Israel Admits to Harvesting Organs From Bodies Without Permission

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Orlanth**

Squigsquasher wrote:
I find the idea of there being "the Jewish community" and "The British community" ridiculous. If you live in the UK, you're part of the British community, regardless of whether you're a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Atheist or (as in my case) a Slaanesh worshipper.

Judaism isn't even a race, it's a religion.

If Mr Abraham Bagel and his family want to go into banking then let them.

Good reason its been left to wiser heads then.

Judaism is a race and a religion and a cultural group and also now potentially a nationality under the Right of Return to become citizens of Israel.

Mr Bagel can also go into banking, in the Jewish community or into investment banking, he could also get a non executive job in a domestic bank without discrimination. Can't buy out a High Street bank though, it would be blocked.

**Frazzled**

Which British financial institutions are private?

**Crimson**

Orlanth wrote:
[Can't buy out a High Street bank though, it would be blocked.

I hate to do this but: citation needed.

**Orlanth**

Crimson wrote:
Orlanth, no such legislation exists. You're detached from reality.

I made no comment or inference that there was any legislation.
There is an agreement, not a law restricting Jews.
Such a law is unnecessary anyway. To buy into a major industry you have to seek government approval. Say for example you had the billions needed to buy a British bank, you cant simply buy the bank, even if the owners sell you the shares. You also have to see Whitehall approval before you can even own the shares. Other countries have similar procedures and for similar reasons, to prevent partisan ownership of important industries.
Ask yourself this,l can a Russian billionarie buy a major US armanents industry. The answer is no, because he is a Russian.
With banking its the same thing, only a little less obvious.
Even so the Bank of England is run by government appouinted personnel and rthey regulate the banking industry. The matter is well at hand without passing any discriminatory laws or restricting Brtish Jews from making business..

Crimson wrote:

Also, if you don't see why restricting what sort of business you can do based on your ethnicity/religion is wrong, I don't know what to tell you.

Again I lead you back to the analogy of a Russian billionaire trying to buy a US armaments industry. Would you be so full of dogma that you think such a sale can never be opposed because it might offend equal opportunities sensibilities? I really hope you can think better than that.
Banking is no different really. You can feth over somewhere with banks just as much as you can with bombs. Bankers are bad enough when greedy and lazy, at least we shouldn't have to worry if they are playing for another team.

Besides if you think that ethnically run industries are always ethically run industries offering equality of services and opportunities for all then you have no reason to call anyone else detached from reality.

**Frazzled**

So what Britsh banks are privately owned?

**Orlanth**

Frazzled wrote:
Which British financial institutions are private?

All of them except Bank of England Frazzie. Though some have been bought back by the government when they collapsed. RBS for example.

RBS is still run as a private bank, its just a private bank unwritten by the tax payer, and the tax payer isn't happy.

Crimson wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
[Can't buy out a High Street bank though, it would be blocked.

I hate to do this but: citation needed.

Don't be lazy. Look up any very large scale control of business transfer and you will find it has to be signed off by the government.
The one that comes immediately to mind is the buy out of Manchester United, it comes to mind because Gordon Brown should have said no, they deal was too dodgy. He could and should have blocked the sale cold because of the transfered debt.
Now Manchester United is not a bank, but it doesn't have to be, banks are included alongside any other industry in a common procedure.

**Frazzled**

RBS is public
Barclays is public
HSBC is public

Those are the only British banks I interact with that I am aware of.

**Crimson**

Orlanth wrote:

Ask yourself this,l can a Russian billionarie buy a major US armanents industry. The answer is no, because he is a Russian.

Indeed, because he is a foreign national, unlike the Jews we are talking about here!

**Orlanth**

Frazzled wrote:
RBS is public
Barclays is public
HSBC is public

Those are the only British banks I interact with that I am aware of.

As good a way to list them as any:

http://www.uknetguide.co.uk/finance/banks_and_banking/high_street_banks.html

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crimson wrote:
Orlanth wrote:

Ask yourself this,l can a Russian billionarie buy a major US armanents industry. The answer is no, because he is a Russian.

Indeed, because he is a foreign national, unlike the Jews we are talking about here!

Foreign nationals can buy US industries.

**Jihadin**

But not deemed a part of National Security.

**Frazzled**

Well he could probably buy a minority interest.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Watch that list Orlanth. It includes Santander. Thats a Spanish bank.

**Orlanth**

Frazzled wrote:

Watch that list Orlanth. It includes Santander. Thats a Spanish bank.

I don't like Santander much, but its the same as most others. Spanish ownership of a UK bank cannot be blocked due to EU free trade laws.

I bank with the Cooperative Bank, and would recommend it to anyone.

**Frazzled**

I meant more that, thats not a British only list my man. Santander's not a bad bank. Good competitors in Latin America.

**Orlanth**

No its isn't British only, was until fairly recently IIRC.
I see what you are getting at, foreign banks could be owned by anyone, and I don't know what the answer is to that.

Anyway this threadjack must end, we are so far off the OP.

**Frazzled**

Sanander's always been Spanish.
My point on the three I mentioned was that they were public. After 2008 they were pretty much govenrment owned.

Not seeing how the cabal works when they are public entities.

**Crimson**

Orlanth wrote:

I see what you are getting at, foreign banks could be owned by anyone, and I don't know what the answer is to that.

Yes, even by Jews! (Oh the horror!) How is your reptoid-controlled government gonna stop that! Hah!

**Squigsquasher**

Crimson wrote:
Orlanth wrote:

I see what you are getting at, foreign banks could be owned by anyone, and I don't know what the answer is to that.

Yes, even by Jews! (Oh the horror!) How is your reptoid-controlled government gonna stop that! Hah!

The same way they're gonna ban porn, I suppose.

The bastards.

**azazel the cat**

purplefood wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
purplefood wrote:
Clearly any CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT of CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT is merely CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT propaganda perpetrated by CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT who aren't CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT and CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT people. CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT is the craziest ever CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT in the world. We should all just CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT

CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT your CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT.

I CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT'ed your correction

I would just like to point out that this is the single best comment I've ever seen posted in any of the myriad threads relating to Israel/Palestine.

Exalted.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Bullockist wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Do I need to point out that you picked 2006, a year on which Israel participated in a war, or is it pointless?

The war was initiated by a Hezbollah ambush. Israel didn't "participate in a war" - it was attacked.

Has anyone else noticed that as soon as things seem to be calming down in israel/gaza/west bank some militant gets assasinated , the militants start doing ambushes and getting much more rocket happy and israel responds with an incusion. May be just my tin foil hat talking , but it seems to happen often.

Nothing sells the Palestinian victim narrative better than dead kids. Nothing gets dead kids faster than firing rockets from civilian areas and waiting for the counter battery fire to hit. Kind of sad that their tactical policies are specifically designed to maximize civilian casualties on their own side...

**NuggzTheNinja**

Orlanth wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Orlanth wrote:

The UK had an amicable solution to this centuries ago that still works. Let Jews have free reign over certain industries, notably the diamond trade, merchant and investment banking and allow them to build any kind of business in their own community, but to restrict them from domestic banking and insurance. This is why the UK has a large stable Jewish population, the problems that occurred in Germany in WW1 cant occur here and the return concessions are acceptable to the Jewish community.

Or, you know, you let Jewish people do the same things as everyone else?

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

1. People network with their own community and Jews have had a global community, even when there was no global community.
People stick with their own kind, its human nature, so Jews give the best deals to other Jews, just as the cliche of the 'Englishman abroad' who forms a club if he finds two other Englishmen. The concept behind this is based on logical observation, people network with their own. We all do it, but Jews have an advantage, being a race, a culture and a religion prascticing seperate living, the grouping is cohesive has a common ethos which is already business orientated though its spiritual teachings and common history and can network frankly far better than anyone else.
So Jews network more and tend to get rich quicker. This isn't a problem, though it can cause resentment of the left wing kind due to envy that of itself is not the fault of the Jews.

2. So where is the problem then?
Where the problems begin is when banking is involved. If the bankers are Jewish they give better deals and more lenient settlement terms to their own kind, which causers resentment and division. Furthermore if a company (likely a Gentile debtor) is foreclosed on the assets go to the creditors, and thus auctioned off to fellow Jews. Now the new management of the old company is Jewish and from then on being Jewish is largely necessary in order to be promoted, thus Jews take over the industry that was previously foreclosed on. This turns into a nasty vicious circle.
At this point claims of 'Jewish conspiracy' arise, and is the source of that theory, even though all we see is open business networking and the conspiracy angle is mostly myth. I say mostly because Jewish business is largely aware of what is going on, but networks as normal, because networking with our own kind is what humans do and Jews cannot be blamed for what is part of essential human nature.
England had this problem earlier than most of Europe as the towns were broadly more fair and there were fewer wars reaching the urban areas, also as an island it was easier to establish a cordon. Thus to combat this trend all Jews were expelled from England in the 13th century. Because we had our over-reaction over and done back in a time when harsh reaction to social conditions was morally acceptable we could also reflect and rebuild a relationship with the Jewish community early.
It was Cromwell who let the Jews return, but there were caveats that work from then to this day, so thwe working relationship with Jews is four centuries old and was built on a common understanding of economic and political realities that are still true today.

3. How does this work and why is it fair?
By limiting Jews from domestic banking the above problems which were major economic bugbears and the direct fuel for the rise of Nazism were curtailed. Its easy to write off Hitlers opinions as just the ravings of a sick feth, but they wouldn't have had any bite unless there was a veneer of truth to them. In the First World War the European economies were squeezed, however where there was partisan banking some people (Jews) would be given concessions, others would be foreclosed on (non Jews with assets sold to other Jews). While this is a gross oversimplification it occurred often enough to cause resentment and help pave the way for German defeat.

4. Ok, but even if that is so tthat deosnt make it right.
Up to a point, but the return concessions were and still are major. We live in a land of equal opportunities legislation, and companies can and are censured as racist if they fail to hire percentages of ethnic workers, or offer equal opportunities to promotion. However there are exceptions, Tescos and Sainsburys are amongst the largest employers in the UK but there is a clean demographic between store workers and head office workers. Jews enter at head office level while non Jews with some token exceptions have a glass ceiling at store manager level, and store managers don't get the same pay as managers with oversight over the quantity of staff you would find in other industries.
I remember a quote given to me from 1999, the height of New Labour and the politically correct move to ethnically equalise the workforce: 'shop level staff is not a profile job for Jews'. Not a profile job could be taken to mean gross discrimination is in place, but isn't, this Status Quo remains intact even when other companies were being censured for not having enough women or ethnics in management.

If supermarkets were unequal employers they have nothing on the diamond trade. You cant even get a job at all unless you are Jewish, and more restrictive than that you need a recommendation. This is discrimination in spades, but is allowed to continue, is even in fact encouraged because the diamond industry deals with small transportable, non detectable high value goods. For a Jew to steal from his employer would be to fly in the face of his own culture and community and thus Jews make more stable and trustworthy employees for the diamond trade.
This might sound like a wise general principle, but be assured it is an exception. There was an expose on BBC Radio of all places about how Chinese agents infiltrated companies and stole their data purely because it was not permissible not to employee them due to underrepresentation of Chinese ethnicity in the workplace, and sensitivity of information was not considered an excuse. The Equal Opportunities dogmas are exceptionally prevalent, but have been continually bypassed by the Jewish community even though evidence 'discrimination' is more clearly prevalent than in other industries to to its extremity or the size of the organisation involved.

5. The end result.
All this doesn't concern me in the least because its part of a wider deal which in the long term is best for everyone in the UK economy, Jewish and non Jewish. Jews get to run thing their way in niche industries but cannot dictate her destiny of the economy at large. They are happy, we are happy and anti-Semitism is a problem only amongst the Islamic community. For this centuries old agreement to have survived the cultural fethstorm that was New Labour is saying something, a lot of what was done in the UK was built on time tested common sense principles, and all too many of those principles were removed due to doctrinal expediency over the last decade and a half..

What a load of fething crap. Are you serious?

People are free to hire whoever they want. There's no global Jewish conspiracy to hire other Jews. Are you really suggesting that Jews help Jews any more than Blacks help Blacks?

**azazel the cat**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Bullockist wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Do I need to point out that you picked 2006, a year on which Israel participated in a war, or is it pointless?

The war was initiated by a Hezbollah ambush. Israel didn't "participate in a war" - it was attacked.

Has anyone else noticed that as soon as things seem to be calming down in israel/gaza/west bank some militant gets assasinated , the militants start doing ambushes and getting much more rocket happy and israel responds with an incusion. May be just my tin foil hat talking , but it seems to happen often.

Nothing sells the Palestinian victim narrative better than dead kids. Nothing gets dead kids faster than firing rockets from civilian areas and waiting for the counter battery fire to hit. Kind of sad that their tactical policies are specifically designed to maximize civilian casualties on their own side...

That's one way to look at it. Another way, however, is to view it as a few monsters and fiends using civilian populations to act as human shields, because they are unaware that the other monsters and fiends which they are assaulting are perfectly willing to kill their way through those human shields to get to them.

TL;DR launching rockets at or near civilians makes you a douche.

**NuggzTheNinja**

azazel the cat wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Bullockist wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Do I need to point out that you picked 2006, a year on which Israel participated in a war, or is it pointless?

The war was initiated by a Hezbollah ambush. Israel didn't "participate in a war" - it was attacked.

Has anyone else noticed that as soon as things seem to be calming down in israel/gaza/west bank some militant gets assasinated , the militants start doing ambushes and getting much more rocket happy and israel responds with an incusion. May be just my tin foil hat talking , but it seems to happen often.

Nothing sells the Palestinian victim narrative better than dead kids. Nothing gets dead kids faster than firing rockets from civilian areas and waiting for the counter battery fire to hit. Kind of sad that their tactical policies are specifically designed to maximize civilian casualties on their own side...

That's one way to look at it. Another way, however, is to view it as a few monsters and fiends using civilian populations to act as human shields, because they are unaware that the other monsters and fiends which they are assaulting are perfectly willing to kill their way through those human shields to get to them.

TL;DR launching rockets at or near civilians makes you a douche.

That's interesting...except that's not how it works. The IAF released scores of videos during Cast Lead of JDAM strikes averted because the target drove his launcher into a populated area. Whenever possible, we tried to minimize casualties. It's not "douchey" to defend yourself against an Islamic death cultist firing rockets at you if he's going to hide behind civilians. If it's him or me, it's going to be him every single time. You wouldn't understand that because you've never been in that situation.

Civilians die in war time. That's just how it is. Look at the civilian death tolls in Iraq. Arabs are knocking each other off in Syria like it's going out of style, yet for some reason, everyone focuses on Israel. Hmmmm...

**azazel the cat**

NuggzTheNinja wrote: Arabs are knocking each other off in Syria like it's going out of style, yet for some reason, everyone focuses on Israel. Hmmmm...

What a lovely colonial perspective. Perhaps next, you can tell me about your White Man's Burden.

**Kovnik Obama**

Orlanth wrote:

Judaism is a race and a religion and a cultural group and also now potentially a nationality under the Right of Return to become citizens of Israel.

Wouldn't the race be Semite, and thus also include quite a few non-jewish people from around Northen-Africa, Ethiopia and the Middle-East?

**LordofHats**

I'd actually argue that 'Semite' as a descriptor is rather distant at this point. It's really only useful now for identifying the language family that makes up much of the Middle East and ancient cultures. Less so for other things. Besides, if I walked up to someone and asked what they thought of Semitic culture they'd just assume I was talking about Jews anyway. The term is too loaded these days to have general use.

Granted, getting modern Israelis and Palestinians to acknowledge a common historical origin may be a useful tool in the future to bring peace back to the region imo.

**Kovnik Obama**

LordofHats wrote:
I'd actually argue that 'Semite' as a descriptor is rather distant at this point. It's really only useful now for identifying the language family that makes up much of the Middle East and ancient cultures. Less so for other things.

Well, isn't that the case for every racial denominators? ''Caucasian'' initially meant ''who'se not Mongolian'', and vice versa, and Semites were Caucasians...

**LordofHats**

Pretty much. Thanks 19th century social Darwinists!

EDIT: Though I'd also argue terms like Caucasian and Hispanic are no where near as butchered as the term Semetic which in general use has been cut down to referring to one comparatively small ethnic group. Caucasian is a good second though.

**Bullockist**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:

That's interesting...except that's not how it works. The IAF released scores of videos during Cast Lead of JDAM strikes averted because the target drove his launcher into a populated area. Whenever possible, we tried to minimize casualties. It's not "douchey" to defend yourself against an Islamic death cultist firing rockets at you if he's going to hide behind civilians. If it's him or me, it's going to be him every single time. You wouldn't understand that because you've never been in that situation.

Civilians die in war time. That's just how it is. Look at the civilian death tolls in Iraq. Arabs are knocking each other off in Syria like it's going out of style, yet for some reason, everyone focuses on Israel. Hmmmm...

If a country hasn't been pacified in 50 years maybe it's time to GTFO ? Or optionally actually approach the peace process in a serious manner and not just as a stalling method so more settlements can be placed.

**Jihadin**

Reservations getting smaller and smaller over there...they need to open up casino's....

**Bullockist**

OH they do run casinos now jihadin. The militants offer odds on the chances of surviving a rocket attack and the Israelis take the odds.