I am sickened by the reaction to events in parliament this week.
I am appalled that those who want a ceasefire so that a civilian population is not collectively punished for matters over which they have no control are being blamed as if they are the terrorists.
I am sickened that Labour is claiming a victory when it partook in shoddy parliamentary practice.
I am appalled at the attitude towards Scottish politicians by those Zionists who claim to hate prejudice but are more than willing to display it against anyone who has the temerity to want to govern their own country that is currently subject to rule from Westminster.
I am shocked that Zionist parliamentarians rigged events in parliament. Both Linsday Hoyle and Rosie Winterton are openly of that persuasion
I am shocked by the appalling treatment of Palestinians here in the UK as well as in Gaza, as well as by the attitudes on display towards them.
I hate the Islamophobia that is now blatant that Tmi Montgomerie thought he could openly display it on Sophie Ridge's programme on Sky last night.
I am appalled that just because I do not want children to die at the hands of Israeli occupying forces who have no legal right to be where they are in Gaza, I am apparently 'hard left', when I am not.
I am shocked by the media's indifference to all this abuse.
Most of all, I am baffled, bemused and straightforwardly angry about the total indifference of our supposedly leading politicians to the suffering of a whole population at the hands of a fascist government because who cares whether it happens to be the government of Israel or not, that is what is happening and that is why it must be condemned: Jewishness has literally nothing to do with this, at all, and I am deeply offended by the anti-Semitism of those who say otherwise.
I want a better world for those who are suffering, and according to our leading politicians, that is something that we cannot aspire to. why, oh why, oh why?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Here is the Labour amendment in full to the SNP motion:-
“That this house believes that an Israeli ground offensive in Rafah risks catastrophic humanitarian consequences and therefore must not take place; notes the intolerable loss of Palestinian life, the majority being women and children; condemns the terrorism of Hamas who continue to hold hostages; supports Australia, Canada and New Zealand’s calls for Hamas to release and return all hostages and for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, which means an immediate stop to the fighting and a ceasefire that lasts and is observed by all sides, noting that Israel cannot be expected to cease fighting if Hamas continues with violence and that Israelis have the right to the assurance that the horror of 7 October 2023 cannot happen again; therefore supports diplomatic mediation efforts to achieve a lasting ceasefire; demands that rapid and unimpeded humanitarian relief is provided in Gaza; further demands an end to settlement expansion and violence; urges Israel to comply with the International Court of Justice’s provisional measures; calls for the UN Security Council to meet urgently; and urges all international partners to work together to establish a diplomatic process to deliver the peace of a two-state solution, with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable Palestinian state, including working with international partners to recognise a Palestinian state as a contribution to rather than outcome of that process, because statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and not in the gift of any neighbour.”
https://commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/Document/85314/Html?subType=Standard#_idTextAnchor005
Hmmm………………….this seems like a wish list appealing to both sides but why can’t Palestinians have a ‘safe and secure’ place to live like the Israelis? Why not use the same objective for both?
Why talk about the hostages who are fewer in number than the Palestinian casualties and make the ceasefire contingent upon their release? The IDF is on a killing spree from what I’ve seen, hiding behind the notion of ‘self defence’ and blasting anything that moves. That will not encourage hostage release. Most of the violence is being perpetrated by Israel: bomb the land – occupy the land. HAMAS fights back on THEIR land.
You have to really read it to see its shortcomings but prima facie it looks genuine if really very garbled.
But I must say, it makes the Speaker and his deputy look really bad. It does not strike me as a document that would make anyone go out and want to kill an MP supporting it.
So my only conclusion can be that an opportunity to do something meaningful has been scuppered by ulterior motives so I support Richard’s plea.
The problem with this, as many people will know, is that it gives Israel to right to decided whether to continue their campaign. They have ignored the ICJ demand to stop killing and ensure aid is ‘immediate and effective’. They asked for a report in a month. That month is now up.
I look forward to hearing Labour’s response to what the ICJ says about the last month.
Too many of our politicians are captured by foreign powers. They are in their pockets for money and they render services to their foreign masters in return in Westminster.
They smirk and sneer knowing there is little we can do about them. Voting every 5 years doesn’t cut it.
I think it is fairly simple. For some reason, which is beyond my comprehension, the world is divided into people and non-people. The Palestinians are non-people. They don’t have any rights and have not had since 1947. The attitude to anti-semitism is, quite rightly, disgust. The attitude to islamophobia is not the same. Why? The safety and security of the people of Israel is important, but should not be more important than the safety and security of the people of Palestine.
This dichotomy is not limited to Israel/Palestine – the Home Office attitude to ‘white skinned’ immigrants and refugees, compared to their attitude to people of a different colour is quite apparent, but it is at its most obvious in Israel/Palestine.
Scotland is also apparently populated by non-people too
Yes, Agreed. English by the way. And thanks for your hard work.
In a Union of Equals, the Scots, Welsh and NI would be able set their own independent budgets. But that would prevent the City of London from profiting falsely and downgrade London and parliaments power. To get low wages and thus high profit the system must coerce ‘The People’ into low paid and often dangerous jobs. Hence sanctions against the unemployed. No one would vote to sanction people to death, but it exists.
A C Bruce.
Agreed.
Electronic Democracy. ‘The People’ vote on everything. It is not policy until the people of a nation vote it to be so. And perhaps elections every year. Drastic cut executive power.
Regards
Its worse than that. Somehow the Govt/Oppo have decided the debate is now about ‘mobs’ threatening MP’S, and not about collective punishments and slaughter of 30,000. BBC R4 Today etc obediently taking its cue .
Demonstrations – ‘mobs’ – only tend to occur when the powers that be won’t engage – its a sign of weakness – and a signal that our ‘perfect democracy’ isn’t working.
MPs apparently only feel pressure to vote against their conscience or better judgement by ‘mob’s not by the Whips promising high office or corrupt money buying up whole political parties.
As someone who served several tours with UN peacekeeping forces, where undoubtably this had a big impact on lives, I have no idea why the world isn’t screaming for a ceasefire. Attacks in Israel on young and old alike by Hamas was a truly horrendous crime, what happened at the Nova festival actually made me feel sick to my stomach as the horror is unimaginable by most. I knew at that moment Hamas had in essence written Israel and blank cheque for the IDF incursion into Gaza. Do we somehow consider the lives of innocent Palestinians, worth less than the lives of someone else? Does the pain of losing a child in Gaza hurt a mother less, than a mother in Israel. This is nothing short now of state sponsored murder.
Thanks
It is hard to be precise about what was the worst part of Wednesday’s Westminster display. One insufficiently fingered candidate was Madam Deputy Speaker, who apparently could not hear the bellows of dissent, audible clearly hundreds of miles away on my TV, when she asked for the ‘No’ voices. That wasn’t the intricacies of procedure. That was nakedly political deafness and she should lose her post.
You rightly deplore the indifference to “the suffering of a whole population” displayed by the shameless manipulations of the two ‘main’ parties; yet even that doesn’t quite catch the awfulness of what is being connived at by the leaders – current and in waiting – of Brexitania, whose arm sales continue unabated to a government which is bombing and blitzing – deliberately, for they have said so – an occupied people, a population for whom they have legal responsibilities, into dust. Millions of them.
Let it be said again. There would have been NO debate about this if the SNP had not and for a second time, placed it on the agenda of our “leading politicians” – Starmer included.
You ask why? Can personal ambition for power so corrode their humanity? Perhaps.
Timothy Snyder in his latest blog about Ukraine and US politics has, however, a different take. In that particular context he writes….
“When we fall in line behind the fearful, when we forget the “spirit of freedom,” we help the weak men create a politics of fear. When we obey in advance, we invite the weak man to take power over our souls, which then means power over our politics.
In 2024, a year of war and a year of elections, a year that will test decency and democracy, the weak man wants to see his fear in our eyes. We will need the courage to admire the courageous, and to say something that might feel risky.” Maybe “the leading politicians” of Brexitania lack bottle as well as principle – and, looking at both Sunak and Starmer the one common word that occurs to me is ‘weak’.
Weak, yes, and bloody, fn dangerous.
Perhaps your readership would be interested in this Palestinian diplomat’s speech. Nada Tarbush is a diplomat with the Palestinian Mission at the UN. The speech was given on 21 February.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDh1VBlhoSs
I’d break this problem down in to two parts:
Firstly, seemingly regardless of the issue, any mass media news-scale event can be politicised for some form of advantage or gain by agents that are sufficiently ruthless to exploit a situation. As has become apparent to no small number of people – most especially those in the HoC with connections to it, the ages old tactic of divide and conquer still works an absolute treat with a significant proportion of the electorate. Dividing the political landscape on any issue into an (all too often) overly simple, binary choice of ‘Us’ versus ‘Them’, appears to work as a near self-perpetuating conflict (requiring only the small effort of stirring the pot) which more-or-less guarantees one of these camps identifying with the perpetrators of this kind of exploitation. The result is a largely uncritical power base. Whether this manifests as islamophobia or stoking hostility towards those calling for peace against a military onslaught inflicted on innocent civilians: the use of division is both potent and reliable. For examples, think about Trump’s MAGA zealots (among all the other groups he has influence), Johnson’s staunch followers, the hard-line Brexiteers, the ‘anti-woke’ and ‘anti PC’ brigades rallying to the culture wars to list just a small number.
Secondly, the crux of all this effort of division is power. Whether we refer to it as class warfare or apply some other label (power of the establishment, interests of elites) we are experiencing a transfer of power to those in positions of authority and influence, or more simply: control. I see it as being analogous to the ‘fire triangle’ that describes the three parameters needed to be present to cause a conflagration, except this is more of an ‘autocracy triangle’ that requires the control of wealth by capitalists, legislation by politicians and information by media.
Richard’s (and that of many others) shock, dismay and anger at the events and attitudes he’s outlined are entirely human and reasonable. However, that relentless syphoning of power by demagogues and plutocrats would come to an abrupt halt should any one of those sides of the triangle fail – and that is why we are witnessing this protracted, large-scale indifference and mendacity being displayed by those that are party to one of those three aforementioned groups: it would be against their self-interests to act otherwise.
Thanks
I was very depressed with what happened in parliament. With a heavy heart I will resign from the Labour Party. The money I save can go to good groups like everydoctor.
I heard Yvette Cooper on Today claiming the issue was not MP safety but they wanted their motion to be heard (I don’t remember exactly what she said). Surely she is lying because why did the speaker say what he did? Maybe you could do poll on that one.
I have been contemplating resigning for a long time thinking that I should be there if labour gets into power and there might be more scope for advancing sensible economic policies, but this is the final straw.
Note also the following on funding by pro Israel entities. https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-mps-have-accepted-over-280000-from-israel-lobby/ I cannot vouch for it’s accuracy.
would a poll on this help?
The Labour Party is not the Labour Party of old.
It changed, not you.
We, in Scotland, say that “we didn’t leave the Labour Party, the Labour Party left us”.
Agreed
Thank you, Andy.
Being a bankster lobbyist, I reckon that’s an underestimate. Donations can be dressed up as many things and provided indirectly. In addition, not all “douceurs” are disclosed.
As I understand it, there are 20 Opposition Days per Parliamentary session: 17 for Labour and 3 for the SNP. If the Labour Party was so concerned about Gaza, what stopped them from using one of their Days to propose their Motion? It’s not a new situation requiring a rapid response. She is being economical with the truth.
Peter Oborne has been writing about funding for both main parties by Israel for years. I can’t help but wonder if the inclusion of, being critical of the state of Israel, in the official definition of antisemitism is the result of this funding. Ethnicity is in our genes and DNA and all people are right to defend themselves from harm and insult directed at their ethnicity and to have this defence inscribed in law. But a government, a state and an army are a different order of thing entirely – they are bodies administered by personnel whose views, intentions and politics could be subject to change. It’s dangerous to conflate the two – as it allows leaders of such a state carte blanche – to do anything they want and then accuse critics of being racist. Change.org have a petition to change the definition of antisemitism.
It’s time we stopped compartmentalising the race issue.
I used to understand at one time the term “Antisemitism ” as prejudice against Semites, ie prejudice against people of the whole Semetic Race.
The term has been reduced in recent times to just mean prejudice against Jews.
This has allowed the blurring of Jews the Racial type with Jews the Religion, something the original use of the word didn’t.
It has also meant the use of the term “Islamaphobia ” has come to represent prejudice against non Jewish Semites from the Middle East. How ridiculous as there are several religious groups all living there.
It’s time we stopped using Antisemitism altogether and just use term “Racist” in all cases. We now call actresses actors and we call a Chairman Chair. Why not call all Racism what it is too, Racism and avoid all he deliberate compartmentalisation.
Interesting
“Why not call all racism what it is too….?”
Because wealthy powerful lobbies create special privilege.
The logic seems to be that if you see what you believe to be a genocide taking place you cannot make any statement to this effect because, at some time in the future, you may have to negotiate with the perpetrator. Effectively this means that genocides cannot be stopped unless there is a collective political force that requires it to end and acts to stop it. Mass slaughter of women and children , extrajudicial killings, destruction of hospitals deprivation of food, water, shelter and power, killing of UN workers, journalists and doctors can be seen to be carried out by a state that has been in illegal occupation of a land that it is not entiled to for some 56 years and yet it is not possible to say stop this genocide because it may affect our future political relationships.
Of course a collective legal opinion has been expressed – there is a plausible genocide taking place. A synonym for plausibly is probaly.
The Labour Party and the Speaker denied the SNP, a country’s representatives it’s Parliamentary rights.
There were rules in place, the rules were clear, the Speaker was advised not to do what he did.
Labour’s long-winded amendment is all very worthy but the main point is to get an immediate cease-fire that the SNP motion unambiguously states. Tory and Labour, both pro-Israei, are ignoring the genocide that is being inflicted on Palestine. This is unforgivable. The details about hostages, 2 states solutions, etc is up to the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators after a cease-fire has been achieved. It is not rocket science……….. The West, in their comfort zone, away from the slaughter, can pontificate and moralise as much as they like but don’t realise they are part of the problem arming Israel to the teeth and even allowing Israeli arms manufacturing in Leicester. Labour was desperate in trying to blackmail the Speaker in trying to water down the SNP’s very straightforward and positive motion and preventing a vote which was supposed to be an opposition day that they had every right to have debated on voted upon but was prevented by . Labour’s unconstitutional interference.
Two points:
1: “noting that Israel cannot be expected to cease fighting if Hamas continues with violence and that Israelis have the right to the assurance that the horror of 7 October 2023 cannot happen again;” is actually the nullification of the rest of the motion – we are fully aware that Israel attributes Hamas membership to babies, that use of ‘fighting’ is a legitimising word, and that Israel has ensured that attacks on them will continue for as long as the current government and the IDF exist. It is carefully constructed to give Israel carte blanche.
2: LINO has ensured a total dislocation of democracy in the party. They push a doctrine of localisation (your role is local alone), and use it to emasculate any constituency level dissent – any that does leak out is dealt with by the Regional Offices suspending the branches. Blair managed this to a large extent, and David Evans at the time put out a paper suggesting that members became supporters with no conference voice, and that conference was not the forum for generating policy. His blueprint has been followed, Starmer signalling this by getting him appointed General Secretary. IMO Blair is pulling all the strings now.
As far as I can see it is a basic humanitarian move to call for a ceasefire in any conflict and to do so without precondition.
In some cases, for example in the Ukraine it isn’t a simple matter, however given the imbalance that exists between the two parties it isnt necessarily realistic, in Gaza however calling on Israel to cease their one sided bombardment is perfectly reasonable.
Why the Labour Leadership lacks the courage to call for this is beyond me
https://labourhub.org.uk/2024/02/23/why-is-legitimate-criticism-of-mps-being-conflated-with-violence/
A good article with lots of MPs saying what they think about violence against MPs.
After Israel spends 10s of millions on a decade-long campaign to delegitimise the BDS Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement …
UN experts now say that an arms embargo against Israel is an obligation under international law.
“GENEVA (23 February 2024) – Any transfer of weapons or ammunition to Israel that would be used in Gaza is likely to violate international humanitarian law and must cease immediately, UN experts* warned today.
“All States must ‘ensure respect’ for international humanitarian law by parties to an armed conflict, as required by 1949 Geneva Conventions and customary international law,” the experts said. “States must accordingly refrain from transferring any weapon or ammunition – or parts for them – if it is expected, given the facts or past patterns of behaviour, that they would be used to violate international law.” ”
“Such transfers are prohibited even if the exporting State does not intend the arms to be used in violation of the law – or does not know with certainty that they would be used in such a way – as long as there is a clear risk,” they said.
See: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/02/arms-exports-israel-must-stop-immediately-un-experts
A significant development indeed …
The sound of our silence.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming
Often quoted lines in the above brief W B Yeats poem are:
“Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
…….The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
“The poem was written in 1919 in the aftermath of the First World War[4] and the beginning of the Irish War of Independence in January 1919, which followed the Easter Rising in April 1916, and before the British government had decided to send in the Black and Tans to Ireland.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_Coming_(poem)
The poem carried a prophetic message, which may still resonate. The last two lines are rarely quoted:
“And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?”
Yeats was alluding to the end of Christianity; not to the prospect of some golden city on a hill but to its foreclosure.
The choices we are currently facing are not like a flock of migratory birds that appear and disappear with seasonal predictability, for now.
If ‘the best’ continue to ‘lack all conviction’ now as then, if they/we do not speak out and fail to act about genocide and global warming, they will continue on to their conclusion.
Our silence will be left to speak for itself and its message will be unequivocal.
Thank you
A great poet
Hi Richard
Not staying silent
To contrast with my earlier post here is link to proponents of a more positive future;
https://senecaeffect.substack.com/p/natural-geoengineering-can-the-ecosystem?publication_id=1514235&post_id=142109982&isFreemail=true&r=2nvyg&open=false
Note the invitation to an online expert discussion scheduled for tomorrow.
All the best.