hsom1

Don’t often start a conversation but doing this thread to articulate views on masks so I can just quote it in future discussions 1/

@mjj122 @innesdoig @SimonCalder That is the most important point. This is not about getting across the border but being allowed to board at the airport by an airline who are fined for any mistakes. Inept from UK Government as normal, not that Schengen is any better!

@innesdoig @SimonCalder If you can get to an immigration checkpoint at a UK airport, it likely can be. The trouble is that the airline might not let you on the plane to fly to the UK.

For the past month, the rule that UK dual nationals cannot obtain an ETA permit with a foreign passport has caused immense stress for many people who live abroad but happen to be British citizens as well. For most, the Dublin Dodge provides an alternative. independent.co.uk/travel/news-an…

@OperHealAmerica Nor do Christians or Jews you ignorant twat

Muslims do not believe that Jesus is God. It’s that simple. Don’t overcomplicate it.

@retrofootballnw Admiral was King when I was a kid. Some great designs! Coventry, Dundee and Wales pinstripes (dodgy chocolate brownCoventry away excepted)

Very soon people will be leaking images of the new shirts for next season. Back in June 1978 on the BBC, The Risk Business looked at the growing popularity of replica kits. Some beautiful examples in the clip too.

@faisalislam @LucyGoBag He is lying! It is fantasy. Why are the markets so gullible?

Gilt yields and other government bond yields actually falling off a cliff down about 25 basis points in about 10 mins… after Trump posts “very good and productive conversations” regarding “complete and total resolution” to hostilities in the Middle East….

@OfSymbols @jhansonradio Quite a few of them started off in this way back in the 80s. Piers Morgan being most obvious

@jhansonradio Do you ever wonder if part of why British media is broke is that all the political commentators are really just wannabe gossip columnists?

Chappell Roan seems horrendous. If you’re newly famous and treat fans in this way, and then issue a non-apology whilst lying in bed… yep, the problem is you.

@simon_schama @realzoestrimpel @mummahlee I get more offended by war criminals and genocide but suppose that is the case when you are not an hypocritical amoral racist twat like you

@realzoestrimpel @mummahlee Am so deeply sorry Zoe absolutely horrifying- can you bear to write it up somewhere?

In Margate. My cheeks are red. I am shaking. I popped into an exhibition that turned out to be the insane fever dream of an artist called Matthew Collins: ‘Drawings Against Genocide.’ The exhibition is described as ‘drawings… raising consciousness about hell…. Israel is the pure encapsulation of it. Zionism is this terror state’s ruling ideology.’ Shocked by the use of Nazi imagery - the room is full of the Star of David pasted around figures meant to be Israelis and the Jewish ‘lobby’ spewing blood, to say nothing of blonde yummy mummies wearing ‘globalise the intifada’ shirts, I spoke to the artist to share my reaction as a Jewish person. He was instantly aggressive. As soon as I started to say I was shocked and threatened by what I was seeing because it was Nazi imagery, the artist started yelling at me that I didn’t mean anything I was saying. Anytime I tried to speak (calmly) he said: ‘you don’t mean any of what you said, you’re just repeating ‘hasbarah talking points’ because ‘you’re defending a genocide’. On and on he yelled, in my face. I said: ‘if I was a Black person…’ but couldn’t finish the sentence because: ‘you’re not are you?’ On the Nazi ideology point he said: ‘yeah. Why do you think it’s there. Israel are the Nazis’. His breath was disgusting. The crowd began booing and closing in around me, making to shoe me out. I said: ‘fine, get the Jew out’ and he yelled more across the room at me, ‘repeatedly jeering ‘call the police, go ahead, call the police’. I said I would, and the community security trust, which features as a devil in his exhibition. This was met with even more jeering. ‘Yeah, call the CST’ was the last I heard before leaving. Someone snapped pictures of me while I was being shouted at. Short video shows the artist. The longer video, of our final almost surreally disgusting exchange, didn’t record.

@edwardclarke @beneathbluster What is she supposed to be influencing?

@beneathbluster Are you one of the micro influencers the Labour Party is recruiting? I hope they are paying you well.

So the Starmer bashing continues. Laura Kuenssberg writes and Chanel4 makes a documentary both about how unpopular Sir Keir is. They really are afraid because actually he is popular with most thinking people. #standwithKeir #TenYearKeir

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani Or Israel could give all the Palestinians the vote and they could have one state together. Choice is there for one or two states. Not one and an illegal occupation. Israel to withdraw unconditionally from the occupation

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani Once Palestinians have the right to self-determination and Israel rescinds all control over the illegal occupation then I will hold them to the same standards as any other state. Until then the focus is on ending the occupation

The "right to exist" of a state has no basis in international law and no precedent in diplomatic practice. Simply put, a state's right to exist does not exist. If Israel nevertheless proclaims a "right to exist", the only reasonable basis for the existence of such a right is that it is a universal one, equally applicable to every other state at the time it was first raised, and particularly applicable to those whose legitimacy, like that of Israel, was also challenged. If it is a right that applies to Israel alone, it is not and cannot be a right. It bears recalling that there were at least two other states that had a similar claim to a "right to exist" when Israel first invented it, on the grounds that their legitimacy and continued existence were also challenged: Rhodesia and the USSR. Yet neither the Soviet Union nor Rhodesia claimed a "right to exist". Nobody and no other state ever claimed either of them had an inherent right to exist, or claimed any fundamental rights would be violated if these states ceased to exist and disappeared from the map. In the case of Rhodesia, there was in fact an international consensus that it cease to exist. This succeeded and Rhodesia was replaced by Zimbabwe, to universal acclaim. It is also important to recognize that Israel's claims of a "right to exist" have nothing to do with achieving a peaceful resolution of the Question of Palestine, and are fundamentally about preventing one. Israel's "right to exist" was first raised precisely because the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), recognized by the international community as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, appeared to be amenable to accepting earlier demands by the United States in exchange for recognition of its mere existence: PLO acceptance of United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, renunciation of armed force, and recognition of Israel. The demand of a "right to exist" was proclaimed by Israel precisely in order to prevent Western recognition of the PLO, and in the expectation that the PLO would reject it out of hand as an unacceptable absurdity. Needless to say, Washington and its Western partners eagerly embraced the Israeli innovation, and never required Israel to define the borders within which the entity was supposed to enjoy a right to exist. When the PLO formally accepted Israel's "right to exist" in the context of the 1993 Oslo Accords, it was careful not to formulate it as an absolute right: "The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security". Palestinian negotiators had wanted to add "within the 5 June 1967 borders", but this was categorically rejected by Israel. It was made unambiguously clear that addition of this clause would have made agreement impossible. Israel demanded and the PLO accepted the above formulation, but it changed absolutely nothing. Several years later, Israel began demanding that the Palestinian not only recognize its "right to exist" but recognize "Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state". It once again did so on the presumption that this would be embraced by its Western sponsors and allies but that the Palestinians would reject the absurdity of this innovation. Israel's objective was to make negotiations and thus a diplomatic settlement impossible, and to ensure that the Palestinians rather than Israel were held responsible for the stalemate. It largely worked, as Western leaders and "mediators" once again embraced the Israeli demand and tried to pressure the Palestinians to accept it. I would not expect Tucker Carlson to be aware of this history. I would however expect Zanny Minton Beddoes, the Editor-in-Chief of The Economist, to be at least generally familiar with the issue, particularly since she made a point of interrogating Carlson about it. Yet, once again, when it comes to Israel, journalists believe themselves perfectly entitled to be zany, and virtually always get away with it.

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani And there are racists and war criminals in Palestine and they should be indicted too. All equal in front of of law including Netanyahu, an indicted war criminal. Israel also being investigated for genocide by ICJ. Happy to see him in the Hague?

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani You just ranting now. There are no Palestinian citizens as Israel controls their territory as has been explained many times. If they have a state and Jewish people live there then I would expect them to have citizenship. Illegal settlers will be evicted though

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani Well you are entitled to your opinion but being from someone who is clearly ignorant and just a sycophantic apologist for racists and war criminals I will choose to file it in the drawer marked ‘shite’. Leave you to your sad little existence

@hsom113 @MouinRabbani All of that is a bunch of horseshit. In reality, they don’t actually have any authority to make those rulings. We saw what happened in 1948, did we not? Clearly their rulings don’t mean much

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani The authority given to them by the UN.

@hsom113 @MouinRabbani What authority do they have to decide country/territory borders? Their word is not law.

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani The ICJ has ruled on this - it is set out in their judgement. I know international law matters little to Israel and their sycophants but that is your lookout.

@hsom113 @MouinRabbani How do they have no rights to the lands though? And in what way did the Palestinians automatically gain control of all of the West Bank once Jordan left in 1967? Who’s right was it to give that land to Palestine?

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani Why bring an ethnicity into it? I am able to draw my own conclusions without needing to be convinced. ICJ, the UN court, has ruled on the legality on this

@hsom113 @MouinRabbani 60% of Jordan is made of Palestinians and it was partitioned by GB as Palestinians lands. How the Arab world convinced people like you that Jordan was somehow not designated to the Arab world/Palestinians and Israel to the Jews is beyond me.

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani I will be consistent and say that any attempts they made to do so are illegal. Israel has no rights to the land so they are not ‘giving’ anything. I have also not moved any goalposts. I am just basing it on the law.

@hsom113 @MouinRabbani So then what will you say if Israel give back the lands and Palestinians still demand the rest? Will you finally be on Israel’s side? Or will you just continue to move the goalpost?

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani Because it isn’t. And I am not sure that someone as incoherent as you are makes a convincing critic of the UN court 😂.

@hsom113 @MouinRabbani Not sure how that’s logical. When Jordan left the lands, why is it that they automatically go to Palestinians? They were never Palestinian lands to begin with. The ruling is ridiculous and based in nothing. Explain how Jordan isn’t a Palestinian state

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani The other option is to give universal suffrage to all in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel. That would be the most democratic approach surely. Only other option is for Israel to just get off Palestinian land and let the people decide. Take all illegal settlers with them

@fishandwhistles @MouinRabbani They are the lead court in the world whereas you are someone who cannot understand simple questions. Palestinian rights go to the 1967 borders as stated by ICJ - this is already conceding much to Israel. Israel must leave unconditionally