Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
On Sat, 04 Nov 2023 15:38:31 +0000, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
Hence my question. With various police forces muttering about locking up
anti war protestors at such parades, then maybe there is a political dimension we have been ill informed about ?
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> >wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a >glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting >war originally.
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting
war originally.
--
Roger Hayter
That said a demonstration supporting terrorists who in two days
murdered more Israelis in cold blood than the number of homicides in
the UK in two years is likely to provoke a strong reaction both from
the marchers and those paying them their respects.
On Saturday, 4 November 2023 at 17:53:26 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting
war originally.
--
Roger Hayter
Maybe it was, maybe one could see it as a celebration of peace, but those who actually did the fighting get very irate if people try to hijack it, witness the strong reaction to pacifists handing out white poppies. That said where I live the parade passes the Friends' Meeting House and one lone protester used to stand there with a placard extoling peace as it went by and there was no issue.
That said a demonstration supporting terrorists who in two days murdered more Israelis in cold blood than the number of homicides in the UK in two years is likely to provoke a strong reaction both from the marchers and those paying them their respects.
It would be just the same if it was, say, Just Stop Oil disrupting the Notting Hill Carnival.
On 5 Nov 2023 at 13:02:00 GMT, "notyalckram@gmail.com" <notyalckram@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Saturday, 4 November 2023 at 17:53:26 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting
war originally.
--
Roger Hayter
Maybe it was, maybe one could see it as a celebration of peace, but those who
actually did the fighting get very irate if people try to hijack it, witness >> the strong reaction to pacifists handing out white poppies. That said where I
live the parade passes the Friends' Meeting House and one lone protester used
to stand there with a placard extoling peace as it went by and there was no >> issue.
That said a demonstration supporting terrorists who in two days murdered more
Israelis in cold blood than the number of homicides in the UK in two years is
likely to provoke a strong reaction both from the marchers and those paying >> them their respects.
It may be difficult for the average passer-by to accept, but the great majority of those supporting the Palestinians are not supporting the terrorists. Just as quite a lot of people (including many Israelis) who oppose
anti-semitism are not supporting all the current Israeli government's actions.
There are nuances.
Anyone would be forgiven if they thought Keir Starmer was in the pockets
of Israel.
Societies attitude nowadays to permanently injured'Twas always thus.
ex-servicemen or perhaps more tellingly those who end
up in prison is possibly a better indication of how much
society actually values its armed services.
On 04/11/2023 17:45, billy bookcase wrote:
Societies attitude nowadays to permanently injured'Twas always thus.
ex-servicemen or perhaps more tellingly those who end
up in prison is possibly a better indication of how much
society actually values its armed services.
"For it's Tommy this, and Tommy that, and "Chuck him out, the brute!
But it's "Saviour of his country" when the guns begin to shoot".
"soup" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message news:uid7tq$vtj0$1@dont-email.me...
On 04/11/2023 17:45, billy bookcase wrote:
Societies attitude nowadays to permanently injured'Twas always thus.
ex-servicemen or perhaps more tellingly those who end
up in prison is possibly a better indication of how much
society actually values its armed services.
"For it's Tommy this, and Tommy that, and "Chuck him out, the brute!
But it's "Saviour of his country" when the guns begin to shoot".
Indeed first published in 1890 and written of course by Rudyard
Kipling. Who's only son John was killed in the Battle of Loos at
the age of 18. Having tragically been encouraged to enlist by
his father, who'd used his connections to enable this.
Leaving aside peasants conscripted by Feudal Lords and the English
Civil War, World War One was the first time ordinary people mainly
young men at first, at least, donned uniforms and were subject to
all the brutalities of modern warfare.
What once had been a minority occupation in 1890, and is so again
today, was something affecting almost every family in the UK in one
way or another. (My own grandad, as never was, was killed in 1918
leaving 2 sons and a widow)
And so some sort of response was called for, simply in order to enable Society as a whole to cope with it all.
And so the whole panoply of military ceremonial regiments, uniforms regimental histories medals were all ramped up. Along with specific
measures war memorials - both national and local a heyday
for the small band of British sculptors, culminating in the Cenotaph
and the Menin Gate gracing one of the many beautifully laid
Commonwealth War Graves cemeteries. All so as to accommodate
people to the realities of modern warfare.
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
Not that you suggested it was, your post was merely a pretext
Help, help, I've been used as a pretext !
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
Not that you suggested it was, your post was merely a pretext
Help, help, I've been used as a pretext !
On Saturday, 4 November 2023 at 17:53:26 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:passes the Friends' Meeting House and one lone protester used to stand there with a placard extoling peace as it went by and there was no issue.
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting
war originally.
--
Roger Hayter
Maybe it was, maybe one could see it as a celebration of peace, but those who actually did the fighting get very irate if people try to hijack it, witness the strong reaction to pacifists handing out white poppies. That said where I live the parade
That said a demonstration supporting terrorists who in two days murdered more Israelis in cold blood than the number of homicides in the UK in two years is likely to provoke a strong reaction both from the marchers and those paying them their respects.
On 05/11/2023 in message <ui89kb$19rf$1@dont-email.me> Fredxx wrote:
Anyone would be forgiven if they thought Keir Starmer was in the
pockets of Israel.
Apologies if you were intending to be ironic, but many MPs of all hews
are members of The Labour Friends of Israel. Do they have to declare
this? Is there a Palestinian equivalent?
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
Anyone would be forgiven if they thought Keir Starmer was in the pockets >>>of Israel.
Apologies if you were intending to be ironic, but many MPs of all hews
are members of The Labour Friends of Israel. Do they have to declare
this? Is there a Palestinian equivalent?
The Israel lobby is extremely efficient at promoting the interests of
Israel and persuading everyone that those who condemn Israel are all >disgusting antisemites, and persuading Jews that they ought to speak up
for Israel and support the actions of Israel.
On 08/11/2023 in message <kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net> The Todal wrote:
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >>wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
I don't think there's anything glorious about being dead, it always
struck me as an odd inscription for the Cenotaph.
On 2023-11-08, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 in message <kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net> The Todal wrote: >>> Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >>> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
I don't think there's anything glorious about being dead, it always
struck me as an odd inscription for the Cenotaph.
It doesn't mean it's glorious to be dead, it means it is dedicated
to those dead who are deserving of praise, honour, thanksgiving, etc.
Young men joined the army, they went to France for WW1 and they became
cannon fodder. It was a shameful waste of life.
Praise, honour and thanksgiving are simply ways of saying that they are
an example for us all to follow.
Maybe we should "thank" the victims of Hiroshima for their selfless
behaviour in showing the world the dangers of thermonuclear war....?
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a wonderful example.
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >> wonderful example.
There never was a romantic narrative concerning the First World War
This is "No Mans Land" a relief by Charles Sargeant Jagger*
https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/jagger-no-mans-land-n01354
Contrary to first impressions maybe, there's only one live soldier represented. The one in the foreground with his back to us. He's
manning a listening post while all the others are dead.. They're
corpses in varying states of decomposition. (If they weren't
dead already they soon would be)
That was the romance of life in the trenches. Living in close
proximity to corpses often of people you'd known.
Here's some more romance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:British_55th_Division_gas_casualties_10_April_1918.jpg
Not dead this time just blinded by gas .
These men weren't particularly brave.
They were simply the victims of women carrying white feathers at home
and the esprit de corps which eventually effects almost all enlisted men.
The simple desire to not let down your mates. And the people back home.
Or the French in granddad's case. He and his mates, vainly trying to plug
a gap in their line. Although being an old soldier, a territorial
lately called up, at 38 he'll have doubtless known what to expect.
Nobody ever pretended that what happened, on the Western Front at least,
was anything other than horrific. Hence the ever more pressing need to
make it "acceptable" in some way,
bb
* An interesting sculptor having served in WW1 and been invalided out
twice. Sculptor of the Artillery Memorial at Hyde Park Corner including
the bronze, dead artillery man, laid out under a blanket at one end.
The extensive stonework was roughed out by the Italian craftsmen from
the Italian community in London. Who also supplied the models for all
his soldiers, The Artillery Memorial, Paddington Station etc etc in
the form of the Mancini Brothers
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives
for us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who
set us a wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
I know Hamas don't. The Palestinian civilians are suffering horribly -
but what can Israel do, faced with a neighbouring government that
believes every single one of them should die?
Andy
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
On 07/11/2023 18:10, billy bookcase wrote:
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
If you speak to most elderly ex-soldiers they will say that their
opinion of Remembrance Day is that it is a day to remember futile human >sacrifice, the young men who were deprived of their future, and to
assert that future wars must be avoided.
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives
for us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who
set us a wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
Another word for these glorious dead would be "martyrs" but that's a
taboo word because it reminds everyone of Islamic fundamentalists.
On 08/11/2023 10:53, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2023-11-08, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 in message <kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net> The Todal wrote:
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >>>> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
I don't think there's anything glorious about being dead, it always
struck me as an odd inscription for the Cenotaph.
It doesn't mean it's glorious to be dead, it means it is dedicated
to those dead who are deserving of praise, honour, thanksgiving, etc.
With respect, I think that means exactly the same thing.
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 09:38:20 +0000, The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
On 07/11/2023 18:10, billy bookcase wrote:
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
If you speak to most elderly ex-soldiers they will say that their
opinion of Remembrance Day is that it is a day to remember futile human >>sacrifice, the young men who were deprived of their future, and to
assert that future wars must be avoided.
As someone who, in my civic capacity, has been closely involved in many Armistice Day, Remembrance Day and related events over the past decade or
so, I'd say that's a very accurate description.
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives
for us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who
set us a wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
That, too. It's always the people who've never had to serve in the forces
who thinks that that warfare is somehow heroic.
Another word for these glorious dead would be "martyrs" but that's a
taboo word because it reminds everyone of Islamic fundamentalists.
I don't think martyr is really the right word; that carries the context of suffering or death as a result of personal beliefs. Most casualties in war aren't really fighting for a cause, they're just doing a job.
On 08/11/2023 13:29, billy bookcase wrote:
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives
for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us >>> a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
Well, we did stand back while he operated the Final Solution and killed
six million. So that's not a relevant consideration. We currently stand back and allow genocide in Gaza. We allowed various other genocides - in Rwanda and Bosnia.
That's "we" meaning governments, of course - it was never offered to us as
an option for ordinary men and women to get involved. We can march, and fuckwit politicians can condemn us for foolishly demanding a ceasefire.
We could not allow Nazi Germany to dominate Europe and challenge Britain's position as the most powerful empire in the world. We therefore had to
stand up to Nazi Germany with the result that....
a) We lost our position as the most powerful empire in the world and were supplanted by the USA and the Soviet Union. Our empire gradually dwindled into nothing.
b) For ever afterwards our government has been forced to pretend to our electorate that we are still a very important and influential nation and
that our best days are not behind us but ahead of us.
Although it was right to go to war against Germany and Japan and to help America and Russia defeat Germany, nobody can really say how different our world would have been, in the long term, if Germany and Japan had won that war. We have to assume the worst, but can it be said that the UK and USA
were benevolent conquerors in the past,
and that the enslaved natives were better off for being conquered? If
Germany had won, perhaps Hitler would have gone back to his original plan
to encourage Jews to leave German territory. Perhaps he would have handed over Palestinian territory to the Jews and called that territory Israel. Perhaps he would have enjoyed watching the extermination of the
Palestinians, another inferior race.
On 8 Nov 2023 at 16:11:28 GMT, "Vir Campestris" <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
I know Hamas don't. The Palestinian civilians are suffering horribly -
but what can Israel do, faced with a neighbouring government that
believes every single one of them should die?
Andy
That is *not* Hamas' policy. Their original charter did say something like that (I think either die or go away rather than just die). And of course the Israelis love to quote that original document.
But Hamas' current policy does not demand that all Israelis die or leave. It is rather more nuanced and politically reasonable. Whereas some of the Israeli
coalition partners do have precisely that policy about the Palestinians.
Both sides tell a lot of lies. It is best to check before assuming that what they say is true.
On 08/11/2023 16:28, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 8 Nov 2023 at 16:11:28 GMT, "Vir Campestris"
<vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
I know Hamas don't. The Palestinian civilians are suffering horribly -
but what can Israel do, faced with a neighbouring government that
believes every single one of them should die?
Andy
That is *not* Hamas' policy. Their original charter did say something like >> that (I think either die or go away rather than just die). And of course the
Israelis love to quote that original document.
But Hamas' current policy does not demand that all Israelis die or leave. It >> is rather more nuanced and politically reasonable. Whereas some of the Israeli
coalition partners do have precisely that policy about the Palestinians.
Cite perhaps please?
The article on Britannica paints a less rosy picture. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hamas
Both sides tell a lot of lies. It is best to check before assuming that what >> they say is true.
Indeed.
Both sides tell a lot of lies. It is best to check before assuming that what
they say is true.
Indeed.
See the following Israeli document. The editorial line is that they are a bit half-hearted about reform and probably still want to kill all Jews. But the fact that they have changed their policy is accepted by this apparently mainstream Israeli source.
https://mitvim.org.il/wp-content/uploads/Ido_Zelkovitz_-_Hamas_New_Policy_Document_-_May_2017.pdf
On 09/11/2023 10:52, Roger Hayter wrote:
.....
Both sides tell a lot of lies. It is best to check before assuming that what
they say is true.
Indeed.
See the following Israeli document. The editorial line is that they are a bit
half-hearted about reform and probably still want to kill all Jews. But the >> fact that they have changed their policy is accepted by this apparently
mainstream Israeli source.
https://mitvim.org.il/wp-content/uploads/Ido_Zelkovitz_-_Hamas_New_Policy_Document_-_May_2017.pdf
"Despite an evident effort by Hamas to amend its political rhetoric and
to align it with the modern era, Hamas sticks with its traditional
positions regarding Israel."
Hmmm. Maybe I take a too-jaundiced view of things, but that reads to me
like an account of a whitewash attempt.
On 5 Nov 2023 at 13:02:00 GMT, "notya...@gmail.com" <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 4 November 2023 at 17:53:26 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting
war originally.
--
Roger Hayter
Maybe it was, maybe one could see it as a celebration of peace, but those who
actually did the fighting get very irate if people try to hijack it, witness
the strong reaction to pacifists handing out white poppies. That said where I
live the parade passes the Friends' Meeting House and one lone protester used
to stand there with a placard extoling peace as it went by and there was no issue.
That said a demonstration supporting terrorists who in two days murdered moreIt may be difficult for the average passer-by to accept, but the great majority of those supporting the Palestinians are not supporting the terrorists. Just as quite a lot of people (including many Israelis) who oppose
Israelis in cold blood than the number of homicides in the UK in two years is
likely to provoke a strong reaction both from the marchers and those paying them their respects.
anti-semitism are not supporting all the current Israeli government's actions.
There are nuances.
--
Roger Hayter
On Sunday, 5 November 2023 at 14:21:42 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 5 Nov 2023 at 13:02:00 GMT, "notya...@gmail.com" <notya...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Saturday, 4 November 2023 at 17:53:26 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:It may be difficult for the average passer-by to accept, but the great
On 4 Nov 2023 at 15:38:31 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> >>>> wrote:
On 2023-11-04, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:Since Blair there has been a consistent attempt to turn it into a
Curious as to how that might play out in a court.
Is a remembrance parade not already a kind of anti-war protest?
glorification of military power, but it certainly had an element of regretting
war originally.
--
Roger Hayter
Maybe it was, maybe one could see it as a celebration of peace, but those who
actually did the fighting get very irate if people try to hijack it, witness
the strong reaction to pacifists handing out white poppies. That said where I
live the parade passes the Friends' Meeting House and one lone protester used
to stand there with a placard extoling peace as it went by and there was no >>> issue.
That said a demonstration supporting terrorists who in two days murdered more
Israelis in cold blood than the number of homicides in the UK in two years is
likely to provoke a strong reaction both from the marchers and those paying >>> them their respects.
majority of those supporting the Palestinians are not supporting the
terrorists. Just as quite a lot of people (including many Israelis) who oppose
anti-semitism are not supporting all the current Israeli government's actions.
There are nuances.
--
Roger Hayter
True - an anti-war protest calling for a cease fire is not the same as a pro Hamas demonstration supporting their atrocities. Nevertheless holding the demo
on the same day as remembrance does seem a provocative thing to do.
I wonder whether these cease fire demonstrators protested about the Russian invasion of Ukraine even though Ukraine had not fired thousands of missiles into Russia, murdered over a thousand of its civilians in cold blood or taken hundreds including women and children hostage (quite the reverse in reality)?
"Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote in message >news:9ngnki18rs34f726rimhqoneth0p1g0qfp@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 09:38:20 +0000, The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote: >>
On 07/11/2023 18:10, billy bookcase wrote:
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country >>>> and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
If you speak to most elderly ex-soldiers they will say that their
opinion of Remembrance Day is that it is a day to remember futile human >>>sacrifice, the young men who were deprived of their future, and to
assert that future wars must be avoided.
As someone who, in my civic capacity, has been closely involved in many
Armistice Day, Remembrance Day and related events over the past decade or
so, I'd say that's a very accurate description.
All that's saying, is that if asked, everyone is in favour of World
Peace. Get away !
But if asked if the UK should immediately disband the Army Navy and
Air Force, thus saving UK taxpyers shedloads of money in the process
I'd hazard a guess they would come up with a somewhat different
answer.
Really? So name some popular World War One heroes everyone is
always banging on about. Some heroes of the trenches
All right. Just one.
Someone most people will have heard of.
On 9 Nov 2023 at 17:33:30 GMT, "notya...@gmail.com" <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
True - an anti-war protest calling for a cease fire is not the same as a pro
Hamas demonstration supporting their atrocities. Nevertheless holding the demo
on the same day as remembrance does seem a provocative thing to do.
I wonder whether these cease fire demonstrators protested about the Russian invasion of Ukraine even though Ukraine had not fired thousands of missiles into Russia, murdered over a thousand of its civilians in cold blood or takenIt would have been a bit bizarre to "protest" about a UK foreign policy that was entirely supportive of the Ukraine. Apart from being a totally spurious argument to say you cannot support x unless you also support y and z. Some, most maybe, probably did support Ukraine but it was entirely their choice as to whether it was close enough to their sympathies to actually go on the streets to support our government unnecessarily.
hundreds including women and children hostage (quite the reverse in reality)?
--
Roger Hayter
True - an anti-war protest calling for a cease fire is not the
same as a pro Hamas demonstration supporting their atrocities.
Nevertheless holding the demo on the same day as remembrance
does seem a provocative thing to do.
There are groups which have attached themselves to the Palestinian cause which have a history of precisely the kind of actions that the
authorities are wary of.
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 20:49:04 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are groups which have attached themselves to the Palestinian cause
which have a history of precisely the kind of actions that the
authorities are wary of.
Well given there are groups that have attached themselves to the
Armistice and Remembrance events, maybe there is a symmetry ?
A lot of this kerfuffle would not have happened if the establishment
hadn't co-opted the occasion into a political spectacle.
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
"soup" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message news:uid7tq$vtj0$1@dont-email.me...
On 04/11/2023 17:45, billy bookcase wrote:
Societies attitude nowadays to permanently injured'Twas always thus.
ex-servicemen or perhaps more tellingly those who end
up in prison is possibly a better indication of how much
society actually values its armed services.
"For it's Tommy this, and Tommy that, and "Chuck him out, the brute!
But it's "Saviour of his country" when the guns begin to shoot".
Indeed first published in 1890 and written of course by Rudyard
Kipling. Who's only son John was killed in the Battle of Loos at
the age of 18. Having tragically been encouraged to enlist by
his father, who'd used his connections to enable this.
Leaving aside peasants conscripted by Feudal Lords and the English
Civil War, World War One was the first time ordinary people mainly
young men at first, at least, donned uniforms and were subject to
all the brutalities of modern warfare.
What once had been a minority occupation in 1890, and is so again
today, was something affecting almost every family in the UK in one
way or another. (My own grandad, as never was, was killed in 1918
leaving 2 sons and a widow)
And so some sort of response was called for, simply in order to enable Society as a whole to cope with it all.
And so the whole panoply of military ceremonial regiments, uniforms regimental histories medals were all ramped up. Along with specific
measures war memorials - both national and local a heyday
for the small band of British sculptors, culminating in the Cenotaph
and the Menin Gate gracing one of the many beautifully laid
Commonwealth War Graves cemeteries. All so as to accommodate
people to the realities of modern warfare.
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
Not that you suggested it was, your post was merely a pretext
Help, help, I've been used as a pretext !
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >>> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138cFeasrU2@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a >>>> wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition >>> his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were just making a fuss about nothing?
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 20:49:04 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are groups which have attached themselves to the Palestinian cause
which have a history of precisely the kind of actions that the
authorities are wary of.
Well given there are groups that have attached themselves to the
Armistice and Remembrance events, maybe there is a symmetry ?
A lot of this kerfuffle would not have happened if the establishment
hadn't co-opted the occasion into a political spectacle.
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition >> his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were just making a fuss about nothing?
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>>>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition >>>> his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for >>>>> us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition >>>> his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
On 11/11/2023 16:12, Brian W wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the
fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their
lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who
set us a
Even back in those days there were plenty of Cruella Bravermans loudly complaining that the nation was facing the threat of a "hurricane" of migrants who, however reasonable their request for help, should be
barred from entry because we would like them to fuck off elsewhere.
On 11/11/2023 16:12, Brian W wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
I think that is correct. And the Wannsee Conference which formalised the arrangements for the extermination was in January 1942.
However, when we knew that tens of thousands of Jews were being deprived
of their homes and possessions and their shops smashed up, and were
being beaten up in the streets, wouldn't that be a sufficient reason to
give them asylum in the USA and the UK? Was it really necessary to
ignore that persecution until the mass shootings and gassings had begun?
Even back in those days there were plenty of Cruella Bravermans loudly complaining that the nation was facing the threat of a "hurricane" of migrants who, however reasonable their request for help, should be
barred from entry because we would like them to fuck off elsewhere.
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the invasion of the USSR in June 1941.Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and starvation.
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 16:52:16 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the >> Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it >> we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >>>> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in >>> 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
OK, fine. I think the point is that the killings increased by at least an order of magnitude in June 1941. Prior to that, I imagine that tens of thousands of Jews were dying each year through forced labour and starvation. Around 3 million were murdered in a single year once the death camps got running in 1942.
On 11 Nov 2023 at 18:20:31 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 16:52:16 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for >>>>> believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
just making a fuss about nothing?
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in
1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it
we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before >> actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
OK, fine. I think the point is that the killings increased by at least an order of magnitude in June 1941. Prior to that, I imagine that tens of thousands of Jews were dying each year through forced labour and starvation.I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide was already clear, at least to those trying to escape, then millions might have been saved.
Around 3 million were murdered in a single year once the death camps got running in 1942.
On 11 Nov 2023 at 18:20:31 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwhitehead@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 16:52:16 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for >>>>>> believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
just making a fuss about nothing?
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in
1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it
we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before >>> actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
OK, fine. I think the point is that the killings increased by at least an
order of magnitude in June 1941. Prior to that, I imagine that tens of
thousands of Jews were dying each year through forced labour and starvation. >> Around 3 million were murdered in a single year once the death camps got
running in 1942.
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide was already clear, at least to those trying to escape, then millions might have been saved.
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 21:02:21 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:course Jews in other European countries as well, but none of the Jews in Poland, USSR and other non-German countries would have been persecuted by the Nazis until their countries were invaded during the war, by when it would not have been possible for
On 11 Nov 2023 at 18:20:31 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 16:52:16 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in messageThat objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for >>>>>>> believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ? >>>>>>>
just making a fuss about nothing?
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in
1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>>>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it
we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before >>>> actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
OK, fine. I think the point is that the killings increased by at least an >>> order of magnitude in June 1941. Prior to that, I imagine that tens of
thousands of Jews were dying each year through forced labour and starvation.
Around 3 million were murdered in a single year once the death camps got >>> running in 1942.
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide >> was already clear, at least to those trying to escape, then millions might >> have been saved.
I don't think that's right, because the vast majority of Jews murdered in the Holocaust were not German. I think there were only around 200,000 Jews in Germany in 1933. 3 million were Polish, and around 1.5 million lived in the USSR. There were of
At most, therefore, 200,000 might have been saved.
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 21:02:21 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 18:20:31 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 16:52:16 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in messageThat objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for >>>>>>> believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ? >>>>>>>
just making a fuss about nothing?
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in
1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>>>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it
we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before >>>> actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
OK, fine. I think the point is that the killings increased by at least an >>> order of magnitude in June 1941. Prior to that, I imagine that tens of
thousands of Jews were dying each year through forced labour and starvation.
Around 3 million were murdered in a single year once the death camps got >>> running in 1942.
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide >> was already clear, at least to those trying to escape, then millions might >> have been saved.
I don't think that's right, because the vast majority of Jews murdered in the Holocaust were not German. I think there were only around 200,000 Jews in Germany in 1933. 3 million were Polish, and around 1.5 million lived in the USSR. There were of course Jews in other European countries as well, but none of the Jews in Poland, USSR and other non-German countries would have been persecuted by the Nazis until their countries were invaded during the war, by when it would not have been possible for them to become refugees.
At most, therefore, 200,000 might have been saved.
I don't think that's right, because the vast majority of Jews murdered in the Holocaust were not German. I think there were only around 200,000 Jews in Germany in 1933....
On 11/11/2023 16:12, Brian W wrote:
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power
in 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon
the invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
I think that is correct. And the Wannsee Conference which formalised the >arrangements for the extermination was in January 1942.
However, when we knew that tens of thousands of Jews were being deprived
of their homes and possessions and their shops smashed up, and were
being beaten up in the streets, wouldn't that be a sufficient reason to
give them asylum in the USA and the UK? Was it really necessary to
ignore that persecution until the mass shootings and gassings had begun?
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 21:02:21 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide >> was already clear, at least to those trying to escape, then millions might >> have been saved.
I don't think that's right, because the vast majority of Jews murdered in the >Holocaust were not German. I think there were only around 200,000 Jews in Germany
in 1933. 3 million were Polish, and around 1.5 million lived in the USSR. There
were of course Jews in other European countries as well, but none of the Jews in
Poland, USSR and other non-German countries would have been persecuted by the >Nazis until their countries were invaded during the war, by when it would not >have been possible for them to become refugees.
At most, therefore, 200,000 might have been saved.
On 07/11/2023 06:10 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"soup" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:uid7tq$vtj0$1@dont-email.me...
On 04/11/2023 17:45, billy bookcase wrote:Indeed first published in 1890 and written of course by Rudyard
Societies attitude nowadays to permanently injured'Twas always thus.
ex-servicemen or perhaps more tellingly those who end
up in prison is possibly a better indication of how much
society actually values its armed services.
"For it's Tommy this, and Tommy that, and "Chuck him out, the brute! >>> But it's "Saviour of his country" when the guns begin to shoot". >>
Kipling. Who's only son John was killed in the Battle of Loos at
the age of 18. Having tragically been encouraged to enlist by
his father, who'd used his connections to enable this.
Leaving aside peasants conscripted by Feudal Lords and the English
Civil War, World War One was the first time ordinary people mainly
young men at first, at least, donned uniforms and were subject to
all the brutalities of modern warfare.
What once had been a minority occupation in 1890, and is so again
today, was something affecting almost every family in the UK in one
way or another. (My own grandad, as never was, was killed in 1918
leaving 2 sons and a widow)
And so some sort of response was called for, simply in order to enable
Society as a whole to cope with it all.
And so the whole panoply of military ceremonial regiments, uniforms
regimental histories medals were all ramped up. Along with specific
measures war memorials - both national and local a heyday
for the small band of British sculptors, culminating in the Cenotaph
and the Menin Gate gracing one of the many beautifully laid
Commonwealth War Graves cemeteries. All so as to accommodate
people to the realities of modern warfare.
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
Not that you suggested it was, your post was merely a pretext
Help, help, I've been used as a pretext !
Yes... my paternal grandfather, relatively newly arrived from Ireland (then still part
of the United Kingdom, of course) volunteered on the outbreak of war. He survived, but
had been affected by chlorine gas (or whatever else the Germans used). He managed to
last until the late 1940s.
PS: I've seen the Menin Gate.
I wasn't aware that it was adjacent to a war cemetery (it's in a town centre). The
Cenotaph, as we know, certainly isn't.
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwhitehead@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >>> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached
an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition >>>>> his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in >> 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the
invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it we call it genocide,
and I think it probably met the criteria long before
actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and starvation.
On 11/11/2023 21:49, Brian W wrote:
...
I don't think that's right, because the vast majority of Jews murdered in the Holocaust were not German. I think there were only around 200,000 Jews in Germany in 1933....
The 1933 census gives a figure of around 505,000, of whom around 400,000
were German citizens:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/germany-jewish-population-in-1933
On 11 Nov 2023 at 21:49:06 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 21:02:21 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 18:20:31 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 16:52:16 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish >> refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote: >>>>>> On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in messageThat objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for >>>>>>> believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious
dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ? >>>>>>>
just making a fuss about nothing?
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in
1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the
invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it
we call it genocide, and I think it probably met the criteria long before
actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and >>>> starvation.
OK, fine. I think the point is that the killings increased by at least an >>> order of magnitude in June 1941. Prior to that, I imagine that tens of >>> thousands of Jews were dying each year through forced labour and starvation.
Around 3 million were murdered in a single year once the death camps got >>> running in 1942.
was already clear, at least to those trying to escape, then millions might >> have been saved.
I don't think that's right, because the vast majority of Jews murdered in the
Holocaust were not German. I think there were only around 200,000 Jews in Germany in 1933. 3 million were Polish, and around 1.5 million lived in the USSR. There were of course Jews in other European countries as well, but none
of the Jews in Poland, USSR and other non-German countries would have been persecuted by the Nazis until their countries were invaded during the war, by
when it would not have been possible for them to become refugees.
At most, therefore, 200,000 might have been saved.Well that's not bad.
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide was already clear, ...
On 11/11/2023 04:52 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwhitehead@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were >>>> just making a fuss about nothing?
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent >>>>>>> patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for
believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in >>> 1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the >> Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it >> we call it genocide,
"When the Chinese do it we call it genocide"?
Well, to the very limited extent that certain persons obviously lacking
in basic education may be doing so), we *shouldn't* call it genocide.
After all, "genocide" - or at least, the "cide" bit of it - means
*killing*.
Imprisonment and forced labour are not forms of killing, are they?
When German POWs were put to work on British farms during WW2, was that "genocide"?
and I think it probably met the criteria long before
actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
What "criteria"?
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide >> was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to the
Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the Jews
could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the 1930s.
Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944
On 07/11/2023 06:10 pm, billy bookcase wrote:SNIP
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from
genocide was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to the
Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the Jews
could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the 1930s.
Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944
I think your point is that before the outbreak of war up to 200,000
might have been saved, but that isn't the entire picture. We could have >facilitated the refugee applications after the outbreak of war, from the
many who had fled to Holland and other countries which were thought to
be safe until they were overran by the Germans.
On 12 Nov 2023 at 16:45:27 GMT, "Colin Bignell" <c...@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk>
wrote:
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish >> refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide
was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to the Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the Jews
could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the 1930s.
Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944I am saying that although the word had not been used the situation of the Jews
in Germany in the thirties would meet our modern definition of genocide. And even if it didn't it would meet any reasonable person's criteria for refugee status.
On 12/11/2023 04:45 pm, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept
Jewish
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from
genocide was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to the
Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the Jews
could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the 1930s.
Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944
I'm surprised it wasn't known (as a concept) any earlier than that.
"war to end all wars" [it wasn't], but pro-peace it definitely is.On 07/11/2023 06:10 pm, billy bookcase wrote:SNIP
Remembrance merely set a precedent; a sense of duty towards one country
and the honour of laying down ones life on its behalf. Which could
then be impressed on future generations if called upon to make a
similar sacrifice.
Anti War it most definitely is not.
Pacifist it definitely not, it commemorates those who died fighting in the
On 12 Nov 2023 at 16:45:27 GMT, "Colin Bignell" <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept Jewish >>> refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from genocide >>> was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to the
Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the Jews
could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the 1930s.
Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944
I am saying that although the word had not been used the situation of the Jews
in Germany in the thirties would meet our modern definition of genocide.
And
even if it didn't it would meet any reasonable person's criteria for refugee status.
See the following Israeli document. The editorial line is that they are a bit half-hearted about reform and probably still want to kill all Jews. But the fact that they have changed their policy is accepted by this apparently mainstream Israeli source.
https://mitvim.org.il/wp-content/uploads/Ido_Zelkovitz_-_Hamas_New_Policy_Document_-_May_2017.pdf
On 09/11/2023 10:52, Roger Hayter wrote:
See the following Israeli document. The editorial line is that they
are a bit
half-hearted about reform and probably still want to kill all Jews.
But the
fact that they have changed their policy is accepted by this apparently
mainstream Israeli source.
https://mitvim.org.il/wp-content/uploads/Ido_Zelkovitz_-_Hamas_New_Policy_Document_-_May_2017.pdf
"it will still reject Israel’s right to exist "
"When phrasing the new document, Hamas took into account the limitations
of the Islamist rhetoric and the weariness it invokes among the
Palestinian public and the Arab world."
"Regional actors can make it clear to Hamas that in order to maintain
its rule in Gaza, it must disavow violence."
That sounds to me rather as if they've been forced to tone down their
public stance, rather than a change in their beliefs.
On 12 Nov 2023 at 13:19:04 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 11/11/2023 04:52 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 16:12:55 GMT, "Brian W" <brianwhitehead@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 11 November 2023 at 14:53:05 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Nov 2023 at 13:32:49 GMT, "JNugent" <jnu...@mail.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2023 01:29 pm, billy bookcase wrote:And the shiploads of Jewish refugees we and the Americans turned away were
"The Todal" <the_...@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:kr138c...@mid.individual.net...
Whereas the armchair warriors, the descendants of soldiers, the fervent
patriots, will generally say that they want to remember the "glorious >>>>>>>> dead", the grandfathers and great grandfathers who "gave" their lives for
us. They want to revel in romantic narratives about brave men who set us a
wonderful example. All bollocks of course.
What about World War Two then ? Do you think we should have reached >>>>>>> an accomodation with Hitler and stood back while he achieved his ambition
his Final Solution of killing off every single Jew in Eurpope ?
That objective was not clearly known in 1939. There are reasons for >>>>>> believing that it hadn't even been formed by then.
just making a fuss about nothing?
The persecution of the Jews started as soon as the Nazis came into power in
1933, and increased thereafter, but the mass murder only started upon the >>>> invasion of the USSR in June 1941.
Imprisonment in labour camps and other forms of forced labour for people the
Nazis didn't like seems to have started in the 1930s. When the Chinese do it
we call it genocide,
"When the Chinese do it we call it genocide"?
Well, to the very limited extent that certain persons obviously lacking
in basic education may be doing so), we *shouldn't* call it genocide.
After all, "genocide" - or at least, the "cide" bit of it - means
*killing*.
Imprisonment and forced labour are not forms of killing, are they?
When German POWs were put to work on British farms during WW2, was that
"genocide"?
If the work was compulsory, more than they could physically tolerate for more than days or weeks and they were starved then, if applied to enough Germans, it easily could be. So its a pretty irrelevant comparison.
and I think it probably met the criteria long before
actual industrial killing was set up, as opposed to forced labour and
starvation.
What "criteria"?
On 12/11/2023 16:51, JNugent wrote:
On 12/11/2023 04:45 pm, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept
Jewish
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from
genocide was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to
the Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the
Jews could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the
1930s. Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944
I'm surprised it wasn't known (as a concept) any earlier than that.
Some would call the slaughter of the citizens of Gaza "genocide". I
don't think that is accurate, because although there is plainly an
intention to impose collective punishment on millions of innocent people
the intention is not to exterminate them as a race. A rather slight distinction, perhaps.
I'm currently arguing with my Israeli relative about the Gaza situation.
It is possible that her opinions accurately represent the opinions of
most Israelis.
quote
Hamas uses the citizens of Gaza as human shields. Harming civilians
during the hunt for terrorists is inevitable. And yet Israel tries to
avoid harming them as much as possible sometimes at the price our
soldiers pay (injury and even death) what do you think about that. .
I think that there are no non-involved people in Gaza. 90% of them want
us dead or gone.
unquote
(also, she talked of Palestinians dancing on rooftops and having loads
of room to live.)
On 12/11/2023 08:38 pm, The Todal wrote:
On 12/11/2023 16:51, JNugent wrote:
On 12/11/2023 04:45 pm, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 11/11/2023 21:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
...
I think my original point was that if a concerted effort to accept
Jewish
refugees happened in the 1930s, when their status as refugees from
genocide was already clear, ...
The Nazi leadership accepted mass killing as the final solution to
the Jewish problem at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, so the
Jews could not have had a status as refugees from genocide* in the
1930s. Their persecution had not progressed that far at that time.
* A word first recorded in 1944
I'm surprised it wasn't known (as a concept) any earlier than that.
Some would call the slaughter of the citizens of Gaza "genocide". I
don't think that is accurate, because although there is plainly an
intention to impose collective punishment on millions of innocent
people the intention is not to exterminate them as a race. A rather
slight distinction, perhaps.
I'm currently arguing with my Israeli relative about the Gaza
situation. It is possible that her opinions accurately represent the
opinions of most Israelis.
quote
Hamas uses the citizens of Gaza as human shields. Harming civilians
during the hunt for terrorists is inevitable. And yet Israel tries to
avoid harming them as much as possible sometimes at the price our
soldiers pay (injury and even death) what do you think about that. .
I think that there are no non-involved people in Gaza. 90% of them
want us dead or gone.
unquote
(also, she talked of Palestinians dancing on rooftops and having loads
of room to live.)
I'm not going to directly comment on that. I have not walked, and am
unlikely to walk, even a half-mile in the shoes of anyone involved.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 40:10:20 |
| Calls: | 6,708 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,353,720 |
