Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

The most surprising thing in these last few pages is that at least one person has hitmouse on ignore.
And answering those occasional posts goading people into replying. Where have they gone et cetera. I’m reading this thread but not commenting much. Because what is there to say. It’s a complete fucking horror show. I mean the situation, not this thread.
 
Yeah, it's the worldview shared equally by hardcore Zionists and antisemites, which is what makes it so important to shut that shit down whenever it raises its head.

There are ways and means, though. Is it helpful to call out Boris Sprinkler as an antisemite because he brought up the bible? Yeah, he knows exactly what he's doing? Apologies to BS here, but he gives every impression of someone who really doesn't know what he's doing.
 
There are ways and means, though. Is it helpful to call out Boris Sprinkler as an antisemite because he brought up the bible? Yeah, he knows exactly what he's doing? Apologies to BS here, but he gives every impression of someone who really doesn't know what he's doing.
Idk, I mean I fully agree BS seems like quite a confused person but then like the last drunk manat a bus stop who told me that he thought all Jews should be kicked out of Britain seemed like someone who didn't particularly have his life together or know what he was doing, I really don't want to be a dick to people who are going through hard times but where do we draw the line for where someone's too incoherent to be challenged?
 
I mean, I don't think that the IHRA definition is good, it's not. But I think the most relevant bit to Tim's criticisms is this:

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

I don't see the double standard in that sense on this thread.

Or elsewhere for that matter.

In the present situation the accusations of double standards are being laid by those outside the West countries who rightly imo see a double standard in how Israel is compared to Russia.

Since it's bombing campaign in Gaza has killed so many civilians and destroyed so much of the infrastructure.

Don't think the double standard line works anymore.
 
TBF that is such a terribly worded example it has always caused confusion like this.

Yes, attacking the mere idea of a Jewish state (any Jewish state) formed by the self-determination of the Jewish people would be inherently anti-semitic, but that is not the same as attacking the state that exists and its history. Such attacks could be anti-semitic, but not simply by making that argument (that it was imposed by force on much of an already existing population by citizens of other countries).
The Jewish people as a whole are not a nation and therefore cannot have a right to self-determination.
 
Idk, I mean I fully agree BS seems like quite a confused person but then like the last drunk manat a bus stop who told me that he thought all Jews should be kicked out of Britain seemed like someone who didn't particularly have his life together or know what he was doing, I really don't want to be a dick to people who are going through hard times but where do we draw the line for where someone's too incoherent to be challenged?
I'm not saying don't challenge it. Challenge it, of course. It's bollocks and needs calling out as such.
 
The Jewish people as a whole are not a nation and therefore cannot have a right to self-determination.

I would not go and tell Jewish people what I think they are.

I can however look at Zionism - which is a specific political project and say no that's not the sort of nation building I can support. It's based on ethnic cleansing and treating section of population as second class citizens.

I can also say occupying others land to build a new nation is something to be opposed.

The other general thing about nations and states is that they can change. This country is significantly changed since when I was born. More socially liberal at least a bit more tolerant of multicultural society.

There is a danger in seeing these things as fixed. They are ongoing process. In Israel case pre Hamas attack nation was tearing itself apart.

In some ways Zionism, from my reading, was a departure from traditional European Jewish life. They ( the Zionists)were building a new kind Jewish society. So it was nation building in sense of constructing a new type of Jewish citizen. Why IDF for example was seen as important. Not just for military purposes but for nation building.

Rambling but maybe a " nation" can be created. Nor saying that's good always.
 
I would not go and tell Jewish people what I think they are.

I can however look at Zionism - which is a specific political project and say no that's not the sort of nation building I can support. It's based on ethnic cleansing and treating section of population as second class citizens.

I can also say occupying others land to build a new nation is something to be opposed.

The other general thing about nations and states is that they can change. This country is significantly changed since when I was born. More socially liberal at least a bit more tolerant of multicultural.

There is a danger in seeing these things as fixed.

In some ways Zionism, from my reading, was a departure from traditional European Jewish life. They ( the Zionists)were building a new kind Jewish society. So it was nation building in sense of constructing a new type of Jewish citizen. Why IDF for example was seen as important. Not just for military purposes but for nation building.

Rambling but maybe a " nation" can be created. Nor saying that's good always.
My position on the National Question (as once it was called) is that of Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

A nation is an historically evolved group of people (i.e, it is not a fixed, eternal entity. It can come into being or disappear) that shares a common language, a common culture, and a common territory, and has the ability to form an independent political economy.

An Israeli Jewish nation has come into being in the post-1948 period, but Jews in the world as a whole do not constitute a nation.

Any principle must be applied universally, and if every geographically disparate group of people sharing a religion or some other characteristic is to be classed as a nation, and thus possess the right to self-determination (form an independent state) then chaos will ensue.

There was no Palestinian Arab nation in 1900. When national consciousness first appeared amongst the Palestinian Arabs, they did not consider themselves to be distinct nation, but a part of the Syrian nation. Their sense of identity has evolved, and now there is a Palestinian Arab nation,
 
I think it's a dead end to try to define nationhood. All nations are political constructs. They all comprise some form of political project of nation-building. And a crucial part of any nation-building is the attempt to portray the nation as something that is more than a political construct, something with a certain timeless ineffability.

Any lasting peace in Palestine/Israel will involve some degree of backing down from current ideas of nationhood in order to construct something else.
 
Idk, I mean I fully agree BS seems like quite a confused person but then like the last drunk manat a bus stop who told me that he thought all Jews should be kicked out of Britain seemed like someone who didn't particularly have his life together or know what he was doing, I really don't want to be a dick to people who are going through hard times but where do we draw the line for where someone's too incoherent to be challenged?
“ They planned but Allah also planned and Allah is the best of planners “ 8:30 [ al anfal (the spoils of war ) ]

This was written on the leaflets that were dropped by Israeli Air Force over Khan Younis 4 days ago.


That is what I am getting at. There are many that believe the current situation is prophesied in their books and you can’t deny that, if my lazy Bible quotes are so dangerous to you, do you condemn the headbangers throwing them from planes to people they are killing?
 
Zarah Sultana MP has put forward proposals for tighter control over arms sales . Which is directed at all arms exports not just to Israel. Though of course due to IDF action in Gaza its connected to that.

Monday’s bill - known as the Arms Trade (Inquiry and Suspension) Bill, which is being brought by backbench Labour MP Zarah Sultana - sets out as its purpose “provision for an inquiry into the end use of arms sold to foreign states to determine whether they have been used in violation of international law; to immediately suspend the sale of arms to foreign states where it cannot be demonstrated that arms sold will not be used in violation of international law; and for connected purposes”.


Sounds reasonable to me.

She was asked on Novara Media if she had had any talks with Shadow front bench on this. Avoided the question. So no Starmer and his lot have no interest in this.


SNP have also raised this.
Last week’s Early Day Motion, sponsored by SNP MP Chris Law, calls for the Government to immediately halt all transfers of military equipment and technology, including components, to Israel, and to suspend the issuing of new licences.

These are imo things the Labour party could be leading on. Not left to SNP and MPs on left of party.

Also shows there are things the government could be doing.


 
if my lazy Bible quotes are so dangerous to you, do you condemn the headbangers throwing them from planes to people they are killing?

Yes, I definitely do (I know you weren't asking me)

It's divisive and provocative whoever does it and if it was verses from the Koran we probably wouldn't even be discussing it.
 
“ They planned but Allah also planned and Allah is the best of planners “ 8:30 [ al anfal (the spoils of war ) ]

This was written on the leaflets that were dropped by Israeli Air Force over Khan Younis 4 days ago.


That is what I am getting at. There are many that believe the current situation is prophesied in their books and you can’t deny that, if my lazy Bible quotes are so dangerous to you, do you condemn the headbangers throwing them from planes to people they are killing?

Why are your lazy Bible quotes being used by the zionists?
 
There's been controversy over the mortality stats with Gaza, with the figures from the Health Ministry being dismissed in some circles because they're allegedly Hamas-oriented.

Well, this correspondence from the Lancet says differently.


It compares the MoH figures with those of UNRWA staff (that's the UN refugee agency) and find that they're broadly similar - especially given that victims of the Israeli regime's campaign who were also UNRWA staff have tended to die at home. Oh, and the UNRWA figures are independent of the MoH, so there you go.
 
Last edited:
There's been controversy over the mortality stats with Gaza, with the figures from the Health Ministry being dismissed in some circles because they're allegedly Hamas-oriented.

Well, this correspondence from the Lancet says differently.


It compares the MoH figures with those of UNRWA staff (that's the UN refugee agency) and find that they're broadly similar - especially given that victims of the Israeli regime's campaign who were also UNRWA staff have tended to die at home. Oh, and the UNRWA figures are independent of the MoH, so there you go.

I don't think there's anything "allegedly" about the Health Ministry, they come under the political wing of Hamas. And their figures (historically) have always been shown to be generally accurate and sometimes underestimated.
 
I don't think there's anything "allegedly" about the Health Ministry, they come under the political wing of Hamas. And their figures (historically) have always been shown to be generally adequate and sometimes underestimated.
I agree (maybe "allegedly" wasn't the best word - I was struggling with COVID over the weekend). This letter in the Lancet is a good riposte to those who say the figures are unreliable because of their source.
 
I agree (maybe "allegedly" wasn't the best word - I was struggling with COVID over the weekend). This letter in the Lancet is a good riposte to those who say the figures are unreliable because of their source.

Man, I wrote 'adequate' instead of 'accurate' and I don't even have Covid as an excuse. Just normal brain deadness at 8am.
 
I thought there was a lot of interesting historical info in this video posted yesterday

This is a long presentation - but one interesting plum so far is this (from Wiki) referring to Edwin Montagu, a Jewish cabinet member of Lloyd George's at the time of the Balfour Declaration:

Anti-Zionism[edit]
The August 1917 memorandum by Edwin Montagu, the only Jew then in a senior British government position,[9]: 193  stating his opposition to the pro-Zionist Balfour Declaration, and that he viewed it as antisemitic[10]

Montagu was strongly opposed to Zionism, which he called "a mischievous political creed", and opposed the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which he considered anti-Semitic and whose terms he managed to modify. In a memo to the Cabinet, he outlined his views on Zionism:

...I assume that it means that Mahommedans [Muslims] and Christians are to make way for the Jews and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mahommedans in Palestine will be regarded as foreigners, just in the same way as Jews will hereafter be treated as foreigners in every country but Palestine. Perhaps also citizenship must be granted only as a result of a religious test.[11]
 
World Health Organization statement on operations in Gaza. Depressing reading.

On 9 December 2023, a WHO team … completed a high-risk mission to Al-Ahli hospital in Gaza City to deliver medical supplies, assess the situation in the hospital, and transfer critically injured patients to a hospital in the south.
On the way north, the UN convoy was inspected at the Wadi Gaza checkpoint, and ambulance crew members had to leave the vehicles for identification. Two PRCS staff were detained for over an hour, further delaying the mission. WHO staff saw one of them being made to kneel at gunpoint and then taken out of sight, where he was reportedly harassed, beaten, stripped and searched.
As the mission entered Gaza City, the aid truck carrying the medical supplies and one of the ambulances were hit by bullets.
On the way back towards southern Gaza, with the patients from Al-Ahli hospital on board, the convoy was again stopped at the Wadi Gaza checkpoint, where PRCS staff and most of the patients had to leave the ambulances for security checks. Critical patients remaining in the ambulances were searched by armed soldiers.
One of the same two PRCS staff temporarily detained earlier on the way in was taken for interrogation a second time. The mission made numerous attempts to coordinate his release, but eventually – after more than two and a half hours – had to make the difficult decision to leave the highly dangerous area and proceed, for the safety and wellbeing of the patients and humanitarian workers. Palestine Red Crescent Society reported afterwards that during the transfer process one of the injured patients died as a result of his untreated wounds.
The PRCS staff member was released later that night after joint UN efforts. Yesterday, the WHO team met him, as well as his father, supervisor, and colleagues. He said he was harassed, beaten, threatened, stripped and blindfolded. His hands were tied behind his back and he was treated in a degrading and humiliating manner. Once released, he was left to walk towards the south with his hands still tied behind his back, and without clothes or shoes.
Obstructing ambulances and attacks on humanitarian and health workers are unconscionable. Healthcare, including ambulances, are protected under international law. They must be respected and protected in all circumstances.

The difficulties faced by this mission illustrate the shrinking space for humanitarian actors to provide aid within Gaza, even though access is desperately needed to alleviate the catastrophic humanitarian situation.

WHO and partners remain firmly committed to staying in Gaza and assisting the population. But as hostilities increase across Gaza, aid falls short of needs, the humanitarian support system is on the verge of falling apart.

The only viable solution is a sustained ceasefire, so WHO and partners can work safely and unhindered to strengthen a deteriorating health system, replenish critical supplies of fuel, medicines, and other essential aid, and prevent disease, hunger, and further suffering in the Gaza Strip.

WHO staff described Al-Ahli Hospital as in a state of “utter chaos and a humanitarian disaster zone.” It is extremely congested with many displaced people and over 200 patients, while it only has enough resources to support 40 beds – half of its original bed capacity. The building has sustained substantial damage because of the hostilities.
Doctors said the situation is “beyond control” as they face shortages of fuel, oxygen, and essential medical supplies, as well as a lack of food and water for patients and themselves. Health staff capacity is minimal, nursing care is extremely limited, and the hospital is relying heavily on volunteers.
They are treating many serious cases in the hospital’s corridors, on the floor, in the hospital chapel, and even in the street.


Sorry I have no idea why two of those blocks of script came out like that. The whole thing is worth reading (just in case, for those who zone out in quoted sections).
 
This is a long presentation - but one interesting plum so far is this (from Wiki) referring to Edwin Montagu, a Jewish cabinet member of Lloyd George's at the time of the Balfour Declaration:

Anti-Zionism[edit]

The August 1917 memorandum by Edwin Montagu, the only Jew then in a senior British government position,[9]: 193  stating his opposition to the pro-Zionist Balfour Declaration, and that he viewed it as antisemitic[10]

Montagu was strongly opposed to Zionism, which he called "a mischievous political creed", and opposed the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which he considered anti-Semitic and whose terms he managed to modify. In a memo to the Cabinet, he outlined his views on Zionism:
I was about to say that's the first time I've been in agreement with a Governor of the Bank of England and then realised I'd got the wrong Montagu... so I won't. :oops:
 
Back
Top Bottom