference such things these days. I merely object to them using passports from a nation they promised they wouldn't do so from, especially given the neccessity of both nation's intelligence services to co-operate against Islamic terrorism. Despite our historical connections to the Middle East, I am sure using our passports was not the only option.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 19, 2010, 01:59:28 PM
You misinterpret slightly. That line was meant to suggest that the fact that we can see any part of the operation on TV is the whole problem. I am sure the Israelis did not intend to carry out an assassination in the glare of such publicity.
What we see could all be disinformation, for all we know. In any case, what we see isn't enough for an objective person (IMO) to call the operation "botched." It is entirely possible that what we can see, if part of the op, was unavoidably public.
We just don't know enough to tell, let alone to be vehement, IMO.
QuoteOf course not. Inventing identities probably went out with the Fifties. It's far too easy to cross reference such things these days. I merely object to them using passports from a nation they promised they wouldn't do so from, especially given the neccessity of both nation's intelligence services to co-operate against Islamic terrorism. Despite our historical connections to the Middle East, I am sure using our passports was not the only option.
You = UK, or something more personal?
I'd be surprised if we knew about all of the passports that were forged, and don't see the outrage that some were from the UK. Sure, the UK government went through the motions of asking the Israelis to not use UK passports, and sure the Israelis went through the motions of promising they wouldn't. I am sure HMG will insist on a re-utterance of the promise and that the Israelis will comply. That will make it great spycraft for the Israeli's to use UK passports in the future.
I'd be surprised to see this having any effect on cooperation against terrorism. These people are all grown up, and allowing one's own people to die rather than allow someone to give one information that would save them is childish.
Well, there was cctv in that hotel.
What did you guys expected them to do? Abort the mission?
Do you have any idea how hard is to locate a hamas operative that is lying low?
I don't think they would have had a second chance to to spill this cat's water.
I say job well done.
Besides, do we even know if those guys in the vids are the real strike team?
Those could be random tourists used by those Dubai cops so they don't look completely clueless.
After all, they have a dead body to answer for.
Quote from: grumbler on January 15, 1970, 10:50:06 AMI'd be surprised to see this having any effect on cooperation against terrorism. These people are all grown up, and allowing one's own people to die rather than allow someone to give one information that would save them is childish.
Brown and Milliband are more than stupid enough to throw the baby out with the bathwater, especially in an election year.
Unless there are bodyguards, who have not been mentioned, I honestly do not see why it took at least six people and twenty minutes to carry out an assassination of this kind. Get in, get out. Signs of torture (according to some news reports on YouTube) would suggest either the Israelis were indulging in a little revenge, which is unprofessional, or attempting to extract information, in which case it is remarkable he broke so quickly.
On a lighter note, Frank Skinner, having been isolated from all sources of news for a week, successfully guessed that two tennis gear clad individuals were trained assassins, and not members of parliament on a fact finding mission in Dubai (as the other two panelists guessed.)
The show being http://tvrage.com/shows/id-25081/, shown on the the BBC with BBC journalists forbidden from taking part.
Quote from: Malthus on February 19, 2010, 10:20:05 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors.
In that order? :P
Yes, 923 was a bad year for Erik the Confused.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 19, 2010, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 10:22:02 PM
And he damns the whole race.
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors. So fuck you.
Really? When did Iceland invade the US?
We invaded your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandmother well before her bloodline moved to america.
Let's not overstate Israeli professionalism. I've heard first-hand accounts of IDF troops throwing goats down wells and raping Palestinian children.
Quote from: Neil on February 19, 2010, 08:02:11 PM
Let's not overstate Israeli professionalism. I've heard first-hand accounts of IDF troops throwing goats down wells and raping Palestinian children.
I thought it was the other way round.
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 07:54:12 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 19, 2010, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 19, 2010, 12:26:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 18, 2010, 10:22:02 PM
And he damns the whole race.
My ancestors killed and raped your ancestors. So fuck you.
Really? When did Iceland invade the US?
We invaded your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandmother well before her bloodline moved to america.
There were precious few viking raids in to South Germany. And like 40% of Icelanders are actually descended for Irish slaves.
Quote from: Agelastus on February 19, 2010, 08:27:38 PM
Quote from: Neil on February 19, 2010, 08:02:11 PM
Let's not overstate Israeli professionalism. I've heard first-hand accounts of IDF troops throwing goats down wells and raping Palestinian children.
I thought it was the other way round.
pssst: those are siegy's stories.
Quote from: grumbler on February 19, 2010, 10:58:27 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on February 19, 2010, 08:27:38 PM
Quote from: Neil on February 19, 2010, 08:02:11 PM
Let's not overstate Israeli professionalism. I've heard first-hand accounts of IDF troops throwing goats down wells and raping Palestinian children.
I thought it was the other way round.
pssst: those are siegy's stories.
Well, he's a continent away and there are no wells near me, so I should be safe.
Huh. Apparently there's some displeasure how it was carried out in Israel.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 08:22:04 PM
Huh. Apparently there's some displeasure how it was carried out in Israel.
Link?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 20, 2010, 09:27:55 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 08:22:04 PM
Huh. Apparently there's some displeasure how it was carried out in Israel.
Link?
Nah, I don't play any Nintendo games anymore.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 19, 2010, 09:01:40 PM
And like 40% of Icelanders are actually descended for Irish slaves.
:lol: You can't get lower than that.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 08:22:04 PM
Huh. Apparently there's some displeasure how it was carried out in Israel.
Of course. It'd be weird if there wasn't, Israel's a decent, civilised country.
Yes, I would imagine that this sort of thing goes down very badly in places like Tel Aviv.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 08:28:29 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 08:22:04 PM
Huh. Apparently there's some displeasure how it was carried out in Israel.
Of course. It'd be weird if there wasn't, Israel's a decent, civilised country.
The big gripe is the publicity, not that it was done or they used British passports.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 21, 2010, 09:01:15 AM
The big gripe is the publicity, not that it was done or they used British passports.
Actually I'd read that there were questions of who within the political structure knew about it and an unhappiness that the real identity of Israeli citizens was used. Which I think is exactly the sort of reaction a similar operation would get in the UK.
I'm curious about that part. Is it because the actual dudes are somehow in danger now?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:41:12 AM
I'm curious about that part. Is it because the actual dudes are somehow in danger now?
I think it's more that it seems distasteful for any state to, in effect, steal the identity of some of its citizens. The German's said that he gave his permission - or it was his real passport or something - but the Brit-Israelis, Irish-Israelis and French-Israelis all completely deny any knowledge of it.
However chances are they are now targets for retaliation, not as much as the agents of course and not, I imagine, terribly prioritised ones.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:48:29 AM
However chances are they are now targets for retaliation, not as much as the agents of course and not, I imagine, terribly prioritised ones.
You think Hamas is going to try and kill some guys who had their passports stolen?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:51:03 AM
You think Hamas is going to try and kill some guys who had their passports stolen?
They were the people who killed this guy and I doubt that Hamas will necessarily believe their protestations of ignorance. I think that killing them would be higher on the list of priorities than, say, killing a random Israeli but that it'd be significantly lower than killing the actual agents or other figures.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:53:51 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:51:03 AM
You think Hamas is going to try and kill some guys who had their passports stolen?
They were the people who killed this guy and I doubt that Hamas will necessarily believe their protestations of ignorance. I think that killing them would be higher on the list of priorities than, say, killing a random Israeli but that it'd be significantly lower than killing the actual agents or other figures.
Killing random Israelis seems pretty high on the list of Hamas' priorities.
Quote from: Neil on February 21, 2010, 10:27:04 AM
Killing random Israelis seems pretty high on the list of Hamas' priorities.
That's because it's easier to do (or to try - the rockets aren't terribly effective) than, say, a big propagandistic attack on something important to Israeli identity, or an assassination of a prominent Israeli. But I think all things being equal they wouldn't choose to kill random Israelis - even if that meant more deaths - they'd want to do something bigger.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 10:30:48 AM
That's because it's easier to do (or to try - the rockets aren't terribly effective) than, say, a big propagandistic attack on something important to Israeli identity, or an assassination of a prominent Israeli. But I think all things being equal they wouldn't choose to kill random Israelis - even if that meant more deaths - they'd want to do something bigger.
Disagree. Killing random Israelis is much more effective as a terror tactic than killing specific Israelis. While I would agree that Hamas would sooner kill a Mossad agent than a random Israeli, I would think they would rather kill a random Israeli than one whose ID was stolen by Mossad. The latter is explicable and hence not as terrifying.
Quote from: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 11:46:47 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 10:30:48 AM
That's because it's easier to do (or to try - the rockets aren't terribly effective) than, say, a big propagandistic attack on something important to Israeli identity, or an assassination of a prominent Israeli. But I think all things being equal they wouldn't choose to kill random Israelis - even if that meant more deaths - they'd want to do something bigger.
Disagree. Killing random Israelis is much more effective as a terror tactic than killing specific Israelis. While I would agree that Hamas would sooner kill a Mossad agent than a random Israeli, I would think they would rather kill a random Israeli than one whose ID was stolen by Mossad. The latter is explicable and hence not as terrifying.
I disagree I think that these people would be useful targets because if they didn't know and they're killed then it's sending a message that, I suppose, what Mossad touches turns to dust. While if Hamas believe they did know that their identities were being used then it's the same as the IRA targeting British civil servants in Northern Ireland.
And I think that targeting something associated with Mossad is more terrifying than a random attack such as a rocket. The precision is scary but also the ability to pull something like that off (I mean I think the idea of Hamas assassinations in themselves would be scary) it's, I suppose, the propaganda of the deed. One of the more important IRA attacks in the seventies was the assassination of Lord Mountbatten, he had very little to do with Ireland in his career. The purpose was simply to make a statement.
I think that while Hamas probably won't target any of these people if they got a chance to kill them I think they'd definitely take it, either as Mossad dupes (in which case they are trying to hit at Mossad's reputation) or as being complicit in the Hamas assassination (in which case they're trying to send a message of what happens with people who help Mossad in any way).
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 12:27:45 PM
I disagree I think that these people would be useful targets because if they didn't know and they're killed then it's sending a message that, I suppose, what Mossad touches turns to dust. While if Hamas believe they did know that their identities were being used then it's the same as the IRA targeting British civil servants in Northern Ireland.
And I think that targeting something associated with Mossad is more terrifying than a random attack such as a rocket. The precision is scary but also the ability to pull something like that off (I mean I think the idea of Hamas assassinations in themselves would be scary) it's, I suppose, the propaganda of the deed. One of the more important IRA attacks in the seventies was the assassination of Lord Mountbatten, he had very little to do with Ireland in his career. The purpose was simply to make a statement.
I think you are waaaay over-analyzing this. Hamas and other terrorist groups operate under the concept that terror is their weapon, not assassination per se. They don't forgo assassination, of course, but neither do they employ it deliberately.
Lord Montbatten was targeted as a public figure, not as a dupe for British intelligence, so I see no parallels here. The Hamas equivelent would be the assassination of a senior retired Israeli military figure (preferably related by bllod to a high-level Israeli politician). Of course, Hamas would be morons to try to duplicate the PR disaster that was the Montbatten assassination...
QuoteI think that while Hamas probably won't target any of these people if they got a chance to kill them I think they'd definitely take it, either as Mossad dupes (in which case they are trying to hit at Mossad's reputation) or as being complicit in the Hamas assassination (in which case they're trying to send a message of what happens with people who help Mossad in any way).
I'm afraid I don't understand this statement at all. Hamas kills its targets. Hamas types don't wander around with guns looking for targets of opportunity. If they don't target these people, they will not kill them (except incidental to a terrorist attack aimed at random civilians). And, as I note above, Hamas targets random civilians for the most part, and Israeli troops for the rest.
Quote from: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 01:47:55 PM
I think you are waaaay over-analyzing this. Hamas and other terrorist groups operate under the concept that terror is their weapon, not assassination per se. They don't forgo assassination, of course, but neither do they employ it deliberately.
The IRA, numerous communist terrorist groups, a number of groups in India and, of course the anarchists, have all used assassination as a weapon within a more general terrorist campaign. I think that Islamists like Hamas are as likely to try especially if rocket attacks are seen to deliver diminishing results and as attacking Israel itself becomes more difficult. I think we simplify terrorism at our peril. If groups like anarchists a century ago, the RAF, the IRA and others can use ideas like the propaganda of the deed or a provocation strategy I think it more than likely that Islamist groups will too and we should be wary of that. For example the attack on the golden mosque in Samarra seems an example of both provocation and propaganda.
QuoteLord Montbatten was targeted as a public figure, not as a dupe for British intelligence, so I see no parallels here. The Hamas equivelent would be the assassination of a senior retired Israeli military figure (preferably related by bllod to a high-level Israeli politician). Of course, Hamas would be morons to try to duplicate the PR disaster that was the Montbatten assassination...
I agree it's an imperfect analogy - I think the better one is the IRA attacks on civil servants throughout the 70s and the 80s. But Mountbatten was attacked not because of his association with Ireland or anything that he'd done but simply as a symbol of the reach and the power of the IRA.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 12:27:45 PM
One of the more important IRA attacks in the seventies was the assassination of Lord Mountbatten, he had very little to do with Ireland in his career. The purpose was simply to make a statement.
The assassination of Lord Mountbatten served to ensure that a terrible retribution will fall upon the Irish people, when I am ready.
"Mountbatten" lol gay name changers
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 01:57:35 PM
I agree it's an imperfect analogy - I think the better one is the IRA attacks on civil servants throughout the 70s and the 80s. But Mountbatten was attacked not because of his association with Ireland or anything that he'd done but simply as a symbol of the reach and the power of the IRA.
While I don't disagree his assassination was meant to be a symbol for the IRA, since they killed him almost literally in their own back yard it didn't say anything about their reach. It would have been far more symbolic to have assassinated him in or near one of the seats of British power.
Quote from: The Brain on February 21, 2010, 02:26:59 PM
"Mountbatten" lol gay name changers
He didn't change his name. It was changed for him.
Quote from: Neil on February 22, 2010, 07:25:38 AM
Quote from: The Brain on February 21, 2010, 02:26:59 PM
"Mountbatten" lol gay name changers
He didn't change his name. It was changed for him.
His father did have the choice of "Battenhill" as an alternative. I know which one I prefer.
Quote from: MalthusBreaking promises is bad, in the same way that gentlemen do not read each other's mail. Gentlemen also do not use spies and assassins.
Indeed. The problem here is that they messed up the part where you make sure that you can maintain at least a fig leaf of this fiction.
Now the big guns are coming out:
QuoteEU condemns passport use in Dubai killing
EU foreign ministers in Brussels have "strongly condemned" the use of forged European passports in the assassination of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh.
The statement made no direct reference to Israel, whose secret services are widely accused of having carried out last month's killing in Dubai.
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman met some foreign ministers on the sidelines of the meeting.
Mr Lieberman has reiterated there is "no proof" of Israel's involvement.
"There is no proof Israel is involved in this affair, and if somebody had presented any proof, aside from press stories, we would have reacted," Mr Lieberman said in a statement from his office.
"But since there are no concrete elements, there is no need to react."
His comments followed the EU statement which said: "The killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai raises issues which are profoundly disturbing.
We spent most of the time talking about the issue of the fraudulent use of British passports, and the profound concern that exists not just in Britain but all over Europe about this incident.
'More UK passports linked to killing'
"We strongly condemn the use of fraudulent EU member states' passports and credit cards acquired through the theft of EU citizens' identities."
French President Nicolas Sarkozy also "unreservedly condemned" the assassination during a press conference with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, news agency AFP said.
Mr Mabhouh was killed in Dubai by a team who had entered the country on assumed identities belonging to British, Irish, French and German citizens.
Israeli meeting
The foreign ministers of those countries have been questioning Mr Lieberman about Israel's role in the assassination, in private meetings on Monday.
After meeting Mr Lieberman, UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband said he had "set out for the foreign minister the seriousness of the issue as far as Britain was concerned".
"We spent most of the time talking about the issue of the fraudulent use of British passports, and the profound concern that exists not just in Britain but all over Europe about this incident," he said.
In another development on Monday, UK Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant said another two British passports had been linked to the assassination, bringing the total to eight.
Mr Mabhouh was murdered in a Dubai hotel room, police say
The EU statement did not mention it by name, but Mossad, Israel's secret service, is widely accused of being behind the killing.
The assassins, some disguised in wigs and moustaches, were filmed following Mr Mabhouh, on Dubai's extensive CCTV network.
He was killed in his hotel room and an autopsy report said he had been electrocuted and then suffocated.
It has emerged that the British citizens whose identities were stolen also hold Israeli citizenship.
Six British Israeli citizens are to be given new passports by the British embassy in Jerusalem, it was announced on Sunday.
The British embassy said it was the first step to clearing their names, which are now on an Interpol wanted list.
Police in Dubai have also indicated there could be further revelations to come about the assassination.
Some of the estimated 18-strong hit team could have entered the country using diplomatic passports, Lt Gen Dhahi Khalifan Tamim told reporters.