Israel Accuses UK of Antisemitism Over Sanctions Threat | Novara Media
Israel Accuses UK of Antisemitism Over Sanctions Threat | Novara Media
novaramedia.com
Israel Accuses UK of Antisemitism Over Sanctions Threat | Novara Media
16 comments
-
What a surprise!
They've never said that in the face of criticism or anything before, have they?
-
Oh noes, Israel has called someone else antisemitic for criticizing and acting against them again? Who'da thunk?
I guess if you only have one card you have to play it for all it's worth.
-
It's becoming funny now. But the sad truth is that Israel is harming Jews everywhere by rendering the term meaningless
-
It's not funny at all. It is, has ever been, will remain only a cynical, calculated move to use Jewishness to silence dissent.
-
-
-
Classic zionist deflection.
-
Palestinians are semitic people too
-
Israelis are not.
-
-
Classic Zionist deflection is their last recourse, it would seem. I suppose because of their loss of the narrative over their obvious genocide against the people of Palestine.
To the UK, France, Canada: thank you.
-
Don't forget Ireland!
-
And brave South Africa.
-
-
The UK have literally done fuck all though & this threat of sanctions is lip service to public opinion (+400,000 marched through London last weekend but you'd never know from British media!).
David Lammy, the foreign secretary said that he had suspended 29 of the 300+ arms contracts to ensure they wouldn't be used against civilians in Gaza.
He didn't specify our give any details about those contacts, just a vague bit of handwaving.
Now we know that the UK has flown+600 surveillance flights over Gaza since October 7th (from the still colonised Cyprus) & have passed that intel to the Israelis.
The state never does anything willingly & when it dies stood like this, it's purely performative.
-
-
Classic zionist deflection.
-
Antisemitism is a badge of honor now like anti Nazi was in the past. Genocidal monsters.
-
Antisemitism definitely isn't. Getting called antisemitic by Israel, on the other hand? Certainly.
-
That was obviously my intended context but thanks for the apropos correction.
-
-
16 comments