The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:30 am
Back in January, this site warned Melbourne court invitees to think twice before engaging the services of leftoid lawyer Jeremy Sear. Sadly, Dr George Varnavides didn’t heed that advice:
A Melbourne man has become Australia’s first dentist to be jailed for professional misconduct for repeatedly breaching orders not to practice.
Dr George Varnavides, 70, was sentenced to three months’ jail today after pleading guilty to being in contempt of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal …
Outside the hearing, counsel for Dr Varnavides, Jeremy Sear, said he did not know if his client would appeal.
You’d think a lawyer might know something like that.
(Via Rene)
UPDATE. Jeremy claims he was misquoted: “Refusing to answer a reporter with ‘I cannot comment on that at this stage’ is not the same as saying ‘I don’t know’, but may end up being written up as such anyway.”
UPDATE II. An “anonymous married man who definitely does not work in the legal profession” makes an appearanceat Spin Starts Here.
UPDATE III. Logged in as LGWS (Lookin’ Good, Wally Sear!) someone who denies being Jeremy (hey, who wouldn’t?) is chattering away in comments like an angry squirrel.
- Both sides are working closely together, to bridge the gap.Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 04 at 11:14 AM • permalink
- It’s probably good than anonymous lefty is representing a 70 year old man. At least the poor old bugger wont serve anymore than 30 years in gaol (’jail’ for Tim’s American readers).
Paco- Jezza Sear wont have any trouble taking up that cause, he defends people like Moussaoui every chance he gets. That’s what puts the lefty in Anonymous Lefty… I dunno what the anon bit is about though… :S
- Aren’t most of Sears’ clients pretty unappealing?Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 04 04 at 12:36 PM • permalink
- I’ll bet the memory of this conviction is Seared into the memory of Dr. Varnavides…..Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 04 at 12:58 PM • permalink
- Hang in there Jeremy. Solidarity and all that stuff.
Keep the faith and someday your lawyerin’ may even match Ramsey Clark’s craptacular career.
- Jeremy has made some clarifying comments about what he did or didn’t know. In case someone was asking. Which they aren’t. But in case they were. No reason, you know, that he would post these comments 4 1/2 hours after Tim did.
- Yes, funny that AL decided to write that not-very-well-veiled response, given that he maintains he’s not Jeremy Sear. Why the interest in what Tim writes about some random lawyer, even if Tim has previously connected that lawyer to AL’s identity…if it’s all ludicrous nonsense anyway, why bother?
I’ll say it again, Jeremy’s problem isn’t so much that he might be a bad lawyer per se (I’m obviously unable to check that), but that he doesn’t seem very bright to begin with. No wonder he feels right at home on the Left.
- clearly tim b can’t understand that what is printed on news.com.au may have in fact been misquoted, but then as usual he hasn’t done any investigating (something actual journalists do).
even the herald sun today has an article detailing this dr’s chequered past and original conviction in 2003, and his guilty plea in january when he wasn’t represented by mr w sears.
perhaps an apology is in order?
- An apology owed to whom, LGWS? Seriously, to whom is an apology to be directed? and furthermore, why?Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 04 at 09:10 PM • permalink
- are you kidding MF? (nice initials btw 😉
clearly tim b should apologise to mr sears for questioning his ability to do his job, after basing his questioning on someone misquoting him.
i know i’m certainly questioning tim b’s ability to do his job based on the lack of context in this posting.
exactly what qualifications does tim b even have? i’m guessing he was unable to even get into law at university, and perhaps this is why he holds a grudge to those who could?
- LGWS
Good on you for sticking up for poor Mr Sear. It is about time someone took non-legal qualified and jealous Tim Bla-urrgh to task, but I despair that your demanded apology may not be forthcoming.
Sometimes it takes a bigger man to say they are sorry. Therefore, I will take it upon myself, on behalf of the fair-minded participants on this blog, to do the right thing.
On behalf of this blog, I would like to express my sincere regrets that in some of his public actions and statements, Jeremy Sear may have looked like a complete fuckwit. I for one, believe he is not a complete fuckwit, as there may yet be unexplored avenues.
Please accept this apology in the spirit in which it is intended.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 09:41 PM • permalink
exactly what qualifications does tim b even have? i’m guessing he was unable to even get into law at university, and perhaps this is why he holds a grudge to those who could?
Ah, a noble defender of Mr. Sears! Who resorts to the jealousy approach (a sort of ad hominen) in order to make a “point”. Quite amusing…..especially given Sears earlier and incoherent response to his Kopyrighted Kitty Kat™.
BTW, Tim and Andrea stock plenty of capitals…..feel free to make use of them, seeing as you used bolding without asking.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 04 at 09:45 PM • permalink
- if anyone made it their business to obsessively follow someone around, online and in real life, it would be very easy to make anybody look like a “complete fuckwit” by taking a small portion of their actions out of context.
i’m sure you and i would look equally foolish if anyone put the time and effort into either of us, MM.
- LGWS
Mate are you so desperate to defend your friend that all you can trot out is my spelling?, I’ll cough to not being the best speller in the world but You got your friend’s name wrong twice .(surely a worse offence than a couple of typo’s)
You have pulled the spelling police line with me before it was stupid then and it is stupid now. Typically in the absence of any substance you trot out the insults .Why am I not surprised?
- Man, I thought it was only me that got the context-aware obsessive stalkers
Use up all the bold you like LG, you’re welcome here
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 09:57 PM • permalink
- Iain,
I questioned Tim Blair’s qualifications, to which your response was questioning my spelling. (see posts #22 & 23, 31)
My original question remains, to which you are welcome to respond.
What are Tim Blair’s qualifications, and what is his motivation for attacking Mr Sear (thanks for the correction), without doing any kind of background research into his posting?
- LG
What are Tim Blair’s qualifications, and what is his motivation for attacking Mr Sear
I’ll help you out.
A: Tim is clearly has no qualifications to criticise people. He seems to think he can comment on just about anything without having done the relevant TAFE course.
B: He is one of the obsessive out-of-context stalkers
Hope this helps
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 10:04 PM • permalink
- perhaps an apology is in order?
For what? Sear defended the fellow and he lost, hence the post ‘Back in January, this site warned Melbourne court invitees to think twice before engaging the services of leftoid lawyer Jeremy Sear’.
The fact that the defendent has lost previous cases is immaterial. Tim is entirely correct, does he have to say yeahbutyeahbutnobut this is the first time Sear represented him? No.
A loss is a loss.
- i’m not bothering with capitals, so don’t bother commenting
nic, you say tim is entirely correct, and yet the facts are clearly disputed, by someone who was actuallythere.
don’t you think that tim should have provided a little more context before questioning someone’s ability to do their job?
i don’t mean to question your legal expertise, but if the guy was previously convicted, and had previously entered a guilty plea, and was there to receive his sentence, exactly what was mr sear meant to do… turn back time? question the barrister who originally worked on the case back in january, or even 2003?
i’m no lawyer but i don’t think that a person will be found innocent after pleading guilty.
- Jeremy Sear reminds me of a paler, more-oppressed Nelson Mandela in many ways. I wonder if we could organise a pop concert at Wembley?Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 10:24 PM • permalink
- #37
i’m no lawyer but i don’t think that a person will be found innocent after pleading guilty.
Read the article!:
A Melbourne man has become Australia’s first dentist to be jailed for professional misconduct for repeatedly breaching orders not to practice
Got it yet? It is not about him being found guilty.
I know why you and Sear are friends. You two share an interest in being ignorant.
- LGWS
I would think that even you know that Tim is a Journalist reporting the facts. There is no point of law at issue here and I would see Tim’s post as being gently mocking rather than attacking as I might add have most of the comments. Some how I think that even the subject of our laughter could see the funny side of this. His post at Anonymous lefty is actually quite witty in its pretence.
- Free-ee, Jer-emy Sear ba, ba, ba baPosted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 10:32 PM • permalink
- who said anything about freeing him?
i just think baseless, mis-informed attacks on anybody are petty and immature.
but then if you guys and gals have nothing better to do with your time than anonymously attack someone you have never met, especially with such vehemence, you should ask yourselves why.
i’m making myself a cup of coffee before i sit down and read all the cliched responses
- Jeremy’s turning into a bit of an online cult joke – kinda like Hoff or Chuck Norris without the looks or talent.
The upside is the marketing potential – Jeremy could make some money selling chinless ‘Jeremy’ dolls or lunchboxes with pics of ‘Jeremy’ and his spastic cat.Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 04 04 at 10:51 PM • permalink
- Mr Sear (LGWS?) says a couple of things, firstly that he was misquoted on his way out of court. He would not be the first counsel that has happened to. It would not have been unethical for him to have stated whether or not his client intended to lodge an appeal but certainly it would have been unwise as:
Secondly Mr Sear claims that he was just the errand boy. He was apparently briefed to collect the judgement, which assuming that the issue of costs as well as penalty had been previously argued, could be performed by a trained monkey but hey a brief is a brief.
Just so everyone can understand why Mr Sear would be so keen on everyone knowing that he said in effect no comment is that 1. it is unethical to comment on the merits of a decision during the currency of an appeal period and 2. as the client presumably wouldn’t have known Mr Sear from adam prior to that day he would have been far exceeding his brief which in all likelihood would have given to him by his chamber clerk on the basis of are you busy today? then could you go and collect judgement for X (X being a more senior member of chambers with presumably better things to do).
All of this goes to demonstrate the dangers of trying to be a big man in the blogosphere and practice in a profession with a high public profile at the same time.
Finally has Tim been fair to Mr Sear? Well in due course the tribunal will publish its decision online and we will all be able to see. The Tribunal’s decisions can be found here.
Posted by Just Another Bloody Lawyer on 2006 04 04 at 10:55 PM • permalink
- Thanks jabl
Now I understand why LG, sorry, Mr Sear is so worked up about this
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 11:11 PM • permalink
- LGWS:
if you guys and gals have nothing better to do with your time than anonymously attack someone you have never met, especially with such vehemence, you should ask yourselves why.
LGWS:
seriously lingus4, that’s the best response you can come up with? i’ve been reading AL for a few months now, and i’d love an example from you…
Question to LGWS – what is Anonymous Lefty’s “BoltWatch” other than an exercise in anonymously attacking someone he has never met, with considerable vehemence?
So there is your example. Please go away.
- I can feel your pain LG. It is the great misfortune of so many people that we are not Jeremy Sear. But can we not dare to dream?Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 04 at 11:41 PM • permalink
- I take solace knowing that if we can’t all be him, we can all still strive to be like him.
Oh, Jezza, I would give anything, just to be like him
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 12:31 AM • permalink
- I THINK THAT LGWS POSTING EXCLUSIVELY IN LOWER CASE IS UNFAIR TO HIS BLOGNAME, WHICH IS ENTIRELY IN UPPER CASE.
THEREFORE, WHENEVER I POST REGARDING LGWS, I WILL USE ALL UPPER CASE IN ORDER TO BALANCE THAT THREAD.
AND, OF COURSE, MY OWN BLOGNAME WILL CONTINUE TO USE THE APPROPRIATE CASE.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 12:34 AM • permalink
- LGWS, WHY ARE YOU DEFENDING MR SEAR SO VOCIFEROUSLY?
SOME INTERESTING POINTS ABOUT YOU:
1. YOU JOINED THIS BLOG ON 29 MARCH 2006, AND NEVER POSTED A THING UNTIL TODAY, AND ARE NOW VEHEMENTLY DEFENDED THE GOOD JEREMY SEAR.
2. IF ONE DOES A GOOGLE SEARCH FOR “LGWS SEAR” (LESS THE QUOTE MARKS, PLEASE”, THE NUMBER ONE HIT IS…..A POST ON IAIN HALL’S BLOG. A POST WHERE JEREMY SEAR IS DEFENDED VOCIFEROUSLY.
ARE THESE COINCIDENCES? SURELY LGWS IS NOT A NON DE PLUME FOR JEREMY SEAR?
THE WORLD AWAITS THE ANSWER!!!!!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 12:41 AM • permalink
- As part of taking my first steps in my Near-ness to Sear-ness campaign, I would like to say I didn’t do it, stop stalking me, and I am not Jeremy Sear
Thank you
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 12:44 AM • permalink
- I FORGOT TO NOTE A THIRD POINT…….THAT IS THE ONLY MEANINGFUL HIT ON THE GOOGLE SEARCH FOR “LGWS SEAR”. THE REST ARE NOT RELATED TO BLOGGING IN ANY WAY.Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 12:44 AM • permalink
- AND NOW WE HAVE THE AMORAL AND WRETCHED EMILY P JOINING IN THIS DEBATE. AH, WE GET TO WATCH YET ANOTHER SHOW IN THAT WORLD FAMOUS VIRTURAL LOVE TRIANGLE OF EMILY, IAIN, AND JEREMY.
OR IS THIS A LOVE QUADILATERAL, IF LGWS IS IN FACT NOT JEREMY?
STAY TUNED FOLKS, THIS IS GOING TO BE EXCITING!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 12:48 AM • permalink
- Time to check on the lint collectionPosted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 12:58 AM • permalink
- you are all so very wrong. check my ip address if you don’t believe me. i am not jeremy sear, refer post #53.
i do so enjoy your logic though, i try and point out flaws in tim blair’s logic, therefore i am jeremy sear!
you guys are so clever. not.
seriously, i can state categorically:
1. i am not a lawyer.
2. i have no university qualifications.
3. i am not jeremy sear.
4. you think i’m jeremy sear, because i deny being jeremy sear. by that logic, you are all jeremy sear. bravo.
- There could be enough to fill my beanbag!Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 01:12 AM • permalink
- Gee – now Jeremy’s sent his girlfriend ‘Emily’ in to defend him.
It’s like being mauled by sheep I tells ya!Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 04 05 at 01:15 AM • permalink
- Mmmmh…being mauled by sheepPosted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 01:18 AM • permalink
- #72 – Now that’s gold!Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 04 05 at 01:19 AM • permalink
- IAIN, I’ll TAKE YOUR WORD ON LGWS NOT BEING JEREMY. TOO BAD, DUDE, NOW IT’S A VIRTUAL LOVE QUADILATERAL. NO, WAIT, THAT’S GOOD. FOR YOU.
LGWS, IF YOU’RE NOT A LAWYER, HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO DEFEND JEREMY?
NYUK NYUK NYUK NYUK!!!!!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 01:24 AM • permalink
- Dammit
One sit on the bean bag and the whole lint collection is squashed. Now I know why they use beans. Looks like back to the drawing board.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 01:43 AM • permalink
- Ah yes, all very predictable. As soon as I saw The Blur had posted yet another troll about Jeremy Sear / Mr Lefty, I knew this thread would contain a variety things:
— Iain Hall’s usual obsessive-compulsive rants about how he took on Mr Lefty and thwarted him in blog-combat
— Thinly-veiled inferences that Mr Lefty is a poor lawyer, supported by no evidence whatsoever
— Another round of ‘no chin’ jokes
— References to me as his ‘girlfriend’Let me strip away the pretense at semi-intelligent discussion condense this primary-school jibbering back to its fundamental meaning:
— I’m bigger/tougher/smarter than Mr Lefty… nah nah nah nah nah
— Mr Lefty sucks at lawyer-ing
— Mr Lefty is sooooo ugly
— Mr Lefty luvs EmilyIt’s good that most of you are well in touch with your inner-child.
It’s good that most of you are well in touch with your inner-child.
That’s a non-sequitor, coming from someone with absolutely no morals.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 01:53 AM • permalink
- From now on I will wear only red cotton shirts, so I can develop a rare pink lint collection. I am not sure yet how this will affect overall volume of the collection.Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 01:54 AM • permalink
- The pink lint collection was my idea, okay. If I see another batch on ebay, there will be trouble.Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 02:14 AM • permalink
- You’re doomed, The_Real_JeffS, the very act of mocking leftist inanities is prima facie evidence of mental illness, donchya know.Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 04 05 at 02:18 AM • permalink
- Wow with all of these capitals flying about I think I’ve gone deaf…
LGWS you are a sad sack for defending Mr Sear.
— Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 04 05 at 02:19 AM • permalink
- I just put all the squashed beanbag lint pieces in the drier for 3 minutes and they have come out lighter and fluffier than ever!Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 02:30 AM • permalink
- — I’m bigger/tougher/smarter than Mr Lefty… nah nah nah nah nah
— Mr Lefty sucks at lawyer-ing
— Mr Lefty is sooooo ugly
— Mr Lefty luvs Emily
You forgot the ‘chin’ thing ‘Emily’-
Remind ‘Jeremy’ to visualise Jay Leno just before he drifts off to sleep every night ok?
Ya never know…Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 04 05 at 02:39 AM • permalink
Real_Jeffs, I’m sorry you’re angry.
What tells you that I’m angry? Oh, wait, that’s right, ad hominem attack , projection, leftie, etc. Right.
Thanks for the reminder, Spiny. For a moment I actually thought Emily was serious, y’know? And then I remember what Emily P really is.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 02:40 AM • permalink
#83 Why do you say Emily has no morals Jeff?
lingus4, read Emily P’s comments starting
here. You could start earlier, but that was the clincher for me.That’s the way I see her.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 05 at 02:45 AM • permalink
- Yep, that’s what I said. Child-murderers are child-murderers to me, whether they’re Palestinians on buses, militant Saudis hijacking planes, expansionist Jews or US bomber-pilots with bad intel. That’s not moral equivalence, it’s moral consistency. You, however, get to pick and choose who’s allowed to kill children and who’s not – your feigned outrage is a joke.
- 97 Lingus, the intent – indeed the whole function – of dropping bombs, firing missiles, laying mines or shooting artillery is to kill people whom you usually cannot see. Some of these may, and often are, children. If you cannot see the great flaw in this whole process than you must be patently blind.
- #106 – ‘Emily strumpet crumpet’ –
Why should anyone have to explain or justify anything to you?
Who do you think you are anyway? the f#%king Queen mother?
Go.away.chode.smoker.Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 04 05 at 04:58 AM • permalink
- That rationale is not quite simplistic enough for Emily P to digest, Lingus and and Jeff_S.
She can’t get past this basic logical arithmetic:
Opposing sides act act against each other. People sometimes die due to the actions of each side against the other. Whaddaya get? COMPLETE EQUIVALENCE!
See, it works just fine (as long as you ignore the small print).
Has dear Emily P stopped to think about how many people would be dead if the Americans wanted to kill civilians?
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 06:30 AM • permalink
- Or perhaps I should say, “how many people would be dead if the Americans (and Israelis, for that matter) had the same motives and objectives as Hamas?”Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 06:47 AM • permalink
- 108 Oh dear, another angry little man, full of misplaced rage because mommy didn’t give him enough hugs.
109 Lingus, it’s clear you know nothing about Zionist groups like Irgun or the Stern gang if you believe they ‘tried to avoid killing civilians’. Do a little reading and enlighten yourself. These groups did everything from mine railways used by combined civilian-military trains, to assassinating visiting Swedish mediators. If you want to maintain your Israel-friendly fantasy then you are either patently ignorant of history or a wilful revisionist of it.
110 James, yes, if you kill civilians without wanting to do it then it’s A-O-K.
- No, Emily, it’s tragic and deeply regrettable.
Geez, you truly don’t get it, do you?
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 06:55 AM • permalink
- 111 James, a lot more, certainly. There’s no doubt that Hamas’ objectives are extreme and unacceptable, and that elements in the US and Israel are working towards a peaceful solution in the Middle East. But Hamas is a relatively new phenomenon (less than 20 years old) and born from generations of violence. I’m sure trying to wipe it out will not solve anything.
- Emily, who is more evil? The person who accidentally runs over and kills your dog, or the person who swerves to deliberately hit and kill it?Posted by HisHineness on 2006 04 05 at 07:08 AM • permalink
- I think you’re missing the point. Motive affects the bodycount. Probability dictates that you cannot face a foe like Hamas or any of the terrorist militant Islamists without accruing some civilian casualties. However, the USA makes every effort to minimise civilian casualties. If they didn’t, many more would perish in the essential fight against Hamas and similar entities. Hamas and their terrorist brethren in other lands generally don’t give a shit how many innocents die for their personal crusades – which often actually target innocents. Therefore, people like Hamas need to be confronted in whatever theatre they appear in – using a number of methods, including open warfare. You disagree – that’s your prerogative. But I firmly believe that, if left to their own devices, the destructive ambitions of these people would cause the deaths of so many more. This is the price of doing nothing.Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 07:20 AM • permalink
- Anyway, that’s why there is no equivalence between Hamas and the Americans – because of all the people that don’t die due to the difference between ideologies.Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 07:22 AM • permalink
- Brett, tyrants only become tyrants because they’re given the means to do so. Remove a leader’s capacity to use force or his supporter base and he quickly turns from despot to two-bit demagogue. Bomb them when they’re at the height of their influence and you’ll create martyrs and causes where none should really exist.
As for your query about murder and manslaughter, yes I’m aware of the distinction. I’m also aware that they’re both crimes.
- 119 James, fair enough, I respect your opinion. But I also believe that if more were done by Israel and moderate Palestinians to advance the peace process and solve the problems of clashes between Arab and Jewish settlers, Hamas would just be another loony fringe group – few Palestinians, if any, would be rushing to blow themselves up on buses. Military action is not the only option, it should be the last option; unfortunately the region has fallen into the habit of using it as the first option.
- I never said Haganah is the same as Irgun or Lehi; nor did I say Haganah or Irgun or the Stern gang is the same as Hamas, other than the fact they produce similar outcomes, ie. dead people. I’m quite confident that my knowledge of the history of Palestine in this period is, at the very least, equal to your own.
And there was no personal attack on James Waterton, who seems one of the reasonable people here, but on the ridiculous poster from 108. Given that just about every post here seems to be prefaced with an insult, I’m not sure why you’d be complaining if I happened to make one.
- For crying out loud could this thread hijacking b**** be banned already? Pretty please?Posted by Just Another Bloody Lawyer on 2006 04 05 at 09:26 AM • permalink
- Bloody hell. Emily P again. Dreyfuze will be next. Remember him Emily? The snide little bigot deadbeat dickhead you applauded the other day on that other thread? These people follow each other around like dancing drunks in a daisychain.
“I never said Haganah is the same as … Hamas”
Why lie Emily? I can understand denial I guess up to a point. But why the bare-faced lying especially when what you said is on permanent record for anybody who could be bothered looking to see?
Profoundly ignorant Emily P. And morally depraved.
Try reading a book sometime. If necessary I will send you a photograph of one for identification purposes.
- Emily P – to be honest, I’m not a great fan of a lot of Israeli action. From what I’ve seen they will eat their own and shit on their friends if that’s what it takes. Take the theft of NZ passports, for instance.
However, I still think it’s important that Israel prevails in the region, as the only advocate of sound Western values.
I saw a movie called Paradise Now recently. Very sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Showed the lives of a couple of Palestinian men bleating about how they couldn’t tolerate being repressed, being treated as second class citizens. Thus they want to blow themselves up.
I wondered how their wives and daughters felt considering they received such treatment from so many Palestinian Muslim men.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 12:39 PM • permalink
- #100 Gin and quince? Thanks for the tip KKPosted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 05 at 05:46 PM • permalink
- Well here I am having what seems intelligent and polite discourse with James—and along comes one of Mr Lefty’s less amiable colleagues (128) and Iain the barely-literate stalker (129) and calls for my banning. Shows how much freedom of speech they truly endorse.
And Geoff (130) what I indeed say is on record, so if you can’t read it’s no fault of mine.
- Emily P/ Bridgit Gread
Stay on topic and everyone will be amused by your posts but when you go of on a tangent (and argue that badly) why should we not say ENOUGH !!
It is so telling that when I contribute less than 1% of the posts to this thread that you sight me as one of the villains here Do you miss me that much you can always try to argue with me at mine , the New Blog does not even have comment moderation enabled …….Yet
- Yes, calm down boys, can’t you see we’re having a discourse here?Posted by James Waterton on 2006 04 05 at 10:50 PM • permalink
- Stay on topic and everyone will be amused by your posts but when you go of (sic) on a tangent (and argue that badly) why should we not say ENOUGH !!
Be honest with us, Iain, you’re just unhappy because we’re discussing Israeli-Palestinian relations and not your favourite subject, Mr Lefty. There’s more important things going on in the world than your worrying fixations with Melbourne lawyers.
- #132 James, agree with all points made. I’m very critical of Israeli responses to the region’s problems, then again the Palestinians are riven by faction, self-interest and corruption. As I said earlier, if mainstream Palestinians could organise and conduct themselves better then there’d be very little interest in or support for the murderous idiocy of Hamas or the Islamic Front.
I haven’t seen the movie you discuss but I don’t doubt there’s an abundance of simplistic pro-Palestinian propaganda—and much of it is indeed supported by the radical Left. There’s no shortage of pro-Israeli propaganda though.
- This whole friggin thread has given me a tremendous headache.
Emily P. I am so sorry that you are such an angry person. I’m just wilted with sorrow. I really don’t think I could feel any more sorrow for your anger. It must be your lack of military service, or perhaps just your lack of any form of useful service that has made you so angry. So angry you can no longer distinguish between good or evil. It is a scary world, isn’t it dear? You poor scrared and angry girl. My soul is weaping with sorrow for you.
There is hope, however. There are marvelous medications on the market these days to help you. Yes! Help you! You with all of that fear and anger. Chin up! (no pun intended)
- Emily Precious 142
Bob, I find it hard to take you seriously when you prefix your name with “Texas”.
Perfect.
That is EXACTLY how bigots think.
And honey, you are one.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 06 at 11:49 AM • permalink
- Wrong as usual, David. I just think prefacing your name with wherever you are from is just incredibly silly – and makes you look thus. I’m not of the opinion that calling myself Aussie Emily would reveal anything; just as you rebadging yourself according to whatever snakepit you came from would not reveal or explain much.
- KK, it’s sceptical persons like yourself who cause all the trouble in the world. Next you’ll be telling me that you don’t believe that Mr & Mrs Dave didn’t decide to name their bouncing boy Stoop, back in 19-mumblety-mumb.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 07 at 11:43 AM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
