Flag dynamics

[Munroast]

just ignore the troll, he/she is trying its hardest just to annoy others - pathetic in the extreme

as they say don't feed trolls

 

[morqthana]

You said this about the Union flag and England flag

They are the flags of, or parts/basis of flags of, violent right wing and proscribed terrorist organisations.

Indeed I did.

But the problem you have with using that to justify the story that I am

accusing groups of ordinary people, with a strong opinion, of being terrorists where no government or other official body has designated them so?

is that it relies on a deliberate misreading, a wilful ignoring of a word which makes your "interpretation" grossly wrong.

Of course, you and Sunray will no doubt continue to wilfully ignore it, as that's what you do, because it suits your narrative.

But it will do no harm to make it crystal clear to you and everyone else that you've been caught out, so I'll repeat what I wrote and highlight what you are deliberately ignoring.

They are the flags of, or parts/basis of flags of, violent right wing AND proscribed terrorist organisations. They are flown by some violent right wing people AND terrorists.

 

[morqthana]

As aveastry says, when a racist, genocidal state such as Israel, commits crimes against humanity, and uses the Israeli flag and the star of David as its symbols, can anyone deny that they are symbols of racism, terrorism and genocide?

A United Nations commission of inquiry has now said what Israeli, Palestinian and international human rights organisations, as well as many genocide scholars, have already argued: that Israel’s war in Gaza amounts to genocide. The commission finds that mass killings, attacks on vital infrastructure, starvation, displacement and denial of medical care meet the legal definition of history’s gravest crime. It finds genocidal intent “the only reasonable inference” from both the statements of Israel’s leaders and the conduct of its forces in Gaza.

Against this, Israel’s repeated assertions that it is acting in lawful self-defence ring hollow in the face of overwhelming evidence and a deliberate pattern of destruction. The UN’s conclusion imposes moral clarity. It also demands political action, especially from those, including the UK and the US, who have for too long treated Israel as an exception to international norms.

Historically, the Guardian supported Jewish aspirations for a homeland, playing a significant role in the early Zionist movement – particularly as antisemitism rose in Europe. That history only adds weight to our present concern over where the country is going. Other states must reckon with the consequences of enabling a far-right government under Benjamin Netanyahu that has defied international law with impunity and pursued its aims with horrifying human cost.

It is no defence to point to Hamas atrocities, appalling as they were, to justify the systematic devastation of Gaza, home to over 2 million people, half of them children. The notion that the flattening of Gaza will bring peace is for the birds. Reportedly, Israel’s military chiefs have privately conceded that Hamas may not be defeated even after Gaza City falls – and that a “complete victory” may require further military expansion in the strip. If accurate, this implies that Israel’s leaders foresee the failure of stated war aims – and are preparing for even greater devastation.

Mr Netanyahu, perhaps recognising the consequences, has warned Israelis to prepare for “isolation” and a new era in which traditional European support may no longer be guaranteed. This shift shouldn’t be underestimated. European powers, including Britain, have long underwritten Israel’s technological and military edge – through arms exports, trade agreements and research funding. The EU’s Horizon programme is only one of many economic levers at Europe’s disposal. Suspension of such links would have profound repercussions, as would recognising a Palestinian state.

The British government’s response has been evasive. Ministers said the UK had “not concluded” that Israel is acting with genocidal intent. That now looks like little more than a fig leaf. A court case revealed the Foreign Office reviewed over 400 alleged violations of international humanitarian law by Israeli forces in Gaza but identified possible wrongdoing in only one. The apparent logic is: ignore enough individual incidents, and you won’t see the pattern.

But the UN says the reality cannot be denied. Under the genocide convention, states must not only punish genocide but prevent it. That threshold has been crossed. To continue with symbolic sanctions is not just morally indefensible – it is complicity. Some will warn against inflammatory language. But Gaza is already burning. Britain must stop all arms sales, back international accountability and drop the legal contortions. The charge is grave. The evidence is overwhelming. To pretend otherwise is to join in with our age’s most shameful evasions.

 

[EFLImpudence]

As with Starmer and 'islamophobia'; redefining a word does not make it so.

 

[aveatry]

A United Nations commission of inquiry has now said what Israeli, Palestinian and international human rights organisations, as well as many genocide scholars, have already argued: that Israel’s war in Gaza amounts to genocide. The commission finds that mass killings, attacks on vital infrastructure, starvation, displacement and denial of medical care meet the legal definition of history’s gravest crime. It finds genocidal intent “the only reasonable inference” from both the statements of Israel’s leaders and the conduct of its forces in Gaza.

Against this, Israel’s repeated assertions that it is acting in lawful self-defence ring hollow in the face of overwhelming evidence and a deliberate pattern of destruction. The UN’s conclusion imposes moral clarity. It also demands political action, especially from those, including the UK and the US, who have for too long treated Israel as an exception to international norms.

Historically, the Guardian supported Jewish aspirations for a homeland, playing a significant role in the early Zionist movement – particularly as antisemitism rose in Europe. That history only adds weight to our present concern over where the country is going. Other states must reckon with the consequences of enabling a far-right government under Benjamin Netanyahu that has defied international law with impunity and pursued its aims with horrifying human cost.

It is no defence to point to Hamas atrocities, appalling as they were, to justify the systematic devastation of Gaza, home to over 2 million people, half of them children. The notion that the flattening of Gaza will bring peace is for the birds. Reportedly, Israel’s military chiefs have privately conceded that Hamas may not be defeated even after Gaza City falls – and that a “complete victory” may require further military expansion in the strip. If accurate, this implies that Israel’s leaders foresee the failure of stated war aims – and are preparing for even greater devastation.

Mr Netanyahu, perhaps recognising the consequences, has warned Israelis to prepare for “isolation” and a new era in which traditional European support may no longer be guaranteed. This shift shouldn’t be underestimated. European powers, including Britain, have long underwritten Israel’s technological and military edge – through arms exports, trade agreements and research funding. The EU’s Horizon programme is only one of many economic levers at Europe’s disposal. Suspension of such links would have profound repercussions, as would recognising a Palestinian state.

The British government’s response has been evasive. Ministers said the UK had “not concluded” that Israel is acting with genocidal intent. That now looks like little more than a fig leaf. A court case revealed the Foreign Office reviewed over 400 alleged violations of international humanitarian law by Israeli forces in Gaza but identified possible wrongdoing in only one. The apparent logic is: ignore enough individual incidents, and you won’t see the pattern.

But the UN says the reality cannot be denied. Under the genocide convention, states must not only punish genocide but prevent it. That threshold has been crossed. To continue with symbolic sanctions is not just morally indefensible – it is complicity. Some will warn against inflammatory language. But Gaza is already burning. Britain must stop all arms sales, back international accountability and drop the legal contortions. The charge is grave. The evidence is overwhelming. To pretend otherwise is to join in with our age’s most shameful evasions.

So you are replying to johnds bulshit quoting lies, about something I never said - you are starting to look deranged and clearly trolling - go and find where I said what johnd said.

 

[SUNRAY]

Of course, you and Sunray will no doubt continue to wilfully ignore it, as that's what you do, because it suits your narrative

You mean in the way you are deliberately ignoring the fact that the flag you so proudly display is proudly flown by the terrorists who invaded Israel and started the current war which you are criticising.

It's you who has been caught out.

 

[pete01]

My god is this still going on

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

My god is this still going on

My god, is he still flying that terrorist flag?

 

[pete01]

My god, is he still flying that terrorist flag?

Someone hates the UK me thinks....

 

[morqthana]

So you are replying to johnds bulshit quoting lies, about something I never said - you are starting to look deranged and clearly trolling - go and find where I said what johnd said.

Your complaint about JohnD quoting you elsewhere as saying something actually written by Sunray is best taken up with him, not me.

But as for his post to which I replied, I'd remind you of the context:

The flag of the state of Palestine does not "support Hamas".

Its a proxy

In the same way that terrorists and genocidal racists fly the Israeli flag, and wear the star of David.

JohnD was pointing out your hypocrisy and bigotry.


You may not try to deny me the right to reply to someone just because they've misquoted you elsewhere, or because you don't understand the points they are making.

Your limitations cannot justify circumscribing the actions of others.

 

[morqthana]

I see you edited your other post - you have been found out for doing that before

Or it could be that he got caught out by the way the insertion point changes when you toggle BB code, and he pasted an image in the wrong place.

You'll note that there is no "Last Edited" timestamp on it, which means that he noticed the error and put it right before your reply 4 minutes later, i.e. pretty much straight away.

 

[aveatry]

JohnD was pointing out your hypocrisy and bigotry.

No hypocrisy here as I have never commented on the flag of Israel either way

You may not try to deny me the right to reply to someone just because they've misquoted you elsewhere,

So you are happily replying to a misquote about something that nobody said- you have lost the plot.

 

[aveatry]

Or it could be that he got caught out by the way the insertion point changes when you toggle BB code, and he pasted an image in the wrong place.

You'll note that there is no "Last Edited" timestamp on it, which means that he noticed the error and put it right before your reply 4 minutes later, i.e. pretty much straight away.

In your desperate attempt to protect him - you are getting mixed up --- the image is MY screen shot of his post and it wasn’t until about 15 mins later that he edited his post. So his post that I had screen shot sat there for 15 mins and then he edited it and yet there is no "last edited" - curious that somehow a poster can edit a post without the "last edited" notice being generated - anyone care to explain that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------you know like the one I have just triggered in this bottom right corner

 

[morqthana]

just ignore the troll, he/she is trying its hardest just to annoy others - pathetic in the extreme

as they say don't feed trolls

you are starting to look deranged and clearly trolling

The problem with people like you is not just that you think you are right - that's fair enough. It's that you have constructed a fantasy world, either entirely on your own or with the assistance of echo-chamber media outlets and social media platforms, which makes you think that everybody agrees with you.

You have become so blinkered that you simply don't believe that anybody else could possibly have a different view to you, and when faced with someone who expresses disagreement you think "well he can't possibly actually disagree, so it can only be that he is trolling".

 

[morqthana]

No hypocrisy here as I have never commented on the flag of Israel either way

So if you are not a hypocrite then your argument about the use of a flag by people carrying out acts of terrorism must apply equally to those flying the flag of Israel, whether you had stated that or not.

So you are happily replying to a misquote about something that nobody said- you have lost the plot.

Did you actually read my reply?

Did you not see that it was amplifying what JohnD had said about Israeli genocide, rather than agreeing with his "misquote"?

Since he neither falsified a [QUОTE] [/QUОTE] block with your name on it, nor used " " to attribute something to you, it's arguably not a "misquote" - it's quite a common construct to write "aveatry is saying ...", or to ask "are you saying ...", or even to assert "so you are saying ..." with a summary, possibly assumed, possibly incorrect. But without something presented as verbatim it's not a "misquote", or at least not a deliberately misleading or malicious one.

Maybe he should have written "aveatry means that when a racist, genocidal state such as Israel, commits crimes against humanity, and uses the Israeli flag and the star of David as its symbols, can anyone deny that they are symbols of racism, terrorism and genocide?"

Because if there is no hypocrisy in your position, that is what you mean.