Britons rank Israel 'worst country'

[newyorican]

British people rate Israel as the country least deserving of international respect, as well as one of the world's "least democratic countries," according to a recent survey.

<snip>

Israel was ranked number one country where British people would least like to live or visit on holiday. Out of several other criteria measured, Russia alone scored lower overall than Israel.

<snip>

In addition, Israel was rated the most unfriendly country after France and Germany.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1104808686264

Yet another reason to hate the French Brits...

49% of those surveyed don't want to live in GB either...

[xultar]

1. I take that back...if you can't say anything nice...n/t

[LiberalVoice]

2. the problem is where you draw the line.

Do you blame the fascists governments or the people that allow them to exist?

[xultar]

3. That is why I can't decide to run straight to Canada tonight or wait

for my residency papers to come through.

[QueerJustice]

54. ``IF``

..they come through

[d_b]

4. Those crazy brits and their Librul media

That's anti-semitic, I'm telling mom!

[garthranzz]

5. Every Jew a Fagin

Ah, yes, Britain - the country so xenophobic it hates itself. Maybe they need to watch Paul Newman in "Exodus" again. (And let's not forget the "enlightened" immigration history of that country.)

[LiberalVoice]

6. I take it then you think...

that Israel is completely deserving of the aid it gets from countries such as the U.S.

[Melech Hamoshiach]

8. Yes.

Yes.

[LiberalVoice]

10. lol

This is a perfect example of how right wing logic can cross lines as boldly drawn as conservative vs. liberal. While I obviously agree that Israelis deserve a safe place to raise their children and sleep at night I also disagree completely with the way their Fascist government treats the palestinian people.

No matter how you slice it Israel doesn't come close to being a democracy. The aid they receive from America is what has allowed them to continue slaughtering anyone who tries to fight for freedom. Whether Jewish, Muslim, or otherwise. You just remember that the money they "deserve" is what keeps the blood flowing down the streets.

[Melech Hamoshiach]

12. How come

How come you aren't saying anything about the aid that Egypt and Jordan get, which combined is more than Israel?

Israel comes far closer to being a democracy than either of these two countries.

Has either Jordan or Egypt even had anything that ever came close to a real election?

[LiberalVoice]

16. So am I to understand then that you have no point?

What do elections have to do with anything? Can the palestinians vote?

I'm not here to compare who comes closer to a democracy...None of them are a democracy.

"How come you aren't saying anything about the aid that Egypt and Jordan get, which combined is more than Israel?" Because if you look at the thread topic it says nothing about Egypt or Jordan. Thats why i'm not commenting on them.

As usual all that can be done is obscure the point.

[Darranar]

17. It's wrong in all three cases. n/t

[TheKingfish]

32. Egypt and Jordan get money

Because these countries sold out the Palestinian people.

[Darranar]

36. No, they get money because they support US imperial dominance...

of the region.

[Coastie for Truth]

51. No - they get money because they bring a "Value Add" to the table

Egypt and Jordan get CORPORATE money because they bring a "Value Add" to the table. While most of the Muslim countries can only exploit their people and natural resources (oil) for the benefit of Soccer Moms in Hummers and of their own thoroughly corrupt OILogarchies - at least Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia being more then oil to the table.

Egypt is struggling to become a new Bangalore, and is even subsidizing "off-shored" (from Europe) routine software businesses and electronics assembly businesses. The buzz on the street ("street" = El Camino Real through Silly Valley) is that Israeli consumer electronics businesses are "off-shoring" assembly to Egypt (via Cypriot, Greek, and Turkish intermediaries).

As far as this Type 2 diabetic is personally concerned, Pakistan is a center of modern Type 2 diabetes management -- see "Cinnamon improves glucose and lipids of people with type 2 diabetes" by Khan A, Safdar M, Ali Khan MM, Khattak KN, Anderson RA. at the Department of Human Nutrition, NWFP Agricultural University, Peshawar, Pakistan, link:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14633804

And guess what - it works - I now have extra cinnamon on my espresso, and my glucose came down by about 20! ;)

Malaysia is becoming a branch of Singapore Inc.

The corporate money is coming as long as Muslim lands have something to put on the table.

[King Mongo]

37. slaughtering people

Egypt and Jordan do not slaughter Palestinians, nor do they slaugher Jews. If they slaughter anyone, it's probably radical Muslims.

[LiberalVoice]

46. untrue

They literally kidnap and murder anyone who poses either a threat to the strenghthining of america's(and therefore Israel's) hold on the region or anyone who poses a threat to disturbing the relationships between both America and Egypt's corrupt governments.

trust me I've seen them do it.

[King Mongo]

48. Correct

Yes, that's why they slaughter radical Muslims.

[The Magistrate]

14. Nonsense, Sir

Democracy has a real meaning; it is not simply a synonym for every good thing from a progressive view. A democracy is a political system in which the citizeny selects its rulers by ballot, and in which the citizenry is at liberty to openly debate that choice without any undue fear of police interference.

All adult citizens of Israel have the franchise; with the exception of a few resident aliens and visitors at any given time all residents of Israel are citizens; the press there is quite free, and so is the speech of its citizens.

The government of Israel may do things you do not approve of, but that does not suffice to overthrow the standard definitions of political systems.

[LiberalVoice]

19. Excuse me?

They persecute a portion of its population based SOLEY on race. Does that fall into the confines of a democracy? I didn't think so. Spare me the big words.

[The Magistrate]

24. What Portion Of Israel's Citizens Would That Be, Sir?

"Democracy is a system of government based on belief the people know what they want and ought to get it, good and hard."

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Magistrate]

26. And Yet, Sir

You do not answer the simple question, namely, what portion of Israel's citizenry does its government persecute?

[LiberalVoice]

27. So because the palestinians are not citizens....

Then Israel is not responsible for its persecution of them. What kind of person does that make you?

[Darranar]

28. It has no relevance to the question of Israel's democratic nature...

Democracies are perfectly capable of committing atrocities and persecuting people.

[The Magistrate]

29. Indeed, My Friend

Israel is a democracy, and it does not behave perfectly, any more than any human being, or collection of human beings, behaves perfectly.

Democracy is style of political organization, and that is all: it is not a synonym for all that is good by one's own lights.

[King Mongo]

38. Israel vs Greater Israel

Israel is a democracy, greater Israel is not a democracy. Given the situation of the illegal settlements, Israel is actually greater Israel and many political organizations in greater Israel are excluded from participating in the government due to race, culture or religion.

The Yesha Council, paid and supported by the Israeli Government, describes Greater Israel as follows:

The legal right of Jews settling in Tel Aviv is the same as that of Jews settling in the areas which were conquered in the Six Day War.
http://www.moetzetyesha.co.il/arti.asp?id=44

This confirms that Greater Israel is not a democracy and Greater Israel is indeed an apartheid state.

Since so many people refuse to recognize that Greater Israel is not a democracy and that aparteid exists in Greater Israel, the criticism of the British people regarding the situation in Greater Israel is properly placed.

Israel, being Greater Israel and a non-democratic apartheid state is further confirmed by the Likud Platform with the following statement:

The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.
http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm

The evidence is there, most people recognize it and understand the problem. Nevertheless, many people see it but denounce it even though they know that they are wrong by believing that greater Israel is a democracy and not an apartheid state.

[The Magistrate]

43. Greater Israel, Your Grace

Does not exist; it is at best a gleam in the eye of some rascals of the ultra-nationalist and ultra-religious right. It is therefore of no more interest to discuss its social arrangements than to discuss those of Pellucidar or Mu....

[King Mongo]

47. demographic realities

I see it as less of a dream and more of a demographic reality on the ground. It is simply not realistic to believe that the illegal settlements in the West Bank will be removed or that the illegal settlers will protest to become Palestinian citizens.

[The Magistrate]

53. There Is Something To Your Grace's Argument

But it remains very far from the legal state of affairs today, and it does not seem to me yet time to conclude there will not a cessation to expansion of settlements in the Jordan valley, or even a liquidation of many of them, in the future.

[King Mongo]

55. Agreed

I do agree with you, honorable Magistrate. I've just noticed however, that many people want to keep the status quo without seeking change while being unwilling to recongize that the status quo will lead to a one-state solution. A change is greatly needed, but most don't want this change.

[LiberalVoice]

42. I stand corrected...

Will you agree with me then that they are a Fascist government?

And if not I would love to hear an explanation as to how that government deserves the support of anyone.

[The Magistrate]

44. It Is A Government At War, Sir

These tend towards extreme measures, and the longer the war persists, the more extreme these tend to become.

Israel's military occupation of the territories over-run in '67 is, to my view, legitimate, and in the main has been carried out in a legitimate manner. The program of settlement is illegal, not only under international law, but in many instances under Israeli law, though that latter law has gone unenforced in almost all such instances. This is a great wrong, and one that does not serve Israel itself in the long run.

This war will, it seems, continue, whatever the character of the conduct of its participants, until the various armed bodies of Arab Palestinians cease to employ violence against the people of Israel, and the people of Israel receive real assurances that the existance of their state is accepted by all their neighbors, including the people of Arab Palestine. The longer these events are delayed, the worse the situation of the people of Arab Palestine will become.

[LiberalVoice]

45. The "war" will end when Israel upholds it's obligation as a govt.

Do you really expect terrorists to follow laws that the Israeli govt themselves won't uphold on themselves? You cannot possibly think that will actually happen.

Israel has BY FAR killed more INNOCENT Palestinians then the other way around with there absolutly reckless disregard for innocent men, women, and children. They have proven time and time again that their main focus has not been to dismantle terrorist organizations but to act more in an "eye for an eye" fashion.

It is the obligation of the govt. to uphold its own laws! And furthermore the obligation of the Israeli people to keep their govt. in check!

[The Magistrate]

52. Who Speaks Of Law Here, Sir?

No written law requires a party to a conflict that has no hope of military success to cease military operations. The conditions outlined above, whether you like them or not, are those that will have to be met if the people of Arab Palestine wish a cessation of Israeli military operations: these will continue until those conditions are met, and there is nothing any body in arms among the people of Arab Palestine can do to make them halt otherwise. The political leadership and people of Arab Palestine are of course free to conduct themselves in a manner that can only prolong their sufferings, and prevent the achievment of any of their legitimate aspirations: people have a perfect right to be fools, and to conduct themselves to the hell of their choice in whatever conveyance they desire.

Your statement that the Israeli government has "proven time and time again that their main focus has not been to dismantle terrorist organizations but to act more in an 'eye for an eye' fashion" is an interesting one. It is very hard to see that the actions of the various armed Arab Palestinian bodies are anything other than acting "in an 'eye for an eye' fashion." Indeed, their communiques very frequently stress that point, announcing with every indication of pride that future operations will avenge this or that, and that operations recently executed are in revenge for something or other. Indeed, the entire campaign of attacks against Israeli civilians is nothing but an exercise in collective punishment, in the eyes of those who execute it, in which any Israeli who can be caught is to pay the forfeit for some act by another Israeli, or of the Israeli government. Why this should not distress you is unclear to me, particularly when you clearly oppose the concept, since you make a very hard reach to accuse the side you oppose of doing just that.

It would be interesting to know what you consider proof that the Israeli government is not actually attempting in its military and other security operations to dismantle the Arab Palestinian organizations that direct attacks against its citizens. My guess would be that you would point to the fact that far from all the Arab Palestinians killed by Israeli forces are members of such organizations, and that there are a number of broad measures employed that impact the people of Arab Palestine widely, and cause them great inconvenience. But neither of these things would suffice for such a proof. The first is an inevitable consequence of even the best and most precisely directed operations against specific targets when such are found only among the civilian population at large. The second, the entire panoply of check-points and curfews, are standard and age-old methods of suppressing guerrilla operations, by impeding their capabilities of movement and communications, and they are standard and age-old because they work to some beneficial degree in the effort.

[King Mongo]

56. This will result in a one-state solution

The problem, honorable Magistrate, is that Israel's conditions will never be met and that's why this idea forces the creation of a greater Israel given the condition of the expanding illegal settlements.

I think that no matter how much Palestinians want to prevent greater Israel from becoming the future, Palestinians cannot prevent greater Israel from becoming the future. Only Israel has the ability to choose if greater Israel will or will not be and the status quo says that greater Israel is the future.

[Darranar]

57. It doesn't. n/t

[Jim Sagle]

58. Israel RRRRRRRAWWWWWWWWWKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Andromeda]

40. Don't be so rude!

It goes boths ways you know.

[LiberalVoice]

41. not being rude...

And I have asnwered quite clearly each time.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

72. It's not inconsistent with democracy, no.

Democracy means government by vote. Israel has that, therefore it is a democracy.

There are no "not persecuting your citizens" or "respecting the rights of minorities" clauses. Those are good things, but they're not part of the semantic definition of a democracy. The tyranny of the majority is a bad thing, but it's the most *democratic* form of government around (although not the most consistent with the *aims* of democracy as they are usually stated).

[Jim Sagle]

9. Hell yeah!

[Coastie for Truth]

30. We (US, especially US motorists) are subsidizing the terrorists

We (US, especially US motorists, amd ,most especially SUV drivers and Hummer driving soccer moms) are subsidizing the terrorists = AlQaida, and the Palestinians.

What is crude going for today? About $42/bbl. To get crude out of the ground, do a "hydrodesulfurization" (the first refining step), drop out the "solids" (ash and "paving asphalt" ), the gaseous products (methane, ethane, propane), and the raw hydrogen -- cost about $8.00/bbl.

Throw in royalties, "severance", and other royalty payments -- adds about $2.50/bbl. Total "cost" is about $10.50-%12.50/bbl.

SO - WHERE DOES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE $42/BBL "PRICE" AND THE $12/BBL COST GO ------ THAT'S $30/BBL!!!!!!

To the thoroughly corrupt Saudi Royals, and various and sundry autocrats and dictators and generalissimos.

And what do they do with it. Well they "recycle" the petrodollars into bordello resorts and gambling resorts, etc. And they give the rest to:

<*>"Arab Charities"
<*>Wahabis and their Matawan Religious Morals Keystone Cops
<*>Wahabis and their Masada Academies of Hate
<*>Various and Sundry Terrorists

But per capita - gornisht to the tsunami victims -- even less per capita the Bushie's "going in offer" of $35M (12.5 cents/capita).

I am a former chemical engineer - when I graduated the "Arab League Boycott Office" allegedly wouldn't let "Big Oil" hire dudes like me.

[Andromeda]

39. Yes it is.

n/t

[Coastie for Truth]

31. The Brits have been lousy colonialists

The Brits have been lousy colonialists/imperialists.

Canada - the French and Indian War, the Francophones versus the Anglophones, Quebecois secession.

US and Caribbean - African slavery

US - Tea taxes, Alien and Sedition Laws, Taxation without Representation, banning domestic manufacture of simple goods; brutal treatment of Colonial POWs - like Gitmo and Abu Grahib.

South Africa - apartheid

India - Muslim versus Hindu, discrimination against Sikhs and Gurkhas, Kashmir, the war between India and Pakistan

Middle East-

Creating the Saudi monarchy

Rewarding the Saudi's cousins with the Jordanian and Iraqi thrones

Screwing the Kurds and the Palestinians

Creating the artificial Iraq (Shia, Sunni, Kurd, Assyrian, Chaldean)

Playing the Israelis against the Palestinians from the Balfour Declaration until Independence

[whistle]

7. Didn't the British leave Palestine after WWII...

...which the British had occupied for decades as part of their dismantling of the Empire and also finding a place for Jews to live after the war? They really created a political mess when they left.

<link> http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/history/muhlberger/2805/israel.htm

[drdon326]

11. In Britain, it is open season on both Israel and the Jews.

http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/mediaobjectivity/The_Anti-Israel_Monopoly_in_the_UK.asp

Of these experiences, Phillips would write later, "I no longer feel comfortable in my own country because of the poison that has welled up toward Israel and the Jews... It is not an exaggeration to say that, in Britain at present, it is open season on both Israel and the Jews."

I have no trouble crediting Phillips' account of her BBC appearances, for on a recent visit to England I too happened to catch Question Time. Though I'm not British, and even though I was safely ensconced in a friend's study, not on the panel in front of a hissing and jeering audience, I too experienced a great sense of unease. The subject that night was the letter of 52 British diplomats lambasting Prime Minister Tony Blair for his support of American policy vis-à-vis Iraq and Israel.

There was not one member of the panel who could be remotely described as a defender of Israel, and there was one skilled panelist, billed as an American Moslem scholar, eager to dig in the knife at every opportunity. Not that much skill was required. The criticism of Israel was more on the order of cheerleading than intellectual argument. To get the audience going nothing more was needed than to mention Israel. (To be honest, many of the panelists did the same with Tony Blair.) It was like watching Tommy Lapid rail against charedim at a Shinui rally.

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

intersting article

[Forkboy]

15. more from this "interesting article"

What makes the situation in Britain so much worse than that in the United States, where a similar Leftism is largely regnant on many elite university campuses, is the lack of any intellectual counterweight. Many of the most widely read and respected columnists in America are consistently strong defenders of Israel: George Will, Charles Krauthamer, Martin Peretz, Victor Davis Hanson, Jeff Jacoby. By contrast, in England only Phillips, Michael Gove in the Times, and Barbara Amiel in the Telegraph can be reliably counted on to fill that role, and Amiel has been largely discredited by the travails of her husband Conrad Black.

respected? Will? Jacoby? Krauthamer? You're right don,this is interesting.

The Left, on the other hand, has shown no inclination to move beyond the received verities of the New Deal. One measure of the intellectual rigor mortis on most of the Left is the total inability to rethink the world in the wake of 9/11. In the 2002 elections, the Democrats main issue was prescription drugs for seniors, just as it had been in 2000.

damn us caring about old people

At the popular level, as well, there are many forces in America that provide important support for Israel that simply have no parallel in England. One of those is the tens of millions of evangelical Christians, who are Israel's most fervent supporters in the United States, and who wield enormous influence within the Republican Party. A second factor is the existence of talk radio, which is dominated by conservative and mainly pro-Israel voices.

Both Melanie Phillips and Michael Gove told me that they cannot, in the current intellectual climate, find British publishers for their latest book proposals: in Gove's case an argument for a more faithful neoconservative approach to the war in Iraq and in Phillips' a plea for common sense in education, family life, defense of Western values and Israel.

lol...where do you find this shit don? On you on some sort of right-wing email alert or something?

[drdon326]

21. I specifically didnt say i agree with it ..

.

[Forkboy]

22. No you didn't

your only comment was "interesting article".

There's still time to edit it though :eyes:

[Englander]

50. wtf?

Melanie Phillips!!

"intersting article"= one that sings the praises of a conservative columnist,& pisses on the "Mindless Leftists" & BBC, or the "British Bias Corporation", as Ms P. calls it.

So,do you ever actually read,or agree with any of the "sources" you post? Or not?

[drdon326]

13. Britain's Disingenuous Iraq-Israel Linkage

The British leaders' false reading of the Security Council resolutions on the Arab-Israeli conflict is insidious because it is undoubtedly a precedent for demands, after the war against Iraq, to implement Security Council resolutions that Israel has allegedly not obeyed. Unlike Saddam Hussein's arrogance in the face of Security Council resolutions requiring his disarmament, Israel's presence in the territories is not the cause of the problem; it is the result of Palestinian unwillingness to give Israel peace and security in exchange for territorial concessions and statehood.

Just as the U.N. failed to play a constructive role during the lead up to the Iraqi war, so too has the international body often been destructive with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, Resolution 242 was the singular positive contribution of the U.N. toward achieving Arab-Israeli peace.

In the days ahead, some in the international community will try to undermine the concept of reciprocity that underlies 242 and that offers the only real hope for Israelis and Palestinians. The Robin Cooks and Jack Straws of the world must be rejected for their dangerous, one-sided reading of U.N. obligations which can only lead to ongoing conflict.

http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/iraq_israel.asp

[Forkboy]

18. time to scratch another country off your itinerary

[Carlos Martillo]

71. If they came for your house

I would hope you would resist. The UK had a responsibility that they had assumed from Ottoman Turkey for the Arabs in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Palestine, and Jordan (since they fought for the Uk for independence from Ottoman Turkey); the French assumed responsibility for Syria and Lebanon. Don't knock the UK (of which I personally am no friend at all) for trying to abide by their agreement with the Arabs.

The country is called Palestine, and even when you run Palestinians off the land, it is still their land. They will be back, or they are still there (having never left).

As a North American native, I understand.

[drdon326]

20. "..systematic anti-Israel bias of the European media."

A British journalist in Israel chronicles the shocking, systematic anti-Israel bias of the European media.


The European media, too, tend to adopt a single line on Israel. This article focuses on bias -- not because the British reporting is worse (it is not), but to show how even in a country that still has an international reputation for "fair play," and whose prime minister has shown marked philo-Semitic attitudes, the media has been swept along in an almost unstoppable anti-Israel European tide.

If the misreporting and virulent bias were limited to one or two newspapers or television programs in each country, one might perhaps shrug them off. But they are not. They can be found in news reports, cartoons, and comment columns, through virtually the entire European print and broadcast media. Bashing Israel even extends to local papers that don't usually cover foreign affairs, such as the recent double page spread entitled "Jews in Jackboots" in "Luton on Sunday." (Luton is an industrial town in the south of England.) That a handful of papers sometimes carry pro-Israel editorial pieces hardly balances things out.

Regarding Britain, we have already seen how the Guardian, and its Sunday sister paper, the Observer, are slanted against Israel. Although its circulation is not particularly high, the Guardian is highly influential: it is overwhelmingly the paper of choice for those who work in education and the media.

snip

The systematic building up of a false picture of Israel as aggressor, and deliberate killer of babies and children, is helping to slowly chip away at Israel's legitimacy. How can ordinary people elsewhere not end up hating such a country? And contrary to the perceptions of some, Israel is not a big tough major power that can withstand such international antagonism indefinitely. As the Jews have learnt only too well, acts of wholesale destruction and ultimately genocide did not just spring forth in a vacuum: they were the product of a climate. The international media is not an innocent bystander in this affair.

http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/mediaobjectivity/European_Media_and_Anti-Israel_Bias.asp

[Forkboy]

23. Tom Gross

He's real popular at the bastion of liberal thinking,the National Review.

Consistant as always Don.

Now you know why I found it so funny to see you complain about people lambasting you for your sources. :shrug:

[ashiebr]

60. And who would have thought a Telegraph journalist....

....would ever denounce one from The Guardian. Amazing...........not!

His own bias is shown in his flattering description of the discredited Conrad Black.

[Coastie for Truth]

33. It;s in the European's Genes.

It's in their genes - I was tutored on Kertzer's "Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortaro" and the Spanish Inquisition (which was really anti-Muslim, Jews were just secondary) and the Holocaust.

[meppie-meppie not]

73. I respectfully disagree. Bigotry is not genetic it's a learned behaviour.

For the Europeans to outright come to the side of the Israelis they would first have to come to terms with the countless "progroms" their ancestors conducted against the Jews, through the centuries. It's easy to hate and skew reality to fit the hate but it takes an enlightened society to face their demons and progressively move towards rectifying. A respect for ALL human life would be a welcome relief but that certainly is a far away dream.

[Carlos Martillo]

70. If Americans died in the King David Hotel bombing

I am sure they would have a pro-Palestinian view of things...

That was terrorism from the other side (and could be viewed as the lesson for the later terrorism that followed).

In any case, Americans are not ready to send their children to die in Palestine. When some died in Lebanon, the Middle East was assured (like Africa after Somalia) that we would never be back. The proxy war in Iraq holds no hope of victory, and Yanks oppose it. Bush won because the same Yanks had no faith in the other guy, who wouldn't withdraw our troops either way.

[meppie-meppie not]

74. before Britain withdrew from the region (pre 1948) both the Israeli and

Palestinian groups fighting were terrorist organizations. Neither side was considered a sovereign state and so no arms "legally" could sold to either side. The 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel was done by the Irgun which was a cell of the Irgun Zvai Leumi (an underground Israeli organization). Much of the excesses of this group were largely responsible for much of the anti-Jewish sentiment of the British forces then which permeate through to the present.

[Carlos Martillo]

75. What are you talking about?

The Brits left their weapons to the Arabs for a reason: they were allies from the first war, and they didn't bomb the King David Hotel.

Nothing else really matters; Britain chose correctly, because they understood that the descendants of Mohammed would out-breed the children of Isaac. Brits thought about Britain, nothing else.

[TheKingfish]

34. Thank god for Israel

The US isn't the worst! ;)

[Paleocon]

49. We'll just have to keep trying...

I'm sure we can do it!

:silly:

[newyorican]

35. I must say...

that the Brits in this survey need to get out more. There are some serious hell-holes around the world.

[QueerJustice]

59. Oh yes...

..the beautiful weather in Britain,the nice beaches,and inexpensive daily living......

[TheKingfish]

61. What do you mean inexpensive daily living? n/t

[newyorican]

62. Wel...

It doesn't usually cost you your life, or the lives of loved ones.

Then there's that whole conscious thing, wonder what that's worth?

[Cervello]

63. About the Poll

I'm pretty sure it was an online poll. So take the results with a grain of salt.

[Violet_Crumble]

64. Yeah, but they love Australia!

Same poll. Smart people..

Forget all the snide remarks - the Brits love Australia, more than any other country except their own, according to an online survey for London's Daily Telegraph.

When more than 2000 Britons were asked to rate 23 countries as the best and worst on 12 criteria, the survey found Australia dominated, emerging as the top-ranked foreign country on seven out of 12 criteria.


<snip>

But the Brits are almost as positive about Australia. The survey, by online pollsters YouGov, found they think Australia second only to Britain as the best country to live in, the most democratic and the most deserving of international respect.

On four criteria - the best public services, the friendliest people, the safest country and the best place to holiday - the Brits rank us number one, even ahead of Britain.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2005/01/12/1105423558054.html

[QueerJustice]

65. its the weather

[rfkrfk]

66. poll, the worst {or best-depends} all-time Imperialist country is-was...

choose from these choices...
Britain, Germany-Hitler, Spain, Britain,
Netherlands, Britain, Persia-Alexander era,
Rome, Britain, Zulu-era, Britain, classic Soviet Union,
France-several eras, Britain, Incas, Moors,
Japan-several eras, Turks-Suleyman era, Mongols,
Britain.

[Coastie for Truth]

67. And then there's Bonny Prince Willie

.. third in line for the throne -- wearing a Nazi uniform.

[Carlos Martillo]

69. That would be Harry "Pothead"

and he didn't insult Jewish people; he insulted the British people that suffered under the Nazi bombs that were dropped on th UK. He is not in line for a Jewish throne, but an English one; the one that the Nazis bombed in the Blitz.

I would be angry if I was Jewish, but more so if I was British (of any faith); they didn't care who was on the island they bombed.

[Carlos Martillo]

68. I thought "Israelis" don't vacation in "Israel" either

what is the point of this article?