Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Muwahid-)
    I didn't answer it because it's a flawed question.
    No, you didn't answer because you don't want to admit that you support Palestinian terrorism. Care to remind me who the aggressors were in 1948? Yom Kippur? Who was massing troops on the border before the Six-Day war and closed a shipping lane that the other had reaffirmed would be considered an act of war?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    So terrorism is only a bad thing and newsworthy if it isn't against a group you don't like?
    I don't regard an attack targeted at uniformed (and it seems from the reports, armed) soldiers (which is what this attack appears to be, based on the information we have) as "terrorism".

    I'm waiting for more information before making a full judgement call, but based on what I've heard so far, it seems legitimate enough.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    legitimate peacekeepers in Israel murdered by terrorist.
    I wouldn't exactly call Israeli soldiers "peacekeepers", but I agree murder from either side is unacceptable. This doesn't help those on both sides who just want a peaceful solution to this Israel-Palestine mess.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Ban Lorries, they're too dangerous if they get in the hands of a nutter!
    Not lorries should be banned, but terrorists. Several grams of lead is enough for permanent ban of a *******.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    Not lorries should be banned, but terrorists. Several grams of lead is enough for permanent ban of a *******.
    You missed the point, clearly.

    (Original post by anarchism101)
    I don't regard an attack targeted at uniformed (and it seems from the reports, armed) soldiers (which is what this attack appears to be, based on the information we have) as "terrorism".

    I'm waiting for more information before making a full judgement call, but based on what I've heard so far, it seems legitimate enough.
    Which state actor is perpetrating an act of war against Israel then? I guess the Hyde Park and Regent's Park bombings were terrorism either then?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Muwahid-)
    A group of soldiers involved in the occupation of Palestinians were killed.

    Not sure there's anything to cry about, or why it's even newsworthy.
    Gee, that's a pretty scummy way of viewing the world you have there.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    No, you didn't answer because you don't want to admit that you support Palestinian terrorism. Care to remind me who the aggressors were in 1948? Yom Kippur? Who was massing troops on the border before the Six-Day war and closed a shipping lane that the other had reaffirmed would be considered an act of war?
    :awesome: It's just Jews my dude :awesome: They basically don't count :awesome: Muh Palestine, right guys? :awesome: The Aliyahs didn't happen :awesome: Netanyahu? More like Naziyahu :awesome:


    If it's necessary for anyone, I'm being facetious. It's an attempt to point out the social acceptability of anti-Semitism in "enlightened" society.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Which state actor is perpetrating an act of war against Israel then?
    Wars don't have to be waged by states. Indeed wars for liberation/self-determination invariably are waged by non-state actors.

    I guess the Hyde Park and Regent's Park bombings were terrorism either then?
    I'd agree to some level that they're a dubious case, though that took place far from the relevant conflict zone, whereas this attack took place inside the occupied territories.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jape)
    If it's necessary for anyone, I'm being facetious. It's an attempt to point out the social acceptability of anti-Semitism in "enlightened" society.
    You're joking, right? In the Western world anti-Semitism is probably the least socially acceptable form of racism. Far more people will admit to being negatively prejudiced towards other groups than Jews (who very few openly say they have a negative opinion of). Whenever a whiff of anti-semitism appears it gets massive attention.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    It was in East Jerusalem, not Israel.

    The driver deliberately targeted IDF soldiers stationed in East Jerusalem, who were therefore directly complicit in the military occupation (and gradual annexation) of Palestinian land and the subjugation of the Palestinian people.

    If they are not a valid target for acts of self-defence/resisting a military occupation - then who is?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    I don't regard an attack targeted at uniformed (and it seems from the reports, armed) soldiers (which is what this attack appears to be, based on the information we have) as "terrorism".

    I'm waiting for more information before making a full judgement call, but based on what I've heard so far, it seems legitimate enough.
    I think we should take account of the fact that people conscripted in the IDF don't have a say as to where they are deployed/stationed (although women are not deployed to the West Bank), and if they refuse conscription the alternative is generally a prison sentence.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    You're joking, right? In the Western world anti-Semitism is probably the least socially acceptable form of racism.
    I absolutely disagree. George Galloway is an excellent example of this. Here is a man, a Parliamentarian even, who has been well-known for a long time to have a core of anti-Semitic support. While MP for Bradford, he was proudly calling his constituency an "Israel-free zone" to whoever would listen, in spite of the fact that there has never been a Jewish community of any particular note in Bradford.

    Ben Judah, an Anglo-French Journalist, went to Bradford in the run-up to the 2015 election to cover Galloway's campaign. It may or may not surprise you to learn that he's Jewish. He was abused and physically thrown out of the place after Galloway's staff and fans became irate at his presence and started throwing anti-Semitic slurs at him.

    Galloway lost his seat in that election, but his replacement was in hot water within a month for implying in a Facebook post that we should just pluck all the Jews out of Israel and drop them in America instead. Problem solved. Neither of them really suffered any consequences. Not that they should have been imprisoned, but certainly the Labour MP should have suffered disciplinary proceedings. She didn't. And the Labour Party at large has a serious anti-Jew sentiment issue, which Jeremy Corbyn feigned addressing but (as a Home Affairs Select Committee Report showed) did nothing concrete about.

    Compare these to the case of that guy who said "bongo-bongo land" in the EU Parliament. Kicked out of UKIP within 48 hours, no questions asked. And that's basically nothing.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    So terrorism is only a bad thing and newsworthy if it isn't against a group you don't like?
    Give it long enough and the followers of the 'religion of peace' will be running so many people over the media will be like 'now lets stop making this about who's driving the truck and make it about how bad trucks are and how we should never have legalised trucks'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You're lost dude; mixing up israel and Jews. Read abit more
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jape)
    his replacement [Naz Shah] was in hot water within a month for implying in a Facebook post that we should just pluck all the Jews out of Israel and drop them in America instead. Problem solved. Neither of them really suffered any consequences. ... the Labour MP should have suffered disciplinary proceedings. She didn't.
    That concerned a post she shared on FB in 2014 before she was even an MP.

    All the post really said was that one solution for the IPC was to "relocate Israel into [the] United States", but obviously people turned that into "MUSLIM LABOUR MP supports forcibly DEPORTING ALL JEWS from Israel".

    She was suspended almost immediately, apologised profusely, and was only later reinstated into the Labour Party.

    Not the strongest example of rampant anti-Semitism, in my opinion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Imagine if the French and came and took all of Britain but left the British only Cornwall and Kent, whilst controlling the conditions they live in. In addition to that killing thousands and displacing a large portion of your population into neighbouring countries. Most of the people here can't empathise because they were born in state of privilege.

    Israel is an illegal occupier state, there is no doubt about this. If occupying soldiers in your country were killing your family on a regular basis you would want to kill them aswell.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Palmyra)
    All the post really said was that one solution for the IPC was to "relocate Israel into [the] United States", but obviously people turned that into "MUSLIM LABOUR MP supports forcibly DEPORTING ALL JEWS from Israel".
    You say that as though it's a wild extrapolation. I don't think it is. Obviously she was just sharing some dumb meme, but that's pretty clearly what the meme suggests (in the broader context of vapid political Facebook memes, of which I am a connoisseur) and she has a close enough mindset to that position to justify having a hearty chuckle and sharing it to all her friends.

    Had perhaps I should say, as by all accounts she immersed herself a bit in Israeli history after that affair in an attempt to better herself somehow. I'm not accusing Naz Shah especially of being part of an anti-Jewish KKK. Although, as the HASC report confirmed, there is still a general anti-Semitic atmosphere throughout the Labour Party structures.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Ban Lorries, they're too dangerous if they get in the hands of a nutter!
    Because lorries kills as many as people as guns do :yy:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    >2017
    >not being a muslim
    ISLAM WILL DOMINATE!
    Inshah'allah.
    Soon my brothers, soon.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Wait, were these soldiers illegally stationed (by international law) in East Jersualem, which is regarded as illegally occupied by the UN? If so, what does international law say concerning illegal soldiers based on your territory?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 11, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.