From webstump at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Fri Oct 17 01:22:00 2025 Return-path: To: JNugent73 at ..il.com Subject: Re: Re: Avoiding the embarrassment of protests References: <10cdpf1$r0p6$1@dont-email.me> <10cj7lm$2ag3s$1@dont-email.me> <10clb5i$2s76s$3@dont-email.me> In-Reply-To: Reply-To: matthewv+ulmtestmod at ..riolis.greenend.org.uk Errors-To: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk X-Webstump-Event: [176064230722656] reject notnew Message-Id: From: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 01:22:00 +0100 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a moderator. This post contains insufficient new material. Similar points have been made already in this discussion, which is in danger of becoming too repetitive. The group charter and moderation policy can be found at https://uklegal.weebly.com/ Disputed moderation decisions can be discussed in the newsgroup uk.net.news.moderation ============================================ Full text of your message follows > From webstump@chiark.greenend.org.uk Thu Oct 16 20:18:27 2025 > Return-path: > Envelope-to: webstump+?@slimy.greenend.org.uk > Authentication-Results: mailhub-hex-d.mythic-beasts.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=uni-berlin.de; dkim=pass header.d=uni-berlin.de header.s=fub01 header.a=rsa-sha256 > X-STUMP-Warning-0: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-1: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-2: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-3: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uni-berlin.de; s=fub01; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Date:Subject:From:To:From: Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:In-Reply-To: References; bh=nvQ6AGLTjKneIUjge53egN1ADKPZyDTJKAj0cTOUHvg=; t=1760642306; x=1761247106; b=o0fQXN6e3PTyRkRa++uGjuEbuMUUPceNknJsINF/7sw8+weT25/dTVGX9i5rH WjvoD3+xYzcrl/ > From: JNugent > Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated > Subject: Re: Avoiding the embarrassment of protests > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 20:18:25 +0100 > Organization: Home User > Message-ID: > References: > > > > <10cdpf1$r0p6$1@dont-email.me> > <10cj7lm$2ag3s$1@dont-email.me> > <10clb5i$2s76s$3@dont-email.me> > > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > X-Orig-X-Trace: individual.net m9g8ZiYPQyztJ536pjqKDwX2fCgk84x9zfB0xVyTmSYwerydti > Cancel-Lock: sha1:5QWuDVdVnK+hnqGMsUdOIRepRug= sha256:GTy4nYSHxIsStQpMTuDRhoMGwPH9qo9A3nCybfWxuvU= > User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird > Content-Language: en-US > X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 251016-4, 10/16/2025), Outbound message > X-Antivirus-Status: Clean > X-Originating-IP: 130.133.4.5 > X-ZEDAT-Hint: RO > X-Mythic-Source-External: YES > X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 43 > X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.3 > Delivered-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-BlackCat-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-Mythic-Originator: uid-1081-on-lynx.mythic-beasts.com > X-STUMP-Warning-4: Unfolded headers Received: Received: Received: Received: Authentication-Results: Received: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: > > On 16/10/2025 12:10 pm, The Todal wrote: > > On 15/10/2025 15:37, JNugent wrote: > >> On 15/10/2025 12:12 pm, The Todal wrote: > >>> On 15/10/2025 11:07, JNugent wrote: > >>>> On 15/10/2025 09:52 am, The Todal wrote: > >>>>> On 14/10/2025 17:39, Mark Goodge wrote: > >>>>>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 13:20:09 +0100, Norman Wells > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 14/10/2025 12:11, GB wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> So, you have no idea what the cost of the repairs will be. But > >>>>>>>> you have > >>>>>>>> a vivid imagination. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> That presupposes that any 'repairs' are actually necessary.  A > >>>>>>> few pints > >>>>>>> of coloured water, if that's what it was, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It wasn't coloured water, it was paint, and it was sprayed > >>>>>> directly into the > >>>>>> engine. That's not something that aircraft engines are designed to > >>>>>> withstand, given that it can never occur naturally and is not a > >>>>>> realistic > >>>>>> attack vector when in flight over hostile territory. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> At the very least, therefore, the engine would need to be > >>>>>> dismantled for > >>>>>> cleaning. I'm not an aviation engineer, so I can't say for certain > >>>>>> how much > >>>>>> work that would be. But, given the very fine tolerances that jet > >>>>>> engines > >>>>>> operate to, I suspect it's a non-trivial task. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In context, even a trivial, non-disruptive bird strike on a jet > >>>>>> engine > >>>>>> (which engines are designed to withstand) will typically cost $50,000 > >>>>>> upwards in subsequent maintenance. But the residue left by a bird > >>>>>> strike > >>>>>> (blood and gore, mostly) is washable, and engines are designed to > >>>>>> be washed. > >>>>>> Paint, however, is designed specifically not to be washable once > >>>>>> it's dried. > >>>>>> You can't wash paint off a fence, or a door, and you can't wash it > >>>>>> out of > >>>>>> the inside of a jet engine once it's got in there either. Getting > >>>>>> it out of the engine is a much more intrusive maintenance task. > >>>>>> > >>>>> If the aim is to impede our nation's support for the genocide in > >>>>> Gaza, then that's a job well done. > >>>>> > >>>>> It won't have significantly impeded our ability to resist a Russian > >>>>> invasion. And an aircraft isn't a priceless art work like the Mona > >>>>> Lisa. > >>>>> > >>>>> The logic of "because the damage was very expensive to rectify, you > >>>>> are therefore terrorists" is wholly irrational. > >>>> > >>>> It certainly is NOT "irrational" in the slightest. > >>> > >>> It is illogical and, in a free society, irrational. You are free to > >>> disagree and to adopt the Trumpian philosophy that any demonstrations > >>> that challenge government policy should be quelled by sending in the > >>> National Guard. > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> You could argue - if you had evidence to support the argument - that > >>>> it was illogical. But it would only be irrational if no action at > >>>> all were taken against the perpetrators.> > >>>>> The remedy, of course, is to improve security. The remedy for the > >>>>> appalling attack on Israel on 7 October is also to improve security > >>>>> [ ... ] > >>>> > >>>> Ah... so the October massacre was all the fault of the victims? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for pointing that out. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Why do you deliberately misrepresent what I say - or did you actually > >>> have a comprehension problem? > >>> > >>> The October massacre was the fault of the terrorists and of the IDF. > >>> The IDF are not "victims".  The dead and injured Israelis were the > >>> victims of Hamas terrorists and an incompetent, negligent IDF. > >>> > >>> Maybe - just a suggestion - you should read up on it and become > >>> better informed. You may now thank me for pointing that out. > >> > >> The victims were the Israeli people, killed, tortured, raped and/or > >> taken as hostage prisoners at random. Not just the ones directly > >> subjected to that inhuman treatment. Their relatives and friends > >> across isreal and the world were also made victim. > > > > A facile truism. > > > > However, it's distasteful if Jews in Britain with no relatives in Israel > > are claiming victimhood because of 7th October. > > > > Personally, I do have relatives in Tel Aviv. > > > > None of the hostages or their relatives would regard the IDF as victims > > of 7 October apart from the individual IDF soldiers killed or captured > > while their commanders neglected their duties. > > None of the IDF at *all*? > > Don't they have relatives, colleagues? > >> > >> Some of those killed or seized weren't even Israeli.> > >>> https://www.ynetnews.com/article/hy2evjoqee > >>> > >>> The IDF on Thursday released its investigation into the October 7 > >>> battle in the southern Israeli community of Pri Gan, revealing > >>> critical delays in the military’s response, a dysfunctional local > >>> alert squad and acts of heroism by volunteer responders from the > >>> nearby community of Shlomit. The report concludes bluntly: the IDF > >>> failed in its mission to defend the town. > >>> The probe, conducted by Brig. Gen. Itamar Ben Chaim and approved by > >>> former Southern Command chief Maj. Gen. Yaron Finkelman, highlights > >>> three key findings: the bravery of Shlomit’s local alert squad, the > >>> IDF’s refusal to immediately engage the attackers and Pri Gan’s own > >>> local emergency response team being severely unprepared due to > >>> negligence by both the army and the town itself. > >>> > >>> https://www.trtworld.com/article/18185282 > >>> > >>> A recent report by the Israeli army has said that the first hours of > >>> the Hamas-led incursion on October 7 were a military failure of the > >>> highest level due to the lack of an effective response, poor conflict > >>> management, and insufficient protection afforded to its own citizens. > > That does not mean that Hamas are excused - or does it?>>> > >>> The report, published in mid-July, is an extensive investigation into > >>> what happened on the day of the incursion in Kibbutz Be'eri, located > >>> 5 kilometres east of Gaza. > >>> > >>> More than nine months after Israel launched a brutal war on Gaza > >>> following the Hamas attack, the Israeli army appears to have tacitly > >>> admitted that it failed in delivering the most basic service of a > >>> military force - that is, tackling external threats. > >>> > >>> The report strikingly proves that the Israeli army, one of the > >>> biggest recipients of military aid in the world, could only reach the > >>> area controlled by Hamas fighters seven hours after the incursion began. > >>> > >>> While the report attempts to justify this failure by citing > >>> simultaneous attacks and blocked access roads, it also admits that > >>> the Israeli forces waited outside the area after their arrival > >>> without engaging with the intruders till the afternoon. > >> > >> Are you really saying that Hamas somehow deserves less opprobrium > >> because the Israeli armed forces weren't stationed on guard all around > >> the border of Gaza? > > > > How on earth did you garble my words to come up with that question? > > You claimed that failures of the IDF were to blame. > > What should that defence force have done that they did not so? > > Please be specific (or as specific as you can). > > > > > > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEfWu6wfyjzX88oocanSrwpvmn4x4FAmjxjCgACgkQnSrwpvmn 4x6P1wf+JYgEJnctMGuBALl2VDd6TgT8sbQc8f01TlqmpuKYPaDdLJUKqLJVy4D2 XHu5fTDweKDNucVy3FxPQpRgBSTibuN5pc3ydZsfPXZdXIYkVcaq3VdV+wcp2JwC DDJzs52EvneWoP0vWdizmN3k0hdNHBrqAP+yVnQAFy6fLBrDdBx8i1LjmAp4Mh4g 0YZgqqv6x0T6BI2aSDdgBFPSADMBtM12Y9oATpP5XmLD6+aOyZfD7Z+LxAHEh91J bVQFxNW0btsrDQnGI89NdEp2yFoYPmAS3XP8kEcNvc33dcsCfwGl8z83brn1y+DS nn0ESjAXQYMOsNkcsrgQqn+WyQp2DQ== =b+Yt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----