Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

Rob Ray said:
Speaking of Qatar, Douglas Murray in the Spectator reckons now is the point at which Britain should divest from it. Not last year, when Britain made £3.4bn in arms sales to Qatar and it hosted the 2022 World Cup in which its appalling human rights record was highlighted (he was critical but liked it happening on the grounds it highlighted said record). Or indeed, presumably, earlier this year when he flew to Qatar to participate in a pompous public debate.
Click to expand...
He isnt serious anyway, as he ends up making clear himself with his final few paragraphs.

The gas imports are really significant and seen as crucial for energy security of supply.

eg see articles such as Qatar trade patterns shift as UK fills gas shortfall | AGBI

Its certainly true that the overall LNG picture is evolving, as the USA has become a major player in recent years. So some statistics show a declining share of imports from Qatar (eg various stuff in Supply_of_Liquefied_Natural_Gas_in_the_UK__2022.pdf )

But still a significant overall share, and in the important area of securing fixed long term supply contracts, Qatar is considered of major importance to the UK, and not just for direct profit reasons.

Qatar is one of those places with interesting contradictions that dont get talked about sensibly by our press very often. Whole aspects of its power arent discussed properly, and sometimes the country goes down the memory hole. The Saudi & UAE etc blockade of Qatar was another period of recent history that was discussed only awkwardly at the time. Theres an entire Turkish-Qatari Muslim Brotherhood axis of power and regional rivalry that gets discussed only fleetingly in countries like ours. Even when its a major regional power dynamic that runs across multiple fault lines and proxy wars, eg Libya proxy wars, Qatar-UAE rivalries, to name just two.

This sort of thing is demonstrated in articles like the following recent one Frank Gardner, that manages to talk about Qatars 'balancing act' and their role in hostage negotiations, and draws attention to certain lesser mentioned facts, whilst managing to avoid even hinting at some of the other regional power axis issues and inconvenient details at all. Some of those pesky details are just hidden under euphemisms such as 'unique role'.

www.bbc.co.uk

How Qatar is at the centre of Israeli hostage talks

Qatar has a unique role leading sensitive negotiations but it comes with a huge risk.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
Pickman's model said:
Yeh complements the article I posted up about his long association with the zionist state
Click to expand...
i missed that as is the case in busy threads, can you post again please?

the incredible thing in the video is not his support of the state, its his openness about the selfish and cynical reasons for the support
 
Last edited:
The word ‘humanitarian’ is interesting.
Need to read more.
It seems to be used as if it’s an option rather than an obligation.
 
teqniq said:
This is worth a read as well:

threadreaderapp.com

Thread by @__BP__ on Thread Reader App

@__BP__: For reasons I will never understand, when I was a first year at uni, a middle-aged Doctor from Gaza moved temporarily into the room opposite mine in halls. We weren't sure what to make of our...…
threadreaderapp.com threadreaderapp.com
Click to expand...

I am ashamed to say I had never heard about Dr Izzeldin Abuelaish before you posted this. I'd never heard about what had happened to him and his family or how he had responded to it. I'd never seen the clip below, which should really be mandatory viewing for the entire world (I hope noone minds the spoiler but it is one of the most heart-rendering things I have ever seen).

 
Eric Jarvis said:
Qatar's human rights record is way better than Saudi Arabia's or Egypt's, by and large it is a little better than the vast majority of regimes in the Middle East. The difference with Qatar is that it isn't seen as a "reliable Western ally" therefore it can be attacked by Western media. OK least appalling human rights record in the Middle East is not exactly a high bar. However people are still being executed in Egypt for being gay, teenage migrant workers from East Africa have been raped and murdered by their employers in Saudi Arabia in recent years, but that's OK because Sisi and MBS are "reliable Western allies". Over all human rights in Qatar have improved since the end of British rule, so there's a level of blindness to eurocentric neo-colonialist attitudes in much of the criticism. Either we divest from everywhere with an awful record on human rights, or from only places with the very worst human rights records, otherwise it looks really bad.
Click to expand...
I'm going to use your post so that I can add a bit more to my previous post on Qatar since I didnt even begin to do it justice.

Beyond the overly simplistic 'tell every story as a story of two sides' wings of the media, Qatar is seen as a Western ally, but a rather complicated one that is full of contradictions.

So to add two more examples to my previous post:

It hosts the largest US air base in the middle east, and a defence coperation agreement. The base has been used in an important way in wars and campaigns this century. They have a security agreement with NATO too.

On the other side of the complex pixture, one of its tools of power is Al Jazeera. And it made heavy use of that to promote its aims during the Arab Spring, infuriating a whole bunch of other regimes in the region which were destabilised as a result.

The wikipedia entry for the 'diplomatic crisis'/blockade of Qatar is another useful thing to consider when looking at many of the complexities and contradictions. Very much including the initial list of demands that countries like Saudi Arabia made of them, which included closing Al Jazeera.

Qatar diplomatic crisis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
WhyLikeThis said:
Dunno if we’ve had this yet but if not…

www.bbc.co.uk

M&S pulls Christmas advert post after Palestinian flag criticism

M&S says sorry after a backlash claiming its advert depicted Palestinian flag colours in flames.
www.bbc.co.uk

View attachment 398303

If someone doesn’t get sacked for this, it would be fair to assume this was given the sign off by senior management.

The M&S brand is now going to be trashed.
Click to expand...
Christmas adverts are filmed in June, by and large. The hats are typical Christmas party hat colours. Let's not join the madcap comment section brigade by seriously considering that M&S have been tasked by Tel Aviv to send coded messages through an advert.

Sometimes party hats in a fire are just party hats in a fire.
 
PR1Berske said:
Christmas adverts are filmed in June, by and large. The hats are typical Christmas party hat colours. Let's not join the madcap comment section brigade by seriously considering that M&S have been tasked by Tel Aviv to send coded messages through an advert.

Sometimes party hats in a fire are just party hats in a fire.
Click to expand...
So they knew about the attack months in advance :hmm: /conspiracy theory mode
 
It’s amazing how people look for coded messages on this when there are huge, blatant messages shouted by the media from every channel. Who needs to secretly put Palestinian colours into a Christmas advert? Political leaders are coming right out and saying that stuff anyway
 
kabbes said:
It’s amazing how people look for coded messages on this when there are huge, blatant messages shouted by the media from every channel. Who needs to secretly put Palestinian colours into a Christmas advert? Political leaders are coming right out and saying that stuff anyway
Click to expand...
This is the thing about conspiracy theorists. They often believe lies and ignore the truth, it's more comforting for them.
 
belboid said:
you don't know the difference between apartheid and racism. You've just shoved a bunch of different types of oppression together to, effectively, minimise criticism of the actual apartheid state. A line its defenders often take.
Click to expand...
belboid said:
you don't know the difference between apartheid and racism. You've just shoved a bunch of different types of oppression together to, effectively, minimise criticism of the actual apartheid state. A line its defenders often take.
Click to expand...
The actual Apartheid state was South Africa. The oppression and persecution of Palestinians is not done on with a pseudoscientific race based system based on skin colour and other physiological characteristics but on the grounds of confessional and to some degree cultural differences. Palestinian Jews have are granted the same rights in Israel as Jews from any other part of the World. Furthermore in reality a very large proportion of Israeli Jews are of Arab heritage be it: Iraqi, Egyptian, Moroccan, Yemeni, etc. An added complication to those pushing the Apartheid cliché is that within the Israeli state Palestinians (Christian Muslim and Druze) descended from those who were not driven out during the Nabka, whilst they face plenty of Prejudice and discrimination have Israeli citizenship and the same civil and political rights as Israeli Jews, although apart from the Druze they are not conscripted into the military. No one who didn't have white skin had, even theoretically, equal rights in South Africa.

The "types of oppression" I cited in my first post are much closer to the reality in Israel than the reality in Apartheid South Africa and vice-versa.
 
Knotted said:
tim I actually think you are underestimating the complexity of Israeli apartheid but I don't see any point in going into it. Do you think Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are ignorant of the points you are making?
Click to expand...

Am I?

Perhaps you could clarify how Israeli Apartheid is so different using some of the examples I gave, for example the treatment of Uyghurs by the Chinese government or of Rohinighas in Myanmar. If it is so obvious it will be an easy task. If you really can't be bothered to I assume it isn't.



I
 
Last edited:
tim said:
Am I, perhaps you could clarify using some of the examples I gave, for example the treatment of Uyghurs by the Chinese government or of Rohinighas in Myanmar.
Click to expand...

There are more complexities eg. wrt the Bedouin, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Arab citizens of Israel in settlements etc. etc. Legally competent human rights lawyers have got their heads round these complexities and I don't see any reason to go into here on this thread. Check the human rights reports.
 
Knotted said:
There are more complexities eg. wrt the Bedouin, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Arab citizens of Israel in settlements etc. etc. Legally competent human rights lawyers have got their heads round these complexities and I don't see any reason to go into here on this thread. Check the human rights reports.
Click to expand...

In what way do those reports make it clear that the policies of Israel are more akin to Apartheid South Africa than to current day Myanmar or China?
 
JimW said:
Yes, as badly as minorities are treated in China, they have the same formal rights as everyone else, allowing for the complications of the household registration system, which is not the case for Palestinians. A Tibetan might not be able to live as they wish in their hometown but they could move to the big city and live like their Han neighbour if they jump through the same hoops as anyone from out of town has to.
Click to expand...
And Muslim and Christian citizens of Israel, who make up 21% of the population have the same formal rights as Jews

Returning to China, there seems to be reliable evidence that Uyghurs are suffering extreme oppression with reports of forced abortions and sterilisations, families being forcibly divided, hundreds of thousands being sent to interment camps for re-education mosques being demolished and the public use of the Uyghur language being banned.

The Chinese regime nay be focused on forced integration rather than forced exclusion but it really doesn't seem that different from the policies of the Israeli state.
 
tim said:
Am I?

Perhaps you could clarify how Israeli Apartheid is so different using some of the examples I gave, for example the treatment of Uyghurs by the Chinese government or of Rohinighas in Myanmar. If it is so obvious it will be an easy task. If you really can't be bothered to I assume it isn't.



I
Click to expand...
There's the Jewish nation state law of 2018 for starters. That combined with the fact that millions of stateless non-jewish non-citizens have lived under direct occupation for more than 50 years. So both de jure and de facto apartheid.
 
tim said:
In what way do those reports make it clear that the policies of Israel are more akin to Apartheid South Africa than to current day Myanmar or China?
Click to expand...

It's a broader concept. I'd like to focus on what is happening right now in Gaza rather than Myanmar or China.
 
tim said:
And Muslim and Christian citizens of Israel, who make up 21% of the population have the same formal rights as Jews

Returning to China, there seems to be reliable evidence that Uyghurs are suffering extreme oppression with reports of forced abortions and sterilisations, families being forcibly divided, hundreds of thousands being sent to interment camps for re-education mosques being demolished and the public use of the Uyghur language being banned.

The Chinese regime nay be focused on forced integration rather than forced exclusion but it really doesn't seem that different from the policies of the Israeli state.
Click to expand...

Are you making this point because you think there's a double-standard here, in terms of activism etc, or just because you think it's a too-loose use of the term/diminishes the ideology behind SA apartheid etc?
 
Cid said:
Are you making this point because you think there's a double-standard here, in terms of activism etc, or just because you think it's a too-loose use of the term/diminishes the ideology behind SA apartheid etc?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm really confused about what you are trying to say.
 
Pickman's model said:
oh: and a link on biden and his longstanding zionism https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/2...utweighs-his-commitment-to-international-law/
Click to expand...
thanks for this....in the article it seemingly speculates that Biden is a self-confessed Zionist for personal religious reasons...the video I posted of his speeches suggests its because he is proud to argue how Israel is an essential proxy power for the US in the middle east. Maybe both are true, but the second point of proxy power is proven by the fact he has said it vigorously and repeatedly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Protag
Israel-Iran conflicts - news and discussion
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
290
Views
16K
agricola
agricola
Pickman's model
Israel and hezbollah after the exploding pagers
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
471
Views
21K
_Russ_
_Russ_
WhyLikeThis
Mpox - news and discussion
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
387
Views
22K
Cerv
C
teqniq
Worldwide protest/actions concerning events in Gaza/Palestine/Israel
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
173
Views
11K
zahir
Z
littlebabyjesus
Israel's shoddy Gaza propaganda
2 3 4
Replies
116
Views
8K
frogwoman
frogwoman
Back
Top Bottom