Jump to content

Israel / Gaza / Lebanon / Iran War Thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Al Bundy said:

In what way am I financing the Guardian?

    Every time you open a web page anonymously or otherwise it is recorded by your browser and hundreds of media related firms who are selling a profile indirectly (the type of person you are) or directly (your e-mail/location etc.) they will know to a greater or lesser extent what else you do on the internet every second of the day. These media companies can find out a huge amount about you from spending patterns to your social class etc. and with AI, your diet, health, finances, education, political views and attitudes. Some of this you volunteer consciously when you fill in forms or put out things on Facebook, Amazon etc. Sometimes unknowingly when you finger/pointer hovers too long over 'click bait', sometimes unknowingly as websites share information legally/illegally but most often through the ignorance of the user who clicks 'allow' or 'legitimate uses only'.

 

   Every time you open a 'The Guardian' page anonymously or otherwise it is recorded.

   This benefits the advertiser who has bought space on the website and they will pay  'The Guardian' more if they attract a larger number and the right type of watcher. Your browser will also pay and be paid. I have a relative in this business who says that the public is 10 years behind, the Government 3 years behind and law enforcement and regulators two years behind what is being done across the world- most is for profit-but some is malevolent. She has re-connected her landline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Annie Bynnol said:

    Every time you open a web page anonymously or otherwise it is recorded by your browser and hundreds of media related firms who are selling a profile indirectly (the type of person you are) or directly (your e-mail/location etc.) they will know to a greater or lesser extent what else you do on the internet every second of the day. These media companies can find out a huge amount about you from spending patterns to your social class etc. and with AI, your diet, health, finances, education, political views and attitudes. Some of this you volunteer consciously when you fill in forms or put out things on Facebook, Amazon etc. Sometimes unknowingly when you finger/pointer hovers too long over 'click bait', sometimes unknowingly as websites share information legally/illegally but most often through the ignorance of the user who clicks 'allow' or 'legitimate uses only'.

 

   Every time you open a 'The Guardian' page anonymously or otherwise it is recorded.

   This benefits the advertiser who has bought space on the website and they will pay  'The Guardian' more if they attract a larger number and the right type of watcher. Your browser will also pay and be paid. I have a relative in this business who says that the public is 10 years behind, the Government 3 years behind and law enforcement and regulators two years behind what is being done across the world- most is for profit-but some is malevolent. She has re-connected her landline.

Interesting but no money whatsoever comes out of my pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

    "They" is a political cartoonist called Martin Rowson, he regularly contributes to the The Guardian.

     Smart arse cartoonists like Rowson specialize in provoking opinion and draws your attention to the 'pyrrhic' nature of Netanyahu temporary victory using American arms. Is it a 'peace sign' or a one of defiance? Are those watching Gaza children or hostages? Is "What's next? the question being asked.

    I am sure that The Guardian continues to welcome your financial support.

If you look at which way the hand is facing, it looks more like a gesture of defiance to me; the observers appear to be child age.
Israel released a video of him defiant to his end, which may yet backfire as many commentators claimed he was always safe underground surrounded by hostages as human shields. 
Yes Netanyahu stands defiant himself, over the dead war criminal he financed as a means of helping defeat a 2 state solution; killed using US weapons and aid, while the US claim to be promoting that 2 state solution.
A pyrrhic victory, in that you can kill an individual, or many individuals, but not an ideology, to which you may actually be acting as a recruiting agent when leaving so much devastation in your wake; also arguably lessening your own country's standing from a world perspective, particularly if a future court does find Israel guilty of genocide.

Personally I'd have preferred him to be captured alive, and tried openly in an international court as a war criminal.

I doubt this was ever going to happen, as part of his defence might expose some very dodgy political machinations.

Similar could be said about a parallel ICC trial with one or two of the Knesset, but that's a different aspect.

Statement of ICC Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan KC: Applications for arrest warrants in the situation in the State of Palestine 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

Interesting but no money whatsoever comes out of my pocket.

  No money came out of your pocket directly.

  But  "The Guardian" got paid by advertisers when you clicked on their site which showed their adverts.

  This is no different to the days of 'black and white' TV when firms had to use 'market research' to estimate how many watched ' Coronation Street' on a Wednesday night- this would effect the price charged for future adverts.

 

  In 2020 MacDonald's spent £89.74 million on UK advertising. None of which in "The Guardian", because few children read "The Guardian" and the adults don't fit the 'target audience' that are likely to succumb to that type of fat and carbohydrate. Instead advertisers of niche, trendy fat and carbohydrate, will expect a higher level of interest their fat and carbohydrate amongst the "The Guardian" readers.

 

  Either way ANYBODY who advertises passes the cost of advertising onto the CONSUMER but even if you don't buy the product, the more YOU click, the MORE the advertisers pay "The Guardian", the MORE you are helping to finance "The Guardian".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, peak4 said:

If you look at which way the hand is facing, it looks more like a gesture of defiance to me; the observers appear to be child age.
Israel released a video of him defiant to his end, which may yet backfire as many commentators claimed he was always safe underground surrounded by hostages as human shields. 
Yes Netanyahu stands defiant himself, over the dead war criminal he financed as a means of helping defeat a 2 state solution; killed using US weapons and aid, while the US claim to be promoting that 2 state solution.
A pyrrhic victory, in that you can kill an individual, or many individuals, but not an ideology, to which you may actually be acting as a recruiting agent when leaving so much devastation in your wake; also arguably lessening your own country's standing from a world perspective, particularly if a future court does find Israel guilty of genocide.

Personally I'd have preferred him to be captured alive, and tried openly in an international court as a war criminal.

I doubt this was ever going to happen, as part of his defence might expose some very dodgy political machinations.

Similar could be said about a parallel ICC trial with one or two of the Knesset, but that's a different aspect.

Statement of ICC Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan KC: Applications for arrest warrants in the situation in the State of Palestine 

The twisting to try and justify terrorism is quite breathtaking.  

 

What actually is the gesture of defiance by the way?

 

You have really surprised me over the last few days. 

 

Incredibly disappointing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

  No money came out of your pocket directly.

  But  "The Guardian" got paid by advertisers when you clicked on their site which showed their adverts.

  This is no different to the days of 'black and white' TV when firms had to use 'market research' to estimate how many watched ' Coronation Street' on a Wednesday night- this would effect the price charged for future adverts.

 

  In 2020 MacDonald's spent £89.74 million on UK advertising. None of which in "The Guardian", because few children read "The Guardian" and the adults don't fit the 'target audience' that are likely to succumb to that type of fat and carbohydrate. Instead advertisers of niche, trendy fat and carbohydrate, will expect a higher level of interest their fat and carbohydrate amongst the "The Guardian" readers.

 

  Either way ANYBODY who advertises passes the cost of advertising onto the CONSUMER but even if you don't buy the product, the more YOU click, the MORE the advertisers pay "The Guardian", the MORE you are helping to finance "The Guardian".

So I personally haven't financed them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

So I personally haven't financed them.

     Who said that you "...personally haven't financed them."?

     What I said was  "I am sure that The Guardian continues to welcome your financial support." i.e.  your very presence on their website increased their revenue. 

    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

The twisting to try and justify terrorism is quite breathtaking.  

 

What actually is the gesture of defiance by the way?

 

You have really surprised me over the last few days. 

 

Incredibly disappointing.

 

If you think Peak4 is trying to justify terrorism then you have simply failed to understand their post. This wouldn't be at all surprising, since you often get the wrong end of the stick unless people triple the word count to spell it out and dumb it down. That in itself isn't surprising either, because the average reading ability of Britons is not very good. Both my kids were ahead of the UK average before they finished primary school. I expect Peak4 was as well. 

 

You owe Peak4 an apology without even understanding why.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Delbow said:

 

If you think Peak4 is trying to justify terrorism then you have simply failed to understand their post. This wouldn't be at all surprising, since you often get the wrong end of the stick unless people triple the word count to spell it out and dumb it down. That in itself isn't surprising either, because the average reading ability of Britons is not very good. Both my kids were ahead of the UK average before they finished primary school. I expect Peak4 was as well. 

 

You owe Peak4 an apology without even understanding why.

Wow .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.