MH17: Russia liable for downing airliner over Ukraine

Scalie asked for an example, so I gave him one that met his exact criteria, so hardly selective.
Did you give any supporting evidence, or were you offering an opinion?
 
Are you serious :) but on the off chance your not pulling my plonker, try typing into google:-

Saddam Hussein NAZIs - explains the background, parallels and everything else.
Baath Party Junta -- explains how the party went from a military junta to a personality cult.
Try and get to the point instead of wriggling.

You said we had called others the same. You went from Libyan groups to Gaddafi to Ukrainians to Croats and now Saddam and the Ba’ath Party. Unless any of those govts/party’s or groups have collectively been called Junta and Nazi’s by the U.K. govt you’re talking out of your hoop again
 
D

Deleted 154930

Guest
Try and get to the point instead of wriggling.

You said we had called others the same. You went from Libyan groups to Gaddafi to Ukrainians to Croats and now Saddam and the Ba’ath Party. Unless any of those govts/party’s or groups have collectively been called Junta and Nazi’s by the U.K. govt you’re talking out of your hoop again
You have fixated on two words, I gave you every opportunity to move on. Both words you don't seem to understand and want to reserve only for your own chosen enemy.

Junta - is generally applied to any military government, I won't give you anymore examples as your been silly.
NAZI - Is specific to the National Socialists of the Third Reich and is now a pejorative word, that is just bandied about by journalists and every government (hansard) including us and Russia. I agreed with you, if you went back to my earlier post.

Its you who has started talking out of your hoop, all because you want to be cleverer than me.
 
Not difficult
 
You have fixated on two words, I gave you every opportunity to move on. Both words you don't seem to understand and want to reserve only for your own chosen enemy.
Russian agitprop calls the Ukrainian govt a Junta and Nazi’s for the umpteenth time. Where has the British govt called any govt other than the Argies and the NSDAP those words?

You’ve come out repeatedly in defence of Putin and his agitprop and say we use the same words and yet have failed to show a single example.
Junta - is generally applied to any military government, I won't give you anymore examples as your been silly.
NAZI - Is specific to the National Socialists of the Third Reich and is now a pejorative word, that is just bandied about by journalists and every government (hansard) including us and Russia. I agreed with you, if you went back to my earlier post.
I wonder if you do egg sucking lessons?

Where in Hansard has the U.K. govt called any other govt a Junta and Nazi’s other than the Argies and the NSDAP?
Its you who has started talking out of your hoop, all because you want to be cleverer than me.
If you can’t back up your statement that we call other govts similar nasty words just say so.
 
Last edited:
I wonder, why those weed-heads didn't accepted Sierra's proves about Soviet invasion in Seattle.
Go to bed YarS, you’re drunk again.
 
More ‘whataboutery’. You reckon you’re not a Russian troll. Have you read it?

You have in no way proven your point that we have called other govts Junta’s
According to Hansard, , Junta was used in 1932 to describe the then Chilean government, 1967 to describe the Greek government, 1973 to describe the then new Chilean government, Sierra Leone in 1998 (Sandline enquiry), Burma in 2002, Going further back, the UK concluded a formal alliance with what was called the Supreme Junta of Spain. The term has been used on numerous occasions in parliament to variously describe the Ankara government, The then Indian home rule government of 1942, the Spanish government, the Portuguese government, the Versailles Commission, Bolivia, the South Vietnamese government, the Iraqi government, Nigeria, Poland, Egypt, Rhodesia, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Haiti, In 1914, Conservatives referred to the cabinet as being an "inner junta" in relation to Ireland. much later on, during debates on the UDR bill, the Labour government was called a Junta in parliament, In 1993, during debates on payment of taxes by the Queen, MPs referred to the EU Commission as a Junta.

In most cases, government and parliament has used the term to denote a military government by committee, but the term has become applied a variety of self appointed groupings, starting with the British cabinet in 1914, through to the GLC in the 80s. The word Junta might have been discovered by the press in 1982, but the British government has applied the word since 1809.

As early as 1939, Parliament was recorded referring to British Nazis, and by 1944, debates included reference to the future Israeli government as Nazis. The term is clearly not so misused.
 
According to Hansard, , Junta was used in 1932 to describe the then Chilean government, 1967 to describe the Greek government, 1973 to describe the then new Chilean government, Sierra Leone in 1998 (Sandline enquiry), Burma in 2002, Going further back, the UK concluded a formal alliance with what was called the Supreme Junta of Spain. The term has been used on numerous occasions in parliament to variously describe the Ankara government, The then Indian home rule government of 1942, the Spanish government, the Portuguese government, the Versailles Commission, Bolivia, the South Vietnamese government, the Iraqi government, Nigeria, Poland, Egypt, Rhodesia, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Haiti, In 1914, Conservatives referred to the cabinet as being an "inner junta" in relation to Ireland. much later on, during debates on the UDR bill, the Labour government was called a Junta in parliament, In 1993, during debates on payment of taxes by the Queen, MPs referred to the EU Commission as a Junta.

In most cases, government and parliament has used the term to denote a military government by committee, but the term has become applied a variety of self appointed groupings, starting with the British cabinet in 1914, through to the GLC in the 80s. The word Junta might have been discovered by the press in 1982, but the British government has applied the word since 1809.

As early as 1939, Parliament was recorded referring to British Nazis, and by 1944, debates included reference to the future Israeli government as Nazis. The term is clearly not so misused.
Clearly you fail to draw the distinction " between "used in Parliament" and "used officially".
Parliament is full of people who speak loosely, inaccurately and sometimes insanely.
Hansard is not policy. It is a transcript.

I will take a guess that this ignorance of UK Parliamentary process and presumption signals other troll using a researched rapid rebuttal pack.
 
I wonder, why those weed-heads didn't accepted Sierra's proves about a Soviet invasion in Seattle.
1) is an entertaining fantasy (like a fair election in Russia).
2) is an internationally recognised criminal investigation into a mass murder.

Your inability to distinguish between popular entertainment and mass murder says more about you and your Russiocentric depravity than about the JIT.
Or is it that Russia considers them one and the same?
 
According to Hansard, , Junta was used in 1932 to describe the then Chilean government, 1967 to describe the Greek government, 1973 to describe the then new Chilean government, Sierra Leone in 1998 (Sandline enquiry), Burma in 2002, Going further back, the UK concluded a formal alliance with what was called the Supreme Junta of Spain. The term has been used on numerous occasions in parliament to variously describe the Ankara government, The then Indian home rule government of 1942, the Spanish government, the Portuguese government, the Versailles Commission, Bolivia, the South Vietnamese government, the Iraqi government, Nigeria, Poland, Egypt, Rhodesia, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Haiti, In 1914, Conservatives referred to the cabinet as being an "inner junta" in relation to Ireland. much later on, during debates on the UDR bill, the Labour government was called a Junta in parliament, In 1993, during debates on payment of taxes by the Queen, MPs referred to the EU Commission as a Junta.

In most cases, government and parliament has used the term to denote a military government by committee, but the term has become applied a variety of self appointed groupings, starting with the British cabinet in 1914, through to the GLC in the 80s. The word Junta might have been discovered by the press in 1982, but the British government has applied the word since 1809.

As early as 1939, Parliament was recorded referring to British Nazis, and by 1944, debates included reference to the future Israeli government as Nazis. The term is clearly not so misused.
Nice bit of snipping on what I said. Reminds me of somebody .....

Anyway, where have the U.K. govt called another govt a Junta and Nazi’s?
 
D

Deleted 154930

Guest
According to Hansard, , Junta was used in 1932 to describe the then Chilean government, 1967 to describe the Greek government, 1973 to describe the then new Chilean government, Sierra Leone in 1998 (Sandline enquiry), Burma in 2002, Going further back, the UK concluded a formal alliance with what was called the Supreme Junta of Spain. The term has been used on numerous occasions in parliament to variously describe the Ankara government, The then Indian home rule government of 1942, the Spanish government, the Portuguese government, the Versailles Commission, Bolivia, the South Vietnamese government, the Iraqi government, Nigeria, Poland, Egypt, Rhodesia, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Haiti, In 1914, Conservatives referred to the cabinet as being an "inner junta" in relation to Ireland. much later on, during debates on the UDR bill, the Labour government was called a Junta in parliament, In 1993, during debates on payment of taxes by the Queen, MPs referred to the EU Commission as a Junta.

In most cases, government and parliament has used the term to denote a military government by committee, but the term has become applied a variety of self appointed groupings, starting with the British cabinet in 1914, through to the GLC in the 80s. The word Junta might have been discovered by the press in 1982, but the British government has applied the word since 1809.

As early as 1939, Parliament was recorded referring to British Nazis, and by 1944, debates included reference to the future Israeli government as Nazis. The term is clearly not so misused.
All true enough. People trying to arguing propaganda is unique to Russia, are living in a bubble.

That said, it is still a stretch for Russia to make some of the laughable allegations about the Ukraine, based on some members of said group, working in the earlier days as muscle. I am certain both Yeltsin and Putin, have utilised similar extremis Russian far right groups and I assume you aren't going to suggest Russia is a fascist junta ?
 
All true enough. People trying to arguing propaganda is unique to Russia, are living in a bubble.

That said, it is still a stretch for Russia to make some of the laughable allegations about the Ukraine, based on some members of said group, working in the earlier days as muscle. I am certain both Yeltsin and Putin, have utilised similar extremis Russian far right groups and I assume you aren't going to suggest Russia is a fascist junta ?
I would argue that Russia is the purest manifestation of working Fascism in existence at the moment.

Dear old Adolf, who ripped off most of Mussolini's ideas, would have been very impressed, to the point of claiming victory in World War 2.
His ideology has, in fact, conquered Communism.

The Oxford dictionary definition of fascism is
"An authoritarian and nationalistic right wing system of government and social organisation.".

Also defined as "Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader,and a strong demagogic approach."

Yep. That's Putin's Russia in an absolute nutshell.

Care to point out ANY aspect of that definition that has NOT been demonstrated by the Russian 'government', aka Vlad the Shortarse?
 
D

Deleted 154930

Guest
I would argue that Russia is the purest manifestation of working Fascism in existence at the moment.

Dear old Adolf, who ripped off most of Mussolini's ideas, would have been very impressed, to the point of claiming victory in World War 2.
His ideology has, in fact, conquered Communism.

The Oxford dictionary definition of fascism is
"An authoritarian and nationalistic right wing system of government and social organisation.".

Also defined as "Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader,and a strong demagogic approach."

Yep. That's Putin's Russia in an absolute nutshell.

Care to point out ANY aspect of that definition that has NOT been demonstrated by the Russian 'government', aka Vlad the Shortarse?
I would tend to agree with you, but that wasn't the question put to me was it.

Its still a stretch, Putin reminds me more of francos Spain and they were catholic nationalists. Putin uses a lot of orthodox iconography in his propaganda, as part of his rebuilding the Russian myth. If I were involved in putting together a brief to outfox him, you would perhaps try and attack him through the church and find those people in Russia who have read the gulag archipelago.
 
I would tend to agree with you, but that wasn't the question put to me was it.

Its still a stretch, Putin reminds me more of francos Spain and they were catholic nationalists. Putin uses a lot of orthodox iconography in his propaganda, as part of his rebuilding the Russian myth. If I were involved in putting together a brief to outfox him, you would perhaps try and attack him through the church and find those people in Russia who have read the gulag archipelago.
Franco? A 1930's Fascist in the Mussolini mould. He used the Catholic Church as a club to beat the Communists with.

The only thing that distinguished him was his wise decision to stay neutral during the war, which allowed him to survive the general collapse of fascism.

Putin has bought the Orthodox Church.
He doesn't care about people who remember the atrocities of Communism. He harks back to the atrocities of Tsardom. - and has convinced the Russians that this is a DESIRABLE state of affairs.

The way to break Putin isn't to try and turn the mush minded plastic patriots like YarS who look forward to a future where the Cossacks can go raping and pillaging, or the soulless drones like KGB Consortium who lie for a living for Russia as much as they would have lied for Goebbals if necessary.

Putin is a thief.
He hides it under the patriotism and nationalism, but he is purely a thief and a leader of thieves.
Follow the money.
Seize the assets.
 
D

Deleted 154930

Guest
Franco? A 1930's Fascist in the Mussolini mould. He used the Catholic Church as a club to beat the Communists with.

The only thing that distinguished him was his wise decision to stay neutral during the war, which allowed him to survive the general collapse of fascism.

Putin has bought the Orthodox Church.
He doesn't care about people who remember the atrocities of Communism. He harks back to the atrocities of Tsardom. - and has convinced the Russians that this is a DESIRABLE state of affairs.

The way to break Putin isn't to try and turn the mush minded plastic patriots like YarS who look forward to a future where the Cossacks can go raping and pillaging, or the soulless drones like KGB Consortium who lie for a living for Russia as much as they would have lied for Goebbals if necessary.

Putin is a thief.
He hides it under the patriotism and nationalism, but he is purely a thief and a leader of thieves.
Follow the money.
Seize the assets.
Like I said Franco and Putin have more in common, if you were doing a dictator top trumps. Franco was just as unsavoury as Mussolini, probably more so.

We are in agreement you know, people are desperate to pick fights with me, not for what I say, but because there obsessed with Russians under the bed, i have chosen to embrace the word, but it can get tedious :(
 
..people are desperate to pick fights with me, not for what I say, but because there obsessed with Russians under the bed, i have chosen to embrace the word, but it can get tedious :(
Far from it. Just questioning your statements that you then try to wriggle out of. Don’t make the statements, don’t get questioned on them.

Nobody is obsessed by ‘Russians under the bed’. You’re (note spelling) upset about people querying what you post. As explained to you previously, new site user, makes a number of pro Putin statements, uses a name from a film/book about an attempt to overthrow the US govt etc. The fact is, you get all ‘huffy’ about it.....
 
Ask weed-heads to use the higher standarts and to make something that looks like a real investigation.
As opposed to the Laurel and Hardy comedy "investigations" offered up by the Russian MoD?
No, we get it.
No investigation is "real" unless it acquits Russia.

And you wonder why your pathetic need to escape judgement and admit your guilt makes your country so contemptible.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
CRmeansCeilingReached Int Corps 12
redshift The Intelligence Cell 4762
Mr Happy Current Affairs, News and Analysis 0

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top