Jump to content

labour


woody2

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, P.K. said:

From what I've read there's no danger of that...

It's obvious you're clearly unhappy with the status quo.

You need to marshall your thoughts and misgivings on so much injustice and send them to:

The United Nations Headquarters

New York

NY 10017

The United States

Be sure to let me know how you get on.

Not that I'm even the remotely bit interested...

The UN who had the "problem" dropped on them by the British, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 hours ago, HeliX said:

Are you suggesting 700k Palestinians weren't displaced from territories that then became the state of Israel in the late 1940s?

They were largely displaced by the war in 1948. Caused by the Arab League countries invading.

A similar number of Jews were displaced across the Middle East.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know the exact figures but the number originally displaced has been vastly increased via demographics since then.

But they are kept stateless and within Camps and generally treated abysmally - Jordan declared war on them etc.

Those that stayed and became Israeli citizens have fared far better.

Right of a return is an inherited characteristic both sides have created.

The number of counterfactuals is vast - if they'd stayed put, if they'd assimulated into the Arab populations of the nations they fled into, if limited return was accepted, goodness knows how things might have turned out different. 

Those who are trapped within the Hamas controlled Gaza strip have probably come off worst

When Sharon withdrew, dismantling the settlements, and offering the governance of Gaza as a stepping stone for future relations the border was open and thousands of Palestinians earned incomes in Israel.  Hamas brought all that to an end with its violence.  Israel ended migrant labour as terrorism exploded and what had been hoped would be a path to Peace became a realisation that the Palestinian side weren't interested in compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Corbyn suspended from the Labour Party. 

Proof that the inaction and indifference went all the way to the top; as if we didn't know already. Corbyn's ideological blinkers put him squarely in the anti-Semite camp but he still refuses to see it. Totally unfit to lead the Labour Party let alone the country. I hope we've seen the last of this deluded fool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Shake me up Judy said:

Corbyn suspended from the Labour Party. 

Proof that the inaction and indifference went all the way to the top; as if we didn't know already. Corbyn's ideological blinkers put him squarely in the anti-Semite camp but he still refuses to see it. Totally unfit to lead the Labour Party let alone the country. I hope we've seen the last of this deluded fool.

Not a view I share , but then I knew Mr Corbyn, he was my constituency MP (and an excellent one IMO) when I lived in Holloway .

I don't believe he is or was ever in the "anti Semite" camp . 

A  bit of research into the 'anti Semite camp' within the Conservative Party is a bit of an eye opener, just saying.

You may be correct in saying he wouldn't be a good choice as a Labour leader , he's perhaps too honest , I did not agree with all of his views  but in his favour he's no tony blair and for that alone he should be respected IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, paswt said:

You may be correct in saying he wouldn't be a good choice as a Labour leader , he's perhaps too honest

He's not very bright. And he's an inveterate contrarian - he will take the contrarian viewpoint on almost any subject almost by default. And Bennite on economics - believed in import controls, capital controls ... all that rubbish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

Whatever your politics, he was certainly the victim of the most concerted and long running smear campaign I have ever witnessed in my lifetime, Meghan markle's being up there but not as long running or all encompassing.

I can understand that perspective, I can see how it could seem like that. But I honestly disagree.

He's the author of his own reportage - absolutely in control of how he has been represented. Repeatedly and over many years. And as with Benn, I honestly believe that there is something inherently stubborn about always deliberately looking to take the alternative perspective on seemingly any issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...