Striving to make sense of the Middle East

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

5 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Possibly because the Jews had only just started immigrating to the area (mainly of European descent) where they had been previously a small minority. 

Forget the historical two millenia link to the area. It only happened to salve our (European) consciences as a late imperial dictat following our (not the Arabs) behaviour culminating in the holocaust.

Mid 19th century we're talking, but we're now heading onto the best part of a century on from the formal establishment of Israel. Multiple generations have been born in Israel as Israelis. It's a sovereign nation, both de jure and de facto. And Balfour predated the second world war.

The ship really should have sailed on people actually challenging and questioning Israel's right to exist at all but you and many others still do it. People do that like it's perfectly reasonable, while in any other context we'd be talking about hate speech and encouraging genocidal sentiments; then everyone wonders why there's no chance of peace while the Palestinians deludedly demand a 'one-state solution' according to polling data, while a growing proportion of Israelis cease to believe in a possible peaceful solution and start thinking about the only other solution that doesn't entail their own extinction and which their enemies openly state is their preferred fate for them and which they demonstrated they'd only too gladly do if October 7th was anything to go by (polling data also shows majority Palestinian support for October 7th).

Edited April 8 by littleyellowbirdie

[Aggy 765]

58 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Mid 19th century we're talking, but we're now heading onto the best part of a century on from the formal establishment of Israel. Multiple generations have been born in Israel as Israelis. It's a sovereign nation, both de jure and de facto. And Balfour predated the second world war.

The ship really should have sailed on people actually challenging and questioning Israel's right to exist at all but you and many others still do it. People do that like it's perfectly reasonable, while in any other context we'd be talking about hate speech and encouraging genocidal sentiments; then everyone wonders why there's no chance of peace while the Palestinians deludedly demand a 'one-state solution' according to polling data, while a growing proportion of Israelis cease to believe in a possible peaceful solution and start thinking about the only other solution that doesn't entail their own extinction and which their enemies openly state is their preferred fate for them and which they demonstrated they'd only too gladly do if October 7th was anything to go by (polling data also shows majority Palestinian support for October 7th).

Snore. Has anyone on these threads ever said Israel shouldn’t exist at all? 

Edited April 8 by Aggy

[Herman 9,820]

9 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Snore. Has anyone on these threads ever said Israel shouldn’t exist at all? 

No, no one at all has said this. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

15 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Snore. Has anyone on these threads ever said Israel shouldn’t exist at all? 

 

5 minutes ago, Herman said:

No, no one at all has said this. 

It is implied every time anyone points to the fact that Jews were a minority in the early 20th century or every time anyone says it shouldn't have been established there in the first place, or suggests it wouldn't exist if it wasn't for European guilt over the Holocaust, dismissing the fact that it does exist and has existed for the best part of a century with multiple generations born there as Israelis.

 

Edited April 8 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Mid 19th century we're talking, but we're now heading onto the best part of a century on from the formal establishment of Israel. Multiple generations have been born in Israel as Israelis. It's a sovereign nation, both de jure and de facto. And Balfour predated the second world war.

The ship really should have sailed on people actually challenging and questioning Israel's right to exist at all but you and many others still do it. People do that like it's perfectly reasonable, while in any other context we'd be talking about hate speech and encouraging genocidal sentiments; then everyone wonders why there's no chance of peace while the Palestinians deludedly demand a 'one-state solution' according to polling data, while a growing proportion of Israelis cease to believe in a possible peaceful solution and start thinking about the only other solution that doesn't entail their own extinction and which their enemies openly state is their preferred fate for them and which they demonstrated they'd only too gladly do if October 7th was anything to go by (polling data also shows majority Palestinian support for October 7th).

You were trying to compare Palestine to India pre division. India (Raj) had large Muslim and Hindu populations that had existed together for centuries ... not a minority that had expanded out of all recognition in a handful of years on some historic pretext.  

They really aren't comparable... although one could say the violence that followed on religious grounds following division does have similaries to the creation of a Jewish state in Arab lands... and then allowing religeous/nationalists extremes to flourish.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

30 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

You were trying to compare Palestine to India pre division. India (Raj) had large Muslim and Hindu populations that had existed together for centuries ... not a minority that had expanded out of all recognition in a handful of years on some historic pretext.  

They really aren't comparable... although one could say the violence that followed on religious grounds following division does have similaries to the creation of a Jewish state in Arab lands... and then allowing religeous/nationalists extremes to flourish.

I'm not trying to at all. The parallels are clear and irrefutable.

• separation from an existing territory establishing a theocratic nation state.
• Separation driven by the campaigning of religious minorities.
• Partitioning endorsed by a colonial power with the control of the territory at the time it was decreed(us for both, with the addition of UN resolution for Israel; both are UN-recognised states)

In addition, while there was indeed substantial Jewish immigration driven by World War 2, it's misleading to dismiss the existence of a substantial Jewish minority predating that by a large margin.

And all of it exposes the sheer hypocrisy that pervades the Islamic  world in refusing to reconcile itself to Israel's existence after all of this time (although granted some of the less fanatical parts have mostly reconciled themselves to it). In contrast, nobody contests Pakistan's right to exist as is common in the Muslim world regarding Israel.

Edit: Another uncomfortable parallel for those wishing to dismiss the Pakistan parallel as inconvenient is the steady decline of the Hindu minority in Pakistan post-separation (2.14% Hindu now in Pakistan, compared to 14.2% Muslim in India).

Actually, maybe that's unfair to call that last one a parallel since the proportion of Muslims who are Israeli citizens stands at 18.2%.

 

Edited April 8 by littleyellowbirdie

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

1 hour ago, Aggy said:

Snore. Has anyone on these threads ever said Israel shouldn’t exist at all? 

That's exactly what Yellow Fever implies when he says

Forget the historical two millenia link to the area.

That's what everybody who thinks there should be a two state solution is suggesting, when Hamas has told them a two state solution means Hamas intends to liquidate Israel.

Edited April 8 by Rock The Boat

[Naturalcynic 654]

9 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I'm not trying to at all. The parallels are clear and irrefutable.

• separation from an existing territory establishing a theocratic nation state.
• Separation driven by the campaigning of religious minorities.
• Partitioning endorsed by a colonial power with the control of the territory at the time it was decreed(us for both, with the addition of UN resolution for Israel; both are UN-recognised states)

In addition, while there was indeed substantial Jewish immigration driven by World War 2, it's misleading to dismiss the existence of a substantial Jewish minority predating that by a large margin.

And all of it exposes the sheer hypocrisy that pervades the Islamic  world in refusing to reconcile itself to Israel's existence after all of this time (although granted some of the less fanatical parts have mostly reconciled themselves to it). In contrast, nobody contests Pakistan's right to exist as is common in the Muslim world regarding Israel.

Edit: Another uncomfortable parallel for those wishing to dismiss the Pakistan parallel as inconvenient is the steady decline of the Hindu minority in Pakistan post-separation (2.14% Hindu now in Pakistan, compared to 14.2% Muslim in India).

Actually, maybe that's unfair to call that last one a parallel since the proportion of Muslims who are Israeli citizens stands at 18.2%.

 

Contrary to the predictable naysaying and accusations of whataboutery, it’s entirely appropriate to compare the establishment and subsequent history of Pakistan with that of Israel.  And you’re absolutely right that there’s absolutely no call from the usual suspects for Pakistan to be disestablished or even for it to stop meddling in Kashmir.  And this makes me question whether the  outrage and intolerance that the Muslim world (and many on the left) heap on Israel would exist at all if it had been an Islamic nation, and I suspect the answer would be a resounding no.  And why is this?  Quite simply because of the clear Islamic teaching of hatred for the Jews and consequently the whole premise for Muslim opposition to the existence of Israel since it was founded in 1948 is based purely and simply on antisemitism.

[ron obvious 1,514]

In my opinion the Balfour Declaration was a prime example of 'the road to Hell being paved with good intentions'. It has proved to be an unmitigated disaster: you cannot recreate a country which hasn't existed for 1,000 years.

Also I cannot help but be struck by the similarity in attitude to those who want unlimited immigration into this country - just so long as they live somewhere else.

BUT Israel is here, now, & it is not going to go away. There are NO EXCUSES foe Hamas' actions. 

Howard Jacobson wrote this article for Unherd. I'd forgotten how well he can write:

https://unherd.com/?p=495046?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3&utm_source=UnHerd+Today&utm_campaign=bd394638ab-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_04_05_01_53&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_79fd0df946-bd394638ab-[LIST_EMAIL_ID]

Edited April 9 by ron obvious

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

14 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

That's exactly what Yellow Fever implies when he says

Forget the historical two millenia link to the area.

That's what everybody who thinks there should be a two state solution is suggesting, when Hamas has told them a two state solution means Hamas intends to liquidate Israel.

I'm just stating historical facts about history or creation of the State of Israel - a  2000 year old nationalist (Zionist) dream and placing the overall problem in context. The state was created in an area that was already occupied by, and displaced others (the vasts majority) and which unsurprisingly then caused much violence in the aftermath of WW2. You can look up the history. My guess is if today faced with the same situation the world would act differently. However, whatever happened in the recent past (within living memory) we are where we are. A two state solution much as originally envisioned remains the only viable way to peace unless Israel wishes to become some sort of secular non-Jewish state. Clearly it can't continue as it is - even LYB's France (the original strongest military supporter of Israel) is contemplating sanctions!

Hamas is an unwelcome symptom not the underlying cause of the long term troubles in the region (c.f. the 'PLO' who eventually recognized Israel (Arafat) were secular but failed to achieve their two-state aims). Current Israeli actions will have only created zillions of new recruits to their cause (my enemies enemy etc) in the absence of any peaceful resolution or so called horizon to a two state solution.

This just isn't rocket science. It needs fresh bold new leaders on both sides able to move forward. Israel could start by stopping / clearing the recent 'outposts' and illegal settlements on the West Bank. 

I'll ignore the absurd shallow Israeli apologists/propagandists who treat any criticism of Israel as somehow pro-Hamas or antisemitic.  

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

2 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

In my opinion the Balfour Declaration was a prime example of 'the road to Hell being paved with good intentions'. It has proved to be an unmitigated disaster: you cannot recreate a country which hasn't existed for 1,000 years.

Also I cannot help but be struck by the similarity in attitude to those who want unlimited immigration into this country - just so long as they live somewhere else.

Howard Jacobson wrote this article for Unherd. I'd forgotten how well he can write:

https://unherd.com/?p=495046?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3&utm_source=UnHerd+Today&utm_campaign=bd394638ab-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_04_05_01_53&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_79fd0df946-bd394638ab-[LIST_EMAIL_ID]

Thanks Ron - I was typing something similar when your post arrived. There is so much one could say.....

I just oppose hypocrisy and try to tell it how it is however uncomfortable it is for us all. Our own hands are not historically clean in this.

I was going to add that perhaps Norfolk should be returned to the Celts (I guess Irish today) - all those more recent Romans, Saxons, Vikings, Huguenots need to move elsewhere  - and we'll recreate the language too. 2000 years ago (Boddica).

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

50 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I'm just stating historical facts about history or creation of the State of Israel - a  2000 year old nationalist (Zionist) dream and placing the overall problem in context. The state was created in an area that was already occupied by, and displaced others (the vasts majority) and which unsurprisingly then caused much violence in the aftermath of WW2. You can look up the history. My guess is if today faced with the same situation the world would act differently. However, whatever happened in the recent past (within living memory) we are where we are. A two state solution much as originally envisioned remains the only viable way to peace unless Israel wishes to become some sort of secular non-Jewish state. Clearly it can't continue as it is - even LYB's France (the original strongest military supporter of Israel) is contemplating sanctions!

Hamas is an unwelcome symptom not the underlying cause of the long term troubles in the region (c.f. the 'PLO' who eventually recognized Israel (Arafat) were secular but failed to achieve their two-state aims). Current Israeli actions will have only created zillions of new recruits to their cause (my enemies enemy etc) in the absence of any peaceful resolution or so called horizon to a two state solution.

This just isn't rocket science. It needs fresh bold new leaders on both sides able to move forward. Israel could start by stopping / clearing the recent 'outposts' and illegal settlements on the West Bank. 

I'll ignore the absurd shallow Israeli apologists/propagandists who treat any criticism of Israel as somehow pro-Hamas or antisemitic.  

I highlighted what I saw as a very problematic request to forget a two thousand year link to the territory. Problematic because context is very important and situations must be analysed within their context.  

But in your response you did a very. Good job of framing the context and I think no one would dispute those facts.  

I was firmly in the two state solution camp prior to October 7th and why wouldn't one be? If there was a possible solution to getting Israel and the Palestinians to peacefully co-exist then it would be worth every effort to m a ke it work. 

But what I can't find anyway around is that Hamas are committed to liquidating Israel and October 7th demonstrated these weren't idle words but they really do intend to  carry out genocide against the Jews. 

I also note that while a lot of planning obviously went into the October 7th attack there seems to have been no plans made for the protection of Palestinian civilians from Israeli reprisals. No attempts seem to be made to move civilians into tunnels. No stores built up for civilian consumption. No underground medical facilities for civilians.  One could believe that Hamas wanted civilians to suffer. 

Therefore, for the sake of Palestinian civilians and for Israelis alike, Hamas has to be eradicated. And such an outcome wouldn't be unwelcome in other Middle Eastern States either. 

[ron obvious 1,514]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

Thanks Ron - I was typing something similar when your post arrived. There is so much one could say.....

I just oppose hypocrisy and try to tell it how it is however uncomfortable it is for us all. Our own hands are not historically clean in this.

I was going to add that perhaps Norfolk should be returned to the Celts (I guess Irish today) - all those more recent Romans, Saxons, Vikings, Huguenots need to move elsewhere  - and we'll recreate the language too. 2000 years ago (Boddica).

A good, thoughtful post YF, but a phrase you used did give me pause: "Our own hands are not historically clean in this."

This highlights a fundamental problem, much the subject of one of my favourite books of all time: 'The Open Society And Its Enemies' by Karl Popper. 

The enemy in question is what he terms Historicism, the philosophical (although not actual) roots of which he traces back to Plato, enshrined in which is the idea of tribalism, & that the tribe, as personified by the State, is all powerful, the guilt or innocence of individuals does not matter. Hence crimes committed by our forebears can lead to retribution on us as their children despite our total innocence; it's how Hamas can justify their recent disgusting acts against women & children. It's an attitude that has caused & is causing endless misery throughout world history.

I cannot recommend Popper's book highly enough; I disagree with parts of it but his arguments are always clear & lucid & he never tries to pass his opinion off as fact. Above all he makes me think, which is what I want from a book of this type.

 

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

57 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

I highlighted what I saw as a very problematic request to forget a two thousand year link to the territory. Problematic because context is very important and situations must be analysed within their context.  

But in your response you did a very. Good job of framing the context and I think no one would dispute those facts.  

I was firmly in the two state solution camp prior to October 7th and why wouldn't one be? If there was a possible solution to getting Israel and the Palestinians to peacefully co-exist then it would be worth every effort to m a ke it work. 

But what I can't find anyway around is that Hamas are committed to liquidating Israel and October 7th demonstrated these weren't idle words but they really do intend to  carry out genocide against the Jews. 

I also note that while a lot of planning obviously went into the October 7th attack there seems to have been no plans made for the protection of Palestinian civilians from Israeli reprisals. No attempts seem to be made to move civilians into tunnels. No stores built up for civilian consumption. No underground medical facilities for civilians.  One could believe that Hamas wanted civilians to suffer. 

Therefore, for the sake of Palestinian civilians and for Israelis alike, Hamas has to be eradicated. And such an outcome wouldn't be unwelcome in other Middle Eastern States either. 

Thanks for the reply. 

For what it's worth I rather doubt Hamas leadership intended Oct 7th to go the way it did - as others noted at the time its rather as if there was a loss of control leading to barbarism and the dehumanization of the 'other'. Sadly we see similar in retribution.

Everybody wants Hamas gone (except Iran) - but almost nobody rational believes they can be fully 'eliminated' - that is simply Netanyahu's excuse for prolonging an unwinnable war (yet staying in power) and frankly only digging ever deeper holes for Israel and the region. 

The real politic is that the more moderate 'political' elements amongst them (of course they exist - the are negotiating hostage release at present) will have to be a part of the eventual solution even if that reality has to be obscured from the general public. As much was said (again) by a senior US politician again on TV last night. Behind the scenes discussions. In truth it is no different to bringing the IRA / Sinn Fein in from the 'cold' (and changing the Irish Constitution which didn't recognize NI - seem familiar?). Of course there will be some extreme elements that can never change their ways but given a just solution (and no Israel won't cease to exist either) most I suspect will. The fuel for extremism will of been switched off. The Palestinians themselves really just want a peace and be left alone to get on with their lives / businesses freely and not be hostage to some ideologically driven agenda. Same can be said actually for most Israelis (i.e not the 'settlers' etc). The trouble is both sides are driven by rage at present which needs better leaders than they have to defuse! 

The US really does have an opportunity now to show some leadership in the Arab world. The historic support (or blind eye hypocrisy) for Israel really stemmed from the cold war considerations (and the Soviet support for the Arabs) but today I frankly suspect Saudi Arabia is a more important ally vs Iran and Jordan and Egypt have already made their own peace. With a peaceful US led solution for the Palestinians the Iranian regime itself will start to fall/crumble (less foreign distractions).

 

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

40 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

A good, thoughtful post YF, but a phrase you used did give me pause: "Our own hands are not historically clean in this."

This highlights a fundamental problem, much the subject of one of my favourite books of all time: 'The Open Society And Its Enemies' by Karl Popper. 

The enemy in question is what he terms Historicism, the philosophical (although not actual) roots of which he traces back to Plato, enshrined in which is the idea of tribalism, & that the tribe, as personified by the State, is all powerful, the guilt or innocence of individuals does not matter. Hence crimes committed by our forebears can lead to retribution on us as their children despite our total innocence; it's how Hamas can justify their recent disgusting acts against women & children. It's an attitude that has caused & is causing endless misery throughout world history.

I cannot recommend Popper's book highly enough; I disagree with parts of it but his arguments are always clear & lucid & he never tries to pass his opinion off as fact. Above all he makes me think, which is what I want from a book of this type.

 

Yes Ron - the phrase "Our own hands are not historically clean in this." I was really relating back to Balfour, the Mandate, our hurried exit and the unmitigated disaster from the region that followed!" Our imperial - line drawing in the sands.

It does seem to me anyway we have two Semitic 'tribes' with a common God that have apparently got themselves into Popper's 'blood feud'. **** for tat.

As I alluded too - I think the reason it has been tolerated to date was actually the geo-politics of the Cold War and possibly today Iran. Israel by it current actions and obstinacy to a solution is making that a very difficult and costly position for the US to maintain - possibly now becoming more of liability!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

19 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

.

As I alluded too - I think the reason it has been tolerated to date was actually the geo-politics of the Cold War and possibly today Iran. Israel by it current actions and obstinacy to a solution is making that a very difficult and costly position for the US to maintain - possibly now becoming more of liability!

I'm not quite clear what the 'it' that you referred to is in the sentence above?

[cambridgeshire canary 6,791]

I thought this was supposed to be a parody page?

 

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

Sadly all kicking off it seems.

Let's hope we can all keep the lid on it.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

Very interesting piece on Wikipedia sourced from Hamas health ministry press releases.

******

As of February 29th, the Gaza Health Ministry stated that its daily tallies now rely upon "a combination of accurate death counts from hospitals that are still partially operating, and on estimates from media reports to assess deaths in the north of Gaza", but did not "cite or say which sources those are."^[14] On March 31st, it stated that 15,070 fatalities (45.8% of the then total) had been compiled via "reliable media sources" instead of direct reporting.^[15][16] The Ministry further clarified in reports made on April 1st and April 4th that it had “incomplete data” for 12,263 (later reduced 11,371) of its 33,091 reported fatalities.^[17][18]

^*********

^{I think that raises a lot of questions over the accuracy, and that's}

^{before you subtract whatever number is actually Hamas.}

Edited April 16 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

Seems to me Israel has now got itself into a bit of pickle.

Iran clearly considers the matter closed - and the 'coalition' which so successfully shot down those missiles including Jordan and even with help from Saudi Arabia doesn't want any further escalation. They will all take a very dim view if Israeli pokes that hornets nest again yet expects the 'coalition' then to rally round and protect it. They don't wish to be dragged into it further and especially on Netanyahu's terms/whim for partisan Israeli domestic reasons!

So as others have noted - Israel has lost a degree a freedom in that it now needs to consider the coalitions view in any further action!

The 'off-ramp' is laid out before it - I would suggest they take it. Will they ?  I rather doubt it

Clearly the world has changed not to Israel's advantage - the miscalculation was the attack on the Damascus consulate letting Iran call the Israeli's bluff.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

A piece from Jeremy Bowen arguing that Iran's attack has offered Netanyahu a lifeline, turning increasingly critical messages into ones of solidarity.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68825752

Who would have ever dreamt that Jordan would actively engage in defending Israel from attack? Yet ordinarily the King of Jordan is one of Israel's fiercest critics.

Truth is that while most Arab states might not like Israel, none of them really fear it, because they know if they leave it alone then it will leave them alone, whereas they mostly fear Iran as a fully-fledged rogue state that actively seeks to dominate the rest of the region.

But the other amazing thing is the Iranian public actually protesting against Iran's actions as military adventurism, even facing arrest for doing so. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68823348

 

 

Edited April 16 by littleyellowbirdie

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

8 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Seems to me Israel has now got itself into a bit of pickle.

Iran clearly considers the matter closed - and the 'coalition' which so successfully shot down those missiles including Jordan and even with help from Saudi Arabia doesn't want any further escalation. They will all take a very dim view if Israeli pokes that hornets nest again yet expects the 'coalition' then to rally round and protect it. They don't wish to be dragged into it further and especially on Netanyahu's terms/whim for partisan Israeli domestic reasons!

So as others have noted - Israel has lost a degree a freedom in that it now needs to consider the coalitions view in any further action!

The 'off-ramp' is laid out before it - I would suggest they take it. Will they ?  I rather doubt it

Clearly the world has changed not to Israel's advantage - the miscalculation was the attack on the Damascus consulate letting Iran call the Israeli's bluff.

Agreed. Having both Jordan and Saudi Arabia allied on the side of Israel is a massive geo-political game-changer that Israel would do well to nuture that relationship for long term benefit rather than go for a short term gain.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

Both the EU and US are pondering new sanctions on Iran after the attempted attack on Israel.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/16/us-and-eu-consider-new-sanctions-against-iran-after-air-attack-on-israel

Yet again, those states who would claim to be on the side of the Palestinians in their outright rejection of Israel's right to exist prove a liability to the Palestinians for their uncompromising approach.

 

Edited April 17 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

To use a religious phrase.

Hallelujah.

About time too. A start on an end to hypocrisy ? 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/21/us-poised-impose-sanctions-israel-defense-force-netzah-yehuda-battalion

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

Speaking of hypocrisy, China's comments about the 'justice' of recognising a Palestinian state made me chuckle. Possibly the US could have a bit of fun by tabling a motion for the recognition of Palestine and Taiwan in a single motion. It'd be fun to see how China reacted.

Seriously though: It should be a pre-requisite that all states that refuse to recognise Israel's right to exist and/or don't have diplomatic relations with it, in a total rejection of international law on their part, abandon that position before any serious consideration of a formally recognised Palestinian state occurs. Otherwise the scene is simply set for more war after the establishment of Palestine anyway.

Edited April 21 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,820]

Why did the Jewish man try to cross the road? 

To provoke a negative reaction and, boy, did a daft policeman help him out!! 

Tiresome. 

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

34 minutes ago, Herman said:

Why did the Jewish man try to cross the road? 

To provoke a negative reaction and, boy, did a daft policeman help him out!! 

Tiresome. 

Sometimes the police will rightly tell you 'don't walk down that street because there's someone waving a gun' . And that would be the right response to an emergency situation. I guess the problem is where the situation becomes normalised so that it is always dangerous to walk that way, and then it is fair to ask the police why they aren't doing something. I'm not sure if we are in normalised or emergency territory with these marches but I think the Jewish bloke was definitely testing the waters

[Fen Canary 866]

I draw no distinction anymore between Hamas and the IDF. Both groups are absolute scum,  child murdering filth no better than ISIS or the SS. Anybody who tries to defend the actions of either in my opinion is lacking a moral compass.

I‘m not a religious man but I pray hell exists as that’s where every single one of them will be headed, hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

Edited April 22 by Fen Canary

[Yellow Fever 3,821]

1 hour ago, Rock The Boat said:

Sometimes the police will rightly tell you 'don't walk down that street because there's someone waving a gun' . And that would be the right response to an emergency situation. I guess the problem is where the situation becomes normalised so that it is always dangerous to walk that way, and then it is fair to ask the police why they aren't doing something. I'm not sure if we are in normalised or emergency territory with these marches but I think the Jewish bloke was definitely testing the waters

There was a clip on Sky News or BBC news this morning of a retired policeman (superintendent?) saying he would of simply arrested the bloke earlier.

Then there is also the whole 13 minute clip - show's a very different context - the bloke was part of a group filming and jostling with the police - at one point standing in the middle of the road etc. if I heard correctly. Simply he's far from an innocent party and was 'angling' for something.

The police have a hard enough job in these situations without what amounts to 'agent provocateurs' trying to cause trouble.

The policeman was eventually clumsy in his words - and the police have rightfully apologized. Next time simply arrest them earlier if they won't move on.

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-news-footage-reveals-new-details-of-exchange-between-police-and-antisemitism-campaigner-called-openly-jewish-13120104

Edited April 22 by Yellow Fever

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

There's no risk to anyone other than the personal risk to the Jewish guy among the pro-Palestinian protesters. If the so-called pro-Palestinians are entitled to protest then so should the pro-Israelis be entitled to protest them. If the pro-Palestinians become violent against the pro-Israelis then they should be arrested.

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie