One for the blood pressure. Finkmeister goes on Piers, with a settler lunatic
Posted by RaskolnikovX on May 16, 2024, 8:45 am
This is infuriating to an almost unbelievable degree. Morgan just never changes and he is lower than slime. Norman is as great as even when he is allowed to complete a sentence. The settler is as bad a dementedly hate-filled racist scumbag as you can find.
Tellingly, the comments under HIS video on HIS channel are mostly critical of him and the settler loon. Perhaps, it's not his intention but some of the maniacs he's platforming are causing the apartheid state to lose support.
[url=
...no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party...So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
....no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party...So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
Re: One for the blood pressure. Finkmeister goes on Piers, with a settler lunatic
It's notable that he had the doctor on alone before he let the lunatic loose and managed to preserve the dignity that his testimony deserved. He also didn't do his usual schtick with him and was very respectful which I think shows that the way he deals with other guests is very manufactured and a definite choice....no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party...So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
Re: One for the blood pressure. Finkmeister goes on Piers, with a settler lunatic
Maybe this shows what Norm meant about not having enough energy to meet this moment as he would have liked (in previous interview posted on here). He should have wiped the floor with this slimy little pr!ck, but was just too slow and ponderous, getting pushed around by his gish gallop style and constant interrupting. Partly Morgan's fault for not putting him on mute after continuously talking during Norm's time, even after being asked not to. At least he called him a war criminal to his face and got the important points about genocide and apartheid, but the 'other guest' was allowed to yap out dishonest counterarguments without getting demolished as they should. Also I can't believe it's so difficult to actually read out the subclauses of the genocide convention that make it plain as day that Israel has ticked off every one:
'Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as:
... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention
People still think it means an effort at wholesale extermination with millions dead, and you can imagine them saying 'well okay, what Israel is doing is bead but it's not genocide'. But again, you'd get about half a sentence into making that point before getting snowed under by a flood of lies & irrelevancies, and the point would get lost. There's no talking to people like this, either you rebut the arguments one by one in written form where they can't interrupt (but nobody will read it) or you shun them.
Even the fiercest criticism by Finkelstein would have been nowhere near as effective as the rabid demented settler in demonstrating the extent of the bigotry and sheer bloodthirsty zeal of the Israeli regime. Norm was pretty laid-back (as usual) except for the "war criminal" comment, but for me his calm and reserved demeanour was the perfect counterpoint to "the other guest's" foam-flecked rant and twitchy paranoia. I hope we see more of him, preferably on the BBC's main news programmes. Better than Mark Regev.
Re: I think the Israeli settler did a great job -- for the Palestinian cause
I hope we see more of him, preferably on the BBC's main news programmes. Better than Mark Regev.
At the current pace of negative prop, not sure if beeb can stop themselves and get him to pontificate about righteousness, mid-genocide. We hope and wait.
Re: I think the Israeli settler did a great job -- for the Palestinian cause
tbh, much as I disagree with the well trained settler- entertainer and agree that the professor mad his points well and remained calm and embarrassed PM into upholding some sort of manners in the debate, I think PMs interventions were more induced by some sort of affinity for the differential in class- etiquette between the two contributors.
Given the right platform, in terms of listenership, the well trained settler-entertainer- salesman- polemicist would make a very formidable opponent in debate .... Logic or no logic.
There are few, bbc-class-etiquette clashes aside, who would fare well against him. Slithy give nor slithy regev he aint