Of course he abused pupils

What is required is some world renowned politician from another country to turn up in the UK at the invitation of the governent

To state that if the UK vote for reform than the UK will
Be at the back of the que for any trade deals :LOL:
I think if anyone did that, even more people would vote for Reform. The British people don't particularly like being dictated to.
Such a thing would unify the people of this country... the real British, of course.
 
I think if anyone did that, even more people would vote for Reform. The British people don't particularly like being dictated to.
Such a thing would unify the people of this country... the real British, of course.
Conveniently ignoring trump Vance and musk of course.

Blind to the full picture
 
Exert:

"The all-parliamentary group against anti-Semitism stated, in its 2015 report, that
“it is important that the (CAA) leadership do not conflate concerns about activity
legitimately protesting Israel’s actions with antisemitism, as we have seen has
been the case on some occasions.”

good point.
It's officially anti-semitic to conflate Israel with Jewish. Unless Isrealis do it, as they regularly do, in which case it's apparently fine.
 
What official told you that?
It's the rules, what the BBC told me once and widely reported. You can't talk about them as being one and the same. You shouldn't refer to Israeli political situations as being Jewish.

But Israelis do it regularly, as do many Jews. Perhaps they have different rules, I don't know who decides this stuff.
 
It's the rules, what the BBC told me once and widely reported. You can't talk about them as being one and the same. You shouldn't refer to Israeli political situations as being Jewish.

But Israelis do it regularly, as do many Jews. Perhaps they have different rules, I don't know who decides this stuff.

It's very complicated. There have been a couple of interesting articles in the NY Times about how Israel constantly attempts to conflate its own needs with those of Jews worldwide.
 
There's no world authority on who can use what words. It's all kind of arrived at by argument.

But generally referring to the activities of Israel as being "Jewish" is frowned upon. For good reason, they definitely don't represent all Jewish people, in fact many protest against their policies.

But the Israeli government will do it, and I don't hear the likes of the BBC or other platforms they comment on calling them out for it.
 
It's the rules, what the BBC told me once and widely reported. You can't talk about them as being one and the same. You shouldn't refer to Israeli political situations as being Jewish.

But Israelis do it regularly, as do many Jews. Perhaps they have different rules, I don't know who decides this stuff.
I don't know who started this supposed argument. Most Israelis are Jews, but Jews live throughout the world (apart from certain countries in which they would be assassinated as being not of the prevailing faith).
How can such people condemn the existence of one single Jewish homeland, when there are many muslim-majority nations around the world? The impression I get is that the muslim religion is determined not only to expel Jews from Israel, but to kill as many as they can in all parts of the world, especially in, for example, Londonistan.
The other thing which I cannot comprehend is that there seems to be many white British people, regularly parading with Palestinian flags. Why? What do they want? Are they nothing but Jew-haters?
 
Your tone is divisive.

It's not hate of either Jews or even Israel to criticise their actions. But sadly you've fallen into the trap of interpreting things this way, just as Israeli politicians often attempt to encourage.

You don't need to pick a side, decide whether you hate jews and love muslims or vice versa, and such belief definitely doesn't follow anyone's opinion of how our government and economy should be run.

I really don't understand why/how we're being artificially divided into left pro-muslim vs right pro-jewish. It's all nonsense, we're being manipulated and deliberately divided.
 
The impression I get is that the muslim religion is determined not only to expel Jews from Israel, but to kill as many as they can in all parts of the world, especially in, for example, Londonistan.

Jordan and Egypt who were at war with Israel for many years both now have peace agreements with Israel, they trade and cooperate, it's in neithers interest to destroy Israel. The UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan have signed up to the Abraham Accords to normalise relations with Israel, Saudi was close to signing up for the same until the October 7 attack.
I think it's unfair to label all Muslims as wanting the destruction of Israel although it does have a strange way of polarising the further away from the middle east you get, the anti Israel and pro Hamas demos in London are evidence of that.

The cost to Iran over the last two years has brought them to their knees, there's been rioting in the streets for almost a week now with the Iranian people seeking to overthrow the Ayatollahs, if this happens, it will be a gigantic step toward peace in the Middle East.

Some won't like that.
 
Your tone is divisive.

You don't need to pick a side, decide whether you hate jews and love muslims or vice versa, and such belief definitely doesn't follow anyone's opinion of how our government and economy should be run.

I really don't understand why/how we're being artificially divided into left pro-muslim vs right pro-jewish. It's all nonsense, we're being manipulated and deliberately divided.
I don't particularly love Jews nor hate muslims. I know some muslims who live here, professional people, who do and say nothing wrong. To be honest, I don't know many Jews either. As for our government and economy are run, I have a pretty good idea that neither have been much of an advantage to the country ever since Maggie Thatcher.
What I do see is a great number of muslims, becoming every greater with every boatload, who are a real threat to our civilisation - obviously supported and encouraged by Labour. That is what worries me more than anything. At the same time, I see and hear nothing on the news about Jewish terrorism.
If I pick sides, those are the reasons and, to be honest, I blame our governments ever since BLiar, as that is when the mass illegal immigration began. Now, tell me that I am wrong.
 
I asked Google what s/he thought. This is a pretty interesting answer:

AI Overview

It is a subject of significant debate and criticism whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately involves the Jewish diaspora in Israeli policy, or rather that his policies have
unintentionally but severely deepened the rifts between Israel and the diaspora.
Many sources argue that the outcomes of his policies and rhetoric often have the effect of placing diaspora Jews in difficult positions or making them feel that their needs and values are secondary to his political agenda and the interests of his right-wing coalition partners.

Key Points of Contention
  • Prioritizing State-Centred Goals: Critics suggest that Netanyahu prioritizes Israel's state-centered objectives over the well-being and security of diaspora communities. For example, he has pursued alliances with right-wing, and in some cases, allegedly antisemitic, European leaders like Viktor Orbán, overriding the objections and concerns of local Jewish communities to secure diplomatic and economic ties.
  • Defining Jewish Identity: Netanyahu's coalition has pushed for changes to the Law of Return (specifically the "grandchild clause") and has challenged the non-Orthodox streams of Judaism (Reform and Conservative), which constitute the majority of American Jewry. These moves are seen by many in the diaspora as an attempt to redefine what it means to be Jewish in a way that alienates them and sidelines their forms of practice and belief.
  • Expectation of Unconditional Support: Some critics argue that Netanyahu's government operates under the assumption of automatic, unconditional support from all Jews, regardless of the specific policies enacted. When diaspora Jews voice criticism of Israeli policies (e.g., judicial reforms, handling of the Gaza conflict), they are sometimes accused of being "leftists" or "betraying" Israel, which forces them into a polarized debate and exposes them to greater hostility in their home countries.
  • Using Diaspora for Political Ends: The perception exists that Netanyahu sometimes "speaks for" all Jews internationally when it suits his political narrative, but fails to support diaspora communities when they are under attack or when their concerns clash with his agenda. His calls for mass migration of European Jews to Israel after attacks have also been criticized by local Jewish leaders as unhelpful and politically motivated, implying that Jews cannot be safe in the diaspora.
In essence, while Netanyahu has stated that Israel has a "responsibility" for Jewish communities worldwide and has allocated funds for their protection, his actual policies and political alliances are widely seen as having a divisive and potentially damaging impact on Israel-diaspora relations.
 
I asked Google what s/he thought. This is a pretty interesting answer:

AI Overview

It is a subject of significant debate and criticism whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately involves the Jewish diaspora in Israeli policy, or rather that his policies have
unintentionally but severely deepened the rifts between Israel and the diaspora.
Many sources argue that the outcomes of his policies and rhetoric often have the effect of placing diaspora Jews in difficult positions or making them feel that their needs and values are secondary to his political agenda and the interests of his right-wing coalition partners.

Key Points of Contention
  • Prioritizing State-Centred Goals: Critics suggest that Netanyahu prioritizes Israel's state-centered objectives over the well-being and security of diaspora communities. For example, he has pursued alliances with right-wing, and in some cases, allegedly antisemitic, European leaders like Viktor Orbán, overriding the objections and concerns of local Jewish communities to secure diplomatic and economic ties.
  • Defining Jewish Identity: Netanyahu's coalition has pushed for changes to the Law of Return (specifically the "grandchild clause") and has challenged the non-Orthodox streams of Judaism (Reform and Conservative), which constitute the majority of American Jewry. These moves are seen by many in the diaspora as an attempt to redefine what it means to be Jewish in a way that alienates them and sidelines their forms of practice and belief.
  • Expectation of Unconditional Support: Some critics argue that Netanyahu's government operates under the assumption of automatic, unconditional support from all Jews, regardless of the specific policies enacted. When diaspora Jews voice criticism of Israeli policies (e.g., judicial reforms, handling of the Gaza conflict), they are sometimes accused of being "leftists" or "betraying" Israel, which forces them into a polarized debate and exposes them to greater hostility in their home countries.
  • Using Diaspora for Political Ends: The perception exists that Netanyahu sometimes "speaks for" all Jews internationally when it suits his political narrative, but fails to support diaspora communities when they are under attack or when their concerns clash with his agenda. His calls for mass migration of European Jews to Israel after attacks have also been criticized by local Jewish leaders as unhelpful and politically motivated, implying that Jews cannot be safe in the diaspora.
In essence, while Netanyahu has stated that Israel has a "responsibility" for Jewish communities worldwide and has allocated funds for their protection, his actual policies and political alliances are widely seen as having a divisive and potentially damaging impact on Israel-diaspora relations.
No person on the planet has done more harm to Jews than the dictator Bibi.
 
Back
Top