"The only purpose of these endless marches is to intimidate British Jews" (part two) ***MNHQ has tweaked the title in order to make the quote more clear***

[stomachameleon]

Only the few apparently........these pictures are from todays March. Footage to follow..

Always talks sense....

I'm afraid you know very little about the Belfast Agreement as it had no absence of hatred. It was a difficult, emotionally charged process that repeatedly broke down.

As I said, absolutely NO peaceful political settlement requires an absence of hatred. It is completely unrealistic to require that of ANY party to a conflict.

You're actually arguing for perfect being the enemy of good there.

It's perfectly valid for anyone to despise and hate terrorist groups such as PIRA, Hamas, FARC, MK, ISIS, AQ, etc.

In my case, I despise PSF/PIRA, but have been and am very civil in all my interactions with their members. On and offline.

So I'll take no lectures from someone like you who has been so privileged as to live in a society not beset by terrorism on a daily basis.

Like I said, good enough IS enough and that's merely being civil as a bare minimum. The Belfast Agreement is built on it.

That is the best that can be hoped for within living memory. Eventually, as long as there's no renewed acts of terrorism, a population can move on from it to live fully as societies in places like GB do.

Just to add to my above post: if anyone wants to claim that the countries in the Middle East didn't have any issue with Jews until Israel was created and filled the country with a bunch of Europeans, well that's not true is it? On either count. In fact the wider region emptied pretty much all of its Jews into Israel.

Oh my god. Thank you for posting these images. Truly shocking - and disturbing.
I don't understand why there can't be an anti war demo without all the hate?
I also think people seem to have forgotten that there are still Israeli hostages. Surely "free the hostages" would be an appropriate placard? Anyone seen one?

Yes, that's spot on. Terrorist groups, their supporters and sneaking regarders prefer to oversimplify conflict in order to attempt to justify their actions.

Oversimplification is actually very successful at swaying people towards them and their cause.

Counter-terrorism, on the other hand, is more complex and definitely not something that can be easily condensed into a social media meme.

In effect, a lie can be halfway round the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.

100% agree.

Mind you, I think you're more likely to see pro-hostage material at kinds of events such as the Israeli one where they use their photos.

Some of those who have been to pro-Palestinian marches have been known to rip hostage posters down in London.

The ripping down of the hostage posters - what despicable behaviour. Some of those images were of little children. Imagine being so intolerant.

@noblegiraffe this one you mean?

@Trulywonderful

This discussion with you has made me reflect on my own behaviour and try to do better. Thankfully, I have always said to my children that we don't hate people, we don't say that word. And I have certainly never told them and would never tell them its OK to hate 'certain groups'. I will never, never, never nurture hate and especially not in my own children.

You say the GFA negotiations broke down a lot. I suspect that was when hate reared it's ugly head and it had to be put back in the box to move forward.

Hate does nobody any good and should be contacted as much as possible. Just my opinion. I can see, not just you, plenty of others disagree and think it's OK to hate each other.

@windowframer That you think Truly considers ALL anti-Zionist comments to be antisemitism is truly laughable.

@noblegiraffe

Of course he's saying the state of Israel should be eradicated, yes. Some flavour of that (whether meaning violently eradicated, deprived of its status as a jewish state, amalgamated with Palestine or whatever) is what anti-Zionism is.

So here:

So, these people are calling for the eradication of Israel. To deny that this has anything to do with antisemitism and purely to do with Israel deserves closer scrutiny.

The question is: do you think that they would be calling for the eradication of Israel if it wasn't a Jewish state (the only one in the world, in fact). Do you think they would be saying this if it were a Muslim state?

There are plenty of other, even newer countries in the region where people have been displaced and land has been grabbed. Are there calls to wipe them off the map?

And then, when you look at groups like the Houthis who don't even bother to hide it, they say "Death to Israel, a curse upon the Jews". The anti-Israel sentiment and the antisemitism are clearly linked.

So denying that this sort of fervent antizionism isn't at all linked to antisemitism or motivated by it doesn't really wash.

you're basically saying that anti-Zionism is antisemitic by definition.

It's not actually a question of scrutinising specific examples of anti-Zionism and working out whether they're actually coded antisemitism. You're saying that they are antisemitic by virtue of being anti-Zionist. It's not necessary to prove or even to know whether they mean anything other than "the state of Israel shouldn't exist". That statement is itself antisemitic.

You may be right, I don't know. Your questions certainly deserve consideration. But the first step is to be clear, and honest, about what we're arguing about.

So I'll take no lectures from someone like you who has been so privileged as to live in a society not beset by terrorism on a daily basis.

Big assumption there.
I shall leave you with your hatred, but please, reflect, it does nobody any good. I will wish you only care and kindness in return.

I understand what you're implying that it means.

But the logic you're using to do so (most people in group A - along with plenty of other people - believe in belief X, therefore attacking belief X must really be an attack against group A) is faulty.

The most obvious interpretation of "de-Zionise" is to oppose the assumption of support for Israel's existence and legitimacy, for example from the editorial position of the BBC, major new outlets and other "institutions".

I never said that.

@windowframer So by your narrow definition you mean only media outlets. What about, for instance, synagogues? Jewish schools?

But the logic you're using to do so (most people in group A - along with plenty of other people - believe in belief X, therefore attacking belief X must really be an attack against group A) is faulty.

Except your logic is faulty. You're incorrect assumption seems to be that most people in group A believe that any antizionist comment is antisemitism.

I think you misunderstood. By "belief X" I simply mean belief in Zionism (which is what is being challenged in the exhortation to "dezionise our institutions"). I didn't mean belief that any anti-Zionist comment is antisemitism.

What I wrote is simply the logic of what you said earlier: He wants us to dezionise our institutions. Most jews believe in Zionism. Therefore he's really talking about getting rid of jews from our institutions.

That logic doesn't follow.

Hard to believe anyone is trying to defend the well known Andrew Tate of Hamas supporters

Plus my name is prounced Truly Wonderful to idiots that think they can twist the truth and Truly Wonderful is sticking with everything she has posted about this cretin and his vile little speech. To add to what I said so far the organisers should have Tate microphone off him or apologised and said he doesn't represent the beliefs of the march/organisers if he this speech goes against the march spirit.

Anyway here is a little bit more about what happened and his response. Though frankly just research the vile man and you will find a fair amount of dodgy stuff he has said. Which begs the question why was he asking to speak in the first place. After all these marches are calling for a ceasefire according to some people.

https://www.israellycool.com/2024/01/14/mohammed-el-kurd-denies-supporting-massacres-the-video-says-otherwise/

Apparently some people don't bother to read the first thread before they comment on the second thread.

I mean we have all very clearly stated our own various views on everything a thousand times over in the last 100 days on various threads it seems.

I am hardly a blatant pro Israel support or political Zionist am I. However people will try to make it so to defend undefendable idiots it seems

The déjà vu is real and fucking exhausting.

It is 100 days since the pogrom and most people here started having to fight off a rise in Jew hate and people putting words in their mouths etc

So yes it is exhausting and like déjà vu at this point

@Trulywonderful that article was eye opening especially his response to 7/10.

Once again, I never made the claim that is being attributed to me here.

I don't understand this tendency (and I've seen it again and again on these threads) to nitpick a small detail to death - is it a derailment attempt because they don't want something discussed?

@SomeCatFromJapan yep.