Re: The PSC Meeting


By Lord Andrew Phi...
November 11, 2010
Share

I have just had drawn to my attention a contribution made to The JC.com website on 3rd November by Jonathan Hoffman. It comments on a short speech I made at a PSC meeting last week. It does not report what I said fairly, or accurately (sadly, not for the first time in the JC as far as I am concerned.)
I will not try the patience of the readers of this blog (and my own!) by detailing all his studied distortions. One example, taken from the start of his piece, may serve to give the flavour.
He states that I said “I do believe in the right of Israel to exist”, he adding “Well thanks buddy – and France? Germany? England?”
In fact I emphasised that I believe “passionately” in the right of Israel to exist in freedom and security, adding that I believed in a similar right for Palestine. I did not also say, but could have, that I volunteered to fight for Israel in 1973.
Israel is in my view destroying its long-term security and harmony inter alia and particularly by its military occupation and colonisation of the West Bank (now extending to 42% of that territory, according to the latest Foreign Office estimate).
I will not be deterred from speaking out against that self-defeating, provocative and illegal policy, and its awful impact on the Palestinians.

COMMENTS

Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:12

Rate this:

1 point

Bravo, Jonathan.

Jon, it goes further than that. Those who pretend that actions against UN resolutions are 'illegal', are talking out of their tuches. They have no idea what 'illegal' means.
The UN is not a legislative body. It is a voluntary talking shop. It has no sovereign authority whatsoever to pass laws, end of. None of its resolutions, of any kind, has any more legal power than those of my local cricket club (and probably less, strictly speaking, since the cricket club is governed by English law; the UN is not governed by any higher law, and as already mentioned, it has nil sovereignty). Membership of the UN is not compulsory under any higher law. In short, the whole thing is a complete myth.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:13

Rate this:

-1 points

The thing is, Yoni, the homeland's boundaries have always changed according to circumstance, once it was between the two rivers (the Euphrates and Nachal Mitzrayim -- it's debatable whether this is the Nile or Wadi Arish, in Sinai) and once it existed on,y as a heartfelt wish. And the circumstance now is that the homeland cannot be the Jewish democracy I am sure we all want it to be outside of the Green Line. I'd rather it didn't become just a heart-felt wish again.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:13

Rate this:

1 point

Yankee, you are full of it. Jon's little finger has more brains than you'll ever have.


yankeeuxb (not verified)

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:14

Rate this:

-3 points

More myths.

The silly little Palestinians left. But then so did all refugees walk calmy and uncomplaining to their end - with a gun to their heads. And there are hundred of Palestinian villages that have been wiped from the map.

The seige of Gaza has nothing to do with heavy weapons. Just ask the 9 protestors who were shot (most of them in the head) for attempting to bring medicine and toys to Gaza. It's an occupation.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:16

Rate this:

2 points

It was never literally as far as the Euphrates. That is a figure of speech.
Spammy, do you ever post anything that makes the slightest sense or demonstrates the slighest acquaintance with the facts?


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:18

Rate this:

2 points

"Just ask the 9 protestors who were shot (most of them in the head) for attempting to bring medicine and toys to Gaza."

Yankee only lies when his lips move or when he is typing.
The organisers themselves admitted publicly that they sought martyrdom.
The 'protestors' were shot for attacking Israeli soldiers with murderous intent. Good riddance.


Jon_i_Cohen

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:19

Rate this:

2 points

Yoni1
I am sure you will have seen my earlier post giving information about the dufferent types of (non binding) resolutions that the UN puts out.
Your information added to this is way above the heads of yankeexub and telegramsham, it is just too much for these 2-digit IQ, useful idiots to comprehend.
Nevertheless,keep up the good work on this blog site and perhaps some of the facts may start to sink in.


Jon_i_Cohen

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:21

Rate this:

2 points

Still waiting for Lord Phillips to respond to my points made at 12:50


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:23

Rate this:

-2 points

Yes it was Yoni, read yer Bible. Have you asked your friend, Jonathan why it is taking so long for him to come up with a full transcript of the Phillips speech.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:25

Rate this:

-3 points

Still waiting for Jonathan to provide us with a full transcript of Phillips's speech so we can ascertain what Jonathan said was true.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:25

Rate this:

0 points

The Bible is not an accurate document in that sense. For that we turn to archaeology as the best we have. Do try to talk some sense, just for a change.

I am not Jonathan's line manager. Do keep up.

Philips has not disputed anything Jonathan has said about the content of his speech. OTOH, he is ducking answering Jonathan's questions. Quelle surprise.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:28

Rate this:

0 points

Yes, I have, Jon. And thanks. Same to you.
And feel free to use my real name, which is Yoni :)
(I am Yoni1 here since Yoni was taken).


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:28

Rate this:

0 points

The Bible isn't accurate in that sense? Do you realise that you have just pulled the carpet from under the whole reasoning behind the Jews being a people? Without the bibke, we are nothing, especially not a people. Are you Shlomo Sand in disguise?


yankeeuxb (not verified)

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:32

Rate this:

-1 points

YOni1

I think the IOF attacked the ship. In international waters. In the dark. Full of unarmed civilians.


yankeeuxb (not verified)

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:36

Rate this:

-1 points

Has the full transcript turned up yet?


Jonathan Hoffman

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:50

Rate this:

1 point

The transcript of the relevant comments is here:

http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/lord-phillips-america-grip-well-organised-...

Lord Phillips has refused to answer any questions. If he did not say the words attributed to him, he would have denied it. He hasn't.

Neither has he withdrawn the inference that I lied.

Despicable. Straight from the Jenny Tonge School of Middle East studies. Yet again the Lib Dems show us their true colours.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 17:55

Rate this:

-1 points

Hardly a full transcript, Jonathan. Has anyone not involved got a full transcript?


Jewish American...

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:06

Rate this:

0 points

I guess there's nothing to do but poke chests and name call until a credible transcript is produced.


Avraham Reiss

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:07

Rate this:

0 points

There seems to be a concerted, organised effort to discredit or embarrass Jonathan Hoffman by requesting that he supply a transcript of a speech made by someone else.

Had Phillips distributed such a transcript amongst his audience immediately following his speech, this might have been a reasonable request - although Phillips would have been the correct person to approach.

But since this was obviously NOT the case, there is no justification in requesting that Jonathan provide such a transcript. His memory is as good as anyone else's.

I want to suggest to the JC that it check the IP addresses of a number of people who made the above demand, to see if the demand did not originate from one ip address - a newspaper always checks its sources, so the suggestion falls within standard newspaper practices.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:11

Rate this:

1 point

Is there or is there not a transcript of this speech? If Phillips said what is claimed, then it is despicable. If not, should there not at least be a retraction of the allegation?


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:13

Rate this:

0 points

I sense a grovelling apology prompted by a solicitor's letter coming on


Jewish American...

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:13

Rate this:

0 points

Chop chop, JC....Avraham has spoken!


Jonathan Hoffman

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:16

Rate this:

0 points

I have provided you with my transcript of the offensive comments which Lord Phillips has not denied.

A full transcript would not excuse the antisemitic phrases I have cited. By asking for one, you are showing yourself yet again to be a vexacious Israel traducer. But we knew that.

The only person who can provide you with a full transcript is Lord Phillips. Have you contacted him and if not why not?


Avraham Reiss

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:22

Rate this:

0 points

Good point, telegramsam. Did you ask Phillips for a transcript, or are you just baiting Jonathan, as always?
Await your binary reply: yes or no.


Yvetta

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:23

Rate this:

1 point

What, what?
His Lordship hasn't yet found his Tonge?
“Silence is Golden”
And often eloquent.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:24

Rate this:

0 points

How is it to traduce, vexaciously or otherwise, Israel if all I want is a full transcript of what Phillips allegedly said in order to see for myself whether he did indeed say these despicable comments? You made the claim that he did, Jonathan, surely it is up to you to back it up with proof. Any court of law or newspaper editor would demand it.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:27

Rate this:

0 points

Funny, how some people don't want proof that Phillips actually said what is claimed and are willing to take it at face value. Imagine one of the alleged Israel-bashers here had done that. Imagine the gevalt.


Jonathan Hoffman

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:29

Rate this:

-1 points

You have had a transcript of the offensive remarks. You are being your usual vexacious self.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:31

Rate this:

1 point

What transcript, Jonathan? That wasn't a transcript, that was an annotated blog. Is it too much to ask for a full transcript to ascertain whether you heard correctly. You made the claim, prove it. Why should we take it at face value?


Yvetta

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:38

Rate this:

0 points

As mentioned (though not in so many words) on Richard's thread by Jondot (smart lad!) we don't know for sure that this post is by yer hactual Lord P, do we?


Avraham Reiss

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:51

Rate this:

1 point

Well, since telegramsam has not replied to the question: did he request a transcript from Phillips?, we now know for certain that:

(1) He did Not make such a request, and

(2) He is definately interested in such a transcript NOT becoming available, since it would prove Jonathan's words beyond all doubt.

I prescribe an early night for telegramsam.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:52

Rate this:

0 points

Indeed, Jonathan, a partial transcript, not a full one. How do we know that what you quoted wasn't taken out of context as in: "There are some idiots who claim that Europe cannot think straight about Israel because of the Holocaust and that America is in the grip of the well-organised Jewish lobby. Those who believe this are idiots and should be shown as such".
What you gave was an interpretation, not a verbatim report. I did not suggest that a transcript could not be provided. Quite the opposite, I want to see a full transcript before jumping to any conclusions about the Baron/Lord/Earl/Whatever.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:54

Rate this:

-1 points

So, Jonathan, you made the claim, back it up with a full transcript or is there going to be another grovelling apology prompted by a solicitor's letter?


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:56

Rate this:

0 points

Bloody Norah, he's got Avraham on his side. He should start to worry.


Yvetta

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 18:59

Rate this:

0 points

Stop trying to undermine Jonathan by tomfoolery, t'sam; JH's recollections were freshly reported at the time, whereas ...


Yvetta

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:02

Rate this:

0 points

I'd be happy to have Avraham in my corner!


Avraham Reiss

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:06

Rate this:

0 points

Yvetta, I always said you had good taste ... :-)


mattpryor

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:07

Rate this:

0 points

Telegramsam: Give it a rest. You know full well that even if there were a transcript, Jonathan is hardly likely to possess it.

Lord Phillips - did you, or did you not, say at the PSC meeting that America is in the grip of the Jewish lobby and Europe cannot think straight about the middle east because we are suffering from Holocaust guilt?

Do you believe those things to be true? For heaven's sake I hope that if you do believe them then you have the courage to defend such views.


Avraham Reiss

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:07

Rate this:

0 points

telegramsam, what part of "early night" didn't you understand?


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:15

Rate this:

0 points

"These people and their ancestors - alive and dead - were born in Palestine and were then expelled from Palestine"

Ducking and diving, mate, ducking and diving. They started a genocidal war, and lost. In the main, they were also advised by their own leaders to leave, in order to leave a clean killing field for the coming genocide.
We know that to someone like you, that's an unimportant detail.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:19

Rate this:

0 points

"I think the IOF attacked the ship. In international waters. In the dark. Full of unarmed civilians."

'Think' is not the term I would use for your confused ramblings.
a) calling it IOF makes you a deranged antisemite.
b) 'international waters' is irrelevant. It was an act of war against Israel.
c) they were manifestly NOT 'unarmed'.
d) they were not 'civilians'.
e) they attacked the IDF soldiers. The video is quite clear on that.

Now buzz off and spam somewhere else.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:22

Rate this:

0 points

Spammy, re the Bible, is full of the usual hot air. I haven't pulled any carpets, rugs or hall runners from under anything. All I said was that the Bible is not accurate down to the nearest 10 yards. It needs to be supplemented by more accurate data from archaeological research, which - surprise, surprise (for the antisemites) - does confirm much of what's said in the OT.
As to the Euphrates, it was never part of any Jewish polity either acc. to the OT or archaeology.


Yoni1

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:25

Rate this:

0 points

Solicitor's letter? ROFL. Philips has NOT denied that he'd said what he said, pompously and condescendingly, about generously permitting Israel to exist.
He'd NOT denied that he was talking about Jewish lobby etc.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:48

Rate this:

0 points

All I was doing was trying to save Jonathan from the embarrassment of having to issue another grovelling apology. Now that the ujia, nif and the Abraham fund are working with the zf it seemed the friendly thing to do.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:50

Rate this:

0 points

If Jonathan makes such a claim, he has to be prepared to prove it. He ha previous after all.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 19:53

Rate this:

0 points

Avraham, heard anything yet from your ayatollah? I'm sure Stephen pollard and the rest of his team are desperate to know whether they are barred from israel.


Yvetta

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 20:07

Rate this:

0 points

Yes, but is stephenb barred from the JC?


Avraham Reiss

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 20:40

Rate this:

0 points

telegramsam, what's new at the Board of Deputies? What's up with Dalet?


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 20:48

Rate this:

0 points

I don't know about the reptillian Stevieb, but there seems to have been some sort of cull of the atrocious.


telegramsam

Thu, 11/11/2010 - 20:49

Rate this:

0 points

You tell me, Avraham, you are the one with friends in low places.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS