Meanwhile in Israel

[Not in Crawley]

1 minute ago, London Wanderer said:

So it is one of our freedoms then 👍

But not one of the ones soldiers died for. So which freedoms did they die for then? 

Who’s getting confused again 😂

 Dave’s words are his own brother. You can agree with all, some, or none of it. I only shared his opinion.

These freedoms, silly!

[royal white]

3 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

So it is one of our freedoms then 👍

But not one of the ones soldiers died for. So which freedoms did they die for then? 

Who’s getting confused again 😂

 Dave’s words are his own brother. You can agree with all, some, or none of it. I only shared his opinion.

Of course you know Dave and his brother well 😂 I wish I knew some squaddies, I could then ask them if what you said was true. 

[BobyBrno]

3 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Not quite that simple, I'm afraid. They were actually given 24 hours before airsrikes began, and now its almost impossible to move around with many not having the capabilites to do so and that's before you get to the sick, old, infirm, young children etc etc

This is a report from back in October about the issues then, as mentioned its now much worse due to the bombing.

https://news.sky.com/story/gaza-evacuation-why-getting-people-out-in-less-than-24-hours-is-impossible-12983748

The last five days, corridors have been opened by the Israelis for civilians to move south. It’s on the BBC website. Not perfect by any means but not as you say. 

[London Wanderer]

33 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

I was saying that no one on here is saying they hate Jews. This appears to have read as no one on the planet hates jews for some reason. Well, we know the reason.

It was pretty obvious from the previous post and your response that you were talking about this thread.

People love a bit of drama though.

”never in all my years have I seen such ignorance” 😂 

can’t believe they actually fell for it

 

[BobyBrno]

Just now, London Wanderer said:

It was pretty obvious from the previous post and your response that you were talking about this thread.

People love a bit of drama though.

”never in all my years have I seen such ignorance” 😂 

can’t believe they actually fell for it

 

I think it may be ❤️ 

[royal white]

But no one hates Jews 🙄

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/news/2023/oct/20/antisemitic-hate-crimes-in-london-rise-1350-since-israel-hamas-war-met-says

[London Wanderer]

3 minutes ago, royal white said:

Of course you know Dave and his brother well 😂 I wish I knew some squaddies, I could then ask them if what you said was true. 

The brother in reference to you❤️

 Who said anything about it being true 😂😂 it’s only one veterans opinion. 
 

But aye, go ask your squaddie mates if they agree or not. I’d be interested to know brother. 
 

Maybe they can enlighten us all as to what freedoms people did and didn’t die fighting for 👍As I never knew free speech wasn’t one.

 

[royal white]

4 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

The brother in reference to you❤️

 Who said anything about it being true 😂😂 it’s only one veterans opinion. 
 

But aye, go ask your squaddie mates if they agree or not. I’d be interested to know brother. 
 

Maybe they can enlighten us all as to what freedoms people did and didn’t die fighting for 👍As I never knew free speech wasn’t one.

 

It wasn’t so we could protest, like you said.  I’ll tell you that for nowt. 👍

[BobyBrno]

2 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

The brother in reference to you❤️

 Who said anything about it being true 😂😂 it’s only one veterans opinion. 
 

But aye, go ask your squaddie mates if they agree or not. I’d be interested to know brother. 
 

Maybe they can enlighten us all as to what freedoms people did and didn’t die fighting for 👍As I never knew free speech wasn’t one.

 

Can we finally address this ‘rivers to the sea’ chant? To me, at worst, it’s a call for genocide, at best, it’s just plain antisemitic. 
Now. Free speech. Is it acceptable for thousands of people to march around the streets of this country chanting such offensive and divisive rhetoric.
Andy McDonald got suspended from the Labour Party for ‘deeply offensive’ comments regarding this very same issue. Where do you draw the line?  Thoughts?

[BobyBrno]

24 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

These freedoms, silly!

 

[Not in Crawley]

1 minute ago, London Wanderer said:

It was pretty obvious from the previous post and your response that you were talking about this thread.

People love a bit of drama though.

”never in all my years have I seen such ignorance” 😂 

can’t believe they actually fell for it

 

Its easier to bicker about semantics and some folks love a quick game of let's round on the Liberal bedwetter. But I've have the last laugh, oh yes indeedy, as I'm looking simply resplendent today in a gold cravat and 15 inch brogue winkles, and so nothing will put me in a bad mood as I sit astride of my penny farthing on my way home.

AND I've also today just purchased some ads in the Jewish Chronicle in their Hannakuh What's On Edition - 'NiC - proudly supporting Jewish businesses and shoe makers.'

 

[Not in Crawley]

2 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

 

How many tears per wheelie bin, do you reckon?

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

16 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Can we finally address this ‘rivers to the sea’ chant? To me, at worst, it’s a call for genocide, at best, it’s just plain antisemitic. 
Now. Free speech. Is it acceptable for thousands of people to march around the streets of this country chanting such offensive and divisive rhetoric.
Andy McDonald got suspended from the Labour Party for ‘deeply offensive’ comments regarding this very same issue. Where do you draw the line?  Thoughts?

For what it's worth, given the wording he used, he shouldn't really have been suspended

[London Wanderer]

23 minutes ago, royal white said:

It wasn’t so we could protest, like you said.  I’ll tell you that for nowt. 👍

So they didn’t fight for freedom of thought & speech then ?

That makes sense 👏

Which freedoms did you and your squaddie lads fight for?

[royal white]

2 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

So they didn’t fight for freedom of thought & speech then ?

That makes sense 👏

Which freedoms did you and your squaddie lads fight for?

No protest. Like you said. Bit late in the day to try and change your wording. 

[Not in Crawley]

9 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

For what it's worth, given the wording he used, he shouldn't really have been suspended

Aye, but its certainly a loaded phrase. I do agree it was more for political expedience than anything.

Here's a decent explianer (i know, i know is the Guardian - but its the best I've read as I didn't know much about it until the marches started) apparently its also used in the Lukid party's founding charter which I didn't know.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/31/from-the-river-to-the-sea-where-does-the-slogan-come-from-and-what-does-it-mean-israel-palestine

[BobyBrno]

15 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

For what it's worth, given the wording he used, he shouldn't really have been suspended

I agree. The wording at the marches is unambiguous though. 

[London Wanderer]

53 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

I think it may be ❤️ 

I think we can all be pretty certain that NiC wasn’t denying the existence of anti-semitism 😂

 Its funny watching people still try and manipulate his words though.

39 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Can we finally address this ‘rivers to the sea’ chant? To me, at worst, it’s a call for genocide, at best, it’s just plain antisemitic. 
Now. Free speech. Is it acceptable for thousands of people to march around the streets of this country chanting such offensive and divisive rhetoric.
Andy McDonald got suspended from the Labour Party for ‘deeply offensive’ comments regarding this very same issue. Where do you draw the line?  Thoughts?

This is worth a read. Gives a fairly balanced perspective on the chant.
 

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/11/2/from-the-river-to-the-sea-what-does-the-palestinian-slogan-really-mean

I don’t believe anyone can say with confidence that the people singing that song want to see the destruction of Israel.  Some will, but many won’t. Palestinian Territories exist throughout the land, from Jordan, down to the Med. A fair two state solution would have to include those historic territories. So I disagree that the song calls for the destruction of Israel. Think of it like the empire songs of old that we sing now - singing them doesn’t mean we want to rule the world again.

I think this is an interesting read as well on what the aims of the current Israeli government are.

the party’s original party manifesto in 1977 stated that “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty”. It also argued that the establishment of a Palestinian state “jeopardises the security of the Jewish population” and “endangers the existence of the state of Israel”.

Israel’s ambassador to the UK, Tzipi Hotovely, has been among the promoters of international recognition of the Jewish historic claim to lands from the river to the sea.

The expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem by successive Israeli governments is seen as an attempt by Israel to control the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, denying Palestinians’ aspiration for an independent state.

Thoughts?

 For me it’s almost like it’s a resistance song for some against the current eviction policies.

Edited November 8, 2023 by London Wanderer

[BobyBrno]

8 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Aye, but its certainly a loaded phrase. I do agree it was more for political expedience than anything.

Here's a decent explianer (i know, i know is the Guardian - but its the best I've read as I didn't know much about it until the marches started) apparently its also used in the Lukid party's founding charter which I didn't know.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/31/from-the-river-to-the-sea-where-does-the-slogan-come-from-and-what-does-it-mean-israel-palestine

Perhaps Starmer doesn’t read the Guardian or maybe he does and knows that it’s just more apologist clap trap. 

[BobyBrno]

2 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

I think we can all be pretty certain that NiC wasn’t denying the existence of anti-semitism 😂

 Its funny watching people still try and manipulate his words though.

This is worth a read. Gives a fairly balanced perspective on the chant.
 

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/11/2/from-the-river-to-the-sea-what-does-the-palestinian-slogan-really-mean

I don’t believe anyone can say with confidence that the people singing that song want to see the destruction of Israel.  Some will, but many won’t. Palestinian Territories exist throughout the land, from Jordan, down to the Med. A fair two state solution would have to include those historic territories. So I disagree that the song calls for the destruction of Israel. Think of it like the empire songs of old that we sing now - singing them doesn’t mean we want to rule the world again.

I think this is an interesting read as well on what the aims of the current Israeli government are.

the party’s original party manifesto in 1977 stated that “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty”. It also argued that the establishment of a Palestinian state “jeopardises the security of the Jewish population” and “endangers the existence of the state of Israel”.

Israel’s ambassador to the UK, Tzipi Hotovely, has been among the promoters of international recognition of the Jewish historic claim to lands from the river to the sea.

The expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem by successive Israeli governments is seen as an attempt by Israel to control the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, denying Palestinians’ aspiration for an independent state.

Thoughts?

 For me it’s almost like it’s a resistance song for some against the current eviction policies.

Thoughts? If it is ambiguous why do the Labour Party find it ‘deeply offensive’? 

 

[Not in Crawley]

Just now, BobyBrno said:

Perhaps Starmer doesn’t read the Guardian or maybe he does and knows that it’s just more apologist clap trap. 

Seems pretty balanced to me - both sides have used it in different contexts - both of which can be considered inflamatory. I don't disagre politically with what Starmer did, the Labour party have to be so strict on any mention of anti-semitisim, no grey areas because of what happened under Corybn's charge. Personally, I thin he was treated a little harshly, but I'd have still made the same call if I was in Starmer's shoes (thankfully, I'm not)

Again, this whole taking moral highgrounds on this topic is futile, and once again it is possible to have sympathy for the Palestinians, loathe the atrocities carried out by Hamas and take issue with certain Zionist policies. People can hold various positions and they not be diametrically opposed.

Its not binary, even if you (and certain sections of the current government) what to make the discussion so.

[London Wanderer]

29 minutes ago, royal white said:

No protest. Like you said. Bit late in the day to try and change your wording. 

You don’t think protest is an example of freedom of speech ? 😂

Come on RW. If you’re going to get sucked into a thread on a conflict you’ve admitted you know nothing about, then at least get the basics right.

 You’ve a very literal brain haven’t you? Nothing wrong with that bdw. 

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by London Wanderer

[London Wanderer]

1 minute ago, BobyBrno said:

Thoughts? If it is ambiguous why do the Labour Party find it ‘deeply offensive’? 

 

I don’t know, what statement did they give?

I imagine they are trying to tread very carefully after Corbyn’s era. The FA have banned it as well. I presume to avoid the controversy. But none of that proves it is a song that calls for the eradication of Jews.  
 

What were your thoughts on the manifesto of the Israeli government?

[royal white]

3 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

You don’t think protest is an example of freedom of speech ? 😂

Come on RW. If you’re going to sucked into a thread on a conflict you’ve admitted you know nothing about, then at least get the basics right.

 You’ve a very literal brain haven’t you? Nothing wrong with that bdw. 

 

By d way? You in da hood now? 

 

I’m not sure how many times I have to mention this but I’ll go for one more, hopefully it might sink in. 
 

I couldn’t give two shiny fucks about what’s going on over there, it will never change. There’s plenty of wars going on around the world which I also don’t give a fuck about. 
 

My main issue on this, as I’ve said numerous times is the thunder cunts over here who are all over it now, these demonstrators, these people who couldn’t point Palestine out on a map. Attention seeking bandwagon cockwombles. 
 

Please tell me you get it now? 
 

as for free speech I strongly suggest you and NIC have a discussion about this one. You have NIC who said on here he was going to report anyone booing the taking of the knee to the police (yep a grown man said that) and then there’s you who seems to be for antisemitic chants on marches. I thought you 2 were singing from the same hymn sheet? 

[Not in Crawley]

1 minute ago, royal white said:

By d way? You in da hood now? 

 

I’m not sure how many times I have to mention this but I’ll go for one more, hopefully it might sink in. 
 

I couldn’t give two shiny fucks about what’s going on over there, it will never change. There’s plenty of wars going on around the world which I also don’t give a fuck about. 
 

My main issue on this, as I’ve said numerous times is the thunder cunts over here who are all over it now, these demonstrators, these people who couldn’t point Palestine out on a map. Attention seeking bandwagon cockwombles. 
 

Please tell me you get it now? 
 

as for free speech I strongly suggest you and NIC have a discussion about this one. You have NIC who said on here he was going to report anyone booing the taking of the knee to the police (yep a grown man said that) and then there’s you who seems to be for antisemitic chants on marches. I thought you 2 were singing from the same hymn sheet? 

Who says I'm a grown man, Pedro?