#syrian refugee crisis

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Tim Ganser at The UnPopulist:

Since the end of World War II, Germans had by and large steadfastly resisted voting for far-right populists. That norm was shattered in the last decade by the success of the political party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), which seemed to gain more traction as it radicalized into a full-blown, hard right populist party. A year into its existence, spurred by widespread discontent with German fiscal policy, the AfD won seven seats in European Parliament. In 2017, after undergoing a hard-right turn, it won 94 seats in the German federal elections, good for third place overall. For the past year, the AfD has consistently ranked second in Politico’s poll aggregator tracking the public’s voting intentions.

In this Sunday’s European Parliament elections, roughly 1 in 6 German voters is expected to cast a ballot for the AfD, whose members have trivialized the Holocaust, encouraged their followers to chant Nazi slogans, and participated in a secret conference where they fantasized about forced deportations of naturalized citizens they derisively call “Passport Germans.” Worse still, the AfD is predicted to be the strongest party, with up to a third of the vote share, in the three elections for state parliament in Saxony and Thuringia on Sept. 1 and in Brandenburg on Sept. 22. And in generic polls for a hypothetical federal election, the AfD fares even better than it did in any previous election. How did Germany get to this point?

The AfD’s Origin Story

The AfD was founded in early 2013 by a group of conservatives, led by the economics professor, Bernd Lucke, greatly disillusioned with then-Chancellor Angela Merkel’s fiscal policy. In their view, the European debt crisis had revealed deep instability within the eurozone project as smaller nations found themselves unable to cope with the economic demands of membership, and they believed Merkel’s focus on saving the euro was coming at the expense of German economic interests. This was, however, the opposite of a populist complaint—in fact, the AfD was initially referred to as a “Professorenpartei” (a professor’s party) because of the party’s early support from various economics professors who were more interested in fiscal policy than catering to popular will. In its earliest days, the AfD could best be characterized as a cranky but respectable party of fiscal hardliners. Its anti-establishment posture stemmed entirely from its belief in the necessity of austerity. Even its name could be construed less as nationalistic and more an answer to the dictum coined by Merkel—“alternativlose Politik” (policy for which there is no alternative)—to defend her bailouts during the eurozone crisis.

Although the AfD had launched an abstract economic critique of Merkel’s policies that could be hard to parse for non-experts, its contrarian stance resonated with a significant portion of Germans. Right out of the gate, the AfD obtained the highest vote share of any new party since 1953, nearly clearing the 5% threshold for inclusion in the Bundestag, Germany’s Parliament, in its first electoral go round. Its success was also measurable in terms of membership, passing the 10,000 mark almost immediately after its formation. The rapid increase in membership, however, helped lay the groundwork for its turn toward right-wing populism. Perhaps due to pure negligence—or a combination of calculation and ambition—the party’s founders did little to stop right-wing populists from swelling its rolls. And as the German economy emerged through the European debt crisis in good financial shape, fiscal conservatism naturally faded from the public’s consciousness. However, a new European crisis having to do with migrants came to dominate the popular imagination. The AfD hardliners seized on the growing anti-migrant opinion, positioning the AfD as its champion, thereby cementing the party’s turn towards culture war issues like immigration and national identity.

Starting in late 2014, organized right-wing protesters took to the streets to loudly rail against Germany’s decision to admit Muslim migrants, many fleeing the Syrian civil war. The AfD right wing’s desire to become the political home of nativism led to a rift within the party that culminated in founder Bernd Lucke’s being ousted as leader in 2015, and his replacement with hardliner Frauke Petry. Lucke left the party entirely, citing its right-wing shift, following in the footsteps of what other party leaders had already done and more would do in the coming year. Up until this point, the AfD unwittingly helped the cause of right-wing populism. If the reactionary far-right had tried to start a party from scratch, it would have likely failed. The AfD, after all, was created within a respectable mold, trading on the credentials of its earliest founders and leaders. But with saner voices now pushed out, right-wing populists had the party with public respectability and an established name all to themselves. And they deliberately turned it into a Trojan horse for reactionary leaders who wanted to “fight the system from within.

[...]

A New Normal in Germany

As right-wing populist positions have become part of the political discourse, Germany is now in the exact same position as some of its European neighbors with established hardline populist parties. In Italy, Giorgia Meloni ascended to the premiership in October 2022 as the head of her neo-fascist Fratelli d’Italia party, which is poised to perform well in the upcoming European Parliament elections. In France, the Marine Le Pen-led far-right Rassemblement National (RN) is set to bag a third of votes in those elections, roughly double what President Macron’s governing coalition is expected to obtain.

What makes the situation in Germany especially worrisome is that, unlike in France and Italy, far-right parties had failed to garner any meaningful vote share in nationwide elections until just seven years ago; indeed, until the 2017 federal election, there had never been a right-wing populist party that had received more than six percent of the national vote in Germany. The nation’s special vigilance toward far right ethnonationalism in light of its history of Nazi atrocities was expected to spare Germany the resurgence of far-right populism. But it actually led to complacency among mainstream parties. By 2017, the AfD—already in its right-wing populist phase—received nearly 13% of the vote in the federal election to become the third-strongest parliamentary entity. And by then it had also made inroads in all state parliaments as well as the European Parliament. The norm against it was officially gone.

To be sure, the AfD is not on track to take over German politics. It currently has the fifth most seats among all German parties in the Bundestag, fourth most seats among German parties in the European Parliament, and is a distant eighth in party membership. Nor is it currently a threat to dominate European politics—late last month, the AfD was ousted from the Marine Le Pen-led Identity and Democracy (ID) party coalition, the most right-wing group in the European Parliament. Le Pen, herself a far-right radical, explained the AfD’s expulsion by describing the party as “clearly controlled by radical groups.” But none of the above offer good grounds for thinking the AfD will be relegated to the fringes of German or European politics.

After the election, the AfD could rejoin ID, or it could form a new, even more radical right-wing presence within the European Parliament. Some fear that the AfD could potentially join forces with Bulgaria’s ultranationalist Vazrazhdane. Its leader, Kostadin Kostadinov, said that AfD’s expulsion from ID could create an opening to form “a real conservative and sovereigntist group in the European Parliament.” Also, ID’s removal of the AfD wasn’t due to its stated policy platform being out of step with Europe’s right-wing populist project. Rather, it was because the AfD’s leading candidate, Maximillian Krah, was implicated in a corruption and spying scandal involving China and Russia, and because he said he would not automatically construe a member of the Nazi Schutzstaffel (SS) to be a criminal. Absent these entirely preventable missteps, the AfD would be in good standing with right-wing populist partners in Europe.

Seeing far-right Nazi-esque Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) rise in prominence in Germany is a sad sight.

[slackbwan]

Sorry people, there are no tags regarding kashmir so, I used others.

[nando161mando]

🔍 BBC Releases Documentary on Water Crisis Casuated in Rojava by Turkey

BBC World Service found that Turkey's repeated air strikes on northern Syria have cut off access to electricity and water for more than a million people, creating a humanitarian crisis that may have violated international law.

BBCEye's investigations have gathered details of more than a hundred attacks between 2019 and 2024 on oil fields, gas plants and power stations in the Kurdish region, an area already suffering from years of conflict and climate-induced drought.

In 2019, after heavy fighting, the Turkish army took control of an area of Rojava along the border, including a major water station, disrupting supplies to drought-stricken communities.

The BBC has gathered evidence showing how a series of attacks by Turkey in October 2023 and January 2024 struck key electrical installations, further disrupting the water supply to the water station and depriving much of the region of access to drinking water.

International lawyers reviewing the BBC's findings said Turkey may have violated international standards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UZPLVDvPMo

[parasiticstars]

Anyways, an unfriendly reminder that a boat filled with Pakistani, Syrian, Palestinian, and Afghan refugees capsized off of the coast of Greece and the Greek coast guard not only initially didn’t do a thing, but once they finally did, ended up making it worse due to not towing the boat properly. The lower decks had the most casualties, and “coincidentally”, were where the refugees were crammed.

over 700 passengers on that boat. Less than 100 survived. Many more missing, and the death toll unsaid yet.

But it’s the unimaginable hubris and stupidity of the rich and this one company, headed by this guy who whole ass said “safety is just pure waste”, who’s shitty fucking submersible is so unsafe and unauthorized that it can’t even be called a submarine, exploding like it was honestly destined to that gets hourly media coverage, millions of taxpayer dollars wasted for a search, and gets unneeded pity for the idiots who signed up for it.

Okay.

What we need to do is focus on what matters, even after it’s off the headlines. Even when the government brushes it aside. Donate to reputable search-and-rescue organizations such as SOS humanity or SOS méditerranée or alarm phone (amongst others, and any other organizations dedicated to this crisis), and spread awareness/add onto this post if you can’t.

hey friendly reminder that “the loss of any human life is an inherent tragedy” and “the ≤1% paying a quarter of a mil. a head and signing a contract that explicitly mentions ‘death’ to disturb a mass grave while shoved in a literal bluetooth cheap-ass metal cylinder made by a company that eschews safety got exactly what they signed up for” AND “we shouldn’t have wasted taxpayer money to find a crumpled up Pringle’s can during several refugee crises” are all opinions that can and should co-exist.

Of course, we shouldn’t be so gleeful in their horrific deaths, especially there was a literal teenager that didn’t even want to go in there. Internet anonymity be damned, it’s the death of basic empathy. And of course, we should rightfully be outraged that watching a bunch of ultra-rich blow their money to do something objectively incredibly stupid (to a MASS GRAVE with human fucking bone dust and preserved shoes, I cannot stress enough) is what’s hitting headlines and what people care about.

However, if you have any sort of basic human decency and a morality view more complex than that of a six year old, I’m sure you can easily reconcile all three valid opinions.

[jarviskingston]

🏀⛹🏿‍♂️⛹🏿

[trendynewsnow]

Erdogan and Scholz Discuss Middle East Crisis and Refugee Management

Erdogan and Scholz Discuss Middle East Conflict and Refugee Crisis On Saturday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan welcomed German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for a significant meeting at the historic Dolmabahce Palace in Istanbul. The discussions between the two leaders centered around the escalating conflict in the Middle East, particularly the ongoing humanitarian crisis, and the potential for…

[mikhaila-bobersky]

Sweden 2015 flashbacks

When you unconditionally love migrants to the point where you fill your country with them to later set their refugee camps into fire.

[slackbwan]

This

help others not because they are your family or from your community but because they are people.

[sayruq]

In January of 2024, Dr. Bara Zuhaili entered Gaza on a two-week medical mission with a U.S.-based organization, Rahma Worldwide. Dr. Zuhaili dedicated most of his time to Shuhada' Al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir Al-Balah, central Gaza. While this was not his first experience in a wartime or crisis setting — he had undertaken medical missions in Syria and was in southern Turkey during the earthquake — it proved to be his most horrific. As a vascular surgeon, he was tasked with assisting Gazan doctors in one of the ugliest tasks of this war: amputations. A generation of amputees has emerged, with over 10 children losing one or more limbs per day, on average, since the beginning of the war. Dr. Ghassan Abu-Sittah called it “the biggest cohort of pediatric amputees in history.” Even this statistic, reported by UNICEF in December of 2023, is now outdated. The true number of men, women, and child amputees remains unknown, with estimates ranging upwards of 10,000 people. It is a number that will continue to rise as new and unknown weapons destroy tissue and bone, crumbling medical infrastructures and scarce supplies force constant life-and-death decisions, while infections and chronic illnesses — largely ignored — silently kill or handicap thousands.

Is this the first time you've worked in a war zone or in a humanitarian crisis? Did any of them prepare you for this? It was not the first time. Unfortunately, I had experience in Syria, working in the underground hospitals in the besieged areas of Aleppo and Idlib. There, the healthcare facilities were also under constant attack by the Syrian regime. But Gaza was unlike anything I had seen before. To start, the supply chain was completely broken. Supplies were extremely limited in Deir Al Balah, where I was based for most of my stay. The hospital functioned at only 5-10% capacity compared to any similar hospital in the Middle East—I'm not even talking about an American hospital. Then, there were the number of patients. Just to give you an idea: Shuhada' Al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir Al Balah is only equipped for 150 patients. Under extreme circumstances, they could maybe stretch to accommodate up to 200 patients. When I arrived, there were 950 patients, in addition to over 20,000 refugees sleeping in the corridors of the hospital and its complex. Every time we experienced a bombardment, we had anywhere from 20 to 60 patients rushing in simultaneously, in addition to the patients already being treated. It was completely overwhelming and overcrowded. The third issue had to do with the type of injuries. I've seen a lot of trauma before — traumatic injuries are not new to me — but the level of trauma I saw was something I've never witnessed in my entire life. When I was in the operating room, I would get a call from the ER saying someone was shot in the leg and they needed me as soon as possible. In my mind, someone shot in the leg with a bullet would have an entry size of about five to six millimeters and an exit wound size of about two centimeters long. That is what I was familiar with. What I saw in Gaza — which I had never seen before — was literally as if an explosion, an RPG, had exploded into the leg. The entry wound would be about five to 10 centimeters wide and the exit wound would be almost 30 centimeters wide. One bullet would destroy a diameter of 10-15 centimeters… all of the muscle, bone, arteries, and nerves were all gone, destroyed.I'm not a military expert, I don't know much about weapons. But I don't know what kind of bullet can cause that much destruction. With a bullet wound in the U.S., I could get away with doing a bypass to salvage the leg. In Gaza, there was nothing anyone could do to salvage the leg. The amount of tissue damage forced me to do amputations almost every single time. 

Can you describe what a single day would look like? As a rule, anytime a bombardment happened, we would wait between four to eight hours before we received any injured people. In Deir Al-Balah, we would see the missile hitting two to three kilometers away and we knew that there were many casualties, but it would take these people — who were only three kilometers away from us — four to eight hours to reach our location. The IOF (Israeli Occupation Forces) prevented any ambulances from entering the scene, and anyone attempting to help or approach would be shot. I had many cases where the ambulance driver would come to me holding two or three kids. They were dead, and he would swear to me they were alive four hours ago. We lost a lot of lives just waiting to reach us in the hospital. Our days typically began around seven in the morning, and even though the night was filled with attacks and bombardments, no casualties would reach us before the morning. By then, we would go to the ER and try to start the triage process: determining who needs to go to the OR first and who could afford to wait. We would then perform surgeries throughout the day, often not finishing until one or two in the morning. Sometimes, if I had time, I would do my rounds to check on the patients, and by late afternoon, we would have more bombardments and injuries coming in until midnight. Usually, by midnight, things slowed down… not because there was no bombardment, but because they couldn't reach us anymore.

[alphadogmp3]

it is incredibly frustrating to see the non-response from westerners to what is arguably the worst natural disaster in recent memory. when the ukraine-russia war broke out, it was on everyone's blogs. everyone--at least on my dash--was trying to spread awareness of the humanitarian crisis. but now?

fucking crickets.

absolutely nothing.

this earthquake has already claimed 20k confirmed lives. it has only been 5 days. most wrecks have not been excavated yet.

we need all the help we can get, but not a single fucking person is doing anything to help spread the message. people who proudly put the ukrainian flag in their display names or in their bios are nowhere to be seen now. the influencers youtubers and tiktok micro-celebrities who shared donation posts and ukrainian refugee testimonials daily are dead silent now. why? why do you only care when the people dying are somewhat like you? do we need to be whiter to deserve your attention? or more christian? do we not deserve your energy as is? are we, turks and syrians, not humans?

im so fucking sorry if donation posts don't fit your blog's aesthetic or if the news are just so fucking draining for you. every single one of you motherfuckers living in the west should be ashamed of yourselves for how differently you are treating us versus how you treated ukrainians when the war broke out.

if this happened in any western country you'd all be making infographics on how to donate or help.

right now the only reason why people on my dash are devastated is because the rhythm guitarist from my chemical romance had a haircut.

all of you need to be doing better.

do better.

[mariacallous]

In the context of a turbulent and unsatisfying three years in office, the incredibly awful September in progress might rank as the three-party German government’s grimmest month yet. After elections in the east that issued record results for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party—another vote, in Brandenburg, looms on Sept. 22—the government is also reeling from the fallout of two Islamist terrorist attacks that left three dead and eight wounded. One of those attacks involved a Syrian asylum-seeker whose petition for protection in Germany had been denied; he had links to the fundamentalist Islamic State, which claimed responsibility for the attack.

Now the government has announced its response: starting on Sept. 16, Germany will unilaterally impose border closures, for six months, on all nine of its borders with other European countries. Incoming foreign nationals will be screened according to arbitrary criteria, and rejected applicants will be forced onto Germany’s next-door neighbors.

Although some details remain unclear, Germany’s plan amounts to an unprecedented step. Eight of the neighboring countries are EU members, and all of them are part of the Schengen regime that guarantees freedom of movement across borders within the bloc and recognizes the right to political asylum. Meanwhile, Germany’s mainstream opposition party is demanding an even more severe policy—one that would essentially prevent the country from accepting any new asylum applicants onto its territory at all.

“Until we achieve strong protection of the EU’s external borders with the new common European asylum system, we must strengthen controls at our national borders,” said Germany’s interior minister, Nancy Faeser. Her proposal involves expedited procedures at the German frontiers to determine whether each person who arrives may enter and apply for political asylum.

According to Faeser, the planned border screenings will limit illegal migration and “protect against the acute dangers posed by Islamist terrorism and serious crime.” There will be more deportations during this period, she said, but they will conform to EU law. But some experts disagree. European law expert Alberto Alemanno, a professor of European law at HEC Paris, told the Guardian that the German controls “represent a manifestly disproportionate breach of the principle of free movement within the Schengen area.”

And Sergio Carrera, a research fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), a Brussels-based think tank, told Foreign Policy that the border closures will most probably have a knock-on effect across the continent: “There’s the risk of these measures triggering a race to the bottom. Where’s the end point? We’re talking about rights that go to the very heart of what the EU is all about.”

The new measures at the German borders ratchet up pressure on European Union norms that are already strained. According to EU law, free movement within the bloc is guaranteed within the Schengen area, which encompasses most EU member countries (except Cyprus and Ireland) as well as Switzerland and Norway. Foreign nationals claiming political persecution have the right to apply for political protection in the country through which they enter the EU. But the bloc’s member countries may suspend Schengen’s guarantees in the case of “internal security concerns” as long as those concerns are proportional and legitimate and the suspensions temporary. Brussels must be briefed in advance.

Germany has had periodic border checks in place along the Austrian border since 2015—a response to the refugee crisis of 2015-16. Last year, in response to heightened migration flows, Germany established checks on its borders shared with Poland, the Czech Republic, and Switzerland. In fact, across the European Union, member states have temporarily restricted internal border crossings 404 times since 2015, according to German daily Die Tageszeitung.

Germany’s move would take another step toward turning the exception policy of internal EU border checks into the rule, argued Christian Jacob of Die Tageszeitung. A European Parliament study issued last year claimed that this was already happening and that a “systematic lack of compliance with EU law” could undermine rule of law guarantees.

One result would almost certainly be a chain reaction across the bloc. Walter Turnowsky, a migration expert at Denmark’s Der Nordschleswiger, a German-language newspaper, fears exactly this. “Officially, the announced German border controls are also temporary, but ultimately the announcement means the end of free travel across the EU,” he said. “From now on, governments will claim: ‘Well, Germany controls its borders too,’” so they will do the same.

The new German measures aim to stop non-EU citizens who have already applied for asylum elsewhere in the bloc from entering Germany by bus, train, or car from Schengen zone neighbors. (Currently, only third-country nationals who have invalid papers or don’t intend to file for political asylum are refused entry.) Under the new measures, the migrants would be returned to the country where they entered the Schengen area and originally applied for asylum, which are usually one of the EU’s southern external border countries, such as Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, or Spain.

German border guards would detain the foreign nationals at the border—perhaps even in a kind of jail, apparently for no longer than five weeks—until their status can be verified. Foreign nationals who had not previously applied for asylum but who claim political persecution could then enter Germany and apply for protection, which German courts would rule on at a later date.

One of the looming questions is what criteria German police would invoke to screen those parties interested in entering the country. Since not every person traveling into Germany can be stopped, “it will be people who look different, regardless of citizenship,” said Carrera, of CEPS. “A certain racial appearance will make some people suspect. This is racial profiling, and it is illegal.”

Against the background of its fierce battle in eastern Germany with the AfD, Germany’s conservative opposition, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), has opted to steal the other party’s thunder by endorsing measures very much like those of the far right—and until recently entirely taboo. Claiming that the government’s measures do not go nearly far enough, the CDU argues that no people—none at all—should be permitted to enter Germany in the absence of a visa or European passport.

This would de facto end the country’s commitment to offering asylum. In order to make this flagrant violation of international law at least appear to conform to EU regulations, under the CDU plan, Germany would declare a state of emergency as a result of internal security threats. This, the CDU believes, would legalize the across-the-board rejection of unwanted third-country nationals.

The proposal also goes a gigantic step beyond the limitation of movement in the EU, effectively eviscerating the right to political asylum.

“This kind of measure, and those the government are taking, will be investigated and could come before the EU court of justice,” Carrera said. “The EU will determine whether the security concerns really justify such a breach of EU law.” Other experts have said that Germany will not be able to prove that the recent attacks or the numbers of asylum-seekers—which have fallen this year—actually threaten the state’s internal security and thus justify (or indeed, are really aided by) these measures.

One of the many problems with the new German modus operandi: Neighboring states will have to accept people refused by Germany back onto their territory—and Austria, for one, which has general elections on Sept. 29 (and where polls indicate the situation for migrants is getting even worse, with a very strong showing of the far-right Freedom Party likely) said forget it, it won’t take them.

Poland is also up arms at the prospect of traffic jams at the borders that would obstruct commercial and private transportation. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the German move a “de facto suspension of the Schengen Agreement on a large scale.”

The Belgian daily Le Soir seems to hit the nail on the head: “With governments like this, there’s no need for the far right to be in power. The pressure of elections and the fear of extremes are causing those in power to run around like headless chickens, with migrants as the only means for decompression.”

EU expert Thu Nguyen, the deputy director of the Berlin-based Jacques Delors Centre, told Foreign Policy that unilateral decisions taken by Germany—the EU’s most populous state—are entirely unproductive. She noted that the EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum, a set of new rules passed this year for managing migration and establishing a common asylum system at a bloc-wide level, addresses some of the concerns about immigration raised by Germany and other EU states, including by facilitating faster procedures for asylum applicants at the continent’s external borders.

After all, Germany—including the CDU’s parliamentary group in the EU, the European People’s Party (EPP)—was essential in drafting the pact, together with the 25 other EU member states. When the pact came in front of the European Parliament earlier this year, EPP parliamentarian Tomas Tobé said that “the absolute best way to help support a European migration policy is to be loyal to the whole migration pact.”

[eretzyisrael]

by Melanie Phillips

Five days after Britain’s Labour party won an overwhelming parliamentary majority in the general election, we can see the outline of what this is likely to mean for British Jews and their country’s relationship with Israel. That outline is not reassuring.

The new Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, is said to have purged his party of antisemitism and has persuaded many British Jews that he has made Labour safe again for Jewish voters. On Sunday morning, he told the Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas — antisemite, Holocaust denier and fan of Hitler’s wartime ally in the Middle East — that an independent state was the “undeniable right” of the Palestinian people and that “financial support for the Palestinian Authority” was one of his “immediate priorities”. 

He did not tell Abbas that a condition of this financial support was that the PA must stop paying financial rewards to terrorists and their families for murdering Israelis. Nor did he say that a condition of receiving more British taxpayers’ money was that the PA must end its indoctrination of Palestinian Arab children in Nazi-themed demonisation of the Jews, teaching them that their greatest ambition should be to murder Jews and steal all their land. 

Instead, Starmer proceeded to lecture Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin  Netanyahu, that there was a “clear and urgent” need for a ceasefire in Gaza as well as an immediate increase in the volume of humanitarian aid reaching civilians. As for the war being waged by Hezbollah in Lebanon against northern Israel, Starmer warned Netanyahu:

It was crucial all parties acted with caution.

What kind of “caution” does Starmer suggest is appropriate in the face of a threat of genocide by Hezbollah and its patron, Iran? Or to put it another way, with Hezbollah primed to unleash its armoury of 150,000 rockets and other missiles that can reach all of Israel, and with Iran itself along with Iraqi, Syrian and Houthi militias not to mention the terrorist armies of the “West Bank” all primed to attack Israel if it launches all-out war against Hezbollah, does Starmer really believe that Israel actually needs to be told to act “with caution”? 

Can he really not grasp that, given the daily onslaught over the past nine months from dozens of rockets, drones and guided missiles that have destroyed Israeli border towns, left swathes of northern Israel burning, made more than 60,000 Israelis refugees in their own country and kept other residents in the north trapped in their safe rooms (two Israelis were killed today by a Hezbollah rocket strike that hit their car) that if the Israelis abandon that “caution” it’s because they have no other choice?   

Starmer shows absolutely zero understanding that this crisis isn’t about Hamas, Hezbollah or the Palestinian Arabs. They are proxies and pawns in an Iranian war of extermination against Israel, the essential precursor to the destruction and conquest of America, Britain and the west. 

So little does he understand this that the new Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, is now poring over the government’s legal advice on whether to stop UK arms sales to Israel.

Once upon a time, Lammy was sympathetic to Israel. Now he is a foe. He has repeated what he said before the election, that Labour supports the request by the International Criminal Court prosecutor, Karim Khan, for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Israel’s defence minister Yoav Gallant — and that if these Israelis came to the UK after such warrants were issued, Britain would arrest them.

This despite the fact that the claims upon which Khan relied were lies, distortions and blood libels drawn from Hamas-sympathising and Israel-bashing organisations, and were all demonstrably untrue.

[allthegeopolitics]

The European Union announced Thursday an aid package for Lebanon of 1 billion euros — about US$1.06 billion — much of which will go to boost border control to halt the flow of asylum seekers and migrants from the small, crisis-wracked country across the Mediterranean Sea to Cyprus and Italy. The deal follows other EU aid packages for countries such as Egypt, Tunisia and Mauritania to fortify their borders. It comes against a backdrop of increasing hostility toward Syrian refugees in Lebanon and a major surge in irregular migration of Syrian refugees from Lebanon to Cyprus.

Continue Reading

[nando161mando]

Tensions come to a head with a proposal to limit the entrance of children of war refugees who are already in the Netherlands and to make families wait at least two years before they can be united.

[fatally-alive]

"Congrats on staying alive, Hope they don't catch you tonight" Part 4

‘Merry Old England’ is quite beautiful in the way it discusses the refugee crisis. What are you trying to invoke with that song? Video here

D: “I love that song so much. I think it’s unfathomably beautiful. You can’t hold me back, I’m going to climb your cliff, scale your fence, and take over your country. I don’t think there’s any question marks at all. One man’s end-time capitalism London is another man’s playground of dreams where anything is possible – the mythical city that you finally reach after trying to break out of your miserable town and fulfil your dreams.

“For all the cynicism and talk of being pushed out of town, there’s another generation that will come and find a way to bring it alive again or find a way to make it their own; despite the weight of the fucking world.”

B: “The song is more of a montage than banging a drum, particularly.”

D: “It’s weird. I’ve tried playing it acoustically to people and some of the lyrics are strangely provocative. Even to say, ‘Syrians, Iraqis, Ukrainians, welcome to Merry Old England – how are you finding it?’ To start singing about visas, dinghies, the cliffs once white now grey; you can see people from both sides get excited. It’s just asking this kid on the corner of Margate who has landed there, kicking his heels and not really knowing what to do, how he’s finding it.”

Article Part I

[thebrightestwitchofherage]

Ah yes, an 🦅🇺🇸🦅American 🦅🦅🇺🇸person who saw 2 TikToks and read one (1) article tells me, an actual Israeli to get educated,,,

About my country,,,

Do you really think you have a proper grasp about one of the most complicated geopolitical conflicts, just cuz you read something online???

Are you really arguing with me about my reality, saying Im brainwashed when I tell you you’re wrong???

Get over yourself , read anything other than Hamas’ propaganda and touch some grass.

Also, stop telling me there’s no proof when Hamas literally live streamed their massacre…

But Hamas are innocent and brave freedom fighters 🥹🥹🥹🥹

Nope. They’re literally ***a globally recognised terror organisation**** - kinda weird to support them …

You’re telling me that Hamas are innocent fighters fighters while People I know are dead.

“Prove it. You’re making things up. “

Nope. That’s what Hamas is doing! Here are a few sources:

*official statements & video evidence released by the Israeli government.

*the IDF’s spokesperson & official video evidence

* “survived to tell”- A civilian campaign on social medias, where survivors of the October 7th massacre tell their story.

*coroner reports and examinations.

*****

Since the first hours of the October 7th attack , survivors and victims called the news stations and posted pictures and videos. Some were later interviewed by the news…

*police and EMT body cams.

*footage released / streamed by Hamas themselves.

*Research done by western media news outlets.

But you would rather believe Hamas ? Mmkay.

If you haven’t spoken up about any other crisis the Palestinians people have faced- You don’t care about the Palestinians, you care about sounding woke& harassing Jews and Israelis.

Where were you when more than 4000 Palestinians refugees were murdered camp by Syria?

When Lebanon banned Palestinians from certain jobs& owning land?

When Hamas prevented medical aid and stole gas from UNRWA?

When over 800 misfired rockets aimed at Israel, ended up falling within Gaza?

They literally store ammunitions and shoot rockets from schools , mosques and youth centres.

When approximately 850,000 Palestinians were displaced due to the Syrian civil war?

When Jordan & Egypt refuse to accept Palestinian refugees? Btw, Egypt has its own blockade as well…

But I support human rights🥹🥺 only the Palestinians are suffering , the Israelis deserve this

*israeli Women were raped as an act of war& terrorism - and suddenly every single women’s rights is silent.

* saying civilians deserve this since they are Israeli ,is a messed up logic and a sense of reality.

*look around- how how much anti- Semitic posts and slurs do you see? Are the protests you go to peaceful?

An elderly man was literally killed in one of those protests. But it’s fine since he’s Jewish & supports Israel… 🤦‍♀️

**********

I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point. There’s video evidence for everything I wrote here, stop believing Hamas’ lies.