• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UK expels Israeli Diplomat

You are making an assumption, that Britain has no evidence. This assumption is false. Blind nationalism is an ugly thing. Face it, you guys got caught, there are repercussions. Boo and hoo.
There's absolutely no way in hell that you've had enough time to read my comment before replying to it.
This is nothing but trolling, and I do not have any further credibility for you as a poster.
 
Whatever, the UK made a just and accurate response, lets not be apologists here.
 
There's absolutely no way in hell that you've had enough time to read my comment before replying to it.
This is nothing but trolling, and I do not have any further credibility for you as a poster.

Another false assumption. Keep up the good work.
 
Whatever, the UK made a just and accurate response, lets not be apologists here.

Yeah! They punished Israel for killing a terrorist! Those damn dirty jews!
 
Whatever, the UK made a just and accurate response, lets not be apologists here.
Just? Not really, where is the evidence against Israel?

Accurate? absolutely.
I believe the response was quite softened up, and could have been much worse.
As I said in the beginning of this thread, this is not a big issue.
 
Another false assumption. Keep up the good work.
You have given up on the stance of a reasonable and rational debater - and for what?
For the meaningless and pathetic fear from being wrong?
 
You have given up on the stance of a reasonable and rational debater - and for what?
For the meaningless and pathetic fear from being wrong?

I explained to you my position. There is a wealth of public evidence that Israel forged British passports, and most likely there is more evidence that we do not have public access to. With that in mind, it is perfectly reasonable that a country act to protect it's laws. That is a reasonable and rational position, and one you have made zero effort to counter.
 
I explained to you my position. There is a wealth of public evidence that Israel forged British passports
Alright, may you please back that up with sources, so I'll have something to actually reply to?
it is perfectly reasonable that a country act to protect it's laws. That is a reasonable and rational position, and one you have made zero effort to counter.
Sure, I agree with that.
As I've stated earlier, my disagreement is with their decision to act against Israel while not having any actual evidence to present us with.
 
Alright, may you please back that up with sources, so I'll have something to actually reply to?
Sure, I agree with that.
As I've stated earlier, my disagreement is with their decision to act against Israel while not having any actual evidence to present us with.

The original article is one piece of evidence, unless you believe the British government is lying. If you believe that, then no evidence is going to work for you. Further reading: Israeli immigration officials copied British passports used by hit squad, ministers told - Telegraph
 
The original article is one piece of evidence, unless you believe the British government is lying. If you believe that, then no evidence is going to work for you. Further reading: Israeli immigration officials copied British passports used by hit squad, ministers told - Telegraph
The above is not an evidence(and certainly not public evidence) - but an assumption.
I do not have to believe that the British officials ("Diplomatic Sources") are lying, but that their conclusions drawing from the incident is wrong.

They have assumed that Israel has gained the copies of the passports that were used in the assassination through airport officials that have taken pictures of the passports during the routine check-ins by the identities-holding individuals in foreign airports.

That is of course not backed by real evidence, and is merely the logical assumption they have reached on the method that Israel has allegedly used.
 
The above is not an evidence(and certainly not public evidence) - but an assumption.
I do not have to believe that the British officials ("Diplomatic Sources") are lying, but that their conclusions drawing from the incident is wrong.

They have assumed that Israel has gained the copies of the passports that were used in the assassination through airport officials that have taken pictures of the passports during the routine check-ins by the identities-holding individuals in foreign airports.

That is of course not backed by real evidence, and is merely the logical assumption they have reached on the method that Israel has allegedly used.

You are assuming they are not backed up with evidence. Just because there is no publicly released evidence of an event still under investigation does not mean it is not there. We have zero reason to doubt the veracity of the British officials, and the scenario does fit with what is known. You do not want to believe, which is fine, but that does not mean there is no evidence.

We have two main possibilities here, either the British have solid evidence that Israel forged British passports, or they have some other motivation for their acts. The first seems about a million times more likely, and better fits what is publicly known.
 
Please elaborate, with links.

You know, I should have read the entire article before spouting off. If I had, then I would have known that I am wrong here. Naturally, I ass-umed that the British government would only export the Israeli diplomat if he had himself broken the law, so I (say the word with me, folks) ass-umed that the fake passports had been in the diplomat's possession. I ass-umed wrong. I stand corrected, and thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Now I have something else to say - Is the British government ****ing stupid? :mrgreen:
 
The UK is weak, what they did here was wrong. The hug the terrorists and kiss the "Palestinians." Sadly, my country now too is attacking Israel. The world needs to take a hard stance, not the soft stance and the falsely accusing eye of focusing on the "evils" of Israel and the "plight" of the Palestinian people. Nations are acting in an anti-Israeli fashion to improve relations with the Arab states who hate Israel.

Well we have been arming Israel for decades and Hamas is an illegal organization here (technically even 'glorifying' it could have legal ramifications). Traditionally Brittan's relationship with Israel has been pretty good as we need people to buy our weapons. You seam to have the world back to front here
 
You know, I should have read the entire article before spouting off. If I had, then I would have known that I am wrong here. Naturally, I ass-umed that the British government would only export the Israeli diplomat if he had himself broken the law, so I (say the word with me, folks) ass-umed that the fake passports had been in the diplomat's possession. I ass-umed wrong. I stand corrected, and thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Now I have something else to say - Is the British government ****ing stupid? :mrgreen:


It is not unusual for us to just expel a diplomat as a protest if we are aggrieved with their country. We used to be doing this forever with Russia.

You might like to listen to this short piece on Milliband talking to Parliament about it.

Video: UK expels Israeli diplomat in forged passports row | World news | guardian.co.uk

France, Ireland and Australia also had people's identity's stolen.
 
You know, I should have read the entire article before spouting off. If I had, then I would have known that I am wrong here. Naturally, I ass-umed that the British government would only export the Israeli diplomat if he had himself broken the law, so I (say the word with me, folks) ass-umed that the fake passports had been in the diplomat's possession. I ass-umed wrong. I stand corrected, and thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Now I have something else to say - Is the British government ****ing stupid? :mrgreen:
Never assume.
It makes an ass of u and me. :2razz:
 
Just? Not really, where is the evidence against Israel?

Umm, enough, i guess. They caught a few people in disguise on camera, who came in with fake passports, to kill a Hamas leader. Now, say it wasnt neccessarily anything to do with Israel, but imo i think it was pretty obvious Mossad had a hand in this affair. Also i heard there method of execution, i believe, was common in Mossad assasinations.

Accurate? absolutely.
I believe the response was quite softened up, and could have been much worse.
As I said in the beginning of this thread, this is not a big issue.

It should be treated like a big issue, allied Agents taking the piss out of our trust, undermiming our security, we should tell there ambassador to piss off too. This isnt the first time its happened.
 
Umm, enough, i guess. They caught a few people in disguise on camera, who came in with fake passports, to kill a Hamas leader. Now, say it wasnt neccessarily anything to do with Israel, but imo i think it was pretty obvious Mossad had a hand in this affair. Also i heard there method of execution, i believe, was common in Mossad assasinations.



It should be treated like a big issue, allied Agents taking the piss out of our trust, undermiming our security, we should tell there ambassador to piss off too. This isnt the first time its happened.

We haven't been investigating the killing Kaya, we are leaving that to Dubai.

For the passports the evidence is circumstantial but compellingly circumstantial. They know it was Israel.

I agree it is an important issue - almost like trying to frame us and undermines the worth of our passports.
 
They caught a few people in disguise on camera, who came in with fake passports, to kill a Hamas leader. Now, say it wasnt neccessarily anything to do with Israel, but imo i think it was pretty obvious Mossad had a hand in this affair. Also i heard there method of execution, i believe, was common in Mossad assasinations.
Again, where is the evidence?
Israel could just as well have claimed that they have compelling reasons to believe Britain is behind this, seeing that the absolute majority of the passports were British, and that most of the identities that were used have belonged to British citizenship holders - but there is no real evidence to legally blame either Israel or Britain.
It should be treated like a big issue, allied Agents taking the piss out of our trust, undermiming our security, we should tell there ambassador to piss off too. This isnt the first time its happened.
It's not a big issue, merely a use of foreign passports by foreign agents, something that happens every ****ing day.
 
For the passports the evidence is circumstantial but compellingly circumstantial. They know it was Israel.
British officials have stated that while they have "compelling reasons" to believe Israel is behind the assassination of the terrorist chief, there is no direct evidence that leads towards Israel.

Completely contradicting your words.
I agree it is an important issue - almost like trying to frame us and undermines the worth of our passports.
Frame you?
By using the passports of 5 different nations? :confused:

Clearly whoever was behind this has done a lot to ensure that nobody would be framed with the terrorist's killing, including Israel.
 
Last edited:
British officials have stated that while they have "compelling reasons" to believe Israel is behind the assassination of the terrorist chief, there is no direct evidence that leads towards Israel.

Thye say they have circumstantial evidence and it is compelling. I think in the US, indeed even in England, though not in Scotland, circumstantial evidence is sufficient to win a trial.

Frame you?
By using the passports of 5 different nations? :confused:

By using the passports of British people you intended to leave a trail that led to Britain, not Israel. For that reason David Milliband yesterday in his speech made it completely clear we had nothing to do with the Dubai murder.

That is how it relates to the UK. Other countries will need to deal with how it relates to them.

We have now been given special warning that if we visit Israel we should take utmost care that an official does not take our passports away.

A British passport is respected all over the world. You have undermined its integrity. Countries will not know if a British passport is a British passport or an Israeli assassin.

In addition you put at risk the lives of the people whose identity you stole.

Clearly whoever was behind this has done a lot to ensure that nobody would be framed with the terrorist's killing, including Israel.

No it was to put the blame on other countries than Israel. Not the way to treat allies.

As Kaya has already said you have done this before in the 80's. We were as cross then and you gave your assurance this would never happen again.

You have gone against your word.
 
Thye say they have circumstantial evidence and it is compelling. I think in the US, indeed even in England, though not in Scotland, circumstantial evidence is sufficient to win a trial.
Did they really present any kind of evidence, though?

"Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Israel had never been supplied with "any proof that Israel was involved in this affair" and that he regretted Britain's decision."

So Israel was not even presented with any evidence.
That's the way third world nations operate, not first-world civilized western democracies such as the UK, and is highly disappointing.

I'll repeat and state it again, though, that this is certainly not a big issue, and the British government's actions are not exaggerated.
While they are definitely disappointing, they are still acceptable.
By using the passports of British people you intended to leave a trail that led to Britain, not Israel.
They have also used Israeli citizens' identities, Austrian phone lines, American credit cards, and Irish, German, Australian and French passports.
It is more than clear than beyond the empty grief of the agenda-motivated, there is nothing that points out towards one of the above countries.
Certainly not Britain, as you claim.
A British passport is respected all over the world. You have undermined its integrity. Countries will not know if a British passport is a British passport or an Israeli assassin.
Most of the countries wouldn't care, since the assassins of the terrorist chief(that you accuse of being Israeli) have targeted a terrorist chief.
In addition you put at risk the lives of the people whose identity you stole.
Their lives were never at risk, certainly they are not at risk now.
No it was to put the blame on other countries than Israel. Not the way to treat allies.
As Kaya has already said you have done this before in the 80's. We were as cross then and you gave your assurance this would never happen again.
And as far as Israel is concerned, this has never happened ever since.
 
Last edited:
So you're saying, Apoca, that the UK must have political reasons for doing this, versus solid evidence? It's basically just another anti-Jew conspiracy?

Have I accurately summed up your argument? England just hates the Jews?
 
So you're saying, Apoca, that the UK must have political reasons for doing this, versus solid evidence? It's basically just another anti-Jew conspiracy?

Have I accurately summed up your argument? England just hates the Jews?
...Just when I thought you couldn't go any lower.

I have never in this entire thread used the word "Jew", nor did I suggest anything close to anti-semitism, or even an anti-Israeli position.

You are like those you-tube dwellers who post their dope of bullcrap and go to bed.
 
I'm afraid this one has to do more with Britain's own citizens.
The Labour party faces a hard election, and a populist action was needed to boost its popularity.

It's not a big deal, however, and cannot be compared with the diplomatic crisis(that is hopefully behind us) with the US.

So, it wasn't your intention to imply that this was an anti-Semitic political position designed to appeal to the far left?
 
So, it wasn't your intention to imply that this was an anti-Semitic political position designed to appeal to the far left?
No more than it was your intention to imply that 9/11 was an inside job and that you believe Osama bin Laden is motivated by just causes.

Seriously, even replying to your awfully torn-off accusations is considered trolling.
 
Back
Top Bottom