No mention on BBC news regarding possible refugee camp being prepared in Egypt.
Printable View
No mention on BBC news regarding possible refugee camp being prepared in Egypt.
Opps showing a truthful item,you will rot in hell now.:thumbup:Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
Perhaps the Christians I have mainly observed are more tolerant, practical and liberal minded that you appear to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by truthpaste
I'll happily be put right but you come across as a Christian fundamentalist. My observations are that fundamentalism in any religion isn't great.
As I've said, NO religion is great at all, as they all offer false hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordi Culé
Jesus isn't a religion, He is a Person; we either know Him or we don't.
A sure way of listening out for someone who doesn't know Him or who He is will be their language. Do they use His Name as a swear word for example, if they do they are 100% not a Christian.
As for being a fundamentalist and not a liberal, a liberal will look to appeal to men while the genuine Christian will want to live for God and will adhere to God's Word, the Bible.
Believe me, you would not want to be a liberal on the Day of Judgment, their plight would be worse than that of an agnostic. So in short, a fundamentally thinking religious person is a problem to others and themselves. Whereas someone who takes God at His Word is wise.
I'm happy to hear your opinions, findings and discoveries re the biggest questions in life.
I meant BBC TV news actually. Would reach a much wider audience. I saw it first on Al Jazeera a few days ago - definitely the best channel for news on Gaza. Clearly heavily biased rhetoric towards Palestinian side of course but they do have reporters on the ground in Gaza so I tend to trust the pictures they show.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
If that's aimed at me, oh, heck :frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepster
I suppose it all depends on what you mean by a "fundamentalist". As TP has stated, Christianity is all about faith in a person not a philosophy. To me, as a Christian, faith in Jesus is fundamental so I suppose by that definition I must be a fundamentalist! Unfortunately these days the term fundamentalist has taken on a more sinister meaning - someone who is very judgemental, intolerant and in extreme cases violent to those who do not agree with them (especially in the U.S.A. it seems). These are not the attributes of a “real” Christian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordi Culé
Jesus warns about being judgemental:
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, `Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. (Matthew 7).
Of course, I believe that this is not to say that as a Christian I cannot have opinions but I leave judgement to God. Each one of us is responsible for our own actions/decisions. I try to live the life Jesus expects me to live but I will never be perfect and will fall far short of what is expected, but at least I recognise that fact and at the end of the day must rely on the grace of God.
P.S. Maybe we need a new thread on this topic rather than keep hijacking this one!
Sorted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
I see Wes Streeting has decided 35,000 + dead at the hands of the Israeli Occupation Forces is enough (if you count the thousands of children and their families buried under the rubble and not yet in the 'dead' column).
He was OK with 25,000. But now Israel has gone too far! Starmer agrees with him (sort of).
Fantastic to have such principled people leading the main political opposition.
Who chose where the battle would take place?Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Hear hear!
Streeting is repugnant. He's an embarrassment.
No at Stevo :thumbup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
Well it wasn't your dyslexic dog, so the only possible answer is Israel - the state that has occupied most Palestinian land since 1967 (if not 1948) and (with a little help from Egypt) turned Gaza into an open air prison for 2.3m people. The location, scale, and deliberately indiscriminate nature of the genocidal revenge attack since 7 October is all Israel.Quote:
Originally Posted by truthpaste
No excuses for any of the atrocities carried out by Hamas or others who crossed the fence on 7 October - but the last four and a half months of mass murder and ethnic cleansing were not carried out by Hamas.
It wasn't so long ago that you were very loud and proud of Israel's drive to pen, humiliate, dispossess, imprison without trial and kill any Palestinians who remained on the land wanted for Greater Israel. You kept talking about a real estate deal between a supernatural being and his 'chosen people' as described in the Old Testament - a book you seem to treat as 100% literally true. Your main comment on the recent history of ethnic cleansing and apartheid was that Israel was showing 'restraint' (your word if I remember correctly).
They are not showing restraint now (they never were) but are still intent on blaming someone else for their crimes. As are you.
No excuses for any of the atrocities carried out by Hamas or others who crossed the fence on 7 October - but the last four and a half months of mass murder and ethnic cleansing were not carried out by Hamas.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Well thanks for acknowledging the hideous spark to this conflict. While Hamas hasn't physically caused most of the deaths of the citizens who voted them into power, they DID decide that the hospitals and tunnels (paid for by their citizens and other less peaceable muslims across the middle east) would be the key areas of conflict.
You know very well that if the civilians were living away from the military bases etc and the hostages were away from them too, then the only casualities would be hamas themselves. But just like Saddam, they are to be used to create the sort of reaction that you and so many others have predictably provided.
....the Old Testament - a book you seem to treat as 100% literally true.
Wrong again, I read the Bible like any other book in it's given context. Some parts are actual history, other parts are poetry and illustrative. The context is always clearly defined, and only people who dive into and out of a statement in isolation will get confused.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68318856
In 2019, Mr Netanyahu told colleagues in his ruling Likud party: "Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas… This is part of our strategy - to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank."
Keeping Hamas strong enough to be an effective rival to Fatah - its West Bank rival - would prevent the possibility of a "unified Palestinian leadership with whom you would have to negotiate some kind of final settlement", says Khaled Elgindy, senior fellow on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs at the Middle East Institute think tank in Washington DC.
I don't agree that 7 October was the spark to this conflict at all. It was a major escalation (or reaction) to a decades long series of sparks (or conflagrations), most of them started by Israel as part of its ideological drive for a Greater Israel.Quote:
Originally Posted by truthpaste
Most of the citizens killed by Israel since 7 October did not elect Hamas into power in 2006-7. They were children or not born then. A third of the victims of Israeli genocidal attacks in Gaza were children at the time they were crushed, dismembered or burned to death under their bombs, shells and rockets.
Yes Hamas built a lot of tunnels (although some like under the Gaza City hospital were Israeli built 20 years ago) and yes they have their fighters in areas where there are a lot of civilians. That is inevitable in one of the most congested places on earth where Israel (with Egyptian help in the south) has blockaded the population for over 17 years. This is not a symmetrical conflict. Hamas' military wing is an underground militia with significant small arms from Qatar and Iran, but it faces one of the largest and best equipped (nuclear) armies in the world - one that is being re-armed every month by the USA on a massive scale. In October Hamas had about 30,000 fighters and Israel had 170,000 troops backed by another 465,000 reservists.
I do not agree that in an imagined world where Hamas fighters could separate themselves from civilians there would have been no civilian deaths from the IDF/IOF. I posted the article below at the start of January, where Paul Rodgers explains the evolution of Israeli military thinking from the pogroms and ethnic cleansing of 1948 through to the current Dahiya doctrine, used in the 2006 Lebanon war.
Destruction of homes and infrastructure for power and clean water (along with hospitals, mosques, churches, UN refuges etc) and civilian deaths to (demoralise the enemy fighters) is intentional. Not some kind of regrettable 'collateral damage'.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ian-casualties
Hamas is a deeply conservative, authoritarian organisation and has used internal violence as well as military violence against Israeli targets that spilled over into atrocities on the day of the attack. I also agree with your claim that the Hamas leadership (in Gaza and those in relative safely elsewhere) were prepared to see Israel impose collective punishment on the innocent civilians of Gaza in reprisals in the hope that would refocus the attention of the world on Palestinians' plight. Israel has always done that. I suspect they were surprised by the damage they were able to do on 7 October, but I also doubt they planned to unleash an Israeli genocide on the population of Gaza. I think both parties miscalculated at the start of this chapter of violence.
However only one side is driving the mass murder, expulsions, starvation, disease and injuries now. They continue to point the finger everywhere else (including at the UN and most of the rest of the world who don't swallow their propaganda).
But the constant repetition of lies and deflection does, to use your words, 'create the sort of reaction that you and so many others have predictably provided'.
Good programme on Hamas on BBC1 Panorama now. Finances, atrocities etc
A ‘good’ programme on the lefty BBC? Whatever next!
Tomorrow's parliamentary debate on Gaza where Starmer is sweating over an even bigger revolt from his MPs than last time.
The solution:
Labour calling for 'immediate humanitarian ceasefire' in Gaza as alternative to SNP's call for 'immediate ceasefire'
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live
Absolutely pathetic!
Not watched it yet (on iPlayer?).Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesWales
But see it is made by John Ware - so I expect to see his usual inate hostility to the Palestinians and their supporters, and his usual whitewash of Israel and their supporters.
He is a serious and experienced journalist but over time has built up so much baggage - and for many is still associated with his recent Panorama hatchet job on Labour under Corbyn. I know you won't agree with me on that, but I think he has already had too much of a licence-fee funded platform to push his warped agenda.
We will see where the lies have come and what the bigger picture is in a coming day.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
You have your view and I have my own.
Time will tell.
It would be the Christian thing to do.
Just looking at today's front pages. Why are the right-wing papers describing the Big Ben protest as antisemitic? Genuine question.
Do you understand what the call 'from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' actually means?Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
This message was projected onto the building.
No, I don't sorry. Well, I kind of do. But is it any different to what Israel are doing to Palestine? So, I'll rephrase my question - what's the difference?
It means from the River Jordan to the sea, the people of Palestine will be free of occupation, apartheid and ethnic cleansing.Quote:
Originally Posted by truthpaste
When Netanyahu and Likud (in their founding charter and ever since) use the phrase - to no objections from those who scream about Palestinian usage - they mean from the River Jordan to the sea there will be Israeli sovereignty, a Jewish supremacist state, a programme of ethnic cleansing of Arab Palestinians, and their replacement with new, illegal, Jewish settlements.
https://www.thenation.com/article/wo...er-to-the-sea/
https://www.vox.com/world-politics/2...e-israel-hamas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_t...nachem%20Begin.
You "kind of do" - How coy!Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
The answer to this is both historical in the lessor part, but the greater part is current.
So for the sake of the extensive historical debate, which would be a thread in itself, the current (the last 4 months) situation is the key answer to your question.
Israel had no interest in anything but defending their citizens prior to last October. When that security was severely destroyed they not only needed to do what we did in WW2 in the essential elimination of the Nazis, they also needed to bring their citizens home.
As previously mentioned, the battleground specifically selected by Hamas was always going to produce these casualities, and in turn the growing hostile attitude towards Israel that Hamas (and many other Islamic nations) desired.
It's a shame for them that they have no idea what the end-game will be.
I am a regular watcher of Al Jazeera TV. They have reporters actually on the ground in Gaza, not safely tucked away in Jerusalem somewhere, hence I believe we get a good picture of what's actually going on. Obviously they, and the experts who join in on the various discussion sessions, are completely pro-Palestinian and seem to be in denial that Hamas fighters are embedded within the population, hiding in tunnels etc. I have yet to see anyone who puts forward the Israeli viewpoint on there!
Leaving that aside, this morning we were shown scenes of the aftermath of the Israeli bombardment of the camp in Rafah last night. The scenes are normally very harrowing so there is very rarely any warning about upsetting content but such a warning was issued this morning. We witnessed tiny tots who were completely traumatised, some with fixed stares and others screaming hysterically. It was reported that one little one had said he would rather be dead than to go on living. I just could not watch for more than a few minutes, it broke my heart and I couldn't see through the tears anyway.
It left me so angry but completely impotent about the situation other than to pray for a cessation of this insanity. There is the innocent blood of children on the hands of both sides in this conflict. I still pray that our government may yet seriously consider the idea of finding foster carers for orphaned Palestinian children along the lines of the Kindertransport scheme in WW2, as, whatever the end game is, there are going to be thousands of traumatised orphans. There must surely be lots of Arabic speaking families, not just in the UK but all over Europe.
Fantastic post.The way to end this is to give the Palestinians a separate land.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gofer Blue
Hopefully then sit down and talk. I know it will never happen,but Northern Ireland was just a dream look what happened.
Attachment 6067Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepster
I agree that a solution must be found, and soon, however the "Blues" are hardly a major player when it comes to land, even Wales is slightly bigger, yet Israel has a population more than double the size of Wales.
Interesting article on the BBC news website regarding the construction of that walled enclosure in Egypt near the Rafah crossing:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68375460
The Egyptians appear to deny that its purpose is to house refugees from Gaza, claiming it is simply an area to store humanitarian aid. It does seem rather large for such a purpose, so who knows.
Five-month-old twins who were conceived after three rounds of IVF have been killed in an Israeli airstrike on their family home in Rafah, southern Gaza.
Naeim and Wissam Abu Anza were among 14 Palestinians – including six children – killed in the strike at the weekend, according to survivors and health officials. The babies’ father was among the dead. Another nine people are still missing under the rubble.
The twins, a boy and a girl, were born less than a week after the start of the Israel-Gaza war. Their parents had spent 10 years trying to conceive.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ke-house-rafah
But remember - it is the people marching to stop this who are the extremists!
Attachment 6083
Sorry Truthpaste, but Jon1959 yet again answers the question a lot more comprehensively than you do. Have you followed the links he provided in that reply? Interested to hear your thoughts on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by truthpaste
Anyone who thinks this all started 5 months ago is either ignorant, disingenuous or fanatically partisan.
The occupation of the Palestine people was always likely to produce horrendous retribution even though it is abominable in itself.
This is a sore that cannot be healed. The most infamous culprits in this murky story are the British and their cynical and irresponsible machinations for their own territorial and hegemonic goals.
This thread has gone very quiet as the daily toll of death, mutilation and starvation rolls across Gaza.
Maybe nothing much more to say?
Failed ceasefire talks? The ICJ ignored?
Pitifully small numbers of aid trucks backed by even more pitiful airdrops and aid ships (big on headlines, small on food supplies)?
Israel going ahead with plans for the Rafah ground attack?
The Oscar acceptance speech by British Director Jonathan Glazer for The Zone Of Interest has opened another window on the events in Israel/Palestine - and generated a wave of abuse and hate from the usual suspects. Naomi Klein's piece on it is well worth a read:
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-gaza-genocide
I focussed my efforts on writing to my MP instead, calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire and to stop supplying Israel with weapons in an effort to stop the genocide.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
This situation is still only seeing the opening moves, much as we would all like it to end, for numerous reasons including those well away from Gaza itself, there is still much to play out.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
:thumbup: