Put Free Palestine on your Bank Notes

First topic message reminder :

A recent report has said that people in Palestine have begun writing 'Free Palestine' on each Israeli shekel bank note that passes through their hands.

No matter what country you are from, no matter what currency you use.. please: every time you get ANY note in that currency, write on it in pen or permanent marker if possible 'FREE PALESTINE'. This is a global event, if it is illegal in your country to write on notes, please do not break the law. If it not, write away.

---

Ok, so some of my friends and I have started doing this. If you see a speech bubble coming out from the Queen's mouth saying "Free Palestine", that's me.

WARNING: defacing bank notes is illegal in the UK and can be fined £200 for each count, according to Currency and Bank Notes Act 1928. But rarely enforced.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Sassy wrote:Hi SM, really glad to hear that Jews against Zionism where there!

Yes its estimated about 10 thousand people attended

That's really great, was thinking about you xx

xxx

Good luck on Sunday. Still so pleased the Jews against Zionism attended xx

scrat wrote:

Sassy wrote:Agree Scrat, perhaps it's part of the idealism of youth, seeing what you think is injustice (and we all see that differently) and wanting to do something to change it.

In my day it was marching against the Vietnam War and being part of CND and all the other ideals we had.   At least we had a small part in stopping the Vietnam war, although I think the fact that the atrocities that were happening, napalm et al, being shown on TV had the most effect.   But it had the most effect on us marching as well, and why we were so angry about it.  

Some people want to dehumanise Muslims, I guess that eases the reasoning for them, with the right whinge it's mandatory, this is why Victor is bias against Muslims and Smelly wants to deny the very existence of Palestinians and Palestine.

show me on a map where Palestine is scat

i triple dog dare you

smelly_bandit wrote:

scrat wrote:
Some people want to dehumanise Muslims, I guess that eases the reasoning for them, with the right whinge it's mandatory, this is why Victor is bias against Muslims and Smelly wants to deny the very existence of Palestinians and Palestine.

show me on a map where Palestine is scat

i triple dog dare you

For you smelly me lad, anything!

scrat wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

show me on a map where Palestine is scat

i triple dog dare you

For you smelly me lad, anything!

The way things are going we shouldn't need to worry about it in a few more years.

Global warming - great, isn't it?!


  

scrat wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

show me on a map where Palestine is scat

i triple dog dare you

For you smelly me lad, anything!

Again that is a misrepresentation, before 1948 Scrat, no independent Palestine existed, it was called the British Mandate for Palestine, they were offered a nation of their own and refused and instead went to war, where the former mandate had been split in two. 
Again I am all for both nations to have peace and reconciliation, to recognize each others existence but lets have some honesty please on the maps and I think it should go back to the original decision of 1948 for the borders.

Didge wrote:

scrat wrote:

For you smelly me lad, anything!

Again that is a misrepresentation, before 1948 Scrat, no independent Palestine existed, it was called the British Mandate for Palestine, they were offered a nation of their own and refused and instead went to war, where the former mandate had been split in two. 
Again I am all for both nations to have peace and reconciliation, to recognize each others existence but lets have some honesty please on the maps and I think it should go back to the original decision of 1948 for the borders.

Heres a map for you Didge.

scrat wrote:

Didge wrote:


Again that is a misrepresentation, before 1948 Scrat, no independent Palestine existed, it was called the British Mandate for Palestine, they were offered a nation of their own and refused and instead went to war, where the former mandate had been split in two. 
Again I am all for both nations to have peace and reconciliation, to recognize each others existence but lets have some honesty please on the maps and I think it should go back to the original decision of 1948 for the borders.

Heres a map for you Didge.

Still poor, as it only highlights the Jewish populated areas, not the Palestinians, what they are poorly doing is counting sparsely populated areas as all Palestinian, including the desert. which is rather silly, are they thus basing this on Bedouin tribes owning all of the desert areas?
Show me the map with has the populated areas of Palestinians, as has been done for the Jewish

Thanks

Didge wrote:

scrat wrote:
Heres a map for you Didge.

Still poor, as it only highlights the Jewish populated areas, not the Palestinians, what they are poorly doing is counting sparely populated areas as all Palestinians, including the desert. which is rather silly, are they thus basing this on Bedouin tribes only all of the desert areas?
Show me the map with has the populated areas of Palestinians, as has been done for the Jewish

Thanks

How about this one from 1850?

1800?

scrat wrote:

Didge wrote:



Still poor, as it only highlights the Jewish populated areas, not the Palestinians, what they are poorly doing is counting sparely populated areas as all Palestinians, including the desert. which is rather silly, are they thus basing this on Bedouin tribes only all of the desert areas?
Show me the map with has the populated areas of Palestinians, as has been done for the Jewish

Thanks

How about this one from 1850?

lol not really, never mind scrat, but do you see my point, they are just basing a map as all other areas even if not populated belonging to the Arabs, when nobody owned many areas under the British Mandate, thus if you showed an equal map, showing the populated areas, it would look little different to the Jewish ones, jut more densely populated in cities

I think you need to put the source of your maps up too, scrat.

I could put a map up showing you that BigAndy9 owns the whole of England - in some areas of England, England is actually called BigAndy9dom and everybody worships the statue "9", which is erected at 9pm every night.

As for Israel, Palestine, call it what you want - whose rule of law do you follow?

Do you listen to the Palestinians, do you listen to the Israeli's, or do you listen to neither and follow the U.N. explicitly?

A map of Palestine around 1500 BC!

BigAndy9 wrote:I think you need to put the source of your maps up too, scrat.

I could put a map up showing you that BigAndy9 owns the whole of England - in some areas of England, England is actually called BigAndy9dom and everybody worships the statue "9", which is erected at 9pm every night.

9cm sounds about right when erected for you Andy. 

I doubt many are going to worship that.

 

Scrat show me a map with the populated areas of Arabs, as you did with Jews for 1948.

Thanks

Didge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:I think you need to put the source of your maps up too, scrat.

I could put a map up showing you that BigAndy9 owns the whole of England - in some areas of England, England is actually called BigAndy9dom and everybody worships the statue "9", which is erected at 9pm every night.

9cm sounds about right when erected for you Andy. 

I doubt many are going to worship that.

 

lol

sorry scat

but there has NEVER been a country called Palestine

so i will ask you once again - show me where Palestine is

smelly_bandit wrote:sorry scat

but there has NEVER been a country called Palestine

so i will ask you once again - show me where Palestine is

He just showed a region called Palestine, under British, Ottoman rule etc.

DOH

Tell me smelly does Kent exist? 

Do you want me to show you where Kent is?

Is Kent a nation?

Or do you want to hit reverse at full speed?

Didge wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:sorry scat

but there has NEVER been a country called Palestine

so i will ask you once again - show me where Palestine is

He just showed a region called Palestine, under British, Ottoman rule etc.

DOH

Tell me smelly does Kent exist? 

Do you want me to show you where Kent is?

Is Kent a nation?

Or do you want to hit reverse at full speed?

actually i need to thank you for this gift

you have just proved how illegitimate the Palestinians claim to being a nation and a country actually is

well done

smelly_bandit wrote:

Didge wrote:


He just showed a region called Palestine, under British, Ottoman rule etc.

DOH

Tell me smelly does Kent exist? 

Do you want me to show you where Kent is?

Is Kent a nation?

Or do you want to hit reverse at full speed?

actually i need to thank you for this gift

you have just proved how illegitimate the Palestinians claim to being a nation and a country actually is

well done

No I just showed you are a right dummy to claim Palestine has never existed, when clearly it has, next you will be telling the forum, Yorkshiremen do not exist.

It proves nothing on a legitimate claim to a nation, are you now telling me countries like Belarus should not exist and it is illegitimate?

Best you get that reverse gear in action because you are getting a right spanking on this

youre boring me now didge

youre so thick you dont even understand the comparison you have just unintentionally drawn which shows us that Palestine has never been a country and only ever an AREA

hence the Palestinian claim to being a "nation" is pure fabrication in the same way that people living Kent would have no basis to claim that Kent is suddenly a country

youre a retard

lol and that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Shall look in later ad hope smelly has been able to get his foot out his mouth.

Bye

smelly_bandit wrote:youre boring me now didge

youre so thick you dont even understand the comparison you have just unintentionally drawn which shows us that Palestine has never been a country and only ever an AREA

hence the Palestinian claim to being a "nation" is pure fabrication in the same way that people living Kent would have no basis to claim that Kent is suddenly a country

youre a retard

Belarus was just a region, never a nation before in history and is now a nation, making your claim utter bollocks as seen, I can give even further examples, but then a simpleton like you has no logic anyway.

Oh there was a Kingdom of Kent once:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Kent

Funny as it lasted about the length of time the Kingdom of Israel did
Man I love showing how utterly thick you are, so by your logic, the people of Kent could break away and form their own nation.

Please continue as I love making you look such a idiot!

look at didge desperately popping smoke and deploying flares

ill ask again in clearer terms

show me a country called Palestine??

smelly_bandit wrote:sorry scat

but there has NEVER been a country called Palestine

so i will ask you once again - show me where Palestine is

Smelly chap, you asked for a map of Palestine,,,,,and I provided you and the Didglet with several maps of Palestine dating back to 1500bc.

Palestinians win implicit U.N. recognition of sovereign state

December 2010, Brazil recognized Palestine as a state with its 1967 borders. This move was later followed by Argentina, Peru, Uruguay, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Only the international Jew struggles with the concept of Palestine, again another irony as Hitlers crew struggled with the concept of the international Jew.

You and the didglets attempts to wriggle away from the reality are highly entertaining, although as bed fellows on this subject, I fear your relationship might come under some strain.

PMSL

I already stated no independent country called Palestine existed to Scrat or can you not read dummy?
What has existed, is a Palestinian people, living in the region of Palestine, or are you going to now claim they are Turks?


Next smelly will tell the forum that even though no Ukraine and Belarus countries existed before their independence after the fall of the Soviet Union, the Belarusians and Ukrainians were now not a people, who were persecuted by Stalin living within in the Soviet Union?

Please continue, I am loving this, ha ha ha ha

scrat wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:sorry scat

but there has NEVER been a country called Palestine

so i will ask you once again - show me where Palestine is

Smelly chap, you asked for a map of Palestine,,,,,and I provided you and the Didglet with several maps of Palestine dating back to 1500bc.

Palestinians win implicit U.N. recognition of sovereign state

December 2010, Brazil recognized Palestine as a state with its 1967 borders. This move was later followed by Argentina, Peru, Uruguay, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Only the international Jew struggles with the concept of Palestine, again another irony as Hitlers crew struggled with the concept of the international Jew.

You and the didglets attempts to wriggle away from the reality are highly entertaining, although as bed fellows on this subject, I fear your relationship might come under some strain.

Incorrect, it has always been under rule, by or within Empires, so you are very much mistaken, just because a nation recognizes and others do not, then that is not the bases for a claim.
Thus it has only been a region, made up of Palestinian people 
Again it was granted nationhood and blew this by going to war, which they lost, of which the Lebanese also found to their cost because of Palestinian armed refugees changing the balance in that nation.
Your attempt to distort  history is very embarrassing to say the least mate



You place me as a bed fellow to smelly, you poor deluded commie, ha ha, yeah you are the one who stupidly thinks in a racist belief of English people being of a pure genetic breed, superior to others, that is daft to say the least, so you hold more in tune with smelly than me

Plus I already stated I want to see the 1948 boundaries for both nations, showing I am not for any side Scrat, which clearly you hold a bias to one!

scrat wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:sorry scat

but there has NEVER been a country called Palestine

so i will ask you once again - show me where Palestine is

Smelly chap, you asked for a map of Palestine,,,,,and I provided you and the Didglet with several maps of Palestine dating back to 1500bc.

Palestinians win implicit U.N. recognition of sovereign state

December 2010, Brazil recognized Palestine as a state with its 1967 borders. This move was later followed by Argentina, Peru, Uruguay, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Only the international Jew struggles with the concept of Palestine, again another irony as Hitlers crew struggled with the concept of the international Jew.

You and the didglets attempts to wriggle away from the reality are highly entertaining, although as bed fellows on this subject, I fear your relationship might come under some strain.

no scatypoo

the map you provided indicated an AREA known as Palestine

i dont dispute that this AREA/region/county/idea once existed

what IS indisputable is that this AREA was never a sovereign country

Palestine is not a state nor a country its a terrorist enclave that has zero legitimacy

it doesn't matter anyway

Israel will soon move in and smash up the terrorist enclave

smelly_bandit wrote:

scrat wrote:
Smelly chap, you asked for a map of Palestine,,,,,and I provided you and the Didglet with several maps of Palestine dating back to 1500bc.

Palestinians win implicit U.N. recognition of sovereign state

December 2010, Brazil recognized Palestine as a state with its 1967 borders. This move was later followed by Argentina, Peru, Uruguay, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Only the international Jew struggles with the concept of Palestine, again another irony as Hitlers crew struggled with the concept of the international Jew.

You and the didglets attempts to wriggle away from the reality are highly entertaining, although as bed fellows on this subject, I fear your relationship might come under some strain.

no scatypoo

the map you provided indicated an AREA known as Palestine

i dont dispute that this AREA/region/county/idea once existed

what IS indisputable is that this AREA was never a sovereign country

Palestine is not a state nor a country its a terrorist enclave that has zero legitimacy

it doesn't matter anyway

Israel will soon move in and smash up the terrorist enclave

Wow smelly finally gets that Palestine has existed and a Palestinian people has existed.

Well done

As to a sovereign nation, that is moot because others have not been a sovereign nation and yet are countries today.

So you have no logical point, which you never do anyway

England has been ruled by empires, we're ruled by an empire now, we were ruled by Italians, and might have been ruled by the French, the Spanish and more recently by zer Germans.

England and the English prevailed!!!,,,cue Elgar!

Arabs have always quarrelled amongst themselves, when we dumped the Jews on them, they found someone else to hate more than themselves, if you're mean spirited you could blame the British.

Israel must be forced to accept Palestine, 1967 seems a popular starting point for borders.

" If rule over the territory was to be transferred to the kingdom, it would only "replace Israeli military rule with Jordanian military rule... and the Palestinians want their own state."

Ain't asking for much in the scheme of things.

scrat wrote:England has been ruled by empires, we're ruled by an empire now, we were ruled by Italians, and might have been ruled by the French, the Spanish and more recently by zer Germans.

England and the English prevailed!!!,,,cue Elgar!

Arabs have always quarrelled amongst themselves, when we dumped the Jews on them, they found someone else to hate more than themselves, if you're mean spirited you could blame the British.

Israel must be forced to accept Palestine, 1967 seems a popular starting point for borders.

" If rule over the territory was to be transferred to the kingdom, it would only "replace Israeli military rule with Jordanian military rule... and the Palestinians want their own state."

Ain't asking for much in the scheme of things.

England was never ruled by the Romans, as it did not exist then as a nation.

Or just both nations come to peace and accept its rights to a nation each. back to the 1948 borders, and then reconcile, placing another Arab nation to Police the nation is not going to resolve matters but make more problems.
The Arabs had started to hate the Jews before the British took control in Palestine, in fact trouble had started with an exodus of Jews from Europe and yes the British Empire also fucked up with empty promises to both sets of people.

Who fired the first "shot" this time! Never mind, it will be one or the other depending on the posters point of view.

Didge wrote:

scrat wrote:England has been ruled by empires, we're ruled by an empire now, we were ruled by Italians, and might have been ruled by the French, the Spanish and more recently by zer Germans.

England and the English prevailed!!!,,,cue Elgar!

Arabs have always quarrelled amongst themselves, when we dumped the Jews on them, they found someone else to hate more than themselves, if you're mean spirited you could blame the British.

Israel must be forced to accept Palestine, 1967 seems a popular starting point for borders.

" If rule over the territory was to be transferred to the kingdom, it would only "replace Israeli military rule with Jordanian military rule... and the Palestinians want their own state."

Ain't asking for much in the scheme of things.

England was never ruled by the Romans, as it did not exist then as a nation.

Or just both nations come to peace and accept its rights to a nation each. back to the 1948 borders, and then reconcile, placing another Arab nation to Police the nation is not going to resolve matters but make more problems.
The Arabs had started to hate the Jews before the British took control in Palestine, in fact trouble had started with an exodus of Jews from Europe and yes the British Empire also fucked up with empty promises to both sets of people.

Do keep up chap,

So who were the Britons inhabiting England at the time of the Roman invasion? The history of pre-Roman coins in southern Britain reveals an influence from Belgic Gaul. The tribes of England south of the Thames and along the south coast during Caesar’s time all had Belgic names or affiliations. Caesar tells us that these large intrusive settlements had replaced an earlier British population, which had retreated to the hinterland of southeast England. The latter may have been the large Celtic tribe, the Catuvellauni, situated in the home counties north of the Thames. Tacitus reported that between Britain and Gaul “the language differs but little.”

"Yet there is no agreement among historians or archaeologists on the meaning of the words “Celtic” or “Anglo-Saxon.” What is more, new evidence from genetic analysis (see note below) indicates that the Anglo-Saxons and Celts, to the extent that they can be defined genetically, were both small immigrant minorities. Neither group had much more impact on the British Isles gene pool than the Vikings, the Normans or, indeed, immigrants of the past 50 years."

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

Us English are British, ergo we were once ruled by Romans, it's in our DNA.

scrat wrote:

Didge wrote:

England was never ruled by the Romans, as it did not exist then as a nation.

Or just both nations come to peace and accept its rights to a nation each. back to the 1948 borders, and then reconcile, placing another Arab nation to Police the nation is not going to resolve matters but make more problems.
The Arabs had started to hate the Jews before the British took control in Palestine, in fact trouble had started with an exodus of Jews from Europe and yes the British Empire also fucked up with empty promises to both sets of people.

Do keep up chap,

So who were the Britons inhabiting England at the time of the Roman invasion? The history of pre-Roman coins in southern Britain reveals an influence from Belgic Gaul. The tribes of England south of the Thames and along the south coast during Caesar’s time all had Belgic names or affiliations. Caesar tells us that these large intrusive settlements had replaced an earlier British population, which had retreated to the hinterland of southeast England. The latter may have been the large Celtic tribe, the Catuvellauni, situated in the home counties north of the Thames. Tacitus reported that between Britain and Gaul “the language differs but little.”

"Yet there is no agreement among historians or archaeologists on the meaning of the words “Celtic” or “Anglo-Saxon.” What is more, new evidence from genetic analysis (see note below) indicates that the Anglo-Saxons and Celts, to the extent that they can be defined genetically, were both small immigrant minorities. Neither group had much more impact on the British Isles gene pool than the Vikings, the Normans or, indeed, immigrants of the past 50 years."

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/mythsofbritishancestry

Us English are British, ergo we were once ruled by Romans, it's in our DNA.

Blimey, that was woeful chap so you now change from the English, a concept not even called upon the people of this land until the 7th to 8th century, what you are saying is that the ancient Britons, who had for the main had adapted a Celtic culture by then, thus no English nation apart from the Normans has ruled England, the Vikings only ruled part of the land, making your knowledge of English history embarrassing.

As to your claim of the Anglo Saxons and Celts being Britons is also embarrassing, they are both Germanic ethnic groups, where as the ancient Brits descend from the Basque region of Spain. What this actually shows is this nation is made up of many different ethnic groups that if you go far back enough all descend back to Africa anyway , making any racial view point absurd, being as we are all one biological race.
What happened was the Britons were invaded by Romans, Anglo Saxons, and Vikings, Normans mixing with the already indigenous group, which means all the above I mention are not really ancient Britons, what has happened is together they form later the concept of an English nation through the Angles and then later the British conception from this mixed group. This to say the English was ruled by the Romans, is complete balderdash. You are also wrong on the gene pool, over a million are descended to the Vikings alone in England.

Sorry please learn your own history, because myths are just that, complete myths

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9888402/One-million-Brits-descended-from-Romans.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/10/one-million-brits-viking-descendants_n_4933186.html

This will fuck your head further,,,if that's possible.

The common language referred to by Tacitus was probably not Celtic, but was similar to that spoken by the Belgae, who may have been a Germanic people, as implied by Caesar. In other words, a Germanic-type language could already have been indigenous to England at the time of the Roman invasion. In support of this inference, there is some recent lexical (vocabulary) evidence analysed by Cambridge geneticist Peter Forster and continental colleagues. They found that the date of the split between old English and continental Germanic languages goes much further back than the dark ages, and that English may have been a separate, fourth branch of the Germanic language before the Roman invasion.

Stephen Oppenheimer’s fascinating thesis helps to answer one of the most vexing questions of dark-age British history: why is there so little trace of Celtic culture in England and in the English language? The fact that so little remains of Celtic influence in England in terms of place names—outside Cornwall and Cumbria—and in the language points to a long process of cultural conquest by the 4th and 3rd centuries BC Belgic invaders, who were Germanic, as implied by Julius Caesar’s history of his British adventures. The cultural and linguistic origins of the English are thus pre-Roman. The Anglo-Saxon elite invasions of the 5th and 6th centuries AD reinforced, rather than created, a pre-existing difference between the proto-English and the culturally Celtic of the western fringes of the British Isles.

Us English were in England long before the Romans invaded.

I hope that this is of some assistance.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Zack you going Sunday?

It was a great demo today did you notice the helicopters and number 9 bus!!!!

Cowards

There were actually many tactics used to stop people getting there. Inc. delays on the circle line.

Is Sunday the one at the bbc? Didn't catch details.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Zack you going Sunday?

It was a great demo today did you notice the helicopters and number 9 bus!!!!

Cowards

That was me on the number 9 bus - i use it as my personal taxi.

I was throwing stink bombs from it and generally shouting abuse and cackles of Haw Haw to the peasants.

scrat wrote:This will fuck your head further,,,if that's possible.

The common language referred to by Tacitus was probably not Celtic, but was similar to that spoken by the Belgae, who may have been a Germanic people, as implied by Caesar. In other words, a Germanic-type language could already have been indigenous to England at the time of the Roman invasion. In support of this inference, there is some recent lexical (vocabulary) evidence analysed by Cambridge geneticist Peter Forster and continental colleagues. They found that the date of the split between old English and continental Germanic languages goes much further back than the dark ages, and that English may have been a separate, fourth branch of the Germanic language before the Roman invasion.

Stephen Oppenheimer’s fascinating thesis helps to answer one of the most vexing questions of dark-age British history: why is there so little trace of Celtic culture in England and in the English language? The fact that so little remains of Celtic influence in England in terms of place names—outside Cornwall and Cumbria—and in the language points to a long process of cultural conquest by the 4th and 3rd centuries BC Belgic invaders, who were Germanic, as implied by Julius Caesar’s history of his British adventures. The cultural and linguistic origins of the English are thus pre-Roman. The Anglo-Saxon elite invasions of the 5th and 6th centuries AD reinforced, rather than created, a pre-existing difference between the proto-English and the culturally Celtic of the western fringes of the British Isles.

Us English were in England long before the Romans invaded.

I hope that this is of some assistance.

Fuck me now you use Tacticus as your argument, really, that is clutching at any straw you can find in your illogical and incorrect history of this nation 
Stephen Oppenheimer’s views have been rebuked by others since he made his claims, so it just shows you read one view on genetics and not others, where again English as a conception id not come to these shores until the Saxons arrived, that means their culture became the dominating one, so again you are talking complete and utter balderdash, not sure how many ways to put this for you really Scrat.
What you are trying to poorly claim is that now we must change every history book and not refer to the ancient Britons as Britons at all but as the English, even Oppenheimer would shake his head with embarrassment at your claims. As seen of just two groups over a million are descended from the Romans and Vikings, I have not even gone into the Celts, the Saxons and Normans, let alone all other later groups that have migrated to these shores.

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_English_language

Lone Wolf wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
A recent report has said that people in Palestine have begun writing 'Free Palestine' on each Israeli shekel bank note that passes through their hands.

No matter what country you are from, no matter what currency you use.. please: every time you get ANY note in that currency, write on it in pen or permanent marker if possible 'FREE PALESTINE'. This is a global event, if it is illegal in your country to write on notes, please do not break the law. If it not, write away.

...............................

 

DON'T be so  naive, Your Fuzziness...

There are only a handful of countries where these kinds of drawn out passive protests will really have any impact on events in the Middle East..

Places like the USA, Britain, maybe Germany or Poland ~ as well as Israel and the occupied territories themselves.

Over here, not only will such a demonstration not have any real effect; but "defacing currency" is a crime, though no-one's likely to ever be convicted unless they put up their hand and admit to it in public..    ::resmahauth:: 

I didn't say it would resolve anything. But only increase awareness, a little.

It is subtle activism like this over the last decade that has highlighted the plight of the Palestinians in the UK - which is Muslims or Palestinians were not the only ones protesting yesterday.

Despite media coverage, ordinary people in the UK can no longer excuse their government for the support they give Israel. The British have become so aware, that even the Israeli government is worried it is losing support in Europe.

BigAndy9 wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Zack you going Sunday?

It was a great demo today did you notice the helicopters and number 9 bus!!!!

Cowards

That was me on the number 9 bus - i use it as my personal taxi.

I was throwing stink bombs from it and generally shouting abuse and cackles of Haw Haw to the peasants.

Have you ever been outside your own home?

You spend a lot of time online.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


That was me on the number 9 bus - i use it as my personal taxi.

I was throwing stink bombs from it and generally shouting abuse and cackles of Haw Haw to the peasants.

Have you ever been outside your own home?

You spend a lot of time online.  

Now now, let's not have a go at BigM, the 58-a-day volunteer.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Lone Wolf wrote:
 

DON'T be so  naive, Your Fuzziness...

There are only a handful of countries where these kinds of drawn out passive protests will really have any impact on events in the Middle East..

Places like the USA, Britain, maybe Germany or Poland ~ as well as Israel and the occupied territories themselves.

Over here, not only will such a demonstration not have any real effect; but "defacing currency" is a crime, though no-one's likely to ever be convicted unless they put up their hand and admit to it in public..    ::resmahauth:: 

I didn't say it would resolve anything. But only increase awareness, a little.

It is subtle activism like this over the last decade that has highlighted the plight of the Palestinians in the UK - which is Muslims or Palestinians were not the only ones protesting yesterday.

Despite media coverage, ordinary people in the UK can no longer excuse their government for the support they give Israel. The British have become so aware, that even the Israeli government is worried it is losing support in Europe.

What about a protest for the one million Lebanese displaced because mainly in part to the Palestinians, who were kicked out of Jordan, who armed, changed the balance of the country into the favour of Muslims?
You see such things are also easily distorted by people who support a biased view which would place Israel under Palestinian control, on the one hand you have smelly argue for the destruction of Palestine and Sassy arguing Israel has no right to exist. Again what needs to happen is reconciliation, as blame has never achieved anything and never will. What gets me is how you ignore Hamas in Gaza, are nothing but extremists, just like Zionists, where I am against both, you speak nothing of this problem, how they care little for the Palestinian people, how they also commit human rights abuses.
So what are you really defending here Zack, extremism, or what I have stated, both nations to have the right to an existence, to accept each other and reconcile?

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

I didn't say it would resolve anything. But only increase awareness, a little.

It is subtle activism like this over the last decade that has highlighted the plight of the Palestinians in the UK - which is Muslims or Palestinians were not the only ones protesting yesterday.

Despite media coverage, ordinary people in the UK can no longer excuse their government for the support they give Israel. The British have become so aware, that even the Israeli government is worried it is losing support in Europe.

What about a protest for the one million Lebanese displaced because mainly in part to the Palestinians, who were kicked out of Jordan, who armed, changed the balance of the country into the favour of Muslims?
You see such things are also easily distorted by people who support a biased view which would place Israel under Palestinian control, on the one hand you have smelly argue for the destruction of Palestine and Sassy arguing Israel has no right to exist. Again what needs to happen is reconciliation, as blame has never achieved anything and never will. What gets me is how you ignore Hamas in Gaza, are nothing but extremists, just like Zionists, where I am against both, you speak nothing of this problem, how they care little for the Palestinian people, how they also commit human rights abuses.
So what are you really defending here Zack, extremism, or what I have stated, both nations to have the right to an existence, to accept each other and reconcile?

No, you seem to think:

1. just because my focus lies against Israel, that I somehow support Hamas. Wrong and very naive.

2. Somehow sitting on the fence will resolve the situation. Again, naive.

Didge wrote:

scrat wrote:This will fuck your head further,,,if that's possible.

The common language referred to by Tacitus was probably not Celtic, but was similar to that spoken by the Belgae, who may have been a Germanic people, as implied by Caesar. In other words, a Germanic-type language could already have been indigenous to England at the time of the Roman invasion. In support of this inference, there is some recent lexical (vocabulary) evidence analysed by Cambridge geneticist Peter Forster and continental colleagues. They found that the date of the split between old English and continental Germanic languages goes much further back than the dark ages, and that English may have been a separate, fourth branch of the Germanic language before the Roman invasion.

Stephen Oppenheimer’s fascinating thesis helps to answer one of the most vexing questions of dark-age British history: why is there so little trace of Celtic culture in England and in the English language? The fact that so little remains of Celtic influence in England in terms of place names—outside Cornwall and Cumbria—and in the language points to a long process of cultural conquest by the 4th and 3rd centuries BC Belgic invaders, who were Germanic, as implied by Julius Caesar’s history of his British adventures. The cultural and linguistic origins of the English are thus pre-Roman. The Anglo-Saxon elite invasions of the 5th and 6th centuries AD reinforced, rather than created, a pre-existing difference between the proto-English and the culturally Celtic of the western fringes of the British Isles.

Us English were in England long before the Romans invaded.

I hope that this is of some assistance.

Fuck me now you use Tacticus as your argument, really, that is clutching at any straw you can find in your illogical and incorrect history of this nation 
Stephen Oppenheimer’s views have been rebuked by others since he made his claims, so it just shows you read one view on genetics and not others, where again English as a conception id not come to these shores until the Saxons arrived, that means their culture became the dominating one, so again you are talking complete and utter balderdash, not sure how many ways to put this for you really Scrat.
What you are trying to poorly claim is that now we must change every history book and not refer to the ancient Britons as Britons at all but as the English, even Oppenheimer would shake his head with embarrassment at your claims. As seen of just two groups over a million are descended from the Romans and Vikings, I have not even gone into the Celts, the Saxons and Normans, let alone all other later groups that have migrated to these shores.

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_English_language

You will of course post these links that rebuke Stephen Oppenheimers thesis.

lol

Ah, pub arguments - when people who are drunk try to act all intellectual by saying what they believe "sounds" clever.

scrat wrote:

Didge wrote:


Fuck me now you use Tacticus as your argument, really, that is clutching at any straw you can find in your illogical and incorrect history of this nation 
Stephen Oppenheimer’s views have been rebuked by others since he made his claims, so it just shows you read one view on genetics and not others, where again English as a conception id not come to these shores until the Saxons arrived, that means their culture became the dominating one, so again you are talking complete and utter balderdash, not sure how many ways to put this for you really Scrat.
What you are trying to poorly claim is that now we must change every history book and not refer to the ancient Britons as Britons at all but as the English, even Oppenheimer would shake his head with embarrassment at your claims. As seen of just two groups over a million are descended from the Romans and Vikings, I have not even gone into the Celts, the Saxons and Normans, let alone all other later groups that have migrated to these shores.

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_English_language

You will of course post these links that rebuke Stephen Oppenheimers thesis.

http://www.irishdemocrat.co.uk/features/relax-were-all-anglo-saxon-anyway/

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-anglo-saxon-invasion-britain-is-more-germanic-than-it-thinks-a-768706.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110824214601.htm