To be utterly disgusted by the woman cutting down yellow ribbons commemorating the October 7th victims in Muswell Hill yesterday morning

[AngeloMysterioso]

When Jewish people are being attacked and murdered on their way to synagogue on Yom Kippur

When you literally can’t move or look in any direction without Palestine Palestine Palestine in our faces

On the eve of the anniversary of the worst atrocity committed against Jewish people since the Holocaust, a small, unobtrusive memorial for the victims of that unthinkable, barbaric attack was destroyed yesterday by a despicable woman who turned up with scissors and cut the ribbons down, one by one.

Ribbons for women and girls who were raped and murdered.
Ribbons for babies ripped from their parents’ arms and slaughtered.
Ribbons for men beaten to death.
Ribbons for the hostages still suffering every moment.

And this disgusting individual took it upon herself to come along with a pair of scissors and cut each one away. Her excuse? They “condone genocide”.

Let’s not pretend for a moment that that was her true motivation. It was a revolting demonstration of the antisemitism that has become so shamefully rife in this country that it sickens me.

This woman needs to be named and shamed for the loathsome person she is.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/07/woman-filmed-cutting-ribbons-commemorating-israeli-hostages/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-woman-ribbons-israel-hostages-london-manchester-synagogue-b1251594.html

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/woman-filmed-cutting-down-ribbons-commemorating-israeli-hostages-in-north-london-5HjdF2y2/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15167737/amp/woman-cuts-yellow-ribbons-israeli-hostages-london.html

https://inews.co.uk/news/anger-woman-filmed-cutting-down-ribbons-london-memorial-israeli-hostages-3961369

No because you don't live there and most likely have citizenship and a passport for where you are from. My point is, they shouldn't be forced out of their homes to the point of calling themselves refugees. Are you denying the rape, killing and displacement of thousands of Palestinians by the Israeli government since 1948?

Indeed. They are no better off by being considered refugees and not being able to move ahead and reach a compromise because they still think they will return to where their grandparents lived in 1948.

i want the same for Palestinians. I assueme you are talking about those in WB and Gaza (you are not clear at all). yes, they need their own state and then they can take their own refugees from Lebanon and Syria and wherever into their own state like Israel did in theirs. But Palestinians are not ready for a state which is why they didn't take the offer of statehood in 1947, it's why no state was declared in the WB and Gaza from 1948-1967, it's why we had the three nos of Khartoum, it's why Barak's offer failed, it's why Olmert's offer failed. Compromise is hard and would lead to civil war as many are not ready for it. State building is hard and boring - and they don't have that yet. hamas has shown what is possible when they have control and Iran is waiting to take advantage.

How do you know I don't live there? I haven't told you where I 'm from and where my GPs were ethnically cleansed from. As it happens, without giving too much outing details, it most certainly was there.

And I'm glad we agree that Palestinian refugees in Jordan with Jordanian citizenship and Jordanian passports should not be counted as refugees any more. They are though. Similarly, Palestine refugees living in Palestine with Palestinian passports are also therefore not refugees.

There's been killing and displacement on both sides during this conflict. The losing side has indeed suffered more.

Here's another pro-Palestinian who supports Hamas, for the poster who was previously claiming that didn't happen.
"Up Hamas", apparently

https://x.com/HeidiBachram/status/1975645404680057080

Well you were born there (wherever that is) and raised there I presume, you weren't displaced yourself? Palestinians who don't want to leave their own homeland shouldn't have to, and they shouldn't have to call themselves that for it either.

Because again all of those deals boiled down to Palestinians accepting a take over of the majority of their land from the Israelis and more occupation and illegal settlements. None of the deals have ever been fair or just.

OK, one last chance and then I can't handle this anymore - you really are a confused lady.

Palestinian refugees are called thus because they are the descendants of those displaced in the 1947-48 war.Other than now in the current war in Gaza which is internal displacement as few are crossing an international border (sadly, I wish they could escape but Egypt doesn't want them), Palestinians have not been displaced by Israel (obviously those in Syria for eg have been displaced due to that war but that is not Israel) and stay where they are.No one is forcing them to leave.

What were the Palestinians proposing instead? What was the counter proposal? These deals were negotiated between the Israelis and Palestinians so if it wasn't fair or just, what was the Palestinian proposal exactly?

The whole point is that there wouldn't have been occupation, there wouldn't be settlements (there was actually agreement between Palestinians and Israelis on land swaps for those settlement blocs close to the border which accounts for the vast majority) and there would have been a viable Palestinian state.

What was wrong with Barak's proposal? Gaza, the West Bank and the road that joined them?

You claim to want rights and safety for Palestinians but the more I read your simplistic posts, the harder it is for me to avoid the conclusion that what you're really objecting to is Israel's continued existence alongside any kind of Palestinian one, and Hamas having to return the hostages and admit that it lost... and that it is preferable for the Palestinians to continue their current suffering than accept these terms.

Buy they are blocking the exits and denying aid regardless of their refugee status, again in their own homes, A basic human rights issue. I am in no way confused. The whole conversation was asking why they chose those to call themselves refugees unlike in Jordan. They have been historically displaced by Israel and currently being massacred in droves via genocide so it's not like they can be displaced now anyway, when the Israeli government are hell bent on eradicating them all together. They should never have been forced to want to call themselves refugees historically when it was their own land they were pushed out from.

Exactly. The Palestinians will never get better than what was offered by Barak and later Olmert. It was already far reaching. In fact, to imaine such an offer today, after 7/10, is just impossible. They are the ones who would have benefitted most, they would have had their own state. At some point the Palestinian leadership also need to internalize that they tried to have it all and lost. Repeatedly. But, no, they are the darlings who are bravely fighting colonialism, imperialism and white superemacy! But also only want to be treated fairly and live in peace.

Not to mention the fact that Egypt is equally as guilty as Israel in terms of blockades and not allowing civilians over the border to escape but of course they rarely get a mention in all of this. It really is Israel hatred.

Again, it would have left Israel with key areas with and control over the holy sites which religious and historically would be wholly unfair. Compromising their religious and national rights. It wouldn't have been a fair deal and would have been considered betrayal of their promised right to return under the UN. But regardless of whether they should still be fighting for their rights for the land after it has been practically taken over, they still shouldn't have to be fighting for basic human rights like being denied free movement and aid.

So you prefer the Palestinians to continue as they have been and continue to be because the alternative is a compromise. You don't even want to accept that deal and continue to pressure for change; it's got to be everything, at once, and continued death and suffering is absolutely preferable to any kind of realistic long term solution.

What solution would you offer? If you were at the table, what deal would you give?

This person previously in the thread explained my thoughts perfectly so I'm just going to paste their comment as I couldn't have said it better:

A fully independent Palestinian state, which has control over its own borders, coast, airspace.
A place which Israel doesn't bomb wherever it fancies.
A place where Israel can't control what the Palestinians eat, where they go, even whether their kids are allowed to eat chocolate.
The West Bank free of Israeli settlements and checkpoints.
The apartheid system currently in place dismantled.
Those held without charge in Israeli prisons returned (especially the children).
The option of a review for the thousands convicted before military courts that have a 99% conviction rate.
An independent investigation into war crimes committed during war, and those with arrest warrants being extradited to face trial.
Justice for the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed or injured by settlers whilst the police and IDF either look away or assist them.

Yes. Various Muslim states fund Hamas but curiously have very little interest in helping Palestinians caught up in the war. Not enough questions are asked about why this is the case.

Well once there is a sovereign Palestinian state without Hamas in charge, alongside an Israeli one, most of that is a given, but you don't want any of the options for this that have ever been on the table, so this is really a lot of talk and no substance. Surprise surprise. Did you think October 7 was a good way to achieve any of this?

I think it's pretty obvious that what you want is the end completely of the Jewish state and you don't mind Hamas in charge and throwing Palestinians under the bus as long as they're working to that end. You're in good company there. Shame the Palestinians have to take the brunt. Still, you're saying nice things about what they should have, that's helpful.

No I'd like to end occupation by Israel. I don't not think or agree that Oct 7 was a good way forward in this at all. Wanting Palestinians to have a fair life and an actual liveable state with control of their own movement, right to work and passport isn't me agreeing with Hamas. Innocent Palestinians in 2025 don't necessarily mean agreeing with Hamas that were elected in 2006 by 40%...

Well no, it’s not a “lots of my friends are black” argument as this woman is Jewish. I don’t see why being Palestinian-Jewish would make her only part Jewish. Jewish people can be of any national origin and Palestinians can be of any faith group.

If anything it’s a “I’m not racist, I’m black” argument. Which is still stupid but not the same thing.

What she is doing is clearly anti-Israeli but you seem to be conflating “Jewish” with “Israeli”.

Yep. A bit like he USA hosting the former Al Qaeda leader, now President of Syria. Welcoming him with open arms. They all do it.

Did you read the article? I don't know why I'm asking. I know people like you are completely incurious and unwilling to countenance that your political opponents may have worthwhile views. Come back when you've read it and have serious counterarguments to make.

THIS THIS THIS

I'd like to end occupation by Israel.

If only there had ever been an option for that! If only Israel had withdrawn 20 years ago!

"Palestinians need a state, it's genocide, it's untenable!"

"Here's an option for an end to the violence and a Palestinian state/first step of a process towards a Palestinian state alongside Israel."

"Not like that! I'd rather continue as we are than take that offer!"

"Why?"

"Because Palestinians need a state, it's genocide, it's untenable!"

Like the extremely knowledgeable previous poster said, this is totally pointless. You may or may not actually be confused, I don't know, but there's only so many rounds of this anyone can take. They've been doing it in the ME for decades, I can't even take half a day.

I'm talking about what I would like now. It is far too late to turn back time obviously, Israel withdrawing at the time wasn't fair and I completely understand why Palestinians didn't want to accept any previous deals as they would have been historically and religiously unfair, but regardless of whether I agree with their decision on the peace deals or what they should have taken, they deserve free movement, a right to work and a passport now.

I'm talking about what I would like now.

Same goes. Same always, always goes.

Once you accept that Israel isn't going anywhere and the only option for long lasting safety and security and sovereignty for Palestinians is to coexist alongside the Jewish state, you can set aside the cognitive dissonance and look at what a secure, self governing Palestinian state could look like. It doesn't involve destroying Israel or being ruled by murderous bastards who want Palestinians to die so they can stoke their murderous antisemitism. You want the best for the Gazans, truly, truly want the best for them, then you want Hamas gone and the State of Palestine alongside the State of Israel. Sorry but that's how it is.

And repeat...