Jump to content
Message added by Administrator,

This is a highly emotive topic. Please debate respectfully. Avoid making provocative statements, personal attacks and accusations against other forum members. 

You will be restricted from posting in this topic if you fail to abide by this.

Recommended Posts

From the BBC news today "The Isreali military has told Palestinians in northern Gaza to leave for their own safety and has now begun telling people in the southern city of Khan Younis, where many thousands of people who have fled northern Gaza are, that they must now also leave "

It opens up a question of what the end game looks like, once the IDF are satisfied Hamas is gone, will they return Gaza to the Palestinians and help them rebuild ? Or will a tranche of land be retained as a buffer between the two states ? 

What happens next will be key to future relations between the two States and the Arab world. 

Edited by Spartacus
On 16/11/2023 at 16:39, shoebox said:

According to BBC,Hayes did NOT vote for ceasefire. When it comes to making any decision, she sits on the fence. LTNs, CPZs now Gaza. She has no shame and won’t be getting my vote any more.

IMG_5477.png

This was already discussed on the thread.

As to the comment re "virtue signalling" on a previous post - I'm speechless.

Virtue signalling to who?

I went on the march because I feel strongly about the issue.

I feel strongly about the people equating Hamas with innocent Palestinians who have nothing to do with Hamas. 

For me, that  calls to mind  the people who say that those who disagree with the government in Israel are anti Semitic.

I don't know much about some aspects of all this. But I feel strongly about thousands of people, including thousands of children,  being killed who have nothing to do with all this except that they have the misfortune to be currently living in Palestine.

I went on the march to stand up and be counted. There isn't anything else I can do about this terrible situation except to do that. To be part of a gathering of thousands of people calling for a cease fire. To be part of a gathering of thousands of people showing their feelings and views to our (mostly)  pathetic politicians.

My daughter and her husband came to the march  from Oxford. They were there because it was important to them to be there. They weren't "virtue signalling" either.

And of course there are many other terrible situations in the world, individual and collective. I can't do something about all of them. Each of us can only do what we can when we are moved to, and a lot of people were moved to show their feelings about the present plight of the people living in Palestine and to try, however faint the hope of being heard, to do something about it.

Edited by Sue
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
On 16/11/2023 at 17:10, HeadNun said:

I think Mal is saying that I'm the one doing the mocking. 

I just think that picking a side with something like this is not only futile, but displays some level of privileged, Western grandiosity, I'm afraid. It's very easy to pick a 'right side of history' when it really doesn't directly affect you, and brush aside all the ugly, gnarly undercurrents that come with any subject like this. 

People die in war and genocide all the time, and have done for time immemorial. I just don't understand why white, middle class Londoners choose to identify with the Palestinian struggle over any other. 

Why? Because innocent children are being bombed and killed. Whether you like it or not, whats happening is wrong and majority of people around the world deep down know it. Hence the massive protests. You can say or think what you want but there are some fundamentals truths in life that can't be changed by man. Wrong is wrong and truth is truth. Its simple. The voice of the people is the voice of god.

"As for apartheid in SA, yes I would have marched against that. But it was a completely different situation" Completely different as in they were not muslims you mean?

  • Like 1
2 minutes ago, Viciam said:

Why? Because innocent children are being bombed and killed. Whether you like it or not, whats happening is wrong and majority of people around the world deep down know it. Hence the massive protests. You can say or think what you want but there are some fundamentals truths in life that can't be changed by man. Wrong is wrong and truth is truth. Its simple. The voice of the people is the voice of god.

"As for apartheid in SA, yes I would have marched against that. But it was a completely different situation" Completely different as in they were not muslims you mean?

Nowhere have I said that what is happening in Palestine is right and nowhere have I denied what is happening.  You're missing my point. 

And no, not because they are Muslims. I studied Islam at uni (and Judaism), was raised in my early years in a Muslim country (very happily), have Muslim friends, so don't even try going there...

But one kind of apartheid is no worse than another and if you're inclined to compare and rate them against eachother, then you're the one who needs to have a think about whether race has anything to do with it. 

On 16/11/2023 at 17:56, HeadNun said:

Mal, I would never, ever go on a march like this. Not in a million years. Firstly, I don't want to be on a march where there is one single Hamas / Jihad sympathiser, or an ignorant, left wing student wearing a keffiyeh, who's just jumped on a righteous bandwagon. I don't want to go on a march, the very idea of which, might scare the living daylights of a Jewish child who suffers from generational trauma and doesn't understand why everyone suddenly hates them (I know there are Jews on these marches too). 

It is my opinion that many people go on marches to feel better about themselves and boost their own saviour complex. A lot of them are angry about other things and these marches just provide a channel for that anger. Maybe I'm wrong. I prefer to stay at home, dig out my history books and reflect on how these situations came to be.

I've seen the aftermath of ethnic cleansing, famine, abject poverty, disease, the fallout from violent inter-tribal clashes. One thing I've learnt is that there is nothing I can do about it, other than to be grateful. 

As for apartheid in SA, yes I would have marched against that. But it was a completely different situation. 

"It is my opinion that many people go on marches to feel better about themselves and boost their own saviour complex. A lot of them are angry about other things and these marches just provide a channel for that anger. Maybe I'm wrong. I prefer to stay at home, dig out my history books and reflect on how these situations came to be. "

So you base your decisions and thoughts on books and things you've read (thats where you'll mostly find propadanda in the firtst place) rather than going out, meeting and talking to people and getting to know their side of the story so you can discover the truth. You've made up your mind and you're 100% convinved you're right by staying locked indoors and reading things online and in books.

The fact is, 13,000 people have been killed, more than half are children. And I also read one of your posts say, this is not genocide. Who are you kidding?

  • Like 2
4 minutes ago, HeadNun said:

Nowhere have I said that what is happening in Palestine is right and nowhere have I denied what is happening.  You're missing my point. 

And no, not because they are Muslims. I studied Islam at uni (and Judaism), was raised in my early years in a Muslim country (very happily), have Muslim friends, so don't even try going there...

But one kind of apartheid is no worse than another and if you're inclined to compare and rate them against eachother, then you're the one who needs to have a think about whether race has anything to do with it. 

Please go out and open your mind by talking to people rather than staying locked in your house and letting the dark corners of your mind convince you otherwise. Kids got bombed and murdered. Its simple to understand. There's no ifs and buts in this situation and there is no justification.

On a basic fundamental human level...wrong was done for whatever reason. The reason doesn't matter. All that matters is that it was indeed done and is being done now.

Evil prevails because the good are silent. There's no neutral stance on this issue. You're either with the truth or the wrong. Oh and btw, staying neutral is siding with the wrong, just in case you're a politician and think you can play both sides.
 

  • Like 3

I also want to say that I was horrified to find a detailed description of a particular atrocity in a post on this forum. 

I go out of my way to avoid seeing or hearing anything like this, for the sake of my mental health, because it stays in my mind for a very long time and causes me great distress.

I don't watch or listen to the news. I read it online where I can choose what to read without having something like this  suddenly thrust at me before I have the chance to turn it off 

What exactly did you think you were gaining by posting  that on here, HeadNun? 

  • Like 3

If one hears the apologists for the war on children in Gaza, they use this type of detailed description as an excuse or rationale for killing children, even descriptions that are not necessarily verified.

Poetry is more powerful than crass descriptions - not mine, I’m no poet..

“I wish children didn't die. I wish they would be temporarily elevated to the skies until the war ends. Then they would return home safe, and when their parents would ask them: "where were you?", they would say: "we were playing in the clouds"

Edited by heartblock
  • Like 1
13 hours ago, Sue said:

I also want to say that I was horrified to find a detailed description of a particular atrocity in a post on this forum. 

I go out of my way to avoid seeing or hearing anything like this, for the sake of my mental health, because it stays in my mind for a very long time and causes me great distress.

I don't watch or listen to the news. I read it online where I can choose what to read without having something like this  suddenly thrust at me before I have the chance to turn it off 

What exactly did you think you were gaining by posting  that on here, HeadNun? 

Sue, I'm sorry if outlining some of Hamas' acts of barbarism upset you - what those men did is indeed traumatising to learn of. What I was trying to achieve by posting it was to underline the extent Hamas is willing to go to exterminate Jews (not to upset anyone). As I've previously said, Hamas has been glossed over in this thread, right from its inception a few years ago now. 

I would have thought that anyone aligning themselves with a cause and picking a side would have made sure they'd armed themselves with all the facts, even the most unpalatable ones. 

People here berate Starmer, Sunak, UK politicians who cannot make a blind bit of difference in this situation (only the Qataris and Americans can make a dent and when there is a ceasefire and hostage exchange, it will be thanks to those backchannels, not public outrage in the west).

What I'd like to see is people (of all denominations) marching against Hamas, the leader of which himself recently said that they need the blood of (Gazan) women, children and elderly to awaken their revolutionary spirit and revive the cause. 

As I think Spartacus pointed out here some time ago, Hamas is just recruiting more martyrs to its cause by inviting the Israeli invasion and you could argue that marching for peace possibly aids Hamas' bid for universal sympathy. 

Again, this is not to in any way undermine the bloodshed and tragedy in Gaza and, to a lesser extent, in the West Bank. I read, with a heavy heart every night, the diary of a palestinian stuck in Gaza, which is published in the Guardian. 

My original points were always about the true motivations of those who march and picking a side in a far from binary situation of right and wrong. 

 

  • Agree 1

HeadNun, have you actually read what other people have posted on here?

Could you perhaps respond to their points one by one, instead of making generalisations and assumptions?

Eg what exactly do you mean by "the true motivations of those who march"?

I posted above about why I marched, and I find your wording "true motivations" extremely offensive.

  • Like 3
51 minutes ago, Sue said:

HeadNun, have you actually read what other people have posted on here?

Could you perhaps respond to their points one by one, instead of making generalisations and assumptions?

Eg what exactly do you mean by "the true motivations of those who march"?

I posted above about why I marched, and I find your wording "true motivations" extremely offensive.

Sue. I have read everything that everyone has posted, several times. Right from the beginning of the thread. Over two years ago. I have also responded to every single point directed at me (including the thinly veiled accusation of racism against Muslims). 

If you had read my posts properly, you would know what I mean by the 'true motivations' of people who march - I've outlined it very clearly and haven't minced my words. 

No need to get extremely offended, it's just a debate. But I'm done with it now, so I'll crawl back under my rock and let you all crack on, without raining on the parade. 

Headnun, the footage you refer to has been questioned and is possibly from a different event a few years ago in different country. (Subject to verification)  

During the great wars, negative media atrocity propaganda campaigns were employed by both sides,  One such story was that German soldiers were deliberately mutilating Belgian babies by cutting off their hands, in some versions even eating them. Eyewitness accounts told of having seen a similarly mutilated baby. (False)

Care should always be taken to verify something before posting it as factual.

 

32 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Headnun, the footage you refer to has been questioned and is possibly from a different event a few years ago in different country. (Subject to verification)  

During the great wars, negative media atrocity propaganda campaigns were employed by both sides,  One such story was that German soldiers were deliberately mutilating Belgian babies by cutting off their hands, in some versions even eating them. Eyewitness accounts told of having seen a similarly mutilated baby. (False)

Care should always be taken to verify something before posting it as factual.

 

Hi Spartacus, it's not footage I'm referring to. It's the testimony of an Israeli morgue worker. She gave her account to the Daily Mail and other media outlets on October 20th. It's of course possible she was lying, but I'm sure that reputable journalists would have done their due diligence before filing, (but who knows!! I'm in no doubt that there's propaganda coming from both sides and I too try to fact-check what I can). 

But I'm also in no doubt about the barbaric levels of atrocity committed by Hamas, as Israel invited journalists from around the world to view UGC filmed by Hamas and the IDF, during the attacks. 

 

Edited by HeadNun
change words

Aaah the Daily Mail... Aaah footage.. a morgue worker.....well that sounds like it simply must be an actual bona fide, truthful, factoid....

here are some more IDF factoids.....

The ‘calendar', a paper on a wall of a hospital that they said was a ‘list of terrorist names’ – Those who read Arabic recognised it as having the days of the week written on it.

They said they targeted a car with “terrorists” in Lebanon. It emerged that the vehicle had three little girls, their mother and grandmother. Only the mother survived the shelling.

They showed a video of a nurse in a hospital in Gaza saying Hamas is holding people as human shields. That video was debunked as fake and that the woman was a Mexican-Israeli actor.

And of course Shereen - RIP, murdered by Israel.

  • Like 3
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Administrator

The last few posts have been removed.

Please, no more comparisons or rankings of the Palestine situation vs historical atrocities. Its further provocation in an already contentious topic and not relevant to the debate.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • 5 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Whilst Israel has the right to defend itself, with the ICJ today issuing a dramatic ruling, ordering Israel to "immediately halt its military offensive in Rafah" and Israel signalling it would ignore any order to halt its operation,  are they in danger of losing all support for their plight and turning the world against them? 

It does feel like the suffering they went through over the centuries is just being applied to their rivals for land and you would have hoped they would have been more sympathetic to others plight.

Whilst the actions if Hamas were wrong, it doesn't justify what is going on to the people of Gaza at the moment. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...