Israel v Hamas

[Stirlingsays]

Jeepers, those are some long replies.

I'll tackle them when I can be bothered and this sodding toothache quietens.

 

[Spiderman]

Firstly, please provide references for the gangs calling themselves "Jew Hunters". It is lazy not to provide references when you quote.

I do not condone violence as you describe. In fact my post should be evidence enough to show as such. In one video it is made clear by the person video'ing it, that there is of a gang of Isreali fans viciously attacking a lone Dutch individual. I condemn that behaviour as well as the incorrect framing of the events in that video by the BBC.

Yet, you are arguing that I condone the attack by the Israeli gang when you say it "Seems like it"...

Thank you for being the perfect case study.

Revealed: How Pro-Palestinian mob organised via WhatsApp to ‘Hunt Jews’ across Amsterdam

Fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv attacked before and after their team’s Europa League match against Ajax

www.telegraph.co.uk

Israeli soccer fans were attacked in Amsterdam. The violence was condemned as antisemitic

Dutch authorities say people on scooters attacked Israeli fans overnight after a soccer game in Amsterdam apparently fueled by calls to target Jewish people spread online.

apnews.com

Perfect case study? Please elaborate
Did I mention an Israeli gang? Apologies must have missed that in my post

 

[Penge Eagle]

The Israelis tore down Palestinian flags that were draped from windows, shouted 'f*** the Arabs', sang 'There are no school because we killed all the kids'.

They are conducting a genocide against the Palestinians and are now bombing Lebanon indiscriminately, killing many hundreds of innocent men, women and children.

The mainstream media are fully in the Israel lobby pockets as are the UK, US and govs of the EU - aside from perhaps Spain who only recently stopped supplying military equipment - perhaps why the Israelis jeered during a minute silence for the flood victims.

Israel is an imperialist colonial project whose intent is to achieve a Jewish state from the river Jordan to the Mediterranean sea - it is written clearly in the Likud party's original charter.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party#google_vignette

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/16/new-new-middle-east-israel-region-saudi-relations-fututre/

Here is a little history of how Israel came to be and continues to be supported by the US.

The UK is a lap dog of the Israeli lobby. Here is a list of current MPs who receive benefits from the Israel lobby either in trips, gifts or support more generally: Israel lobby funded a quarter of British MPs

Notable mentions: "...Trevor Chinn, a long-time pro-Israel lobbyist who has financed eight members of Keir Starmer’s front bench, including his deputy Angela Rayner as well as shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves, shadow foreign secretary David Lammy and shadow health secretary Wes Streeting.

Chinn gave £50,000 to Starmer’s Labour leadership campaign. His donation was only disclosed after Starmer had won."

The mainstream media framing of the Amsterdam incidents are testament to their bias. The framing is that the Israelis are victims of antisemitic violence is absurd when there is clear provocation. The early BBC article showed Israeli football thugs attacking a Dutch citizen and framed it as violence against the Israelis. As pointed out by the journalist who video'd the event, it was misrepresented by the BBC. It is clear that there was violence, abuse and vandalism. If you had gone to a foreign country and aacted in such a way, you would expect a reaction.

Stop being idiots. The Israeli regime are the modern day Nazis. They use Palestinians as human shields, they boast about killing children (war crimes).

x.com

x.com

Stop being mindless idiots and wake up. Don't be lazy. Don't be morons.

I have two questions for you:

1. Should the state of Israel exist?

2. Did the Holocaust happen?

 

[Badadmcmad]

Revealed: How Pro-Palestinian mob organised via WhatsApp to ‘Hunt Jews’ across Amsterdam

Fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv attacked before and after their team’s Europa League match against Ajax

www.telegraph.co.uk

Israeli soccer fans were attacked in Amsterdam. The violence was condemned as antisemitic

Dutch authorities say people on scooters attacked Israeli fans overnight after a soccer game in Amsterdam apparently fueled by calls to target Jewish people spread online.

apnews.com

Perfect case study? Please elaborate
Did I mention an Israeli gang? Apologies must have missed that in my post

Re case study, I refer to proving my point about laziness...

You said:

"Are you condoning the vicious assaults on individuals by gangs?"

I said:

"I do not condone violence as you describe." I then provided evidence of an Israeli gang beating up an individual. Do you condone that example?


I cannot read the article from the Telegraph as it's behind a paywall. Can you copy it?

Wrt to the report saying "apparently riled up by calls on social media to target Jewish people" that doesn't sound particularly definitive evidence of people calling themselves "Jew Hunters".

However, if the reports are accurate that innocent Israeli fans were targeted with violence, I certainly condemn that. Indeed I condemn violence and vigilantism against even those chanting racist and openly genocidal chants as presented.

But tell me. Why do you not condemn the Islamaphobic chants of the Israeli? The violence they subjected people and property to while in a foreign nation?

From your investigations, how many Israelis were arrested? Who was hospitalised? It's all pretty vague from what you've presented. It could be that Dutch people were hospitalised on the strength of that report.

 

[cryrst]

Re case study, I refer to proving my point about laziness...

You said:

"Are you condoning the vicious assaults on individuals by gangs?"

I said:

"I do not condone violence as you describe." I then provided evidence of an Israeli gang beating up an individual. Do you condone that example?

Jeez I need speed to read your posts. This is a forum not an exam.

 

[Badadmcmad]

I have two questions for you:

1. Should the state of Israel exist?

2. Did the Holocaust happen?

LOL! Let me get my bingo card out!

1. I'll let the UN Special Rapporteur answer the first question. She does it far more succinctly than I could.

2. Yes.

Questions for you:

1. What defines a genocide?

2. Given the stated objective of the ruling Likid party in Israel is to have solely Israeli sovereignty from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean Sea, have the any of the actions of the Isralie state since its inception and history including the past year shown an intent to achieve that goal?

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

And as a bonus question:

3. According to the Holocaust museum in the US, how many of the facets of a fascist regime can you identify with the current Israeli regime. You will get bonus points for linking examples.

 

[Badadmcmad]

Jeez I need speed to read your posts. This is a forum not an exam.

Thanks. You prove my point about laziness quite well...

If people want to discuss complex problems in 2 sentences or less, then no one is going to actually learn anything especially with geopolitics and an issue that spans several generations and that ties in to our politics domestically as well.

 

[Penge Eagle]

LOL! Let me get my bingo card out!

1. I'll let the UN Special Rapporteur answer the first question. She does it far more succinctly than I could.

2. Yes.

Questions for you:

1. What defines a genocide?

2. Given the stated objective of the ruling Likid party in Israel is to have solely Israeli sovereignty from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean Sea, have the any of the actions of the Isralie state since its inception and history including the past year shown an intent to achieve that goal?

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

And as a bonus question:

3. According to the Holocaust museum in the US, how many of the facets of a fascist regime can you identify with the current Israeli regime. You will get bonus points for linking examples.

Nice cop-out... Just for clarity, I'd like to hear your answer and not a video: Do you think Israel has the right to exist?

 

[Penge Eagle]

LOL! Let me get my bingo card out!

1. I'll let the UN Special Rapporteur answer the first question. She does it far more succinctly than I could.

2. Yes.

Questions for you:

1. What defines a genocide?

2. Given the stated objective of the ruling Likid party in Israel is to have solely Israeli sovereignty from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean Sea, have the any of the actions of the Isralie state since its inception and history including the past year shown an intent to achieve that goal?

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

And as a bonus question:

3. According to the Holocaust museum in the US, how many of the facets of a fascist regime can you identify with the current Israeli regime. You will get bonus points for linking examples.

Hamas has explicitly called for the genocide of Jews in their founding document
.
If Israel is committing genocide then they're not doing a very good job if it. Since withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, the Palestinian population has increased by almost one million people. The same number for the West Bank. The death toll is about 30,000 (c10,000 terrorists), with a large number of civilians killed by Hamas by misfiring rockets.

Bashar al-Assad is said to have slaughtered 600,000 Arab Muslims. Around 300,000 have been killed in Yemen. Is this not actual genocide? I can't remember seeing many large protests in London about this or the genocide of the Uyghurs in China. But then the country is sadly full of anti-Semites such as yourself.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Part 1

Yes, following the money, the US economy underpins the funding (to the tune of many billions of dollars) to arm Israel and enable its genocide in the region. The US tax payer underpins the money sent to Israel which they spend on US weapons which are used to ethnically cleanse Palestine. The military complex gets paid, the Israeli regime gets what it wants (expansion), the Israel lobby (AIPAC and others) pay handsomely to elect senators as well as MPs in the UK.

----------

Yep.....I wouldn't use the word genocide though as the US intention. That may be the position of certain leaders in the current Israeli government but American Jewish leaders tend to be far more supportive of a two state solution rather than genocide. However, if it came down to a choice they certainly would do everything they could for the homeland.

Do I think these American Jews should be putting Israel first over America.....Nope, but hey, that's how it works with Arab Americans as well.....they put their ancestral homes first as well.

"Obviously Britain needs to be practical and live in financial reality, but by the same token, we aren't someone's b1tch..."

I disagree strongly. The UK is very much beholden to the US. This has been the case really since WW2 where we saw the UK handing over much of what you would consider its IP and industry (jet engine tech for example) to the US in return for the US's intervention and assistance in the war. Skip to 20 years ago, you have Blair bending over backwards and entering the UK into an illegal invasion of Iraq under false pretences of the existence of WMDs all to the benefit of oil cartel and the neo-liberal machine (Cheney, Halliburton etc). Insight to the the modern day situation is described here

The hot take highlighted in the first seconds is that the UK is still selling industry to the yanks. You can add L3Harris, Cobham etc.

Annually it is estimated that the UK pay the US £100bill annually based on US investments. Amazon Web Services underpin UK security service infrastructure instead of our own, the interview and book cite many others.

----------

You misunderstand me here, I'm saying we shouldn't be anyone's 'b1tch' exactly because I believe in a nation's right to independent policy.....I don't like foreign lobbies influencing politicians with money and job inducements, even if I agree with a policy they are pushing.....it's corruption.

However, I'm recognising that we are a client state of the US for the practical reasons that I stated. I'm stating dissatisfaction with that situation......Not because of the nature of the policy, but just on the grounds that it isn't organic but instead one we are obliged to follow......and then have our politicians pretend that everything is organic.

"I would also agree with you on the real intention of the Israeli government.....with the important fact, that just as with Arabs and Palestinians there is opposition to their positions. A minority within both but it's an important fact because when we get a situation where people are being beaten on the streets that goes out the window."

Not 100% sure on what you're saying here tbh. The Likud charter is a matter of record. It is fact. It is entirely consistent with the actions of Netneyahu and his predecessors. The ongoing creep of illegal occupation, ethnic cleansing and resettlement. That is the Zionist project.

In the same breath you mention Arabs and Palestinians (as general groups - not reasonably specific groups such as Hezbollah or Hamas, but the whole ethnic or national group). If you could just clarify the point you are making, that would be helpful.

I very much recognise the distinction between the fascist and non-fascist elements of Israeli society. For brevity, I refer to the Israeli regime and do not tar all with the same brush. There are very many heroic and brave Israeli Jews who staunchly oppose the genocide. That fact is not in question and really goes without saying because they are not the problem. The same is said of Palestinians, and Arabs. There are the fanatics, the fascists the religious nutters.

In your last paragraph here you seem to have understood what I was saying. I'm saying that when it comes to people being attacked in the streets because they are Jewish or Arabs....as has happened in this incident with Jews, you reach the point where what someone actually believes doesn't matter and that all that matters is which tribe they are and that innocents can get caught up in that.....So I was just making that point.

 

[Penge Eagle]

LOL! Let me get my bingo card out!

1. I'll let the UN Special Rapporteur answer the first question. She does it far more succinctly than I could.

2. Yes.

Questions for you:

1. What defines a genocide?

2. Given the stated objective of the ruling Likid party in Israel is to have solely Israeli sovereignty from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean Sea, have the any of the actions of the Isralie state since its inception and history including the past year shown an intent to achieve that goal?

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

And as a bonus question:

3. According to the Holocaust museum in the US, how many of the facets of a fascist regime can you identify with the current Israeli regime. You will get bonus points for linking examples.

The Likud party strongly supported the Trump Peace Plan in 2020 for a two-state solution. Your link is out of date.

The party also played a key role in forming the 2020 Abraham Accords which established formal diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations. That is a very good thing.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Part 2

-----------
On Owen Jones. You criticise him for not being objective. You cast aspersions that he is a communist. So what? Is what he has presented in the supplied factual and truthful? Do you have objective evidence to disprove his assertions?
In this case, it is clear you are not being objective but prejudicial. You engage in an ad hominem attack without challenging, objectively the evidence and arguments he has presented. This is clear and obvious hypocrisy when you state Jones "can hardly be seen as objective in any analysis on this topic."
Owen Jones at least has a First Class Honours Degree from Oxford in History. He describes himself as a democratic socialist - not a communist.

Interview: Owen Jones

'Welfare cuts are going to inflict misery on hundreds of thousands; it's going to destroy lives...', the popular left-wing commentator and author of 'Chavs' tells Varsity

www.varsity.co.uk

With respect, I refer you to my ending statements of my post regarding laziness etc.

People who use the term 'democratic socialist' are describing adherence to a form of western neo communism. By that I mean his economic policies are socialist but his social policies are neo Maoist and thus communist. I've listened long enough to Owen Jones to know that.....Let's not forget that his close friend Ash Sakar let that mask slip when she described herself as a communist to Piers Morgan.....another irritating berk, but at least not a communist.

Jones isn't objective on this topic as he is fully within the Palestinian camp.....I wouldn't call him anti Semitic but he is fully anti Zionist..not unexpected in a communist as they are against nationalism in all its forms.

-------------
'I don't agree with the importation of blood feuds into this or European countries.'
Am I correct in understanding from this point you make that you consider upholding our responsibilities under international humanitarian law as it relates to providing refuge and asylum for those subject to persecution as 'the importation of blood feuds'? Please correct me if i'm wrong in that interpretation.
If I am correct, should you not be arguing against the presence of the other side of the coin? What I mean is that you argue that presumably Palestinian refugees shouldn't be given asylum in European countries because of their blood feud... but don't the anti-Palestinian types also have a blood feud which you should also challenge?
I might be incorrect in my understanding of what you are saying here so please correct me if I'm wrong.

The problem with your contention here is that Jews have been in Britain in reasonable numbers since before the Normans. They have a history in these isles. This is not true for Arabs, who haven't existed in significant numbers until post WW2.

So yes, I'm fully against the importation of a foreign blood feuds into the streets of Europe and more specifically Britain. These conflicts should not be brought here and people wanting to live the trauma of foreign enmities on British soil should be deported as trouble makers.

Why should I care what some 'international' law says? Other countries ignore them....for example, Saudi, Egypt and Yemen are close countries to Palestine and natural cultural enclaves for Arabs. Why aren't they 'upholding their responsibilities'? No, this is Europe and Europe is for Europeans and not just some piece of dirt you can claim as your own. This is the same attitude all over the world including Arab lands themselves.....just as Africa is for Africans or Iran is for Iranians for example.

--------------
"I try to be honest as I see it so I can agree with you somewhat on Likud's intentions. They made these decisions a long time ago, however I could point to Hamas and say much the same thing."
Yet you acknowledge that Israel's intentions have not changed and I'm sure you'll agree their actions are 100% in line with that original charter (Netenyahu did show maps after all and is exterminating the Palestinian population from the region). [Aside, there is also a quote from a former UK ambassador from a dinner event where he quotes Netenyahu saying the next war will be the last].

My personal view is that Netanyahu's view on a greater Israel has been his position for decades and that he is attempting to move the needle in that direction. Whether he will succeed or not we will see.

You describe it as Israel's position but I think you'd agree that within Israel itself there is considerable resistance to Netanyahu's approach......I wouldn't know myself what the breakdown would be between support for a greater Israel or two state solution.....Personally I don't think either solution work that well.....Especially since America obviously don't appear keen on the greater Israel project (despite weapons supply) due to its relations with important countries in the region.....Are they being two faced on that? Don't know.

In terms of this 'oh it was a long time ago' non-argument, what does the most recent Hamas charter say, for instance? I believe, and I'll let you confirm, that their fight is against the ocupation and the Zionist project and that they seek a 2 state solution based on 1967 Oslo accords. That update I think was 2018. So I'd argue that Hamas (which is not universally supported), objectively have shifted position since their original charter of 1988 (IIRC), whereas Likud haven't since 1977.

I'm English what has any of that got to do with me? My own country is being invaded by foreigners and I'm meant to care about which semite runs that patch of the middle east? Sure I have an opinion on the rights and wrongs of the situation but ultimately what do they care what I think?....And what has it to do with me? I don't expect them to care about our problems so the same should apply.

As for Hamas changing their charter.....Yeah, I would regard any agreement they made as purely a staging point. They won't be happy until the Jews are gone from the land. Any nationalist would think the same, so I don't trust changes made that would appeal to two states when the Palestinians are very weak......If they were strong they would do exactly the same to the Jews as what's happening now.

-------------
I'll not go into ancient religious conflicts by region further than to say that Europe is probably close to 100% Christian as much as the middle East, as you postulate, is 100% muslim. I wonder how Europe might have come to be so? A peaceful and respectful exchange of ideas? Or war? I don't think your arguments on that front are going to particularly sound or persuasive.

'Europe is probably close to 100% Christian as much as the middle East, as you postulate, is 100% muslim?'

I suspect you aren't on actual drugs but you might as well be with that statement. If you think Europe is nearly 100 percent Christian try visiting a church. I think you'd end up revising that opinion.

Sure, it's true that Christianity was spread by the sword just as Islam was. But the elimination of Judaism and Christianity from the middle east was a far more recent occurrence and one that is maintrained up till this day. For example, mosques are being built in Britain but Churches aren't allowed to be built in Saudi.....What Christians exist in middle eastern countries often have to hide and are treated as second class citizens.....Jews flee or suffer the consequences.

As I stated, Muslims expect tolerance in Europe but are intolerant in their own lands.

"So sorry if I regard this one eyed focus on Israel as a very modern reading that's missing a mirror"
The issue here is that Israel is committing a genocide at this exact moment. My position is that genocide is about the worst thing one group can do to another and it should be stopped. I mean, we were taught all about the Nazis at school and how bad they were, right? So why are we supporting a genocide now? Why should we not be focussed on that? The Palestinians are not exterminating the Jews - they are utterly incapable of doing so. The Arab world, are not targetting Israeli citizens in their retaliations to Israeli aggression as evidenced by the Iranian rocket attack that sadly killed 1 Palestinian but objectively only targetted military installations...
I'm afraid that you are being lazy here and just parroting Israeli propaganda (yes, I have heard your exact talking points regarding the ancient history before from Israeli propagandists). This line of argument is very weak and not demonstrative of critical thinking, I'm saddened to say.
-------------

Personally I understand what Netanyahu is doing, do I agree with it? No.....However, that's easy for me to say. Also, as stated this is s foreign conflict that is none of my business.

If this 'genocide' must be stopped then that's the job of the countries in the region. Israel is literally surrounded by Arab countries. If it's a genocide of Arabs then let them deal with it.....Just as it should be them dealing with any refugees.

I'm parroting Israeli propaganda am I? That's somewhat amusing as I remember being called anti semitic recently.

"The people who should resolve this issue are the region itself with the UN ensuring fair treatment.....but we know that's not going to happen due to the lack of objectivity and lobbies. "
"In addition to financial and military aid, the U.S. provides large-scale political support, having used its United Nations Security Council veto power 42 times against resolutions condemning Israel, out of 83 times in which its veto has been used."
- Israel–United States relations - Wikipedia.
So there have been plenty of UN resolutions to condemn Israeli actions. Yet they are consistently vetoed by the US, stymieing effective action.
The UK have abstained which does not act in the interest of resolution rather continuation and procrastination. When you consider the evidence of the influence of the Israeli lobby (which you accept is present), then it's really not a leap to understand the position.

UN General Assembly demands Israel ends occupation of Palestinian territories

Israel denounces the Palestinian-drafted, non-binding resolution as "diplomatic terrorism".

www.bbc.co.uk

The UK’s explanation of vote on the UN General Assembly resolution on the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories

Explanation of vote by Ambassador Barbara Woodward, UK Permanent Representative to the UN, on the UN General Assembly resolution on the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories – Wednesday 18 September 2024.

www.gov.uk

When you also consider the military support the UK offers to Israel, including parts supply of F35 fighters which have been documented as being used in the bombing and murder of civilians and the airborne surveillance the UK has undertaken on behalf of the Israeli state, then any notion that the UK is not complicit or involved is for the birds.
"Regardless, it has bugger all to do with Britain" - this is utter tosh, I'm afraid.

I would say that I don't agree with the British participation in any of this, however as I stated earlier the reason this is done is for financial, trade, and for maintaining client status with the US.

I'll add that historically, the UK was pivotal in the creation of Israel and has been very closely involved with its military industrial complex. The UK has the like of Elbit systems, and Israeli owned defence contractor and its decision to ban only a small number of arms licenses is an admission that the UK considers itself potentially complicit in war crimes based on the continued supply of Israel.
-------------------

I wouldn't deny any of this.....though our involvement with Israel is minimal in real terms. America/Israel is the reality.

"When you say to Holers don't be lazy or be morons I think you are mostly missing out the fact that it's not really either of those.....they have chosen a side and while I might position myself as being an unapproving observer of these foreign tragedies I personally think that individuals....Just as you have.....get that choice."
You touch on an important observation of human behaviour. The choosing of sides. Tribalism has a purpose and there is an innate desire for humans to form tribes.
However, it is also one of human kinds greatest stumbling blocks. Nazis were a tribe and did horrific things - more than likely there were some who, if not for the peer pressure that comes with belonging to a tribe, wouldn't have done the heinous acts they did.
When I refer to people being lazy and morons, it's likely partly due to frustration at individuals' inability to see when this sense of tribalism, or cultishness at its extreme end, prevents them from making sound, objective and principled choices.

Tribes, political or ethnic are inevitable.....you call them a human 'stumbling block', I would recognise that sometimes that's the case, however I suggest that this is a fundamental problem the left have with human nature.....they think it's fixable, when the stark reality is no it isn't and you're only going to worsen outcomes trying (which they have...the 'blank slate' for example).....The reality is that human nature can only be usefully directed up to a limited point.

It's not a human flaw anymore than the accident of our births were, it just is.

I would agree with you that what's happening in these far away lands is a tragedy.

Don't get me wrong, as I've eluded to in this response, the laziness is also apparent in arguments that are put forward. I have highlighted, with evidence some of those times where I think you've just not done your homework and have presented bad arguments that had you spent time researching properly, you may well have thought differently or come up with a more persuasive and justifiable argument.
There are limits and I hope people can pick my arguments apart as that helps me to broaden my understanding. What helps me is to be self critical and also ask what I don't know and be honest about it. Then seek that knowledge...

I would say I've spent far more time thinking about this blood feud over the years than I would have liked to. Being English I don't think it belongs here and I advocate for a more isolationist approach towards nations when it comes to intervening in their affairs.

 

[Spiderman]

Re case study, I refer to proving my point about laziness...

You said:

"Are you condoning the vicious assaults on individuals by gangs?"

I said:

"I do not condone violence as you describe." I then provided evidence of an Israeli gang beating up an individual. Do you condone that example?


I cannot read the article from the Telegraph as it's behind a paywall. Can you copy it?

Wrt to the report saying "apparently riled up by calls on social media to target Jewish people" that doesn't sound particularly definitive evidence of people calling themselves "Jew Hunters".

However, if the reports are accurate that innocent Israeli fans were targeted with violence, I certainly condemn that. Indeed I condemn violence and vigilantism against even those chanting racist and openly genocidal chants as presented.

But tell me. Why do you not condemn the Islamaphobic chants of the Israeli? The violence they subjected people and property to while in a foreign nation?

From your investigations, how many Israelis were arrested? Who was hospitalised? It's all pretty vague from what you've presented. It could be that Dutch people were hospitalised on the strength of that report.

Thank God I thought you were going to say I was the perfect case study of a pretentious obnoxious individual! We dont want any of those on here, do we?
I would have thought the WhatsApp group “ hunt Jews” may have been a clue but there we go.
Is your evidence any more reliable than that you are trying to dismiss? I quote “IF the reports are accurate” so you are not prepared to accept those as fact but you are prepared to accept the video ( and Owen Jones’s version) as fact. IF it is true, of course I don’t condone it, I dislike violence of any kind, as I hate any hateful chanting.
People being surrounded and asked for their passports and if they are Jewish. Obviously you will not accept this account given the outlet but hey Ho,

Jewish Londoner hospitalised after saving Israeli in Amsterdam - Jewish News

EXCLUSIVE: Aaron from Hendon was surrounded by a violent gang of 10 after intervening after a football match between Maccabi Tel Aviv and AFC Ajax.

www.jewishnews.co.uk

Only four anti-Israel Amsterdam ‘pogrom’ attackers remain in custody after 63 detained

There were 63 people detained following the Thursday night horror when local anti-Israel gangs targeted Maccabi Tel Aviv soccer fans.

nypost.com

Looks like this MAY have been premeditated.
By the way there does not seem to be any breakdown of those arrested although it seems on,y 4 still in custody. Hope this helps

 

[Badadmcmad]

Nice cop-out... Just for clarity, I'd like to hear your answer and not a video: Do you think Israel has the right to exist?

I agree with her sentiment that the international community has agreed that Israel has a right to exist, by virtue of Israel's entry into the UN.

It is no cop out but a more intellectually robust answer than perhaps you have considered.

Countries and nations have always argued and fought over borders and territory. The idea of countries and nations is not universal. Bedouin peoples of the middle east would wander over the land. They have just as much right to exist as anyone else. Various tribes through history will live from the land nomadically yet just because they don't plant a flag and draw lines on a map or erect walls to segregate themselves from others, also does not diminish their right to exist.

I place the right of people to exist peacefully ahead of any notion of a 'State' having the right to exist. I would tentatively postulate that States should exist such that all people may live in peaceful coexistence.

Put another way, we're all human. The sooner we as a species can get past petty tribalism, we might actually start to advance rather than regress.

Now, do you have a response to my questions?

 

[Rudi Hedman]

I agree with her sentiment that the international community has agreed that Israel has a right to exist, by virtue of Israel's entry into the UN.

It is no cop out but a more intellectually robust answer than perhaps you have considered.

Countries and nations have always argued and fought over borders and territory. The idea of countries and nations is not universal. Bedouin peoples of the middle east would wander over the land. They have just as much right to exist as anyone else. Various tribes through history will live from the land nomadically yet just because they don't plant a flag and draw lines on a map or erect walls to segregate themselves from others, also does not diminish their right to exist.

I place the right of people to exist peacefully ahead of any notion of a 'State' having the right to exist. I would tentatively postulate that States should exist such that all people may live in peaceful coexistence.

Put another way, we're all human. The sooner we as a species can get past petty tribalism, we might actually start to advance rather than regress.

Now, do you have a response to my questions?

Sure, everyone has a right to exist. Question is where. If a gypsy or refugee camp set up say on your close or on the nearest piece of grass outside your home, you might think otherwise, even if it’s in secret behind closed doors.

‘Getting past petty tribalism’ as you put it sounds like one of those leftie frustrations of something towards countries and borders. War and conflict is never going to stop. Why would it? It’s unfortunately part of human nature. Maybe accepting that and managing things better before they escalate might improve situations.

 

[Badadmcmad]

Hamas has explicitly called for the genocide of Jews in their founding document
.
If Israel is committing genocide then they're not doing a very good job if it. Since withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, the Palestinian population has increased by almost one million people. The same number for the West Bank. The death toll is about 30,000 (c10,000 terrorists), with a large number of civilians killed by Hamas by misfiring rockets.

Bashar al-Assad is said to have slaughtered 600,000 Arab Muslims. Around 300,000 have been killed in Yemen. Is this not actual genocide? I can't remember seeing many large protests in London about this or the genocide of the Uyghurs in China. But then the country is sadly full of anti-Semites such as yourself.

Oh dear. You really are far down the rabbit hole.

You complain about supposed cop out answers and here you straight up don't answer the questions asked.

As you said previously: "I'd like to hear your answer" to my question number 1 and we'll go from there (hint there is an internationally agreed upon definition).

 

[Penge Eagle]

I agree with her sentiment that the international community has agreed that Israel has a right to exist, by virtue of Israel's entry into the UN.

It is no cop out but a more intellectually robust answer than perhaps you have considered.

Countries and nations have always argued and fought over borders and territory. The idea of countries and nations is not universal. Bedouin peoples of the middle east would wander over the land. They have just as much right to exist as anyone else. Various tribes through history will live from the land nomadically yet just because they don't plant a flag and draw lines on a map or erect walls to segregate themselves from others, also does not diminish their right to exist.

I place the right of people to exist peacefully ahead of any notion of a 'State' having the right to exist. I would tentatively postulate that States should exist such that all people may live in peaceful coexistence.

Put another way, we're all human. The sooner we as a species can get past petty tribalism, we might actually start to advance rather than regress.

Now, do you have a response to my questions?

It's a simple yes or no answer. It doesn't need any rambling.

Do you think Israel has the right to exist?

 

[Badadmcmad]

The Likud party strongly supported the Trump Peace Plan in 2020 for a two-state solution. Your link is out of date.

The party also played a key role in forming the 2020 Abraham Accords which established formal diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations. That is a very good thing.

Where is the Likud's updated charter?

I mentioned that Hamas updated its charter in 2017 (apologies i misremembered the year previously stating 2018).

There are many changes to the Hamas charters. To the point that one could argue, as you have done, that the original is out of date. So in the interest of not being overtly and entirely hypocritical in your argumentation, let's work from the latest published charters.

Could you please provide the up to date Likud party charter and highlight the parts where it no longer states its explicit intent to expand Israel from river to the sea.

Here is a link to the Hamas charter of 2017 with a couple of highlighted sections.

Hamas in 2017: The document in full

Hamas explains general principles and objectives in 42-article document

www.middleeasteye.net

"16. Hamas affirms that its conflict is with the Zionist project not with the Jews because of their religion. Hamas does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine. Yet, it is the Zionists who constantly identify Judaism and the Jews with their own colonial project and illegal entity."

"20. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus."


--------------

"The 1967 border, which is defined as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th 1967, is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine. A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967. The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the occupied State of Palestine, including East Jerusalem."

Borders

The delineation and demarcation of agreed upon borders are central to reaching an end of conflict on the basis of the two-state solution. A State of Palestine based on pre June 4th 1967 border with East Jerusalem as its Capital. The Palestinian position on borders has undergone a significant...

www.nad.ps

 

[Penge Eagle]

Where is the Likud's updated charter?

I mentioned that Hamas updated its charter in 2017 (apologies i misremembered the year previously stating 2018).

There are many changes to the Hamas charters. To the point that one could argue, as you have done, that the original is out of date. So in the interest of not being overtly and entirely hypocritical in your argumentation, let's work from the latest published charters.

Could you please provide the up to date Likud party charter and highlight the parts where it no longer states its explicit intent to expand Israel from river to the sea.

Here is a link to the Hamas charter of 2017 with a couple of highlighted sections.

Hamas in 2017: The document in full

Hamas explains general principles and objectives in 42-article document

www.middleeasteye.net

"16. Hamas affirms that its conflict is with the Zionist project not with the Jews because of their religion. Hamas does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine. Yet, it is the Zionists who constantly identify Judaism and the Jews with their own colonial project and illegal entity."

"20. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus."


--------------

"The 1967 border, which is defined as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th 1967, is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine. A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967. The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the occupied State of Palestine, including East Jerusalem."

Borders

The delineation and demarcation of agreed upon borders are central to reaching an end of conflict on the basis of the two-state solution. A State of Palestine based on pre June 4th 1967 border with East Jerusalem as its Capital. The Palestinian position on borders has undergone a significant...

www.nad.ps

Ok, it's good to know we have a spokesman for proscribed terrorist group Hamas on the boards. That's fine, I'm all for free speech.

I've read through the 2017 document – which Hamas (Mahmoud al-Zahar) says does not replace its original charter – is a crap PR attempt to make the terrorists not appear like the evil Nazi scum that they are.

It says it is willing to accept a territorial compromise but still does not recognises Israel's right to exist anywhere on the land and continues to advocate for violence against Israel.

 

[Badadmcmad]

People who use the term 'democratic socialist' are describing adherence to a form of western neo communism. By that I mean his economic policies are socialist but his social policies are neo Maoist and thus communist. I've listened long enough to Owen Jones to know that.....Let's not forget that his close friend Ash Sakar let that mask slip when she described herself as a communist to Piers Morgan.....another irritating berk, but at least not a communist.

Jones isn't objective on this topic as he is fully within the Palestinian camp.....I wouldn't call him anti Semitic but he is fully anti Zionist..not unexpected in a communist as they are against nationalism in all its forms.

It's human nature to want to pigeonhole people and ideas because it makes things easier. Just as you have done here. What you do here is link someone to a political ideology which you object to, and thus ignore/disregard the specific information presented. Now there are questions I have have with the piece Jones presents. There are some gaps in the information, for sure. But evidence is provided to support the assertions made. Communist or not, facts don't care for your prejudices.

Ironically, one of the main points in Jones' piece is that he objectively points out the misframing of the violent scenes by the BBC.

I suspect you are missing the fact that objectively, the State of Israel is actively committing what is defined, internationally, as a genocide and that, objectively, a portion of its citizens are fascists and revelling in the murder and displacement of a significant proportion of another people based on their proximity to land they wish to colonise and now, more generally (as evidenced from the chants), based on ethnicity.

Jones' supposed communism, has, objectively nothing to do with the facts as presented. That is a failing of your own objectiveness - if indeed that is something you are trying to be.

-------------------------------------

The problem with your contention here is that Jews have been in Britain in reasonable numbers since before the Normans. They have a history in these isles. This is not true for Arabs, who haven't existed in significant numbers until post WW2.

So yes, I'm fully against the importation of a foreign blood feuds into the streets of Europe and more specifically Britain. These conflicts should not be brought here and people wanting to live the trauma of foreign enmities on British soil should be deported as trouble makers.

Why should I care what some 'international' law says? Other countries ignore them....for example, Saudi, Egypt and Yemen are close countries to Palestine and natural cultural enclaves for Arabs. Why aren't they 'upholding their responsibilities'? No, this is Europe and Europe is for Europeans and not just some piece of dirt you can claim as your own. This is the same attitude all over the world including Arab lands themselves.....just as Africa is for Africans or Iran is for Iranians for example.

I find you position entirely unstable and incongruent as well as ambiguous without an ounce of objectivity that can be applied.

Is it your argument that because some Jews were in the UK, before WW2 it's OK for them to be here and more of them may migrate or seek asylum etc. But because fewer Muslims were in the UK, and maybe more Jews were here at this arbitrary time, then it's not ok.

So how do you feel about Hindus and Muslims from India and Pakistan coming to the country, or is there historical animosity to one another not a 'blood feud' as you put it? What defines a 'blood feud'?

This is all very unconvincing and smacks of bigotry.

Considering the UK's complicity in creating the issues people flee from. Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Myanmar, Iraq... Palestine. You say don't bring your s*** here after the UK's meddling is often a significant part of why these people are being displaced or persecuted.

You proclaim the UK is innocent as if it has done nothing. Never broken international law. Which is objectively false. It is just hypocrisy to criticise other countries for breaking international law, when the UK has also... bad argument.

Europe is for Europeans... well maybe America is for the Native population, or Palestine is for the Palestinians not a Zionist colonial project.

Yeah, your argument here is just lazy, moronic bogitry.
---------------------------

My personal view is that Netanyahu's view on a greater Israel has been his position for decades and that he is attempting to move the needle in that direction. Whether he will succeed or not we will see.

Correct.

You describe it as Israel's position but I think you'd agree that within Israel itself there is considerable resistance to Netanyahu's approach......I wouldn't know myself what the breakdown would be between support for a greater Israel or two state solution.....Personally I don't think either solution work that well.....Especially since America obviously don't appear keen on the greater Israel project (despite weapons supply) due to its relations with important countries in the region.....Are they being two faced on that? Don't know.

Here is some poll data. I cannot vouch for its reliability, but it does, anecdotally match with what I've heard reported. Happy to be corrected on if this is reasonable.

But based on this information, the vast majority of Israelis were happy with the degree of bombing and destruction as of April 2024. There have been escalations and expansion of violence to Lebanon of course now, but I'd say, Israel pretty much overwhelmingly support the genocide.

I'm English what has any of that got to do with me? My own country is being invaded by foreigners and I'm meant to care about which semite runs that patch of the middle east? Sure I have an opinion on the rights and wrongs of the situation but ultimately what do they care what I think?....And what has it to do with me? I don't expect them to care about our problems so the same should apply.

You elect leaders who spend taxes to support the Israeli regime's genocide. Displacing millions, some of whom you would say bring their 'blood feud' to the UK as refugees.

It's not a tenuous link. It's quite clear. It's quite obvious.

-------

As for Hamas changing their charter.....Yeah, I would regard any agreement they made as purely a staging point. They won't be happy until the Jews are gone from the land. Any nationalist would think the same, so I don't trust changes made that would appeal to two states when the Palestinians are very weak......If they were strong they would do exactly the same to the Jews as what's happening now.

Zionists by their updated words. Of course, to mirror your observation, Jews existed in reasonable numbers in the region for a long time. Hamas identify the Zionist project which is one dependent on the displacement and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population for its success.

---------

'Europe is probably close to 100% Christian as much as the middle East, as you postulate, is 100% muslim?'

I suspect you aren't on actual drugs but you might as well be with that statement. If you think Europe is nearly 100 percent Christian try visiting a church. I think you'd end up revising that opinion.

Sure, it's true that Christianity was spread by the sword just as Islam was. But the elimination of Judaism and Christianity from the middle east was a far more recent occurrence and one that is maintrained up till this day. For example, mosques are being built in Britain but Churches aren't allowed to be built in Saudi.....What Christians exist in middle eastern countries often have to hide and are treated as second class citizens.....Jews flee or suffer the consequences.

As I stated, Muslims expect tolerance in Europe but are intolerant in their own lands.

91.4% Muslim in the mid-east, 74.5% Christians in Europe by the references below. So both wrong, who gives a s***. The vast majorities in both cases are as described.

Europe

Europe is the only region projected to see a decline in its total population between 2010 and 2050. Although Christians will continue to be the largest

www.pewresearch.org

Region: Middle East-North Africa

The Muslim population in the Middle East-North Africa region is expected to grow by more than a third (37%) in the next 20 years. It is projected to grow

www.pewresearch.org

Why do you care about building churches in 100% muslim countries?

-----------------

Personally I understand what Netanyahu is doing, do I agree with it? No.....However, that's easy for me to say. Also, as stated this is s foreign conflict that is none of my business.

If your elected government is funding genocide with your country's resources, then yeah... it has something to do with you.

If this 'genocide' must be stopped then that's the job of the countries in the region. Israel is literally surrounded by Arab countries. If it's a genocide of Arabs then let them deal with it.....Just as it should be them dealing with any refugees.

How many Palestinian refugees has Israel taken in?

I would say that I don't agree with the British participation in any of this, however as I stated earlier the reason this is done is for financial, trade, and for maintaining client status with the US.

I wouldn't deny any of this.....though our involvement with Israel is minimal in real terms. America/Israel is the reality.

Ok, so you accept Britain is helping, but you remove yourself from any responsibility for Britains actions. It's understandable to feel powerless and to feel like nothing you can do would make any difference. But to say the actions of the British government have have nothing to do with you in what is supposed to be a representative democracy where we can vote for our government... now who's on drugs?

Helping genocide a little bit is ok then. Gotcha. Maybe lower the drug intake.

Tribes, political or ethnic are inevitable.....you call them a human 'stumbling block', I would recognise that sometimes that's the case, however I suggest that this is a fundamental problem the left have with human nature.....they think it's fixable, when the stark reality is no it isn't and you're only going to worsen outcomes trying (which they have...the 'blank slate' for example).....The reality is that human nature can only be usefully directed up to a limited point.

It's not a human flaw anymore than the accident of our births were, it just is.

I would agree with you that what's happening in these far away lands is a tragedy.

Not familiar with 'blank slate'. Can you elaborate?

Where i'd disagree is that the 'right' is not at all shy of trying to 'fix' human nature. Religion is all about changing human nature. Communism at least would attempt to fix people of their desire for religion.

So yeah, I'd argue that it's human nature to try 'fix' the behaviour of others. It's not a left vs right thing in the slightest.

I'd perhaps reframe the argument from 'fix' to 'educate'. Which is of course, a fundamental necessity for the continuation of society.

Otherwise you imply we're all just slave to our impulses. It most certainly can be argued for some.

I would say I've spent far more time thinking about this blood feud over the years than I would have liked to. Being English I don't think it belongs here and I advocate for a more isolationist approach towards nations when it comes to intervening in their affairs.

----------

I understand the appeal of isolationism. It is just ideology. Of course, if the world were a more harmonious place, then the dream of isolation, free from the dramas of geopolitical games and tribal feuds over land and resources would be that much more feasible.

The reality is upping your medication might be the only way to get closer to that.