Post ww2 was a different world. I don't agree his comments are germane now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Printable View
Post ww2 was a different world. I don't agree his comments are germane now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Argument from authority. Rhetorical fallacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
The modern Chinese arsenal puts paid to contemporary hopes of disarmament. Any attempts to revive US-Russian bilateral efforts are trivialized by its existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
I agree that MAD is outdated: nowadays, a single offensive nuclear discharge could be expected to provoke no more than proportionate retaliation, while also potentially achieving all conventional military and political objectives in the act.
What did he argue from authority?Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
He got on his high horse about how he's properly representative of the left and how I'm on the slide towards the far right, then I posted a quote from one of the icons of the Labour party that argued the opposite of his position. He's previous also used the same dismissal (argument from authority) to dismiss accounts from former shadow cabinet ministers of Corbyn's incompetence. It's his method of dismissing any and all evidence that might make his beloved leader look bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Quote:
Originally Posted by pannonian
Remember kids, when teachers mark you down for being wrong, refute them with "This is called argument from authority. Usually a favourite rhetorical fallacy of American gun nuts and anti abortionists."Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Why should we have Nuclear Weapons?
Because otherwise we will be sheltering under America's Nuclear Shield, which means we really will be an American vassal - unless you prefer being a French vassal.
We will also be subservient to Israel, Pakistan, India, France, China and Russia in all military matters, as well as the US.
Nuclear weapons are things we have, not things we use. This is why their maintenance has traditionally been separate from the defence budget, they are weapons of diplomacy - not war.
It is, in fact, possible that within out lifetimes these weapons will be made obsolete by anti-missile shields, and then we can consider getting rid of them - not before.
He stated that Nye Bevan was against unilateral disarmament, therefore it's wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Well, you were once, can't say it would be a completely new and unknown situation...:sweatdrop:Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Or, he's presenting a statement from a politician which he agrees with - Jeremy Corbyn being another leading politician, and so in a position of authority, though one with whom Pannonian disagrees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
You'd be closer to something if you could get Pannonian to say that this fellow's case is worth more than Corbyn's on the basis of Corbyn being a lesser politician.
I'll happily say that and more. I'm principally concerned with domestic matters, how to make Britain better. I like those politicians like Bevan and Cooper who have substantially contributed to this (and Cooper, significant though her contribution is, isn't a patch on Bevan). They have rather more of my ear than someone like Corbyn who has done nothing except go on protest marches and rallies throughout his life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
What has Corbyn ever done to make Britain a better place, compared with someone like Cooper? What does his CV consist of, that we should attach any kind of weight to his views, especially where they clash with the mainstream?
TBH I think we have too many excitable red blooded males in the country for Trident to be scrapped anytime soon, as shown by the entertaining questions completely removed from reality on QT about responding to an Iranian or N. Korean attack....
A French Vassal like Germany, Spain, Italy and so many smaller servants? Or maybe France doesn't ask for any oath of submission since she alone funds her nuclear strike force. And then we'll take Jersey back from the Crown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Is it formally so? French nukes are funded on defense budget.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Those people don't want Corbyn to use Nuclear Weapons, they just want to know he won't upset the global strategic status quo.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
That's how important Trident is, it's a question of global political significance and people want to know Corbyn is going to make political decisions divorced of any personal ideology.
Corbyn proved with Trident that he'll push for his own position ahead of any agreed party position. He proved with Brexit that, first chance he gets, he'll push his own personal position ahead of manifesto position. He proved on various policies that he'll readily push a position agreed only among his inner circle, ahead of positions agreed with shadow cabinet ministers. Corbyn's Labour does not believe in cabinet government; it believes in Corbyn staking out his own private position, regardless of anything previously agreed, and Momentum backing him up. You can see on here, how every changing position is defended to the hilt by his fans. The details of any position matters less than the fact that it's Corbyn pushing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Yes, well Saint Jeremy can't be wrong, can he?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Just so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Against an attack from N. Korea....Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Or Iran...
I assume we both understand the concept of us keeping nuclear weapons to keep ourselves safe from an attack from N. Korea or Iran is ridiculous?
I have no problem with people who have somewhat informed positions on the matter but people like that are clearly not part of that group. Probably think we can fight terrorists using them.
This is the person who took a post of mine and bolded one name because I used it excessively apparently as part of some proof that Corbyn fans are somehow obsessive...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
There certainly is an obsession but it seems to be more in his opponents, this one in particular.
I refer to the near namesakes Bevin and Bevan. One of whom demanded nuclear weapons, the other supported them. And Attlee, who gave the go ahead. Do they count as informed opinions?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Sure, I can't say I have read their exact arguments on why but I imagine they were far better arguments than an attack from a then day equivalent of N. Korea or Iran. To clarify I wasn't saying we should get rid of Trident because idiots on QT think we needed them for N. Korea and Iran, just that we won't get rid of them because many people don't understand what they are actually for.
Given the overgenerous press of Weak and Wobbly Mway and constant negativity of Corbyn for over two years.. he hasn't been given the 'Saint'-ly treatment of the pair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Though Theresa May's ineptitude in the Home Office (and as Prime Minister) is definitely making itself clearer.
It has turned what was a initially an easy win by a landslide, into a hung parliament (according to polls). That takes some serious craftsmanship to achieve. Especially with manifesto u-turns within 24 hours (cue: Dementia Tax)
I think it worked out for the best with the press going at Corbyn so hard so early on, they haven't really left themselves much room to have a go at him now without repeating or going over the same complaints about him being scruffy or principled. Overplayed their hands in the hope of getting him out early.
May's incompetence leaves me with zero trust in her ability to be PM. Corbyn's incompetence in opposition makes me trust him even less. I've said before, Blair circa 1997 would run up a 200 seat majority against the abysmal current Tory front bench. Only Corbyn could make May look remotely good. And only May could make Corbyn look remotely decent. Where are the Clarkes and Heseltines of May's cabinet? Where are the Browns and Cooks of Corbyn's shadow cabinet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
It just entrenches his supporters further. The same happened with UKIP, except now UKIP is given prime time slots everywhere whilst not even having a sitting MP, unlike the Green party for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Momentum are already well entrenched, with fortifications going into the Earth's mantle. That's what the post-truth politics consists of. Hell, even Corbyn recognises this, although his fans still do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
As PFH likes the Telegraph, let's look at this article:
David Cameron's former aide Steve Hilton calls on Theresa May to resign over terror 'failures'
Entering number 4 in the UK Charts is the song "Liar Liar", a song that was promptly banned from being aired by the BBC.
Why is a top new single banned? Because it calls out Theresa May for being a 'Liar Liar'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxN1STgQXW8
Corbyn's early bad press was much of his own making. The Professional politician on TV today is a far cry from the man in the rumpled shirt and t-shirt he was when he was elected. A man who appeared to take no care over his appearance asking to be given care of the country, a political rebel suddenly demanding personal loyalty. Then came traingate - a scandal entirely of his own making, one which his supporters just ignored because they agreed with his point even if he had lied on camera to make it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Then there's the scandal of his separating from his wife and giving her "sole responsibility" for schooling their children so that he doesn't have to make the decision over whether his son goes to a terrible Comp or the local Grammar.
Then there's his links to the IRA, Anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers.
Then, just last week he lied when he said he didn't take advantage of free Further Education, although others had, when defending his plan to abolish Tuition Fees. In fact, he attended a Polytechnic but left because he didn't agree with the syllabus on the political course he took. Even at 20 Jeremy knew better than his lecturers.
I think he's had an easier ride of it than he could have.
As to the Dementia Tax - commentary on that has been inaccurate, unfair, unrealistic and entirely misleading. In the future the majority of people needing professional care will go into a home eventually, like my Nan, so it doesn't matter when you include the value of their house - because they'll have to sell it eventually one way or the other.
Don't forget: He is Putin's friend, admires Chavez, support Castro... I think I forgot nothing...
Interesting to see that the attitudes towards the two party leaders are shifting as well, the more they see of May the less they like her, the more they see of Corbyn, the more they like him.
He went to a Stop the War fundraiser (whilst Labour leader) a month after they said that the Parisians had brought their attacks on themselves. What is the StWC's position on the recent UK attacks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Both are utter shite, as are their front benches.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
To be the honest the information I'm seeing says something completely different... although the link to the original doesn't work...
----------------------------------------
The anti-war pressure group came under intense fire from Labour MPs after it posted a blog on its website titled: "Paris reaps whirlwind of western support for extremist violence in Middle East".
----------------------------------------------------------
English has only been a first language for 30 or so years but that sounds a lot different from what you said...
At least when you call him scruffy you are being factual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
One of them more people seem to like the more they see of him though, well people other than you.
I'm sure you could dig up more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
All of this whilst he was in the "political wilderness" too, so he's either an egomaniac convinced he has more swing than he does, or he's actually supportive, or ambivalent, towards their methods.
Oh... and he thinks Russia Today is a quality news channel.
Corbyn has had a good campaign, but a certain amount of this is May's awkwardness making him look good by comparison. He would not be getting so much of a bounce facing Cameron.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Stop the War never said that. They said that western violent interventions in the region, coupled with military and financial support to extremist Muslim sects (through Saudi Arabia), has brought hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and general instability in the region. The power vacuum was filled by extremists and terrorists, which caused or contributed to an increase of terrorist attacks in western nations, France included.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Article is spot on. Even if you subscribe to the notion that there is nothing political about ISIS, just pure irrational hatred of the west, surely you understand that without intervention in Iraq and support for anti-Assad forces, ISIS wouldn't exist.
In addition, one doesn't have to agree with the opinion of every single member of an organization to support the general principles of that organization.
Corbyn has actual appeal, I am sure there are enthusiastic May voters out there but they are very few in number. After years of Cameron/Blair I think a lot of people are excited about an actual alternative. May is no doubt helping but I can't imagine the others Labour might have fielded (if Labour voters weren't allowed to pick) doing this well.
Let's see what result Corbyn can achieve then, if people prefer him to Blair. Blair's worst electoral result was a Commons majority of 66. He twice achieved a Commons majority of 160+. Let's see if Corbyn can better these results.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Blair would have absolutely marmalised May.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Sorry I didn't realise Blair did so well and was so popular in 2017, I must be getting confused with some other widely despised former leader who wouldn't come anywhere near winning even the Labour party nomination let alone a general election these days....Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Yup, this is what the Labour party has descended into. I had considered holding my nose and voting Labour anyway, but after this reminder of how the Labour party is nothing more than Corbyn's personal cult nowadays, that's not going to be the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Diane Abbott
Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan
Abbott is in one of the top 4 posts in the Labour shadow cabinet. Shadow home secretary to be precise, or interior ministry.
Edit: If Labour win, she'll be in charge of counter-terrorism.
It's the cult of Labour offering an actual alternative, I realise to a Blairite such as yourself to see the Labour party actually representing the working and middle classes must be quite galling, you know he doesn't even respect Rupert Murdoch?!but this is what the people want, not because they are brainwashed or unthinking. If they were they would have ever elected Cobyn just like the media told them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Your real problem is the cult within the Labour party is finally being killed off, Blair's perversion of the Labour party is at its end.
Are you aware that one of the current Labour shadow ministers attributes her success in life to a programme began under Blair? Are you aware that, certainly in my lifetime, the biggest lifting of pensioners from poverty happened under the Blair government? Are you aware that, certainly in my lifetime, in real terms schools were better funded under the Blair/Brown governments than any other?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
I'm sorry if I rate real achievements like the above rather higher than "a real alternative". What has Corbyn ever achieved in his career that compares with the above?
BTW, are you going to vote Labour on Wednesday as Diane Abbott urges everyone to do?
Point of order, latest polls still favour Conservative to win most seats and May still has a better approval rating than Corbyn. It's also worth pointing out that for all the bluster about Police numbers the London attackers were neutralised in 8 minutes. Failure to prevent the three recent attacks are as much the responsibility of MI5 as the Police and irrc MI5's capabilities have grown over the last seven years.
Don't worry. Abbott will sort out that mess once she takes charge of the Home Office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Depends if I can take a break from my highly important civic duty of helping Britain become a world leader in preventing tourism....
Populations have grown massively so you are only comparing them to governments with much smaller populations (and less resources) or the austerity enforcing Tory governments that have been in power since.... Hardly that impressive when you cut through the Blairite spin.
You can see what exactly what Corbyn is offering and that is why as a Blairite you will vote against it, representing the working and middle classes?! this isn't your Labour party anymore!
I don't think anyone has said any different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
It is just all very impressive considering the media spin regarding having to get rid of him for the good of the party and a large section of MPs trying to take him down, it was all supposed to be a landslide, Labour wiped out, lesser politicians would crumbled long ago but Corbyn has actually managed to turn this into a contest.
Someone can offer me a million quid. I'd look up their credentials to see where it's coming from, and what's the likelihood of them going through with it. What has Corbyn ever done in his career that compares with the achievements I listed? What are his credentials? Or do CVs not matter?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Has anyone else watched that Abbott interview?
I think we've just discussed Blair's CV above, his biggest plus points seem to consist of being less worse than what came after him, which was an austerity enforcing Tory government..Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Tell me when the impressive part starts...
Corbyn's credentials are his entire career, I realise to a Blairite this might seem strange but a principled man who cares for the working classes and middle classes and wouldn't sell his own grandmother to please Rupert Murdoch is a pretty damn attractive feature in a politician.
Before Blair became Labour leader, he was shadow home secretary. A fairly impressive one as well. What offices has Corbyn held prior to becoming Labour leader?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Ahh yes principle, character or actual beliefs none of these things matter....
Well they would usually but Corbyn comes out looking a lot better than Blair so lets quickly move on from that.
No you see the real problem with Corbyn is he has principles and beliefs, so rather than work for the self serving Blair governments he continued to work for the people...
A black mark against Corbyn surely, to a Blairite, sure. To myself it is one of the best things about him.
Also whilst we are discussing CV I think its worth mentioning Tony Blair's huge hand in the mess the Middle East has been turned into today and the increased terrorism we suffer in the West.
That and the almost complete elimination of the Labour party in Scotland.
That along with countless other mistakes he made, quite frankly an empty CV would compare favourably let alone one such as Corbyn's which shows a man of real principle.
What do you think of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary? Do you admire her for her principles and beliefs? Do you think she'll do a good job as Home Secretary?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
No, Theresa May screwed up - she's bad at elections, instead of defending their Conservative Social Care plans she did a U-Turn because she's unable to relate to ordinary people.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn believes he can contribute to the end of Nuclear War.
TBF, May's not just bad at elections, but she's been an abysmal minister and prime minister as well. She only looks good in comparison with the atrocity that is the Labour front bench (watch that Abbott view I linked to).Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
I'd say she's mediocre.
Hence six years in the same post - if she was good she'd have been moved, abysmal and she'd be fired.
Part of it is down to May part of it is down to Corbyn doing well and connecting with people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
Corbyn had ridiculous notions about helping end apartheid as well, other nations manage just fine without nuclear weapons. The fact you think the idea is absurd says more about you than it does Corbyn. I think we should stop wasting money on Trident as well.
I prefer Caroline Lucas to her personally (as a for example) but realistically given that I don't actually get to pick my own cabinet her as home secretary or the woman who wants to make us a world leader in preventing tourism as prime minister....?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Not a tough choice. Well actually it is all about the policies for me really but politicians saying stupid things is entertaining I guess.....
If possible, would you agree with selling it to the United States?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Yes, let's become an actual vassal of the US, totally dependent on them for our security. Like the rest of the EU and France.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Corbyn is pro-Brexit as well. Moreso than May.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
This is really annoying me now, is it same for anyone else?
I am on my seventh letter from Theresa May telling me to vote Conservatives. One or two was fine, but I am now on my seventh. Thing is, I also have already voted and it certainly was not for her or her party anyway.
Not like we are actually paying the USA for Trident and they hold the keys for it, or anything. Given how it also runs Windows XP, only death it would bring would be a blue screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
The USA doesnt hold the keys to our nukes, they sold us the delivery system but have no control over our weaponry.
We also do not use windows XP on Trident subs but a robust custom retooling of the system, the actual missiles arent controlled by these systems.
Anger over 'Star of David' symbol on Labour poster
Quote:
A giant left-wing political banner in one of Britain’s biggest cities has been condemned as antisemitic for portraying Theresa May wearing Star of David earrings.
The banner, which was hung at the Bearpit roundabout in Bristol, depicted Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May facing each other, with positive slogans endorsing Jeremy Corbyn and negative statements about Theresa May’s policies.
...
“It's even more worrying that the Bristol city council have given these views credence by allowing them to be shown in such public space such as The Bearpit, which is driven past by thousands of motorists a day”.
He condemned the banner as antisemitic, saying “the Magen David [Star of David] earrings are clearly implying that the Jews/Israel have hegemony over our government, which is a century old antisemitic trope.”
It couldn't just be Labour saying "she supports Israel, we are less supportive?" Has to go straight for anti-Semitism?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Well, it isn't Labour, it is the random person who did the poster. But yes, it is in relation to Balfour declaration and British Governments decision recently not to apologise to Palestine over it. Some on the left are up in arms over Israel like you can see with Idaho's posts, but I don't think it is attacking Jewish people per say, it is just an unfortunate trope that Israel=All Jews which leads to things looking like that. Gets more complicated when people hijack the trope to attack Jewish people too, they are the some of the worst.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Well, considering that Labour already has a reputation among British Jews for anti-semitism, especially among their far left that is the base of Corbyn's support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
One thing you can't charge him with is that he is a woman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
We need to keep our American maintained nuclear weapons in order to maintain some independence from America?Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
I disagree, quite frankly we follow American policy where other EU states don't because we want to anyway.
Isn't the Israeli flag the star of david?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Obviously that could also be conflated with all Jewish people rather than just Israel but you can understand the confusion both ways
Any criticism of Israel unless done super carefully is always going to come back to anti Semitism anyone working on any kind of promotional material should understand that. Unfortunately its not like when Corbyn and the left were even more strongly protesting Apartheid South Africa as now supporters of the ones carrying out injustice can claim racism is the reason they are not liked rather than their misdeeds
That was a reference to May messing up and saying tourism instead of terrorism, it was in response to your Diane Abbot says something stupid video....Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Although like I said in the previous post, politicians saying stupid things is entertaining but it is all about the policies for me really....
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
I saw it, she directly said we have been too tolerant, was cut out here but the internet never forgets nothing. I got all uncut tapes for ya
Fair comment. I have garnered that @Idaho is pretty staunchly anti-Zionist, but I never heard him comment on the religion at all. I'd guess he probably has the usual agnostic/atheist disdain for formal Judaism, but no more or less so than for any other organized religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
We have that trope at play on this side of the pond as well. Were they free of political history and influence of blocs of voters in key states, our heart of our political left would (if they could) cut off more or less all support for Israel and take a solid pro-Palestinian stance. Most on the political right here are supportive of Israel, but we our right wing also has a strong isolationist/"a pox on both their houses" contingent.
The pro-Israel lobby is well leveraged and politically savvy though, and wield a lot of influence for their size in the halls of Congress and a couple of very influential statehouses. And they DO sometimes play that same trope to advantage.
@Beskar
Yes...
Except...Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Greyblades is correct. Your support of Corbyn has reached such a level you are no longer debating anything - you've just become an election mouthpiece.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
This is probably just a petty point either way... but wouldn't a customised version of Windows XP still be windows XP.... albeit a customised version...?
Also I would argue given we rely on America to maintain our nuclear weapons that they do hold some control over them, enough to use the phrase hold the keys maybe not but to pretend its completely independent would be equally false.
We partially rely on America for our nuclear weapons.
You have to know the language of anti-semitism on the left to recognise the signs. It's about media conspiracies and evil bankers, often in the same package. The Chakrabarti report actually comments on this. Ironically, on the day of the release of said report on anti-semitism in the Labour party, one of Corbyn's longstanding friends (since the 70s) confronted the attending Jewish Labour MP with exactly these accusations, showing how these tropes are not only current in the Labour party, but are especially so among Corbyn's core support. And when said MP went to Corbyn to complain about it, Corbyn backed his friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
1) I don't support Corbyn. Funnily, to recognise the bias and argue against it doesn't actually mean you are supporting someone. It is simply pointing and arguing against unfair coverage. It isn't as if he is a complete clown like Donald Trump where it is actually justified though it is also countered by the very pro-Trump voices of Fox which itself argues provides the news for 50% of Americans (chiefly republicans) compared to the British media where no one is supporting Corbyn. Corbyn has more similarities to Bernie Sanders than Trump when it comes to media in this regard. I have already voted in this election and I voted tactically for a candidate I didn't want, simply because it wasn't the worse alternative. It is a shame with our terrible election system that it has descended to this, and why I have always advocated alternatives such as STV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
2) LittleGrizzly just replied expanding what I was saying. Unfortunately, Greyblades' first link does not work as it points to the XP article.. which says the submarines use a modified version of Windows XP. Customised or not, it is still a Microsoft Windows product and if there an error, it would indeed give a blue screen. As for America holding the keys.. it supplies, repairs and maintains Trident. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if there were backdoor or covert access to the submarines as well, but that is a different point entirely, as the basic fact we are paying America for our nuclear weapons does mean they hold the keys as if they said no, we would start to quickly get screwed over because we do not have the infrastructure presently to do it ourselves.
In regards to Corbyn himself he even more passionately protested White led Apartheid South Africa who are certainly comparable, I would suggest he is either racist to both Jewish and White people or just really doesn't like our support of injustice. Only the latter really seems logical.
I can't speak for every single person Corbyn ever talked with or interacted with but he has taken action where It has come up in the Labour party where he can. Unsurprisingly though with any criticism of Israel comes a barrage of racism claims, whereas supporting the death and occupation of Muslims (or the opposite side at least) is somehow okay, clever PR certainly.