Summing up for a legal lynching

Carlos Perera

Judge Norman's tendentious instructions to the jury should not be particularly shocking. By now, we should all be used to the spectacle of judges legislating their pet social, political, and economic preferences from the bench. In my own country, the U. S. A., the federal judiciary made up a theretofore unsuspected right to abortion out of whole cloth in 1973 (Roe v Wade), an equally unsuspected right to sodomy in 2003 (Lawrence v Texas), and is currently in the process of making up the even more spurious right to homosexual marriage just a few days ago (July 8, 2010, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management). To a large extent, Western societies are becoming kritarchies, as statutory law, precedent, and ancient custom and usage are casually overturned by the whims of judges, who barely deign to justify their actions through recognizably legal reasoning. So, if Judge Norman doesn't like "Zionism," why should we be surprised that he lets his own prejudices dictate the tenor of his jury instructions?

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Over to you, Stephan...

david elder

Where did you get this guy? Cloning Judge Jeffreys?

Shame on the Judiciary

Disgraceful. Utterly disgraceful. This should prompt a retrial as he is clearly going senile and has fed false information to the jury. He should stay in retirement and perhaps should set up his bath chair in Gaza in solidarity with HAMAS.
He was born in Tel Aviv (or was it actually Jaffa) apparently.

Sam Davidson

I wish I could be shocked or surprised, Melanie. But such surreal grotesqueries are par for the course with the insane caste of liberal hypocrites who have been oozing their way into power for the past fourty years.

William NByd

I'd like to read the entire summing up if its available on-line.

I certainly think on the evidence of these passages that the judgement should be examined.

I notice you use the word 'Judeophobic' here. New?

Commentor

This is incitement of any activist to take it upon themselves to assault any property (or even persons) they deem to ‘support’ Israel.

The assertion Osmond was brave, deserving of the George Cross no less, was interesting.

If that constitutes putting your life on the line, presumably putting a pro-Israeli war criminal’s life on the line isn’t putting his life on the line.

Of course that would never be defended in court. But it is incitement nonetheless.

There will now be an explosion of such violent assaults.

While the fact of the US and NATO in Iraq and Afghanistan will be quietly put aside, and popular resentment vented on the Jews concerned.

The pogroms are here. First on property, of course. But if it fails to have its intended effect…

charles soper

The judgement of this undead judge (for he was curiously resurrected from retirement) rings the death knell of British justice unless it's acted on and fast. Sanctifying slander, glorifying vandalism and vaunting comparisons with Nazis in his summing up - I have never read of such an egregious, contemporary British judge. He belongs in the days of Judge Jeffreys.

ab

Setting aside the issue that the judge’s comments were outrageously biased and inappropriate, from a strictly legal perspective, they were totally irrelevant to the offence charged and were highly inflammatory.
It seems to me that the jury were invited to consider the case not on its legally relevant merits, but on whether, from somebody’s perspective – and outside legally recognized defences – the acts the accused acknowledged committing (and with malice aforethought) and which formed the substance of the offence charged were “justified”. In this case, clearly, the judge agreed with the cause of the accused. In his charge, he had forsaken the fundamental meaning of the fundamental principle of any self-respecting democracy: the rule of law. As I understand it, the prosecution is now permitted, in England, to appeal acquittals in certain circumstances. I cannot see how this gross misconduct by the judge should not be grounds for disciplinary action against the judge and an appeal of the acquittal.

watttyler

How did this judge get the gig? Are we only seeing the tip of the iceberg of some serious institutional anti-semitism?

This country is truly biblically evil, and I'm sorry Bovine British Tories, voting for Cameron didn't stymie the decline. You did not change the government, you still got an EU sock puppet with as much concern for English-God-given-liberties as Obama has for valid birth certificates. Even now the ship carrying the "Ive-got-a-good-job-and-so-i'll-keep-quiet" middle classes is listing in a sea of crap, and the fetid sewage of social reality is washing over their pristine deck shoes. Keep voting LibLabCon sailors!

maddy1

Democracy would not exist if you could not lead five thousand peasants to their deaths in twenty minutes in Passiondale, so what? Our GND. would not be so high if we did not pay our judges and lawyers so much.

revolution

Is true that the completely neutral special envoy Tony Blair was onboard one of the Israeli gunboats that are blockading Gaza to observe that the Israeli miltary were not being threatened by people aboard the aid ship?

Terry in Oz

My advice to British Jews is to leave. The law won't protect you, as this judge has shown. You may get away with becoming an Israel hater, because British society will love you for that. On the other hand, the resurfacing of rampant antisemitism in the guise of anti Zionism won't stop even Jew hating Jews from being looked down upon for being Jewish.

Israel beckons.

Leave Britain to be not at all great. I'm sure the lost Jews will be adequately replaced by enthusiastic jihadists wishing to do to Christians, what they would have achieved with Jews, if the latter are sensible enough to leave. We all eventually get what we deserve.

Discourse

Unforgiveably one-sided but equally Melanie how can you straight-facedly quote the IDF report on the death of Rachel Corrie as the sole version of the truth while at the same time fail to spell out that IDF stands for the Israeli Defence Force??? Hardly an independent report. Also you may rejoice that there isn't a country called Palestine but many who would acknowledge the existence of Israeli believe that existence will not be legitimate until the Arab population under it's control is granted an equitable political settlement (possibly through a country called Palestine) and beyond the Bantustans of Gaza and the West Bank. Hopefully you won't see these sentiments as Judeophobic.

AY

Yet another example, a small component in a jihadi-engineered chaos, that is approaching very fast.

1) weaken, confuse, discredit and eventually paralyze law-enforcement
2) introduce and promote anti-Western, nihilist, relativist cultural stereoptypes
3) maintain unity of "umma" in the UK, and high level of intolerance to unbelievers
4) enhance Islamic presence in the key controlling points in social life - finances, security/police, heritage, justice, media, IT, transport, education
5) crack the unity of West, by singling out and defeating Israel and Jews first - to illustrate "glory of jihad", and intimidate others
6) divert taxpayers' money under the guise of "international aid" to jihadi groups abroad; and internally - to different Islam-"understanding" projects

and so on.

one must be blind not to see the whole nasty picture.

GaryO

It seems the nation of Israel and its people were on trial in that court not vandals.

This gives us a mere hint of what progressives think in private. It is but the tip of the proverbial.

O/T Please read this:

http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/3222

And then follow up with this:

http://spinwatchwatch.wordpress.com/millionaires-funding-spinwatch/

The West is on the precipice.

Joshua

"I notice you use the word 'Judeophobic' here. New?"

"Judeophobia" was first used by Leon Pinsker in 1882 in his "Auto-Emancipation". The word "anti-Semitism" was coined in 1879 by Wilhelm Marr.

Joshua

"This is incitement of any activist to take it upon themselves to assault any property (or even persons) they deem to ‘support’ Israel"

If this judgement is anything to go by the police in Britain won't need to arrest Israelis. "Anti-Zionists" will simply lynch them instead.

TomTom

George Alfred Bathurst Norman was born on 15 January 1939 at Tel Aviv, Israel.2 He is the son of Charles Bathurst Norman and Hon. Doreen Albina de Burgh Gibbs.1 He married, firstly, Prudence Veronica Keenlyside on 29 July 1967 at All Saints' Church, Odiham, Hampshire, England.2 He married, secondly, Susan Elizabeth Ball on 14 September 1973 at Gray's Inn Chapel, London, England.

His Honour Judge George Bathurst Norman will retire from the Circuit Bench on the South Eastern Circuit on 31 December 2004.

Let noone accuse British Judges of being compos mentis, or anything but scions of the isolated and highly privileged hereditary social elite imbued with their narrow-minded prejudices

Notes to Editors Judge Bathurst Norman was called to the Bar (I) in 1961. He was authorised to sit as a Deputy Circuit Judge in 1975 and as a Deputy Stipendiary Magistrate in 1979. He was appointed as a Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate (now known as District Judge (Magistrates' Court)) in February 1981

tiki

Stop talking!Sue this "judge! Let HIM proof and justify his 'truthfull and impartial advise to the jurors.

Bob

Carroll Quigley, who predicted that all civilizations go through 7 stages before being finally extinguished by a newer more vigorous civilization.

We are in the 7th Stage.
(incorporation through settlement, invasion at some point destroys what was once a great civilization)

The Seven Stages of Civilization (By Carroll Quigley)

1. Mixture
Out of the mixture of cultures has come a new culture, with the opportunity to become a civilization. (Britain is part of the Western Civilization)

2. Gestation
The new civilization defines what it is and what it is not)

3. Expansion
Once a civilization has a functioning instrument of expansion, (We had the Industrial Revolution. Islam has Oil Revenue) it will begin to grow. increases in production of goods, population, geographic extent, knowledge

4. Age of Conflict
Eventually all instruments become institutions. Un-necessary jobs are retained for certain classes regardless of whether they serve any useful function. Once this process has occurred to a substantial degree to a civilization's instrument of expansion, the civilization enters an age of conflict. This period is marked by four trends:

a decline in the rate of expansion
an increase in class conflicts, especially in the core
an increase in imperialistic wars
an increase in irrationality and general pessimism
a decrease in the desire to produce offspring (a western womans right to choose, ususally leads to the woman choosing to kill her unborn children to maintain her lifestyle)

5. Universal Empire
We include other cultures with different, sometimes conflicting agendas into our societies. This of course is to the great detriment of our society and the killing of PC Bashinevsky shows

6. Decay
Once it becomes clear that the bulk of a civilization's wealth has been used up, the decline is usually mercifully swift. "Mercifully," because this is a period of great distress.

During this time, as recognition of the civilization's poverty spreads, the standard of living falls quickly. Law and order break down. Civil unrest sparks protests, some of which turn violent. Taxes cannot be collected, and other forms of public service such as military service (and military actions themselves) are resisted. Property cannot be protected except (if at all) by force. Personal violence becomes a daily occurrence. Trade fails, as fraud can no longer be punished. Town life fails; basic survival needs force people into the country where they can grow food, and the "middle class" disappears. Religious revivals sweep the land. The medical technology that sustains life becomes difficult or impossible to obtain, resulting in high rates of infant mortality and shortened lifespans. Finally, literacy itself fails.

7. Invasion
Although geographical or other features may allow a civilization to remain in a period of decay for many years, eventually it falls prey to forces of one or more external cultures. Whether by military occupation or political annexation, or simply by incorporation through settlement, invasion at some point destroys what was once a civilization. The mixture of old and new cultures may produce a new culture, forming Stage 1 of what will become a new civilization, or it may not. But the old civilization is gone.

just Louise

We weaken our case if we throw the "senile" insult at this biased judge.
From the looks of things he was cogent in his summing up - and knew exactly what he was saying and why.
The episode is a total disgrace and David Cameron should be issuing a statement about it in Parliament, and B-N should be nmade to apologise to the Jewish community.
Jonathan Hoffman has done a public service in bringing this matter to public attention.
The implications of the judgment go beyond attitudes to Israel; it would seem to impact potentially on any factory which some hotheaded activists decide is producing goods objectionable to them.

Derek Pasquill

Britain's zombie death rattle:

foul-smelling and vile.

phil

Is nothing being done to investigate what this man has done ,and are there no sanctions on a judge who appears to have incited others to commit a crime ,or is breaking and entering to cause damage no longer a crime ?

Mailman

Discourse,

What has the IDF and Israel to gain from the publication of a poor report or publication of lies?

The fall out from that report would outweigh anything from the initial action that lead to the report being commissioned.

Secondly, we have seen time and time again what happens when so called "independent" reports are produced. Goldstone's only being one in a very long line of blatantly biased and bigotted independent reports totally ignoring Israeli evidence.

Thirdly, a Palestinian state already exists. Its called Jordan.

Mailman

John Edwards

I thinks you need to read all 87 pages of the Judge's summing up before commenting rather than a few selected quotes.

Nevertheless I agree with everything he says and it bolsters my faith in British justice and the common sense of most juries.

mcmrjp

Can I suggest -
The Office for Judicial Complaints
102 Petty France, 10th Floor Tower, 10.52
London SW1H 9AJ

Tel: 020 3334 2555
Fax: 020 3334 2541

revolution

I can assure those without knowledge of a big D9 or D10 Cat bulldozer that one that has extra armour plating which drastically reduces visibilty for the operator who said he did not see the girl i beleive is probably true.

Derek Pasquill

Thanks Bob - I amend my earlier comment to:

A stage seven zombie death rattle.

Still smelly though, and its stench should be pervading the corridors of those with the responsibility to do something about it.

john begley

well said and true melanie...so, as ever i'm with you and supporting your efforts.

john begley, canada

Derek Pasquill

Perhaps Bathurst Norman is a fan of Bakunin's anarcho-fascism:

"We want that now only the deed dictates the word" and "find the enemy and, without thinking, destroy him."

A suitable motto for Bathurst Norman would be:

"ira quaerens intellectum"

Something he might like to put on his escutcheon.

Lynn Johnston

I would like to know if the company who were vandalised are going to challenge the decision. Surely they took on a contract that perfectly legal under English law and English law has failed to protect their interests. Not only have they lost a lot of money but I would have thought they have had to spend on an inordinate amount of time on this problem.

Owen

"There is no evidence that Israel committed war crimes in Gaza."

You obviously didn't read the report by the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which concluded that the IDF and Gazan militant groups had both committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity. As much as the Israel lobby can slander the authors personally or accuse the mission of inherent bias, you can't deny the mass of evidence for this conclusion listed in the report. It points to war crimes by both sides.

Don't get too upset when people refer to 'Israel and Palestine' by declaring that there is no country called Palestine. Strictly speaking you are correct, it is 'Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories' which is not in itself a country. However, any language which refers to Israel and the Palestinians is inherantly unfair since you are talking about a country and a people, which represents an imbalance in favour of Israel. If you really must object to describing OPT as a country for semantic reasons (hopefully Israel will be successful one day in its quest to turn the OPT into a country called Palestine) then instead refer to the conflict as being between 'Israelis and Palestinians' as it puts them on a fair and equal footing.

Julius O'Malley

The real tragedy is in fact broader and more thorough than the judgment in this case. The gift that England has bequeathed to the world is its judicial system and the rule of law that evolved over half a millennia and was exported through colonialism. The reason nations such as Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand are stable, prosperous democracies is firmly rooted in this inheritance. India, Ghana, Israel, Hong Kong Malaysia and others also owe a great deal to the same.

AB is dead right, the most shocking thing about Bathurst Norman's summing up is its irrelevance to the charge. A judge discharging his judicial functions within the precepts of the law, who was nonetheless privately a raving Jew-hater, would never have sermonized to a jury in that manner. It would have been unthinkable.

Bathurst Norman is the tip of a very ugly iceberg and the thin edge of a very pernicious wedge. In 300 years legal scholars, assuming the UK has not succumbed to sharia law in the interim, will cite this judgement as an egregious example of what went wrong with the noble tradition of English judicialism.

steve mann

Nothing any more surprises me on this topic-
However I fail to understand the mind of the Left Wing elite in the Western world- From teachers to judges- All at the drop of a hat jump at vilifying a democratically constituted state as Israel. That whilst not perfect (Who is) Allows all faiths and non-faiths to go about their business- Allows groups to peacefully protest even to condemn government decisions- Has outlawed the death penalty- And has a secular government.
Yet diametrically opposing the Ideals of these Left Wing intellects are a people who have brutal punishments for even minor infringments-
Even to the point of crucifixion for Christians in Gaza should they support Israel in any way. Desire the down fall of Western society and all it stands for and still these Judges Teachers and journalists support, appease, make excuses for and give oxygen to a theocratic regime that belongs to the 8th century.

All I can conclude is that they have Masochistic tendencies.

Lynn Johnston

I would like to know if the company who were vandalised are going to challenge the decision. Surely they took on a contract that was perfectly legal under English law and English law has failed to protect their interests. Not only have they lost a lot of money but I would have thought they have had to spend an inordinate amount of time on this problem.

Charlene Hale

Unbelievable how biased and wrong this man is, who has such power, and one assumes is of great intellect and extremely well educated. Some times I can only read a little at a time because my blood pressure spikes. I am a mature student who is starting a History degree in September. I would like to major and possibly do my dissertation in Nazi propaganda and the Holocaust, linking it to current day propaganda against Israel. My 19 year old son has told me I will fail because of subject content. After reading this article I fear he could well be correct. What awful days to live in when good is called evil and evil called good. See tributes to Raol Moat on facebook and look how Hamas et al are sainted whilst Israel is decried as most evil etc, what inversion of truth, justice and morality, it truly defies comprehension.

Penny

John - surely you can't agree with statements that were factually wrong?

B-N's direction on Resolution 242, for example, indicates that he either didn't know much about it or that he did and deliberately misled the jury - who, in fairness, were unlikely to have any great insight into this, or any other, UN resolution.

Alice Cripps

Discourse,

> report on the death of Rachel Corrie
> as the sole version of the truth
> while at the same time fail to

How many versions of truth do you think there are?

Andy Gill

I emailed the Office of Judicial Complaints about this via their website

www.judicialcomplaints.gov.uk

and have been informed that the complaint is being looked into, and that a tape-recording of the hearing is being examined.

They expect to have a decision by 12th August.

Penny

Discourse:

This is a strange and possibly factually confused statement:

"..but many who would acknowledge the existence of Israel believe that existence will not be legitimate until the Arab population under it's control is granted an equitable political settlement..."

What do you mean by:

1)"...believe that existance [of Israel] will not be ligitimate....'. (In what way is Israel currently not legitimate?)

2)'The Arab population under its [Israel's] control' (Who do you refer to here - Israeli Arabs?)

3)' an equitable political settlement'?

(a) What do you define as 'equitable' and how can this be reconciled with Hamas' stated intentions? and b) how many offers have already been made - and are still being made - to the PA/PLO leaders and refused or ignored by them? The Camp David offer being so equitable that it unwittingly called Arafat's bluff and, as a result, triggered yet more violence from his people towards Israeli citizens.

Giving back Gaza was a move that seems to have backfired on Israel - what lesson would be hard to ignore in this particular example?

Shouldn't the near million Jews exiled from Arab lands with all their property, bank accounts and valuables seized also be granted an equitable settlement?

Truthtriumphs.

Surely, this is about one thing only, and that is whether the defendants broke the law of the land, when they took literally took the law into their own hands in breaking into those premises, and smashing up the contents.
The answer is an unequivocal, yes.
THAT is the outrage, and if it is not addressed, it will give the green light to anarchy.

B Walters

It is essential that this judge be brought to account for his grossly discriminatory words.
Surely the judiciary in the UK has not sunk to the level of Zimbabwe or any other third world corrupt kleptocracy.
Official and personal attacks are required. This person is not fit to hold a position on the bench.
The Jewish Borad of Deputies in England, and others, should protest this officially at the highest levels. Surely in law, the action is what is judged, not the reasons for the action, or some deadbeat moron judge's bigotry.

John S

Blimey! This summing-up is pure Peter Cook "Entirely a matter for you". An open-and-shut case of Wilde's dictum that Life imitates Art.

Rob-NY

Lies are at the very soul of left-wing opinion.

Rob-NY

Sorry judge. It is the soldier, not the reporter that gives us freedom of the press.

Bob

The Stench from The Bench makes me clench

Robin Shepherd

Congratulations to Melanie (and to Jonathan Hoffman of course) for highlighting this. Comparing Israel to the Nazis is objectively (see EUMC definition) anti-Semitic. I hope the ZF and others are following up with a prosecution under race hate laws. The judge should also be struck off. Utterly appalling, even by UK standards...

Bob, son of Bob

Bob (no relation) in your cycles what you omitted was that in previous civilisations the ambitious conqueror types rose to rule, but in our time wealth and democracy has allowed everyone to follow their calling and this has allowed a different type to get into power – their motive is not wealth or glory, as in the past, but the bringing down of better people and that is extended to bringing down better countries. Hatred of the better is their motive.

If you were full of hate in the past you still had to be a baker or a cobbler or whatever fate handed you, and so the hate was spread out. Now these types can follow their calling, thanks to the wealth of the country, so they can gravitate to the professions of education, media, the legal system, local councils, and parliament, where they can fulfil all their instincts of antipathy towards better people. That is why the cycles of the past might not apply as this situation is unique and due to our wealth allowing everyone to pursue their calling. Power has been transferred from a small section in the upper class and now a different type of person has taken over.
We still have a democracy, and the future of the country depends on the wisdom of the voters.

jobloggs

oh dear

jobloggs

The funniest of these blogs are those demanding the company take legal action against the defendants. This company is too busy worrying about being prosecuted for illegal arms trading and their managing directer being prosecuted for perjury to take civil action against anyone

Bob, son of Bob

Considering only the non-Muslim British people - I do not think they are fundamentally anti-Jewish or anti-Israel; they are simply not very politically aware and easy prey for the likes of the BBC and this judge. Let them hear the other side and they would be strongly pro-Israel. One hour of the truth can easily cancel out decades of lies, which is why the BBC is so vigilant to keep the bias level in the region of 98-100%. As with AGW, they know their position would collapse if both sides were given. The population might be stupid but they are not fundamentally wicked and have a concept of right and wrong and justice, so the TV media has to hide the truth from them.

Derek Pasquill says: "its stench should be pervading the corridors of those with the responsibility to do something about it."
I think they can smell it but too many of them like the smell and want everything to collapse around them, even if they too will be worse off. Hatred is a powerful motive, and the left are motivated by a fundamental hatred of better people and better countries. The question is, where does the hate originate? Is it nature or nurture that makes them like this? I think it is nature.

Bob, son of Bob

The judge talks with a tear in his eye about the horror of the Nazi regime in Germany, meanwhile offering his support to those who include amongst their number many who wish to carry out the second holocaust personally. Meanwhile the BNP are the only British party to fully support the right of Israel to defend itself. Strange times.

Commentor

Independent watchdog finds “no evidence” EDO supplied components to Israel

In November 2009, an independent panel found no evidence that EDO had ever supplied components to Israel:

“In May managing director Paul Hills told The Argus: “I would and have stood up in court and sworn under oath that we don’t supply to Israel, which is one of the things Smash EDO accuse us of. “ The tribunal concluded: “There was no dispute that the ERU151 and the ZRFAU are components which can be incorporated into VER-2 bomb racks for use with F-16 combat aircraft, that those aircraft are used by the Israeli air force, and that from 1998 EDO owned the right to manufacture the ERU151 and the ZRFAU.””

The panel held a closed session to quiz a BIS civil servant about the confidential information and examined copies of all the export licences SMASHEDO had requested.

After examining the documents, it concluded the information did not confirm SMASHEDO’s claims that EDO supplied Israel and should remain confidential.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/4734080.Watchdog_rule__no_evidence__that_Brighton_s_EDO_supply_Israeli_air_force/

bob mountjoy

you have missed the point

Info tribunal found no evidence that EDO MBM had been approved export licences to supply israel.

The Hove jury came to the conclusion that it was happening anyway without licences.

No contradiction.

But good grounds for a criminal investigation.

jobloggss

well they aren't confidential any more

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Discource: "Also you may rejoice that there isn't a country called Palestine but many who would acknowledge the existence of Israeli believe that existence will not be legitimate until the Arab population under it's control is granted an equitable political settlement (possibly through a country called Palestine) and beyond the Bantustans of Gaza and the West Bank. Hopefully you won't see these sentiments as Judeophobic."

Not at all...but one wonders why you think this is possible or (so you imply), simply up to Israel - given the Arabs and moslems' consistent rejection of a Palestinian state since '47, which would not have been what you refer to as a "bantustan" (thank goodness you indilge only apartheid allusions and not nazi ones).

Israel has no reason to believe it is in their hands alone to eanble the creation of a state for the "Palestinians" which will not be rejected by the Palestinian governing elites, Syria, Iran and its other proxies.

Until that is feasible, talk of Israel as the "spoiler" is not only misleading but it does indeed encourage Judophobia..but perhaps you can live with that (?).

Lindsay

"Now for the truth. Corrie was not “murdered”. The IDF investigation..." - ?

"Britain’s degraded and vicious Judeophobic public discourse." - ?

"for the English judiciary, there is now one law for the gentiles and another law for the Jews." - ?

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Penny: Discourse will not respond to your points...without letting the old canard out of the bag again...just like Harold, Richard, Lyndsay etc have had to do.

This s ALL about their questioning of Israel's legitimacy. They all feel that the Jews are nothing much more than ethnic cleansers and the manipulators of the Post WW1 Imperial powers - hoodwinking these baby stars in the international political galaxy into granting them what wasn't theirs to have granted. The League, The British Empire etc were just a collective David against the Goliath of the great Jewish conspiracy.

It's the tired old hack Leftist politics of the Protocols...It always starts with an insistence that we all confront the horror of the Jews' past "heinous" behavior in Palestine. After all, if only we would face the fact, the Jews, were the very definition of a blood-lusting, ethnic cleansing lot - driven by (God help us) some unique religious zealotry and/or (throw your arms up in horror) a virulent nationalism (never seen by any other groups in the Middle East. of course, before..at the time.. or since)...

The unique qualifier for the arabs and moslems for moral superiority in this blame game, is that their property rights in "Palestine" can be traced - forensically - back thousands of years. Any similar claims - by Jews - is merely fraudulent (also, unlike that venerable bible of the anti Zionist moslems - the Protocols - which underscores their claims, still, to this day).

When these great scholars of Ethics and History are pushed to realise that the current Israel will not destroy itself based on self criticism of past behaviour; and the Arabs and moslems will have to compromise to have peace..they are stymied. They frantically look around for another meat hook to hang the Jews on. "NO NEGOTIATIONS WITHOUT EVERY ELEMENT OF THE MOSLEM INTERPRETATION OF RES 242 BEING IMPLEMENTED" i.e. in advance - they scream!!...as if, negotaitions would in any way harm their cause or end game (they can always ull out of negotiations). No debate..and, of course, no negotiations.

They know Arafat's bluff was called. And they know they have to resort to violence, the closer Israel comes to accommodation based on the so-called will of the so called international community (which is all bluff and bluster, of course, reflecting the mutliplicity of other agendas they have in play at any one time) and the so-called great powers are constrained to put their weight (or be seen to do so, at any rate) behind the peace process.

Violence, they know, will cause an Israel response. Eventually, if they kill enough Israel kids, they will get a harsh response. If they fight and fire rockets using civilians as human shields, they know Israel will be forced to kill civilians and they can fire up the proganada machine again and kickstart the whole delgitimisation process once more and bury the prospect of negotiations until the wheel turns full circle again.

Iran is currently trying to loosen the noose that the US and EU has placed around its neck. If it can get Russia and China to do help it do that, all will be back to where it has been - a race to upset Israel's ability to hold the ultimate survival card.

If the noose tightens, you will see Hezbollah jump into the breach and start a war, since peace is not an option Iran can contemplate.getting a proxy to fight it for them is typical. Hamas and Fatah cannot refrain from violence, either, because their power bases depend on it ..though war is also a very dangerous game for them and risky in terms of the whirlwind they may reap in the process (as Lebanon did a few years back).

Those who support the Arab and Moslem cause; who feel it as sexy as the clothing accessories they so love to wear in our university canteens (the keffiyeh etc) - are profoundly misguided in some crucial ways. They do not realise the imlications of their conflation of Leftist values and those of extreme Islam and the cynicism of the politics that has ALWAYS characterised Arabs and Moslems - WOTHOUT ANY EXCEPTION WHATSOEVER. It's a blindspot in their thinking and idealising which cause death..and the Left, historicaly, has enough of that to answer for in its history - to last a few millenia.

The Jews of Palestine, however, will not be defeated by this cant and vicious hypocracy...ever.

Dale

For the person who asked if there was anywhere they could read the whole transcript of the summing up: yes, there is. It is located here https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/07/455659.html and is a verbatim account of the full 2 1/2 hrs.

Commentor

No, Mountjoy. YOU have missed the point.

'The Hove jury came to the conclusion that it was happening anyway without licences.'

No it didn't. That wasn't Norman's defence argument.

His argument was that the activists' actions were justified because they BELIEVED they were justified.

Commentor

"Next, of course, Mr. Hills himself conceded that in the
light of MBM's advertising material and of what could be found
in various websites, a protestor might well both honestly and
reasonably have thought that the weapons were made in
Brighton.All you have to worry about is the word "honestly"."

http://thejc.com/35771/judge-bathurst-norman-full-summing

The activists do not, according to Bathurst-Norman, have to have been correct in their supposition, merely to have honestly believed it.

Dale

To commentor: Yes and no...The accepted defence for this is reasonable belief (it is not as if this was the judge's opinion, it is THE LAW). In this case a lot of this reasonable belief related to whether or not the belief that EDO supplied Israel was reasonable. With all the evidence that was presented (which included a lot of stuff not looked at in the previous, heavily undisclosed enquiery) the jury came to the conclusion that the belief was reasonable. Even Paul Hills, EDO's managing director said at one point that from the evidence presented it would be likely that anyone would think that they supplied Israel. Read the judge's summing up of Paul Hill's evidence of the previous link to see what the evidence was.

Andrew

John Roosevelt,

I have read enough of the threads here to know that your account of what those you don't agree with have to say is mistaken, if not dishonest. If you want a genuine exchange of views, you have to do your best to understand what it is you object to, not just assume it fits a template you prepared earlier.

Your thumbnail sketch of the Israel/Palestine conflict and of "leftist" responsibility for this that and the other (including fashion atrocities) is just silly.

Tilting at straw men and concocting historical fiction can't be a very satisfying way to persuade yourself you have won an argument.

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Commentator: "The activists do not, according to Bathurst-Norman, have to have been correct in their supposition, merely to have honestly believed it"

What next - that they honestly believed the Jews are trying maintain their conspiratorial domination of the world all Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

The Law's an ass and so is this judge.

Commentor

No, Dale.

The judge says all the jury need heed is "honestly". The reason for that is because he knows perfectly well that Smash EDO are or were not interested in acquiring real proof that EDO Brighton were supplying said items to Israel. They wanted to simply hurt MBM EDO because of its wider association with Israel, directly or indirectly. And since EDO Brighton was all that was available, that would do.

BTW, are you the Dale that works or worked for ELAC, Trinity College Carmarthen?

bob mountjoy

Mr commentator, you really dont get it, or don't want to get it.

there is no law that says that just believing something (without reason) justifies this kind of lawful excuse defence. There has to be objective evidence that would also make a reasonable person in the same circumstances come to the same conclusion.
12 reasonable people -the jury (its an insult to suggest they were all raving anti-semites)heard the evidence put to the MD Paul Hills for nearly a week on the witness stand and decided the evidence was credible enough for them to have believed it too. This is despite the Paul Hills and the CPS having the chance to present evidence to the contrary throughout the trial. The didn't resent any. The jury looked at the facts presented to them by the defence team and by Mr Hills for the CPS and decided they did not believe Mr Hills denials. In short - he lied and lied and lied, and it was obvious to anyone who saw it, he was (still is) a liar.

This is why a criminal investigation of his company's activities is now essential

Commentor

Also, we don't know what Hills actually said. Norman doesn't provide a quotation.

Commentor

It's astonishing isn't it? Umpteen sites verifiably produce weapons the UK, US and NATO use in Iraq and Afghanistan and elswhere. Yet the only one these activists sought to attack was one they accused of supplying components to Israel, despite considerable evidence to the contrary.

Nothing gets their juices going like the one Jewish state in the world.

Commentor

'12 reasonable people -the jury (its an insult to suggest they were all raving anti-semites)heard the evidence put to the MD Paul Hills for nearly a week on the witness stand and decided the evidence was credible enough for them to have believed it too. This is despite the Paul Hills and the CPS having the chance to present evidence to the contrary throughout the trial. The didn't resent any. '

They did. They presented the findings of an independent panel that they had not supplied any such components to Israel.

All Bathurst-Norman offered as the most tenuous, entirely CIRCUMSTANTIAL 'evidence', is that the US sent EDO Brighton 2 ZRFAUs to troubleshoot.

Bathurst-Norman INSTRUCTED the jury to find the defendants innocents, which they duly did.

Raf

If you have a minute, you could easily find out that they make Zero Retention Force Arming Units are a small but vital part of the aircraft in which they are used. These devices are used on the U.S. Navy BRU-32,BRU-41,BRU-42, BRU-45, the USAF BRU-46 & BRU-47, the RAAF MAU-12, the European Tornado HMERU & LMERU, and the IAF VER-2 & VER-4.

The US probably buys them and resells them (or, more accurately, gives them away to countries they support.

Like many other posters, I believe that the majority of the "protesters" won't have a clue what they are there for, other than the pap fed to them by the manipulative SMASH EDO organizers, most of which is half-truths and smoke-and-mirrors. I also believe that most people in Brighton don't give a flying four letter word about SMASH EDO and don't want a bunch of derelicts out for day of mayhem in their neighbourhoods. I don't live in Brighton any more, and even I don't want them there.

Actually, without an arming unit (based on my experience with RAF ones), Israeli jets would be able to bomb away quite happily. They just wouldn't be able to jettison them inertly in an emergency.

So, even if the UK business is supplying them (when it appears to be the case that the US one is, but hey, guess airfare is expensive to justify a foreign protest) they are hardly going to stop the Israelis by not supplying them. The IDFAF would just have to be a bit more careful...

As for VER-2/4. A bit of reading up (now I know why I kept those Jane's all these years) shows them to be multi-store carriers, not the actual aircraft pylon racks. Now, if they are anything like our multi-store carriers on the Tornado and Harrier, they are probably gathering dust because they can't carry smart weapons. Certainly a GIS reveals no recent shots (including a few from the December period) of any IDFAF F-16 carrying anything like them.

So if we accept that the Israeli connection makes up a large chunk of the resentment, we had a protest against a safety critical device (as they were always refered to in the RAF),manufactured in the US (not Brighton).

bob mountjoy

Commentator

The Information Tribunal did not investigate EDO MBM for all wrongdoing (it does not have that power), it only investigated a narrow set of Goverment export licence records.

It established EDO MBM did not (up to 2007)have an export licence to send military components to Israel.

The Hove Jury reached a conclusion that it was happening without a licence anyway.

Again- no contradiction.

There now needs to be a criminal investigation of Paul Hills and EDO MBM, not to mention its already convicted parent company ITT Corporation.

jobloggss

Save the wear and tear on your keyboard Bob there are none so blind as those that see an anti semite behind every tree

jobloggss

ignoring my own advice to Bob...

the so called panel did not find that EDO did not supply arms to Israel but that the material they were provided with did not prove that they did so.

And what was this material ? Why material provided by the company of course. By the time Mr Hills hit the witness stand the defence team had unearthed a mass of further material ( much to Mr Hills shock and discomfort ).By the end of his cross examination the entire court room was clear that EDO had and were illegally supplying arms to Israel. It just remains to step up the campaign to get the company prosecuted

Commentor

Bloggs,

you're conflating EDO with EDO MBM Brighton.

Hills didn't say EDO didn't supply stuff to Israel. He said EDO Brighton didn't.

And what other evidence?

That only Israel uses the VER 2 is baloney. The Verticle Ejector Rack for 2 1000 lbs is a rack for all F-16 an F-18s. Israel doesn't have any F-18s.

All Bathurst-Norman comes up with is an export licence for 2 ZRFAUs to the US. He says it is suspicious to "the outsider", "someone without knowledge of the history", "the protestor", these items were in the UK at all. It is not at all clear why. Perhaps they were originally developed here. Perhaps the necessary brains are in Brighton to troubleshoot. But now they are made in the sister US based company, Artisan.

That still doesn't mean that EDO Brighton supplies Israel.

But all that is besides the point.

a) The is no evidence the EDO Brighton were doing anything illegal

b)and even if they were, there is plenty of evidence the activists acted illegally.

c) once again, we are at the same point, that these activists are strangely quiescent when it comes to weapons components verifiably produced in the UK for NATO or elsewhere. Just Israel gets them going.

The ZRFAU is used, as Raf, notes in the U.S. Navy BRU-32,BRU-41,BRU-42, BRU-45, the USAF BRU-46 & BRU-47, the RAAF MAU-12, the European Tornado HMERU & LMERU.

So it makes sense that the US based Artisan produces at least the bulk of ZRFAUs, even if they were developed in the UK.

Which means the protestors claims to belief that by vandalizing EDO Brighton they would cripple Israeli abilities is also baloney. Smash EDO knew EDO Brighton didn't manufacture and supply them. They just wanted to hurt EDO, by hook or by crook, even if only indirectly.

The 100s of 1000s of dead in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't move them enough, though.

Talk about foreign villains distracting from dissatisfaction back home. It wouldn't surprise me if HMG did through Israel to the wolves, to sate the malcontents, the time honoured role for Jews, of one kind or another.

Commentor

You can see why British Jews are concerned.

If it's legal to assault the property of EDO Brighton because the actions of EDO USA, what's next? Assaulting the property of British "Zionists" because of US "Zionists"?

British "Zionists" because of Israeli ones?

Because, if the attempts of Smash EDO fail (and, let's face it, smashing a factory that doesn't produce the components you want to stop reaching Israel isn't the smartest move), that is the logical direction.

Commentor

Having said that, perhaps EDO Brighton does produce ZRFAUs, just not for Israel, but European NATO.

It wasn't clear to me from Norman's summing up that Hills denied ZRFAUs were produced in EDO Brighton. He just denied they went to Israel.

ZRFAUs seem a pretty essential component for NATO bomb racks: they allow the pilot to jettison the bomb INERTLY in an emergency.

Think about that, readers.

Without the ZRFAU, the pilot would have to jettison the bomb live, which would suck for the unfortunate persons it landed on.

Of all the components to smash!

Smash EDO Brighton are not blessed with best and brightest of Brighton students, clearly.

They want to hurt Israel (alone of all states it seems) SO BADLY, they want to remove the one fail safe component that really does protect the innocent in all circumstances.

Commentor

This does remind me a little of the mob that murdered a paediatrician for being a "pedo".

Commentor

Sorry, "replies" should be "replaces".

bob mountjoy

Mr commentator

you are becoming increasingly irrational.

A cursory glance at the wealth of material out there concerning the smash EDO campaign shows that it has been protesting against UK, US and NATO war crimes for over six years now. You are the one fixated on Israel.

This case concerned the 2009 Israeli attack on gaza, but it could equally have come about from a UK or US attack on civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many protests have taken place against the factory's supply of weapons systems used by those forces.

You are changing your tune with every new argument put to you.

You now concede EDO MBM involvement in the ZRFAU. Infact they have owned this technology since 1998. You wrongly claim the VER-2 is used by other air forces. In the trial paul hills confirmed it was only used by the Israelis.

You fail to mention the Ejector Release Unit 151 (bomb Rack) which EDO MBM in Brighton have been the 'design authority' on since 1998 and paul Hills also confirmed was only used by the Israeli Air Force. EDO MBM also own the technology.

It is clear you dont have a clue what you are talking about. You are changing your rant with every new bit of information put to you.In fact rather like paul hills did in court. This is part of the reason the jury didn't beleive him, and also a good reason why your critique of this case is misconceived and increasingly desperate.

You can attack the judge all you like, but in the end it was the jury who made the decision, no one else.
They could have been satisfied with the prosecution arguments that the defendants had committed a crime. They were not satisfied.

Both defence and prosecution agreed that israel committed war crimes in Gaza. That is why the judges summary of the evidence does not mention any dispute on this fact.

Commentor

‘nor any evidence EDO Brighton supplies them to Israel’

which was the basis of Bathurst-Norman’s effective instruction in his summing up to the jury to acquit.

Never mind all the legal ramifications that has: if someone thinks someone or thing is “supporting” Israeli war crimes, in the same fashion e.g. allowing bombs to be ejected inertly (how does that facilitate any war crime, alleged or otherwise), does that permit assault on them?

If all a ZRFAU does is allow a bomb to be ejected inertly, Smash EDO’s contesting that they simply had to smash EDO’s alleged facility to make them and allegedly supply them to Israel to stop alleged Israeli war crimes is, not too fine a point on it, baloney.

Oh, your honour, I simply felt compelled to make sure that, if an Israeli F-16 has to abort a mission, or jettison its load, the bombs explode when landing, even on people.

I simply had to, to prevent a greater crime. I was so morally outraged that Israeli F-16s had this ability.

tommy

What is the penalty for aiding and abetting a terrorist organisation like hamas---oops its not..... Actually its the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas declared terrorist

sort of like a Sinnfein IRA setup
no doubt ably advised by sinnfein on one of their visits to gaza

bob mountjoy

Mr commentator

You state:

''If all a ZRFAU does is allow a bomb to be ejected inertly, Smash EDO’s contesting that they simply had to smash EDO’s alleged facility to make them and allegedly supply them to Israel to stop alleged Israeli war crimes is, not too fine a point on it, baloney.''

However again you are incorrect. The ZRFAU is what it says it is - an arming unit, not a disarming unit.

The bomb is inert until the arming unit arms it. it is only then a live bomb.

The only safety aspect of it is its ability to arm the bomb at the moment of ejection from the bomb ejector rack, so as to not get caught in the slipstream of the supersonic war plane and explode under that war plane. It does not make anyone on the ground safer.Only the pilot of the war plane is protected.

It makes bombing missions more likley as there is less danger to the air force of losing their pilots and aircraft as a result.

That danger is already absent in Gaza because the Gazan's have no air force, or anti-aircraft defences.
The arming unit protects the interests of the air force, not civilians or innocents.

There is nothing safe about ariel bombardment, whether a bomb is live or not.

Again you skate over the fact of EDO MBMs involvement in the whole bomb rack, the VER-2, the main bomb rack of the Israeli F-16. This technology is owned by EDO MBM in Brighton (evidence of paul hills). The ejector release unit 151 is uniquely used by the Israeli Air force and no-one else (again evidence of paul hills)..EDO MBM own and are the design authority for this bomb ejector unit, and have been since 1998 (again paul Hills).

As an officially 'critical' component of the F-16 weapons system, the ZRFAU is essential to the carrying out of any bombing mission. Without the bomb rack it is built into, the F-16 could not drop bombs.
Therefore it is quite reasonable to believe that stopping its production would have an effect (however small) on the ability of the israeli air force to commit war crimes and damage to property in Gaza.

The jury heard the evidence of both sides or the argument and came to the same conclusion.

Commentor

It looks like the ZRFAU is a patent by Raytheon, and can be manufactured by anyone under license:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6622605/description.html

EDO Brighton's sister company, Artisan, manufacture them in the US, according to this link:

http://www.thomasnet.com/heading.html?cov=JN&what=zrf+arming+units&heading=51261006&searchpos=16&cid=572507

But here the Canadian air force awards its ZRFAU contract (for its F-18s -it doesn't have F-16s), to Lucas Western:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-7959834.html

Dale

Commentor...I answered you at lenght yesterday but for some reason it did not go up so...I'm glad to see Bob Mountjoy have now done the job for me! As he said, the Smash EDO campaign have acted against all the Iraq, Afghanistan etc war crimes as well in over 50 court cases during the last 6 years (if you want, there are all previous press releases on www.smashedo.org.uk). Israel does not need to feel singled out. However, according to UK trading regulations supplying components to Israel which might be used in the OT is prohibited. This is what makes it different in a court from protests against weapons supplied to the MOD.

In response to this quote ‘nor any evidence EDO Brighton supplies them to Israel’
which was the basis of Bathurst-Norman’s effective instruction in his summing up to the jury to acquit."

First of all, he did not instruct the jury to acquit. And the defence never said that EDO supply Israel directly, but put a lot of effort into exposing the way this is done through a network of American companies, as is the way of the global arms trade these days. This is equally illegal as the end user is what counts.

And no, I am not the Dale you speak of. My name might not even be Dale... ;)

By the way, the summing of of the Judge was just that -a summing up. If the prosecution had presented any stronger evidence it would have had to have been included.

Commentor

No, Mountjoy.

The ZRFAU is a safefy component: it ensures the bomb is not live if accidentally released or jettisoned in an emergency.

Its primary purpose is

"to provide an arming unit which releases armed weapons with zero retention force and which releases unarmed weapons even in the event of a release system failure."

In force retention arming units

"a hook retains the weapon lanyard such that when the weapon is released, the lanyard is pulled, and the weapon is armed by the pulling of the lanyard."

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6622605/description.html

The ZRFAU is a patent of Raytheon, and can be manufactured by anyone under license e.g. Lucas Western for the Canadian air force.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-7959834.html

Hills has admitted to EDO Brighton involvement with the VER 2. It is manufactured in Israel. It is not supplied by EDO Brighton.

Apparently Artisan manufactures ZRFAUs in the US.

companydatabase.org/c/aircraft/helicopter.../edo-artisan-inc.html

And to iterate:

to smash any air force's ability to utilise ZRFAUs increases the chances of war crimes, not the reverse.

It would be like insisting that fitting a time specific auto-destruct to land mines or anti-personnel munitions was facilitating war crimes.

Commentor

'As an officially 'critical' component of the F-16 weapons system, the ZRFAU is essential to the carrying out of any bombing mission.'

As would be the auto-destruct in a land mine once integral to the item.

But have you actually any evidence that the IDF could not revert to the physical lanyard pull which it used hitherto? That was for what its F-16s were previously designed?

But there is no evidence EDO Brighton supplies ZRFAUs to Israel.

Commentor

'Without the bomb rack it is built into, the F-16 could not drop bombs.'

A bomb rack which EDO Brighton does not supply.

Also, it is unclear who licenses what to whom, or who exactly designed what for whom.

In any event. Brigton EDO doesn't build it (at least not for Israel) and, ergo, doesn't supply it.

Commentor

All stopping Israel using ZRFAUs would do would mean it uses a physical lanyard, so, if Hamas or Hizbullah shot any aircraft down, and the weapons were pulled free, they would explode on impact.

It doesn't make it safer for the pilot, because the lanyard is only pulled upon release.

Commentor

'The jury heard the evidence of both sides or the argument and came to the same conclusion.'

Yeah. And they also heard the judge say a ZRFAU was a guidance system and insinuate EDO Brighton supplied ZRFAUs to Israel on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.

Commentor

'It does not make anyone on the ground safer'

That's just utter rot, isn't it?

The whole purpose of a ZRFAU is precisely to ensure the bomb is not live with accidental or emergency release.

All that stuff about slip stream is just cods wallop.

If a ZRFAU armed weapon is so caught up, it's still going to detonate under the plane!

Also I have seen no evidence that the technology for the Elbit VER-2 is actually owned by EDO Brigton. It looks to me as if it is owned by Elbit:

http://www.sibat.mod.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8447D5C7-57BE-4F69-8420-F877956E75C4/0/sod_elbit.pdf

Commentor

Further, as I understand it, Elbit makes the ERU 151 too, along with the rest of their VER-2 rack.

Commentor

'And the defence never said that EDO supply Israel directly, but put a lot of effort into exposing the way this is done through a network of American companies, as is the way of the global arms trade these days.'

You're mixing up EDO with EDO Brighton, again. If other branches of EDO supply Israel, it doesn't mean EDO Brighton does.

But the defence argument of the judge was that smashing EDO Brighton would deprive Israel of ZRFAUs etc.

Smashing up EDO Brighton doesn't stop Artisan, say, manufacturing or supplying ZRFAUs.

The summing up only mentions the exporting of ZRFAUs (2) to the US, and only to the US and only 2.

I admit the judge did not instruct to acquit. Or, as you might say, directly instruct to acquit. But he all but did.

OK, so you're not that Dale. Good.

jobloggss

are you the commentator that used to twang my sisters bra strap on the school bus ?

Commentor

I'm not even a commentator, Jo.

Ian Hills

The kind of judicial thinking that permits left-wing criminal damage to a firm supplying Israel, is the same kind of judicial thinking that would permit jihadi criminal damage to a synagogue, on the grounds that worshippers might be contributors to Zionist causes. If the latter atrocity ever occurs, I hope that this Jaffa-born (read "Palestinian") judge won't be presiding. So far no word on the EDO case yet from Justice Minister Kenneth Clarke.

nivs

that judge should be stood down. he is a hateful and dangerous person to have in a position of such power. all i can say to the jews of the uk is GET OUT!

Dale

"You're mixing up EDO with EDO Brighton, again. If other branches of EDO supply Israel, it doesn't mean EDO Brighton does."

We have used EDO as short hand for EDO MBM here. They are the Brighton company -now owned by ITT. It was their business that was discussed in the court case and which the evidence related to. No confusion.

Gordon Ross

Commentor: "Nothing gets their juices going like the one Jewish state in the world". I like it !

Remember the days, pre-1948, when we were regularly taunted with "Go back where you came from", in the knowledge that we were, in those times, powerless and without the means to effectively do so, and in the belief that it could never happen. Now that, after an exile of some two thousand years, during which we have managed to preserve our national identity (a miracle in itself), the unbelievable has happened, 'they' don't like it ! We should be dead, but we won't lie down ! It suggests that maybe we, as a people, have some special innate strength that 'they' do not possess. So, 'they' change the tune, and now they work pretty hard at trying to delegitimise "the one Jewish state in the world". Some forty years ago, an Israeli acquaintance of mine remarked "'They' don't want us to have even that little piece of land".

jobloggss

Gordon would you like some cheese to go with that gut wrenching vomit inducing self pitying whine ?

ReyaPhoenix

hello joebloggss - wassamatter, still trying to impress? Give it up. CiFWatch got your number.

Bathurst-Norman went beyond his brief when he mentioned the Mavi Marmara at all, the following statement about the legal basis of the naval blockade of Gaza is well-grounded in international law, rather than in an addled old judge's head:

http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=4402&TTL=The_Legal_Basis_of_Israel%E2%80%99s_Naval_Blockade_of_Gaza

Note in particular

"What If a Ship Disobeys the Blockade?

"What may be done to a ship that disobeys the blockade? Here, there may be a distinction between merchant ships and warships. A merchant ship may be visited, searched, or captured; and if the ship resists, it may be attacked. The situation of neutral warships is not quite clear: Warships may also be searched and captured, but opinions are divided on whether they may be attacked. An attack is certainly permitted in a situation of self-defense.

"A ship that clearly intends to breach the blockade can be dealt with while it is still on the high seas. Stopping the flotilla in international waters 100 kilometers from Israel was legal: In time of armed conflict, ships breaching the blockade may be searched even on the high seas."

(All of which shows that Bathurst-Norman was talking rot as well as showing his bias)

And, later in the statement, the precedents in respect of blockades

@Shame on the Judiciary - I wouldn't want this crackpot to go anywhere near Gaza, except if he were forced to live in one of the specially-squalid show camps Hamas keeps to impress foreign visitors with Israel's "heartlessness."

Allowed to choose for himself, Bathurst-Norman would almost certainly choose to be wined and dined at Roots, alongside the other malefactors bought off by Hamas, see http://www.rootsclub.ps/services.php

Gordon Ross

jobloggss, you've got it wrong. I'm very proud of what my people have achieved in the face of centuries of ongoing discrimination and oppression, and especially so of "the one Jewish state in the world", as my comment surely indicated. I guess that you are one of 'them', those who are not comfortable over the fact of our survival and success. Well, you'll just have to swallow that, and if it's hard to digest, then you can do the puking !

Commentor

'It was their business that was discussed in the court case and which the evidence related to. No confusion.'

Clearly not. Because you just said you were talking about "a network of American companies" i.e. EDO beyond the UK.

And there clearly was confusion, since also was adduced the absence of evidence for EDO Brighton's supplying anything to Israel as though it were evidence for the contrary.

Artisan isn't located in Brighton. It is its own manufactory. That is why Hills said Artisan make those ZRFAUs that go to Israel perfectly legally.

Which is why Norman had to insinuate Hills was lying to justify smashing EDO Brighton would prevent supply of ZRFAUs to Brighton.

You couldn't smash Artisan. So you smashed the nearest thing you could.

Talk about impotence.

Commentor

*

'would prevent supply of ZRFAUs to Brighton'

to Israel

Hazel

I have made a complaint against the "judge" on the relevant Courts website. I've had an email saying they are obtaining a transcript and investigating. The man is clearly mentally incompetent, but why is he still "judging"?

Dale

'It was their business that was discussed in the court case and which the evidence related to. No confusion.'

Clearly not. Because you just said you were talking about "a network of American companies" i.e. EDO beyond the UK.

Sure, and EDO MBM's (in Brighton) business with thouse companies, i.e part of the same transactions. Yes, we alsways said that EDO (Brighton)exported to Israel via America -not directly. As I said earlier, this is equaliy against the guidelines as the end user is what matters.

Dr W. Michael

Up to now one could say that whereas in Nazi Germany both the street and officialdom were anti-Jewish, in the UK officialdom was non-discriminatory. If indeed no action is taken against this judge, the distinction above will exist no more, and a lawless society is upon us.

Commentor

'Sure, and EDO MBM's (in Brighton) business with thouse companies, i.e part of the same transactions.'

Sophistic rubbish. Just because one branch is part of a larger company does not mean it shares in the transactions of another. And, even if it does, as all parts of the same body may do, to some degree, that does not mean any law is violated thereby.

You have no evidence EDO MBM supplies ZRFAUs or anything else to Israel via Artisan.

'we alsways said that EDO (Brighton)exported to Israel via America -not directly.'

On the basis of zero evidence.

EDO MBM doesn't need to supply ZRFAUs to Israel.

Artisan manufactures them.

And they both belong to EDO.

It is not EDO MBM's fault it belongs to EDO, and it commits no crimes thereby.

You really wanted to smash Artisan, but you couldn't, so you smashed EDO MBM.

Which is why your judge had to insinuate EDO MBM did supply ZRFAUs to Artisan in an attempt to justify you.

Commentor

'Sure, and EDO MBM's (in Brighton) business with thouse companies, i.e part of the same transactions.'

What does that even mean?

Just because EDO MBM is part of EDO, if any other part of EDO supplies Israel, it doesn't mean EDO MBM does, even indirectly.

Basically, you want to smash up Israel. But you can't. You can't get your hands on American suppliers, so you smash up the nearest thing by proxy.

Commentor

'As I said earlier, this is equaliy against the guidelines as the end user is what matters.'

But you have no evidence there is an end user. You have no evidence EDO MBM Brighton supplies ZRFAUs to Israel even indirectly.

If EDO can produce ZRFAUs under licence from Raytheon, any of their factories can make them.

That doesn't mean another member factory is supplying them indirectly.

Dale

What we now refer to as EDO MBM is no longer part of the EDO corporation at any rate...They are now part of ITT. Anyway, this disscussion is getting silly and we are never going to agree. Let's see what comes out of any further public enquiery. Out of the internet forums and back on the streets for some real campaigning...

Commentor

Yeah, go smash up some more organisations that don't supply Israel directly or indirectly, legally or otherwise.

Direct Brighton's crime rate at the second or largest Jewish community in the world, or against their British "suppliers", at any rate, however intangible.

Beats beating up foreign students, I suppose.

Whatever you do, don't smash up factories in Britain that verifiably produce weapons used by the US and NATO in Iraq and Afghanistan. That might actually get you prosecuted.

Israel's "proxies" are easier targets. The only people who care are Jews, and no one is going to stick their neck for them.

Dale

I said that I was out of here but...EDO do supply the MOD and, for example, made part for the hell fire missile that was the most used munition in Iraq. There have been plenty of actions and court cases against them in relation to that too so, as I've said previously, don't feel singled out about the Israel issue. Any war crime will be resisted.

Commentor

'There have been plenty of actions'

You smashed up UK for NATO factories? In the UK?

When?

You went for EDO MBM because of its extremely tenuous Israel connection. Your court case was based on the bogus assertion it supplies ZRFRAUs and ERU 151s to Israel.