Forum Topics

Divide, separate, rule

"In the entire area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, the Israeli regime implements laws, practices and state violence designed to cement the supremacy of one group – Jews – over another – Palestinians. A key method in pursuing this goal is engineering space differently for each group.Jewish citizens live as though the entire area were a single space (excluding the Gaza Strip). The Green Line means next to nothing for them: whether they live west of it, within Israel’s sovereign territory, or east of it, in settlements not formally annexed to Israel, is irrelevant to their rights or status.Where Palestinians live, on the other hand, is crucial. The Israeli regime has divided the area into several units that it defines and governs differently, according Palestinians different rights in each. This division is relevant to Palestinians only. The geographic space, which is contiguous for Jews, is a fragmented mosaic for Palestinians:Palestinians who live on land defined in 1948 as Israeli sovereign territory (sometimes called Arab-Israelis) are Israeli citizens and make up 17% of the state’s citizenry. While this status affords them many rights, they do not enjoy the same rights as Jewish citizens by either law or practice – as detailed further in this paper. Roughly 350,000 Palestinians live in East Jerusalem, which consists of some 70,000 dunams [1 dunam = 1,000 square meters] that Israel annexed to its sovereign territory in 1967. They are defined as permanent residents of Israel a status that allows them to live and work in Israel without needing special permits, to receive social benefits and health insurance, and to vote in municipal elections. Yet permanent residency, unlike citizenship, may be revoked at any time, at the complete discretion of the Minister of the Interior. In certain circumstances, it can also expire. Although Israel never formally annexed the West Bank, it treats the territory as its own. More than 2.6 million Palestinian subjects live in the West Bank, in dozens of disconnected enclaves, under rigid military rule and without political rights. In about 40% of the territory, Israel has transferred some civilian powers to the Palestinian Authority (PA). However, the PA is still subordinate to Israel and can only exercise its limited powers with Israel’s consent. The Gaza Strip is home to about two million Palestinians, also denied political rights. In 2005, Israel withdrew its forces from the Gaza Strip, dismantled the settlements it built there and abdicated any responsibility for the fate of the Palestinian population. After the Hamas takeover in 2007, Israel imposed a blockade on the Gaza Strip that is still in place. Throughout all of these years, Israel has continued to control nearly every aspect of life in Gaza from outside.Israel accords Palestinians a different package of rights in every one of these units – all of which are inferior compared to the rights afforded to Jewish citizens. The goal of Jewish supremacy is advanced differently in every unit, and the resulting forms of injustice differ: the lived experience of Palestinians in blockaded Gaza is unlike that of Palestinian subjects in the West Bank, permanent residents in East Jerusalem or Palestinian citizens within sovereign Israeli territory. Yet these are variations on the fact that all Palestinians living under Israeli rule are treated as inferior in rights and status to Jews who live in the very same area."From:-https://www.btselem.org/publications/fulltext/202101_this_is_apartheid

David Ainsworth ● 20d7 Comments ● 18d

Hereditary MPs

Thank god they are getting rid of hereditary peers,the privilege the entitlements just stank too too much.Meanwhile back in the lower house there is Hamish Falconer son on Labour peer Charlie. But as Tory web site Guido Fawkes points out "these little connections are everywhere. Morgan McSweeney, the new Downing Street chief of staff, is married to Imogen Walker, the newly-elected Labour MP for Hamilton and Clyde Valley. Liam Conlon, who won the Beckenham and Penge seat for Labour in the election, is the son of Sue Gray. Richard Burgon is the nephew of Colin Burgon, a Labour MP from 1997-2010. Markus Campbell-Savours MP is the son of former Labour MP Dale Campbell-Savours. Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker and a former Labour MP, is the son of former Labour MP, Douglas Hoyle. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is the sister of Lewisham West MP, Ellie Reeves. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, is married to Ed Balls, the former MP and minister. Then there’s Hilary Benn (son of Tony) and Stephen Kinnock (son of Neil). There’s Valerie Vaz, who is the sister of former MP, Keith. It is all part of being in the ever-expanding Labour family.To be fair, this kind of thing is not confined to Labour. Plenty of Tories have relatives as former MPs, such as Bernard Jenkin (son of Patrick, who served as a minister under Margaret Thatcher) and Tom Tugendhat (whose uncle Christopher was an MP during the 1970s) – it is just that there are infinitely more on the Labour side of the house"

Hugh Thompson ● 22d12 Comments ● 21d

More Evidence Of Two-Tier Policing, Yvette?

Nigel Farage and Reform UK threatens to bring private prosecution against men accused of attacking cops at Manchester Airport saying failure to charge them yet is evidence of 'two-tier policing'The party has written to the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper over the incident at the airport in July, which sparked accusations of police brutality after officers were filmed kicking an unconscious man in the head while arresting him.The footage of an officer kicking and stamping on the head of Fahir Amaaz, 19, as he and his brother Muhammed Amaad, 25, were restrained by officers, went viral.But further footage, obtained by the Manchester Evening News, emerged days later which showed the immediate lead-up to the incident on July 23, including when two female police officers being hit to the ground before Mr Amaaz was incapacitated with a Taser.In a press conference today Mr Farage and his deputy Richard Tice questioned the delay in charging the men over the attack and said they would bring a private prosecution if it took too long. They are unhappy at the delay, when protesters convicted of crimes during racist riots following the Southport murders were dealt with quickly.An Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is under way into the incident and nobody has been charged.The letter to Ms Cooper, signed by the party's five MPs, said: 'We have genuine reason to be concerned that in fact the CPS is awaiting for the IOPC to find some fault with the police officers, which will then give them a reason not to progress charges against the assailants. This is totally unacceptable.'The letter added: 'We are therefore serving notice that if the CPS is not going to charge the assailants, then we will organise a private criminal prosecution against them. We have taken initial advice and have a legal team on standby to progress when required.'The letter added that the prosecution would be crowdfunded if necessary.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13932621/Nigel-Farage-Reform-UK-private-prosecution-Manchester-Airport.html?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubuttonI am really looking forward to hearing Cooper's response. She was very happy carping from the sidelines in Opposition but let's see how she copes doing the job for real?

Sue Hammond ● 23d1 Comments ● 23d

Trump - “We’re poisoning the blood of our country"

"If genealogy is destiny, as Donald Trump believes, then “poison in the blood” – a phrase Trump repeatedly uses – determines the fate of nations. By Trump’s logic, “blood” is the true and final measure. Trump, like Hitler, appears to classify people and countries by “blood” on a scale of their innate racial characteristics. Those features define the essence of nations, which are themselves delineated on a racial pyramid, with the purest and whitest, the most Aryan, at the pinnacle." "Trump has Hitler on the brain in unknowable ways until he lets his admiration seep out. “Well, but Hitler did some good things,” Trump remarked to his White House chief of staff, General John Kelly. “Well, what?” asked Kelly. “Well, [Hitler] rebuilt the economy,” Trump replied. Kelly was outraged. He told him, “Sir, you can never say anything good about the guy. Nothing.” Kelly reflected, “It’s pretty hard to believe he missed the Holocaust, though, and pretty hard to understand how he missed the 400,000 American GIs that were killed in the European theater,” Kelly told Jim Sciutto, the CNN correspondent. “But I think it’s more, again, the tough guy thing” – Trump’s insatiable need to playact.On 17 September, Trump launched a new theme with an old echo. He made a prophecy about who should be blamed if he is defeated in the election. “I’m not going to call this as a prediction, but in my opinion, the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss,” he said. Then, he repeated, “If I don’t win this election – and the Jewish people would really have a lot to do with that if that happens because if 40%, I mean, 60% of the people are voting for the enemy …” He complained that as “the most popular person in Israel” he was not “treated right” by American Jews.Trump’s Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner, his converted Jewish daughter Ivanka, his Jewish grandchildren, his Jewish adviser Stephen Miller, who is poised to be the implementer of the replacement theory and deportation of millions, including legal immigrants, and his Jewish supporters and donors are exempt from his condemnation of “the Jewish people”. Trump’s family ties don’t give him pause from his obsession. His “blood” makes them kosher. In the case of an inconvenient contradiction his narcissism prevails.Trump’s blame game is his version of the Dolchstosslegende – the stab in the back legend – that Germany did not lose the first world war in battle but was betrayed on the home front by Jews and leftists. Hitler traced his political awakening to his understanding of the Dolchstoss.Now, after all Trump has done for the Jews, after all he has done for Israel, “the Jewish people” are ungrateful. Too many of them support “the enemy”. Trump is warming up his myth of a scapegoat."By Sidney Blumenthal"Donald Trump’s Hitlerian logic is no mistake"https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/07/donald-trumps-hitlerian-logic-is-no-mistake"Israelis broadly pick former President Donald Trump over Vice President Kamala Harris as better for Israel's security and in turn favor Trump for the U.S. presidency, albeit with sharp political divisions, a national survey by Langer Research Associates and PORI (Public Opinion Research Israel) finds.Fifty-eight percent of Israelis in the survey, conducted in September, said Trump would be better for Israel's security, vs. 20% for Harris. If they had a vote in the U.S. election, Israelis said they'd pick Trump over Harris by a similar 54%-24%, with the rest taking a pass."ABC News 4/10/24

David Ainsworth ● 23d0 Comments ● 23d

Farage ~ Wants Urgent Debate

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle is under pressure to call an emergency debate on Monday on Labour's surrender of the Chagos Islands after Nigel Farage complained that the 'damaging capitulation' occurred while MPs were away from Westminster.The Reform UK leader's move comes as diplomatic sources revealed Sir Keir ­Starmer's humiliating handover of the Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius, a close ally of China, had been rushed through before a potential Donald Trump victory in next month's US Presidential election.Trump's allies have complained that the deal represents a strategic coup for Beijing.The move – plans for which were first revealed in The Mail on Sunday last year – have triggered fresh speculation about the future of the Falkland islands and Gibraltar after the Prime Minister refused to guarantee that no other British Overseas Territories would be given away.Argentina's foreign minister Diana Mondino said of the Chagos deal: 'We welcome this step in the right direction and the end to outdated practices. With concrete actions and not empty rhetoric, we will recover full sovereignty of Las Malvinas.'In a letter sent this weekend to Foreign Secretary David Lammy and copied to Sir Lindsay, Mr Farage wrote: 'The strategic importance of the Chagos Islands to our nation and to our most important ally, America, is well known... The future of the Chagos Islands was announced when the House was not sitting, meaning that members of all parties remain in the dark about so many aspects of this decision.https://mol.im/a/13927957

Sue Hammond ● 25d3 Comments ● 25d

Rosie Duffield's Resignation Letter

"I can no longer stay a Labour MP under your management of the party, and this letter is my notice that I wish to resign the Labour Party whip with immediate effect.Although many "last straws" have led to my decision, my reason for leaving now is the programme of policies you seem determined to stick to, however unpopular they are with the electorate and your own MPs. You repeat often that you will make the "tough decisions" and that the country is "all in this together". But those decisions do not directly affect any one of us in Parliament. They are cruel and unnecessary, and affect hundreds of thousands of our poorest, most vulnerable constituents.This is not what I was elected to do. It is not even wise politics, and it certainly is not "the politics of service". I did not vote for you to lead our party for reasons I won't describe in detail here. But, as someone elevated immediately to a shadow cabinet position without following the usual path of honing your political skills on the backbenches, you had very little previous political footprint. It was therefore unclear what your political passions, drive or direction might be as the leader of the Labour Party, a large movement of people united by a desire for social justice and support for those most in need. You also made the choice not to speak up once about the Labour Party's problems with antisemitism during your time in the shadow cabinet, leaving that to backbenchers, including new MPs such as me. Since you took office as Leader of the Opposition you have used various heavy-handed management tactics but have never shown what most experienced backbenchers would recognise as true or inspiring leadership. You have never regularly engaged with your own backbench MPs, many of whom have been in Parliament far longer than you, and some of whom served in the previous Labour government. You have chosen neither to seek our individual political opinions, nor learn about our constituency experiences, nor our specific or collective areas of political knowledge. We clearly have nothing you deem to be of value. Your promotion of those with no proven political skills and no previous parliamentary experience but who happen to be related to those close to you, or even each other, is frankly embarrassing. In particular, the recent treatment of Diane Abbott, now Mother of the House, was deeply shameful and led to comments from voters across the political spectrum. A woman of her political stature and place in history is deserving of respect and support, regardless of political differences. As Prime Minister, your managerial and technocratic approach, and lack of basic politics and political instincts, have come crashing down on us as a party after we worked so hard, promised so much, and waited a long fourteen years to be mandated by the British public to return to power. Since the change of government in July, the revelations of hypocrisy have been staggering and increasingly outrageous. I cannot put into words how angry I and my colleagues are at your total lack of understanding about how you have made us all appear. How dare you take our longed-for victory, the electorate's sacred and precious trust, and throw it back in their individual faces and the faces of dedicated and hardworking Labour MPs?! The sleaze, nepotism and apparent avarice are off the scale. I am so ashamed of what you and your inner circle have done to tarnish and humiliate our once proud party. Someone with far-above-average wealth choosing to keep the Conservatives' two-child limit to benefit payments which entrenches children in poverty, while inexplicably accepting expensive personal gifts of designer suits and glasses costing more than most of those people can grasp — this is entirely undeserving of holding the title of Labour Prime Minister. Forcing a vote to make many older people iller and colder while you and your favourite colleagues enjoy free family trips to events most people would have to save hard for — why are you not showing even the slightest bit of embarrassment or remorse? I now have no confidence in your commitment to deliver the so-called "change" you promised during the General Election campaign and the changes we have been striving for as a political party for over a decade. My values are those of a democratic socialist Labour Party and I have been elected three times to act on those values on behalf of my constituents. Canterbury made history when its voters elected their first woman, and only non-Conservative, MP since the seat was created in the thirteenth century. My constituents elected an independent-minded MP who vowed to put constituency before party, and to keep tackling the issues that most affect us here — Brexit fallout, funding for our universities, our desperately struggling East Kent NHS, dire housing situation, repeated sewage pollution and protecting our vital green spaces. I am confident that I can continue to do so as an independent MP guided by my core Labour values. Sadly, the Labour Party has never shown any interest in my wonderful constituency in the seven years that I have been in Parliament. But I am proud of my community and will continue to serve them to the best of my ability. My constituents care deeply about social issues such as child poverty and helping those who cannot help themselves. I will continue to uphold those values as I pledged to do when I first stood before them for election in 2017. As someone who joined a trade union in my first job, at seventeen, Labour has always been my natural political home. I was elected as a single mum, a former teaching assistant in receipt of tax credits. The Labour Party was formed to speak for those of us without a voice, and I stood for election partly because I saw decisions about the lives of those like me being made in Westminster by only the most privileged few. Right now, I cannot look my constituents in the eye and tell them that anything has changed. I hope to be able to return to the party in the future, when it again resembles the party I love, putting the needs of the many before the greed of the few."Wow!! Don't hold back Rosie!! 😹

Sue Hammond ● 31d4 Comments ● 31d

What are Labour's policy commitments fir this Parliament ?

Can anyone list or point me to a list of the policies that Starmer has promised the Labour Party will legislate for and commit to delivering in this Parliament ?By this I mean policies that have some measurable base and target and are not just woolly platitudes such as Miliband's 'tackling the climate crisis that imperils our world'.Though to be fair to him he did make a measurable promise that we would have 'zero carbon electricity by 2030' which would then save families “up to £300” on their bills per year'.So that's one to watch out for.There will also be a 'The Railway Services Bill - bringing our railways back into public ownership.'Now that will raise a cheer from every £65,000 a year (plus pension and other benefits) train driver.Also especially for their leader Mick Lynch whose annual renumeration package is worth some £124,886 -  a £89,962 gross salary, Employers' NI contributions of £11,590 and pension contributions of £23,334.Will he take a pay cut as he will be negotiating, not with the wicked Tories, but with the Party which shares his political viewpoint and which he supports and is thus more likely to give him what he asks for ?An improvement in service will doubtless result from this Bill with performance targets set, monitored and published one hopes.Furthermore we have been promised an improvement in the NHS presumably in terms of efficiency and outputs.Again we should look for targets and measured achievements.Though no member of the Government has any experience in working in business or industry, one hopes they will adopt many of their performance measurement approaches.

John Hawkes ● 35d12 Comments ● 33d

Is Starmer Unfit For The Job?

There's a very insightful article about Starmer written by Peter Hitchens in the Mail on Sunday. It is behind a paywall so I have copied it below. Look away now if you think Starmer a top man in the top job ...Can it be that the Great Prosecutor Starmer is a colourless empty nobody unfit for the top?Is it possible that Sir Keir Starmer simply isn't up to the job the Labour Party tried so hard to get for him? Anyone who observes modern politics knows that many who now struggle to the top of the greasy pole are deeply unwonderful. I am always amused by journalists who boast of their conversations with 'ministers', as if such people are especially intelligent, informed or talented. Most of them are dullard careerists who hope for an easy route to wealth and status.How could Sir Keir, for instance, not have realised that his childlike readiness to accept shiny gifts was a danger childlike readiness to accept shiny gifts was a danger? Honestly, free suits for him and free dresses for his wife? VIP seats at concerts and football matches? This would be a very cheap price to accept for your soul, if you thought you had one, as he doesn't. Perhaps the free glasses failed to improve his vision and made him unable to spot approaching disaster.We are always told he is the great prosecutor, but really, is heading a staff of trained lawyers, with all the prestige and money of the state on your side, so hard? I'd be more impressed if he were a penniless defence counsel who won his cases against the odds.I've many times drawn attention to Sir Keir's past as a wooden-headed, hard-Leftist, revolutionary dogmatist. He doesn't actually disown this past, though nobody has ever properly questioned him about it. He's still an atheist, perhaps the flattest and most boring world-view known to man. It is empty of hope or depth, based on the view that the universe is nothing but a cosmic car crash in which nothing can therefore matter very much.Amazingly (to me anyway) he confessed before the election that he does not have a favourite book or a favourite poem. Some people say he was afraid of getting into trouble if he revealed such things. But I believe him. He acts at all times as if he has no imagination, and no poetry. It is in the imagination that we work out how our actions will affect others, and with poetry we surprise ourselves by finding out what really moves us.We also know he has an unfavourite work of art, a painting of Margaret Thatcher that so got on his nerves that he had it put in some (as yet unidentified) boxroom. This is in the same class as the leaden decision of his equally colourless Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, to tolerate no paintings in the State Room in 11 Downing Street, except pictures of or by women.When he felt safe to do so, he used to call for the abolition of the monarchy, another crude and unpoetic opinion. Now that this position would lose him votes, he mumbles vaguely nice things about the monarch and accepts various honours from the Crown. But I haven't heard him say he actually prefers a constitutional monarchy to a republic. He has also followed the Blairite practice of displaying Union Jacks everywhere, in the hope that this will fool people into thinking Labour is a traditionalist, patriotic party. But what do you think he really thinks?And this is why he is making such a mess. He has long-term dogmatic aims – his Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, for example, is pursuing those with vigour and spite. But he only ever wanted to be Chief Commissar and Chief Bureaucrat. The ancient splendours of Downing Street, as the King's First Minister, as heir of Pitt, Wellington, Disraeli, Gladstone, Lloyd George and Churchill, mean little to him. He is an uninteresting man, scuttling about in vast echoing halls and chambers built for far bigger people.https://mol.im/a/13876179

Sue Hammond ● 38d13 Comments ● 33d