Forum Topic

Blundering Susan Hall

The central finding of Louise Casey's review of the Metropolitan Police was that it was institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic.So what does Hall conclude? That the dreadful problems of sexism and misogyny in the Met are down to “bad 'uns” and “wrong ’uns”: precisely the "rotten apple' theory that has been demonstrated to be utterly wrong. She also says that that these issues should be dealt with behind closed doors, again exactly the wrong approach when fundamental reform must not only be done but seen to be done.What is it with the Conservatives and their unerring ability recently to choose no-hoper candidates? Shaun Bailey in the last mayoral election was a liability, but Hall is in a different league for sheer clumsy incompetence.

Richard Carter ● 58d114 Comments

Bizarre that you insist on introducing skin colour into your post.

Philippa Bond ● 44d

Thank you for your eloquent post, Steven.

Lucille Grant ● 44d

Mr Rose'But Hamas did not perpetrate the massacre on October 7 because they wish to see the settlements dismantled. They attacked because they wish to destroy the State of Israel and exterminate its Jewish population. I think that those who lament that Israel has fallen below their high expectations need to explain what the Israelis should do about an implacable enemy across their border who wants to kill them'.I doubt if you will get any response to your question because many UK keyboard warriors and keffiyeh wearing white marchers have no answer, and some even want the destruction of Israel as does Hamas. The real problem is not 'what do we do about Israel' but 'what do we do about Gaza' - now in the hands of an unelected terrorist group.According to some reports Hamas has declining support amongst Gazans and maintains control using typical terrorist means of fear, punishment and physical violence.I have read a suggestion that one way out of the crisis would be not for Israel to conquer and administer Gaza as it could, but for those Western countries (US, UK, EU etc) concerned with what is occurring to use UN procedures in the Security Council to seek a Mandate to collectively govern and control it until some civilised and democratically acceptable Palestinian government can be formed, free from terrorist influence.There could hardly be any objection to this overriding the democratic rights of Gazans because they have none at the moment.'Following the Fatah–Hamas conflict that started in 2006, Hamas formed a government ruling the Gaza Strip without elections. Gazan Prime Minister Haniyye announced in September 2012 the formation of a second Hamas government, also without elections'. Wikipedia.

John Hawkes ● 44d

Mr IxerThere is little or nothing you write here that I disagree with.

John Hawkes ● 44d

Many supporters of Israel dislike Netanyahu and disapprove of the settlements on the West Bank. But Hamas did not perpetrate the massacre on October 7 because they wish to see the settlements dismantled. They attacked because they wish to destroy the State of Israel and exterminate its Jewish population. I think that those who lament that Israel has fallen below their high expectations need to explain what the Israelis should do about an implacable enemy across their border who wants to kill them.

Steven Rose ● 44d

Precisely, Michael. I remember visiting a university friend who had moved there in the 60s to work at the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot and  being very impressed with what Israel had achieved against vast odds, especially in the kibbutz movement's 'making the desert bloom.' It's been so depressing sonce that time to see the aggression of the settler movement and the personal corruption of Netanyahu, conniving with the extreme right wing in order to keep his grip on power and avoid being sent to prison. I would have hoped for better from a country with such a justified proud history.

Richard Carter ● 44d

"because they genuinely believe it is a more civilised western state from which we should expect better"Exactly that!

Michael Brigo ● 45d

Mr Hawkes, your last paragraph reflects the point I made (or thought I was making!)  in a previous post. Israel democratically elected it's current right wing government. I may not like that government's policies, and as I live in another country that is a democracy I can comment on it but nevertheless it has the authority of the democratic process.Terrorists and dictatorships are so defined because they don't have the same freedoms or standards as democracies. For example, we criticise the Russian government because of its apparent extrajudicial killing of leaders and citizens opposing it, particularly when those take place outside of its own territories. Therefore by definition we hold democracies to higher standard, and of course they sometimes fail - and sometimes that failure may dilute the quality of the democracy (many of my US friends would feel the USA's democratic standard wis diluted by the attack on Congress on 6th January, 2021). Hamas was elected in Gaza but its subsequent actions have erased the any semblance of democracy and its agreession has earned it the status of a terrorist organisation in many countries. I'm not sure one should hate a country but perhaps one should be opposed to and criticise its government, actions or failures? The aim should surely to be to try and remove "hate" from the discussion even when people are opposing one's views and we believe them too be wrong or misguided? Additionally, my friends in the US would not want to be considered collateral damage for the action of a US president who (aside from the fact he didn't win the popular vote just the skewed electoral college but then all democracies have their limitations) they felt they had no agreement with or ability to restrain. Perhaps many of the innocent in Gaza feel the same way? Perhaps some empathy should be shown, even if it's outside of one's control to do anything? 

Michael Ixer ● 45d

Ms Bond'Where are you getting your information from because it does not seem to match what a lot of the world's politicians think who have become more and more concerned at what Israel is doing'.If there is any concern over Israel's actions it is surely that if they don't get the balance right in retaliation for being invaded of 7th October 2023 they will lose the support of the world's more civilised nations.The support of those who cannot be so described has never been given them anyway.

John Hawkes ● 45d

Mr Rose'Hatred of Israel, in contrast, is manifested by the following:'Spot on again !All points you make are true.I am truly amazed that people cannot see how unbalanced is the coverage of Israel compared to that of Arab countries.Either those that criticise Israel more harshly do so because they genuinely believe it is a more civilised western state from which we should expect better or they have something in their psyche that is irredeemably anti-Jewish.

John Hawkes ● 45d

Where are you getting your information from because it does not seem to match what a lot of the world's politicians think who have become more and more concerned at what Israel is doing.

Philippa Bond ● 45d

Mr CarterI did indeed say I would stop corresponding with you on the issue of the conflict in the Middle East and your one sided version of who are the oppressors (Israeli Jews) and who are the victims (Arab Palestinians). However you keep going on and on about the evils of Israel and the plight of the Palestinians; comments that reveal how little you actually know about the history of and background to the current conflict.I was thus sufficiently irritated by your persistence and hence my 'essay' on the matter, the contents of which were complemented by others.You write -'If you're going to criticise an article, at least have the courtesy to read it first. And when you last wrote, you said "I too will not correspond with you again on this issue." At least if you stuck to that there'd be fewer of your tendentious essays to suffer'.I was not criticising the article per se but the precis you kindly provided."It will no doubt give the Israel apologists here a fit of the vapours, but there's an interesting article by Pankaj Mishra in the current issue of the London Review of Books. It's very long at over 7,500 words/5 closely packed pages, and it can be accessed here (I think without a subscription):https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n06/pankaj-mishra/the-shoah-after-gazaThere's a lot to summarise in sentence, but essentially he argues that Israel weaponises the memory of the Holocaust to justify its present-day actions, and that this defiles that memory".I think this is called 'victim shaming' and it added anger to my irritation. Do you know that 'tendentious' means 'expressing or intending to promote a particular cause or point of view, especially a controversial one'.Pot-kettle-black: is that not what you do in your comments ?I would not describe them as essays of course, just insults to those that disagree with your point of view.I reserve the right to express views that support our ally Israel against bilious attacks from those that support their Arabic enemies, some of whom publicly state a wish to see the country and its people obliterated.And a final point about the comment you presented to us from Pankaj Mishra, a socialist polemicist.He says the Jews 'weaponises the memory of the Holocaust to justify its present-day actions, and that this defiles that memory".As I said above; victim shaming at the grossest level.What right does an Indian Hindu have to say such a thing ?A member of a religious sect responsible for the attempted genocide of the Muslim part of his country's population and forcing thousands of them to leave.Do leftists like you and him not believe it legitimate for Jews to express whatever views they wish on the Holocaust, what is their and perhaps history's most horrific and extreme lived experience; one which you and he cannot even truly imagine.Yet now their opponents accuse them of genocide for defending themselves in lethal conflict after being invaded, and bandy about the word Holocaust (6 million exterminated) when describing the fatalities their attackers incur !

John Hawkes ● 45d

Well said Steven Rose.  Calm, coherent and very very clear.

Robert Wheeler ● 45d

The answer to Michael Brigo's question is that criticism of Israel does not equate to hatred of Israel. Many Jewish people, indeed many Israelis, are critical of  the policies of Netanyahu's government.Hatred of Israel, in contrast, is manifested by the following:1) a one sided account of the history of the region whereby, for example, the expulsion of 700 000 Arabs from Israel in the 'naqba' of 1948 is mentioned, but not the expulsion of 800 000 Jews from Arab countries and Iran in the same period2) gratuitous comparisons of the Israelis with the Nazis 3) false accusations of genocide4) the baseless assertion that Israel exploits the Holocaust to justify its occupation of Palestinian land5) equating the systematic mutilation, rape, murder and hostage taking of civilians perpetrated by Hamas on civilians on October 7 with the tragic loss of civilian life in Gaza as a result of attempts by the Israeli military to capture or kill Hamas militants6) judging Israel by different standards than those applied to other countries, so that Israeli bombardment, even when warnings are given, is condemned whereas, for example, the the Dam Busters are celebrated as heroes  6) a refusal to accept that many of the enemies of Israel don't just want to see an independent Palestinian state but the destruction of the Jewish state. 

Steven Rose ● 45d

Where was the mention of The Nakba?  Some seem to have a misconception that this trouble between the two sides started on 7 October last year - it didn't!

Philippa Bond ● 45d

I'm curious as to why any critisism of Israel is immediately portrayed as hatred of Israel?

Michael Brigo ● 45d

No more tendentious essays than your own, Richard. I would also like to know why you hate Israel so much. Mr Rose has written exceptionally well on this thread in the subject of Israel and it's neighbours.

Lucille Grant ● 46d

Mr Brigo'Er...... how do you explain calling it 'pretentious nonsense' if you didn't bother to read it'?My comment was based on the precis kindly provided by Mr Carter.

John Hawkes ● 46d

Yes, I overlooked that sentence. But it is the only reference to the atrocity in the essay, the rest of which consists of a litany of accusations against Israel, up to and including genocide. No reference is made to the fact that Israel was simultaneously attacked by all its Arab neighbours on the very day it declared Independence in 1948. There is no mention of the fact that since 2007 Israel has been regularly bombarded by Hamas, a group, supported by Iran, which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the extermination of its Jewish population, culminating in the massacre of October 7. The whole essay is centred around the author's thesis that the Holocaust has created a 'survivalist' paranoia among Israelis which is used to justify  persecution of the Palestinians. He should remember that it isn't paranoia when people really are out to get you.

Steven Rose ● 46d

"Firstly thank you for reading this so that we don't have to.What pretentious nonsense !"Er...... how do you explain calling it 'pretentious nonsense' if you didn't bother to read it?

Michael Brigo ● 46d

"The author manages to write over 7000 words .... without once mentioning the atrocity of October 7"On the second page of the article is this: "the massacres and hostage-taking in Israel on 7 October by Hamas and other Palestinian groups rekindled a fear of collective extermination among many Jews."

Richard Carter ● 46d

I have read the essay by Pankaj Mishra. The author manages to write over 7000 words, in which he accuses Israel of exploiting the holocaust to justify 'systematic cruelties and injustices' against the Palestinian people, without once mentioning the atrocity of October 7. I think that tells you all you need to know about his integrity as a commentator.

Steven Rose ● 47d

And I just thought that Susan Hall had been chosen on purpose to be divisive:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66990999

Philippa Bond ● 47d

This was an interesting decision by the Home Office, perhaps the government isn't entirely sure about the equality within Israel's democracy?https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/12/palestinian-citizen-of-israel-granted-asylum-in-uk-in-case-said-to-be-unprecedented

Michael Ixer ● 47d

If you're going to criticise an article, at least have the courtesy to read it first. And when you last wrote, you said "I too will not correspond with you again on this issue." At least if you stuck to that there'd be fewer of your tendentious essays to suffer.

Richard Carter ● 47d

Mr Carter'Israel weaponises the memory of the Holocaust to justify its present-day actions, and that this defiles that memory'.Firstly thank you for reading this so that we don't have to.What pretentious nonsense !But what else would one expect from someone described as an 'Indian essayist, novelist, and socialist polemicist'.Someone from a country where the Muslim community under threat from a Hindu majority was forced to leave and set up its own independent state.Are Muslims 'weaponising' this fact ?Perhaps he or you might explain what has Israel got to apologise for ?Its retaliation against attack by Arab terrorists or perhaps its very existence ?Do you have to be reminded that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust ?Hence how they treat this fact is, with regard to political public opinion, very much up to them.Yet you and this journalist/novelist who have no experience of such horrific suffering have the audacity to claim the right to criticise them for doing so.Some of us sympathise with the Jewish people and believe that the tiny yet civilised and thriving multi-ethnic state of Israel they developed amongst vast surrounding backward Arab countries is small recompense for what they suffered.Others obviously do not.We wonder why their defensive actions are so heavily criticised in the name of sympathy for Arabs and yet attacks by Arabs on Arabs in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Iran and the hundreds of thousands killed in such are never mentioned.No, it's just Israel in the wrong over and over again.  Will you please answer what exactly have Israelis done such that you display to my mind such a visceral dislike of them and the state they live in and have made such a success of ?

John Hawkes ● 47d

On reflection, I think the word "defiles" in my last sentence isn't right: "muddies" or something similar would be more appropriate.

Richard Carter ● 47d

Steven, accuracy in wartime is always going to be difficult to achieve and there's always the risk of inadvertently double counting some casualties. Of course, with the Israelis cutting of power and telecommunication links at times (my understanding is Israel has control over those?) there's also a possibility of data becoming corrupted in the event of a computer being interrupted in the middle of an update transaction. Interestingly, however, this link suggests that in previous conflicts the Hamas Health Ministry estimates have been close to subsequent UN ones (of course, as is said about financial services past performance isn't a guarantee of future results): https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/what-is-gazas-ministry-of-health-and-how-does-it-calculate-the-wars-death-tollOne can't rule out current Hamas leadership is modifying figures announced but the UN doesn't seem to challenge those figures and - if one looks at the devastation in the photos and videos of Gaza - the figures don't seem unrealistic, plus some think they're likely an underestimate as not all bodies will have been recovered. I sense that the UK and US authorities aren't challenging these figures so perhaps satellite and electronic surveillance and intelligence may substantiate that they're in the correct "ball park". (And the UN, who have agency staff in Gaza haven't to my knowledge challenged the figures.)With regard to Wyner's paper (which I can't access directly as it's behind a paywall), it appears to be a speculative suggestion that he hasn't direct evidence to prove its veracity. I've been informed by a friend who does have access that one of the comments challenges it as it uses too few sample days (I believe only 13 days out of a conflict of around four months) and presents them as a cumulative graph rather than a daily graph that seemingly hides the variability of the figures, effectively "smoothing" them. There are a number of known unknowns (and probably many unknown, unknowns as well):1. The IDF figures for Hamas fatalities: are the identities supplied to the Hamas Health Ministry for inclusion in there statistics? My understanding is the Hamas Health statistics are compiled from bodies taken to hospitals, do the IDF return bodies to the Hamas authorities?
2. Do the Hamas figures for their casulaties indicate if these were battle casualties or bombing of the member's residence, which could also result in death of their wife and family alongside the Hamas member?.
3. If the IDF operates area bombing to target Hamas strong holds, which as you've said only mirrors WWII RAF strategies (the RAF ones designed to demoralise the civilian German population) and which photographic evidence of collapsed blocks of flats seem to collaborate, then are women and children more vulnerable? Are men more likely to be away from the family homes; I've seen TV interviews with male medical staff and journalists who've returned home to find their families wiped out by air attacks, or are Hamas fighters safe in their tunnels while bombing takes place? That could possibly explain a bias against male civilian casualties?I've certainly heard BBC News staff explain they're only Hamas Health statistics but that others statistics aren't available, what else should the BBC report? I guess they're the only ones available; we'll only know the truth once the conflict ends and, in any case, it looks like the collapse of the health system and famine in Gaza is likely to cause more deaths than the conflict if something isn't done soon to alleviate those. The current and possible future dealth toll now seems to be worrying US, EU and UK leaders; as I've said I'm sure western intelligence has a good handle on the real statistics... and my original point was I don't believe your ratio is necessarily correctly as we need more information, we can all speculate but there's too many unanswered questions. Perhaps we need BBC, Sky, CNN, Fox, Reuters, etc journalists allowed into Gaza?

Michael Ixer ● 47d

It will no doubt give the Israel apologists here a fit of the vapours, but there's an interesting article by Pankaj Mishra in the current issue of the London Review of Books. It's very long at over 7,500 words/5 closely packed pages, and it can be accessed here (I think without a subscription):https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n06/pankaj-mishra/the-shoah-after-gazaThere's a lot to summarise in sentence, but essentially he argues that Israel weaponises the memory of the Holocaust to justify its present-day actions, and that this defiles that memory.

Richard Carter ● 47d

Michael, I don't think the Palestinians should be punished for Arafat's mistake. But the mindset which led to his refusal of Barak's offer is still in evidence. Arafat said no because he believed that the Palestinians would not accept anything less than the right of those who left or were forced to leave Israel in 1948, together with their descendants, to return and reclaim their land and property. The right of return of what would now be millions of Arabs would effectively end the Jewish State of Israel. It would not be a two state solution but a unitary Palestinian state with an embattled Jewish minority. The end of the Jewish State is exactly what Hamas demand, though they would be unlikely to tolerate a Jewish minority living on what they consider Muslim land, so they would want to exterminate the Jews who were foolish enough to remain or drive them  into exile. Mahmoud Abbas, on the other hand, says he is willing to accept a two state solution of the kind offered by Barak. Unfortunately the Israeli public don't trust him. They think he sees a two state solution as a stepping stone to achieving a unitary Palestinian state. They also fear that even if he were sincere, an independent Palestinian state on the West Bank might soon be taken over by Hamas (who enjoy a great deal of support) or by some other fanatical group, creating a second Gaza from which militants would fire rockets into Israel, but from just a few kilometres away.Clearly Israel and the Palestinians need to have better leaders who are prepared to face down the extremists on each side, the fanatical settlers and the terrorists, and create an atmosphere of trust. But I don't see much prospect  of a peaceful solution at the moment. 

Steven Rose ● 48d

'I think it time we get away from the simplistic view that Israel is and always has been the colonial oppressor of poor little, friendless Palestine and realise it's more complex than that.'Absolutely Mr Hawkes.

Lucille Grant ● 48d

Mr RoseThank you for more historical analysis of how the current Israel-Palestine conflict came about.I always felt Arafat looked and acted like a bit of a chancer putting his own interests above those of the people he claimed to represent.What you also demonstrate is how much conflict there was and is amongst Palestinians themselves and within the Arab world in general.Hence the blame shifting onto Israel the lack of any resolution to the problem.Until any Arab statesman (or woman !!) comes along willing to face down terrorists like Hamas and accept the history and current reality of the situation in order to negotiate a settlement, then a better and more productive way of life for Palestinians will never come about.

John Hawkes ● 48d

I suppose Arafat wouldn't be the first politician to make a mistake? (For example, many consider Tony Blair's support of the Iraq war based on non existent WMD; others might consider David Cameron's Brexit referendum to be ill conceived, etc, etc, etc.) Are we saying that Arafat's mistake should condemn the Palestinians and Israelis to an infinity conflict, as I can't see a way out of it at present, perhaps others can?

Michael Ixer ● 48d

As a supplement to John Hawkes' history of the conflict, it is worth noting that at Camp David in 2000, under the mediation of President Clinton, Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat the following: the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on 92% of the West Bank and 100% of Gaza; the dismantling of most of the settlements; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state but no 'right of return' to Israel itself.Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton said,'You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe'. Later Clinton told Alan Dershowitz that  the negotiations failed due to Arafat's refusal to give up the right of return. It appears that Arafat feared that he might be assassinated by his own side if he conceded on the question of Palestinian refugees from 1948.Following the breakdown of the talks Arafat's standing among Palestinians grew. 68% of Palestinians approved of his refusal of the offer made by Israel. Recently the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has said that Arafat's refusal was a mistake.

Steven Rose ● 48d

Ms Holliday'I am afraid I must correct you in your belief that the bombings on 7 July 2005 as well as the Manchester Arena bombing were carried out by Palestinian extremists.They were carried out by Islamists'.Thank you for this.I get confused over all these Islamist groups.Hamas we can agree is Palestinian so making sure this ethnic group is making its contribution in the attempt to obliterate Israel and its Jews.Re the 7/7 and Manchester massacres I assume the perpetrators shared the same politicised interpretation of Islam as Hamas, presumably learnt in Pakistan before they decided to live in our country and take advantage of our education system.Perhaps for them we were Jewish clones and deserved the same retribution.The Jamaican's grudge is intriguing.Perhaps racial harassment by the Met ? The Arena bomber was apparently the son of Libyan parents given asylum/sanctuary in the UK after being persecuted by Gaddafi.His action must be an old North African Arabic gesture of thanks. Both father and son supported radical Islamic groups and fought Gaddafi.The BBC reports "A Libyan businessman, Adel Alrayni, told BBC Arabic that Abedi's father supported the radical cleric, Abu Qatada, and used to meet him in London".His empathetic 'motivation' you describe seems only to have been claimed by his sister.Overall he seems to have been a bit of a dim kid with a grudge who was indoctrinated and used by manipulative elders which is a tactic Islamists are fond of using. BBC news also reported he was a cannabis user.Like the Jamaican ?

John Hawkes ● 48d

Mr Hawkes,I am afraid I must correct you in your belief that the bombings on 7 July 2005 as well as the Manchester Arena bombing were carried out by Palestinian extremists.They were carried out by Islamists.  In the case of the July 2005 bombings, they were 4 extremists:  3 of Pakistani-British origin and the 4th from Jamaican-British origin.  All 4 were educated in the UK.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombingsAs for the Manchester Arena bombing in 2017, I am not too sure the origin of the bomber, but it was motivated the suffering of children in the American-led intervention in the Syrian civil war.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing

Ivonne Holliday ● 48d

Mr Carter'That conflict, as you well know, goes even further back, for example, than the 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel by Jewish terrorists that killed 91 people and injured 46 more (and no, I am not "equating" that bombing with any other terrorist outrage, just pointing out that either side has clean hands in this)'.As regard this incident the lead perpetrator Manacham Begin caused warning telephone calls to be made to the hotel, the French Consulate and the Palestine Post.All were ignored.These warnings were denied by British officials until 1979 when Richard Crossman admitted to Parliament that they had been made and had in fact been ignored.I think it true no warnings were made by Palestinian extremists in the UK before the 7/7 bus and tube explosions killing 52 and injuring 700 nor before that at the Manchester Arena killing 22 and injuring 1017.Unlike the King David bombing, these incidents happened miles away from the Middle East conflict itself where our country and its citizens were in no way involved. And yes, I too will not correspond with you again on this issue.Our chosen interpretation of its cause and sympathies with its participant groups are too divergent.

John Hawkes ● 48d

Hi Michael, I am afraid I don't understand your point. Let us assume for the sake of argument that 30 000 people have been killed. According to Hamas 70% of these are women and children. That is to say, 21 000 of the victims are women and children. Then according to Hamas 6000 of their fighters have died. So the total so far is 27 000. That leaves 3000 victims, who being neither women, nor children nor Hamas fighters must be adult male civilians. The conclusion is that the Israelis have killed 21 000 civilian females and children compared to 3000 adult male civilians. Is that likely? How come the Israelis in a supposedly indiscriminate slaughter have killed so few adult male civilians? The figures just don't make sense. In fact the Israelis claim to have killed near  9000 Hamas fighters. If true, that makes the figures even more improbable. For then there would be 21 000 female and child victims and 9000 Hamas dead, implying that no civilian adult males at all have been killed. I don't wish to minimise the tragic situation in Gaza. I merely wish to point out that the figures emanating from the Hamas Health Ministry are unreliable and should not be reported as fact on the BBC.

Steven Rose ● 48d

Steven, I'm not sure I follow your maths. If we assume in a sexist way that the Hamas fighters are all adult males then sure we have 30% of those killed as being males, so we have a more sensible ration of women and children to men as 7:3. Given many families have several children a ratio of deaths of men:women:children of 3:3:4 wouldn't be unreasonable?

Michael Ixer ● 49d

Richard, I am afraid Idon't recognise your apparent view of Putney Forum as a battleground where warring parties, abetted by their 'allies, cast 'vicious smears'. I think contributors see the Forum as opportunity to exchange views. Sometimes these views are pungently expressed but there is no need for anyone to take offence.Returning to the topic under discussion, the Secretary General's crass remark gave great offence in Israel because it implicitly depicted the massacre as an act of war to seen in the context of a long standing conflict, rather than as the worst pogrom inflicted on the Jewish people since the Second World War.On another matter, I have long been suspicious of the casualty figures in Gaza released by the Hamas 'Health Ministry', regularly reported by the BBC and confirmed as reliable by BBC Verify. The statistic that 70% of the dead are women and children is particularly puzzling. So I was pleased when this question was addressed in the 'Sunday Telegraph' today by Jake Simons, the editor of the 'Jewish Chronicle'. In February Hamas admitted that 6000 of their fighters had been killed, which represents around 20% of the total killed. The women and children allegedly account for 70% of the dead. So that means only 10% of the dead are adult male civilians. How is that possible? Are we to believe that the Israelis in the course of their allegedly indiscriminate slaughter somehow managed to miss the men, hitting the women and children by a factor of 7:1? This obvious discrepancy casts doubt on the veracity of the figures emanating from Hamas.

Steven Rose ● 49d

It really is pointless to discuss this any further with you. It's not your opinions that I'm offended by, but your repeated foul accusation that people (unspecified) here are Hamas supporters. Until you can point to any posts here that express this supposed support I won't be engaging with you any more.

Richard Carter ● 49d

Mr Carter'It decidedly did *not* equate the pogrom with the actions of the Israeli army, but tried to set it in the historical context of what is a long-standing and terrible conflict. That conflict, as you well know, goes even further back, for example, than the 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel by Jewish terrorists that killed 91 people and injured 46 more (and no, I am not "equating" that bombing with any other terrorist outrage, just pointing out that either side has clean hands in this). There is a very clear division which you are trying to blur so that you can then see Israel's actions in a more favouable light'.It does your cause no favours to dismiss arguments you disagree with as 'blurring' the issue.You have tried to place the situation in an historical context.Here is my version of 'the context' which relates to a telling point made earlier by Mr Ixer regarding our difference in expectations of behaviour between Israel and the surrounding Arab states.-----------------------------------------------------------I agree with you that we have higher expectation of Israel following UN standards than we do of the Arab countries and terrorist groups that surround and threaten it.And I have said before, the belligerency and self-aggrandisement of Netanyahu tarnish this reputation and Israel's public relations efforts.I don't know the facts concerning any restrictions of journalists following the IDF actions but sure as hell there is more press scrutiny of Israel's actions than there is of those carried out by Hamas, Syria, Yemen, Saudi, Iran etc.Sunday Times journalist Marie Colvin was assassinated in Syria in 2012 as have hundreds more since.But to put all the discussions about Israel and Palestine  in an historical context , it should not be forgotten that there have been Jews living in the region for millennia alongside Arabs.Read the Bible !The 'Two State Solution' has been on the agenda at least since the Balfour Declaration of 1917 "favouring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.....it being clearly understood that nothing be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine".Emir Faisal, son of Sherif Hussein leader of the Arab revolt against the occupying Turks, signed an agreement with Chaim Weizmann during the 1919 Peace Conference supporting the Declaration and acknowledging the 'kinship and bonds' between Arabs and Jews.The international community accepted the Declaration which specifically referred to "the historical connections of the Jewish people with Palestine" and included it in terms of the British Mandate for the region which was formalised by the fifty-two governments at the League of Nations in 1922.Ironically Churchill in 1921 took four-fifths of Palestine, 35,000 square miles, to create a new Arab entity Transjordan and by 1949 Britain allocated 87,000 acres of the 187,000 cultivatable land to the Arabs and 4,250 to the Jews.In 1922 the Jewish population in Palestine was 84,000 and the Arab 643,000.In 1939 the British also said Jewish immigration into Palestine would be limited to 75,000 during the next 5 years and then cease.Arab migration would be unrestricted.The Arabs rejected these terms.In 1937 the Peel Commission, following the ending of the British Mandate in Palestine offered the Jews 15% of Western Palestine and the Arabs independence in the rest.This was rejected by the Arabs.In 1941, the Mufti of Jerusalem left Palestine to meet with Hitler.He wanted the Nazis to extend their anti-Jewish program to the Arab world.Hitler said the time was not yet right but the Mufti thanked him for his sympathy to the Palestinian cause and saying the Arabs were Germany's natural friends.Then the UN set up a Special Commission on Palestine in 1947 which recommended the establishment of two separate states - one Jewish and one Arab.Jews welcomed the compromise.The Arabs rejected it wanting a unitary Arab state and not wanting to be seen recognising Israel.And the interagency and antagonism of the Arabs towards Israel continues to this day.Even though the Arabs govern Gaza and the West Bank.Sorry to go on so long but I think it time we get away from the simplistic view that Israel is and always has been the colonial oppressor of poor little, friendless Palestine and realise it's more complex than that.

John Hawkes ● 49d

Mr CarterI am sorry you feel offended by the comments I make which describe opinions and views that are obviously opposite to yours.How would you describe Hamas and the Palestinians who invaded Israel ?

John Hawkes ● 49d

"I am sure that none of the contributors to Putney Forum supports Hamas or would wish to defend the massacre of October 7."Correct, but you might try persuading your ally here, John Hawkes, of that to stop his propagating the vicious smear that it is otherwise."Even the comment by the Secretary General of the UN, that October 7 did not 'happen in a vacuum', implicitly placed the massacre in the context of the struggle between the Palestinians and Israel, effectively equating a horrible pogrom in which civilians were raped, tortured and murdered, to efforts by the Israeli army to root out armed militants."It decidedly did *not* equate the pogrom with the actions of the Israeli army, but tried to set it in the historical context of what is a long-standing and terrible conflict. That conflict, as you well know, goes even further back, for example, than the 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel by Jewish terrorists that killed 91 people and injured 46 more (and no, I am not "equating" that bombing with any other terrorist outrage, just pointing out that either side has clean hands in this). There is a very clear division which you are trying to blur so that you can then see Israel's actions in a more favouable light.

Richard Carter ● 49d

In saying that Hamas were originally elected into power, I was not trying to give them any kind of democratic legitimacy. They have murdered their political opponents, they have maintained control of Gaza through a mixture of indoctrination and intimidation and they have never held another election. I was just trying to make the point that they cannot just be regarded as a bunch of terrorists who should be dealt with by the police rather than the army. They constitute the government of Gaza and possess an army of over 20 000 militants. Therefore the analogy of a lone terrorist who has holed out at St George's is impossible to take seriously.I am sure that none of the contributors to Putney Forum supports Hamas or would wish to defend the massacre of October 7. But some of the protesters who attend the marches in London undoubtedly do condone the actions of Hamas. Chris Williamson, for example, the former labour MP, who has now joined George Galloway's party, has described the events of October 7 as 'a break out from a concentration camp'. Even the comment by the Secretary General of the UN, that October 7 did not 'happen in a vacuum', implicitly placed the massacre in the context of the struggle between the Palestinians and Israel, effectively equating a horrible pogrom in which civilians were raped, tortured and murdered, to efforts by the Israeli army to root out armed militants.

Steven Rose ● 49d

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Hind_RajabThis is also on Youtube but this was also playing out over several days on the various media here.  The last I had heard was that the ambulance had been despatched and that there was no reply from the IDF when nothing more was heard.  It is definitely not true that the IDF only target terrorists.

Philippa Bond ● 49d

"Yet I find that strangely there are still many that hold them out to be some misunderstood, maligned freedom fighters for a just cause as is proved by the comments of some on this website."Once again you post this vile smear - without, of course, any evidence. I'm getting tired of pointing out that it is a lie. So much for your ludicrous claim of "balance."

Richard Carter ● 49d

Mr Rose'Hamas, though designated as a terrorist organisation, are not terrorists in the usual sense. They are the elected government of a foreign territory which has declared war on Israel with the stated aim of exterminating its Jewish population'. Though I agree wholeheartedly with you over the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and your description of the  objectives of Hamas to obliterate Israel and its Jews as stated in its Charter, you give undeserved credit to Hamas with regard to their claims of being the legitimate, democratically elected 'government' of Gaza.They won an election in 2006 and without further elections nor mandate have remained in control since.Below is taken from Slate - the liberal US online news medium.https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/10/was-hamas-elected-to-govern-gaza-george-w-bush-2006-palestinian-election.html 'How did Hamas come to power in Gaza in the first place? That history is worth revisiting now, two and a half weeks into the war, as it tests whether Biden’s point is true.It was in January 2006 that the Palestinian territories held what turned out to be their last parliamentary elections. Hamas won a bare plurality of votes (44 percent to the more moderate Fatah party’s 41 percent) but, given the electoral system, a strong majority of seats (74 to 45). Neither party was keen on sharing power. Fighting broke out between the two. When a unity government was finally formed in June 2007, Hamas broke the deal, started murdering Fatah members, and, in the end, took total control of the Gaza Strip. Those who weren’t killed fled to the West Bank, and the territories have remained split ever since'.Yet I find that strangely there are still many that hold them out to be some misunderstood, maligned freedom fighters for a just cause as is proved by the comments of some on this website.To me however I just see how 'those Hamas boys do like to rumble' !

John Hawkes ● 49d

"It seems to me that the author of the article is attempting to draw a false parallel between Hamas and Israel."No, you have misread what I posted. Yuval Noah Harari is *not* drawing a parallel between Hamas and Israel but between the perceptions of the people on each side. This is clear from the two paragraphs I quoted, which start respectively "The current war has confirmed Palestinians' deepest fears" and "The current war has confirmed Israelis' deepest fears."

Richard Carter ● 49d

free rein

Steven Rose ● 49d

A single terrorist who has holed up in a hospital is not comparable to Hamas. Hamas, though designated as a terrorist organisation, are not terrorists in the usual sense. They are the elected government of a foreign territory which has declared war on Israel with the stated aim of exterminating its Jewish population. They possess an army of 20 000 to 30 000 militants, including a number of sadistic psychopaths given free reign by the leadership. They fire rockets from hospitals and schools, using the civilian population as human shields. How is Israel supposed to deal with this threat?

Steven Rose ● 49d

"They have only targeted Hamas militants but since these individuals shoot from residential areas many civilians have tragically been killed."So if a terrorist holes up in St Georges would you call in an air strike?

Michael Brigo ● 49d

I agree with John Hawkes' response to the article from the FT quoted by Richard. It seems to me that the author of the article is attempting to draw a false parallel between Hamas and Israel. There is plenty of evidence that Hamas aims at the destruction of Israel. The destruction of the 'Zionist entity' and the extermination of its Jewish population is written into its constitution. But there is no evidence, apart from the angry statements of two or three extremist politicians who do not represent the policy of the Israeli government, that Israel wishes to expel the Palestinians from Gaza or 'terminate their existence as a national collective'. The idea that the Palestinians are threatened with annihilation is just deceitful Hamas propaganda.  Far from wishing to annex Gaza, the Israelis unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, since when they have been continually been attacked by Hamas militants, culminating in the dreadful massacre of October 7. And contrary to what is believed by many people in this country, the Israelis have not  have not indulged in indiscriminate slaughter of the civilian population. They have only targeted Hamas militants but since these individuals shoot from residential areas many civilians have tragically been killed. Once the Hamas have been defeated, Netanyahu's plan, as reported by the BBC, is for Gaza to be administered by Palestinians with no links to groups hostile to Israel while security is indefinitely maintained by the Israel Defence Force. Now whether or not this plan is acceptable or even feasible, it certainly does not suggest an intention to expel the Palestinians from Gaza.

Steven Rose ● 50d

I hold views and write as I do because I genuinely fear that many of those that spew vicious anti-Israeli 'criticism' are in fact racist.And that they could well soon turn more of their attention to non-Arab citizens in this country.Not that they haven't done so already as the atrocities committed and lives taken by them bear witness.As regards the person you quote - 'The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is fuelled by the mutual horror of destruction. Each side fears the other wishes to kill or expel it, and terminate its existence as a national collective'.This is certainly true of Hamas as I am sure you know having read its charter.I have seen no clear evidence that Israelis, other than a few extremists have ever wanted to 'take back' control of Gaza and the West Bank from the Palestinians on a long term basis.I consider what Israel is doing now in Gaza, however regrettable in terms of civilian collateral damage, as part of a justifiable response to being attacked by Palestinians on 7th October 2023. 'The current war has confirmed Palestinians' deepest fears. After the Hamas attack on October 7 2023, calls for the utter destruction of the Gaza Strip and their mass killing and expulsion have become routine in the Israeli media and among some members of Israel's ruling coalition. On October 7, the deputy Speaker of parliament, Nissim Vaturi, tweeted 'Now we all have one common goal - erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth.' On November 1, Israel's minister of heritage, Amichai Eliyahu, posted 'The North of the Gaza Strip, more beautiful than ever. Everything is blown up and flattened, simply a pleasure for the eyes.' And on November 11, Israel's minister of agriculture, Avi Dichter, said that 'we are now actually rolling out the Gaza Nakba'."Stupid remarks from extremist politicians.Happens everywhere even in the UK where many Labour MPs have lost the whip for what have been deemed to be antisemitic remarks.Remember Azhar Ali ? 'The current war has confirmed Israelis' deepest fears. After Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, Hamas and other militants turned it into an armed base to attack Israel. On October 7, Hamas terrorists killed, raped and took hostage more than 1,000 Israeli civilians. Entire communities were systematically destroyed, and hundreds of thousands of Israelis had to flee their homes. If any Jews harboured hopes that they could live in a Palestinian state, what happened to Jewish villages such as Be'eri and Kfar Aza and to Nova music festival attendees proved that Jewish communities cannot survive under Palestinian rule for even a single day."You and I both agree on this point do we not ?'Jews should know by now that Arab-Israelis do not fantasise about the day when they can finally kill or expel all Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.  No matter how hard it is for the rest of us to change our intentions, the good news is that this is something each side - even each person - is capable of achieving by themselves. We have little control over the intentions of others, but we should be able to change our own minds. Even readers who are neither Israeli nor Palestinian can contemplate whether they wish well for both sides, or whether they cherish the hope that one of these groups would simply disappear from the face of the Earth."I am sure sensible Jews would have agreed with this up until 7th October 2023.That is why Arabs can be Israeli citizens and serve as members of the Knesset.Hamas' aim of course is to destroy this trust and then obliterate the state of Israel and the Jews that live in it.In my opinion or lived experience your views and those of others like you are no more balanced than mine.We just disagree on the matter.

John Hawkes ● 50d

You claim that you are just trying to put across views that offer balance rather than racial prejudice against Israel, yet anyone looking for balance in your posts will not find it. For real balance, try "Is there a way out of Israeli-Palestinian trap" by the historian, philosopher and author Yuval Noah Harari in today's FT. I can't even post a link to it because my subscription doesn't cover it, so I'll have to post a few paragraphs from a scan of the actual paper (because of which this will a long post: apologies). He starts with this:"The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is fuelled by the mutual horror of destruction. Each side fears the other wishes to kill or expel it, and terminate its existence as a national collective. Unfortunately, these are not irrational fears born out of paranoia, but reasonable fears based on recent historical memories and a relatively sound analysis of the other side's intentions."A bit later there is this"The current war has confirmed Palestinians' deepest fears. After the Hamas attack on October 7 2023, calls for the utter destruction of the Gaza Strip and their mass killing and expulsion have become routine in the Israeli media and among some members of Israel's ruling coalition. On October 7, the deputy Speaker of parliament, Nissim Vaturi, tweeted 'Now we all have one common goal - erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth.' On November 1, Israel's minister of heritage, Amichai Eliyahu, posted 'The North of the Gaza Strip, more beautiful than ever. Everything is blown up and flattened, simply a pleasure for the eyes.' And on November 11, Israel's minister of agriculture, Avi Dichter, said that 'we are now actually rolling out the Gaza Nakba'."Then this:"The current war has confirmed Israelis' deepest fears. After Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, Hamas and other militants turned it into an armed base to attack Israel. On October 7, Hamas terrorists killed, raped and took hostage more than 1,000 Israeli civilians. Entire communities were systematically destroyed, and hundreds of thousands of Israelis had to flee their homes. If any Jews harboured hopes that they could live in a Palestinian state, what happened to Jewish villages such as Be'eri and Kfar Aza and to Nova music festival attendees proved that Jewish communities cannot survive under Palestinian rule for even a single day."Then, the end of this long piece, he gives examples of Arab-Israelis who have gone on serving in iraeli institutions from hospitals and government offices, concluding:"Jews should know by now that Arab-Israelis do not fantasise about the day when they can finally kill or expel all Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.  No matter how hard it is for the rest of us to change our intentions, the good news is that this is something each side - even each person - is capable of achieving by themselves. We have little control over the intentions of others, but we should be able to change our own minds. Even readers who are neither Israeli nor Palestinian can contemplate whether they wish well for both sides, or whether they cherish the hope that one of these groups would simply disappear from the face of the Earth."

Richard Carter ● 50d

Mr Hawkes, there may be something else from BBC News on iPlayer, I haven't time to look at the moment but there are these videos on YouTube:https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DrnQjH8lyXTU&ved=2ahUKEwjru7WE9_iEAxUGZ0EAHWp4BWgQwqsBegQIERAE&usg=AOvVaw27LZZtO7NE_nWUHQlULKmFhttps://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DCh6T9oR6tro&ved=2ahUKEwjru7WE9_iEAxUGZ0EAHWp4BWgQwqsBegQIEBAE&usg=AOvVaw2A0ApYqDOH4Eqg_cti4Qtthttps://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D3ZdS1Te-GbQ&ved=2ahUKEwiB1PiJ-PiEAxUkUkEAHc2yC14QwqsBegQIDxAE&usg=AOvVaw1hLliZPxrutWjmTui_s-rG

Michael Ixer ● 50d

Mr IxerThank you.Barbaric behavior.Interesting though.Just text not heart-felt commentary from any correspondent quoting relations of the victims !

John Hawkes ● 50d

Mr Hawkes Is this what you're looking for?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67629181

Michael Ixer ● 50d

Mr CarterI agree that the event reported by the BBC is shocking and on the face of it inexcusable.The wider report in itself however only comments on what is happening in Palestine from an Arab perspective would you not agree ? However as you seem to be a bit of a wiz identifying news items on Youtube perhaps you could let me have a link to the BBC item that reported the invasion of Israel by Hamas on 7th October 2023 and the murder, rape, sexual mutilation and hostage taking of Israeli woman and children.And further perhaps also links to the videos of these actions published by Hamas on the web.I publish what I do on PutneySW15 to try to counter those whose own anti-Israel and pro-Palestine comments demonstrate unequivocally the bile and hatred they feel towards Israel.I am neither desperate nor in a panic over the issue.I am just trying to put across views that offer balance rather than racial prejudice against Israel regarding the situation in the Middle East that itself is generating disharmony in the UK which is not affected by nor has any direct interest in what is happening there.Rather than throwing out puerile jibes, why don't you reply to and counter what I have posted ?

John Hawkes ● 50d

I expect this might get the Yemeni conflict onto the international agenda even if the cable breaks were an accident caused by a dragged anchor!https://itweb.africa/content/8OKdWqDXyDBqbznQ

Michael Ixer ● 51d

Mr Hawkes, to clarify,  I meant the extremist, political subversion of it, not Islam per se. 

Michael Ixer ● 51d

" 'Only yesterday the IDF killed a 12 year old boy who was playing with a firework'.A sad incident and we do not know the circumstances," you write.Wrong: the "circumstances are clear in this report on the BBC News a couple of days ago:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JBkNDNj05XAAnd no fewer than 6 posts from you in little more than a quarter of an hour! This smacks of desperation and panic; I recommend lying down in a dark room until you've recovered.

Richard Carter ● 51d

Ms Holliday'should Israel and Palestine not be independent States'?Israel is one already and Palestine will warrant the status when it declares Israel has a right to exist and be trusted to stand by this statement.

John Hawkes ● 51d

Mr Ixer'With regard to your point as to why doesn't Hamas want Israel to exist I could say your guess is as good as mine but my speculation would be it's a combination of resentment over lost territory and misguided religious ideology?'Are you suggesting that Islam is a 'misguided religion' or do you mean the politicised version of it ?I would simply put it down to racism which when directed against Jews I think we call antisemitism.

John Hawkes ● 51d

Ms BondIn answer to a question which countries wish to eliminate another you state 'Russia, China, North Korea, Israel.Cannot think of any others at the moment'This is a laughable response even from you.Which country does Israel want to eliminate ?The only ruling 'government' that wants to eliminate another is the government of Gaza - Hamas.Have you read their Charter ?And there it states the country it wants to eliminate.Guess what - Israel.I really am intrigued what you must have experienced to have taken up such a position against it.

John Hawkes ● 51d

Mr Carter'And on the question of why people demonstrate against Israeli killing and not that by murderous dictators like Putin and Assad, it should be obvious to all but the terminally blinkered: Israel is a democracy and an ally so we hope demonstrations here will be noticed in Israel. The same does not apply to so many other terrible regines like that in Russia and Syria, for example. Got it now?'Oh I get it but I doubt many do that will take to the streets tomorrow.Still they might be forgiven as if they are Arabs they have never lived and a democracy.And if they are British they are probably totally ignorant of the history and current democratic status of the region as a whole.

John Hawkes ● 51d

Mr Carter'Palestinians also have that right, and it is daily being denied by Israel and, particularly, by the extremist settlers in the West Bank'.How many settlers are involved in this ?Very few and Israel takes steps to stop them. 'Only yesterday the IDF killed a 12 year old boy who was playing with a firework'.A sad incident and we do not know the circumstances.But doubtless Israel will take steps to investigate and punish if necessary.That is what it does.On the other hand Hamas invaded Israel on 7th October 2023, took numerous women and children hostage and FILMED their killing, torture and sexual attacks and mutilations.Who is investigating that ?What Arab groups have publicly criticised what happened ?Sources please.

John Hawkes ● 51d

Mr Rose'Not all Palestinians are members of Hamas but Hamas enjoys considerable support in Gaza. Hamas was voted into power in 2007wuth the aim, clearly stated in its constitution,of destroying the State of Israel and extermination its Jewish population, since when it has reinforced its grip on Gaza through a mixture of indoctrination and intimidation. Now it may be that the majority of Hamas supporters don't necessarily approve of the 'fighters' who raped the lifeless bodies of teenage girls on October 7  but I am afraid that when they gave their vote to a party advocating genocide they signed a pact with the devil'.Spot on again !

John Hawkes ● 51d

Mr Ixer'(And it's easy to take a pop at South Africa but having suffered decades of racist apartheid but resolved it relatively peacefully without civil war perhaps they have a lot of issues to work though, and that means they have a different perspective on things from those of us living in a relative comfortable, safe and affluent western country?)'Good point.I watched a DVD of 'Invictus' yesterday showing how a magnanimous and politically astute Nelson Mandela, recently released from jail, used SA's successful winning of the 1995 Rugby World Cup to make good strides in bringing the country together.He even donated 1/3rd of his Presidential salary to charity.Now his political successors seem to have made little further progress yet are all multi-millionaires !My point is that I think they are making grandiose noises on the world stage to cover up their own failings and not putting their own house in order.I agree with you that we have higher expectation of Israel following UN standards than we do of the Arab countries and terrorist groups that surround and threaten it.And I have said before, the belligerency and self-aggrandisement of Netanyahu tarnish this reputation and Israel's public relations efforts.I don't know the facts concerning any restrictions of journalists following the IDF actions but sure as hell there is more press scrutiny of Israel's actions than there is of those carried out by Hamas, Syria, Yemen, Saudi, Iran etc. Sunday Times journalist Marie Colvin was assassinated in Syria in 2012 as have hundreds more since.In all the discussions about Israel and Palestine, it should not be forgotten that there have been Jews living in the region for millennia alongside Arabs.Read the Bible !The 'Two State Solution' has been on the agenda at least since the Balfour Declaration of 1917 "favouring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.....it being clearly understood that nothing be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine".Emir Faisal, son of Sherif Hussein leader of the Arab revolt against the occupying Turks, signed an agreement with Chaim Weizmann during the 1919 Peace Conference supporting the Declaration and acknowledging the 'kinship and bonds' between Arabs and Jews.The international community accepted the Declaration which specifically referred to "the historical connections of the Jewish people with Palestine" and included it in terms of the British Mandate for the region which was formalised by the fifty-two governments at the League of Nations in 1922.Ironically Churchill in 1921 took four-fifths of Palestine, 35,000 square miles, to create a new Arab entity Transjordan and by 1949 Britain allocated 87,000 acres of the 187,000 cultivatable land to the Arabs and 4,250 to the Jews.In 1922 the Jewish population in Palestine was 84,000 and the Arab 643,000.In 1939 the British also said Jewish immigration into Palestine would be limited to 75,000 during the next 5 years and then cease. Arab migration would be unrestricted.The Arabs rejected these terms. In 1937 the Peel Commission, following the ending of the British Mandate in Palestine offered the Jews 15% of Western Palestine and the Arabs independence in the rest.This was rejected by the Arabs.In 1941, the Mufti of Jerusalem left Palestine to meet with Hitler.He wanted the Nazis to extend their anti-Jewish program to the Arab world.Hitler said the time was not yet right but the Mufti thanked him for his sympathy to the Palestinian cause and saying the Arabs were Germany's natural friends.Then the UN set up a Special Commission on Palestine in 1947 which recommended the establishment of two separate states - one Jewish and one Arab.Jews welcomed the compromise.The Arabs rejected it wanting a unitary Arab state and not wanting to be seen recognising Israel.And the interagency and antagonism of the Arabs towards Israel continues to this day.Even though the Arabs govern Gaza and the West Bank.Sorry to on so long but I think it time we get away from the simplistic view that Israel is and always has been the colonial oppressor of poor little, friendless Palestine and realise it's more complex than that.Feel free to pass this to anyone you know planning to march tomorrow !!

John Hawkes ● 51d

Hi IvonneNot all Palestinians are members of Hamas but Hamas enjoys considerable support in Gaza. Hamas was voted into power in 2007wuth the aim, clearly stated in its constitution,of destroying the State of Israel and extermination its Jewish population, since when it has reinforced its grip on Gaza through a mixture of indoctrination and intimidation. Now it may be that the majority of Hamas supporters don't necessarily approve of the 'fighters' who raped the lifeless bodies of teenage girls on October 7  but I am afraid that when they gave their vote to a party advocating genocide they signed a pact with the devil.The phrase 'six of one and half a dozen of the other' is inappropriate in my view. Would you have said of the Second World War, given that Britain was bombing Germany and Germany was bombing Britain, that it was 'six of one and half a dozen of the other'? Hitler did not threaten to exterminate the entire British population, but Britain felt it was necessary to eradicate the Nazi regime. Israel is faced with a terrorist organisation on its border which has threatened to repeat the massacre of October 7 'again and again' until the Jewish state is destroyed. How is Israel supposed to counter this threat if not by eradicating Hamas from Gaza?I personally don't support the presence of Isaeli settlements on the West Bank, let alone settler violence. But if Israel withdrew from the West Bank tomorrow, just as they withdrew from Gaza in 2005, the Palestinian question would not be settled.  That is because most Palestinians don't just want an independent state on the West Bank, they want to reclaim their land in Israel itself. They see the two state solution (demanded by some contributors to Putney Forum) as a stepping stone to the eventual dismantling of the Jewish State of Israel. The Israeli public perceive this, which has diminished their willingness to compromise.

Steven Rose ● 51d

Robert.  I'm not sure which comments you're relating to UN reports. With regard to your point as to why doesn't Hamas want Israel to exist I could say your guess is as good as mine but my speculation would be it's a combination of resentment over lost territory and misguided religious ideology? I note that the US is now applying sanctions to some settlers in Palestinian territory.

Michael Ixer ● 51d

Israel is not trying to destroy another country it is trying to rid confirmed terrorists who want to destroy its existence.  Russia has invaded another country and maybe the others will do so but they don’t want the sheer existence of the people of that country not to exist.  Ultimately it is only Hamas and Iran that propose genocide

Robert Wheeler ● 51d

Russia, China, North Korea, Israel.Cannot think of any others at the moment.

Ivonne Holliday ● 51d

It is actually.  How many governments do you know that want the elimination of another country.

Robert Wheeler ● 51d

If only it were that simple!

Ivonne Holliday ● 51d

Michael my comments came from UN reports that anyone can google.  The question for  everyone is why don’t Hamas want Israel to exist.  Deal with that and we can all move forward.

Robert Wheeler ● 51d

Good evening Steven,The reply must be that the saying "six of one and half a dozen of the other" applies in this case.Hamas, as well as Boko Haram in Nigeria and other terrorist groups, past and present throughout the world - are beyond despicable. One thing that is incredibly important to bear in mind that members of Hamas are Palestinian but not all Palestinians are members of Hamas.  It is also incredibly important to say that Gaza is nowhere near East Jerusalem in the West Bank though an Israeli soldier shot dead a 12 year old boy there. Gaza is governed by Hamas.  The West Bank is administered by the Palestinian Authority though Israel has military control over various sections in the West Bank.Apologies if I sound like a teacher here, it is not the intention!But the question must be - should Israel and Palestine not be independent States?When I say Palestine, I do not say Hamas.Also, how come IDF does not know where Hamas is?  Their level of intelligence is absolutely amazing and beyond!Is it a question that there is no worse blind than somebody or entity who/that does not want to see?  Please, do not misunderstand me! I do not like Hamas by any stretch of the imagination.But they are not the only culprits in this case.I thought there were demonstrations asking for the release of the remaining hostages but not reported on the news?

Ivonne Holliday ● 51d

Roberts. I obviously meant it was brutal for innocent people on both sides - the teenage Israelis you mention and the Palestinian children with limbs blown off. I purposely put question marks on many of the statements as none of us knows the full truth of the conflict's details. I would just be concerned that if the devastation erases Hamas it then becomes a breeding ground for Hamas V2 - I suppose it depends what effort the Israelis put in to alleviate the humanitarian crisis and rebuild Gaza, particularly if they don't want a two state solution? As I've said, I'm really not sure what the answer is :-(

Michael Ixer ● 51d

The problem with the two state solution is that the Israeli public have no confidence that the West Bank, once it became an independent Palestinian state, wouldn't become a second Gaza, that is to say, a launch pad for further attacks on Israel by Hamas supporters who have never accepted the existence of a Jewish state.The situation is Gaza is tragic. But those who criticise Israel's campaign have not explained how else Israel is to neutralise a genocidal terrorist organisation who hide among the civilian population and who  have vowed to repeat the massacre of October 7.  As to the demonstrations, how about a demonstration calling on Hamas to release the remaining hostages?

Steven Rose ● 52d

There seems to be a disconnect between Hamas and the Palestinian population don’t you think.  If our elected government carried out such an action would we not uprise? Blaming the Israeli government is not credible - it was the government of Gaza that launched the attack on Oct 7th.  Remember the Palestinians elected this Hamas Government . “It’s a brutal conflict “ yes it is if you are a 19 yr old female hostage being raped and the horror broadcast on line does not bode to negotiations.Humanity only seems to work providing you don’t fight back.

Robert Wheeler ● 52d

My guess would be for the same reason the Hamas terrorists took them in the first place - they're a basis for negotiation. I'm also guessing the Israeli government, in spite of what they say, perhaps considers them expendable? It's a brutal conflict:-(

Michael Ixer ● 52d

For goodness sake Richard tone it down and you wonder why people don’t debate on this forum.It is not just one state against another but people trying to highlight Hamas who Palestinians democratically elected who have vowed to destroy Israel no matter how long it takes.  I can understand the lack of respect for these marches.Please will someone clarify why the Israeli hostages have not been released.

Robert Wheeler ● 52d

And on the question of why people demonstrate against Israeli killing and not that by murderous dictators like Putin and Assad, it should be obvious to all but the terminally blinkered: Israel is a democracy and an ally so we hope demonstrations here will be noticed in Israel. The same does not apply to so many other terrible regines like that in Russia and Syria, for example. Got it now?

Richard Carter ● 52d

Mr Hawkes, yet again you smear people who are demonstrating against the mass killing in Gaza with the lie that they are terrorist sympathisers. How many times must we say that this is a lie before you manage to get it into your head?And you write of "those that believe Israel and its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens have a right to their land and a right to live there in peace" and ask if we believe Israel has this right.  Speaking for myself, of course Israel has that right. But, unlike in your world, Palestinians also have that right, and it is daily being denied by Israel and, particularly, by the extremist settlers in the West Bank, and by the IDF. Only yesterday the IDF killed a 12 year old boy who was playing with a firework, a long distance away and who could not possibly pose any danger to his assassin. And that fascist Ben-Gvir wanted to give the man a medal!

Richard Carter ● 52d

Some interesting points, Mr Hawkes.I guess with regard to Russia and Iran people aren't demonstrating because many (most?) agree with the stance our government is taking with regard to supporting Ukraine (many have taken in Ukrainian refugees) and agree with sanctions against the actions of those two countries?Perhaps people have higher expectations of a modern, democratic country such as Israel to follow UN humanitarian standards than they do of murderous dictators and terrorist extremists? Looking at the news and forgetting the rights or wrongs of the situation, the pressure openly being applied by Israel's allies to pay more attention to humanitarian considerations indicates to me they've lost the public relations war? The cynic in me wonders why no independent journalists have been able to follow the IDF action, my natural inclination is to wonder what's being hidden? (Perhaps I've spent too much time with auditors, if I can't see the evidence that the rule are being followed, why should I believe it?)Yes, there's a lot else wrong in the world; the Yemen seems to be forgotten - perhaps the current threat to our supply chains and telecommunications lines will change that, and, yes, a lot of other injustices are carried out in the name of religion; perhaps that's why I'm an atheist! Although I think people such as Peter Tatchell do try to put those on the protest agenda? (Will the middle eastern desire to buy into western sporting enterprises cause those laws and attitudes to change?)Obviously, Israel has a right to exist - it was created as part of a UN decision - but perhaps as a democratic country one might expect it to follow other mandates from the UN? Is anything achievable without a two state solution and restrictions on illegal settlements?That's just my perception of the situation; perhaps it's wrong but I guess - putting aside the history and everything else that's wrong in the world - the real question is how does one stop the killing in the middle east irrespective whether it's from bombs, bullets, famine or dought? Sorry, I haven't got an answer for that, there seems to be a complete brick wall between the parties with regard to that, although Qatar seem to be working hard as it?(And it's easy to take a pop at South Africa but having suffered decades of racist apartheid but resolved it relatively peacefully without civil war perhaps they have a lot of issues to work though, and that means they have a different perspective on things from those of us living in a relative comfortable, safe and affluent western country?)

Michael Ixer ● 52d

Mr RoseYour bewilderment if I may call it such, over the political myopia of the pro-Palestine anti-Israel faction in British Politics is spot on.It has been estimated that in every war between the Palestinians and Israel since 1948 (and I do not mean to belittle the number) a total of just 60,000 on both sides have died which is far, far less than the 6,000,000 Jews killed it the ultimate genocide.  Ms Bond in my opinion, seems to be taking a narrow view of the history and politics of the middle East as a whole.For example she does not criticise the Syrian Arab Republic, ruled by the nepo-dictator Basher al-Assad, himself an Arab Muslim who has killed 600,000 of his Arab Muslim subjects.Nor commented on the Yemen where the UN estimates that between 2015-2021, some 377,000 Arab Muslims have been killed by other Arab Muslims. Or even the Islamic Republic of Iran where women far braver than those joining the London march are dragged from the streets and executed for protesting .Nor has she called out the fact that there are nine Muslim countries in which consensual homosexuality carries the death penalty and that in Saudi Arabia an unmarried adulterer can be given 100 lashes and a married one expect the death penalty ?Why not ?Ah, no Jews involved here !But she is not alone in ignoring these facts because so has has the International Court of Justice even though it seems to be taking seriously the claim against Israel made by the leadership in South Africa.This is a country where the economy is in tatters with vast numbers in poverty; where the leadership is known to be corrupt to the extent that President Cyril Ramaphosa allegedly kept large sums of money in foreign currency, estimated to be $4 million, “concealed” under a mattress and couches at his farm in Bela-Bela, Limpopo; where a large number of its prominent politicians have made vast fortunes (billions) from 'business ventures'; where the murder rate is one of the highest in the world.Perhaps there are no marches against the genocide attempted in Ukraine by Russia because the protesters would be concerned by the recent spate of unexplained deaths of Russian dissidents.They might also recall of the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko and that of Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia in Salisbury and a similar poisoning of two British nationals in Amesbury, involving the same Novichok nerve agent.Far safer to go on-line at Amazon, buy a trendy keffiyeh, join all your mates on a Saturday morning to march and denounce Israel, then pop along to Stamford Bridge for the match or to Waitrose for some humas and pitta to eat in sympathy for Hamas.Or am I becoming a little tired of this posturing or worse becoming somewhat of a cynic !

John Hawkes ● 52d

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/israeli-human-rights-groups-icj-gaza-aid-ruling

Philippa Bond ● 52d

Ms BondI have no doubt any fighting would stop if 1) the terrorist organisation Hamas that invaded Israel and butchered, sexually tortured and took hostage Israeli women and children on 7th October 2023 (remember that incident ?) could be trusted both not to do so again and 2) also  renounced its Charter that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the annihilation of the Jews that live there.Why on earth do you and the Saturday marchers give these people any support and sympathy ? You state "It would be good if those in Govt and in the public eye did not attempt to create greater divisions in our society".The biggest division in society is between those that side with Arab terrorists and those that believe Israel and its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens have a right to their land and a right to live there in peace.Do you believe Israel has this right ?BTW you have not answered my question to you posted on the 9th.What land apart from Gaza and the West Bank do the Palestinians think should be theirs ?

John Hawkes ● 52d

Perhaps you should think harder about that!

Philippa Bond ● 52d

Let's be clear. There is no ruling by the International Court of Justice on Gaza. The Court is considering South Africa's charge of genocide against Israel.Meanswhile Russia, which (unlike Israel) was not actually attacked, has killed over 10 000 civilians in Ukraine. The Syrian regime is responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and has driven millions more into exile. Yet these events don't seem to excite the same level of outrage in this country. There are no demonstrations every weekend against Syria or Russia. Nor, as far as I am aware, has the International Court ever considered a charge of genocide against these countries. Why is that?

Steven Rose ● 52d

Lucille I'm sorry that you feel frightened about going into central London on Saturdays and if we had remembered about the marches we probably would not have gone into central London either.  However we spent years of daily commuting there for work and we just arranged to meet somewhere we knew near to where our friends (with small child) were staying.  Our work moved further out of London and we just don't go into central London as often.  We saw no problems and an incredible number of tourists (enough to put us off going there frequently)!  You should however also imagine the situation of those people who feel unable to do much more than peacably protest as part of our democracy because they see such horrendous killing and starvation of the people in Gaza despite the calls for aid to be allowed in by many countries.  There is also the International Court of Justice ruling...It would be good if those in Govt and in the public eye did not attempt to create greater divisions in our society which it definitely it looks as though they are deliberately doing  for political reasons. They should look at history - which IS important despite some people's irritation. 

Philippa Bond ● 52d

Philippa you may feel that these constant marches are peaceful but I can assure you that the vast majority of Jewish Londoners find going into town on a Saturday very intimidating.

Lucille Grant ● 57d

Makes absolutely no sense at all. They are using the hostages as bargaining chips 😡

Lucille Grant ● 57d

Ms Bond'As for Hamas - of course they should release the hostages that they should never have taken in the first place - but of course the plight of the Palestinians would never have been highlighted if nothing dramatic had ever happened but you cannot put back the clock'.So the murder, sexual molestation and hostage taking (now belatedly even acknowledged by the UN) carried out by a barbaric organisation whose Charter calls for the obliteration of the state of Israel and the Jews, is worth it to gain notice for Palestinian recognition.Very nice !And remind me again what else do the Palestinians want in terms of territory over and above Gaza and the West Bank ?

John Hawkes ● 57d

Apologies, Richard.  I am guilty of digressing too.On the subject of candidates for mayor, for by-elections or any other political posts, I feel the pool in any party is either very dry or incredibly poor.

Ivonne Holliday ● 57d

Hamas are supposedly negotiating the release of prisoners from Israeli gaols in return for releasing the hostages, while at the same time pretending that they can't give the names or the whereabouts of their hostages. Does that make any sense?

Steven Rose ● 57d

We were in Central London a couple of Saturdays ago - not protesting but to meet visiting friends - and it was really really busy.  It was full of tourists and there were also people who had obviously been protesting travelling back on the tube.  There was no unrest - it was just as peaceful as usual.  There is however an element in our society that is trying to cause division by frightening people - and some of them are in Govt and in the media where they can use their name and social media to make inflammatory statements.  The majority of people move around peacefully and safely with no-one knowing or showing what if any religion they practise. As for Hamas - of course they should release the hostages that they should never have taken in the first place - but of course the plight of the Palestinians would never have been highlighted if nothing dramatic had ever happened but you cannot put back the clock.  With the heavy bombardment and the movement of people from place to place and the lack of communications it should be no surprise that their whereabouts may be unknown.  That's what happens to everyone in war.

Philippa Bond ● 57d

Ms Bond'Perhaps you should look a little more closely at who is protesting on Saturdays since you seem to have such a narrow view'.You are correct to point out which groups are promoting the increasingly pointless and tedious pro-Palestine marches in London.'Left wing and Islamist' I would describe them, with an underlying antisemitic core.And as I have asked our Labour MP - 'How is it that seemingly more than 100,000 Palestinians participating in the marches reside in London and under what grounds were they given permission to do so'?We should all resist the attempts at political gaslighting by the left who try to equate actions by Islamists with those supposedly carried out by 'right wing extremists'.Probably for fear of being called 'racist', in his 10-minute address from Number 10 to warn of a growing threat to British democracy Rishi Sunak took aim at Islamist extremists and the far right as “two sides of the same extremist coin”.PM Sunak I am sure felt obliged to reference 'right wing groups' alongside Islamist ones for fear of being labelled 'racist', even though attacks by the former are vastly outnumbered by those of the latter.For who can name yet alone take seriously the actions and influence of such right wing groups ?Such groups have no impact and are regarded as a joke.And the only recent instance of a terrorist attack by someone 'of the right' is the deplorable murder in 2016 of Jo Cox MP whose killer had mental health issuers and was said to have had 'far right' sympathies ?Islamists on the other hand have been recorded as responsible for the following terrorist attacks -the tube bombing on 7/7/05 killing 52; murder on 22/5/13 of Fusilier Lee Rigby; 5 killed on 22/3/17 on Westminster Bridge including PC Palmer; 22 killed on 22/5/17 at Manchester Arena concert; 8 killed on 3/6/17 on London Bridge; 30 injured on 15/9/17 on the tube; 3 injured on 14/8/18 at Parliament barrier; 3 stabbed on 31/12/18 at Manchester shopping centre; 2 murdered on 29/11/19 on London Bridge; 3 stabbed on 2/2/20 at Streatham; 3 murdered on 20/6/20 in Reading; bomb attack on Liverpool Women's Hospital on 14/11/21. And of course it is a fact that there is now, as pro-Palestinian support increases, a great  increase of antisemitic attacks on London streets resulting in some Jews fearing to walk in their own neighbourhoods.Also Parliament itself has been under attack from Islamists as well as such people being responsible for the attack on Labour MP Stephen Timms and the murder of Conservative MP David Amess.Further, Mike Freer MP for Finchley having a large Jewish population says he will not stand for re-election because of death threats.So let's not forget which groups in this country we should be wary of and which we should give our support and protection to.

John Hawkes ● 57d

He made a mistake by extending the commissioner's contract a few months before possibly forcing her out. We all make mistakes but he seems to have compounded this one doubling down.Second mistake possibly was not to keep the matter private and aggree between them that she could stay on whilst looking for a replacement, with agreed suitable compensation. Which is what happened anyway.Did he intentionally force her out or was it unintentional due to poor management?? I'm not sure, either way he must have known it would be a risk. The possible third mistake was to not to have a reform plan and not even a idea of replacement timescales.The expectation seems to be the plan would come from the police. No vision of what policing should be in London. Stick to the same old formula with minimal changes.Fourth mistake was to take ages haggling over the compensation which delayed her replacement.During this time crime went up and one assumes morale plummeted. And we still do not have a plan!My preference would be to split the force with local policing being the Mayors responsibility and the rest the home secretary's. The problem is now after years of turmoil we can not spend another couple of years doing this. An opportunity has been missed.We now have police guarding cameras. Guards 24/7 on bridges and people sat the whole day parked in restrictive area in a camera car, and other such nonsense.I really do not know why the so called liberals and Greens find it so difficult to accept the fact that you can not have a green city with high crime. They must live in a fantasy world.

Ed Robinson ● 57d

Entertaining though it may for the haters here, the thread was originally about Susan Hall's uselessness as mayoral candidate - and Paul Skully, a former Minister for London, has emphasised that by pointing out that choosing Hall as the Tory candidate was "not in London's interest."https://www.mylondon.news/news/former-tory-mayor-hopefuls-parting-28756867.ampSkully himself would have made a much better candidate, but of course the Tories went for Hall, whose suggestion for reducing pollution last year was to widen London's roads. She evidently doesn't understand that it would induce more traffic with the inevitable congestion, thus increasing pollution yet more. Genius she isn't.

Richard Carter ● 57d

Technically, Dick resigned.  Perhaps her problem was the obvious ambiguity of having to resolve the requirements of both the Mayor of London and, the person with most power, the Home Secretary? 

Michael Ixer ● 57d

Do check your Guardian before posting - 26 th August 2022 - “Khan made his decision after losing confidence in Dick’s …….”.  You can’t get away from Khan being responsible for the Met and the fact that many people are wary of visiting Central London.

Robert Wheeler ● 57d

Robert Wheeler,Really????  Remember this?Tensions between Priti Patel and No 10 over Met Commissioner Cressida DickPublished 2 February 2022https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60229473"......A Home Office spokesperson said: "In September 2021, following consultation with the Mayor of London, the home secretary extended the commissioner's term until April 2024."This extension was agreed in order to provide continuity and stability as we emerge from the coronavirus pandemic and deliver on our promise to recruit more police officers while driving down crime in the capital......."

Ivonne Holliday ● 57d

The Stop The War coalition currently protesting against Israel's campaign in Gaza is an off-shoot of the Socialist Workers Party. They are not actually against war, only some wars, specifically those conducted by the West. For example, Stop The War opposed Ukrainian resistance to the Russian invasion.

Steven Rose ● 57d

Philippa your accusations to me of a narrow view mirror your posts.  You ask “so who exactly is trying to cause division and inflame the situation” - therefore my question is why doesn’t Hamas release the hostages.

Robert Wheeler ● 57d

You fail to mention the difficulties of dealing with normal business during a pandemic when Cressida Dick was in place which was presumably a sensible reason to just extend a contract at that particular time.

Philippa Bond ● 57d

Wasn't the Labour party found to be institutionally racist by the EHRC?What seems to be lacking is any plan to address these issues. We know Khan doesn't have a plan as he has fumbled over the extension then the sacking of the last police commissioner.The current commissioner has a very difficult job at a very difficult time. Sadly, I think we have missed the boat for radical reform, and have to accept improvements are going to be slow.

Ed Robinson ● 57d

Presumably if Starmers lot get in they and Khan will have no one to pass the buck to.So we will then see if this numpty of a mayor really can sort out knife crime etc.

Andy Pike ● 57d

Perhaps you should look a little more closely at who is protesting on Saturdays since you seem to have such a narrow view.https://www.stopwar.org.uk/https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-jewish-bloc-marching-gaza-ceasefire-rejects-london-no-go-zone-claimhttps://cnduk.org/ceasefire-now-take-action-for-palestine/instead of paying so much attention to a right wing rabble- rouser.So who exactly is trying to cause division and inflame the situation???

Philippa Bond ● 57d

Passing the buck to the Home Secretary doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.  Sadiq was responsible for forcing Cressida Dick out, was fully involved in the selection process and approved the appointment of the current Commissioner.  Clearly he has the power to hold the Commissioner accountable for leadership, policy, culture if he chooses to do so. The buck stops with him.I look forward to being able to visit Central London on Saturdays without fear of abuse.

Robert Wheeler ● 58d

And it is also forgetting that the one really in charge is the Home Secretary."The Commissioner is accountable in law for exercising police powers and to the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) and is held to account for the delivery of policing by the Home Secretary and the Mayor of London. Both have a role in appointing the Commissioner, with the decision taken by the Home Secretary following consultation with the Mayor.The Home Secretary also has a specific role regarding the functions of the Met that go beyond policing London – for example, counter-terrorism policing and the national policing functions that the Met carries out."https://www.met.police.uk/police-forces/metropolitan-police/areas/about-us/about-the-met/governance/

Ivonne Holliday ● 58d

"what is your diagnosis of what is wrong and how matters should be put right ?"No need for my diagnosis, just read Louis Casey's report on the Met (you'll find it here: https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/media/downloads/met/about-us/baroness-casey-review/update-march-2023/baroness-casey-review-march-2023a.pdf).To summarise, the report said "We have found widespread bullying, discrimination, institutional homophobia, misogyny and racism, and other unacceptable behaviours which are a far cry from the high ethical standards the public rightly expects of its police officers," and it noted that these problems were first formally identified in 1999 in the Macpherson report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence but that "Many people have been raising grave concerns And in a facile attempt to attack Sadiq Khan you imagine that he has the power to sort out this appalling mess, when even the Commissioner denies Louise Casey's main finding!

Richard Carter ● 58d

Mr CarterHow bad do you believe is the overall behaviour of the Met ?If it so bad why has the Mayor Khan taken no steps to change matters just as he seems not to have taken any to reduce knife crime in parts of the Capital ? If you do not subscribe to the 'rotten apple theory', namely that in any large organisation there will always be individuals who abuse their position and should be removed from it, what is your diagnosis of what is wrong and how matters should be put right ?Just slagging off the Conservative Party is not sufficient.All of this is quite surprising as we have a very powerful (and vocal) Labour Mayor who oversees the Met.Of course the Met might have more of an opportunity to address the problems faced by women in the Capital if it did not have to police the tedious, smug and self-aggrandising pro-Palestine marches every Saturday; attendance at which for some is the equivalent of attending a Premier League football match.  Doubtless however, the problem will be quickly fixed in the early days of the expected labour Government.

John Hawkes ● 58d

It's infuriating that the Conservatives can't find a competent mayoral candidate to prevent Sadiq Khan holding a third term as London Mayor. Anyone but Khan?

Lucille Grant ● 58d