Manchester Synagogue Attack

foxie48

Nanna8 I think that's the point. Most of the people on these marches are not antisemitic, they support a two state solution with Palestinians and Israeli Jews being treated fairly. Some are rabidly antisemitic but I genuinely think most are not, with Jews joining other faiths, including Quakers showing their support.
I find it odd that people were prepared to accept that many of the people on the Unite march, organised by a known extremist who has been in prison on a number of occasions for violent crimes and membership of proscribed organisations, were there to reclaim the English flag not in support of racist thugs. Yet seem to think these marches which are attended by people of all faiths want to see Jews murdered. It's a crazy world. I think having some discussion of what motivates people can help us to understand the world a bit better but perhaps others prefer to live with their prejudices.

That's a fantastic post foxie48.

Ben Houchen called the people on the march with genuine beliefs "useful idiots" and claimed they had been hoodwinked by extremists. I wondered at the time whether he would claim the same for the "ordinary citizens" who went on the protests about immigration or the so-called Unite march in London.

People seem to be so partisan, but they can't see it.

Fwiw (before I get jumped on) I have already said upthread that I do not support marches over the last weekend so my comment is a general one.

I wasn't referring to you sunami. I should have been clearer who I was referring to.

A proper discussion about Zionism, using the original and correct definition, isn't antisemitic either.

Galaxy

It's antisemitism doodledog, if you are using the words zionist and river to the sea on this thread you are anti semitic.

I hope you realise I wasn't the first to use "river to the sea". I was merely pointing out that the claim made was ludicrous.

Nanna8 I think that's the point. Most of the people on these marches are not antisemitic, they support a two state solution with Palestinians and Israeli Jews being treated fairly. Some are rabidly antisemitic but I genuinely think most are not, with Jews joining other faiths, including Quakers showing their support.
I find it odd that people were prepared to accept that many of the people on the Unite march, organised by a known extremist who has been in prison on a number of occasions for violent crimes and membership of proscribed organisations, were there to reclaim the English flag not in support of racist thugs. Yet seem to think these marches which are attended by people of all faiths want to see Jews murdered. It's a crazy world. I think having some discussion of what motivates people can help us to understand the world a bit better but perhaps others prefer to live with their prejudices.

Sorry that was muddled. I am not referring to you doodle I am referring to caleos posts.

Not you in the personal sense either.

It's antisemitism doodledog, if you are using the words zionist and river to the sea on this thread you are anti semitic.

What is ‘going on here’, please? I don’t think it is ‘clear for everyone to see’. I find the whole thing muddled, confusing and horribly difficult to understand, never mind take a partisan view on, so would love to be told how ‘clear’ it is by someone who feels that she can speak for everyone.

Galaxy

Why are we being asked to care this woman on a thread about a terrorist attack on a synagogue. I apologise for getting drawn into this discussion.
As for people using river to the sea on this forum, I have no words. It is just clear for everyone to see what is going on here.

I've no idea why some woman has been dragged into this thread either.
My point was that just sitting around, albeit peacefully, waiting to be arrested, is a selfish act because the police are taken away from serving other people. How is that helping each other at a time when we should come together?

Why are we being asked to care this woman on a thread about a terrorist attack on a synagogue. I apologise for getting drawn into this discussion.
As for people using river to the sea on this forum, I have no words. It is just clear for everyone to see what is going on here.

Wyllow3

escaped

I'm afraid I've lost the plot on this thread since it's inception 3 days ago.

However, the old lady mentioned, sitting at the protest, with her placard has little to lose if she is arrested. She certainly isn't going to be applying for a job in the future! She is, however, wasting valuable police time. You do know that, as she is old, police have to handle her very carefully to avoid any injuries. Five or six policemen are needed just to arrest her and carry her off to a detention centre, which means that police resources are thereby thin on the ground in other areas of the country.
So she's rather silly, foolish, in my opinion.

This is just ludicrous 🤣

She is an active 72 year old, ^I mentioned her already cycling* , I mentioned that she works several times a week she is at the end of a phone as a Samaritan, talking down suicidal people, for goodness sake.

It's 8 miles to Meeting and back from where she lives.

Honestly. (goes away muttering).

You're all writing the script to suit you.

I did not use the word elderly

Annie - the peace testimony - I told you we all interpret our testimonies it according to out own conscience, that we dont have "creeds. No one "Tells" you what to do. We dont all agree with what each other chooses, there may be a consensus meeting if the matter is controversial and support could be withheld. (Believe me, they can take hours 🤨)

In WW2 many young Quakers did choose to go and fight with everyone else, others (like in WW1) worked on the ambulances. But no one ever takes it lightly.

Doris is an all round jolly good egg 😊

(also goes away muttering) (me, not Doris)

nanna8

Long ago many of my ancestors were Quakers. They felt so strongly that they forfeited their land rather than bow to the Anglicans. A different world and I am absolutely convinced they would not march with terrorists and people who were intent on destroying all people of the Jewish faith. That is what ‘from the river to the sea’ is all about. They are not interested in compromise and the sooner those people marching with them realise that, the better.

There are nearly as many Jews living in the US as in Israel, so even if (and it won't happen) Palestinians did occupy all the land 'from the river to the sea', all people of the Jewish faith wouldn't be destroyed.

nanna8

Long ago many of my ancestors were Quakers. They felt so strongly that they forfeited their land rather than bow to the Anglicans. A different world and I am absolutely convinced they would not march with terrorists and people who were intent on destroying all people of the Jewish faith. That is what ‘from the river to the sea’ is all about. They are not interested in compromise and the sooner those people marching with them realise that, the better.

Who are not interested in compromise? "From the River to the sea" has been used by both Zionists and Palestinians at different periods.

I am not inclined to complain to the management of online forums about others' political views .

Long ago many of my ancestors were Quakers. They felt so strongly that they forfeited their land rather than bow to the Anglicans. A different world and I am absolutely convinced they would not march with terrorists and people who were intent on destroying all people of the Jewish faith. That is what ‘from the river to the sea’ is all about. They are not interested in compromise and the sooner those people marching with them realise that, the better.

Lathyrus3

I didn’t see your post, but children of a lesser god” historically referred to children born with disabilities.

I can’t think how it would have fitted in this thread. And I suppose I’ll never know what you posted now🤔

"Children of a lesser god" means subordinate/underprivileged/ less than, in several different contexts. Children born with disabilities would certainly for the phrase even today, with parents struggling to get their child into a suitable school .

I was using the phrase in the context of one people deeming another people to be subordinate, underprivileged, and less than.

btw, probably like in many places on Sunday morning, the only ministry today was holding those suffering as a result of the Synagogue attacks "in the light" as we say: it went onto grieving for the hatred and divisions we find ourselves in, in our world.

sunami

surfsup

Well his Hamas supporting father posted in Arabic on social media after the October 7 massacres. He praised the murdering savages apparently, so not too much of a stretch to see how and why ‘Jihad’ (how’s that for a name?) learned to hate Jews.

Jihad is an established first name:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad_(name)

Jihad is firstly for one's own soul, and only secondarily for one's cultural values.

Well, we all have our ways of travelling our journeys with politics and morality:

did I say we were better, or just say where I was coming from? I believe, the latter

I don't experience circles, rather it's an exploration, because other Quakers and non Quakers have different points of view, and worth listening to.

I'm interested in different belief and political systems and have studied them, in some depth, and to me it opens more new questions rather than some kind of comforting repetitive vain self satisfaction.

Yes, there are some Quakers like that.

Just like there are like that in all kinds of groups, all religious, political or social groups. That would be tedious and deny willingness to take new discoveries on board.

And at its worst religion is oppressive, cruel, and turns to hate and war.

You get politicians who parrot the same stuff again and again, and others who change as they take on board and change when they really listen to others.

Humans will be humans, there is no ideal or perfect way of being, just trying to be open and curious.

I didn’t see your post, but children of a lesser god” historically referred to children born with disabilities.

I can’t think how it would have fitted in this thread. And I suppose I’ll never know what you posted now🤔

Was it my post about " children of a lesser God" that was withdrawn by Gransnet?
I confess the phrase was not mine but originated with a Christian emissary from Palestine to the Holy See called Afif Safieh.

Afif Safieh – Palestinian Diplomat and Advocate for Dialogue

Afif Safieh (born 1950 in Jerusalem) is a veteran Palestinian diplomat noted for his long service in international diplomacy and his articulate advocacy for peace and mutual understanding.

Educated at the Catholic University of Louvain and Sciences Po (Paris), Safieh has represented the Palestine Liberation Organization and later the Palestinian Authority in several major postings, including London (1990–2005), Washington D.C. (2005–2008), and Moscow (2008–2009), as well as at the Vatican.

Throughout his career, Safieh has focused on promoting negotiated solutions, respect for international law, and dialogue between peoples. He is widely respected for his measured tone and ability to engage diplomatically with diverse audiences.

His book “The Peace Process: From Breakthrough to Breakdown” (2009) reflects on decades of diplomatic efforts and offers insights into both the achievements and challenges of Middle East peace negotiations.

Safieh’s career stands out for its commitment to diplomacy, communication, and mutual respect—qualities that continue to resonate in discussions of international relations and conflict resolution.

I was brought up in one of the cities which was a historic hotspot of Quaker belief. Been to the Meeting house as a teenager. Tried it again when I was having my search for a religion that actually lived by its beliefs🙂

The people weren’t any different from any other person.

But even after one has done all the soul searching, or perhaps because their thinkng is self focused, they will never be able to understand if they have gone wrong because their conscience always tell them they are right. Because they doing what their conscience told them to do so it must be right.

It goes around in circles, that always justifies itself.
I am right because my conscience tells me I am right and I always act according to my conscience that tells me what is right so what I do must be right because my conscience tells me ………..

I hadn’t really thought about the reasoning before. I just knew Quakers weren’t any better than anyone else. Now I see the fallacy in the belief.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.