2009 starts badly

protests in front of israeli embassy, south kensington.
Israeli secret agent with a GSD(just kidding)

Attachments

IMG_0120.JPG

IMG_0127.JPG

IMG_0128--8589707700580869558.JPG

IMG_0129--8589707699954932058.JPG

IMG_0130.JPG

IMG_0134.JPG

Just what has that lot got to do with bikes m8?

i rode bike to join the protest and took some photos

Oh! :hehe:

Look around the forum and you’ll find that half the topics have sod all to do with bikes. In fact they constitute some of the best threads on here…:slight_smile:

Hi BBS. Didn’t have you down as someone in favour of the proliferation of nuclear weapons?

stop the rockets , stop the rockets.

just to give both sides, HAMAS are a brutal group who would stop at nothing to end Isreal.

I dont like what Isreal is doing but they want to defend their people so what lengths would you go to to protect your family?

Oh I thought it was Westminster Parking Fee protests again:D

nuclear proliferation is probably the only way to solve middle east problem

crikey I joined thje campaign for no parking fees for bikes, didnt know I was getting into nuclear proliferation…looks can be so deceptive…

only cure for middle east is Armaggedon…not sure which one is god though…

nuclear deterrence can prevent war and mass killing, not necessarily leads to Armaggedon, as history has shown

Gaza is one of the most densley populated tracts of land - it’s a fifth of the size of London and the population is made up of refugees kicked off of their land by Zionist settlers from the United states and Europe - settlers who felt they had more of a right to the land than the people who have lived there for thousands of years (the Palestinians) because they (the Zionist Israelis) say God gave it to them (so who are the real fanatics?) extreme groups like Hamas are a product of the historical injustice done to the Palestinian people which dates back to 1948 (and which the UK is largely responsible for - google the Balfour declaration) and the United States which keeps Israel armed with the weapons that it regularly uses to kill large numbers of civilians - most recently in Lebanon and now Gaza (so who has most blood on their hands?) - any people treated as badly as the Palestinians have been treated would produce groups like Hamas - the only thing that will put an end to groups like Hamas is justice for the Palestinians - the right of return to their homes and land that they were robbed of 60 years ago.The UK (which has a lot of the historical responsibility for this mess) and the United States (which keeps Israel afloat) have the power and influence to put this situation right by granting Palestinians natural justice - the right of return to their land - the fact that this injustice has been allowed to stand for so long is a bloody disgrace.

i agree there are always 2 sides but there is a line which has been crossed…to defend your family does not consist of bombing every place you think attackers MAY be hiding with no care to weather its a bunker in the woods or a mosque next to a block of flats and a school. the uk and america sit back even though it is our training and weapons funding that has ultimately given isreal this power trip. and isnt it funny, if america wants oil in iraq they will take over and set up a political base for the country to make itself heard…but if they have no interest, as in palestines case, they will leave them with no leg to stand on and no where to go for help while they are bombed non-stop by a country they supplied with weapons

Not strictly true.

The 1917 Balfour Declaration was an agreement in principle to the formation of a Jewish “national home” (not a state, the word “state” was deliberately not used as it was never envisaged that a Zionist state should be created) in Palestine but it was made clear that this should not interfere with the civil or religious rights of non Jewish people already living there. Nothing was done about it though, as far as I am aware, apart from an increase in movement of Jewish people to that region. Straight after WW2 the UN attempted to create a partition with Jews on one side, Arabs on the other. The UK position then was that Palestine should be annexed by Jordan, and the UK attempted to boost Arab negotiating power by uniting it by creating the Arab League. Britain by then had virtually no political power at all in the region.

Unfortunately we took heavy losses at this time at the hands of Jewish terrorists such as 91 killed in the King David Hotel bombing in 1946. David Ben Gurion’s Haganah Jewish terrorist organisation obtained serious funding and armaments from sympathisers in the USA, and the post WW2 British Army couldn’t compete with that (as the US would not give us financial support to fight Jewish insurgents, and as a country we were bankrupt as a result of WW2) so we had to pull out, then Gurion created Israel by force by winning the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. So the answer to the question of what created - and maintains - the nation of Israel, is: American money.

With regard to the current conflict, as both Palestine and Israel are both bankrolled by other countries, those countries have a responsibility to force them to resolve their differences around the negotiating table or threaten to withdraw funding.

(duplicate post pl delete)

what Israel has been doing all the time is clearly in breach of the Balfour declaration, Balfour asked Zionists to respect the religious and political rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine

as eezyrida pointed out, Britain, the superpower at that time (Belfour letter) only permitted Jews to set up their nation’s “home” instead of a state. it was the later superpower the United States made the Jewish State possible after the War.

Absolutely BBS - but I think that the British/Balfour were being dishonest - they knew that giving the go-ahead for a Zionist ‘National Home’ in Palestine would end up in a state - Balfour was just letting Britain off the ‘historical hook’ by employing diplomatic double-speak.

Nice post Eezyrider - Intelligent, well made and sticking to the facts - which is appreciated - but with respect - the use of “National Home” was surely a diplomatic euphemism for “State” peddled out by an Imperialistic British govt. with hundreds of years experience in the use of weasel words and diplomatic double speak to confuse and bamboozle it’s victims - in this case the Palestinians - I mean it’s not as if we have to look back in history for examples of this - how about the smoke and mirrors manufactured to justify the invasion of Iraq for crying out loud.

Balfour was not an idiot and knew exactly what would happen if you give the green light to a militant political movement (the Zionists) to pursue their agenda - the aim of the Zionists in creating a state in Palestine were explicit - Balfour was well aware of this.

To expand on this theme - how can support for the establishment of a “National Home” by extrapolation not result in the establishment of a state? Imagine for a moment that you live in a country controlled by a large Imperialist power that decides to agree in principle to the establishment of a “National Home” for a people on another continent within the borders of England - with respect mate I don’t reckon you would be worrying about the exact phraseology of the document!

The British troops that died fighting Zionist terrorists were also victims of government lies and bad faith - as some of the relatives of British (and U.S. soldiers) who have died recently in Iraq will testify.

Any right thinking person should be disgusted by the crime committed against the Jewish people in Europe by the Nazi regime of 1933 to 1945. But the Palestinian people should not have to bear the burden (the loss of their country) for crimes committed by others against others in another continent.

agree with Sid, “national home” probably was meant to be a sovereign state. But i do not know enough history, don’t know any autonomy solution was ever discussed in that context.