Hypocrisy

[AFC]

Israeli authorities have turned a historic mosque in an occupied Palestinian town into a nightclub,

An Israeli company linked to the municipality of Safad in North Palestine has turned the 13th century Al Ahmar (Red) Mosque into a bar and a wedding hall.

“I was shocked when I saw aspects of sabotage inside the mosque,” Khair Tabari, the secretary of a Palestinian Islamic endowment agency, told London-based newspaper Al Qodus Al Arabi.

There is a worldwide condemnation over Turkey’s decision to convert the Byzantine-era monument Hagia Sophia back into a mosque, yet there was a deafening silence across the world when the Israeli municipality in Safed had converted Al-Ahmar Mosque into a bar.

[sophie]

Does the worldwide audience know about the sacrilege purported by the Israelis? I certainly didn't? Sadly Israeli plc has far more influence than Palestine plc has. Same goes for here and down South.

[AFC]

Indeed Sophie, isnt that the truth. One of the nations to complain Russia, on Saturday blocked an essential UN humanitarian pipeline sending food and essential supplies to an area in Syria. More then a million people now face the prospect of moving or starving.

Im posting a link to a film made this year by an American Journilist accused By the US govt of "Fomenting Radical discontent".

Gaza fights for freedom is free to watch atm.
https://mobile.twitter.com/empirefiles

Instructions:
Go to film, click, press rent, make a vimeo account, apply code, free to watch

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Im posting a link to a film made this year by an American Journilist accused By the US govt of "Fomenting Radical discontent".

Gaza fights for freedom is free to watch atm.
https://mobile.twitter.com/empirefiles

Was about to then saw it was Abby Martin.
If you believe 9/11 was an inside job and Venezuala hasn't been destroyed by Chavez and his mates I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Im posting a link to a film made this year by an American Journilist accused By the US govt of "Fomenting Radical discontent".

Gaza fights for freedom is free to watch atm.
https://mobile.twitter.com/empirefiles

Was about to then saw it was Abby Martin.
If you believe 9/11 was an inside job and Venezuala hasn't been destroyed by Chavez and his mates I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

If you do watch it bear in mind that Gaza has been governed by Hamas since 2007.

[AFC]

An organisation accepting Palestinian independence based the formation of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders, and fully recognises Israel.

[AFC]

In 2018, Israeli forces and settlers have killed 295 Palestinians according to a UN monitoring group.

More than 29,000 Palestinians were injured during 2018 – the highest number of injuries in a single year since the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs began collecting data in 2005.

Nearly 60 of those Palestinians killed and 7,000 of those injured were children. Hundreds of Childen are detained indefinately in prisons.

More than 60 percent of the fatalities and nearly 80 percent of the injuries took place in the context of the Great March of Return – mass protests held regularly along Gaza’s eastern and northern perimeter since 30 March.

Some 14,000 people were hospitalized for injuries sustained during the protests, while more than 12,000 were treated at field clinics.

More than 6,000 Palestinians were injured by live ammunition during the Great March of Return.

The demonstrations call for an end to Israel’s blockade on the territory, now in its 11th year, and demand Palestinian refugees’ right to return to the lands from which their families were expelled during, before and after Israel’s founding in 1948. The protet has NOTHING TO DO WITH HAMAS.

Israel has used deadly force against unarmed protesters during those demonstrations, provoking the condemnation of UN human rights officials and an unprecedented warning from the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, yet nothing is ever done - hyrocisy.

Facts my friend are facts.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

An organisation accepting Palestinian independence based the formation of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders, and fully recognises Israel.

Are you talking about Hamas here or....?

[EnjoyingTheSun]

In 2018, Israeli forces and settlers have killed 295 Palestinians according to a UN monitoring group.

More than 29,000 Palestinians were injured during 2018 – the highest number of injuries in a single year since the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs began collecting data in 2005.

Nearly 60 of those Palestinians killed and 7,000 of those injured were children. Hundreds of Childen are detained indefinately in prisons.

More than 60 percent of the fatalities and nearly 80 percent of the injuries took place in the context of the Great March of Return – mass protests held regularly along Gaza’s eastern and northern perimeter since 30 March.

Some 14,000 people were hospitalized for injuries sustained during the protests, while more than 12,000 were treated at field clinics.

More than 6,000 Palestinians were injured by live ammunition during the Great March of Return.

The demonstrations call for an end to Israel’s blockade on the territory, now in its 11th year, and demand Palestinian refugees’ right to return to the lands from which their families were expelled during, before and after Israel’s founding in 1948. The protet has NOTHING TO DO WITH HAMAS.

Israel has used deadly force against unarmed protesters during those demonstrations, provoking the condemnation of UN human rights officials and an unprecedented warning from the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, yet nothing is ever done - hyrocisy.

Facts my friend are facts.

Yes I am always interested in facts such as the genocide of Palestinians. How many multiples has their population grown by in the last 50 years?

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/is ... ot-of-gaza

https://www.investigativeproject.org/38 ... wood-magic

The double standards that Marxists such as Abby Martin subjects Israel to, only strengthens Netanyahu and the hardliners.

ok you believe that Israel has a right to exist?
Do you favour a two state solution?
If we have a two state solution, a Palestinian and an Israeli state where do the Palestinian refugees have a right to return to? The Palestinian State or the Israeli state?

[AFC]

I do find it extremely amusing how you rely on right wing Jewish Media, when I've presented independent facts, confirmed by independent organisations.

In answer to your question, a two-state solution is dead. Israeli occupation of the West Bank, continued settlement building and now the threat of partial annexation have made it clear that a two-state solution would mean “a fragmented Palestine under de facto Israeli control.”

The number of Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has grown from zero at the time of the 1967 war to 700,000 today. Their widespread presence means that creating a contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank would be impossible.

The only remaining solution is a multicultural, pluralistic, democratic state based on equal rights for all.

I can carry on posting INDEPENDENT facts all, however this thread is about the hipocracy that is the worldwide condemnation over Turkey’s decision to convert the Byzantine-era monument Hagia Sophia back into a mosque, yet there was a deafening silence across the world when the Israeli municipality in Safed had converted a 13th century Al-Ahmar Mosque into a bar.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

I do find it extremely amusing how you rely on right wing Jewish Media, when I've presented independent facts, confirmed by independent organisations.

I find it extremely amusing that you count the UN as independent when it comes to Israel.

In answer to your question, a two-state solution is dead. Israeli occupation of the West Bank, continued settlement building and now the threat of partial annexation have made it clear that a two-state solution would mean “a fragmented Palestine under de facto Israeli control.”

The number of Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has grown from zero at the time of the 1967 war to 700,000 today. Their widespread presence means that creating a contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank would be impossible.

The only remaining solution is a multicultural, pluralistic, democratic state based on equal rights for all.

So one state with Jews as the minority? And who will ensure that this state remains democratic as democracy isn't terribly fashionable in the Middle East? Also who will ensure that the Jews are not persecuted when they are a minority as there is little historical precedent to illustrate that they won't?

I assume you are going to come up with the UN again?

I can carry on posting INDEPENDENT facts all

Please quote the source for your 'facts"

however this thread is about the hipocracy that is the worldwide condemnation over Turkey’s decision to convert the Byzantine-era monument Hagia Sophia back into a mosque, yet there was a deafening silence across the world when the Israeli municipality in Safed had converted a 13th century Al-Ahmar Mosque into a bar.

As you are an expert on Middle Eastern affairs you will be aware that under the 1949 Armistice Agreement there was to be free access to the Western Wall and other holy sites? You will also be aware that Jordan immediately violated that agreement?
Please point out the UN resolution that condemned Jordan for that act.

[jofra]

"Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?"

"Yes I am always interested in facts such as the genocide of Palestinians. How many multiples has their population grown by in the last 50 years?"

[Hedge-fund]

There are plenty of bars in London that used to be churches.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

"Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?"

"Yes I am always interested in facts such as the genocide of Palestinians. How many multiples has their population grown by in the last 50 years?"

Genocide is the deliberate/targeted killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group?

Starkey’s point was extremely clumsily made but accurate. Slavery was wicked and exploitive but it wasn’t genocide. The brutal truth is slave owners and traders had people as a product so their purpose wasn’t to kill them.

The often quoted genocide of the Palestinian people is just one of those nonsense soundbites thrown up such as Israel being an apartheid country. Israel has Arab MPs and the Palestinian population has gone up 9 fold since 1948. If the Israelis are trying to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians they are doing a poor job of it. The genocide phrase is used like the Israelis are like Nazis as a particularly hurtful slogan.

Israel has done some terrible things as have the Palestinian terrorists but the question is do you want Jews to have a homeland?

While the UN continues to show the bias they have against Israel then Netanyahu and/or the hardliners are guaranteed power because only a suicidal moron would expect the UN to oversee a democratic country where all are treated equally. Unless you think that Gaza or indeed anywhere in the Middle East is a good example?

So I know the whole anti American bit and holding up
Palestinian flags is a great piece of virtue signalling and very on trend but if you want to see what can accurately be called a genocide then push for a one state solution where Jews are the minority that will rely on the UN to keep it democratic and equal.

[Up the Reds.]

IMHO thhis subject is almost impossible to debate. Just as the BML topic is almost possible to debate too. The first is open to being called antisematic and the second a racist.I would just ask 'a curved ball' question ..Why is it that Israel has broken International law over 'settlements' and still has direct flights from all over the World yet the TRNC isn't allowed that luxury?.

[EnjoyingTheSun]

IMHO thhis subject is almost impossible to debate. Just as the BML topic is almost possible to debate too. The first is open to being called antisematic and the second a racist.

I agree that it is a very difficult subject to debate because everyone takes a polarised position on these debates. e.g.Our side is totally right and your side is totally wrong. With most of these subjects it is never that black and white.
I don’t think all criticism of Israel is anti-semitic, much of it is very justified.
I do think however that many people because of their political leanings have a very anti American slant and that drifts into the Middle Eastern conflict and they tend to apply, often quite innocently, double standards there which can border on AS.

I think when you have Israel being the subject of human rights criticism in isolation from the rest of the world and you find that the UN committee making the resolutions is populated by countries such as China, Cuba and North Korea you can’t help but think maybe you could pull the plank out of your eye here.
It’s laughable but Iran, that feminist capital of the world, was elected to the UN Commission on the Status of Women in 2010 and again in 2014.

I would just ask 'a curved ball' question ..Why is it that Israel has broken International law over 'settlements'

Whatever your feelings on the morality of the settlements, I’m not so sure Israel has broken international law. Or it is certainly not as clear cut as some would have it.

UN resolutions, although they make statements about the legality of the settlements, are merely political statements. They are non-binding under international law. Most of the voting in the U.N. is for non-binding resolutions that hold no weight.

In order to find Israel’s settlements to be a violation of international law, first, Israel must be considered an occupier of foreign territory. Yet, Israel’s legal claim to the territory in question was recognised by the international community on several occasions.
First, the land on both sides of the river Jordan were recognized as part of the Jewish National Home by the 1920 San Remo Conference.
This was endorsed by the League of Nations (predecessor to the United Nations) in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate to Britain, and affirmed by article 80 of the United Nations charter in 1945.
When Israel’s leaders declared sovereignty in all territory relinquished by Great Britain on May 15, 1948 (including the territory that is called the West Bank) it was recognized as the State of Israel by the General Assembly and Security Council by May 1949.

Jordan invaded (along with four other Arab states) and conquered this specific territory in 1949, annexed it in 1950, and gave it a new name: West Bank. Only two countries in the entire world recognized Jordan’s annexation (Great Britain and Pakistan) and not a single Arab country recognized this annexation.
Furthermore, article 2 of the UN charter forbids the acquisition of territory through war. Thus, Jordan’s acquisition and annexation of the territory was illegal under international law.
In 1967 Jordan was pushed out of the territory (back to Jordan’s recognised boundaries on the east bank of the Jordan river) by Israel.

This re-acquisition of the territory by Israel was legal because article 51 of the U.N. charter permits a nation to defend itself from attack. It is understood that national self-defense often necessitates control of any territory from which the initial aggression was launched.

If the territory would have been recognized as within the borders of the State of Jordan by either Israel or the international community between 1949 and 1967, then it would have meant Israel’s return to the territory was an occupation, regardless of previous title. But Jordan’s annexation was not recognized by the international community, nor did the Jordan-Israel ceasefire agreement represent acquiescence to new borders by either side.

Given the fact that Israel had legal title to the territory that was recognized by the international community and Israel’s final control of the territory was a result of self-defense rather than aggression, while Jordan’s control of the territory was never recognized as legitimate by the international community, Israel merely won back territory that legitimately belonged to it in the first place.

This is a strong legal argument for why Israel has superior title to the territory, in a legal chain that was never legitimately broken, therefore Israel can’t be an occupier on territory that belongs to it in the first place.


In addition Jordan relinquished all claims to the territory in 1988 and recognized the territory as part of Israel in a peace treaty signed in 1994.
Thus, even if Israel’s capture of the territory in 1967 is considered an occupation, the fact that Jordan later relinquished all its claims and then recognized the territory as part of the State of Israel means any such occupation is long over.


Those who claim the settlements are illegal often point to Article 49 of the convention, which states that to be an illegal occupier the occupying power must do one of two things:

1. Forcibly transfer the population under occupation to outside the occupation zone, either inside the controlling country or to another country.
2. Transfer the population of the occupier from its own country to the occupied zone.


No one is claiming that Israel is absorbing the Arab-Palestinian population into Israel proper, nor is anyone claiming Israel is deporting entire populations from the territory to somewhere else. So the first provision does not apply.

As for the second provision, it requires a wild stretch of the imagination to describe the voluntary choice made by free acting persons to migrate to the area as “persons being deported or transferred by their government”.

Even if you took the view that the Israeli government’s allowance of its citizens to live and build within its borders is a violation of article 49. The settlements are still not illegal under international law because of the Oslo Accords signed by the Palestinian-Authority, under Yasser Arafat, and Israel.
This was an internationally recognised agreement to divide jurisdiction of the territory between Israel and the newly created Palestinian Authority. Under this agreement, Israelis have full jurisdiction to live and build on the designated 60% of the territory. Therefore, any building in this territory is completely legitimate under international law through the Oslo Agreement.

So whatever the politics or morality of the settlements, legally I think Israel is own pretty solid ground.

and still has direct flights from all over the World yet the TRNC isn't allowed that luxury?.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan admitted in 2006 “On one side, supporters of Israel feel that it is harshly judged by standards that are not applied to its enemies. And too often this is true, particularly in some UN bodies.”
In August 2013, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon acknowledged that Israel has “suffered from bias— and sometimes even discrimination” within the organisation.
Israeli diplomat Abba Eban commented: “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.”

The reason for this has been well established: the automatic majority of states that because of oil, Islam, or anti-Americanism will vote yes on almost any anti-Israel resolution.

The UN and a lot of international agencies work on influence and block votes so if Greece can garner more votes/influence than Turkey then they win. As Greece is in the EU that’s a fair block vote there.

It’s not down to what is right or fair it’s down to winning the votes.

[Up the Reds.]

Wow ETS I admire your fortitude ..you really must get out more !! The lockdown is now over !! Seriously an interesting reply with some really good points. I got 'mugged' on another social media platform a while back about this subject so will leave it at that !!

[EnjoyingTheSun]

Wow ETS I admire your fortitude ..you really must get out more !! The lockdown is now over !! Seriously an interesting reply with some really good points. I got 'mugged' on another social media platform a while back about this subject so will leave it at that !!

I’m clinging to the air con at the moment!

It’s a very complicated subject with a great deal of propaganda from both sides so it isn’t as simple as Israel bad, Palestine good or vice versa but as always it’s the innocent civilians caught in the middle that suffer.
Tbh I think with the West Bank like the TRNC it suits both sides and the world at large for the status quo to remain in a state of confusion.