Middle East Conflict | Netanyahu orders strikes on Gaza (p1161)

BobKowalski said:
There is no need to make a comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany. It’s a comparison that is wrong and offensive to those that were systematically exterminated in a cold, clinical manner and without provocation.

I disagree with the Israeli response and the needless deaths. It is also counterproductive and devoid of any long term plan or strategy. While Netanyahu and others like him remain in power there is no chance of any meaningful peace. The same is true of Hamas. They both feed off each other.
Click to expand...
Which is what a lot of people have said in here, from seemingly opposite sides of the debate.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I am a little uneasy with this talk of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. While the list certainly includes things someone who is anti-Semitic may say or do, I am not sure it works the other way: that someone who says or does some of those things is, by definition, anti-Semitic. It certainly doesn't work that way in law in the UK, for example. There is no offence (or definition) of anti-Semitism in UK law. Unless I am wrong, which is entirely possible, of course, the offence would fall under hate crime legislation which also has to consider motivation.

Put it this way, if there was a similar definition of anti-Palestinianism, anti-Arabism or Islamophobia (take your pick), the joke you made earlier about suicide bombers could fall under two of the corresponding activities described in the definition. Should you be prosecuted? Should you lose your livelihood, as some people on here have been saying about the idiot woman with the stupid placard? Should you be labelled an Islamophobe? Of course not.

It all goes too far, imho.
Click to expand...
In fairness @Prestwich_Blue When I read that response whether being sarcastic or not, I found it in very poor taste.
 

www.mediaite.com

U.S. Believes Hamas Has a Command 'Node' Under Al-Shifa Hospital: CNN

Tapper’s scoop noted that the U.S. concluded Hamas “uses fuel intended for it and its fighters regularly cluster in and around Gaza’s largest hospital”
www.mediaite.com www.mediaite.com
Prestwich_Blue said:
No it isn't legally binding in itself. But the police and CPS can use it to demonstrate antisemitism.
Click to expand...
Inter alia, it can be used to go after people who express a political opinion about a foreign state. British citizens cheering it on.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
No it isn't legally binding in itself. But the police and CPS can use it to demonstrate antisemitism.
Click to expand...
I understand the reason for having the IHRA and let it never happen again, to anyone.
But, admittedly if taken out of historical context, it does read like a total outlawing of criticism to anything Jewish or Israeli.
I don’t get some of the definitions. Why can you not criticise anything Jewish but not equally recognise the same definitions for any religion or ethnicity.

I am not belittling anti-semitism. I just don think every criticism of, for example, a right wing government’s policy is antisemitic.
Perhaps it’s a critic of how they are in danger of becoming what they hate, while remaining the victim.

I looked at the IHRA definitions and noted Ireland are signed up to them, and couldn’t help thinking how a similar list of antiIrish or even anti-Catholic definitions that had they been signed up to in Britain alone, would have come in handy in the last century.

And before you say it, I am not comparing any one event between our countries, even the famine, or the penal laws or the emigration ship deportations, to anything like the holocaust.
But do you understand my point?

The holocaust happened. The IHRA has just reason to pursue their aims, but can you see that there are a lot of other ‘peoples’ that would like the same protections, either now or in the past.
 
Last edited:
Keeper! said:
On the 6th October there seemed little "anti Jewish" feeling world wide, the 7th as said was shocking but the response from Israel is barbaric in the extreme and has done their cause and feeling towards them huge damage.

Yes they has to retaliate against Hamas but against the innocent in Gaza?

Not from me and I have to say it's left me feeling very indifferent towards them.

And what about the 200 plus hostages? Most are Jewish, their leaders don't seem to have much feeling for them, do they?
Click to expand...
The hostages is the thing I don’t get most about this approach.
Of course you may be sure that talks are going on however.
The are many governments involved, including our own, trying to negotiate for one young girl with an Irish passport.
You may be sure the US and UK governments and perhaps others are working in the background.
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
In fairness @Prestwich_Blue When I read that response whether being sarcastic or not, I found it in very poor taste.
Click to expand...
I'm not taking lessons on good taste from an Irishman, when the Celtic fans, who clearly associate themselves with the Catholic community in Ireland, booed the two minutes silence this last weekend and after many Scots have bravely fought and given their lives for their country. Did you condemn that as being in poor taste? Let me check.

Yes of course it was sarcastic, and someone, well quite a few, have actually done that in the name of their religion. Now of course they only represent a small minority of that religion fortunately. But they've done it regularly and mostly against their own kind.
Whereas Israel has never undertaken industrial-scale extermination against the Palestinians (although it's obviously not treated them particularly well or fairly). Nazi Germany reduced the global Jewish population by 50% between 1933 and 1945, whereas the Palestinian population has QUINTUPLED since 1948.

But essentially you're just deflecting. And to answer the post from @halfcenturyup, you can be as uneasy as you want but the IHRA definition is an internationally agreed definition based on a consensus of a number of individual experts and bodies on the subject.

Like we joke about it being a shame that UEFA and CAS didn't call some of the united and Liverpool "financial geniuses" who "know" City are "financial cheats", it's a shame the IHRA they didn't consult some of the "antisemitism experts" on Bluemoon.
 
Keeper! said:
On the 6th October there seemed little "anti Jewish" feeling world wide, the 7th as said was shocking but the response from Israel is barbaric in the extreme and has done their cause and feeling towards them huge damage.
Click to expand...
Obviously no one was antisemitic before October (sarcasm alert for those who don't quite grasp the concept).

But what you're essentially saying is that it's OK and understandable to persecute Jews for Israel's actions. Some of you on here are fucking brain dead.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
But everyone knows the tactic to label people racist at the drop of a hat is designed to shut down debate. It’s not really news. It obstructs from real issues like this.
Click to expand...

So you know that's factual do you Tim. You've substantiated it have you?

I'm surprised at you, and particularly after people have been asked not to post this stuff.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I'm not taking lessons on good taste from an Irishman, when the Celtic fans, who clearly associate themselves with the Catholic community in Ireland, booed the two minutes silence this last weekend and after many Scots have bravely fought and given their lives for their country. Did you condemn that as being in poor taste? Let me check.

Yes of course it was sarcastic, and someone, well quite a few, have actually done that in the name of their religion. Now of course they only represent a small minority of that religion fortunately. But they've done it regularly and mostly against their own kind.
Whereas Israel has never undertaken industrial-scale extermination against the Palestinians (although it's obviously not treated them particularly well or fairly). Nazi Germany reduced the global Jewish population by 50% between 1933 and 1945, whereas the Palestinian population has QUINTUPLED since 1948.

But essentially you're just deflecting. And to answer the post from @halfcenturyup, you can be as uneasy as you want but the IHRA definition is an internationally agreed definition based on a consensus of a number of individual experts and bodies on the subject.

Like we joke about it being a shame that UEFA and CAS didn't call some of the united and Liverpool "financial geniuses" who "know" City are "financial cheats", it's a shame the IHRA they didn't consult some of the "antisemitism experts" on Bluemoon.
Click to expand...
Well I’m sorry that my opinion may upset you, but you can’t seem to see that what you have written is inflammatory, not to mention stereotypical.

I'm not taking lessons on good taste from an Irishman, when the Celtic fans, who clearly associate themselves with the Catholic community in Ireland, booed the two minutes silence this last weekend and after many Scots have bravely fought and given their lives for their country.
Click to expand...
I’m unaware of any debate revolving around Celtic fans. I have no interest in Celtic. No love for them whatsoever and have no time for the sectarianism that they practice the same as Rangers.
If they did what you say, I would have no problem whatsoever condemning them.
I’m Irish. Yes. That doesn’t automatically make me a Celtic fan.
I was brought up Catholic. Yes. I have no time for any outdated church and don’t agree with church and state being in bed with each other.

I don’t know what your concept of what Irishness is, but I can assure you that I am not that out of the ordinary in my opinions over here.

If you want to accuse me of deflection, I would argue that’s exactly what you have done with the generalisations you have posted.
Many Irishmen fought in British regiments in both world wars, particularly the 1st, thinking that the democratic vote we had for an Irish parliament would be rewarded.

I wouldn’t dream of questioning your knowledge on Jewish history and the last 80 years since the war and the setting up of the state. I came on here asking questions to educate myself and have read up myself since.

I am genuinely surprised and disappointed by your first paragraph, but I’m guessing that doesn’t really concern you.

The reason for my post saying I thought it was in poor taste, is because although I know this is an emotional subject for you, I genuinely thought you are better than that remark.
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
If they did what you say, I would have no problem whatsoever condemning them.
I’m Irish. Yes. That doesn’t automatically make me a Celtic fan.
I was brought up Catholic. Yes. I have no time for any outdated church and don’t agree with church and state being in bed with each other.
Click to expand...
Yet you get annoyed with me, a Jew who won't unreservedly condemn Israeli actions, and tries to give a more nuanced view rather than simply spout propaganda.
 
U.S. Confirms Hamas Command Center Under S. Confirms Hamas Command Center Under Hospital

A U.S. intelligence official confirmed that Israel's claim about a Hamas command and operations center located under the Al-Shifa Medical Center in Gaza City is accurate.

Additionally, it was noted that Hamas fighters frequently siphon off fuel intended for the hospital.

These fighters often assemble and operate around the hospital, using the facility and its patients as human shields.

Source: CNN
 
trueblue1972 said:
U.S. Confirms Hamas Command Center Under S. Confirms Hamas Command Center Under Hospital

A U.S. intelligence official confirmed that Israel's claim about a Hamas command and operations center located under the Al-Shifa Medical Center in Gaza City is accurate.

Additionally, it was noted that Hamas fighters frequently siphon off fuel intended for the hospital.

These fighters often assemble and operate around the hospital, using the facility and its patients as human shields.

Source: CNN
Click to expand...
The Israelis tell US intelligence who tell CNN ...... Lol
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
No it isn't legally binding in itself. But the police and CPS can use it to demonstrate antisemitism.
Click to expand...
The non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

That doesn't include the "examples", some of which are contentious, including stuff which could never be proved in a court of law - but also includes holocaust denial which is a criminal offence in many countries (but not a specific offence in the UK). Curiously, the last example is "Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel" which seems to admit that the state of Israel does things which it ought not do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top