Comment on Comment Is Free Is Free

From the comment thread for the Michael Mansfield post at keeptonyblairforpm:

Troy Says:
May 25, 2010 at 10:50 pm Reply

He acted for the family of Tom Hurndall?

Well, that puts his credibility beyond defence – afterall, what sort of a man would pursue some justice for the family of a man shot dead in an act that was found to be unlawful by both an Israeli military court and a British inquest?

You silly people. The Israelis refused more than a routine inquiry until high profile pressure by the parents forced the issue. To hold this mans part in securing rightful convictions of a murderer of a British citizen against him does your argument no favours.


keeptonyblairforpm Says:
May 25, 2010 at 11:06 pm

Troy,

You might have noticed that I used the reference to Tom Hurndall only as part of the article which I reproduced in full from the CIFWatch site. I did not express an opinion on any of their links or references.

The yeahs and nays of the good guys (Palestinians iinvariably, I imagine, in your mind – those who have been attacking Israel weekly for years) and the bad guys (Israelis, I imagine in your mind) is too complex for any of us ignorant bystanders to understand, it seems to me.

Let others decide on the BIG picture. One dead photographer does not an Enemy State make. Sorry, that’s just the way it is. Life and death. And realpolitik.

Btw, someone put this comment on the Ban Blair-Baiting petition recently:

The UK Guardian newspaper cannot call itself a newspaper any more. It has a manipulative
propaganda organ of the extreme disassociated anarchist left.

Of course you are likely to just discount it. After all, that someone was from Israel.

Observations:

1) Standard Operating Procedure for Uncle Jimmy: he begins by wriggling that the piece he's just quoted verbatim over four screensful of his blog wasn't meant to imply any kind of agreement with anything int it, oh no, any more than when he did the same for the piece that described Muslims as taking part in human sacrifices. No, Jimmy is a balanced blogger who publishes everything as a public service and never expresses an opinion. By quoting these things as masses of inline text with only an indication at the start or the end that it's not his own work, he allows the careless reader who approves to imagine he at least some of it, while being able to hold up his hands and say "I never said I approved of this stuff, I just linked it AND quoted the whole of it".

I suppose we should expect that from someone who admiringly displays in his sidebar Tony Blair's whiny :

"This terrorism isn't our fault. We didn't cause it. It's not the consequence of foreign policy. It is an attack on our way of life. It is global. It has an ideology. We will not win until we shake ourselves free of the wretched capitulation to the propaganda of the enemy that somehow we are the ones responsible."

"We....our....": you can tell Blair is feeling guilty there, because her NEVER shares responsibility for successes, only blame for failures. But honestly. "We" run around invading countries whose particular kind of murdering thug we dislike (while ignoring all the ones with murdering thugs we're pals with), and when they hit back it's not "our" fault. A big American did it and ran away.Though Blair is right about one thing: "we" (i.e. Blair) will not win. Since he was fired as PM for being a corrupt liar who had bled away most of Labour's votes since he arrived in Downing Street, nobody gives a pisspot for his opinion. Any winning will be done by those still involved. not by after-dinner speakers.

2) Then since he has no answer to the commenter's actual point, he claims it's all too complicated for little old him, and of course the rest of us. However, he seems to imagine he "understands" the commenter's views on Palestinians and Israelis. It isn't all too complicated for him to claim that the former have been "attacking Israel weekly for years", though clearly any comprhension that the latter have also been "attacking Palestine daily for decades" is far beyond his wee brain..
3) Regarding the murder of Tom Hurndall, Jimmy says "One dead photographer does not an Enemy State make. Sorry, that’s just the way it is. Life and death. And realpolitik."

Funny: when Theo van Gogh was murdered Jimmy seemed to believe that made an enemy of an entire religion. Is he going to revise his opinon now and say "One dead film-maker does not a conspiracy to take over Europe make. Sorry, that's just the way it is. Life and death. And neo-Nazi scum." ?

I'm not holding my breath.

4) Finally a quick plug for the petition got up by him and his fellow Blair-loving losers (I feel a Richard Farina parody coming on here... ) He quotes a comment (presumably to support his love of CIFWatch) to the effect that "The UK Guardian newspaper cannot call itself a newspaper any more. It has a manipulative propaganda organ of the extreme disassociated anarchist left." Then he says that Troy will probably discount the remark because the commenter is from Israel.

Let's pass over the casual (and oh-so-predictable) accusation of antisemitism in anyone who disagrees with him. Personally I'm more likely to disregard this work of genius because its author begins by emphasising that the UK Guardian is a newspaper (well strike me, and there I was thinking it was a nuclear power station) before saying it can't call itself a newspaper any more. Then he confuses "is" and "has". Perhaps the Guardian IS a manipulative propaganda organ of the extreme left: I wouldn't know (all too complex for me, and anyway since the anarchists disassociated they stopped inviting me to their meetings). The ones who HAVE manipulative propaganda organs are the lying wankers at the Ban Blair-Baiting petition site.

I don't know about Troy, but I couldn't possibly discount a comment which provided an excuse for such a gloriously apposite pun.