Best Of

It seems that Israel is on the good side because they’re like us. They have the same God, even if they don’t have the same support for Jesus. Whereas the other countries in the Middle East, don’t have the same God. Jesus was only a prophet of Mohammed.

It's certainly news to me that Jews believe Jesus was God!

In fact, Jews and Muslims clearly have the same God as each other. Trinitarian Christians, not so much.

To clarify, Jews don’t believe Jesus was God. Both Jews and Christians believe in the God of Abraham. Jews, AFAIK, don’t believe that Jesus was the son of God.

Muslims believe Jesus was Messiah, just not God and Muhammed is their main prophet.

Jews don't even believe Jesus was Messiah let alone God and certainly don't have Muhammed as a prophet either

So, remind me again, PB, why do we favour Jews over Muslims?

We don't.

We do favour liberal democracies like Israel over authoritarian dictatorships like Iran.

With the best will in the world, I do not think it is rational to call Israel a "liberal" democracy anymore. The majority have voted for a fascistic, fanatical government intent on genocide.

An activist walked into a police station with a signed statement saying he supported Palestine Action – but was not arrested.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/18/police-let-palestine-action-protester-walk-free/

What does 'support' mean? Saying "Yeah, I think they might have a point..." may be seen as 'support'. But that's miles away from (say) turning up to a supportive rally that turns violent.

I don't support either Hamas or Palestine Action, and have never been to a March or protest over the issue. By all means prosecute the PA activists who broke in to the airbase for criminal damage, but don't aren't people for placards and t shirts opposing genocide.

I feel that these arrests are a tyrannical abuse of anti-terrorism legislation because the government wants to continue arming the IDF. I would happily turn out for a protest in order to repeal these laws standing in the way of free speech and assembly.

PB Righties may want to consider that at some point they too might want to protest something.

I don't think the "reason" is important (or is indeed what you say).

But I do think that the government's actions have clearly overstepped a line. Expressing support for a banned organization is free speech. I should be allowed to say (as Grok does) that I support Hitler.

What I cannot do, obviously, is join a proscribed organization, or fund it, or work in concert with it. Not can I harass other human beings or break into military bases. Or, for that matter, throw soup over works of art, or stop traffic by sitting in the middle of the motorway.

Surely proving intent to destroy a national or religious or ethnic group in Gaza is going to be difficult as long as it can be proven that Hamas used human shields, no matter the number of dead. People have been saying that it's a genocide since Hamas' propaganda figures were 4:1 Civillian:Military deaths which I'm sad to say is nothing special. So I'm sceptical.

Per Wikipedia:

Between January 2008 and October 2023:
Israelis killed by armed Palestinians: 308
Palestinians killed by armed Israelis: 6,407

On October 7th 2023:
Israelis killed by armed Palestinians: 1,195
Palestinians killed by armed Israelis: 1,609

Since October 7th 2023:
Israelis killed by armed Palestinians: 851
Palestinians killed by armed Israelis: 73,601

Even if accurate, high civilian numbers aren't sufficient to prove intent, especially in the context of human shields. It's entirely arguable that Hamas are responsible for those deaths. It is tragic and horrible, but intent and context are important. Just listing numbers off Wikipedia, I don't think that would satisfy the ICC for some reason.

If the choice was Netanyahu or Hamas, lots of us would have difficulty, but it's very easy to reject both. More specifically, to reject the excuse that it's OK to kill a hundred civilians if it gets one member of the opposite camp.

I'm by descent Jewish and pro-Israel - my mother worked for UNRRA (not to be confused with UNWRA) until they closed, specifically with a view to helping Jews during and after WW2. But Netanyahu's policies seem to me both repellent and unlikely to work (since killing a hundred civilians almost certainly persuades a few relatives to join Hamas).

It really shouldn't be that difficult Nick. Netanyahu might be a bad guy but Hamas are frankly sick. They have a total disregard for human life and sadistic enjoyment of suffering. Frankly I'm giving up all hope in the western left who seem psychologically incapable of seeing how bad the other side are.

This is your misapprehension. As a member of the "western left" for decades, I haven't come across any of my leftie peers supporting Hamas. We all think Hamas are really, really bad people, and that the October 7 attack was a monstrosity. There's no debate about that.

At the same time, we don't think Israel has the right to raze Gaza and its citizens to the ground as a form of collective punishment. Nor do we think that Israeli settlers should be allowed to continue their criminality on the West Bank, And we want the Palestinian people (not Hamas) to be able to live a peaceful, dignified life in their own territory. And the same for the Israeli people.

Surely proving intent to destroy a national or religious or ethnic group in Gaza is going to be difficult as long as it can be proven that Hamas used human shields, no matter the number of dead. People have been saying that it's a genocide since Hamas' propaganda figures were 4:1 Civillian:Military deaths which I'm sad to say is nothing special. So I'm sceptical.

Per Wikipedia:

Between January 2008 and October 2023:
Israelis killed by armed Palestinians: 308
Palestinians killed by armed Israelis: 6,407

On October 7th 2023:
Israelis killed by armed Palestinians: 1,195
Palestinians killed by armed Israelis: 1,609

Since October 7th 2023:
Israelis killed by armed Palestinians: 851
Palestinians killed by armed Israelis: 73,601

Even if accurate, high civilian numbers aren't sufficient to prove intent, especially in the context of human shields. It's entirely arguable that Hamas are responsible for those deaths. It is tragic and horrible, but intent and context are important. Just listing numbers off Wikipedia, I don't think that would satisfy the ICC for some reason.

If the choice was Netanyahu or Hamas, lots of us would have difficulty, but it's very easy to reject both. More specifically, to reject the excuse that it's OK to kill a hundred civilians if it gets one member of the opposite camp.

I'm by descent Jewish and pro-Israel - my mother worked for UNRRA (not to be confused with UNWRA) until they closed, specifically with a view to helping Jews during and after WW2. But Netanyahu's policies seem to me both repellent and unlikely to work (since killing a hundred civilians almost certainly persuades a few relatives to join Hamas).

An activist walked into a police station with a signed statement saying he supported Palestine Action – but was not arrested.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/18/police-let-palestine-action-protester-walk-free/

What does 'support' mean? Saying "Yeah, I think they might have a point..." may be seen as 'support'. But that's miles away from (say) turning up to a supportive rally that turns violent.

I don't support either Hamas or Palestine Action, and have never been to a march or protest over the issue. By all means prosecute the PA activists who broke in to the airbase for criminal damage, but don't arrest people for placards and t shirts opposing genocide.

I feel that these arrests are a tyrannical abuse of anti-terrorism legislation because the government wants to continue arming the IDF. I would happily turn out for a protest in order to repeal these laws standing in the way of free speech and assembly.

PB Righties may want to consider that at some point they too might want to protest something.