Peace, just as long as Israel isn’t criticised
As I said earlier, a rally that supports Israel unequivocally isn’t a rally for peace. It is for the continuation of a blockade, occupation, illegal settlements and for the continuation of the bombing of Gaza.
Why is a rally to support Palestinians reported on through the prism of some minor violence, while a rally to support Israel’s action is dubbed as a ‘call for Mid-East peace’? While Israel bombs Gaza, keeps imposing blockades or building illegal settler settlements, or breaks the ceasefires, there won’t be peace. You can’t support Israeli action now and say you’re for peace. It is completely like supporting Hamas’ actions and saying you want peace. It’s deluded.
This letter is more about peace.
Update: LOL at Malky Muscular. Spot on.
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: Media,Middle East
I agree this seemed just as one-sided as yesterday’s rally (your banner appeared the exception that rather proved the rule, I thought).
As I’ve said before – the only solution will be one imposed, and guaranteed, from outside. The whole lot of you should have marched on the Iranians, Syrians, Yanks and EU.
Israel is doing a great job of forcing world opinion against itself with it’s war crimes…
through the prism of some minor violence
I don’t think that’s entirely fair. It’s like everything else, it’s reported through the prism of the bias of the reporter. The Beeb was very even-handed and referred to a “minority of people” and stressed that the rally went peacefully apart from that. Sky News reported it in a way that implied that Central London was razed to the ground. Entirely as you’d expect.
If a group of 200 masked idiots start smashing windows and fronting up to policemen, some people will seize on that as an excuse to denigrate the rally as a whole. I have to say I think that 200 people being violent is quite a lot of people in terms of group size, although obviously it’s a tiny fraction of the people who were there. But I went on a few rallies in the early 90s which weren’t racially or ethnically related at all and there were always a bunch of idiots who had obviously turned up purely to start trouble, so I can’t honestly say that I think it’s terribly sinister in itself.
The BBC reports have started with trouble at the protest, colouring the perception of the protest and ignoring the 100,000 or more that were peaceful protesters so yeah I think the BBC are being idiotic here.
The point is they were an extreme minority from the day, you can’t report the actions of a violent 200 hundred as equal to the actions of a peaceful 100/150,000 and be taken seriously!
That’s why I went on to say “although obviously it’s a tiny fraction of the people who were there”. AKSHULLY.
Some people beg to differ…
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/01/11/we-want-peace/
HARRY’S PLACE said that? You HAVE to be shitting me…
Ben
LOL. Well, that really was a surprise marvin. But their delusion doesn’t change what I’ve said above.
Peace doesn’t come through bombing the hell out of an entire peoples and killing nearly 300 innocent children.
There are people who wouldn’t recognise a call for peace if it jumped up and tweaked their beard.
Peace doesn’t come through bombing the hell out of an entire peoples and killing nearly 300 innocent children. Well said, but I reckon today’s pro-war protesters would disagree and respond with some handy talking points.
In the spirit of Slumdog Millionaire, let’s play… Who Wants To Be An Apologist For Israel!
In response to the ongoing indiscriminate slaughter of Gaza’s civilians, which lie should Israel’s apologists feed the media this time:
A) Hamas broke the ceasefire so any civilian deaths are in fact their fault
B) Israel has no option but to bomb Gaza to guarantee its security
C) Hamas is using civilians as ‘human shields’ so Israel cannot avoid ‘collateral damage’
D) Israel tries to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible
So what’s your final answer?
Rayyan, you’ve posted comments similar to that on every single thread at least once and often more than once for the last week.
And everyone has replied to you more than once every day for the last week.
Everyone knows what you think, everyone knows what I think and everyone knows what everyone else thinks.
So perhaps all of us should shut the fuck up and just read what we’ve said already, and what was said in response, rather than trying to get each other’s backs up. It’s just a thought.
Is that D) then? Don’t forget, you still have one lifeline left!
Aaaaarrrrgggghhhh!!!!
Is that D) then?
Is that an “I’m the sort of person who likes to get people’s backs up for fun”, then?
I’m going to watch Gladiators, which, by the way, may be the nonviolent solution to I/P that we’ve all been looking for. Check it out:
1. Pugil-sticks, not machine guns
2. Safety nets and deep warm water to cushion falls from the pugil-podium
3. Body armour
4. Everyone’s basically friends with everyone else
5. Foam fingers
6. Casualties: 0 on both sides
Watch it and see if I’m not right.
As I’ve said before – the only solution will be one imposed, and guaranteed, from outside. The whole lot of you should have marched on the Iranians, Syrians, Yanks and EU.
This solution is only possible if it’s agreed between the Palestinian and the Israelis. I don’t beleive it’s possible, because the Israilis will never agree to the Return of the Palestinian refugees, this would be the end of the ‘Jewish State’ The palestinians will never give up the right to armed resistant. My personal opinion is a One State solution, where jews,muslims and christinian can live side by side. Even if a Two State solution is found,These two states will continue to be at war [Pakistan/India] What will happen if the USA is no longer a world millitary power. Great Empires are no longer around. Any thought’s
Sunny, if you watch the pictures from the two rallies you’ll understand why the pro-Israel rally was a rally for peace, and the pro-Hamas rally was a rally of hate.
In the pro-Israel rally, the marchers carried signs saying such things as “Stop the Rockets”, “An End to Terror”, and “No peace in Gaza if there’s no peace in Israel”
The pro-Hamas marchers carried signs saying “Time to put and end to Israel”, “Israel, go back to Europe”, (actually most Israelis originate in the Arab countries), and “Throw them out of the UN”.
So, Sunny, there’s your answer for you. Calls for peace versus ugly calls of hate.
The pro-Hamas marchers carried signs saying “Time to put and end to Israelâ€, “Israel, go back to Europeâ€, (actually most Israelis originate in the Arab countries), and “Throw them out of the UNâ€.
Well, for a start, there was a surprisingly lack of hamas flags in a rally apparently for Hamas. And I even carried an anti-Hamas banner and no one said anything to me.
Secondly, the pro-Palestinian rally was more than ten times bigger. Just because David T caught the pictures of a few nutters doesn’t mean it solely consisted of them.
A pro-Israel rally that says Israel should not be criticised for its current action is a rally in favour of killing Palestinians, as the country is doing now.
It is not a rally for peace, unless you accept the current actions make the Middle East more unstable. And unless you call for a proper end to the blockade.
Chairwoman – I have been doing some digging around for you on your project to trace your family and the Yad Veshem Museum in Jerusalem can help and offer assistance and also the Bet Hatfutzot which is The Diaspora Museum.
http://www.yadvashem.org.il/
I think they do help with locating family and friends but don’t think they do what I suggested which was trying to link them up online so people can see who was related and friends to whom.
Sorry to go off topic but it may help Chairwoman who may know about this already in which case I haven’t really helped her.
“Israel is doing a great job of forcing world opinion against itself with it’s war crimes…”
Leon, I have problems with your references to “100,000″ but your comment above is bang on the money.
I was on an anti-Iraq war rally 2 million-strong once, though it didn’t start out that many…
I think the ground has shifted a bit and even The Chief Rabbi didn’t follow his normal Israel I love you and it doesn’t matter what you do I love you from previous speeches.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7822656.stm
“Chief Rabbi Dr Sir Jonathan Sacks said he wanted Hamas to “say yes to peace”.”
He went on:
“Rabbi Sacks told the crowd: “All it took to avoid this suffering was for Hamas to stop firing rockets on Israeli citizens.
“Let a voice go out today from here in Trafalgar Square, and other gatherings being held, that we want peace.”
“We say to those who criticise Israel: You want Palestinian children to grow up with hope, so do we.
“You want Palestinians to be able to live with dignity, so do we.”
He said the day would come when Israelis and Palestinians would live together in peace.
“It could be hundred years away, or it could be today, it is up to Hamas and the people that give them arms, for the sake of Israeli children and the Palestinian children, we say, let it be today.” ”
It isn’t enough but it is a bit of a start.
His miserable failure to address the indignity with which Israel is treating and blockading people, stealing land for colonisation needed to be addressed which is what causes the rockets and terror. But he failed to do that.
At least he mentioned peace a bit today which is a departure from his usual approach.
The problem here is that by failing to lead they are basically telling the people at todays rally that most of what Israel does is ok but we want peace.
I think the depth of unhappiness with the actions of Israel may have hit home despite Harry Place’s take on things, the numbers were below what was expected so I think even the Jewish Community isn’t happy and the leadership need to adjust their position to reflect the reality.
Like I said I think there needs to be some events which help bring Jews and Muslims together in this country to start a healing process. Hopefully one of the major mosques in London and one of the major Synagogues can lead the way.
Right now I would like to see the Israeli and Palestinian Ambassadors here now show a bit of common sense and work together to show that a path to peace can begin even if it starts in London. So how about the two coming together and issuing a joint call to work for peace.
Maybe Rabbi Sacks can help with this and get some dignity back into his Chief Rabbi title because he isn’t showing the dignity of difference and understanding which he keeps talking about.
Imran, that was an extremely poor speech from Sacks. Why you think otherwise I don’t know.
Refresh – It was a poor speech but given his past speeches it could have been worse.
Why I expected better is because Sacks is supposed to lead the Jewish Community and provide correction when people stray too far from the teachings.
He is failing to do that and is an unapologetic cheerleader for an occupation that can’t possibly do World Jewry any good. Thus he is taking down a road which can only lead to problems and thus he is a poor leader who fails to stand up for what is right.
He is a good academic but he fails his own community and the wider community and what is scary is he has the ear of government and thus is influential but his influence isn’t for the good it is simply causing more problems.
He needs to step down as he is failing his duty.
Sacks is also very selective in that when Israel is on the ropes he says that now isn’t the time to discuss such matters but otherwise he is the biggest cheerleader.
What Israel needs is allies who will tell it when it goes too far and not cheerleaders.
Bush, Sacks, Blair have all led to the tragedy that we see today. Sacks needs to accept his portion of the blame and step down.
17 Sunny, if you watch the pictures from the two rallies you’ll understand why the pro-Israel rally was a rally for peace, and the pro-Hamas rally was a rally of hate.
An elephant has two sets of teeth, one for show and one for eating.
Yeah, well the Muslim leaders ain’t any better to be honest.
What problems?
Sunny – agreed but they are not as influential as Sacks are they now?
Sacks has the ear of Government and speaks at major organisations such are the European Parliament. Sacranie is lucky if he gets a cup of coffee at the same place
Different level and different world.
They are both the same but one has far more influence at a political level. Look at Sacks list of speaking engagements and Sacranie’s or Bari’s. Polar opposites.
Though Sacranie has been to visit Sacks I don’t the he has visited Sacranie.
I don’t believe it, not without evidence. Isn’t that obvious. Do I really have to spell it out?
Why is there always an assumption that police estimates are wrong?
Either way, looks like London’s efforts were dwarfed by Madrid’s. Apparently, there were 250,000 demonstrators there — according to the organisers.
If you can read Spanish, here’s a link:
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/Carlos/III/hace/palestino/elpepuesp/20090111elpepunac_3/Tes
Its poor and extremely worrying – Sacks actually opens out the scenario that there may not be peace for another hundred years, if ever.
I happen to believe Israel has dropped all pretense of a settlement with the Palestinians. They have reset the clock on any negotiations.
I am sorry if I bring grim news, but that is where we are.
Refresh – Sacks was a bad choice for Chief Rabbi. He is, as Imran says, a good academic and theologian, but no politician.
I doubt very much that he has any influence on Israeli politics, or that he is much confided in by Israeli politicians.
Here, I feel, that people show more respect for the position than the man.
I like him, although not necessarily all that he says.