Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Two threads to this... firstly any artist should be judged on the art not their ideology or beliefs.. if you like his music he should be allowed to perform Secondly if a government seeks to censorship any artist, that should be opposed, especially the current UK leadership.. anyone that they would want to silence i would want to hear shouted from the rooftops " . *you* can separate the artist from their art and their actions. That is your prerogative. But society doesn't have to, and that is their prerogative as well. . Institutions (eg, festivals, media platforms, etc) will always weigh ethics + money + optics. . When someone’s actions are serious enough, continuing to celebrate or platform that person isn’t neutral—it’s a choice. It's a choice which gives them visibility, influence, and often financial support. It is supportive of the individual concerned and said support will be seen and judged accordingly. . And once a person makes that choice, they own what comes with it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Two threads to this... firstly any artist should be judged on the art not their ideology or beliefs.. if you like his music he should be allowed to perform Secondly if a government seeks to censorship any artist, that should be opposed, especially the current UK leadership.. anyone that they would want to silence i would want to hear shouted from the rooftops " What about when their ideology and their "art" are one and the same? Also, "The Government" were totally oblivious to the artist list for Download Festival until people started complaining. Many news outlets reported that "The Government are under pressure to ban Kanye West from entering the country" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Strange. Starmer usually provides police protection and immunity from prosecution to artists who call for the murder of Jews. " Ouch !  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ye blocked. Festival cancelled. I’m surprised they’ve binned the event. There must have been some other no-mark anti semitic rappers around who could have filled his spot. Or maybe someone from Labour or the Greens." Amazing how Labour can enforce borders when they wish. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmm? But what about freedom of speech ? Only works one way does it?" It comes with responsibility and accountability.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmm? But what about freedom of speech ? Only works one way does it?" I think the big difference is you or I can come on here or other platforms and bleat about this or that maybe spout some hate filled rant and it's only going to be read by a few who really don't give a crap what we say. Mr West on the other hand has the ability and position to influence millions of people and that's a dangerous thing. He's never been shy of controversy and honestly I never know with these celebrities if they are just trying to get publicly or not. It's been well documented that he suffers from Bi polar, I'm not sure if this is an excuse to say the thing's he does or not , but perhaps it offers an explanation?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Something a bit different ! American musician Kanye West is due to perform at London's Wireless Festival this summer but there has been a backlash due to his previous awful anti semitic comments, for which he has apologised. Sir Keir Starmer is even threatening to ban him from the UK although Kanye says he will just take a rubber dinghy instead. Should Kanye perform or be banned? Can past racism be forgiven, or is irrelevant to an artist's work?" So you support anti semitism then | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Something a bit different ! American musician Kanye West is due to perform at London's Wireless Festival this summer but there has been a backlash due to his previous awful anti semitic comments, for which he has apologised. Sir Keir Starmer is even threatening to ban him from the UK although Kanye says he will just take a rubber dinghy instead. Should Kanye perform or be banned? Can past racism be forgiven, or is irrelevant to an artist's work? So you support anti semitism then " I'll reply only because I'm a decent person, and no. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He released a song called Heil Hitler, marketed swastika T-shirts then blamed it on his bipolar disorder - this was just last year. He should not be allowed anywhere near this country." I disagree with banning him from entry, I think that's state overreach. What I do question is Wireless's organisers judgement. At a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise this decision was really interesting poor taste and probably nothing but cheap publicity so I'm kinda glad it's blown up in their face. As for Kanye, maybe a condition of entry should be that he has to appear in front of a panel of intelligent people to answer and take accountability for his words and actions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Should Kneecap also be banned ? " Not in the slightest. That’s not how art works. Artists often use provocative language to make you question something, not to incite violence. Kneecap are rooted in satire, irony, exaggeration and cultural expression. Their background matters. The context is cultural expression, not a literal war plan. South Park characters say worst possible thing ever on purpose to expose the absurdity. They distance themselves from real violence. Censorship based on surface interpretation isn’t good. If we start banning artists because someone misinterpreted satire then George Orwell will be gone. Kanye statements in the past have been politically or personally motivated. Plus they’re more public with ambiguous intent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Should Kneecap also be banned ? Not in the slightest. That’s not how art works. Artists often use provocative language to make you question something, not to incite violence. Kneecap are rooted in satire, irony, exaggeration and cultural expression. Their background matters. The context is cultural expression, not a literal war plan. South Park characters say worst possible thing ever on purpose to expose the absurdity. They distance themselves from real violence. Censorship based on surface interpretation isn’t good. If we start banning artists because someone misinterpreted satire then George Orwell will be gone. Kanye statements in the past have been politically or personally motivated. Plus they’re more public with ambiguous intent. " I'm not aware Kanye has ever directly incited hatred against individuals. Kneecap literally called for violence against Tory MPs, not that long after Tory MP David Amess was murdered. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He released a song called Heil Hitler, marketed swastika T-shirts then blamed it on his bipolar disorder - this was just last year. He should not be allowed anywhere near this country. I disagree with banning him from entry, I think that's state overreach. What I do question is Wireless's organisers judgement. At a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise this decision was really interesting poor taste and probably nothing but cheap publicity so I'm kinda glad it's blown up in their face. As for Kanye, maybe a condition of entry should be that he has to appear in front of a panel of intelligent people to answer and take accountability for his words and actions." Really good points.👏 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You’re treating a provocative line as if it’s a literal instruction, which is exactly the problem. Kneecap build their entire style around satire, exaggeration, and antiestablishment rhetoric. That kind of language is meant to shock and provoke thought, not function as a call to violence. Saying they “literally called for violence” assumes intent without engaging with tone, genre, or delivery. There’s a big difference between hyperbolic, performative language about politicians and genuinely targeting individuals in a serious, actionable way. Kanye West reaches a far bigger audience and his controversies aren’t about one ambiguous line, they’re about repeated, direct statements that people reasonably interpret at face value. That’s a different category from satirical or persona driven expression. If the standard becomes someone could interpret this literally, therefore it should be banned then we’re not just talking about Kneecap, we’re talking about a huge amount of music, comedy, and political art disappearing. You can disagree with Kneecap’s tone, but treating their style as a literal call to violence requires stripping away the context that gives it meaning. That’s not the same standard people are applying to Kanye. Artistically I like both for different reasons though and would catch both at a festival tbh " Kanye has explained many times that his anti semitism was motivated by his poor mental health. I have no idea if this is true but its at least as credible as Kneecap's claims that their calls for violence (aimed at actual people) are just satire or performance. My own view is thar both claims are bs to avoid responsibility. I wouldn't ban either as neither has been convicted of hate related offences, but I think the argument for banning Kneecap is stronger than for Kanye. Also he's a genius and they are no marks ! 🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't mind the state stopping people from entering the country for the sake of safety and security or to protect public order. People outside the country do not have a right to enter the UK whenever they want. It's a privilege. But... If we are going to apply certain rules, they should apply to all of them equally. I can find a few people who have said things as bad and the government let them in." That is inarguably true. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You’re treating a provocative line as if it’s a literal instruction, which is exactly the problem. Kneecap build their entire style around satire, exaggeration, and antiestablishment rhetoric. That kind of language is meant to shock and provoke thought, not function as a call to violence. Saying they “literally called for violence” assumes intent without engaging with tone, genre, or delivery. There’s a big difference between hyperbolic, performative language about politicians and genuinely targeting individuals in a serious, actionable way. Kanye West reaches a far bigger audience and his controversies aren’t about one ambiguous line, they’re about repeated, direct statements that people reasonably interpret at face value. That’s a different category from satirical or persona driven expression. If the standard becomes someone could interpret this literally, therefore it should be banned then we’re not just talking about Kneecap, we’re talking about a huge amount of music, comedy, and political art disappearing. You can disagree with Kneecap’s tone, but treating their style as a literal call to violence requires stripping away the context that gives it meaning. That’s not the same standard people are applying to Kanye. Artistically I like both for different reasons though and would catch both at a festival tbh Kanye has explained many times that his anti semitism was motivated by his poor mental health. I have no idea if this is true but its at least as credible as Kneecap's claims that their calls for violence (aimed at actual people) are just satire or performance. My own view is thar both claims are bs to avoid responsibility. I wouldn't ban either as neither has been convicted of hate related offences, but I think the argument for banning Kneecap is stronger than for Kanye. Also he's a genius and they are no marks ! 🤣" Nah, I disagree, you can’t pin that on mental health. Bipolar might lower inhibition, sure, but racism and antisemitism come from belief systems, not diagnoses. In forensic settings, people who are sectioned are still be held accountable for hate crimes against staff. Those kinds of views aren’t recognised as mental disorders in ICD-11. I think it’s right that he’s apologised. But Kneecap have consistently said not to take them literally. Honestly, I’m more into bubblegrunge anyway, and I love the Evil Genius podcast. It took me ages to get over John Lennon, and I’ll never listen to Jacko with intent but I can separate the art from the artist when it comes to Kanye and with Kneecap, I don’t think the intent is there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmm? But what about freedom of speech ? Only works one way does it?" A quick search for what Freedom of Speech means in the uk shows: "Free speech in the UK is the legal right to hold opinions and express ideas, protected under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998. It allows expression through speech, writing, and media, but is not absolute; it is subject to restrictions for safety, public order, and preventing hate speech or harassment." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Warmonger Trump can visit and have a king’s banquet, but Kanye can’t " To be fair... Trump didn't appear on the list of artists booked for Wireless this year. Realistically, Heads of State (and their representatives) from ANY country or regime are generally permitted access to most countries for the purposes of Diplomacy. Cal | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You’re treating a provocative line as if it’s a literal instruction, which is exactly the problem. Kneecap build their entire style around satire, exaggeration, and antiestablishment rhetoric. That kind of language is meant to shock and provoke thought, not function as a call to violence. Saying they “literally called for violence” assumes intent without engaging with tone, genre, or delivery. There’s a big difference between hyperbolic, performative language about politicians and genuinely targeting individuals in a serious, actionable way. Kanye West reaches a far bigger audience and his controversies aren’t about one ambiguous line, they’re about repeated, direct statements that people reasonably interpret at face value. That’s a different category from satirical or persona driven expression. If the standard becomes someone could interpret this literally, therefore it should be banned then we’re not just talking about Kneecap, we’re talking about a huge amount of music, comedy, and political art disappearing. You can disagree with Kneecap’s tone, but treating their style as a literal call to violence requires stripping away the context that gives it meaning. That’s not the same standard people are applying to Kanye. Artistically I like both for different reasons though and would catch both at a festival tbh Kanye has explained many times that his anti semitism was motivated by his poor mental health. I have no idea if this is true but its at least as credible as Kneecap's claims that their calls for violence (aimed at actual people) are just satire or performance. My own view is thar both claims are bs to avoid responsibility. I wouldn't ban either as neither has been convicted of hate related offences, but I think the argument for banning Kneecap is stronger than for Kanye. Also he's a genius and they are no marks ! 🤣 Nah, I disagree, you can’t pin that on mental health. Bipolar might lower inhibition, sure, but racism and antisemitism come from belief systems, not diagnoses. In forensic settings, people who are sectioned are still be held accountable for hate crimes against staff. Those kinds of views aren’t recognised as mental disorders in ICD-11. I think it’s right that he’s apologised. But Kneecap have consistently said not to take them literally. Honestly, I’m more into bubblegrunge anyway, and I love the Evil Genius podcast. It took me ages to get over John Lennon, and I’ll never listen to Jacko with intent but I can separate the art from the artist when it comes to Kanye and with Kneecap, I don’t think the intent is there" Checking out bubblegrunge now ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If Farage, Kemi or Lowe had taken the same action they would have been branded racist by Starmer. Back in the ‘70s and ‘80s it was widely thought that black people couldn't be racist. Seems now it’s the far left that can’t be racist, even when they are " Farage announced a Reform Party policy stating that any country seeking reparations for historic sl@very would be denied visas. Cal | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If Farage, Kemi or Lowe had taken the same action they would have been branded racist by Starmer. Back in the ‘70s and ‘80s it was widely thought that black people couldn't be racist. Seems now it’s the far left that can’t be racist, even when they are" "Farage announced a Reform Party policy stating that any country seeking reparations for historic sl@very would be denied visas." Not sure how that relates to racism. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Social media followers Kanye West 30.9 million X Donald Trump 7 million (Social truth) Kier Starmer 2.1 million X Lisa Nandy culture secretary 303k X The minority shutting down the majority They tried the same with Kneecap " Not sure what you mean by that unless you are suggesting that your own personal view is invalid as you don't have any following? ....because we all know that social media with all of the fake accounts, bots, AI misuse and malicious state intervention from all over the world is the way that the planet should be run, don't we? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If Farage, Kemi or Lowe had taken the same action they would have been branded racist by Starmer. Back in the ‘70s and ‘80s it was widely thought that black people couldn't be racist. Seems now it’s the far left that can’t be racist, even when they are Farage announced a Reform Party policy stating that any country seeking reparations for historic sl@very would be denied visas. Not sure how that relates to racism." It's Farage taking exactly the same "type" of stance but on whole nations of predominantly black people. Although I don't agree with the government being involved in this situation, I also do see how this has anything to do with racism either. The whole issue is about hateful & discriminatory bloke has said. The reason the festival has been scrapped ISN'T because Mr West isn't coming, it's because their biggest sponsors have pulled out and the promoters can no longer afford to run the event. Cal | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The reason the festival has been scrapped ISN'T because Mr West isn't coming, it's because their biggest sponsors have pulled out and the promoters can no longer afford to run the event." I can't help shake the feeling that this is a "The Producers" move, i.e. the festival promoters were running out of money so they hired an act that would definitely get them banned so that they could claim on the insurance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The reason the festival has been scrapped ISN'T because Mr West isn't coming, it's because their biggest sponsors have pulled out and the promoters can no longer afford to run the event. I can't help shake the feeling that this is a "The Producers" move, i.e. the festival promoters were running out of money so they hired an act that would definitely get them banned so that they could claim on the insurance." Haha, that would be inspired ! Kanye could make a fortune rescuing bankrupt concert promoters 🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Checking out bubblegrunge now !" Top picks for me atm are all women when I’m not heading back to the 90s Wolf Alice - Silk Lola Young - Spiders Wet Leg - Mangetout Last Dinner Party - Count the Ways Mitski - I bet on losing dogs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was have more sympathy for “yey” if it was one singular incident…… I don’t think you can really blame bipolar and not taking the meds for the last 10 years Shame… because when he is well… his music is banging!" Hear hear. It's one thing to try and wave away one off racial/ ethnic/ religious hostile remarks, but to bring out a clothing line with swawstickas and release songs praising Hitler?..... If a person of Kanye West resources cannot get self control or keep good counsel, then we may aswell open our borders to all comers and release all the prison convicts at the same time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Social media followers Kanye West 30.9 million X Donald Trump 7 million (Social truth) Kier Starmer 2.1 million X Lisa Nandy culture secretary 303k X The minority shutting down the majority They tried the same with Kneecap " Absolute nonsese comparing West to Kneecap, politically they are polar opposites. Kneecap we're prosecuted due to their pro-irish national views and their views on Palastine innocents being blown to pieces. West was just an anti-jewish pro Nazi rant. Nonsense to compare them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe he will be allowed back under Starmers massively successful 1 out 1 in scheme ? " 😄🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Token shit tbh. Deal with the British Jew haters who shout 'Up Hezbollah' or 'Death to the IDF' first. Then deal with all the keffiyeh wearing cunts who go out on the streets cosplaying as terrorists, while trying to pretend that anti-Zionism isn't antisemitism (It is)." Who said up hezzbollah? Being anti the current Isriel government is no where near antisemitism. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Who said up hezzbollah? " Kneecap, at a gig in Kentish Town. "Being anti the current Isriel government is no where near antisemitism." I never said it was – anti-Zionism means rejecting the right of Jews to self‐determination in their ancestral home. Criticising Likud or the current coalition is not the same as calling for Israel to be dismantled. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmm? But what about freedom of speech ? Only works one way does it?" We have freedom of expression, not speech. It means we don't have to suffer freedom of speech that allows people to be abused directly. Just look at the U.S. for example, hate speech and direct attacks are hidden behind their fake freedom of speech. I say fake because you insult the Orange thing and you get cancelled off tv etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmm? But what about freedom of speech ? Only works one way does it? We have freedom of expression, not speech. It means we don't have to suffer freedom of speech that allows people to be abused directly. Just look at the U.S. for example, hate speech and direct attacks are hidden behind their fake freedom of speech. I say fake because you insult the Orange thing and you get cancelled off tv etc. " Those freedoms are given a pass if the focus is Trump, I would say. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Who said up hezzbollah? Kneecap, at a gig in Kentish Town. Well they didn't and thats why the case collapsed. Being anti the current Isriel government is no where near antisemitism. I never said it was – anti-Zionism means rejecting the right of Jews to self‐determination in their ancestral home. Well the expansions of the current home is illegal and thats just one of the issues of the current Israel government. Israel has a right to exist, it doesn't have a right to steal land. Criticising Likud or the current coalition is not the same as calling for Israel to be dismantled. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Who said up hezzbollah? Kneecap, at a gig in Kentish Town. Well they didn't and thats why the case collapsed." They did – but the case collapsed because of the Legal Timing Limit: The case was thrown out ecause it was brought outside the mandatory six-month time limit for summary offences. "Well the expansions of the current home is illegal and thats just one of the issues of the current Israel government. Israel has a right to exist, it doesn't have a right to steal land. " Israel has not st0len any land. Judea and Samaria (The West Bank) is within the borders laid out at the 1920 San Remo Conference and allocated as part of the Jewish homeland. Jordan occupied and annexed this land from 1948 until 1967, but under the rules of Uti Possidetis Juris – a principle that new states inherit the administrative boundaries of the prior colonial power – the land is really disputed rather than occupied. Jordan had no such claim; Israel did and does. Prior to this, there was never any independent country or nation known as Palestine. Most people don't really understand the way international law is applied however, and they also conveniently skip the agreements (and lack of agreements) brought in during the Oslo Accords. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just to add even if there wasn’t a modern state called Palestine historically, that doesn’t mean Palestinians don’t have a right to be there. People were living on that land for generations, and like anyone else, they have a right to selfdetermination and to live with dignity and security. Recognising that doesn’t take away from Jewish people’s rights or connection to the land it just means both peoples’ rights matter." I agree to some extent. But it was the Palestinian Arabs who were first to use violence. The flight, expulsion and displacement of Palestinians was their own doing – while the rest of the Middle East was in the process of post-Ottoman state building, the Palestinian Arabs were pushing back against efforts that could have benefited everyone. The original displacement of some share-croppers (post land purchases ) was a relatively minor issue that was politicised by the Grand Mufti, who used it to rile up support for a larger Pan-Arabist cause. The Palestinian identity was largely the post-1969 construct of Yasser Arafat – but yes, they should have the right to self-determination too. However, they've rejected statehood several time, because they only want statehood when it involves dismantling Israel. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m a massive fence-sitter here, I really fail to believe either side is full of bad people. " Because it isn't. "There’s just a lot of fear, propaganda, mistrust, and history shaping everyone’s opinions. Claims that Palestinians “started the violence” or caused their own displacement in 1948 are oversimplified." Yes, I oversimplified that for the sake of a forum post. However, the violence during the "Zionist period" (can't think of a better phrase) was initiated by Arabs in the late 1800s – a mixture of misunderstandings, Bedouin raids and eventually into political violence by the first decade of the 1900s. It then escalated further after the start of the British Mandate, but was largely fuelled by Arab leaders like the Haj Amin Al Husseini who spread conspiracy theories about Jews destroying Al Aqsa. The tensions were already there – because of the massive unknown that was awaiting them following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and Husseini (later The Grand Mufti) exploited them. "Violence escalated on both sides, and the flight of around 700,000 Palestinians was due to war, expulsions, and fear not just their choices. " It went like this. The Arabs rejected the partition plan and started to attack Jews on 30th November 1947 – they attacked buses, blocked the roads to Jerusalem and literally started the civil war. The pushback that followed was brutal, but attacks were exaggerated by the Higher Arab Committee, hoping it would call people to arms – instead it backfired and caused people to start to flee. The same exaggerations, then inspired Arab States to invade the day after Israel declared independence – they probably would have invaded anyway, but this certainly heightened the urgency. 700,000 people were either forcibly expelled - usually in strategic locations, while many also fled. Some Jewish leaders (like in Haifa) tried to encourage them to stay, some Arab leaders encouraged Arabs to evacuate, expecting a hasty victory. Israel declared independence, inviting everyone, regardless of race, to join in creating a new state. "Palestinian identity existed long before Arafat, there was a distinct identity emerging in the late ottoman period and past rejections of statehood were about borders, refugees, and security, not simply a desire to dismantle Israel." Palestinian identity started to emerge as a response to Zionism and the British Mandate – but they were still Arabs, with many identifying as part of Greater Syria, and largely interested in Pan-Arabist ideals. It was under Yasser Arafat, when he took over the PLO, that it really began to solidify into a separate ethnicity distinct from Pan Arabism. "The history is complicated, and blaming one side entirely misses the bigger picture. Peace efforts have failed due to mutual disagreements, not just one-sided rejection." The bigger picture is that there was plenty of room for everyone in the post Ottoman Levant – and, while some tenant farmers were displaced (and some compensated), there were also new opportunities and improved infrastructure. The Arab population grew through an increase in migration and lower mortality rates after Zionists had wiped out malaria. But, in spite of this, Arabs rejected Jews for religious reasons, fear of change and a wider pushback against the Sykes Picot agreement that was carving up the region. While the Jewish Agency was building a state, the Higher Arab Committee was pushing back against one – when the British left, The Zionists were ready for a state, the Arabs were not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Who said up hezzbollah? Kneecap, at a gig in Kentish Town. Well they didn't and thats why the case collapsed. They did – but the case collapsed because of the Legal Timing Limit: The case was thrown out ecause it was brought outside the mandatory six-month time limit for summary offences. More semi nonsense, yes it was time barred but the question you need to ask is why government couldn't read a calender....easy...they new there was no case to answer, so to get it thrown out on a technically saved face. Easy . Well the expansions of the current home is illegal and thats just one of the issues of the current Israel government. Israel has a right to exist, it doesn't have a right to steal land. Israel has not st0len any land. Judea and Samaria (The West Bank) is within the borders laid out at the 1920 San Remo Conference and allocated as part of the Jewish homeland. Jordan occupied and annexed this land from 1948 until 1967, but under the rules of Uti Possidetis Juris – a principle that new states inherit the administrative boundaries of the prior colonial power – the land is really disputed rather than occupied. Jordan had no such claim; Israel did and does. Prior to this, there was never any independent country or nation known as Palestine. Most people don't really understand the way international law is applied however, and they also conveniently skip the agreements (and lack of agreements) brought in during the Oslo Accords. " Israel is and is stealing land, here Ill copy paste this for you as it seems the way forward. Illegal Settlements: The vast majority of the international community, including the United Nations and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegal under international law. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own population into occupied territory. Have a pleasant weekend | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Israel is and is stealing land, here Ill copy paste this for you as it seems the way forward. Illegal Settlements: The vast majority of the international community, including the United Nations and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegal under international law. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own population into occupied territory. Have a pleasant weekend" Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention was written to prevent forcible population transfers like WWII deportations — not voluntary civilian movement. This law was never intended to apply to Israeli settlements. The West Bank was also not the sovereign territory of any state in 1967. Jordan’s annexation lacked recognition, and no Palestinian state existed there. That makes the territory legally disputed, not clearly “occupied” in the conventional sense. Also, the Mandate for Palestine of 1922 explicitly recognised Jewish settlement rights in the territory — rights never formally revoked. And “the international community says so” is a political consensus, not a legal ruling. Many of the same states voting in the UN once expelled or deported their own Jewish populations, or closed their doors to Jews fleeing persecution — they have no right to tell Jews that they are illegal in JUDEA. 🙄 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Strange. Starmer usually provides police protection and immunity from prosecution to artists who call for the murder of Jews. " Loves a whataboutery No ye shouldn't have been invited, I'm not sure it should have been the state to ban him.... Might be my liberalism, I just think people shouldn't have gone that's the best way | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Something a bit different ! American musician Kanye West is due to perform at London's Wireless Festival this summer but there has been a backlash due to his previous awful anti semitic comments, for which he has apologised. Sir Keir Starmer is even threatening to ban him from the UK although Kanye says he will just take a rubber dinghy instead. Should Kanye perform or be banned? Can past racism be forgiven, or is irrelevant to an artist's work?" 
He's a fruit loop yeh a believeable one no.
The fact that he's articulate enough to change his point of view for work is pulling the bell a bit.
Maybe he should have kept his opinions to himself and not been vain enough to be think like a dictator in the first place, the twat. Walking into that sign post affected him.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
