Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion


Read David Lammy statement.

It reads like he's apologising for stopping some arms licenses.

It's like he's addressing Netanyahu and saying sorry about this. But my officials have said we have to do something.

And look we are doing all these sanctions against Iran

For me it's a wind up. At one point he's saying there is not enough categorical evidence in Israel case and btw for Iran we just get on with it and sanction them.

This comes across as double standard.

And then he says he is a Progressive Liberal Zionist.

Hardly appropriate for a Home Secretary whose supposed to represent country.

And what does that mean?

He makes no mention of the ICJ ruling on the occupation. Or the genocide case.

He does make a nod to Palestinian statehood.

There is the usual stuff about Hamas and Israel's right to defend itself.
 
From David Lammy statement

In many cases, it has not been possible to reach a determinative conclusion on allegations regarding Israel’s conduct of hostilities, in part, because there is insufficient information either from Israel, or other reliable sources to verify such claims.

It's been all over news for months. All he criticises Israel for is not allowing enough aid in and it's treatment of prisoners.

It's like the bombing - destruction of hospitals / universities etc is not something he's seen

Reads as he doesn't want to criticise IDF directly.

Bizarre imo
 

Is it me or is the tone of the bbc's coverage much less zionist than previously?
If it is maybe they've finally gotten the message from all the entirely justified criticism on Twitter every time they post a Tweet with obvious bias in the content.
 
Another person shot dead for allegedly throwing stones, which will no doubt soon be changed to accidentally shot in the head.
 

Read David Lammy statement.

It reads like he's apologising for stopping some arms licenses.

It's like he's addressing Netanyahu and saying sorry about this. But my officials have said we have to do something.

And look we are doing all these sanctions against Iran

For me it's a wind up. At one point he's saying there is not enough categorical evidence in Israel case and btw for Iran we just get on with it and sanction them.

This comes across as double standard.

And then he says he is a Progressive Liberal Zionist.

Hardly appropriate for a Home Secretary whose supposed to represent country.

And what does that mean?

He makes no mention of the ICJ ruling on the occupation. Or the genocide case.

He does make a nod to Palestinian statehood.

There is the usual stuff about Hamas and Israel's right to defend itself.

To quote myself I wondered why I was so annoyed that David Lammy a Labour Foreign Secretary said in in Parliament he was a Zionist.

Back months ago when there was all the arguments about voting for a ceasefire the Labour right argument was that voting for a ceasefire was divisive.

My Lambeth Labour Cllr run by right of party and my MP Helen Hayes who is centre both argued that at the time voting for a ceasefire when representing a diverse multicultural area was divisive.

This was Lambeth Council ruling Labour group on this



To quote from the Labour group

The ceasefire motion risks creating divisions in our communities at a time when our focus should be uniting the borough

Argument was that supporting ceasefire motion from Greens was divisive at a time when the Council in a multicultural borough had to bring communities together.

In so many words supporting a ceasefire was taking sides.

Now the Labour Foreign Secretary says in front of parliament that he is a Zionist.

The double standards so wind me up.

Leading member of labour government saying he is a Zionist is apparently not divisive.

What a load of bollocks this all is.

The utter cynicism of the support Israel whatever it does. I'm only stopping a few weapons because I have to crap.
 
Last edited:
End user certification applies no?

Spot on.

I had a watch of this again



The guy from Campaign Against the Arms Trade pointed out the David Lammy was talking bollocks about F 35

For start they have been used in Gaza

And as you correctly point out UK could say to third party ,like US it sends components of F35 to ,yes you can pass them on to other countries but Israel is by UK not on list of approved destinations.

It's not that complicated thing to do.

So Lammy was talking horseshit. What a surprise from self confessed Zionist.

As the guy from CAAT says Lammy argument is just excuses. 12 minutes in on the programme

He also said its not just about upsetting US its also about the arms industry lobby.

I did not think about this before. It's not all about Israel Lammy is under pressure from the Arms industry in this country as well. Who are worried about there profits.

Inside Story on Al Jazeera is always worth a watch. Short to the point half hour programmes. Very informative
 
Last edited:
Trouble is when I watch programmes like this with people who know what they are talking about I end up being so angry about what our politicians let Israel get away with.
 
Last edited:
Been reading A Line in the Sand


Half way through.

What Id like to see is the Foreign Secretary in UK apologise to the people of the middle east for the UK government of the past doing the Balfour Declaration. As this is the start point of what is happening now.

British Empire meddling in the middle east for its own purposes

And apologise for the Labour party in the past supporting the Balfour declaration. Which it did.
 
Last edited:

The summary of the process government did on IHL and weapons for Israel

First two sections fair enough.

Lack of aid getting through and treatment of prisoners.

The last part about conduct of military operations I don't get.

Says not enough evidence. Yet with the treatment of prisoners there is the same issue. As the summary points out Israel state has been refusing access to Red Cross. So in that case its taken by UK government as an issue re IHL but conduct of military operations no
Despite the mass casualties of the conflict, it has not been possible to reach a determinative judgment on allegations regarding Israel’s conduct of hostilities. This is in part due to the opaque and contested information environment in Gaza and the challenges of accessing the specific and sensitive information necessary from Israel, such as intended targets and anticipated civilian harm. This is further complicated by credible reports that Hamas embeds itself in a tightly concentrated civilian population and in civilian infrastructure.

And repeats the Israeli government excuse that Hamas are hiding in hospitals etc. Gaza is one of the most densely populated places in the world. Any State actor who decides on policing action as an occupying power must take possibility of civilian casualties into account. Looks to me there is an argument that Israel as a State actor is not doing enough to stop civilian casualties. And is also deliberately blowing up infrastructure like Universities - not for military justifiable reasons.

This is summary of what they do:

Having assessed the recipient country’s attitude towards relevant principles established by instruments of international humanitarian law, the Government will: (c) Not grant a licence if it determines there is a clear risk that the items might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law.

And I notice this:

The process also draws on a log of military incidents (such as air strikes or ground operations) and statements by political actors, which is prepared on a regular basis.

Statements by political actors - been plenty of those. And no mention of Israel politicians comments here or by David Lammy in his speech.

The idea is to establish a clear risk not 100 percent evidence.

I think on the military side of it ( conduct of hostilities) the UK government has not followed its own policies.
 
Too many wrong people in power all over the world causing havoc and destruction. None of them care one iota for the planet or its people. Power at all costs. I don’t believe the Middle East will be resolved until certain people are out of power. It’s like we have no choice but to wait and watch the slaughter. 🥲
 
Too many wrong people in power all over the world causing havoc and destruction. None of them care one iota for the planet or its people. Power at all costs. I don’t believe the Middle East will be resolved until certain people are out of power. It’s like we have no choice but to wait and watch the slaughter. 🥲
Same as it ever was. Honest caring types seldom desire power over others.
There really isn't an answer the cunts will always seek these positions.
Like every truism there will be an occasional exception, but such strength and desire to fight the hordes of cunts to obtain these positions is relatively rare in those of good intent towards their fellow humans, they generally just crave peace
 
I did not think about this before. It's not all about Israel Lammy is under pressure from the Arms industry in this country as well. Who are worried about there profits.

Well it's not the nice, peaceful countries who buy all the weapons is it? Not selling weapons to someone who will use them to hurt people sets a dangerous precedent if your whole schtick is making things to hurt people with.

Even if you ignore morality, I doubt the arms industry makes as much money as the state has to spend to keep it in business.
 
They've now added '...by Israeli forces' but they've also added '...of Turkish origin' to the 'American activist' bit. Not sure why that needs to be in the headline.
For that matter, their use of the loaded word “activist” also creates a little narrative in its own right. Why not “peaceful objector to Israeli atrocities executed by Israeli military”?
 
I sere this has finally made it to a mainstream outlet:

I seen lots of reports about this after October 7th. I also seen this.



Is this being investigated? The IDF like to investigate a lot but we never seem to get the results.
 
I sere this has finally made it to a mainstream outlet:

The Telegraph three months ago MSN

There are older reports but I'm not sure whether they meet ms definition
 
Got community note for this:
View attachment 441718
That bit "destroyed by community notes" is a bit of a trigger for me its all about that demeaning the opposition thing as the only way to make a point that has always been the arena Republicans play in.... makes me feel quite uneasy when I read the phrase.

Any road up, I didnt know what that community notes bollox was so googled...so being able to make a comment on a posting is some sort of wizzo new thing invented by twitter? Isnt that something you could just do anyway? (I know fuck all about twitter and the more I find out the more likely it is Ill never sign up to that crap
 
That bit "destroyed by community notes" is a bit of a trigger for me its all about that demeaning the opposition thing as the only way to make a point that has always been the arena Republicans play in.... makes me feel quite uneasy when I read the phrase.

Any road up, I didnt know what that community notes bollox was so googled...so being able to make a comment on a posting is some sort of wizzo new thing invented by twitter? Isnt that something you could just do anyway? (I know fuck all about twitter and the more I find out the more likely it is Ill never sign up to that crap
You can only write and publish a community note if a you have a blue tick (paid) account.
 
Back
Top Bottom