Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

Oh noes. 3 (teleprinter - THREE) dead US servicemen in a secret (not so secret) base in Syria, which the US pretends is a base in Jordan, means direct retaliation is needed because the incumbent US President is losing in the polls in election year so Iran will get bombed.

Keep up.

And...Iran.

(Apologies, couldn't be bothered to look for a relevant thread. Just compare 3 with 30,000).
 
Oh noes. 3 (teleprinter - THREE) dead US servicemen in a secret (not so secret) base in Syria, which the US pretends is a base in Jordan, means direct retaliation is needed because the incumbent US President is losing in the polls in election year so Iran will get bombed.

Keep up.

And...Iran.

(Apologies, couldn't be bothered to look for a relevant thread. Just compare 3 with 30,000).
Yes it is surreal:

3 US soldiers get killed by a drone which is a weapon the US uses with great regularity and little news coverage. But the 3 soldiers het headlines

Countless Palestinians murdered by the genocidal IDF, which the US arms and nothing happens....yet when the genocide perpetrators accuse 7 UN officials of taking part in 7/10 their funding gets cut by the US and their poodles like the UK.
 
Just finished this short book ( just over 100 pages) from a Liberal Zionist perspective.


A good read. Some of it been covered elsewhere. As with Anti Zionists he now regards Israel as an Apartheid State. With its long term occupation of West Bank and Gaza de facto annexation.

So Palestinians should have in his opinion Israeli citizenship.

What distinguishes him from anti Zionists is that he says a Bi National State was a position of early Zionists.

Its an interesting position.

He has sections on the liberal state. He comes from a liberal perspective not radical one.

He argues that the present day Israeli state does not count as a liberal democratic state. In practise its a an ethnocratic democracy for Jews only.

A liberal democratic state treats citizens as neutral , whatever their background. Israeli state as it has developed has gone the other way. Its a state for Jews.

He says two of things about foundation of Israel.

The British Peel commission of the 1930s made population transfer ( ethnic cleansing ) respectable.

( I differ here. Zionists lobbied Peel to include population transfer)

Once that was made official people like David Ben Gurion became more interested in it.

The second is the Holocaust. This pushed Zionists to position that liberal democracy in Europe had failed to protect Jews as a minority so a state purely for Jews was required. In order to protect the remaining Jews.

Hence the Nabka.

He mentions the Israeli historian Benny Morris. Morris does not deny the Nakba, position is that it did not go far enough. He is the "you cannot make a omelette without breaking eggs" view. Given the historical circumstance of the time David Ben Gurion et all should have gone all the way and expelled Palestinians from all of Palestine. His view is that great democracies like USA were built on the dirty work of ethnic cleansing. And its historically required. He however is honest about this and does not deny it. His view is that if that was done in 48 it would have meant the problems now would have been avoided. Not saying the writer of this pamphlet agreed with this.

This is different from Ilan Pappe who regards the Nakba as a war crime and the foundation of Israels later actions in oppressing and removing the indigenous population to make state for Jews.

Both historians btw are Israeli Jews,

He has whole section on how the Holocaust is used to justify the Israeli state. In first decades Holocaust did not feature. It was the show trial of Eichmann that changed all that. David Ben Gurion made sure of that.

After that Holocaust became a founding principle of Israeli ( Jewish) identity. He points out that the Nakba was not remembered in the same way. It was hardly acknowledged.

He regards this in Israel as misuse of the history of Holocaust.

This gave justification that Israel is exceptional state. ( see this with reaction to ICJ ruling)

He goes onto political philosophy of what is a citizen and a state. The ideal , from his perspective , is a citizen who is patriotic to a republican state. But not nationalist. Nationalist is based on racial or other kind of identity. Which excludes others.

To get to a republican state which is not nationalist remembering and forgetting is required.

In Palestine / Israel case Palestinians need to acknowledge what Holocaust means to Jews and Israeli Jews need to acknowledge the Nakba. Both side need to remember.

Then as citizens need to put this aside and look to a future where both communities live side by side.

He looks at philosophers who say the past should not determine the future. (Nietzsche)

Lastly he argues that Liberal Zionism has roots in the very early Zionist ideas of a bi national state.

National self determination does not have to be about exclusive sovereignty.

National self determination of a people can take place in a bi national state of Palestinian and Jews.

So he says he is not an anti Zionist he regards himself as still a Zionist who is picking up ideas from early days of Zionism.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PTK

The reason the book is call Haifi Republic is that this is town where still Palestinians and Jews live side by side.

He's not saying its perfect but its practical viewpoint that is saying there is a possibility that Jews and Palestinians can live side by side.

This pre dates the present war.

He say the political parties who were Liberal Zionist are now marginalised. Rabin was murdered and the dream of a peace lost.

There is a "Joint List" of Arab parties in Israel who were doing ok electorally.

His argument is that polling figure mean that some Liberal Zionist Israelis are now voting for the Joint List. Given demise of left Zionism as credible political force. He also say some Left Zionist parties have made unholy alliances with right to keep in power.

He sees this as opportunity for Palestinian Israelis and Jewish Israelis to work together to build a new politics moved towards a One state which is bi national.
 
The "All Party Parliamentary Group for the Prevention of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity" has members who abstained from voting or voted against support for a ceasefire.

The chair is Labour MP Fleur Anderson. She abstained from the ceasefire amendment vote in November. In other words, she chose not to oppose a ceasefire as people in Gaza were being murdered, maimed, bereaved and deprived of any kind of normal life en masse.

Vice-chairs Feryal Clark, Rushanara Ali, Florence Eshalomi -who are all Labour - also abstained.

Vice-chair Nicholas Bourne is Conservative so either voted against the call for a ceasefire or abstained.

Vice-chair Brendan O'Hara is SNP and I don't know how he voted.

Underneath the Chair and Vice-Chairs is a list of members:

About — APPG on the Prevention of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity

There are a lot of hypocrites on that list.

Sorry I can't go through them all.
What's the point of an APPG for prevention of genocide and crimes against humanity if its members cherry-pick which crimes to oppose? Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em all. But, especially, fuck the white supremacist, genocide-enabling Labour Party.
 
I emailed the Foreign Office about the export of arms to the State of Israel, and in the generic reply there was the following:

“No-one wants to see this conflict go on a moment longer than necessary. This means achieving a sustainable ceasefire - one that will last and prevent another generation of children living under the constant threat of war - with Hamas no longer in power in Gaza, able to threaten Israel with rocket attacks and other forms of terrorism.”

If the position of the government of the UK is that Hamas should be removed from power in the Gaza Strip, then it actually opposesthe negotiation of a “sustainable ceasefire”, for Hamas is never going to agree to its removal from power.
 
On the West Bank.
well maybe thats a possibility though it will just open up the next wave of ethnic cleansing to the last prized area
i cant see how it can be on any territory that was gaza, overground or underground
likud are being brazen about the occupation they have planned, tehy're make public their maps of the new occupied territory Opera Snapshot_2024-01-29_132006_archive.ph.png
who can stop them? this is tacitly approved by the US&co whose one decisive move is to make sure everyone starving acutally does starve by cutting off the trickle of aid

anyhow the This Makes Hamas stronger argument, I cant see how
 

The reason the book is call Haifi Republic is that this is town where still Palestinians and Jews live side by side.

He's not saying its perfect but its practical viewpoint that is saying there is a possibility that Jews and Palestinians can live side by side.

This pre dates the present war.

He say the political parties who were Liberal Zionist are now marginalised. Rabin was murdered and the dream of a peace lost.

There is a "Joint List" of Arab parties in Israel who were doing ok electorally.

His argument is that polling figure mean that some Liberal Zionist Israelis are now voting for the Joint List. Given demise of left Zionism as credible political force. He also say some Left Zionist parties have made unholy alliances with right to

He sees this as opportunity for Palestinian Israelis and Jewish Israelis to work together to build a new politics moved towards a One state which is bi national.
Thank you for your posts on this book. They are interesting. Perhaps they are an example of why it is not useful to use the term "Zionist".
 
well maybe thats a possibility though it will just open up the next wave of ethnic cleansing to the last prized area
i cant see how it can be on any territory that was gaza, overground or underground
likud are being brazen about the occupation they have planned, tehy're make public their maps of the new occupied territory View attachment 410073
who can stop them? this is tacitly approved by the US&co whose one decisive move is to make sure everyone starving acutally does starve by cutting off the trickle of aid

anyhow the This Makes Hamas stronger argument, I cant see how

They've secured generations of new recruits from the slaughter and trauma that's gone on and I'm willing to bet they've made money from all of this, state and private actors will be happy to fund an ongoing resistance movement whether that's out of a sense of moral obligation or just blind political opportunism. Israel will never be able to keep all weapons out of whatever remains of Palestinian land. And they'll have even less control if they get their wish and manage to push a significant portion of people out of the country completely.
 
This is a righteous denunciation and I'm a bit surprised to see the guardian publish it. Though it would have been even better as an editorial rather than just an opinion piece: Why do America’s liberal hawks attack Russia while giving Israel a free pass? | Peter Beinart

It is, but even then it fails to give the answer that is staring everyone in the face - that if you work in politics, associated media or senior academic circles in the US that you will face severe consequences if the pro-Israel lobby think they dislike your opinions on this subject.
 
Idly speculating - could a US hit on Iran Aircraft Manufacturing Industries (HESA) and Qods Aviation Industries (QAI), which most notably produce the Ababil and Mohajer families of drones solve two problems as once - the Houthis and Russian attacks on Ukraine?

BTW there is a subsidiary drone factory in Tajikistan under the same management: Iran’s drone factory in Tajikistan
PS to the above - seems Russian drones contain repurposed mobile phone SIM cards!
 
What I was referring to. Surely there can be no doubt whatsoever about Israel's attitude towards Palestinians.

 
What I was referring to. Surely there can be no doubt whatsoever about Israel's attitude towards Palestinians.

Yes I saw this on Twitter earlier along with a number of vids of settlers stopping aid from entering Gaza.
 
Watching Owen Jones this evening and he has piece on Labour MP suspended due to equating what is happening in Gaza as Genocide.

This in Starmer party is enough to get suspended.

The politically correct terminology is that what is happening in Gaza is a "humanitarian catastrophe"

Saying that remembering the Holocaust and other genocides in history is also about a warning from history and can be related to what is happening in present day is according to the Starmer lot a misuse of history.

Sometimes I think politics is just a load of old bollox. After watching Owen Jones good piece on this Im feeling do I want to vote?

 
Thank you for your posts on this book. They are interesting. Perhaps they are an example of why it is not useful to use the term "Zionist".

Its well worth a read.

Problem I have with it is that its in effect One State solution. Which to all intents and purposes is end to Zionism.

I do not have a problem with that. But he tries so hard to reconcile Zionism with this view.

When he blames Peel Commission for advocating population transfer I part company with him.

On one hand he criticises mainstream Zionist leaders of left and right then he tries to argue that the leading figures in early Zionism were for a bi national state then the Peel report came along.

He is almost saying that it was interference from outside that led away from Jews and Palestinians learning to co inhabit the land

Which simply is not historically correct.

I can see the rational behind the political intervention his pamphlet makes. That their is a possibility to transcend the historical legacies of both sides.
 
Watching Owen Jones this evening and he has piece on Labour MP suspended due to equating what is happening in Gaza as Genocide.

This in Starmer party is enough to get suspended.

The politically correct terminology is that what is happening in Gaza is a "humanitarian catastrophe"

Saying that remembering the Holocaust and other genocides in history is also about a warning from history and can be related to what is happening in present day is according to the Starmer lot a misuse of history.

Sometimes I think politics is just a load of old bollox. After watching Owen Jones good piece on this Im feeling do I want to vote?

I am a member of the Labour Party and I am going to spoil my ballot paper, because the local candidate remains silent on this issue, and in general is not worth voting for. I may campaign in another constituency for a left-wing candidate.

It annoys me that Labour MPs will praise Nelson Mandela, who faced the death penalty, and they will not stand up and support one of their own who is unfairly suspended.
 
I am a member of the Labour Party and I am going to spoil my ballot paper, because the local candidate remains silent on this issue, and in general is not worth voting for. I may campaign in another constituency for a left-wing candidate.

It annoys me that Labour MPs will praise Nelson Mandela, who faced the death penalty, and they will not stand up and support one of their own who is unfairly suspended.

Was listening to Novara Media this evening and Ash Sarkar made the point that the Labour party adopting the IHRA definition of anti semitism plus the examples means that criticising Israel state as in this case equating Gaza with previous genocides including Holocaust is under that definition labelled as anti semitic.

Going back to the Israeli philosopher Omri Boehm he has whole section in his pamphlet about how Holocaust has been misused in Israeli politics in its later period.

This therefore is not just about Starmer and the right of the party using this for factional gain ( which they are) it also about how criticism is effectively silenced when it comes to Israel. Or attempted to be silenced.
 
There is an argument that comparing anything to the genocides carried out by the Nazis is Judeophobic because it lessens the crimes of the Nazis, but this argument was never deployed when such comparisons were made decades ago. The actions of the US troops in the My Lai massacre, and other massacres, in Vietnam were likened to the actions of the Nazis.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom