Absolutely zero chance Israel nukes Iran. Biden will veto it. If Israel were to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle then you can be damn sure Putin will be nuking Ukraine. And then we are in all likelihood in WWIII.
We're back to the ominous music and blue tickertape headlines from Threads, aren't we?
Biden will let the Israelis slake their bloodlust for a while and then tell them when it's sufficient. If the Palestinian body count gets close to six digits, I think that's where it begins to get politically tricky for him. They don't want to let it get too genocide-y.
The SMO is settling into a Stan and Hilda Ogden style stalemate. Both sides are making Billy Big Bollocks claims using random number generators to come up with their claimed kills, etc. but both sides are also going nowhere fast.
So I think the doomsday clock has gone backwards a few ticks from this time last year. The wildcard is some fucking idiot from NATO or the RF shooting something down by accident over the Black Sea as nearly happened with the Flanker-E/Rivet Joint episode.
Six figures?
That would be be twice the death rate of people from the UK in the whole of WWII.
Six figures is 100,000 and above not (as I suspect you think) 1 million and above.
The population of Palestine is just under 5m.
The UK population at the time of WW2 was just under 50m.
So, six figures in Palestine, would be equivalent to around 1m UK deaths in WW2.
The UK death toll from WW2 was less than half a million,
And 1m is twice half a million.
I suspect you haven't realised just how astonishingly high a death toll of six figures in Palestine would be.
I suspect you haven't realised that the Israelis don't care.
I think some won't care, and some would relish it as a second Nabka. Many Israelis would care though. Haaretz is rather an Israeli Guardian equivalent, but already it is questioning what is going on.
Israel is a very vibrant and diverse country, with every political opinion represented.
Which is one of the things that sets it apart from Hamas.
They also have other advantages. Not murdering LGBT people. A proper justice system (until Netanyahu got hold of it). A democratic system of government. Religious freedom.
Unfortunately, it is not always so easy to make a clear distinction between the morals of the current leaders of the country and their enemies.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies @RedfieldWilton Largest lead for the Conservatives since we started our Blue Wall tracker last October.
Blue Wall VI (7 October):
Conservative 36% (+5) Labour 32% (-1) Liberal Democrat 25% (-1) Reform UK 4% (-2) Green 3% (-1) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 10 September
This represents a 12.5% Con to Lab swing since the general election.
Labour finished third in these seats in 2019 under your boy Corbyn.
Whats the swing since 2017?
Nobody cares, because Theresa May won. And we have had a defining election since.
I know Centrists would like to pretend 2017 never happened but it did and when you say Theresa May won she went into the Election with a Majority and came out of it without one.
Biggest increase in Lab vote share since WW2
Yep. 17 was a great result no question. Caused me to join up. Hope renewed. Felt like a win. Kind of was a win. Churlish of people to deny it. But then came the horror of 19. That can't be denied either. Time for a change. Enter SKS. And hasn't he just nailed it. Lucky, yes, but you can only beat what's in front of you, and boy is he ever doing that. Landslide coming.
I'm on board bettingwise, as a party member, as a voter, and (most importantly) as a citizen. I have just this minute ordered my Sparkle With Starmer tee shirt from the club shop. I suggest you put your debilitating grudge aside and do the same. If you give me your size and colour I'd be happy to put it on my account.
I haven't been a member since Milliband. Previously I had been involved since the '80s, and I was active in Camden and later Cardiff North and the Vale of Glamorgan. I made the error of voting for the wrong Milliband after Brown resigned. Corbyn was a fiasco and I am not sure what Starmer Labour stand for.
That said the post-2019 Government has been without doubt the most appalling administration of my lifetime. After Johnson, I had high hopes of Sunak, but since he became PM he has lost every last shred of common sense. I though if they replace him with Mordaunt, I can live with that, but her speech last week confirmed she is hopeless. Which leaves us with a selection of absolute right wing roasters.
So despite my ambivalence towards Starmer, I do hope Labour win, and win big.
I do have a ton on a Conservative majority at 9/1 to soften any unexpected blow.
No £££ win could be big enough to mitigate an emotional and spiritual blow of that magnitude!
Yes, it's mainly that a fresh Labour government is just by the iron laws of physics bound to be tons better to what we've been tortured with these last few years. That's how I feel too. But, you know, I'm a touch more optimistic than that. I think Starmer is very able and will be bold and creative (in a good way) in office.
That said, the fiscal, monetary and geopolitical headwinds mean that miracles (aka things getting better) remain off the menu.
Hamas could be Sunak's black swan.
I am also concerned if Labour prevail and fail, you know what comes next. Full frontal Suella!
Do you mind? I'm eating, and I could have done without that mental image.
I don't think Suella will ever lead the Cons. Assuming a defeat but not a complete wipeout, then the Tory parliamentary party is likely to become somewhat less Brexity. I would expect the one nation faction to have enough MPs to block Suella (although not enough to guarantee their own candidate wins).
Many very Brexity MPs are in ultra safe seats, and the temptation to double down after a loss appears very high.
The beauty of that - as our HY has long been telling us - is that the rump of Tory MPs likely to be left after the next election will choose some nutter to promote their cause, keeping them out of power until many of us are ready to sink beneath the gravestone.
I don't agree with that necessarily. Quite a few of the "old guard" Brexiteers are in safe seats (Baker and Redwood are a couple of exceptions) but a lot of the newer Brexiteers are in the Red wall and risk being swept away. Of course, some of the One Nation faction are also vulnerable to the LDs
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
Sure I can.
Are you suggesting the Palestinians can't build there either?
No they can't. They need permits from the military government which are oddly never forthcoming.
Bart really does know bugger all about the situation for Palestinians in the West Bank. I would have hoped he would have educated himself a bit before jumping in at the deep end but it seems not.
Or maybe he just doesn't care.
Its door number 2.
Israel has accepted peace offers multiple times, the only reason there's no Palestinian state is that the other parties rejected them.
The Palestinian situation is brought about entirely because of the Arab states and the Palestinian leaders. So its on them to fix it, its on Israel's leadership to ensure Israel's safety and security instead.
Has anyone given serious consideration to the possibility that Kennedy's independent bid could lead to Biden's removal as Democratic candidate? Because apparently some polling shows that Kennedy damages Biden more than Trump, but Trump more than other Democrats.
Absolutely zero chance Israel nukes Iran. Biden will veto it. If Israel were to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle then you can be damn sure Putin will be nuking Ukraine. And then we are in all likelihood in WWIII.
We're back to the ominous music and blue tickertape headlines from Threads, aren't we?
Biden will let the Israelis slake their bloodlust for a while and then tell them when it's sufficient. If the Palestinian body count gets close to six digits, I think that's where it begins to get politically tricky for him. They don't want to let it get too genocide-y.
The SMO is settling into a Stan and Hilda Ogden style stalemate. Both sides are making Billy Big Bollocks claims using random number generators to come up with their claimed kills, etc. but both sides are also going nowhere fast.
So I think the doomsday clock has gone backwards a few ticks from this time last year. The wildcard is some fucking idiot from NATO or the RF shooting something down by accident over the Black Sea as nearly happened with the Flanker-E/Rivet Joint episode.
Six figures?
That would be be twice the death rate of people from the UK in the whole of WWII.
Six figures is 100,000 and above not (as I suspect you think) 1 million and above.
The population of Palestine is just under 5m.
The UK population at the time of WW2 was just under 50m.
So, six figures in Palestine, would be equivalent to around 1m UK deaths in WW2.
The UK death toll from WW2 was less than half a million,
And 1m is twice half a million.
I suspect you haven't realised just how astonishingly high a death toll of six figures in Palestine would be.
I suspect you haven't realised that the Israelis don't care.
I think some won't care, and some would relish it as a second Nabka. Many Israelis would care though. Haaretz is rather an Israeli Guardian equivalent, but already it is questioning what is going on.
Israel is a very vibrant and diverse country, with every political opinion represented.
Which is one of the things that sets it apart from Hamas.
They also have other advantages. Not murdering LGBT people. A proper justice system (until Netanyahu got hold of it). A democratic system of government. Religious freedom.
Unfortunately, it is not always so easy to make a clear distinction between the morals of the current leaders of the country and their enemies.
Much more importantly - if your enemy is 100% wrong then it doesn't make you 100% right. The Iran Iraq war was a clear example of two wrong-headed participants.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
They are Israeli citizens, and they have the same rights as all.
Eh?
That's simply not true. Arabs in Israel proper are citizens. Arabs in the West Bank are not.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
Only partly on topic, I went up the local hospital yesterday morning, for an appointment with a consultant made back in April. I’d arranged for one of the friends Leon says I don’t have to look after the dog, and drove the half hour up to St Mary’s,
The upper car park at the hospital, nearest to the department, was in complete chaos, with no free parking space, tons of people waiting about, and cars abandoned on corners or up on the verge or anywhere where people could leave their car and run.
The lower car park was little better, with a long queue for spaces, but eventually I managed to park up.
The entrance to the hospital was fenced off with barricades, behind which were a load of skips full of building rubbish with no sign of any actual building work taking place. To get into the hospital required a walk around the detour, and then a long trek to the relevant ward.
When I arrived, it turned out my appointment had been cancelled, because the consultant wasn’t there, but the booking department hasn’t made any effort to tell me. The nurse was very apologetic; clearly it wasn’t her fault and there was nothing she could do.
Returning to the car park, all but one of the parking payment machines was out of order, so I joined the long queue to pay £1.70 for the utterly futile visit to the hospital.
And returned home.
Doubtless I will eventually get a letter giving me a next appointment some time early in 2024.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
Sure I can.
Are you suggesting the Palestinians can't build there either?
No they can't. They need permits from the military government which are oddly never forthcoming.
Bart really does know bugger all about the situation for Palestinians in the West Bank. I would have hoped he would have educated himself a bit before jumping in at the deep end but it seems not.
Or maybe he just doesn't care.
Its door number 2.
Israel has accepted peace offers multiple times, the only reason there's no Palestinian state is that the other parties rejected them.
The Palestinian situation is brought about entirely because of the Arab states and the Palestinian leaders. So its on them to fix it, its on Israel's leadership to ensure Israel's safety and security instead.
Some of these pledges are pathetic and dishonest. So, for example, they claim that they are going to get an extra £1bn from the cancellation of non dom status and use that to address waiting times in the NHS.
Let’s put aside the possibility that eliminating non doms might actually reduce our tax take and also reduce aggregate demand in the UK costing VAT and other indirect taxes. Last year we spent £181.3bn on the NHS. So this £1bn, if it comes, is an increase of around 0.5%. To claim that such a paltry sum is going to solve or even materially contribute to the problem is frankly dishonest. It’s not just wrong, it’s dishonest.
Correct.
I listened to Starmer this morning on the radio and it was clear that much of what he said was no more concrete than the rubbish from Sunak last week. The assumptions about tax revenue were dubious, and his commitments were maybe not as substantive as implied, nor was he likely to be able to deliver them without real opposition from his own party never mind the Tories.
I'll give him a couple of points for at least wanting to go in the right direction, but I won't be holding my breath on him fixing very much.
Or take another example. He wants specialist teachers in every classroom. No idea what that means to be honest but let’s assume it is a good thing.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from? But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
One of the things I was told when I was in a Palestinian area just outside East Jerusalem (and just beyond the wall) was that it had no refuse collection service.
I asked why not, and was told that the Israelis refused to provide one on the grounds that it wasn't in Jerusalem's city limits and therefore was a Palestinian matter.
I asked why the Palestinians hadn't done so.
Well, came the reply, they did offer, but the government said that it was in Jerusalem and therefore outside Ramallah's jurisdiction.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
If only Arafat had had a little more strategic vision, 200% more razzmatazz, and a sense of when to say yes. They needed Martin McGuiness, basically.
Absolutely zero chance Israel nukes Iran. Biden will veto it. If Israel were to let the nuclear genie out of the bottle then you can be damn sure Putin will be nuking Ukraine. And then we are in all likelihood in WWIII.
We're back to the ominous music and blue tickertape headlines from Threads, aren't we?
Biden will let the Israelis slake their bloodlust for a while and then tell them when it's sufficient. If the Palestinian body count gets close to six digits, I think that's where it begins to get politically tricky for him. They don't want to let it get too genocide-y.
The SMO is settling into a Stan and Hilda Ogden style stalemate. Both sides are making Billy Big Bollocks claims using random number generators to come up with their claimed kills, etc. but both sides are also going nowhere fast.
So I think the doomsday clock has gone backwards a few ticks from this time last year. The wildcard is some fucking idiot from NATO or the RF shooting something down by accident over the Black Sea as nearly happened with the Flanker-E/Rivet Joint episode.
Six figures?
That would be be twice the death rate of people from the UK in the whole of WWII.
Six figures is 100,000 and above not (as I suspect you think) 1 million and above.
The population of Palestine is just under 5m.
The UK population at the time of WW2 was just under 50m.
So, six figures in Palestine, would be equivalent to around 1m UK deaths in WW2.
The UK death toll from WW2 was less than half a million,
And 1m is twice half a million.
I suspect you haven't realised just how astonishingly high a death toll of six figures in Palestine would be.
I suspect you haven't realised that the Israelis don't care.
I think some won't care, and some would relish it as a second Nabka. Many Israelis would care though. Haaretz is rather an Israeli Guardian equivalent, but already it is questioning what is going on.
Israel is a very vibrant and diverse country, with every political opinion represented.
Which is one of the things that sets it apart from Hamas.
They also have other advantages. Not murdering LGBT people. A proper justice system (until Netanyahu got hold of it). A democratic system of government. Religious freedom.
Unfortunately, it is not always so easy to make a clear distinction between the morals of the current leaders of the country and their enemies.
Much more importantly - if your enemy is 100% wrong then it doesn't make you 100% right. The Iran Iraq war was a clear example of two wrong-headed participants.
No, no, no. That can’t be right. We backed the chap with the moustache. What happened to him? And what ever happened to those brave bearded freedom fighters we backed in Afghanistan? I saw them in a Bond film once, and they also worked with Rambo.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
Only partly on topic, I went up the local hospital yesterday morning, for an appointment with a consultant made back in April. I’d arranged for one of the friends Leon says I don’t have to look after the dog, and drove the half hour up to St Mary’s,
The upper car park at the hospital, nearest to the department, was in complete chaos, with no free parking space, tons of people waiting about, and cars abandoned on corners or up on the verge or anywhere where people could leave their car and run.
The lower car park was little better, with a long queue for spaces, but eventually I managed to park up.
The entrance to the hospital was fenced off with barricades, behind which were a load of skips full of building rubbish with no sign of any actual building work taking place. To get into the hospital required a walk around the detour, and then a long trek to the relevant ward.
When I arrived, it turned out my appointment had been cancelled, because the consultant wasn’t there, but the booking department hasn’t made any effort to tell me. The nurse was very apologetic; clearly it wasn’t her fault and there was nothing she could do.
Returning to the car park, all but one of the parking payment machines was out of order, so I joined the long queue to pay £1.70 for the utterly futile visit to the hospital.
And returned home.
Doubtless I will eventually get a letter giving me a next appointment some time early in 2024.
I love that optimism. A letter! You should be so lucky.
Some of these pledges are pathetic and dishonest. So, for example, they claim that they are going to get an extra £1bn from the cancellation of non dom status and use that to address waiting times in the NHS.
Let’s put aside the possibility that eliminating non doms might actually reduce our tax take and also reduce aggregate demand in the UK costing VAT and other indirect taxes. Last year we spent £181.3bn on the NHS. So this £1bn, if it comes, is an increase of around 0.5%. To claim that such a paltry sum is going to solve or even materially contribute to the problem is frankly dishonest. It’s not just wrong, it’s dishonest.
Correct.
I listened to Starmer this morning on the radio and it was clear that much of what he said was no more concrete than the rubbish from Sunak last week. The assumptions about tax revenue were dubious, and his commitments were maybe not as substantive as implied, nor was he likely to be able to deliver them without real opposition from his own party never mind the Tories.
I'll give him a couple of points for at least wanting to go in the right direction, but I won't be holding my breath on him fixing very much.
Or take another example. He wants specialist teachers in every classroom. No idea what that means to be honest but let’s assume it is a good thing.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from? But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
Yes, fundamentally what Labour is still offering is tinkering around the edges of the central problem - which, as always, is that we can't afford to survive as a country stuffed full of old people without taxing those who control most of the resources, who are also old people - who also vote religiously, so nobody dare tax them. Instead we pretend that they're all dirt poor, slowly starving and freezing to death in their hovels (when most of them are comfortably off and a full quarter are asset millionaires,) and promise to keep ramping their benefits at the expense of those who still work for a living.
It doesn't mean that Labour's tinkering around the edges won't be less bad than Tory tinkering, but it's still tinkering.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
I have no doubt Netanyahu would extend the offer to the inhabitants of the West Bank if it gave him the sovereignty he craved.
I'm sure he wouldn't.
If you take Israel + West Bank + Gaza as a whole Jews are in a minority.
I'm not sure of the exact figures but if you exclude Gaza then Jews can't be much more than 55% to 60% of a combined Israel + West Bank. That's nowhere near enough for them to be comfortable.
And the Palestinian birth rate is miles higher. One astonishing stat quoted this week is that 50% of Gaza's population is children. Just think what that means for population growth going forward.
The proportion of children may be a bit lower in the West Bank but it'll still be way higher than in Israel.
No, Israel's occupation of the West Bank is straightforward apartheid - they take the land but they certainly won't be allowing the Palestinians to vote.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Sigh…. Read up on this. Back when the settlements were a bit more modest they did negotiate for some land swaps. But now look at what Netanyahu has done with where the new settlements are that he won’t demolish. He has wilfully make that impossible.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
Only partly on topic, I went up the local hospital yesterday morning, for an appointment with a consultant made back in April. I’d arranged for one of the friends Leon says I don’t have to look after the dog, and drove the half hour up to St Mary’s,
The upper car park at the hospital, nearest to the department, was in complete chaos, with no free parking space, tons of people waiting about, and cars abandoned on corners or up on the verge or anywhere where people could leave their car and run.
The lower car park was little better, with a long queue for spaces, but eventually I managed to park up.
The entrance to the hospital was fenced off with barricades, behind which were a load of skips full of building rubbish with no sign of any actual building work taking place. To get into the hospital required a walk around the detour, and then a long trek to the relevant ward.
When I arrived, it turned out my appointment had been cancelled, because the consultant wasn’t there, but the booking department hasn’t made any effort to tell me. The nurse was very apologetic; clearly it wasn’t her fault and there was nothing she could do.
Returning to the car park, all but one of the parking payment machines was out of order, so I joined the long queue to pay £1.70 for the utterly futile visit to the hospital.
And returned home.
Doubtless I will eventually get a letter giving me a next appointment some time early in 2024.
I love that optimism. A letter! You should be so lucky.
I think that is part of the problem. The post is so crap that patients don't get the cancellation letters. I am actually serious!
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies @RedfieldWilton Largest lead for the Conservatives since we started our Blue Wall tracker last October.
Blue Wall VI (7 October):
Conservative 36% (+5) Labour 32% (-1) Liberal Democrat 25% (-1) Reform UK 4% (-2) Green 3% (-1) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 10 September
This represents a 12.5% Con to Lab swing since the general election.
Labour finished third in these seats in 2019 under your boy Corbyn.
Whats the swing since 2017?
Nobody cares, because Theresa May won. And we have had a defining election since.
I know Centrists would like to pretend 2017 never happened but it did and when you say Theresa May won she went into the Election with a Majority and came out of it without one.
Biggest increase in Lab vote share since WW2
Yep. 17 was a great result no question. Caused me to join up. Hope renewed. Felt like a win. Kind of was a win. Churlish of people to deny it. But then came the horror of 19. That can't be denied either. Time for a change. Enter SKS. And hasn't he just nailed it. Lucky, yes, but you can only beat what's in front of you, and boy is he ever doing that. Landslide coming.
I'm on board bettingwise, as a party member, as a voter, and (most importantly) as a citizen. I have just this minute ordered my Sparkle With Starmer tee shirt from the club shop. I suggest you put your debilitating grudge aside and do the same. If you give me your size and colour I'd be happy to put it on my account.
I haven't been a member since Milliband. Previously I had been involved since the '80s, and I was active in Camden and later Cardiff North and the Vale of Glamorgan. I made the error of voting for the wrong Milliband after Brown resigned. Corbyn was a fiasco and I am not sure what Starmer Labour stand for.
That said the post-2019 Government has been without doubt the most appalling administration of my lifetime. After Johnson, I had high hopes of Sunak, but since he became PM he has lost every last shred of common sense. I though if they replace him with Mordaunt, I can live with that, but her speech last week confirmed she is hopeless. Which leaves us with a selection of absolute right wing roasters.
So despite my ambivalence towards Starmer, I do hope Labour win, and win big.
I do have a ton on a Conservative majority at 9/1 to soften any unexpected blow.
No £££ win could be big enough to mitigate an emotional and spiritual blow of that magnitude!
Yes, it's mainly that a fresh Labour government is just by the iron laws of physics bound to be tons better to what we've been tortured with these last few years. That's how I feel too. But, you know, I'm a touch more optimistic than that. I think Starmer is very able and will be bold and creative (in a good way) in office.
That said, the fiscal, monetary and geopolitical headwinds mean that miracles (aka things getting better) remain off the menu.
Hamas could be Sunak's black swan.
I am also concerned if Labour prevail and fail, you know what comes next. Full frontal Suella!
Do you mind? I'm eating, and I could have done without that mental image.
I don't think Suella will ever lead the Cons. Assuming a defeat but not a complete wipeout, then the Tory parliamentary party is likely to become somewhat less Brexity. I would expect the one nation faction to have enough MPs to block Suella (although not enough to guarantee their own candidate wins).
Many very Brexity MPs are in ultra safe seats, and the temptation to double down after a loss appears very high.
The beauty of that - as our HY has long been telling us - is that the rump of Tory MPs likely to be left after the next election will choose some nutter to promote their cause, keeping them out of power until many of us are ready to sink beneath the gravestone.
I don't agree with that necessarily. Quite a few of the "old guard" Brexiteers are in safe seats (Baker and Redwood are a couple of exceptions) but a lot of the newer Brexiteers are in the Red wall and risk being swept away. Of course, some of the One Nation faction are also vulnerable to the LDs
Any Tory MP with a majority under 10000 is very worried indeed. That was 128 last time. Factoring in some above that will probably lose, and some under 10k will manage to hold on, it makes for a plausible sounding number of losses overall.
The fifteen safest Tories were:
Caroline Johnson Mark Francois John Hayes John Whittingdon Steve Barclay Alex Burghart Victoria Atkins Gavin Williamson Nigel Huddlestone Andrea Leadsome Kemi Badenoch RIshi Sunak Tom Tugendhat Alicia Kearns Rebecca Harris
In fairness a mixture of top ministers, has beens, Brexiteers, and unknowns.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
But they can have it both ways - and they have been having it both ways for decades - because nobody is going to stop them.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies @RedfieldWilton Largest lead for the Conservatives since we started our Blue Wall tracker last October.
Blue Wall VI (7 October):
Conservative 36% (+5) Labour 32% (-1) Liberal Democrat 25% (-1) Reform UK 4% (-2) Green 3% (-1) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 10 September
This represents a 12.5% Con to Lab swing since the general election.
Labour finished third in these seats in 2019 under your boy Corbyn.
Whats the swing since 2017?
Nobody cares, because Theresa May won. And we have had a defining election since.
I know Centrists would like to pretend 2017 never happened but it did and when you say Theresa May won she went into the Election with a Majority and came out of it without one.
Biggest increase in Lab vote share since WW2
Yep. 17 was a great result no question. Caused me to join up. Hope renewed. Felt like a win. Kind of was a win. Churlish of people to deny it. But then came the horror of 19. That can't be denied either. Time for a change. Enter SKS. And hasn't he just nailed it. Lucky, yes, but you can only beat what's in front of you, and boy is he ever doing that. Landslide coming.
I'm on board bettingwise, as a party member, as a voter, and (most importantly) as a citizen. I have just this minute ordered my Sparkle With Starmer tee shirt from the club shop. I suggest you put your debilitating grudge aside and do the same. If you give me your size and colour I'd be happy to put it on my account.
I haven't been a member since Milliband. Previously I had been involved since the '80s, and I was active in Camden and later Cardiff North and the Vale of Glamorgan. I made the error of voting for the wrong Milliband after Brown resigned. Corbyn was a fiasco and I am not sure what Starmer Labour stand for.
That said the post-2019 Government has been without doubt the most appalling administration of my lifetime. After Johnson, I had high hopes of Sunak, but since he became PM he has lost every last shred of common sense. I though if they replace him with Mordaunt, I can live with that, but her speech last week confirmed she is hopeless. Which leaves us with a selection of absolute right wing roasters.
So despite my ambivalence towards Starmer, I do hope Labour win, and win big.
I do have a ton on a Conservative majority at 9/1 to soften any unexpected blow.
No £££ win could be big enough to mitigate an emotional and spiritual blow of that magnitude!
Yes, it's mainly that a fresh Labour government is just by the iron laws of physics bound to be tons better to what we've been tortured with these last few years. That's how I feel too. But, you know, I'm a touch more optimistic than that. I think Starmer is very able and will be bold and creative (in a good way) in office.
That said, the fiscal, monetary and geopolitical headwinds mean that miracles (aka things getting better) remain off the menu.
Hamas could be Sunak's black swan.
I am also concerned if Labour prevail and fail, you know what comes next. Full frontal Suella!
Do you mind? I'm eating, and I could have done without that mental image.
I don't think Suella will ever lead the Cons. Assuming a defeat but not a complete wipeout, then the Tory parliamentary party is likely to become somewhat less Brexity. I would expect the one nation faction to have enough MPs to block Suella (although not enough to guarantee their own candidate wins).
Many very Brexity MPs are in ultra safe seats, and the temptation to double down after a loss appears very high.
The beauty of that - as our HY has long been telling us - is that the rump of Tory MPs likely to be left after the next election will choose some nutter to promote their cause, keeping them out of power until many of us are ready to sink beneath the gravestone.
The opposite actually, Sunak won most votes amongst MPs even last summer, it was party members who chose Truss.
If it was left to the members the likely next Conservative leader would be Badenoch or Braverman, maybe even Mogg.
However as MPs pick the last 2 there is a significant chance Barclay and Tugendhat could be the last 2 sent to members (MPs didn't even put Badenoch or Braverman in the last 3 last summer, despite Badenoch comfortably leading members' polls).
For the same reason Starmer has changed Labour leadership rules so contenders need the support of 20% of MPs to go to the members rather than 10% as now
Or take another example. He wants specialist teachers in every classroom. No idea what that means to be honest but let’s assume it is a good thing.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from? But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
Fix schools with VAT on private education. Fix the NHS by taxing nom doms. But as you rightly say it simply doesn't add up. It's no more substantive than the windfall tax rubbish that Labour was trotting out before.
What might add up is doing something meaningful about business productivity, but I've certainly not heard anything from Labour that makes me think they have more of a clue than the other parties on that matter.
I know there was a lot of outrage about the sentence upon conviction and the specifics of Scottish sentencing guidlines, but people are acquitted on appeal under English law too.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
Only partly on topic, I went up the local hospital yesterday morning, for an appointment with a consultant made back in April. I’d arranged for one of the friends Leon says I don’t have to look after the dog, and drove the half hour up to St Mary’s,
The upper car park at the hospital, nearest to the department, was in complete chaos, with no free parking space, tons of people waiting about, and cars abandoned on corners or up on the verge or anywhere where people could leave their car and run.
The lower car park was little better, with a long queue for spaces, but eventually I managed to park up.
The entrance to the hospital was fenced off with barricades, behind which were a load of skips full of building rubbish with no sign of any actual building work taking place. To get into the hospital required a walk around the detour, and then a long trek to the relevant ward.
When I arrived, it turned out my appointment had been cancelled, because the consultant wasn’t there, but the booking department hasn’t made any effort to tell me. The nurse was very apologetic; clearly it wasn’t her fault and there was nothing she could do.
Returning to the car park, all but one of the parking payment machines was out of order, so I joined the long queue to pay £1.70 for the utterly futile visit to the hospital.
And returned home.
Doubtless I will eventually get a letter giving me a next appointment some time early in 2024.
I am down on the Island at the weekend. Fancy a pint?
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
As I noted the other day, from my recent experience of being treated on a Saturday (and very promptly too). Different health service, never mind trust, so mileages may vary in any direction.
One point though - it was dermatological, checkup for skin cancer and precursors. The only hi-tech the chap needed was a magnifying glass, and for support the usual receptionist(s) and nurse(s).
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
Only partly on topic, I went up the local hospital yesterday morning, for an appointment with a consultant made back in April. I’d arranged for one of the friends Leon says I don’t have to look after the dog, and drove the half hour up to St Mary’s,
The upper car park at the hospital, nearest to the department, was in complete chaos, with no free parking space, tons of people waiting about, and cars abandoned on corners or up on the verge or anywhere where people could leave their car and run.
The lower car park was little better, with a long queue for spaces, but eventually I managed to park up.
The entrance to the hospital was fenced off with barricades, behind which were a load of skips full of building rubbish with no sign of any actual building work taking place. To get into the hospital required a walk around the detour, and then a long trek to the relevant ward.
When I arrived, it turned out my appointment had been cancelled, because the consultant wasn’t there, but the booking department hasn’t made any effort to tell me. The nurse was very apologetic; clearly it wasn’t her fault and there was nothing she could do.
Returning to the car park, all but one of the parking payment machines was out of order, so I joined the long queue to pay £1.70 for the utterly futile visit to the hospital.
And returned home.
Doubtless I will eventually get a letter giving me a next appointment some time early in 2024.
I love that optimism. A letter! You should be so lucky.
I think that is part of the problem. The post is so crap that patients don't get the cancellation letters. I am actually serious!
My letters seem to arrive OK and I have had dozens of them this year (at one point I had about 8 appointments in a fortnight) - though it might struggle if it is to update an appointment due in say 72 hours. Had a phone call from the Haematology Secretaries today changing an appointment from Clinic Appt to Phone Appt for a few days' time, which was already recorded as a phone appointment so she was just checking to make sure.
I think text messages are very helpful, though not *all* departments send text message reminders. Though my GP does.
OTOH I tried to cancel a follow-up appointment to discuss a biopsy which is no longer relevant as the condition has gone weeks ago, and I was told I must contact the nurses from the department who commissioned the biopsy, and they must send a note. Which is a bit round-the-houses.
Interesting to read the Standard say Starmer "hadn't dropped the ming vase" in his speech yesterday. It was the same analogy Jenkins used of Blair in 1996-97. The idea now is NOT to create great dividing lines or make hostages to fortune - the idea is to re-assure the 2019 Conservative faithful one more again he is neither Corbyn nor is the Labour party he now leads the party of Corbyn but in truth a non-socialist party of the centre and centre left.
Previous pronounced policy positions under different leaders may be wheeled out as proof of inconsistency but parties are or should be disciplined creatures and loyalty rules. The leader or party sets a policy direction which all should follow - imagine a party which constantly changed its views on key issues or leaders....
Starmer's discipline may have driven some from the party to other pastures but I suspected it's recruited more and after 13 or more years in the wilderness Labour now wants to be back in office and taking the big decisions.
I sense now Labour are trying to move to the electorate while the Conservatives are still trying to make the electorate move to them.
Surely the simple solution is to remove the whole concept of "acquittal".
I'm sure there was a story recently about complaints victims of crime do not get sufficient support (which is probably true), but which essentially went on to bemoad that defendants defended themselves aggressively including attacking credibility of accusers. Which must be distressing, but there's probably not a way around that as we don't want it to be absurdly hard to convict people, but it is meant to be hard. That's why DavidL gets paid the big bucks.
Or take another example. He wants specialist teachers in every classroom. No idea what that means to be honest but let’s assume it is a good thing.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from? But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
Fix schools with VAT on private education. Fix the NHS by taxing nom doms. But as you rightly say it simply doesn't add up. It's no more substantive than the windfall tax rubbish that Labour was trotting out before.
What might add up is doing something meaningful about business productivity, but I've certainly not heard anything from Labour that makes me think they have more of a clue than the other parties on that matter.
They are planning a publicly owned energy company which is apparently going to control our green energy supply ( but not actually pay for it, so far as I can see). I mean, what could possibly go wrong with that?
Why should Twitter 'contain' 'misinformation'? Censorship is not going to make everyone less misinformed - if anything it adds credence to the misinformation. People should accept there's a lot of bollocks on social media and use their common sense.
Twitter has turned to shit under Elon, as a direct result of his mismanagement and alt-right fetish.
There was always bollocks on Twitter but the noise:signal ratio has deteriorated rapidly.
No it hasn't. There was always lefty hysterical nonsense on Twitter. Now there is about an even balance
THAT is why it is only left libtards complaining about Twitter
i've noticed no difference at all, apart from a flurry in disinfo surrounding this latest war, but that was always gonna happen, because AI, and because of the newly sophisticated people botting for either side
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
Or take another example. He wants specialist teachers in every classroom. No idea what that means to be honest but let’s assume it is a good thing.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from? But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
Fix schools with VAT on private education. Fix the NHS by taxing nom doms. But as you rightly say it simply doesn't add up. It's no more substantive than the windfall tax rubbish that Labour was trotting out before.
What might add up is doing something meaningful about business productivity, but I've certainly not heard anything from Labour that makes me think they have more of a clue than the other parties on that matter.
They are planning a publicly owned energy company which is apparently going to control our green energy supply ( but not actually pay for it, so far as I can see). I mean, what could possibly go wrong with that?
Its completely the wrong priority.
Green energy supply is getting built rapidly, its getting curtailed because of the National Grid not being able to fully handle it.
Want to sort out green power and cut our bills? Sort out the Grid.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The NHS needs both centralisation and decentralisation as part of reform. Centralising a bulk purchase agreement for Amoxicillin makes sense. Decentralising other things to make them more flexible to patient needs is another thing. As is reforming employment practises to late 20th cent standards.
We will leave reforming to 21st vent standards for later. Don’t want to cause to much future shock.
A part of this needs to be massive investment in the not-doctors-and-nurses bits. Productivity in testing is ripe for improvement, for example. There is some great new technology on the way that could massively speed up the test-result-diagnose cycle.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Some of these pledges are pathetic and dishonest. So, for example, they claim that they are going to get an extra £1bn from the cancellation of non dom status and use that to address waiting times in the NHS.
Let’s put aside the possibility that eliminating non doms might actually reduce our tax take and also reduce aggregate demand in the UK costing VAT and other indirect taxes. Last year we spent £181.3bn on the NHS. So this £1bn, if it comes, is an increase of around 0.5%. To claim that such a paltry sum is going to solve or even materially contribute to the problem is frankly dishonest. It’s not just wrong, it’s dishonest.
Correct.
I listened to Starmer this morning on the radio and it was clear that much of what he said was no more concrete than the rubbish from Sunak last week. The assumptions about tax revenue were dubious, and his commitments were maybe not as substantive as implied, nor was he likely to be able to deliver them without real opposition from his own party never mind the Tories.
I'll give him a couple of points for at least wanting to go in the right direction, but I won't be holding my breath on him fixing very much.
Or take another example. He wants specialist teachers in every classroom. No idea what that means to be honest but let’s assume it is a good thing.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from? But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
Of course it is tosh. How could he possibly win an election by listing all the additional free owls he wants to dish out (many of which are entirely justifiable - NHS and schools etc), explaining how the non-existent human resources are assembled and deployed in short order, how he will bridge the current £100 billion gap, and what this will cost the tax payer.
(When the FT minimum wage earner is already paying thousands in IT and NI and fiscal drag has brought middle earners into higher rates).
The less he promises the more I shall vote for him.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Don't be silly, of course it does.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
That’s not entirely fair. Many Palestinians work in the Arab states. For shitty wages and generally the shittiest jobs and treated - guess how?
Some Arab countries complain about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is really demarcation - “Hey, treating those people like dirt is *our* job”.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
Quite so. Israel is now Britain in 1940. Yes, others - like the USA - MIGHT come to our aid, but on the other hand there is a large constituency in the USA which thinks Fuck Israel just as there was an isolationist Fuck Everyone Especially England policy in America in 1940
Israel has to do it alone. It isn't going to be pretty, but the entire nation is set on this, and there is naff all we can do, except ameliorate the pain for deserving Gazans
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Stop being a liberal humanist. Where’s your inner hatred? This is PB!
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Pushing against a locked door. Maybe he should have a word with his master about this?
Sen. Lindsey Graham: “To my Republican colleagues who believe that we should pull the plug on supporting Ukraine: If you think Putin’s going to stop at Ukraine, you’re not paying attention...I think it would be really ill-conceived to not support Ukraine.” https://nitter.net/GOP4Ukraine/status/1712121857648796027#m
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
I don't want to see a bloodbath, I want to see safe haven offered by Arab states so that the Arabs living in Gaza can find safety and security.
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Don't be silly, of course it does.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
People can’t be treated as helots, forever. Eventually, they revolt.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
Practical politics. No western country will want to take a population that has voluntarily voted for Hamas. As Gaza was under Egyptian jurisdiction a few decades ago and there is a border it is in that direction they should look.
Plus of course no Hamas voter would prefer to live under the authority of a non Islamic state, any more than they would want to live under Israel.
What someone who was involved once told me was that actually it is very difficult to get sent to jail. The courts will try most every avenue to avoid it and you have to be very determined to end up in prison. Despite the various Daily Mail/Mirror headlines.
What that says about the price of eggs goodness only knows but it would appear that our lily-livered criminal justice system is overwhelmed by actual criminals.
I would imagine that we're also still abiding by human rights legislation that means priosners can't be incarcerated too far from home, so that family can visit, hence still having prisons in London. Are we transferring prisoners around the UK where there's space? We should be.
Gone are the days of Norman Stanley Fletcher being sent to the wilds of Cumbria, far from his home in Muswell Hill
Well back they should come. Sell the prisons in London for housing.
Can't really disagree with you there.
Are you also opposed to families being able to visit prisoners in jail? Most of them are obviously very poor. Who would pay for the the train fares?
I believe the research shows that prisoners who maintain relationships with their families while incarcerated are much less likely to reoffend.
So, it's short term costs vs long term costs. Cheaper prisons but maybe more reoffending.
To be honest what you would find with the London prisons is that the land values would not be as high as you may expect anyway in the current market. There is also the problem that they are listed (Pentonville and Wandsworth) so demolition would be unlikely to be allowed and these buildings are notoriously difficult to repurpose. Then you have to add on all the usual problems and costs of the public sector trying to build anything and there being no land anywhere to do anything with because of various regulatory problems. The idea would never get off the ground and I am sure it has been under active consideration for many years.
Notoriously hard to repurpose? For many Londoners, living in a damp, squalid, poorly insulated and badly maintained six foot by twelve foot cell would be an *upgrade* on their current living conditions.
Heck, Foxton's could rent Pentonville out as-is for £1200 a room. "Communal living. Trendy East London vibe. Close to Tube Station. Lots of good "bars"..."
The several weeks I spent in HMP Brixton were gruelling in multiple ways. But the worst of it?
My address, for the one and only time in my life, was "south of the river"
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
I don't want to see a bloodbath, I want to see safe haven offered by Arab states so that the Arabs living in Gaza can find safety and security.
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
This is the same silly wriggle as yesterday.
Do you still support a ground invasion even if there are no escape routes for civilians?
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
I don't want to see a bloodbath, I want to see safe haven offered by Arab states so that the Arabs living in Gaza can find safety and security.
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
This is the same silly wriggle as yesterday.
Do you still support a ground invasion even if there are no escape routes for civilians?
Of course.
Its on other states to provide escape routes. They can't veto Israel's entirely legitimate self-defence and destruction of Hamas by blockading escape routes.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Why aren't they? We are the ones giving full backing to Israel, not the Arab states.
Why shouldn't should bear the consequences of our support?
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Don't be silly, of course it does.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
In what way is the West Bank an active warzone?
Or it might be becoming one now, but last year there were what... zero... Israeli military deaths in the West Bank. That's one weird ass warzone.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
I don't want to see a bloodbath, I want to see safe haven offered by Arab states so that the Arabs living in Gaza can find safety and security.
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
This is the same silly wriggle as yesterday.
Do you still support a ground invasion even if there are no escape routes for civilians?
Of course.
Its on other states to provide escape routes. They can't veto Israel's entirely legitimate self-defence and destruction of Hamas by blockading escape routes.
Comment by Neil Monnery, Betfred on the Mid Beds election:-
"When you speak to people on the ground (and yes, activists from all parties will say the canvassing is going great, that is par for the course) but the feeling seems to be that Labour think they are on the right path, the Tories know their vote will collapse but are still hopeful, whilst the Lib Dems are still working it extremely hard.
On the face of it that may seem like it is Labour who deservedly get the favourites spot but as anyone who has followed Liberal Democrat by-election campaigning, when the party are still going all out ten days out from polling day, they are quietly confident of getting the win. There has been no withdrawal of funds or a realisation that it is slipping away. Clearly the by-election specialists are still thinking the game is very much on.
Another (albeit very unscientific) approach is to see what social media is saying. A quick search on the platform formally known as Twitter for Mid Bedfordshire by-election terminology shows that probably 50-60% of posts from activists in the constituency are actually Lib Dems.
Labour are next up with a fair few Tories still out there hoping for a split in the vote, allowing them to slip right through the middle. That might mean nothing at all but seeing so many supporters for Emma Holland-Lindsay still turning out in their droves from across the country is noteworthy.
Anyone who has been an avid by-election watcher knows that there are still plenty of minds to be made up in the coming days. In this situation, it is pretty clear that there is significant anger about how the former MP acted and her decision to quit.
Most fun state of affairs during the count would be for all the coverage to say it's too close to call, then go to a series of recounts, and only once the final result is in do we find out that it was too close to call between Labour and Lib Dems, with the conservatives in distant third (or better still 4th behind the independent).
Recount to see if the Tories save their deposit...
What someone who was involved once told me was that actually it is very difficult to get sent to jail. The courts will try most every avenue to avoid it and you have to be very determined to end up in prison. Despite the various Daily Mail/Mirror headlines.
What that says about the price of eggs goodness only knows but it would appear that our lily-livered criminal justice system is overwhelmed by actual criminals.
I would imagine that we're also still abiding by human rights legislation that means priosners can't be incarcerated too far from home, so that family can visit, hence still having prisons in London. Are we transferring prisoners around the UK where there's space? We should be.
Gone are the days of Norman Stanley Fletcher being sent to the wilds of Cumbria, far from his home in Muswell Hill
Well back they should come. Sell the prisons in London for housing.
Can't really disagree with you there.
Are you also opposed to families being able to visit prisoners in jail? Most of them are obviously very poor. Who would pay for the the train fares?
I believe the research shows that prisoners who maintain relationships with their families while incarcerated are much less likely to reoffend.
So, it's short term costs vs long term costs. Cheaper prisons but maybe more reoffending.
To be honest what you would find with the London prisons is that the land values would not be as high as you may expect anyway in the current market. There is also the problem that they are listed (Pentonville and Wandsworth) so demolition would be unlikely to be allowed and these buildings are notoriously difficult to repurpose. Then you have to add on all the usual problems and costs of the public sector trying to build anything and there being no land anywhere to do anything with because of various regulatory problems. The idea would never get off the ground and I am sure it has been under active consideration for many years.
Notoriously hard to repurpose? For many Londoners, living in a damp, squalid, poorly insulated and badly maintained six foot by twelve foot cell would be an *upgrade* on their current living conditions.
Heck, Foxton's could rent Pentonville out as-is for £1200 a room. "Communal living. Trendy East London vibe. Close to Tube Station. Lots of good "bars"..."
The several weeks I spent in HMP Brixton were gruelling in multiple ways. But the worst of it?
My address, for the one and only time in my life, was "south of the river"
*shudders, even now*
Re accommodation, Oxford Prison is now chic hipster hotel accommodation. So repurposing is sometimes possible.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Don't be silly, of course it does.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
In what way is the West Bank an active warzone?
Or it might be becoming one now, but last year there were what... zero... Israeli military deaths in the West Bank. That's one weird ass warzone.
Because there's no peace agreement.
Just because there's a cessation of active hostilities doesn't mean the war is over.
Completely outstanding, not only the first 10 minutes but all the rest of the discussion as well. Highly recommended.
How do we get him back in the Commons or otherwise make use of him? We don’t have talent like that to waste.
I was watching a documentary about Barbara Castle the other week. I kept thinking "If she was up against Rishi, she'd have had him as a light Hors d'oeuvre.
On topic - the Cons stopped being the party of law and order quite a while ago. This has nothing to do with their contempt for the rule of law (though that is obvious) and rather more to do with the fact that they are useless. In this case the hopeless mess is on the watch of one Alex Chalk. Apparently he's one of the best the current Con leadership has to offer.
Our tragedy is that opposition appears to lack the resolution of boldness or ambition to do more than tinker around the edges.
Actually I thought that broadcast was brilliant.
Here's what the problem is, here is our solution, here is how we pay for it.
It is bombshell proof stuff and who can blame them with the folk memory of 1992 stalking Labour HQ?
I spent two terms serving on the same council as Wes Streeting, and he’s a centraliser born and bred, without a single liberal bone in his body. His diagnosis probably contains a lot of truth in it, but (I sadly forecast) he is destined to spend a term trying to impose his views on a massive organisation that will inevitably kick back and frustrate him, whereas the secret to unlocking the potential of our wonderful health service is to find a way to free up doctors, nurses and hospital managers to use their own initiative to achieve improvements without the heavy hand of government forever pressing on their backs
The sums do not add up.
Even if the staff wanted to do overtime at weekends to tackle waiting lists*, to run a 7 day service instead of a 5 day service requires 40% more staff. It cannot just be doctors, but has to be everybody: secretaries, receptionists, nurses, porters, theatre staff, laboratory staff etc etc. £1.5 billion won't touch the sides.
* this is hardly new, my hospital has Waiting List Initiatives at weekend and evening pretty much every weekend for the last 2 decades, with short gaps when money runs out.
Can you elucidate on the numbers?
£1.5 billion looks suspiciously close to 100k (ie 10% of the current waiting list) x the £160 every letter I get from the Hospital tells me it costs if I miss an appointment.
It would all need careful and competent management, certainly. Hopefully Labour would do planning.
I think Starmer's goal would be noticeable and rapid progress, but looking to take 2-3 years to get waiting lists down to an acceptable level to avoid cash-splurge - covered by rhetoric dumping on the previous government.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Why aren't they? We are the ones giving full backing to Israel, not the Arab states.
Why shouldn't should bear the consequences of our support?
We are offering support to Ukraine, doesn't mean that we take Russian refugees.
Those who are giving backing to Hamas should offer the escape routes to Gazans.
Keir Starmer is a lawyer - supposedly a human rights lawyer. He should know that imposing collective punishment such as deprivation of food and water (also demolition of homes and indiscriminate bombing) is against international law."
New Zealand votes on Saturday and when we surface (apart from the all-night party animals) we'll probably know the result.
The ruling Labour Party are set to be the big losers - in 2020, Jacinda Ardern won 65 seats in the 120 seat Parliament with near enough 50% of the vote. The latest One News poll has them on 28% and winning just 35 seats.
The main opposition National Party took a beating in 2020 but are now on 37% and winning 47 seats, a gain of 14 seats.
Barely half of Labour's losses are moving directly to National - the Greens are polling 14% (+6) and are set to win 17 seats (+7). They have decisively won the battle for third place as ACT, after some decent poll numbers a few weeks ago, are back on 9% (+2) and winning 11 seats (+1).
The National-ACT centre-right coalition which had looked set for a solid majority now finds itself only ahead 58-52 and with the pro-Labour Maori Party winning two to make it 58-54, the key is the new kingmaker (or rather the old kingmaker).
Step forward Winston Peters whose New Zealand First has staged a lazarus act of some significance - having been a coalition partner with Labour and the Greens in Ardern's first term, NZ First slumped to 2.6% and lost all their seats in 2020 and seemed set for oblivion but no one told Peters and he has had a bravura campaign lifting NZ First to 6% and a projected 8 seats leaving them holding the balance.
Labour leader and current Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has ruled out a coalition with NZ First but we've been here before in 2017 when National won most votes and seats and was widely expected to go into coalition with NZ First. Peters had other ideas and backed Jacinda Ardern. Could he do the dirty on National twice?
One thing's for certain - IF he's in a position to be kingmaker, he'll milk every second of the limelight for all it's worth. I still think he'll back National-ACT but history does occasionally repeat itself and whether New Zealanders will consider it tragedy or farce remains to be seen.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
I don't want to see a bloodbath, I want to see safe haven offered by Arab states so that the Arabs living in Gaza can find safety and security.
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
This is the same silly wriggle as yesterday.
Do you still support a ground invasion even if there are no escape routes for civilians?
Of course.
Its on other states to provide escape routes. They can't veto Israel's entirely legitimate self-defence and destruction of Hamas by blockading escape routes.
Right, so you're pro-bloodbath.
I'm pro destruction of Hamas.
I want to avoid a bloodbath, but not at the cost of allowing Hamas to exist.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Why aren't they? We are the ones giving full backing to Israel, not the Arab states.
Why shouldn't should bear the consequences of our support?
The solution to Israel finding itself next to a vipers' next of genocidal Islamist nutters is categorically NOT to invite them all to come and live in Foggia, Gdansk and Basingstoke instead.
What someone who was involved once told me was that actually it is very difficult to get sent to jail. The courts will try most every avenue to avoid it and you have to be very determined to end up in prison. Despite the various Daily Mail/Mirror headlines.
What that says about the price of eggs goodness only knows but it would appear that our lily-livered criminal justice system is overwhelmed by actual criminals.
I would imagine that we're also still abiding by human rights legislation that means priosners can't be incarcerated too far from home, so that family can visit, hence still having prisons in London. Are we transferring prisoners around the UK where there's space? We should be.
Gone are the days of Norman Stanley Fletcher being sent to the wilds of Cumbria, far from his home in Muswell Hill
Well back they should come. Sell the prisons in London for housing.
Can't really disagree with you there.
Are you also opposed to families being able to visit prisoners in jail? Most of them are obviously very poor. Who would pay for the the train fares?
I believe the research shows that prisoners who maintain relationships with their families while incarcerated are much less likely to reoffend.
So, it's short term costs vs long term costs. Cheaper prisons but maybe more reoffending.
To be honest what you would find with the London prisons is that the land values would not be as high as you may expect anyway in the current market. There is also the problem that they are listed (Pentonville and Wandsworth) so demolition would be unlikely to be allowed and these buildings are notoriously difficult to repurpose. Then you have to add on all the usual problems and costs of the public sector trying to build anything and there being no land anywhere to do anything with because of various regulatory problems. The idea would never get off the ground and I am sure it has been under active consideration for many years.
Notoriously hard to repurpose? For many Londoners, living in a damp, squalid, poorly insulated and badly maintained six foot by twelve foot cell would be an *upgrade* on their current living conditions.
Heck, Foxton's could rent Pentonville out as-is for £1200 a room. "Communal living. Trendy East London vibe. Close to Tube Station. Lots of good "bars"..."
The several weeks I spent in HMP Brixton were gruelling in multiple ways. But the worst of it?
My address, for the one and only time in my life, was "south of the river"
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
I believe the covert long term policy of Israel - certainly since the 90s - has been to cruelly squeeze and squeeze the Palestinians into such an abominable state that eventually they would react in a Satanic way (because a lot of them really ARE flat out kill-them-all anti-Semites) which would then give Israel the chance to drive them all out of Greater Israel
I do NOT believe Netanyahu planned this whole debacle this weekend past, I suspect he is as shocked as anyone, and he will eventually lose his job, but is it of a piece with the general trend? Yes
It is cynical realpolitik on a grand scale. And yet, on the other hand, Israel really is facing an enemy that wants them all dead, and that has been true probably since the 1940s
The main thing is to avoid the rest of the world being engulfed in the wider war that might result from this endgame now playing out
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Don't be silly, of course it does.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
In what way is the West Bank an active warzone?
Or it might be becoming one now, but last year there were what... zero... Israeli military deaths in the West Bank. That's one weird ass warzone.
Because there's no peace agreement.
Just because there's a cessation of active hostilities doesn't mean the war is over.
And only Palestinians are responsible for that right?
Not the members of the Israeli government who openly say there will never be a Palestinian state? Nor the builders of new settlements in the West Bank?
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
Your problem is that the Israelis are about to do that to the Palestinians. Drive them into the Med.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
I don't want to see a bloodbath, I want to see safe haven offered by Arab states so that the Arabs living in Gaza can find safety and security.
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
This is the same silly wriggle as yesterday.
Do you still support a ground invasion even if there are no escape routes for civilians?
Of course.
Its on other states to provide escape routes. They can't veto Israel's entirely legitimate self-defence and destruction of Hamas by blockading escape routes.
Right, so you're pro-bloodbath.
I'm pro destruction of Hamas.
I want to avoid a bloodbath, but not at the cost of allowing Hamas to exist.
Would support strikes on Iran (if feasible), instead of a ground invasion of Gaza?
That's where Hamas get their funding and arms from.
MattW asked: "Do non-Usonians get an opt-out of that?
Say if a British or French or Japanese child is at a school in the USA?"
Yes they do, and so do American children, since 1943: "The most important U.S. Supreme Court legal victory won by the Witnesses was in the case West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette (1943), in which the court ruled that school children could not be forced to pledge allegiance to or salute the U.S. flag. The Barnette decision overturned an earlier case, Minersville School District vs. Gobitis (1940), in which the court had held that Witnesses could be forced against their will to pay homage to the flag." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_cases_involving_Jehovah's_Witnesses_by_country#United_States
Two unrelated thoughts: In this area, from what I have seen, the most enthusiastic patriots are naturalized citizens.
Second, one of the things in my list of things former Chancellor Merkel deserves credit for -- a list that, sadly, has gotten shorter in recent years -- is her protest against the treatment of Jehovah Witnesses in Russia.
What someone who was involved once told me was that actually it is very difficult to get sent to jail. The courts will try most every avenue to avoid it and you have to be very determined to end up in prison. Despite the various Daily Mail/Mirror headlines.
What that says about the price of eggs goodness only knows but it would appear that our lily-livered criminal justice system is overwhelmed by actual criminals.
I would imagine that we're also still abiding by human rights legislation that means priosners can't be incarcerated too far from home, so that family can visit, hence still having prisons in London. Are we transferring prisoners around the UK where there's space? We should be.
Gone are the days of Norman Stanley Fletcher being sent to the wilds of Cumbria, far from his home in Muswell Hill
Well back they should come. Sell the prisons in London for housing.
Can't really disagree with you there.
Are you also opposed to families being able to visit prisoners in jail? Most of them are obviously very poor. Who would pay for the the train fares?
I believe the research shows that prisoners who maintain relationships with their families while incarcerated are much less likely to reoffend.
So, it's short term costs vs long term costs. Cheaper prisons but maybe more reoffending.
To be honest what you would find with the London prisons is that the land values would not be as high as you may expect anyway in the current market. There is also the problem that they are listed (Pentonville and Wandsworth) so demolition would be unlikely to be allowed and these buildings are notoriously difficult to repurpose. Then you have to add on all the usual problems and costs of the public sector trying to build anything and there being no land anywhere to do anything with because of various regulatory problems. The idea would never get off the ground and I am sure it has been under active consideration for many years.
Notoriously hard to repurpose? For many Londoners, living in a damp, squalid, poorly insulated and badly maintained six foot by twelve foot cell would be an *upgrade* on their current living conditions.
Heck, Foxton's could rent Pentonville out as-is for £1200 a room. "Communal living. Trendy East London vibe. Close to Tube Station. Lots of good "bars"..."
The several weeks I spent in HMP Brixton were gruelling in multiple ways. But the worst of it?
My address, for the one and only time in my life, was "south of the river"
*shudders, even now*
What was the food like?
OMG bad. Worse than modern French food.
BAD
On Sundays we got "high tea", which was sliced white bread with margarine, tomatoes and processed cheese
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Don't we have a connection too? We have a large Muslim population. Not discussed very much but Humza Yousaf's parents in law are currently trapped in Gaza.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Why aren't they? We are the ones giving full backing to Israel, not the Arab states.
Why shouldn't should bear the consequences of our support?
The solution to Israel finding itself next to a vipers' next of genocidal Islamist nutters is categorically NOT to invite them all to come and live in Foggia, Gdansk and Basingstoke instead.
I was just pointing out the weird demands Barty is putting on other states to take refugees.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
If the land becomes a wilderness, and if all the residents get out safely to the south (or otherwise) then that'd be a great resolution.
Who wants a Gazan though as an immigrant? Given they're all so young and impressionable, and the terrorist climate there, I'd question whether anyone would want them.
I think every Palestinian needs to look at themselves and realise that they are in a hopeless nowhere of their own making, and yet the Israelis are shining. More importantly the Arabs and the Palestinians within the state of Israel are happy and prosperous.
I'm sorry, did the Palestinians force the Israelis to build settlements on the West Bank?
I'm happy to go with: this was a cowardly, vicious attack, and we should support the Israelis in dealing with it. But I'm not going to blame the Palestinians for existing. Or, indeed, for hating Israel. I suspect I would to if I had been born there.
Why shouldn't the Israelis build settlements on their own land?
The Arabs, not the Israelis, chose to deny a Palestinian state and Israel offered them one yet again in the negotiations with Arafat which was yet again rejected.
In the meantime, unless or until an agreement is reached, Israel is perfectly free to build on its own land.
In which case, the Palestinians in the West Bank are Israeli citizens, and need to be granted the same rights as all other Israelis.
You can't have it both ways.
I have often wondered if the shrewd Palestinian approach would be to say “we want rights as Israeli citizens”. Hard to argue against given their location, and a terrifying prospect for Israel, which would want rid.
But all for another time. Right now Hamas has committed an atrocity and Israel needs support..
That's my view as well.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
Why can't they have it both ways? The stated position of both parties is that the final border is up for negotiations.
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Every settlement that Israel builds makes it harder for them to agree a sustainable Palestinian state. Because that means one more Israeli citizen that would need to be moved back to Israel.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
Then sign a peace agreement. They've had plenty of options.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
With all due respect, I don't believe it is the policy of the State of Israel to allow the creation of an independent Palestine.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
It wasn't Israel who rejected the peace agreement, it was Arafat. So yes, solely and squarely their fault.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
They are human beings, just like you.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
Don't be silly, of course it does.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
In what way is the West Bank an active warzone?
Or it might be becoming one now, but last year there were what... zero... Israeli military deaths in the West Bank. That's one weird ass warzone.
Because there's no peace agreement.
Just because there's a cessation of active hostilities doesn't mean the war is over.
And only Palestinians are responsible for that right?
Not the members of the Israeli government who openly say there will never be a Palestinian state? Nor the builders of new settlements in the West Bank?
It's all - 100% - the fault of the Palestinians?
Absolutely.
Palestinians rejected the state and have only become more aggressive since then now openly calling for Jews to be killed from sea to sea.
Settlements or the Israeli government are neither here nor there. If someone was seeking the murder of every Englishman I'd completely support the government not negotiating with them.
Dreadful scenes from Gaza . It will be uninhabitable by next week . What happens after Israel finishes its operation there.
No food , no water , no power . How long can this be sustained for ?
There’s understandably a lot of goodwill towards Israel given the horrific events of recent days but I just can’t see this lasting if Gaza is razed to the ground and there’s a huge amount of civilian deaths .
What is the point of having all this "goodwill" if all it means is that you are told you cannot take any action to defend yourself?
What does this "goodwill" actually amount to?
There have been a goodly number of people whose first instinct was to blame Israel for what happened, to celebrate what happened. They will blame Israel no matter what it does. If this happened to us here, would we be content with "goodwill" or would we take action to deal with the threat?
Those who are worried about civilian deaths should come up with a proposal that might avoid these. That is what the UN is for. Perhaps all those Arab states who are so busy furiously denouncing Israel might use their brains and money to help the poor civilians trapped in Gaza. Perhaps they might lean on Hamas. Perhaps. Perhaps.
But frankly if I were attacked in the way those families were I wouldn't give a shit about having lots of goodwill. I'd want my government to protect me and I'd be pretty bloody sceptical of foreign governments who will rapidly move on when the headlines change.
If we want Israel to do something other than a bloody invasion of Gaza - which may not succeed and which may be strategically unwise and which will certainly kill a lot of innocents - we'd better bloody well offer them an alternative which will work and not just tut about lost goodwill.
I don’t have an alternative , sorry . Maybe the international community could come up with something but they need to act quickly . An interesting view just now on Channel 4 . Netanyahu wants Gazans to leave and go to Egypt and ethnically cleanse them from Gaza so Israel can annex it . Maybe this is why Egypt is reluctant to be too helpful .
The EU took in 6 million refugees from Ukraine. So why not 2 million more from Gaza?
It have to say that it is absolutely shocking that people in Europe are not wanting to take in refugees from Gaza or even talk about the idea. It just gets skimmed over and ignored, as if it is not a serious idea.
That the Arab states won't take them in speaks more volumes.
Doesn't say much about us either.
They're not our responsibility.
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Why aren't they? We are the ones giving full backing to Israel, not the Arab states.
Why shouldn't should bear the consequences of our support?
The solution to Israel finding itself next to a vipers' next of genocidal Islamist nutters is categorically NOT to invite them all to come and live in Foggia, Gdansk and Basingstoke instead.
I was just pointing out the weird demands Barty is putting on other states to take refugees.
Nothing weird about it.
Those who claim to support Palestine/Hamas should take responsibility for their own actions and any refugees they've caused by instigating this conflict. And show care to the people they pretend to care about.
Comments
They also have other advantages. Not murdering LGBT people. A proper justice system (until Netanyahu got hold of it). A democratic system of government. Religious freedom.
Unfortunately, it is not always so easy to make a clear distinction between the morals of the current leaders of the country and their enemies.
Israel has accepted peace offers multiple times, the only reason there's no Palestinian state is that the other parties rejected them.
The Palestinian situation is brought about entirely because of the Arab states and the Palestinian leaders. So its on them to fix it, its on Israel's leadership to ensure Israel's safety and security instead.
This attack was - genuinely - a terrorist attack, designed with the express purpose of terrorizing Israeli citizens.
And we therefore need stand with Israel.
In the long-run, though, Israel needs to decide. Is the West Bank part of Israel? In which case, the people there are Israelis. Or is it part of Palestine? In which case they shouldn't be building settlements there.
You can't have it both ways, because right now the people of the West Bank are treated in much the same was as the black population of South Africa in the Apartheid days.
That's simply not true. Arabs in Israel proper are citizens. Arabs in the West Bank are not.
Jews in the West Bank, by contrast, are citizens.
The upper car park at the hospital, nearest to the department, was in complete chaos, with no free parking space, tons of people waiting about, and cars abandoned on corners or up on the verge or anywhere where people could leave their car and run.
The lower car park was little better, with a long queue for spaces, but eventually I managed to park up.
The entrance to the hospital was fenced off with barricades, behind which were a load of skips full of building rubbish with no sign of any actual building work taking place. To get into the hospital required a walk around the detour, and then a long trek to the relevant ward.
When I arrived, it turned out my appointment had been cancelled, because the consultant wasn’t there, but the booking department hasn’t made any effort to tell me. The nurse was very apologetic; clearly it wasn’t her fault and there was nothing she could do.
Returning to the car park, all but one of the parking payment machines was out of order, so I joined the long queue to pay £1.70 for the utterly futile visit to the hospital.
And returned home.
Doubtless I will eventually get a letter giving me a next appointment some time early in 2024.
This is to be paid for by taxing private schools. Which is supposedly going to raise £1.5 billion. I mean, is he having a laugh? Private schools are already going insolvent, as one did very near here earlier this year. Where the hell are they going to get this money from?
But let’s, once again, put this aside. Last year the education system cost us £105bn. Once again, we are talking relatively trivial sums, way less than it is going to cost to fix the RAAC problem, for example. It’s just tosh.
I asked why not, and was told that the Israelis refused to provide one on the grounds that it wasn't in Jerusalem's city limits and therefore was a Palestinian matter.
I asked why the Palestinians hadn't done so.
Well, came the reply, they did offer, but the government said that it was in Jerusalem and therefore outside Ramallah's jurisdiction.
That's having it both ways.
(By the way - my informant was an Israeli.)
Why can't they negotiate to include any settlements? Is negotiations only meant to be a one-way ratchet?
If Fatah want Israel out of the West Bank then Fatah should sign a full and final peace settlement that ends the conflict and sets the border at whatever they can get and draw a line under it and move on.
They won't do that though. So until then, Israel needs to look after Israel.
Meanwhile, under Scottish law a man is acquitted of raping a 13 year old girl and will face no sentence at all
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-67076504
It doesn't mean that Labour's tinkering around the edges won't be less bad than Tory tinkering, but it's still tinkering.
If I were to put myself in the shoes of an average Palestinian in the West Bank, I don't see how I wouldn't feel that I was being slowly - but continually - invaded.
If you take Israel + West Bank + Gaza as a whole Jews are in a minority.
I'm not sure of the exact figures but if you exclude Gaza then Jews can't be much more than 55% to 60% of a combined Israel + West Bank. That's nowhere near enough for them to be comfortable.
And the Palestinian birth rate is miles higher. One astonishing stat quoted this week is that 50% of Gaza's population is children. Just think what that means for population growth going forward.
The proportion of children may be a bit lower in the West Bank but it'll still be way higher than in Israel.
No, Israel's occupation of the West Bank is straightforward apartheid - they take the land but they certainly won't be allowing the Palestinians to vote.
Edit - only just noted the 'acquitted' part. But I think the point is even when convicted, he wasn't jailed.
When Israel signed an agreement with Egypt to return Sinai, they dismantled settlements.
Stop trying to be maximalist, recognise Israel's right to exist in peace, negotiate a border of what you can get, and Israel will surely dismantle any settlements outside that border. Arafat had the offer of this and spurned it.
Whatever the Palestinians may "feel", the fault lies squarely with one side and one side alone. Spoiler: Its not Israel.
The fifteen safest Tories were:
Caroline Johnson
Mark Francois
John Hayes
John Whittingdon
Steve Barclay
Alex Burghart
Victoria Atkins
Gavin Williamson
Nigel Huddlestone
Andrea Leadsome
Kemi Badenoch
RIshi Sunak
Tom Tugendhat
Alicia Kearns
Rebecca Harris
In fairness a mixture of top ministers, has beens, Brexiteers, and unknowns.
So it goes on and on and on and on and on.
Certainly, certain parts of Netanyahu's coalition have been vocally opposed to the idea of any Palestinian statehood.
So, to claim this is all the fault of the Palestinians is simply incorrect.
If it was left to the members the likely next Conservative leader would be Badenoch or Braverman, maybe even Mogg.
However as MPs pick the last 2 there is a significant chance Barclay and Tugendhat could be the last 2 sent to members (MPs didn't even put Badenoch or Braverman in the last 3 last summer, despite Badenoch comfortably leading members' polls).
For the same reason Starmer has changed Labour leadership rules so contenders need the support of 20% of MPs to go to the members rather than 10% as now
What might add up is doing something meaningful about business productivity, but I've certainly not heard anything from Labour that makes me think they have more of a clue than the other parties on that matter.
And let us not forget that had Egypt and Transjordan not invaded in the first place, there'd have been a state called Palestine existing since 1948.
As for whether Israel wants an independent state now, after Arafat rejected peace? That's irrelevant. Still the Palestinians fault, they're still the ones who rejected peace, and given Hamas are pledging the total destruction of all of Israel and the murder of every Jew from sea to sea, its entirely reasonable self-defence to say you don't want to negotiate with that.
One point though - it was dermatological, checkup for skin cancer and precursors. The only hi-tech the chap needed was a magnifying glass, and for support the usual receptionist(s) and nurse(s).
I think text messages are very helpful, though not *all* departments send text message reminders. Though my GP does.
OTOH I tried to cancel a follow-up appointment to discuss a biopsy which is no longer relevant as the condition has gone weeks ago, and I was told I must contact the nurses from the department who commissioned the biopsy, and they must send a note. Which is a bit round-the-houses.
Back from a couple of days in the Red Wall.
Interesting to read the Standard say Starmer "hadn't dropped the ming vase" in his speech yesterday. It was the same analogy Jenkins used of Blair in 1996-97. The idea now is NOT to create great dividing lines or make hostages to fortune - the idea is to re-assure the 2019 Conservative faithful one more again he is neither Corbyn nor is the Labour party he now leads the party of Corbyn but in truth a non-socialist party of the centre and centre left.
Previous pronounced policy positions under different leaders may be wheeled out as proof of inconsistency but parties are or should be disciplined creatures and loyalty rules. The leader or party sets a policy direction which all should follow - imagine a party which constantly changed its views on key issues or leaders....
Starmer's discipline may have driven some from the party to other pastures but I suspected it's recruited more and after 13 or more years in the wilderness Labour now wants to be back in office and taking the big decisions.
I sense now Labour are trying to move to the electorate while the Conservatives are still trying to make the electorate move to them.
THAT is why it is only left libtards complaining about Twitter
i've noticed no difference at all, apart from a flurry in disinfo surrounding this latest war, but that was always gonna happen, because AI, and because of the newly sophisticated people botting for either side
Even when he was convicted before he only got a community sentence due to new Scottish sentencing guidelines for under 25
I:t could be owned (derided, etc.) in public. Or owned by the members of the public on the LSE.
The hyphen is needed to stop the reader's mind oscillating between the two.
Green energy supply is getting built rapidly, its getting curtailed because of the National Grid not being able to fully handle it.
Want to sort out green power and cut our bills? Sort out the Grid.
We will leave reforming to 21st vent standards for later. Don’t want to cause to much future shock.
A part of this needs to be massive investment in the not-doctors-and-nurses bits. Productivity in testing is ripe for improvement, for example. There is some great new technology on the way that could massively speed up the test-result-diagnose cycle.
Simply because one person did something stupid thirty years ago, does not mean that these human beings should be denied the same rights that other people on planet earth have.
(When the FT minimum wage earner is already paying thousands in IT and NI and fiscal drag has brought middle earners into higher rates).
The less he promises the more I shall vote for him.
Thanks to what he did, they live in a warzone.
People in ongoing warzones or conflict areas don't have the same rights that those living in peaceful, sovereign democracies.
If Fatah and Hamas surrender unconditionally and end the war, then a state could maybe be negotiated.
I want the DfE to have a fair trial with everything in their favour before we find the lying scumbags guilty.
It doesn't matter whether that's fair or karma or "their fault". It's understandable, sure, but will always remain a bloodbath instigated by Israel.
This isn't to say I'm not as hawkish on this as others. I'd want Israel to go after Iran in response, rather than a full ground invasion of Gaza.
Some Arab countries complain about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is really demarcation - “Hey, treating those people like dirt is *our* job”.
Israel has to do it alone. It isn't going to be pretty, but the entire nation is set on this, and there is naff all we can do, except ameliorate the pain for deserving Gazans
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67082047
Oops.
Sen. Lindsey Graham: “To my Republican colleagues who believe that we should pull the plug on supporting Ukraine: If you think Putin’s going to stop at Ukraine, you’re not paying attention...I think it would be really ill-conceived to not support Ukraine.”
https://nitter.net/GOP4Ukraine/status/1712121857648796027#m
If the Arab states won't allow their brethren in and it results in a bloodbath when Israel entirely legitimately seeks to destroy Hamas, then why do you think they're acting that way?
Plus of course no Hamas voter would prefer to live under the authority of a non Islamic state, any more than they would want to live under Israel.
My address, for the one and only time in my life, was "south of the river"
*shudders, even now*
When China repressed Hong Kong we offered hundreds of thousands of refugee places to people living there as we had a connection.
The Arab states have a connection here, but are turning their back. Why?
Do you still support a ground invasion even if there are no escape routes for civilians?
Its on other states to provide escape routes. They can't veto Israel's entirely legitimate self-defence and destruction of Hamas by blockading escape routes.
Why shouldn't should bear the consequences of our support?
Or it might be becoming one now, but last year there were what... zero... Israeli military deaths in the West Bank. That's one weird ass warzone.
https://www.malmaison.com/locations/oxford/ (worth clicking to see the imagery and marketing phraseology on the very first page)
Just because there's a cessation of active hostilities doesn't mean the war is over.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLCpw0pYm88
Lord help us.
https://youtu.be/5HO70-Rk3jE?si=5h5OqfhqffCJDCfX
£1.5 billion looks suspiciously close to 100k (ie 10% of the current waiting list) x the £160 every letter I get from the Hospital tells me it costs if I miss an appointment.
It would all need careful and competent management, certainly. Hopefully Labour would do planning.
I think Starmer's goal would be noticeable and rapid progress, but looking to take 2-3 years to get waiting lists down to an acceptable level to avoid cash-splurge - covered by rhetoric dumping on the previous government.
Those who are giving backing to Hamas should offer the escape routes to Gazans.
"Lynne Jones is on Mastodon
@lynnejones_exMP
Keir Starmer is a lawyer - supposedly a human rights lawyer. He should know that imposing collective punishment such as deprivation of food and water (also demolition of homes and indiscriminate bombing) is against international law."
https://twitter.com/lynnejones_exMP/status/1712178736815096206
The ruling Labour Party are set to be the big losers - in 2020, Jacinda Ardern won 65 seats in the 120 seat Parliament with near enough 50% of the vote. The latest One News poll has them on 28% and winning just 35 seats.
The main opposition National Party took a beating in 2020 but are now on 37% and winning 47 seats, a gain of 14 seats.
Barely half of Labour's losses are moving directly to National - the Greens are polling 14% (+6) and are set to win 17 seats (+7). They have decisively won the battle for third place as ACT, after some decent poll numbers a few weeks ago, are back on 9% (+2) and winning 11 seats (+1).
The National-ACT centre-right coalition which had looked set for a solid majority now finds itself only ahead 58-52 and with the pro-Labour Maori Party winning two to make it 58-54, the key is the new kingmaker (or rather the old kingmaker).
Step forward Winston Peters whose New Zealand First has staged a lazarus act of some significance - having been a coalition partner with Labour and the Greens in Ardern's first term, NZ First slumped to 2.6% and lost all their seats in 2020 and seemed set for oblivion but no one told Peters and he has had a bravura campaign lifting NZ First to 6% and a projected 8 seats leaving them holding the balance.
Labour leader and current Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has ruled out a coalition with NZ First but we've been here before in 2017 when National won most votes and seats and was widely expected to go into coalition with NZ First. Peters had other ideas and backed Jacinda Ardern. Could he do the dirty on National twice?
One thing's for certain - IF he's in a position to be kingmaker, he'll milk every second of the limelight for all it's worth. I still think he'll back National-ACT but history does occasionally repeat itself and whether New Zealanders will consider it tragedy or farce remains to be seen.
I want to avoid a bloodbath, but not at the cost of allowing Hamas to exist.
I do NOT believe Netanyahu planned this whole debacle this weekend past, I suspect he is as shocked as anyone, and he will eventually lose his job, but is it of a piece with the general trend? Yes
It is cynical realpolitik on a grand scale. And yet, on the other hand, Israel really is facing an enemy that wants them all dead, and that has been true probably since the 1940s
The main thing is to avoid the rest of the world being engulfed in the wider war that might result from this endgame now playing out
Not the members of the Israeli government who openly say there will never be a Palestinian state? Nor the builders of new settlements in the West Bank?
It's all - 100% - the fault of the Palestinians?
That's where Hamas get their funding and arms from.
Say if a British or French or Japanese child is at a school in the USA?"
Yes they do, and so do American children, since 1943: "The most important U.S. Supreme Court legal victory won by the Witnesses was in the case West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette (1943), in which the court ruled that school children could not be forced to pledge allegiance to or salute the U.S. flag. The Barnette decision overturned an earlier case, Minersville School District vs. Gobitis (1940), in which the court had held that Witnesses could be forced against their will to pay homage to the flag."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_cases_involving_Jehovah's_Witnesses_by_country#United_States
Two unrelated thoughts: In this area, from what I have seen, the most enthusiastic patriots are naturalized citizens.
Second, one of the things in my list of things former Chancellor Merkel deserves credit for -- a list that, sadly, has gotten shorter in recent years -- is her protest against the treatment of Jehovah Witnesses in Russia.
BAD
On Sundays we got "high tea", which was sliced white bread with margarine, tomatoes and processed cheese
And back then you had to "slop out"
Not discussed very much but Humza Yousaf's parents in law are currently trapped in Gaza.
Palestinians rejected the state and have only become more aggressive since then now openly calling for Jews to be killed from sea to sea.
Settlements or the Israeli government are neither here nor there. If someone was seeking the murder of every Englishman I'd completely support the government not negotiating with them.
Those who claim to support Palestine/Hamas should take responsibility for their own actions and any refugees they've caused by instigating this conflict. And show care to the people they pretend to care about.