comment by Rwanda forever (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
Emir of Qatar has said he will stop the export of gas if the bombing of Palestine continues.
Could be bad news for the West. United in particular.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But atleast he’ll still spend on Man Utd
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
Jewish Brits? Why would Jewish Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish care about what the English FA do?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're part of the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never mind, I've read through and seen you are dense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 7 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was a lot of reporting that made a big splash without verification, and some concerns that the original source was a partisan propagandist, but yesterday I saw some suggestions that there was verification of some cases. There's so much misinformation flying around that I think it's sensible to be cautious, but on the same note, I don't think it has been debunked.
While the natural reaction to these stories is the deepest disgust, I think we have a moral duty to engage our reason. Not to minimise our disgust, which is absolutely correct. But to guard against the temptation to insulate ourselves from ethical complacency as a result. It's easy enough in human nature to react to savagery by wanting terrible revenge on the culprits, and in that emotion to forget about the fine distinctions between the individuals responsible and the community they came from. Moreover, it's quite easy, given the way we humans are wired, to fail to respond with the same visceral shock and utter disgust when a baby is killed, unseen, in the rubble of a flattened building, and when the act of killing is performed at a long distance. I'm sure it's easier on a psychological level to press a button that kills someone a mile away than to look into their eyes and
physically swing a blade at their body - this must be part of why one feels so much more unthinkable than the other, and inspires more horror. But ethically, it's exactly the same thing. We mustn't get into a position where we see one of them is absolute evil and the other less so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There's been mixed reports. The reason why I ask for independent verification is that there is a lot of misinformation and both sides are known for it. The media themselves have trust issues.
The alarming thing is how this was spread by major outlets without independent verification. I doubt this would have been the case of Hamas were saying this any Israel.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Who’s wumming, Dickerson again?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obsessed. You've just been pulled apart for being a liar.
Have some shame.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 26 seconds ago
Interesting, I’ve just read an article on the BBC on that very subject.
Can I also point out that was written well before we knew the full horrors of the Hamas incursion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you now concede that I said nothing of the sort which you attributed to me with direct quotation marks, they were completely fabricated and that you did in fact say exactly what I quoted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you didn’t, it was a reaction to you falsely accusing me of supporting Hamas after all that’s happened in the last 5 days.
My sympathies will always lie with the victims of terrorism and brutality rather than the perpetrators regardless of who they represent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough and I know that you did pull back a bit from your initial reaction.
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 25 seconds ago
I think on balance it's the right thing to do. And I do think this is more complex than other examples cited.
Ukraine: invaded by Russia in an explicitly colonial venture. There is no reasonable argument that Ukraine's resistance to being a satellite state of of Russia justified the brutal invasion or made the moral equation 'complex'.
Bataclan attack: terrorists murdered innocent civilians. The French state is open to criticism, but at the time of the gestures of solidarity, it wasn't doing the same.
Israel: there's absolutely no moral ambiguity in condemning the hideous actions of Hamas and we should all have total sympathy and solidarity with their victims. That's not morally complex. Equally, we should have sympathy and solidarity with the innocent civilians and children in Gaza who are dying as whole neighbourhoods are wiped out. We must condemn collective punishment as justification for murder of civilians, whether it's Hamas doing it at close range, looking innocent people in the eye, or a well armed state doing it from a distance. So from the FA's point of view, the complexity comes from how a simple gesture like lighting up the arch is read. How can you ensure it is understood as purely a message of solidarity to the Israeli victims, and not a message of support to the Israeli state for the mass civilian killing it is at this very moment unleashing? And if you express sympathy with the innocent Israeli dead only, is it implicit that you don't have sympathy for the innocent Palestinian dead?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is indeed difficult to distinguish between support for innocent victims from support for a state, perhaps a message to convey that in form of an announcement?
I think if you choose to express support for one set of innocent victims and not another then you are, by default, choosing one side over another. Whether that is correct or not, I think it would be a fair judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it follows that the FA would have to light up the arch in the colours of the Palestinian flag as well as the Israeli flag, if it were to be morally consistent. And we know that both gestures (regardless of clarifying statements) would unleash howls of fury from people who interpreted them as support for the killing that has been carried out in the name of those flags, rather than sympathy with the respective victims. That fury would be amplified by the ocean of bad faith and tribalism that washes around social media, and what would at best have been a symbolic gesture of good will would risk inflaming community relations in this country as well as abroad.
As someone else mentioned above, it's also politically absolutely unthinkable that the Palestinian flag would be displayed in this way, in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, yes it would follow but I agree that it is unlikely that we would see that in this country given its official 'standing with Israel' stance. Our initial involvement in causing this mess no doubt has a strong part to play in having that stance.
Perhaps a universal display of sympathy for victims rather than flags?
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
Jewish Brits? Why would Jewish Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish care about what the English FA do?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're part of the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never mind, I've read through and seen you are dense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL mu52
I do think BMCL that you are missing the dual culture factor at play here. They are British AND Jewish. I can fully understand why non-English Brits wouldn't care what the English FA does but I think it's pretty logical that non-English Jewish Brits, on the whole, would care as I have exemplified earlier.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
Jewish Brits? Why would Jewish Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish care about what the English FA do?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're part of the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never mind, I've read through and seen you are dense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL mu52
I do think BMCL that you are missing the dual culture factor at play here. They are British AND Jewish. I can fully understand why non-English Brits wouldn't care what the English FA does but I think it's pretty logical that non-English Jewish Brits, on the whole, would care as I have exemplified earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly Sat Nav.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 25 seconds ago
I think on balance it's the right thing to do. And I do think this is more complex than other examples cited.
Ukraine: invaded by Russia in an explicitly colonial venture. There is no reasonable argument that Ukraine's resistance to being a satellite state of of Russia justified the brutal invasion or made the moral equation 'complex'.
Bataclan attack: terrorists murdered innocent civilians. The French state is open to criticism, but at the time of the gestures of solidarity, it wasn't doing the same.
Israel: there's absolutely no moral ambiguity in condemning the hideous actions of Hamas and we should all have total sympathy and solidarity with their victims. That's not morally complex. Equally, we should have sympathy and solidarity with the innocent civilians and children in Gaza who are dying as whole neighbourhoods are wiped out. We must condemn collective punishment as justification for murder of civilians, whether it's Hamas doing it at close range, looking innocent people in the eye, or a well armed state doing it from a distance. So from the FA's point of view, the complexity comes from how a simple gesture like lighting up the arch is read. How can you ensure it is understood as purely a message of solidarity to the Israeli victims, and not a message of support to the Israeli state for the mass civilian killing it is at this very moment unleashing? And if you express sympathy with the innocent Israeli dead only, is it implicit that you don't have sympathy for the innocent Palestinian dead?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is indeed difficult to distinguish between support for innocent victims from support for a state, perhaps a message to convey that in form of an announcement?
I think if you choose to express support for one set of innocent victims and not another then you are, by default, choosing one side over another. Whether that is correct or not, I think it would be a fair judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it follows that the FA would have to light up the arch in the colours of the Palestinian flag as well as the Israeli flag, if it were to be morally consistent. And we know that both gestures (regardless of clarifying statements) would unleash howls of fury from people who interpreted them as support for the killing that has been carried out in the name of those flags, rather than sympathy with the respective victims. That fury would be amplified by the ocean of bad faith and tribalism that washes around social media, and what would at best have been a symbolic gesture of good will would risk inflaming community relations in this country as well as abroad.
As someone else mentioned above, it's also politically absolutely unthinkable that the Palestinian flag would be displayed in this way, in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, yes it would follow but I agree that it is unlikely that we would see that in this country given its official 'standing with Israel' stance. Our initial involvement in causing this mess no doubt has a strong part to play in having that stance.
Perhaps a universal display of sympathy for victims rather than flags?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m looking forward to Britain or the FA displaying sympathy for victims in Iraq (at least 3 times over!), Afghanistan, Libya, the Chagos Islands, Yemen or any of the vast numbers of victims resultant from *ongoing* UK foreign policy, from diplomatic, economic, arms & military support for brutal regimes or victims of our own more direct brand of military violence.
Would be quite amusing.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 25 seconds ago
I think on balance it's the right thing to do. And I do think this is more complex than other examples cited.
Ukraine: invaded by Russia in an explicitly colonial venture. There is no reasonable argument that Ukraine's resistance to being a satellite state of of Russia justified the brutal invasion or made the moral equation 'complex'.
Bataclan attack: terrorists murdered innocent civilians. The French state is open to criticism, but at the time of the gestures of solidarity, it wasn't doing the same.
Israel: there's absolutely no moral ambiguity in condemning the hideous actions of Hamas and we should all have total sympathy and solidarity with their victims. That's not morally complex. Equally, we should have sympathy and solidarity with the innocent civilians and children in Gaza who are dying as whole neighbourhoods are wiped out. We must condemn collective punishment as justification for murder of civilians, whether it's Hamas doing it at close range, looking innocent people in the eye, or a well armed state doing it from a distance. So from the FA's point of view, the complexity comes from how a simple gesture like lighting up the arch is read. How can you ensure it is understood as purely a message of solidarity to the Israeli victims, and not a message of support to the Israeli state for the mass civilian killing it is at this very moment unleashing? And if you express sympathy with the innocent Israeli dead only, is it implicit that you don't have sympathy for the innocent Palestinian dead?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is indeed difficult to distinguish between support for innocent victims from support for a state, perhaps a message to convey that in form of an announcement?
I think if you choose to express support for one set of innocent victims and not another then you are, by default, choosing one side over another. Whether that is correct or not, I think it would be a fair judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it follows that the FA would have to light up the arch in the colours of the Palestinian flag as well as the Israeli flag, if it were to be morally consistent. And we know that both gestures (regardless of clarifying statements) would unleash howls of fury from people who interpreted them as support for the killing that has been carried out in the name of those flags, rather than sympathy with the respective victims. That fury would be amplified by the ocean of bad faith and tribalism that washes around social media, and what would at best have been a symbolic gesture of good will would risk inflaming community relations in this country as well as abroad.
As someone else mentioned above, it's also politically absolutely unthinkable that the Palestinian flag would be displayed in this way, in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, yes it would follow but I agree that it is unlikely that we would see that in this country given its official 'standing with Israel' stance. Our initial involvement in causing this mess no doubt has a strong part to play in having that stance.
Perhaps a universal display of sympathy for victims rather than flags?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m looking forward to Britain or the FA displaying sympathy for victims in Iraq (at least 3 times over!), Afghanistan, Libya, the Chagos Islands, Yemen or any of the vast numbers of victims resultant from *ongoing* UK foreign policy, from diplomatic, economic, arms & military support for brutal regimes or victims of our own more direct brand of military violence.
Would be quite amusing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that is a stain on our government for sure. I think not flying an Iraqi flag at the time is the least of the crimes committed.
In fairness, our country (population I mean) vehemently opposed the Iraq invasion, not everyone but an awful lot of people.
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. And that lack of verification of a particular narrative always benefits our allies and/or condemns ‘Official Enemies’. The media simply would have treated a comparable story or allegation of Israeli violence with great caution, or, as is the documented case over and over… with total silence.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. And that lack of verification of a particular narrative always benefits our allies and/or condemns ‘Official Enemies’. The media simply would have treated a comparable story or allegation of Israeli violence with great caution, or, as is the documented case over and over… with total silence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/israel-white-phosphorus-used-gaza-lebanon
This if from HRW. I wonder how the reaction would be if this was by Russia on Ukraine..
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 1 minute ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s about innocent victims mate. Or at least it should be
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 2 minutes ago
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s actually a good idea I think
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 56 seconds ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not as support of their causes but of the loss of life.
But I also agree with what some have said here, time to remove sport from all this political stuff. Leave it alone.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 42 seconds ago
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 2 minutes ago
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s actually a good idea I think
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought I would be the only one who suggested this
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 4 minutes ago
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With the Israeli colour slowly, but by bit claiming more of the Palestinian colour space…
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 1 minute ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s about innocent victims mate. Or at least it should be
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those in power have made it clear it's about political agenda.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that is a stain on our government for sure. I think not flying an Iraqi flag at the time is the least of the crimes committed.
In fairness, our country (population I mean) vehemently opposed the Iraq invasion, not everyone but an awful lot of people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimate my point is this: Britain is a rogue state. It supports brutal regimes - the vast majority of whom are on our *own human rights abusers* list. Britain carries out, directly or indirectly, violence in pursuit of its geostrategic foreign policy objectives.
The idea Britain can then fly flags for victims of those same types of acts is plainly ludicrous and cannot be taken seriously.
Just after Operation Protective Edge, we sold Israel a few million £ worth of arms. Small by our own standards in that particular case. The UK also conducts joint naval exercises and training with the Israeli navy in the Gaza sea, helping to enforce the monstrous blockade of Gaza.
Our government could never credibly show sympathy for the Palestinians given our role in supporting Israel, including throughout its very worst acts of extreme military violence.
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 56 seconds ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not as support of their causes but of the loss of life.
But I also agree with what some have said here, time to remove sport from all this political stuff. Leave it alone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you would have to show both flags as you've suggested.
Also we have had threads on here on where politics in sport would lead to—here we are.
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. And that lack of verification of a particular narrative always benefits our allies and/or condemns ‘Official Enemies’. The media simply would have treated a comparable story or allegation of Israeli violence with great caution, or, as is the documented case over and over… with total silence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/israel-white-phosphorus-used-gaza-lebanon
This if from HRW. I wonder how the reaction would be if this was by Russia on Ukraine..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly.
We actually have multiple examples that prove the rule. Frankly too many to even begin to go through. There’s a systemic bias in media coverage that essentially disables our media from adequately covering and reporting on the crimes of allies/ourselves.
Sign in if you want to comment
Wembley arch
Page 5 of 14
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Rwanda forever (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
Emir of Qatar has said he will stop the export of gas if the bombing of Palestine continues.
Could be bad news for the West. United in particular.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But atleast he’ll still spend on Man Utd
posted on 13/10/23
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
Jewish Brits? Why would Jewish Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish care about what the English FA do?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're part of the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never mind, I've read through and seen you are dense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 7 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was a lot of reporting that made a big splash without verification, and some concerns that the original source was a partisan propagandist, but yesterday I saw some suggestions that there was verification of some cases. There's so much misinformation flying around that I think it's sensible to be cautious, but on the same note, I don't think it has been debunked.
While the natural reaction to these stories is the deepest disgust, I think we have a moral duty to engage our reason. Not to minimise our disgust, which is absolutely correct. But to guard against the temptation to insulate ourselves from ethical complacency as a result. It's easy enough in human nature to react to savagery by wanting terrible revenge on the culprits, and in that emotion to forget about the fine distinctions between the individuals responsible and the community they came from. Moreover, it's quite easy, given the way we humans are wired, to fail to respond with the same visceral shock and utter disgust when a baby is killed, unseen, in the rubble of a flattened building, and when the act of killing is performed at a long distance. I'm sure it's easier on a psychological level to press a button that kills someone a mile away than to look into their eyes and
physically swing a blade at their body - this must be part of why one feels so much more unthinkable than the other, and inspires more horror. But ethically, it's exactly the same thing. We mustn't get into a position where we see one of them is absolute evil and the other less so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There's been mixed reports. The reason why I ask for independent verification is that there is a lot of misinformation and both sides are known for it. The media themselves have trust issues.
The alarming thing is how this was spread by major outlets without independent verification. I doubt this would have been the case of Hamas were saying this any Israel.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Who’s wumming, Dickerson again?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obsessed. You've just been pulled apart for being a liar.
Have some shame.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 26 seconds ago
Interesting, I’ve just read an article on the BBC on that very subject.
Can I also point out that was written well before we knew the full horrors of the Hamas incursion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you now concede that I said nothing of the sort which you attributed to me with direct quotation marks, they were completely fabricated and that you did in fact say exactly what I quoted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you didn’t, it was a reaction to you falsely accusing me of supporting Hamas after all that’s happened in the last 5 days.
My sympathies will always lie with the victims of terrorism and brutality rather than the perpetrators regardless of who they represent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough and I know that you did pull back a bit from your initial reaction.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 25 seconds ago
I think on balance it's the right thing to do. And I do think this is more complex than other examples cited.
Ukraine: invaded by Russia in an explicitly colonial venture. There is no reasonable argument that Ukraine's resistance to being a satellite state of of Russia justified the brutal invasion or made the moral equation 'complex'.
Bataclan attack: terrorists murdered innocent civilians. The French state is open to criticism, but at the time of the gestures of solidarity, it wasn't doing the same.
Israel: there's absolutely no moral ambiguity in condemning the hideous actions of Hamas and we should all have total sympathy and solidarity with their victims. That's not morally complex. Equally, we should have sympathy and solidarity with the innocent civilians and children in Gaza who are dying as whole neighbourhoods are wiped out. We must condemn collective punishment as justification for murder of civilians, whether it's Hamas doing it at close range, looking innocent people in the eye, or a well armed state doing it from a distance. So from the FA's point of view, the complexity comes from how a simple gesture like lighting up the arch is read. How can you ensure it is understood as purely a message of solidarity to the Israeli victims, and not a message of support to the Israeli state for the mass civilian killing it is at this very moment unleashing? And if you express sympathy with the innocent Israeli dead only, is it implicit that you don't have sympathy for the innocent Palestinian dead?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is indeed difficult to distinguish between support for innocent victims from support for a state, perhaps a message to convey that in form of an announcement?
I think if you choose to express support for one set of innocent victims and not another then you are, by default, choosing one side over another. Whether that is correct or not, I think it would be a fair judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it follows that the FA would have to light up the arch in the colours of the Palestinian flag as well as the Israeli flag, if it were to be morally consistent. And we know that both gestures (regardless of clarifying statements) would unleash howls of fury from people who interpreted them as support for the killing that has been carried out in the name of those flags, rather than sympathy with the respective victims. That fury would be amplified by the ocean of bad faith and tribalism that washes around social media, and what would at best have been a symbolic gesture of good will would risk inflaming community relations in this country as well as abroad.
As someone else mentioned above, it's also politically absolutely unthinkable that the Palestinian flag would be displayed in this way, in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, yes it would follow but I agree that it is unlikely that we would see that in this country given its official 'standing with Israel' stance. Our initial involvement in causing this mess no doubt has a strong part to play in having that stance.
Perhaps a universal display of sympathy for victims rather than flags?
posted on 13/10/23
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
Jewish Brits? Why would Jewish Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish care about what the English FA do?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're part of the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never mind, I've read through and seen you are dense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL mu52
I do think BMCL that you are missing the dual culture factor at play here. They are British AND Jewish. I can fully understand why non-English Brits wouldn't care what the English FA does but I think it's pretty logical that non-English Jewish Brits, on the whole, would care as I have exemplified earlier.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
Jewish Brits? Why would Jewish Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish care about what the English FA do?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they're part of the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never mind, I've read through and seen you are dense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL mu52
I do think BMCL that you are missing the dual culture factor at play here. They are British AND Jewish. I can fully understand why non-English Brits wouldn't care what the English FA does but I think it's pretty logical that non-English Jewish Brits, on the whole, would care as I have exemplified earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly Sat Nav.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 25 seconds ago
I think on balance it's the right thing to do. And I do think this is more complex than other examples cited.
Ukraine: invaded by Russia in an explicitly colonial venture. There is no reasonable argument that Ukraine's resistance to being a satellite state of of Russia justified the brutal invasion or made the moral equation 'complex'.
Bataclan attack: terrorists murdered innocent civilians. The French state is open to criticism, but at the time of the gestures of solidarity, it wasn't doing the same.
Israel: there's absolutely no moral ambiguity in condemning the hideous actions of Hamas and we should all have total sympathy and solidarity with their victims. That's not morally complex. Equally, we should have sympathy and solidarity with the innocent civilians and children in Gaza who are dying as whole neighbourhoods are wiped out. We must condemn collective punishment as justification for murder of civilians, whether it's Hamas doing it at close range, looking innocent people in the eye, or a well armed state doing it from a distance. So from the FA's point of view, the complexity comes from how a simple gesture like lighting up the arch is read. How can you ensure it is understood as purely a message of solidarity to the Israeli victims, and not a message of support to the Israeli state for the mass civilian killing it is at this very moment unleashing? And if you express sympathy with the innocent Israeli dead only, is it implicit that you don't have sympathy for the innocent Palestinian dead?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is indeed difficult to distinguish between support for innocent victims from support for a state, perhaps a message to convey that in form of an announcement?
I think if you choose to express support for one set of innocent victims and not another then you are, by default, choosing one side over another. Whether that is correct or not, I think it would be a fair judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it follows that the FA would have to light up the arch in the colours of the Palestinian flag as well as the Israeli flag, if it were to be morally consistent. And we know that both gestures (regardless of clarifying statements) would unleash howls of fury from people who interpreted them as support for the killing that has been carried out in the name of those flags, rather than sympathy with the respective victims. That fury would be amplified by the ocean of bad faith and tribalism that washes around social media, and what would at best have been a symbolic gesture of good will would risk inflaming community relations in this country as well as abroad.
As someone else mentioned above, it's also politically absolutely unthinkable that the Palestinian flag would be displayed in this way, in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, yes it would follow but I agree that it is unlikely that we would see that in this country given its official 'standing with Israel' stance. Our initial involvement in causing this mess no doubt has a strong part to play in having that stance.
Perhaps a universal display of sympathy for victims rather than flags?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m looking forward to Britain or the FA displaying sympathy for victims in Iraq (at least 3 times over!), Afghanistan, Libya, the Chagos Islands, Yemen or any of the vast numbers of victims resultant from *ongoing* UK foreign policy, from diplomatic, economic, arms & military support for brutal regimes or victims of our own more direct brand of military violence.
Would be quite amusing.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 25 seconds ago
I think on balance it's the right thing to do. And I do think this is more complex than other examples cited.
Ukraine: invaded by Russia in an explicitly colonial venture. There is no reasonable argument that Ukraine's resistance to being a satellite state of of Russia justified the brutal invasion or made the moral equation 'complex'.
Bataclan attack: terrorists murdered innocent civilians. The French state is open to criticism, but at the time of the gestures of solidarity, it wasn't doing the same.
Israel: there's absolutely no moral ambiguity in condemning the hideous actions of Hamas and we should all have total sympathy and solidarity with their victims. That's not morally complex. Equally, we should have sympathy and solidarity with the innocent civilians and children in Gaza who are dying as whole neighbourhoods are wiped out. We must condemn collective punishment as justification for murder of civilians, whether it's Hamas doing it at close range, looking innocent people in the eye, or a well armed state doing it from a distance. So from the FA's point of view, the complexity comes from how a simple gesture like lighting up the arch is read. How can you ensure it is understood as purely a message of solidarity to the Israeli victims, and not a message of support to the Israeli state for the mass civilian killing it is at this very moment unleashing? And if you express sympathy with the innocent Israeli dead only, is it implicit that you don't have sympathy for the innocent Palestinian dead?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is indeed difficult to distinguish between support for innocent victims from support for a state, perhaps a message to convey that in form of an announcement?
I think if you choose to express support for one set of innocent victims and not another then you are, by default, choosing one side over another. Whether that is correct or not, I think it would be a fair judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it follows that the FA would have to light up the arch in the colours of the Palestinian flag as well as the Israeli flag, if it were to be morally consistent. And we know that both gestures (regardless of clarifying statements) would unleash howls of fury from people who interpreted them as support for the killing that has been carried out in the name of those flags, rather than sympathy with the respective victims. That fury would be amplified by the ocean of bad faith and tribalism that washes around social media, and what would at best have been a symbolic gesture of good will would risk inflaming community relations in this country as well as abroad.
As someone else mentioned above, it's also politically absolutely unthinkable that the Palestinian flag would be displayed in this way, in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, yes it would follow but I agree that it is unlikely that we would see that in this country given its official 'standing with Israel' stance. Our initial involvement in causing this mess no doubt has a strong part to play in having that stance.
Perhaps a universal display of sympathy for victims rather than flags?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m looking forward to Britain or the FA displaying sympathy for victims in Iraq (at least 3 times over!), Afghanistan, Libya, the Chagos Islands, Yemen or any of the vast numbers of victims resultant from *ongoing* UK foreign policy, from diplomatic, economic, arms & military support for brutal regimes or victims of our own more direct brand of military violence.
Would be quite amusing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that is a stain on our government for sure. I think not flying an Iraqi flag at the time is the least of the crimes committed.
In fairness, our country (population I mean) vehemently opposed the Iraq invasion, not everyone but an awful lot of people.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. And that lack of verification of a particular narrative always benefits our allies and/or condemns ‘Official Enemies’. The media simply would have treated a comparable story or allegation of Israeli violence with great caution, or, as is the documented case over and over… with total silence.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. And that lack of verification of a particular narrative always benefits our allies and/or condemns ‘Official Enemies’. The media simply would have treated a comparable story or allegation of Israeli violence with great caution, or, as is the documented case over and over… with total silence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/israel-white-phosphorus-used-gaza-lebanon
This if from HRW. I wonder how the reaction would be if this was by Russia on Ukraine..
posted on 13/10/23
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
posted on 13/10/23
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 1 minute ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s about innocent victims mate. Or at least it should be
posted on 13/10/23
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 2 minutes ago
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s actually a good idea I think
posted on 13/10/23
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 56 seconds ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not as support of their causes but of the loss of life.
But I also agree with what some have said here, time to remove sport from all this political stuff. Leave it alone.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 42 seconds ago
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 2 minutes ago
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s actually a good idea I think
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought I would be the only one who suggested this
posted on 13/10/23
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 4 minutes ago
I am sorry but I agree with the FA. I why can't they light it half Israeli and half Palestine colours.
There is some serious shocking behaviour being performed by both sides to civilians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With the Israeli colour slowly, but by bit claiming more of the Palestinian colour space…
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 1 minute ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s about innocent victims mate. Or at least it should be
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those in power have made it clear it's about political agenda.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that is a stain on our government for sure. I think not flying an Iraqi flag at the time is the least of the crimes committed.
In fairness, our country (population I mean) vehemently opposed the Iraq invasion, not everyone but an awful lot of people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimate my point is this: Britain is a rogue state. It supports brutal regimes - the vast majority of whom are on our *own human rights abusers* list. Britain carries out, directly or indirectly, violence in pursuit of its geostrategic foreign policy objectives.
The idea Britain can then fly flags for victims of those same types of acts is plainly ludicrous and cannot be taken seriously.
Just after Operation Protective Edge, we sold Israel a few million £ worth of arms. Small by our own standards in that particular case. The UK also conducts joint naval exercises and training with the Israeli navy in the Gaza sea, helping to enforce the monstrous blockade of Gaza.
Our government could never credibly show sympathy for the Palestinians given our role in supporting Israel, including throughout its very worst acts of extreme military violence.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by The Goofy One (U16087)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 56 seconds ago
You can't support the occupied one minute and the occupier the next.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not as support of their causes but of the loss of life.
But I also agree with what some have said here, time to remove sport from all this political stuff. Leave it alone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you would have to show both flags as you've suggested.
Also we have had threads on here on where politics in sport would lead to—here we are.
posted on 13/10/23
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInPoland (U11181)
posted 30 minutes ago
Is the beheading of the babies actually been independently verified?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But of course dead babies by any method is an abomination, be it airstrikes or by hand.
At the moment the “beheaded babies” story looks to be of the “incubators” in Iraq & “viag fuelled” soldiers in Libya variety. The media running the story unverified is a reckless disgrace and only helps to generate public support for the even bigger massacres taking place in Gaza right now.
As for the OP… Of course not flying the Israeli flag is the correct decision. It’s not even complicated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There will be a lot of disinformation out during this conflict. It doesn't help that major outlets carry news pieces without verification.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed. And that lack of verification of a particular narrative always benefits our allies and/or condemns ‘Official Enemies’. The media simply would have treated a comparable story or allegation of Israeli violence with great caution, or, as is the documented case over and over… with total silence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/israel-white-phosphorus-used-gaza-lebanon
This if from HRW. I wonder how the reaction would be if this was by Russia on Ukraine..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly.
We actually have multiple examples that prove the rule. Frankly too many to even begin to go through. There’s a systemic bias in media coverage that essentially disables our media from adequately covering and reporting on the crimes of allies/ourselves.
Page 5 of 14
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10