@ButtUglyBabies@btharris93 But you’ve said “support” should lead to a ban, so that’s anyone who uses supportive words towards the IDF, Smotrich, Ben-Gvir or Netanyahu, should be banned from the UK?
@LBC@cenkuygur It’s a sophomoric line of reasoning that “inflammatory language” should get you banned from a country.
Freedom to offend, freedom to be offended, freedom to counter.
The idolatry of civility is unacceptable.
Disturb the comfortable, comfort the disturbed.
Human Rights Watch has concluded that Israel's denial of water to Gaza amounts to an act of genocide.
In October 2023, Keir Starmer said "Israel does have that right" to cut off water and power from Gaza. This is what complicity in genocide looks like👇
@btharris93 This would mean showing explicit support of the IDF should lead to bans from the UK. Gallant/Netanyahu literally have ICC/ICJ arrest warrants for crimes against humanity. Such support would fall under the same remit.
@MoJo__sexual@btharris93 What he previously said was atrocious. However, check the Oxford Union which always invites controversial speakers across the ideological spectrum. If we ban speakers for objectionable speech, where do civil liberties begin and end?
@UnionJacked__ Depends on what Burnham’s platform is. There’s a portion I agree with, and pleased to see him distance himself from Blair. Will watch intently how Makerfield plays out.
A former Tory foreign minister admitted in his diaries that Israel controls the UK Foreign Office
It wasn’t reported in a single UK newspaper
The Israel lobby has captured the British political, judicial and media systems
We are under concerted and wide-ranging attack. Wake up
“The war in Gaza” is actually “the Genocide in Gaza”
“The war in Lebanon” is actually “the Genocide in Lebanon”
“Collateral damage and human shields” is actually “murder children and innocent civilians”
The media uses euphemisms to control the narrative. The media is complicit