Tony Benn slams BBC on air for "capitulating to Israeli pressure"

ILW

The_White_Horse wrote: »

If you can't see that Hamas is a terrorist organisation, then there is clearly no hope for peace in the middle east. If Hamas had an airforce, then they would just commit even more acts of terrorism. There stated aim is the total destruction of Israel. Very hard to negotiate peace with that.

Can you define terrorism?

CLAPTON

The issue isn't only about the rights and wrongs or who are terrorists and who are not.

Hamas is committed to the complete elimination of the Israeli state and Israel is committed to its preservation.

That implies a lack of negotiating room.

The_White_Horse

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition

redux

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the BBC could barely me more pro-Palestinian if it tried. This morning their Gaza correspondent must have said "dead babies" at least 15 times in 40 seconds.

Perhaps you exaggerate a little, and ...

A recent BBC article mentions a house where 9 or 10 members of a family died, and includes: "Israel's Haaretz newspaper said the strike appeared to
have mistakenly hit a neighbour's house."

In your opinion, who is distorting this story, BBC, Haaretz, or perhaps neither?

ILW

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition

So by that definition, it could equally apply to both sides.

sweetpea26

Its a very tragic situation where the two parties will not give in and it is like in all wars, the innocent suffer.

Israel is backed by America its the foothold they need into the Middle East so they will continue to support their actions. Hamas have blood on their hands too. They know what will happen to their own civilian people when they attack Israel but they benefit from the media coverage of innocent children dying.

They fire rockets from behind Christian homes into Israel and Israel fires back to where the rocket originated from. They don't care about the people of their own country just as long as they get what they want. We don't hear this on the news do we????

One is as bad as the other.

I think we should do our best to help them by contributing to charities to help those without food shelter etc.

The_White_Horse

ILW wrote: »

So by that definition, it could equally apply to both sides.

absolutely not. Israel is a nation state defending attacks from outside its borders.

No other nation in the world would show the restraint that Israel has - if London was hit by over 500 rockets this year alone, do you think the UK Govt would take no action???? Look at the action they took following the IRA bombings.

System

It's a tragic situation, but hardly an unpredictable one.
When they founded Israel in 1948 didn't anyone wonder what the consequences would be of defining an area as the inalianable homeland of people who hadn't lived there for a thousand years, and was already inhabited by other long-established people?
They chose to base their country on inevitable and everlasting conflict with their neighbours and co-inhabitants.

ILW

The_White_Horse wrote: »

absolutely not. Israel is a nation state defending attacks from outside its borders.

No other nation in the world would show the restraint that Israel has - if London was hit by over 500 rockets this year alone, do you think the UK Govt would take no action???? Look at the action they took following the IRA bombings.

They did not order airstrikes on Dublin.

sweetpea26

The_White_Horse wrote: »

absolutely not. Israel is a nation state defending attacks from outside its borders.

No other nation in the world would show the restraint that Israel has - if London was hit by over 500 rockets this year alone, do you think the UK Govt would take no action???? Look at the action they took following the IRA bombings.

There is quite difference. The IRA were not sanctioned/funded/authorised by the Irish Government and had no support from the said government. There is absolutely no comparison.