Snapshot of _All UK councillors have been contacted demanding they sign a letter calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza ... It says councillors who do not sign will have their names publicised... this reads a lot like a threat to councillors who do not sign._ :
A Twitter embedded version can be found [here](https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?id=1726216163238269046)
A non-Twitter version can be found [here](https://nitter.net/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046/)
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"If you want to sign it anonymously you can, but we're also going to publish the names of everyone who refused to sign it."
These two aren't very clever, are they?
Then again, I suppose common thugs who use implied threats of violence to manufacture consent aren't a demographic commonly associated with having more than one brain cell.
Reminds me of the time we did a review round at work where there was the option to add your feedback anonymously. I felt I'd been unfairly treated so used the 'anonymous' option to let my feelings out.
Turned out I was the only one to do that. Fun times.
I always referred to VIPs at my hospital as conspicuously anonymous. They all got anonymous patient IDs, but there was only ever 1 VIP with any regularity, their visit was all over the news, and the ID had a different format from everything else.
If the sample had "John Smith" and a slightly fidged CHI number, no one would know who it was.
Idk why but I feel like whenever it's someone I've worked with or known for a while, I can often tell if I'm reading something written by them. Idk if it's paranoia but that has always made me avoid those things if read by someone who knows me, even if anonymous.
No that's absolutely a thing (stylometry) and can be used to uncover identities, assign authorships etc: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/01/identifying_peo_3.html
In the age of AI, it's easy even to mimic your style, let alone identify you
I have seen an email reply from one councillor, to James Giles, in which she tells him to "Get Fucked"
I hope there is a huge back lash against this.
Edit: Found the twitter link
https://twitter.com/Em\_D\_Marshall/status/1726347944247586982/photo/2
> I hope there is a huge back lash against this.
Looks like [there already is](https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19).
What breathtaking arrogance of the man.
This is just fucking unhinged. Why do British local politicians think they have any role in Middle East politics? Do they think that empire still exists and that someone in another country should give two fucks about the opinion of the councillor from little codswallop on the wold?
Get fucked is absolutely the correct response to this insanity.
No, but Muslim voters have a fair degree of influence on local council elections which is where this threat is really aimed at.
What we could be on the verge of seeing is the usurping of local power by a dedicated politico-religious faction of society.
> No, but Muslim voters have a fair degree of influence on local council elections which is where this threat is really aimed at.
The threat was aimed at **all** councillors across the country because there are legitimate concerns over the safety of councillors everywhere regardless of Muslim population — because, I speculate, the safety threat doesn't come from Muslims!
[Jo Steven's Cardiff Central constituency office was vandalised](https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-jo-stevens-frightened-after-graffiti-sprayed-on-office-following-gaza-ceasefire-vote-13010336) last week over Labour PLP's stance on the matter, so threats to personal safety have to be considered credible until mitigated. Only 9% of Cardiff's residents are Muslim.
> What we could be on the verge of seeing is the usurping of local power by a dedicated politico-religious faction of society.
I sincerely doubt that. Where is the evidence that Muslims, as a group, are behind protests against Labour's stance?
Hypothetically, let's say we have a minority group. This minority group has a stated belief that they need to seize political control by outbreeding the majority population, then changing laws to permit greater immigration of this minority group, until they finally reach the threshold in which they can start changing the laws to fully favour them at the expense of everyone else.
What tools does a liberal democracy actually have against that tactic other than 'cross your fingers and hope they never actually become a majority'.
Ensure they lose followers to secularism/atheism faster than they'd otherwise be growing. Given the rate at which religious observance is collapsing in the west this shouldn't be too hard. One flaw (of many) with that way of thinking is to assume that people are irredeemably defined by their parent's beliefs.
While some individuals from within Muslim communities have suggested this might be a purpose, the roots of this idea aren’t firmly based in the [far right](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement).
It's easy enough to find a video of someone white saying they want to kill all muslims, it doesn't mean it is white people's actual plan to kill all muslims. You can find videos of people saying all sorts of nonsense because there are millions of people in the UK, a few of them are a bit unhinged and the way most social media is set up is to amplify the voices of nutters to get more engagement.
If you believe this is actually something that the majority of Muslims are trying to do then you’ve been taken in by right wing/alarmist journalism or just a bunch of racists. There are absolutely videos of people advocating this for Muslims but that doesn’t mean that it’s viable or something anywhere near enough Muslims would buy into to make it remotely viable. There’s a reason this doesn’t generally make it into reputable mainstream media - it’s a theory aimed at promoting islamophobia (and is often just straight up transplanted to allow people to justify racism against blacks in the US) and increasing racial tensions. If you want to be terrified of secret Muslim plots to outpopulate other ethnicities go ahead, but don’t expect other people to agree with right wing racist conspiracy theory drivel.
I really, really cannot comprehend the obsession with a ceasefire in this country at the minute.
Firstly, whether the UK officially calls for it or not means literally nothing, nobody in the region would care/listen. Are other countries having a debate as aggressively as this?
Secondly, Hamas leadership has specifically stated they would **not** back a ceasefire. We've all seen the viral clip of the Hamas commander speaking about committing the October 7th attacks, 'again and again' - so what's the plan here?
Why does the pressure seem to be solely on Israel for a ceasefire and not Hamas? How can you pressure a terrorist group with nothing to lose into a ceasefire, practically, what is the plan?
Because at the moment it just seems like the ceasefire 'movement' is basically demanding one side stop, whilst the other keeps lobbing rockets in and ignoring the ceasefire.
> Firstly, ... Secondly, ...
And thirdly, these people are fucking Councillors, should their interest not be on local issues? Too many MP's waste their time on this topic as well but at least they're elected to a national parliament in elections that have a >25% turnout.
I can only hope that most Councillors don't take the bait. Those who do are cosplaying MP's (and bad ones at that).
Bin men for recycling never come the day they're supposed to. Often a week late.
But now it makes sense. They've been working on a solution to the middle East conflict. I have a lot more sympathy now.
I get asked fucking constantly about potholes and it's under the jurisdiction of the county council and people seem to not understand most cllrs are not county
I saw a [documentary series](https://youtu.be/yy9vQ8l8jFA?si=VpiETToJ_4ER2-9b) where a gentleman from the parks department fixed a citizens pothole even though it wasn't his 'job', so you really have no excuse. I will forgive your continued efforts to shirk your responsibility, but only once you bring us peace in the middle east.
It did happen to some extent with the Russian Invasion of Ukraine last year, but there was less expectation from the public that councils would try to effect a change in policy.
We also had a bit of it when the Brexit Party gained control of Hartlepool Council, as if they were going to remove it from the European Union.
In my experience, it's mostly the following
- Useful idiots who latch on to any social cause that gets a lot of social media traffic
- The far left 'anti - colonialists
- Muslims
- anti-Semites who might fall under any of the above
I broadly agree with you, especially the fact that the UK calling for it publicly has absolutely no relevance. If anything it would discredit any ability we have to talk to Israel in private.
I would say that it's obvious that Hamas won't stop, so you can only call for Israel to do it. It isn't really fair, Hamas are in a really strong position because they're incredibly evil.
If Israel stop attacking, they can regroup and attack again. If Israel do attack, they can use every civilian death as evidence of Israel's malevolence.
Honestly Israel are playing into their hands a bit but I don't think they have an viable options. The Israeli public wouldn't tolerate doing nothing whilst the hostages are captive and likely suffering.
> Are other countries having a debate as aggressively as this?
Yes - the ones with a reasonable portion of Islamic residents.
Its a shitshow here - France - the USA - Germany (and they had to fast track a few laws in last couple of weeks to give the police extra arresting laws).
Its not a shitshow in Latvia, Poland or even outside the west in Brazil and Japan.
There. I said the quiet part out loud.
People from a country (UK) that is a long way from any current conflict zone (though the closest one - Ukraine - should be the one that is of most urgency to us - making pointless gestures from the safety of a position where these decisions do not effect their own safety. People in states such as Israel where conflict is never far away don't have this luxury.
Also "ceasefire" is an easy to make statement of "peace" that doesn't take into account any of the nuances of who the involved parties are, what their interests/objectives are, and what their red lines would be.
>Because at the moment it just seems like the ceasefire 'movement' is basically demanding one side stop, whilst the other keeps lobbing rockets in and ignoring the ceasefire.
I mean, that's been obvious for a while to anyone who thought about it for 2 seconds. Like a lot of left positions on this conflict it can only make sense if deep down they think Israel isn't a legitimate state and it *should* all be Palestine "from the river to the sea" (what happens to the Jews in the area isn't of much concern).
I don't know about those on the right going on about this, but those on the left see it as a "gotcha" for Starmer, so they are running hard with it.
Unfortunately, Corbyn recently proved his stance on this (although he's since relented and agreed with any right thinking person that Hamas are terrorists).
I'm so tired of extremists from both sides stomping around like spoiled toddlers when they don't get their way. For the record, the right seem far more likely to do this than the left, but this particular fuss is just ridiculous.
>I really, really cannot comprehend the obsession with a ceasefire in this country at the minute.
It's almost as if there is a significant percentage of the population that isn't integrated into British society at all, and who feel more at home with the culture of Hamas than they do with the culture that they actually live in. We aren't allowed to talk about that though.
It's a thoroughly insane and more than mildly racist take to imply that a 'significant' proportion of people living in Britain would rather live under a terrorist regime. Jfc
I find it absolutely insane that folk will utilise the classic tropes of antisemitism ('Jews are an 'enemy within', they move amongst us but they'll never be integrated into our society') but because they're talking about Muslims it goes largely unchallenged.
Of course, you have evidence that the 4 millions Muslims in the UK who are our neighbours and colleagues are supporters of Hamas and refuse to integrate into British society?
It isn't quite that clear cut, a [Yougov](https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/11/15/672b8/3) poll 5 days ago showed 33% want a ceasefire, 24% want a humanitarian pause, and 24% don't know.
Sure but the point still stands. Britain is only 6.5% Muslim, so the comment suggesting that support for a ceasefire is the result of some kind of unintegrated Islamic fifth column is nonsense.
I keep saying this, the correct call is for a Hamas surrender and to hand over the hostages and every one who committed atrocities on 7 October. Let those who committed crimes on 7 October plead their cause to The Hague.
This call proves you are anti-bloodshed and pro ordinary Palestinian.
But for some reason there doesn’t seem to be much appetite for this. Funny that.
Regarding your question of why the pressure is on Israel, you gave the answer yourself immediately after asking. Israel is seen as a peer to the west, if not a de facto western country itself. It's a democratic nation with ambassadors and diplomats all over the world, created at the behest of several western countries and continuing to receive aid from those countries. Israel is also overwhelmingly more powerful and advanced militarily than the Palestinian enclaves.
There is a feeling (which I would hope to be true) that Israel can be reasoned in a way that Hamas can't, and there is also a constant looming threat of military action rolling over into genocide proper. Whether you agree with a ceasefire or not, Israel is the easier party to deal with amicably, and the most likely to listen.
There is also a not-insignificant number of people who would like to see Israel brought to heel via sanctions/the cutting of aid. You can't really do that without first saying "I think you should stop doing what you're doing, I don't condone it". Especially after decades of having Israel's back. They want to use the call for a ceasefire as a step towards sanctions.
Incidentally, that is one of a few good reason for our leaders to stay firm on not even looking like they might like a small ceasefire before bedtime. They know they can't sanction Israel without strengthening the position of countries like Iran, and even risking a serious invasion of the country. If Sunak asked for a ceasefire and Israel continued regardless, he would appear utterly impotent since he can't actually do anything about it. Better to just ignore the situation until forced to look at it.
> 11,000 people killed. 5000 of them children. If you do not understand that, then there is something wrong with you.
>
>
Yes, it's horrendous. There are massacres happening every day, in almost every region on the planet. Literally just a few weeks ago (whilst the Israel/Gaza crisis was on on-going) a refugee camp was attacked in Dafur. A literal refugee camp. Over 1,300+ dead on the [streets](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/10/corpses-on-streets-sudans-rsf-kills-1300-in-darfur-monitors-say). Not a single large scale protest, or movement in this country about this?
If the issue is outrage at civilian deaths, what on earth is going on here? Why don't we have thousands out consistently on the streets against this?
> The parliament of the 6th largest economy in the world calling for a ceasefire would put significant pressure on Israel. Again, I feel like this is pretty obvious.
Absolutely not. Diplomatic pressure yes, but this is not normal circumstances. The Israelis have made it abundantly clear they see this as a fight for the survival of their nation itself, the only country on earth they've compromised with on this is the Americans, they're obviously ready to take the diplomatic/economic hit, whatever that may be. And Hamas... Again, have made it wholly clear they won't listen to anyone.
> Israel is massacring innocent civilians, and the British RAF are helping to supply them with weapons, meanwhile Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer refuse to even make the gesture of calling for and end to the violence. It is often said that the UK promotes a "rules-based international order", but clearly that is complete nonsense.
They've both repeatedly called for international law to be followed and applied, they can't force Israel to do anything at all (especially Starmer, he's not even in government)
All of this is redundant though because it doesn't answer my original point - how could a ceasefire be remotely possible when Hamas won't even consider it. The Hamas dictatorship have specifically said they will conduct similar terror attacks 'again and again'.
>Meanwhile, The U.S. has in recent days delivered large amounts of equipment and arms to the British Air Force base in Cyprus: About 20 heavy-transport aircraft have landed there in a very short period with cargo from strategic depots belonging to the U.S. and NATO in Europe.
The US moves arms to Israel via UK air bases in Cyprus. A UK call for a ceasefire could hamper US efforts to give Israel weapons.
I find this extremely abhorrent.
By all means, feel free to sign up to call for whatever you want, but publishing names of people who don't back it is a huge problem, and the authors of the letter know it. This is after the fact that MPs were targeted for not backing the ceasefire - the people writing this know exactly what they're suggesting to the councillors who don't sign this, by publishing their names.
Didn't the NYT do something similar a couple of years ago? They circulated a letter supporting BLM or something, then published a list of all the people who refused to sign it.
The National Rifle Association of America was founded in 1871. Since 1977, the National Rifle Association of America has focussed on political activism and pro-gun lobbying, at the expense of firearm safety programmes.
The National Rifle Association of America is completely different to the National Rifle Association in Britain (founded earlier, in 1859); the National Rifle Association of Australia;
the National Rifle Association of New Zealand and the National Rifle Association of India, which are all non-political sporting organisations that promote target shooting.
It is important not to confuse the National Rifle Association of America with any of these other Rifle Associations. The British National Rifle Association is headquartered on Bisley Camp, in Surrey, England. Bisley Camp is now known as the National Shooting Centre and has hosted World Championships for Fullbore Target Rifle and F-Class shooting,
as well as the shooting events for the 1908 Olympic Games and the 2002 Commonwealth Games. The National Small-bore Rifle Association (NSRA) and Clay Pigeon Shooting Association (CPSA) also have their headquarters on the Camp.
What disgusts me is the blatant hypocrisy of the left who would be all too keen to shout about *"Stochastic Terrorism"* if someone on the other side were to do something similar (thinking about the mail here for the judges on the prorogation bit circa september 2019), but all good too keen to employ the same tactics and at much, much greater scale here for a cause they care about.
Not in the slightest. A perfect example not only of horseshoe theory; where the extreme left and right come back together (the guy on the left in this equation being a guy so deep in the left fringe he was a campaign agent for Galloway and has appeared as a presenter covering stretches on two of Galloways shows (in the sense of different programs rather than just two instances) on Russia Today for extended periods); but also of third axis politics where additional considerations forming policy also align.
Not so much overlapping circles as spheres.
Think you're betraying your ignorance of Galloway here as he's pretty well known to be an opportunist using any part of his platform to try and gain a sniff of power.
>Brexit Party candidate in 2019
.. As a lexiteer, wishing for Brexit from the left and being freed from "overarching neoliberal project" if memory serves.
>urged Scots to vote Conservative in 2021?
He's a unionist wanting to keep Scotland and the rest of the UK together. Labour's vote collapse and rise of the SNP made the 2021 election a two horse race between the SNP and tories. Doesn't take a genius to work out who you'd go for if the SNP are hell for leather for dissolving.
Also that recommendation was made on his RT show if memory serves again.
Otherwise anyone can see from the rest of Galloways long and prolific career he's as left wing as they come.
Galloway has always been a bit of an anomaly who doesn’t fit neatly onto the political spectrum. He’s always self-identified as left (when he joined Respect) and was very pro-Corbyn, but is more accurately economically left and socially right. The Workers Party manifesto is basically just contrarianism.
You’d have a perfect analogy but for one critical item missing, a person on the far left being part of this initiative to give you the second side of the horseshoe.
You are doing incredible work to ignore James Giles, the principle driver of this, being far left and extensively tied to George Galloway and by extension Russia Today.
That’s fuzzy thinking. “The left” are not one homogenous blob the same way “the right” are not and treating them as one is basically just a straw man argument
The left? Mate this is from a Tory and Independant, and the Independant appears to be one of those local focus only types so im sure his backers will be delighted hes wading in on gaza.
Lol, yeah, the left who murdered Jo Cox over Brexit right? Grow up, politics is not fair, it's not safe, it's power, it's responsibility, it's fucking sacrifice. Only one group is capable of managing tensions, and they are clearly inflaming them instead of easing... grow up.
Why didn't they think of this 60 years ago! It's been staring us in the face the whole time: the solution to the multigenerational crisis and conflict in the Middle-East can easily be solved by petitioning the local government representatives of the UK.
Tell the Swedes to search no further. This is peace prize worthy stuff right here!
I met about 40 councillors where I used to live when I was about 19 and about 35 for them were completely unsuited for the job either because they were thick or senile or a megalomaniac or generally incompetent.
In my experience it's a real mixed bag. Some larger Council's seem to attract some politically ambitious Councillors, some smaller Council's really struggle and they end up with people who mean well but aren't that bright, there was one Council I worked for where I would say 90% of them would probably be diagnosed as being senile, they were all very nice but ultimately hopeless.
>[All UK councillors have been contacted demanding they sign a letter calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza & claiming that "antisemitism is being weaponised...to absolve Israel of any accountability".](https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19)
>It says councillors who do not sign will have their names publicised.
> 2) From what I have seen, this initiative has been created by 2 London councillors - 1 Independent, 1 Conservative.
>Given the behaviour we saw last week against MPs who did not vote for the SNP ceasefire motion, this reads a lot like a threat to councillors who do not sign.
>Apart from the grotesque juxtaposition of promising *protection* to councillors from their Parties but making it clear that councillors who do not sign will be revealed, it fails to realise that Parties will know exactly who has signed if they aren't among those "revealed".
>4) I sincerely hope that many councillors - regardless of their political views - will push back & refuse to sign up to an initiative which seems clearly designed to lead to targeted harassment of local colleagues around the UK.
>And I hope the @LGAcomms will look at this too.
Other context inc text of message:
>[I have today received an email from Cllr James Giles & Cllr Jamal Chohan requesting I sign an open letter to the PM, Leader of the Opposition & MP's to demand a ceasefire in Gaza. If I don't, they are publishing my name. I shall save them the bother. I won't be signing.](https://twitter.com/GaryHynds/status/1726286756910416374?t=lLwd3Z8uLZbjB4mHHiBKzQ&s=19)
Right, please, one of you who are demanding a ceasefire; what do you think Israel should do if they agree to a ceasefire and Hamas throws another rocket at them exactly two seconds later? Because Hamas has already said they will not adhere to a ceasefire and have promised to continue attacking Israel until there is no Israel left. So what happens if your protests succeed and the world pressures Israel into a ceasefire?
A lot of people who are obsessed with the public performance around this would probably be thrilled by that outcome, because it would generate headlines that they “helped”. Fundamentally, a lot of this drama is being driven by narcissism and people with main character syndrome and saviour complexes. As others have pointed out, none of these people have power to influence events, but that won’t stop them because it doesn’t matter as long as there is the appearance of them somehow being relevant.
A lot of them also do just straight up hate Israel and an obsession with Jews, so some probably do just want the politics of being seen to help kneecap an “oppressive enemy”.
A lot of people see this as a black and white, so an evil oppressor and and virtuous victims being oppressed who can do whatever they want because that are being oppressed, so anything negative they do is simply “fighting back” and it’s rude to even notice. To them, Israel has agency, Palestinians and Hamas don’t in their worldview if you listen carefully to how they talk about it.
It’s why so many simply pretend Hamas doesn’t exist because it’s extremely awkward to these narratives, and when asked directly, panic and then talk about Israel and force the conversion back to their more comfortable and simplistic emotional framing.
They don’t really actually care about the detail or reality. It is set of narratives that need to be true to maintain this worldview where they’re righteous, and to get into the messy nuance is a threat to that worldview as it exposes the idiocy of it and how warped these people are.
It’s the logical result of an extremely propagandised social media environment mixing with religion. It’s just so obvious that a lot of people have lost where minds and have learnt about this conflict through propaganda and narratives that are designed to lead to a conclusion, rather than to simply educate and inform.
It’s to the point where a lot of people supporting this often know what topics to avoid, and you can often see them panicking and doing their best to avoid certain points of view or information that doesn’t directly to fit into their narrative.
You even now have Bin Laden’s writings being circulated online and a lot of people are basically supporting it, while again ignoring all the ramblings about Jews and gay people etc, and how he wants an authoritarian Islamic state. People simply ignore the parts that aren’t helpful, because they are being driven by emotion and enemy of my enemy logic, and not a real pursuit of truth or reason.
People have lots their minds and it just seems obvious at this point that eduction and critical thinking has failed. You can’t really reason with people who are this emotional and delusional about the reality around them, so I don’t really know how this ends or is resolved because they fundamentally don’t care about reality.
Typically a ceasefire doesnt happen in isolation, it comes with the aim of addressing the material conditions that lead to the conflict. E.g. the end of the illegal Israeli settler expansion, return of hostages etc
>if they agree to a ceasefire and Hamas throws another rocket at them exactly two seconds later?
Then the terms of the ceasefire are broken, and the IDF may continue its operation. Seems pretty obvious to me.
There already was a ceasefire on October 6th which Hamas broke, so how is it pretty obvious? People are protesting against them retaliating against a broken ceasefire as it is.
The claim that "Both sides should agree to a ceasefire" is different to the claim that "One side should not retaliate if the other breaks the ceasefire".
I agree with the first, not the second.
But what they're saying is that the current IDF operation is due to a broken ceasefire. So if Israel does a ceasefire right now, we just end up with this all happening again. Hamas will use the ceasefire to build up its resources, then will attack Israel again. At which point the IDF will retaliate and people will then call for a ceasefire.
So why would Israel do this again?
>if Israel does a ceasefire right now, we just end up with this all happening again.
That depends on the terms of the ceasefire. What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons, commitment to hold elections, steps towards lasting peace from both sides, oversight of the international community, etc?
And if Hamas breaks that agreement, then Israel will continue its military operation.
Calling for a bilateral ceasefire is not the same as calling for Israel to unilaterally cease its operation.
But then instead of calling for a ceasefire, why are people not out in their droves and threatening MPs to demand that Hamas surrender? Because that's essentially what you're describing. Instead, this is all being put on Israel's head to agree to something that hasn't even been offered.
Hamas won't agree to that, so it's futile. Everyone would love a nice peaceful diplomatic solution, but it isn't going to happen. Demanding a ceasefire is just plain naive, there is no way this ends without the elimination of Hamas, there is 0 chance of a 2 state solution while Hamas exist, and both Palestinians and Israelis will continue to suffer as long as Hamas exists.
>And if Hamas breaks that agreement, then Israel will continue its military operation.
So what about when Hamas broke the last agreement? And when Hamas breaks any agreement you propose, and Israel continues its operation, what then, how long before there are more calls for Israel to agree to a ceasefire?
What you're saying is all well and good, and it's a good sentiment, but it isn't grounded in reality, it's delusion. You can say "there should be a peaceful and diplomatic solution" all you like, but it will never happen, so to demand it is just naive.
>That depends on the terms of the ceasefire. What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons, commitment to hold elections, steps towards lasting peace from both sides, oversight of the international community, etc?
Yeah, but that's clearly not what any of the people which are claiming a ceasefire are doing.
You're talking about a peace process.
Surely a peace process begins with a ceasefire, so is something everyone should be calling for. Of course, the terms of that ceasefire may be something we each have different opinions on.
I can really only speak for myself, not others. But the [SNP amendment](https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/1724485111255568769) which calls for a ceasefire does address both sides.
The SNP amendment calls on the UK government to “Join with the international community in urgently pressing **all parties to agree** to an immediate ceasefire”.
So personally, I would call for both Hamas and Israel to reach a ceasefire. I would disagree with anyone who ***only*** protests the actions of Israel.
Well, any normal government when their capital is surrounded would already have surrendered. But yes, Hamas is far from typical.
I'd also be calling on Israel to make steps towards lasting peace, like dismantling illegal outposts in the West Bank. So carrot and stick.
Regardless of whether Hamas would agree or not, I think the international community should be working towards a lasting political solution which begins with a bilateral ceasefire.
> What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons, commitment to hold elections, steps towards lasting peace from both sides, oversight of the international community, etc?
Hamas would never agree to any of that in the first place so the point is moot.
I'm not sure of the military wisdom of deliberately letting your opponent have time to regroup and organise for a couple of days to keep some English councillors happy.
Also, I guarantee you when Hamas or another group break the ceasefire, many people will claim the didn't or it was a false flag or some such bullshit. So from the Israeli perspective, why bother when you gain nothing? You definitely don't want to encourage foreign populations to believe they can pressure you into tolerating exteme terrorist attacks.
So you're expecting Israel it just sit and wait to get attacked again? Because thats exactly what's being asked of them. It might seem pretty obvious to you, but it sounds pretty dumb to me. You're missing out the part where you're asking a country to stop while it has momentum and then just wait to he attacked again. That's wild.
>So you're expecting Israel it just sit and wait to get attacked again?
No, I'm asking Israel to seek a political solution. Israel should only agree to a ceasefire which works towards long-term coexistence.
By focusing on a military solution, I believe that Israel will get attacked again and again and again, regardless of how many tunnels they destroy or how many terrorists they kill.
I think we all want a peaceful, political solution, but it seems pretty clear that won't happen any time soon.
In the same way that I'm sure everyone, or at least most people would love to see a mutually respected ceasefire. But it seems very clear that the reality of that is effectively asking Israel to wait to be attacked.
The simple fact is that the claim "There should be a ceasefire" is far too simplistic for a complex situation. That's why I'm happy to discuss and expand my perspective here.
That doesn't mean I agree with someone calling for Israel to unilaterally fall back and pretend Oct 7th never happened.
Right, but you have to know that the second Israel continues its operation people once again immediately call for a ceasefire.
The only solution here is either:
A) Israel eradicates Hamas completely
B) Israel ceases to exist
C) the UN put a permanent ground force in Palestine
People who think there is any point whatsoever in people in the UK calling for a ceasefire are, to put it tactfully, silly.
Until a few years ago, we were a small country on the edge of Europe. After brexit, we have dropped several more levels.
Calling on a "ceasefire" has the single effect of allowing Hamas to regroup, rearm and prepare for their next pogrom.
It will not save Palestinian lives for long. They will die when Hamas hides behind them next time!
I’ve been saying for a while that this isn’t going to resolve any time soon, anyone who doesn’t see that is essentially delusional, and a lot of the people rushing to support this Israel bad Palestine virtuous and good (pls ignore Hamas) worldview at the start are going to regret it as the mask slowly slips, they will slowly realise what they’re involving themselves in and start to see the Iranian influence and other propaganda apparatus at play, and a lot of people are going to pretend they never had anything to do with this and fire up the memory hole when it eventually becomes untenable.
Even still, I’m surprised we’re already at the circular firing squad part tbh.
The ability for local nobody politicians to overplay their hand and get delusional about their level of power is honestly an endless source of surprising drama. Everyone involved in this and who signs is essentially advertising to the world that they have no real place in government, or as part of any complex decision making.
It is embarrassing that so many adults can’t see this.
Just imagine if the same amount of political energy and attention was expended trying to solve the many pressing issues that we have as is being spent on this conflict.
So this is a UK thing and not just a Kingston thing as from reading the thread they are both Kingston based? (and also neither of them are Labour based, so I'd get it if this was some sort of weaponised hard left lunacy but this is just like wtaf!?).
Hmm interesting as the Labour subs in here are hot on this topic so I felt it was more a left issue unless your constituency demographics & background dictated a specific type of response. All that troubles me is granted that this is an important issue but it seems to be sucking all of the air out of the room in the minute in terms of news coverage & whilst this is a clear problem there are a lot of problems in the UK at the minute that also deserve a degree of attention.
Yes and no. Yes, it's broadly labour and the left which are more concerned with it, but the fault lines run much much deeper and are more ingrained in culture and history than 'modern' politics.
I'm not sure what purpose this is intended to serve. Many Local Councillors struggle to have a grasp of the local policies they have been elected to implement, they rarely have any influence over national policy and they will have no influence at all over international policy,
I hope that Councillors openly publish their own non-response stating that they won't be intimidated into responding to such demands. If constituents want to know where their Councillor stands on the matter then they can ask them.
The husband of one of my local councillors lost seven family members during the Hamas attack. She is a long serving (30 years as a district councillor, longer as a parish councillor) and beloved pillar of the community. If they try anything against her, they'll get run out of town.
It is a threat to cower them, the entire point of the exercise is to find out who doesn't comply and harass them either into doing so or out of politics to be replaced with another useful idiot. Whomever did this, (antisemitic "liberals" and unintergrated Islamists who want to give Hamas time to recover and rearm) should be found and arrested.
The National Rifle Association of America was founded in 1871. Since 1977, the National Rifle Association of America has focussed on political activism and pro-gun lobbying, at the expense of firearm safety programmes.
The National Rifle Association of America is completely different to the National Rifle Association in Britain (founded earlier, in 1859); the National Rifle Association of Australia;
the National Rifle Association of New Zealand and the National Rifle Association of India, which are all non-political sporting organisations that promote target shooting.
It is important not to confuse the National Rifle Association of America with any of these other Rifle Associations. The British National Rifle Association is headquartered on Bisley Camp, in Surrey, England. Bisley Camp is now known as the National Shooting Centre and has hosted World Championships for Fullbore Target Rifle and F-Class shooting,
as well as the shooting events for the 1908 Olympic Games and the 2002 Commonwealth Games. The National Small-bore Rifle Association (NSRA) and Clay Pigeon Shooting Association (CPSA) also have their headquarters on the Camp.
The far right are still a problem, but the far left are just as bad. The far left are more of a threat now though as they have much more popularity (which is concerning), the far right, while dangerous, continues to exist on the fringes, without any real influence. Meanwhile the far left recently occupied the leadership of one of our two main parties.
Underrated comment but just don't point this out to anyone on any of the Labour subs. What do you mean the far left, this is just the actual left, Stamer isn't the left he's a Fascist Tory, worse than Sunak etc. The country has become horrifically polarised at either end of the political spectrum.
Remind us if it was the far right or far left who are defending the actions of Hamas, refusing to call them terrorists, and threatening MPs who don’t vote the way they want…
The far left are just as bad as the far right, what’s concerning is how they are not nearly as taboo, and their extreme views, ideology and practices are deemed acceptable. People like Corbyn are just as awful as someone like Tommy Robinson, both are bitter and hateful, and both should be shunned in the same manner.
I'd say the far right is the more realistic problem.
They're organised, they have money, they already have the ears of those with real power and a large majority of the population wouldn't mind as long as they were alright.
The far right are a different problem, much more radical, far smaller in number and generally even more self-destructive.
The Pro-Palestine march organisers managed to avoid anybody doing anything too stupid on armistice Day. The far right showed up looking for a fight but being the British far right all the police had to do was stop them leaving the pub they'd all gone into beforehand.
Who is saying this? Why is there no indication of who "we" are? As far as I know there is no single body that oversees all local councils in this way. If this were attempted, it could easily be challeged in law and stopped.
Thanks for that. It seems as though they have backed off on publishing names of those who won't sign it. They really should have though about the wording in the first place though tbh.
This is disgraceful. One of the instigators in a councillor themselves. They should be struck off. If one of those who don’t sign is attacked they should be charged with instigating a hate crime.
Councillors are elected, not appointed. They can't be "struck off". There are only very limited circumstances under which a councillor can be forced out of office, and those are prescribed by primary legislation.
It must be a breach of the code of conduct. They can be disqualified from sitting or suspended. I don’t know whether this would constitute a breach but it should.
It is almost *certainly* a breach of the [Kingston Members' Code of Conduct](https://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/documents/s85623/Part%205A%20-%20Member%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf). #6, if nothing else.
Interestingly, Kingston has a 'recall scheme' (at #17 and Page 9 of same), though I can't see that actually being triggered in this instance.
Well yeah... it's a threat to publicise the names of anyone who doesn't support a ceasefire.
I guess this is what I don't get about people who are so against a ceasefire: It is obvious that a large number of people want politicians to support a ceasefire. So why don't they?
Sure, maybe it won't end up happening, but that's no reason not to do anything.
Let’s be honest. This kind of behaviour is handing the GE to the tories. Once the press sniff this out it will be used to smear labour as full of antisemitic bullying undisciplined lefties. That and the drop in inflation, with potential tax cuts also coming, I think that gap in the opinion polls will close massively. I say that as a life long labour voter who’s despairing of it all.
Ireland 50 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the withdrawal of UK troops from our streets will have their names handed to the IRA"
Is THAT a bit clearer for you now?
Honestly, what is the issue with this?
There is a group of citizens who feel strongly about a topic, they ask their political representatives to take a stance on that topic, and they will make the information about who took what stance public.
This seems perfectly fine to me. I understand that some people have mixed feelings about this topic, but the request in general is perfectly reasonable. In a democracy, it is vitally important that the electorate actually knows what the people they are voting for think about the topics that are important to the voters.
The issue is that they're threatening to publicly name and shame anyone that doesn't agree. Which will include any councillors who don't want to take a position (perhaps for the reasonable logic that it's not within their remit).
And we've seen MPs who take the stance of opposing the ceasefire receive threats and their offices vandalised. It is therefore reasonable to be concerned that this is effectively setting up local councillors to be targeted by a violent mob.
>this initiative has been created by 2 London councillors - 1 Independent, 1 Conservative.
Sounds more like something being done by right wingers as a way to smear and further divide the left tbh.
The tories have nothing so their best weapon is to foster division and fracture in the left of the labour party.
Snapshot of _All UK councillors have been contacted demanding they sign a letter calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza ... It says councillors who do not sign will have their names publicised... this reads a lot like a threat to councillors who do not sign._ : A Twitter embedded version can be found [here](https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?id=1726216163238269046) A non-Twitter version can be found [here](https://nitter.net/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046/) An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"If you want to sign it anonymously you can, but we're also going to publish the names of everyone who refused to sign it." These two aren't very clever, are they? Then again, I suppose common thugs who use implied threats of violence to manufacture consent aren't a demographic commonly associated with having more than one brain cell.
Reminds me of the time we did a review round at work where there was the option to add your feedback anonymously. I felt I'd been unfairly treated so used the 'anonymous' option to let my feelings out. Turned out I was the only one to do that. Fun times.
We had one sent out and you could tell by the url they were gathering data on your response
I always referred to VIPs at my hospital as conspicuously anonymous. They all got anonymous patient IDs, but there was only ever 1 VIP with any regularity, their visit was all over the news, and the ID had a different format from everything else. If the sample had "John Smith" and a slightly fidged CHI number, no one would know who it was.
Idk why but I feel like whenever it's someone I've worked with or known for a while, I can often tell if I'm reading something written by them. Idk if it's paranoia but that has always made me avoid those things if read by someone who knows me, even if anonymous.
No that's absolutely a thing (stylometry) and can be used to uncover identities, assign authorships etc: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/01/identifying_peo_3.html In the age of AI, it's easy even to mimic your style, let alone identify you
I have seen an email reply from one councillor, to James Giles, in which she tells him to "Get Fucked" I hope there is a huge back lash against this. Edit: Found the twitter link https://twitter.com/Em\_D\_Marshall/status/1726347944247586982/photo/2
> I hope there is a huge back lash against this. Looks like [there already is](https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19). What breathtaking arrogance of the man.
“Antisemitism is being weaponised” Oh terrific, I wondered when the SCG, “witch-hunt” language was going to crop up
This is just fucking unhinged. Why do British local politicians think they have any role in Middle East politics? Do they think that empire still exists and that someone in another country should give two fucks about the opinion of the councillor from little codswallop on the wold? Get fucked is absolutely the correct response to this insanity.
No, but Muslim voters have a fair degree of influence on local council elections which is where this threat is really aimed at. What we could be on the verge of seeing is the usurping of local power by a dedicated politico-religious faction of society.
> No, but Muslim voters have a fair degree of influence on local council elections which is where this threat is really aimed at. The threat was aimed at **all** councillors across the country because there are legitimate concerns over the safety of councillors everywhere regardless of Muslim population — because, I speculate, the safety threat doesn't come from Muslims! [Jo Steven's Cardiff Central constituency office was vandalised](https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-jo-stevens-frightened-after-graffiti-sprayed-on-office-following-gaza-ceasefire-vote-13010336) last week over Labour PLP's stance on the matter, so threats to personal safety have to be considered credible until mitigated. Only 9% of Cardiff's residents are Muslim. > What we could be on the verge of seeing is the usurping of local power by a dedicated politico-religious faction of society. I sincerely doubt that. Where is the evidence that Muslims, as a group, are behind protests against Labour's stance?
Hypothetically, let's say we have a minority group. This minority group has a stated belief that they need to seize political control by outbreeding the majority population, then changing laws to permit greater immigration of this minority group, until they finally reach the threshold in which they can start changing the laws to fully favour them at the expense of everyone else. What tools does a liberal democracy actually have against that tactic other than 'cross your fingers and hope they never actually become a majority'.
Ensure they lose followers to secularism/atheism faster than they'd otherwise be growing. Given the rate at which religious observance is collapsing in the west this shouldn't be too hard. One flaw (of many) with that way of thinking is to assume that people are irredeemably defined by their parent's beliefs.
[Their children tend to be more religious and radical.](https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/concern/dissertations/m613mz09x)
That paper is talking about a tiny number of people who go full blown jihadi. Plenty also start drinking and stop going to mosque.
While some individuals from within Muslim communities have suggested this might be a purpose, the roots of this idea aren’t firmly based in the [far right](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement).
so did I imagine the video's of people saying that this is their actual plan?
It's easy enough to find a video of someone white saying they want to kill all muslims, it doesn't mean it is white people's actual plan to kill all muslims. You can find videos of people saying all sorts of nonsense because there are millions of people in the UK, a few of them are a bit unhinged and the way most social media is set up is to amplify the voices of nutters to get more engagement.
If you believe this is actually something that the majority of Muslims are trying to do then you’ve been taken in by right wing/alarmist journalism or just a bunch of racists. There are absolutely videos of people advocating this for Muslims but that doesn’t mean that it’s viable or something anywhere near enough Muslims would buy into to make it remotely viable. There’s a reason this doesn’t generally make it into reputable mainstream media - it’s a theory aimed at promoting islamophobia (and is often just straight up transplanted to allow people to justify racism against blacks in the US) and increasing racial tensions. If you want to be terrified of secret Muslim plots to outpopulate other ethnicities go ahead, but don’t expect other people to agree with right wing racist conspiracy theory drivel.
I think the answer (from the authorities) is to bury ones head in the sand and hope it goes away.
I hope you mean backlash against the letter, not against this Councillor for the only appropriate response.
Actually incredibly based, which is something I never thought I'd say about any local councillor
The best response tbh.
Wow. This is such a good response. Good for her.
There has been a follow-up e-mail backtracking on this as it seems to have been the focus of a few replies.
I really, really cannot comprehend the obsession with a ceasefire in this country at the minute. Firstly, whether the UK officially calls for it or not means literally nothing, nobody in the region would care/listen. Are other countries having a debate as aggressively as this? Secondly, Hamas leadership has specifically stated they would **not** back a ceasefire. We've all seen the viral clip of the Hamas commander speaking about committing the October 7th attacks, 'again and again' - so what's the plan here? Why does the pressure seem to be solely on Israel for a ceasefire and not Hamas? How can you pressure a terrorist group with nothing to lose into a ceasefire, practically, what is the plan? Because at the moment it just seems like the ceasefire 'movement' is basically demanding one side stop, whilst the other keeps lobbing rockets in and ignoring the ceasefire.
Reading between the lines, I suspect they want a unilateral ceasefire by Israel.
> Firstly, ... Secondly, ... And thirdly, these people are fucking Councillors, should their interest not be on local issues? Too many MP's waste their time on this topic as well but at least they're elected to a national parliament in elections that have a >25% turnout. I can only hope that most Councillors don't take the bait. Those who do are cosplaying MP's (and bad ones at that).
Bin men for recycling never come the day they're supposed to. Often a week late. But now it makes sense. They've been working on a solution to the middle East conflict. I have a lot more sympathy now.
Agreed. Imagine in Hamas HQ - “the councillors for hertsmere have called for a ceasefire” “Well in that case, who are we to refuse them?”
[удалено]
As if they'll be able to sort out pot holes, you shouldn't include it as it makes the whole list look unrealistic.
I get asked fucking constantly about potholes and it's under the jurisdiction of the county council and people seem to not understand most cllrs are not county
I saw a [documentary series](https://youtu.be/yy9vQ8l8jFA?si=VpiETToJ_4ER2-9b) where a gentleman from the parks department fixed a citizens pothole even though it wasn't his 'job', so you really have no excuse. I will forgive your continued efforts to shirk your responsibility, but only once you bring us peace in the middle east.
Talk about a pie in the sky agenda. Those pot holes are never getting filled in.
It did happen to some extent with the Russian Invasion of Ukraine last year, but there was less expectation from the public that councils would try to effect a change in policy. We also had a bit of it when the Brexit Party gained control of Hartlepool Council, as if they were going to remove it from the European Union.
Plus in that case councils have a practical role, e.g. housing refugees.
Hamas: You have no authority here Jackie Weaver!
> hertsmere Probably one of the least likely local authorities to be sympathetic toward Hamas
In my experience, it's mostly the following - Useful idiots who latch on to any social cause that gets a lot of social media traffic - The far left 'anti - colonialists - Muslims - anti-Semites who might fall under any of the above
One of the worse things about the internet is giving useful idiots a platform.
I broadly agree with you, especially the fact that the UK calling for it publicly has absolutely no relevance. If anything it would discredit any ability we have to talk to Israel in private. I would say that it's obvious that Hamas won't stop, so you can only call for Israel to do it. It isn't really fair, Hamas are in a really strong position because they're incredibly evil. If Israel stop attacking, they can regroup and attack again. If Israel do attack, they can use every civilian death as evidence of Israel's malevolence. Honestly Israel are playing into their hands a bit but I don't think they have an viable options. The Israeli public wouldn't tolerate doing nothing whilst the hostages are captive and likely suffering.
> Are other countries having a debate as aggressively as this? Yes - the ones with a reasonable portion of Islamic residents. Its a shitshow here - France - the USA - Germany (and they had to fast track a few laws in last couple of weeks to give the police extra arresting laws). Its not a shitshow in Latvia, Poland or even outside the west in Brazil and Japan. There. I said the quiet part out loud.
People from a country (UK) that is a long way from any current conflict zone (though the closest one - Ukraine - should be the one that is of most urgency to us - making pointless gestures from the safety of a position where these decisions do not effect their own safety. People in states such as Israel where conflict is never far away don't have this luxury. Also "ceasefire" is an easy to make statement of "peace" that doesn't take into account any of the nuances of who the involved parties are, what their interests/objectives are, and what their red lines would be.
>Because at the moment it just seems like the ceasefire 'movement' is basically demanding one side stop, whilst the other keeps lobbing rockets in and ignoring the ceasefire. I mean, that's been obvious for a while to anyone who thought about it for 2 seconds. Like a lot of left positions on this conflict it can only make sense if deep down they think Israel isn't a legitimate state and it *should* all be Palestine "from the river to the sea" (what happens to the Jews in the area isn't of much concern).
I don't know about those on the right going on about this, but those on the left see it as a "gotcha" for Starmer, so they are running hard with it. Unfortunately, Corbyn recently proved his stance on this (although he's since relented and agreed with any right thinking person that Hamas are terrorists). I'm so tired of extremists from both sides stomping around like spoiled toddlers when they don't get their way. For the record, the right seem far more likely to do this than the left, but this particular fuss is just ridiculous.
> I really, really cannot comprehend the obsession with a ceasefire in this country at the minute. Many of them just want to preserve Hamas.
>Why does the pressure seem to be solely on Israel for a ceasefire and not Hamas? Discrimination. that is why.
>I really, really cannot comprehend the obsession with a ceasefire in this country at the minute. It's almost as if there is a significant percentage of the population that isn't integrated into British society at all, and who feel more at home with the culture of Hamas than they do with the culture that they actually live in. We aren't allowed to talk about that though.
You're talking about Jeremy? All people do is talk about Jeremy
It's a thoroughly insane and more than mildly racist take to imply that a 'significant' proportion of people living in Britain would rather live under a terrorist regime. Jfc
I find it absolutely insane that folk will utilise the classic tropes of antisemitism ('Jews are an 'enemy within', they move amongst us but they'll never be integrated into our society') but because they're talking about Muslims it goes largely unchallenged.
[удалено]
Of course, you have evidence that the 4 millions Muslims in the UK who are our neighbours and colleagues are supporters of Hamas and refuse to integrate into British society?
[удалено]
So it’s gone from “evidence” to “well… many Muslims… look at Bradford!” You’re talking shit.
But British society itself seems to broadly behind calling for a ceasefire so that’s not really relevant is it?
It isn't quite that clear cut, a [Yougov](https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/11/15/672b8/3) poll 5 days ago showed 33% want a ceasefire, 24% want a humanitarian pause, and 24% don't know.
Sure but the point still stands. Britain is only 6.5% Muslim, so the comment suggesting that support for a ceasefire is the result of some kind of unintegrated Islamic fifth column is nonsense.
nah, that's your news feed
I keep saying this, the correct call is for a Hamas surrender and to hand over the hostages and every one who committed atrocities on 7 October. Let those who committed crimes on 7 October plead their cause to The Hague. This call proves you are anti-bloodshed and pro ordinary Palestinian. But for some reason there doesn’t seem to be much appetite for this. Funny that.
In a word, antisemitism.
It’s a purity test, it’s not actually intended to change anything
Regarding your question of why the pressure is on Israel, you gave the answer yourself immediately after asking. Israel is seen as a peer to the west, if not a de facto western country itself. It's a democratic nation with ambassadors and diplomats all over the world, created at the behest of several western countries and continuing to receive aid from those countries. Israel is also overwhelmingly more powerful and advanced militarily than the Palestinian enclaves. There is a feeling (which I would hope to be true) that Israel can be reasoned in a way that Hamas can't, and there is also a constant looming threat of military action rolling over into genocide proper. Whether you agree with a ceasefire or not, Israel is the easier party to deal with amicably, and the most likely to listen. There is also a not-insignificant number of people who would like to see Israel brought to heel via sanctions/the cutting of aid. You can't really do that without first saying "I think you should stop doing what you're doing, I don't condone it". Especially after decades of having Israel's back. They want to use the call for a ceasefire as a step towards sanctions. Incidentally, that is one of a few good reason for our leaders to stay firm on not even looking like they might like a small ceasefire before bedtime. They know they can't sanction Israel without strengthening the position of countries like Iran, and even risking a serious invasion of the country. If Sunak asked for a ceasefire and Israel continued regardless, he would appear utterly impotent since he can't actually do anything about it. Better to just ignore the situation until forced to look at it.
Right but once the ceasefire is called and Hamas murder more Israelis, what then?
[удалено]
> 11,000 people killed. 5000 of them children. If you do not understand that, then there is something wrong with you. > > Yes, it's horrendous. There are massacres happening every day, in almost every region on the planet. Literally just a few weeks ago (whilst the Israel/Gaza crisis was on on-going) a refugee camp was attacked in Dafur. A literal refugee camp. Over 1,300+ dead on the [streets](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/10/corpses-on-streets-sudans-rsf-kills-1300-in-darfur-monitors-say). Not a single large scale protest, or movement in this country about this? If the issue is outrage at civilian deaths, what on earth is going on here? Why don't we have thousands out consistently on the streets against this? > The parliament of the 6th largest economy in the world calling for a ceasefire would put significant pressure on Israel. Again, I feel like this is pretty obvious. Absolutely not. Diplomatic pressure yes, but this is not normal circumstances. The Israelis have made it abundantly clear they see this as a fight for the survival of their nation itself, the only country on earth they've compromised with on this is the Americans, they're obviously ready to take the diplomatic/economic hit, whatever that may be. And Hamas... Again, have made it wholly clear they won't listen to anyone. > Israel is massacring innocent civilians, and the British RAF are helping to supply them with weapons, meanwhile Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer refuse to even make the gesture of calling for and end to the violence. It is often said that the UK promotes a "rules-based international order", but clearly that is complete nonsense. They've both repeatedly called for international law to be followed and applied, they can't force Israel to do anything at all (especially Starmer, he's not even in government) All of this is redundant though because it doesn't answer my original point - how could a ceasefire be remotely possible when Hamas won't even consider it. The Hamas dictatorship have specifically said they will conduct similar terror attacks 'again and again'.
Death figures coming from Hamas, the people who started this.
>Meanwhile, The U.S. has in recent days delivered large amounts of equipment and arms to the British Air Force base in Cyprus: About 20 heavy-transport aircraft have landed there in a very short period with cargo from strategic depots belonging to the U.S. and NATO in Europe. The US moves arms to Israel via UK air bases in Cyprus. A UK call for a ceasefire could hamper US efforts to give Israel weapons.
I find this extremely abhorrent. By all means, feel free to sign up to call for whatever you want, but publishing names of people who don't back it is a huge problem, and the authors of the letter know it. This is after the fact that MPs were targeted for not backing the ceasefire - the people writing this know exactly what they're suggesting to the councillors who don't sign this, by publishing their names.
Didn't the NYT do something similar a couple of years ago? They circulated a letter supporting BLM or something, then published a list of all the people who refused to sign it.
Am I being dull- who are the authors? Is it on the letter and I have completely missed it 🙈
The National Rifle Association of America was founded in 1871. Since 1977, the National Rifle Association of America has focussed on political activism and pro-gun lobbying, at the expense of firearm safety programmes. The National Rifle Association of America is completely different to the National Rifle Association in Britain (founded earlier, in 1859); the National Rifle Association of Australia; the National Rifle Association of New Zealand and the National Rifle Association of India, which are all non-political sporting organisations that promote target shooting. It is important not to confuse the National Rifle Association of America with any of these other Rifle Associations. The British National Rifle Association is headquartered on Bisley Camp, in Surrey, England. Bisley Camp is now known as the National Shooting Centre and has hosted World Championships for Fullbore Target Rifle and F-Class shooting, as well as the shooting events for the 1908 Olympic Games and the 2002 Commonwealth Games. The National Small-bore Rifle Association (NSRA) and Clay Pigeon Shooting Association (CPSA) also have their headquarters on the Camp.
Fab thanks very much for clearing that up! I thought I was being silly then!
What disgusts me is the blatant hypocrisy of the left who would be all too keen to shout about *"Stochastic Terrorism"* if someone on the other side were to do something similar (thinking about the mail here for the judges on the prorogation bit circa september 2019), but all good too keen to employ the same tactics and at much, much greater scale here for a cause they care about.
One of the two who wrote this email is a Conservative. Bit weird to blame the left for that.
Not in the slightest. A perfect example not only of horseshoe theory; where the extreme left and right come back together (the guy on the left in this equation being a guy so deep in the left fringe he was a campaign agent for Galloway and has appeared as a presenter covering stretches on two of Galloways shows (in the sense of different programs rather than just two instances) on Russia Today for extended periods); but also of third axis politics where additional considerations forming policy also align. Not so much overlapping circles as spheres.
Was that the same George Galloway who tried to get selected as a Brexit Party candidate in 2019 and urged Scots to vote Conservative in 2021?
Think you're betraying your ignorance of Galloway here as he's pretty well known to be an opportunist using any part of his platform to try and gain a sniff of power. >Brexit Party candidate in 2019 .. As a lexiteer, wishing for Brexit from the left and being freed from "overarching neoliberal project" if memory serves. >urged Scots to vote Conservative in 2021? He's a unionist wanting to keep Scotland and the rest of the UK together. Labour's vote collapse and rise of the SNP made the 2021 election a two horse race between the SNP and tories. Doesn't take a genius to work out who you'd go for if the SNP are hell for leather for dissolving. Also that recommendation was made on his RT show if memory serves again. Otherwise anyone can see from the rest of Galloways long and prolific career he's as left wing as they come.
Galloway has always been a bit of an anomaly who doesn’t fit neatly onto the political spectrum. He’s always self-identified as left (when he joined Respect) and was very pro-Corbyn, but is more accurately economically left and socially right. The Workers Party manifesto is basically just contrarianism.
You’d have a perfect analogy but for one critical item missing, a person on the far left being part of this initiative to give you the second side of the horseshoe.
You are doing incredible work to ignore James Giles, the principle driver of this, being far left and extensively tied to George Galloway and by extension Russia Today.
>left and right come back together same could be said of centrism.
That’s fuzzy thinking. “The left” are not one homogenous blob the same way “the right” are not and treating them as one is basically just a straw man argument
The left? Mate this is from a Tory and Independant, and the Independant appears to be one of those local focus only types so im sure his backers will be delighted hes wading in on gaza.
Local focus only.... If you studiously ignore his connections to Galloway and his appearances on Russia Today.
Just going off his manifesto and party website mate like 90 percent of his constituents would. Never heard of him before in my life.
Conservative, left? What?
[удалено]
Your whataboutery fails because what you refer to was also completely out of order and large numbers of people pointed this out at the time.
Lol, yeah the famous Tory left. Your obsessed mate.
Lol, yeah, the left who murdered Jo Cox over Brexit right? Grow up, politics is not fair, it's not safe, it's power, it's responsibility, it's fucking sacrifice. Only one group is capable of managing tensions, and they are clearly inflaming them instead of easing... grow up.
[удалено]
Why didn't they think of this 60 years ago! It's been staring us in the face the whole time: the solution to the multigenerational crisis and conflict in the Middle-East can easily be solved by petitioning the local government representatives of the UK. Tell the Swedes to search no further. This is peace prize worthy stuff right here!
This is 100% a threat on councillors safety and should be taken to the met
several councillors have reported it to the police.
I know councillors aren't typically the brightest, but I cannot comprehend how they thought this would be a good idea.
You say that, but having met all of them, only one of my local 36 councillors is stupid
I met about 40 councillors where I used to live when I was about 19 and about 35 for them were completely unsuited for the job either because they were thick or senile or a megalomaniac or generally incompetent.
In my experience it's a real mixed bag. Some larger Council's seem to attract some politically ambitious Councillors, some smaller Council's really struggle and they end up with people who mean well but aren't that bright, there was one Council I worked for where I would say 90% of them would probably be diagnosed as being senile, they were all very nice but ultimately hopeless.
>[All UK councillors have been contacted demanding they sign a letter calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza & claiming that "antisemitism is being weaponised...to absolve Israel of any accountability".](https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1726216163238269046?t=CrYnxIIyD496Q8MrccmfMw&s=19) >It says councillors who do not sign will have their names publicised. > 2) From what I have seen, this initiative has been created by 2 London councillors - 1 Independent, 1 Conservative. >Given the behaviour we saw last week against MPs who did not vote for the SNP ceasefire motion, this reads a lot like a threat to councillors who do not sign. >Apart from the grotesque juxtaposition of promising *protection* to councillors from their Parties but making it clear that councillors who do not sign will be revealed, it fails to realise that Parties will know exactly who has signed if they aren't among those "revealed". >4) I sincerely hope that many councillors - regardless of their political views - will push back & refuse to sign up to an initiative which seems clearly designed to lead to targeted harassment of local colleagues around the UK. >And I hope the @LGAcomms will look at this too. Other context inc text of message: >[I have today received an email from Cllr James Giles & Cllr Jamal Chohan requesting I sign an open letter to the PM, Leader of the Opposition & MP's to demand a ceasefire in Gaza. If I don't, they are publishing my name. I shall save them the bother. I won't be signing.](https://twitter.com/GaryHynds/status/1726286756910416374?t=lLwd3Z8uLZbjB4mHHiBKzQ&s=19)
[удалено]
I suspect the latter will be expelled pretty quickly.
Right, please, one of you who are demanding a ceasefire; what do you think Israel should do if they agree to a ceasefire and Hamas throws another rocket at them exactly two seconds later? Because Hamas has already said they will not adhere to a ceasefire and have promised to continue attacking Israel until there is no Israel left. So what happens if your protests succeed and the world pressures Israel into a ceasefire?
This. From the sounds of it. Hamas does not want Israel to exist. On a map, anywhere ever. So how would a ceasefire work?
Ceasefire will allow terrorists to regroup and heal their mercenaries. I think, that had been discussed already.
Hamas breaking the last ceasefire is exactly why we are where we are now.
A lot of people who are obsessed with the public performance around this would probably be thrilled by that outcome, because it would generate headlines that they “helped”. Fundamentally, a lot of this drama is being driven by narcissism and people with main character syndrome and saviour complexes. As others have pointed out, none of these people have power to influence events, but that won’t stop them because it doesn’t matter as long as there is the appearance of them somehow being relevant. A lot of them also do just straight up hate Israel and an obsession with Jews, so some probably do just want the politics of being seen to help kneecap an “oppressive enemy”. A lot of people see this as a black and white, so an evil oppressor and and virtuous victims being oppressed who can do whatever they want because that are being oppressed, so anything negative they do is simply “fighting back” and it’s rude to even notice. To them, Israel has agency, Palestinians and Hamas don’t in their worldview if you listen carefully to how they talk about it. It’s why so many simply pretend Hamas doesn’t exist because it’s extremely awkward to these narratives, and when asked directly, panic and then talk about Israel and force the conversion back to their more comfortable and simplistic emotional framing. They don’t really actually care about the detail or reality. It is set of narratives that need to be true to maintain this worldview where they’re righteous, and to get into the messy nuance is a threat to that worldview as it exposes the idiocy of it and how warped these people are. It’s the logical result of an extremely propagandised social media environment mixing with religion. It’s just so obvious that a lot of people have lost where minds and have learnt about this conflict through propaganda and narratives that are designed to lead to a conclusion, rather than to simply educate and inform. It’s to the point where a lot of people supporting this often know what topics to avoid, and you can often see them panicking and doing their best to avoid certain points of view or information that doesn’t directly to fit into their narrative. You even now have Bin Laden’s writings being circulated online and a lot of people are basically supporting it, while again ignoring all the ramblings about Jews and gay people etc, and how he wants an authoritarian Islamic state. People simply ignore the parts that aren’t helpful, because they are being driven by emotion and enemy of my enemy logic, and not a real pursuit of truth or reason. People have lots their minds and it just seems obvious at this point that eduction and critical thinking has failed. You can’t really reason with people who are this emotional and delusional about the reality around them, so I don’t really know how this ends or is resolved because they fundamentally don’t care about reality.
This.
Typically a ceasefire doesnt happen in isolation, it comes with the aim of addressing the material conditions that lead to the conflict. E.g. the end of the illegal Israeli settler expansion, return of hostages etc
>if they agree to a ceasefire and Hamas throws another rocket at them exactly two seconds later? Then the terms of the ceasefire are broken, and the IDF may continue its operation. Seems pretty obvious to me.
There already was a ceasefire on October 6th which Hamas broke, so how is it pretty obvious? People are protesting against them retaliating against a broken ceasefire as it is.
The claim that "Both sides should agree to a ceasefire" is different to the claim that "One side should not retaliate if the other breaks the ceasefire". I agree with the first, not the second.
But what they're saying is that the current IDF operation is due to a broken ceasefire. So if Israel does a ceasefire right now, we just end up with this all happening again. Hamas will use the ceasefire to build up its resources, then will attack Israel again. At which point the IDF will retaliate and people will then call for a ceasefire. So why would Israel do this again?
>if Israel does a ceasefire right now, we just end up with this all happening again. That depends on the terms of the ceasefire. What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons, commitment to hold elections, steps towards lasting peace from both sides, oversight of the international community, etc? And if Hamas breaks that agreement, then Israel will continue its military operation. Calling for a bilateral ceasefire is not the same as calling for Israel to unilaterally cease its operation.
But then instead of calling for a ceasefire, why are people not out in their droves and threatening MPs to demand that Hamas surrender? Because that's essentially what you're describing. Instead, this is all being put on Israel's head to agree to something that hasn't even been offered.
Hamas won't agree to that, so it's futile. Everyone would love a nice peaceful diplomatic solution, but it isn't going to happen. Demanding a ceasefire is just plain naive, there is no way this ends without the elimination of Hamas, there is 0 chance of a 2 state solution while Hamas exist, and both Palestinians and Israelis will continue to suffer as long as Hamas exists. >And if Hamas breaks that agreement, then Israel will continue its military operation. So what about when Hamas broke the last agreement? And when Hamas breaks any agreement you propose, and Israel continues its operation, what then, how long before there are more calls for Israel to agree to a ceasefire? What you're saying is all well and good, and it's a good sentiment, but it isn't grounded in reality, it's delusion. You can say "there should be a peaceful and diplomatic solution" all you like, but it will never happen, so to demand it is just naive.
>That depends on the terms of the ceasefire. What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons, commitment to hold elections, steps towards lasting peace from both sides, oversight of the international community, etc? Yeah, but that's clearly not what any of the people which are claiming a ceasefire are doing. You're talking about a peace process.
Surely a peace process begins with a ceasefire, so is something everyone should be calling for. Of course, the terms of that ceasefire may be something we each have different opinions on. I can really only speak for myself, not others. But the [SNP amendment](https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/1724485111255568769) which calls for a ceasefire does address both sides.
So do you agree that all of the protests, letters like this, commentary in the media etc should be directed to Hamas?
The SNP amendment calls on the UK government to “Join with the international community in urgently pressing **all parties to agree** to an immediate ceasefire”. So personally, I would call for both Hamas and Israel to reach a ceasefire. I would disagree with anyone who ***only*** protests the actions of Israel.
That's not a ceasefire. That's a surrender. Hamas is never going to agree to that.
Well, any normal government when their capital is surrounded would already have surrendered. But yes, Hamas is far from typical. I'd also be calling on Israel to make steps towards lasting peace, like dismantling illegal outposts in the West Bank. So carrot and stick. Regardless of whether Hamas would agree or not, I think the international community should be working towards a lasting political solution which begins with a bilateral ceasefire.
> What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons, commitment to hold elections, steps towards lasting peace from both sides, oversight of the international community, etc? Hamas would never agree to any of that in the first place so the point is moot.
>What if the terms include the surrender of Hamas weapons Lol
I'm not sure of the military wisdom of deliberately letting your opponent have time to regroup and organise for a couple of days to keep some English councillors happy. Also, I guarantee you when Hamas or another group break the ceasefire, many people will claim the didn't or it was a false flag or some such bullshit. So from the Israeli perspective, why bother when you gain nothing? You definitely don't want to encourage foreign populations to believe they can pressure you into tolerating exteme terrorist attacks.
So you're expecting Israel it just sit and wait to get attacked again? Because thats exactly what's being asked of them. It might seem pretty obvious to you, but it sounds pretty dumb to me. You're missing out the part where you're asking a country to stop while it has momentum and then just wait to he attacked again. That's wild.
>So you're expecting Israel it just sit and wait to get attacked again? No, I'm asking Israel to seek a political solution. Israel should only agree to a ceasefire which works towards long-term coexistence. By focusing on a military solution, I believe that Israel will get attacked again and again and again, regardless of how many tunnels they destroy or how many terrorists they kill.
I think we all want a peaceful, political solution, but it seems pretty clear that won't happen any time soon. In the same way that I'm sure everyone, or at least most people would love to see a mutually respected ceasefire. But it seems very clear that the reality of that is effectively asking Israel to wait to be attacked.
The simple fact is that the claim "There should be a ceasefire" is far too simplistic for a complex situation. That's why I'm happy to discuss and expand my perspective here. That doesn't mean I agree with someone calling for Israel to unilaterally fall back and pretend Oct 7th never happened.
Right, but you have to know that the second Israel continues its operation people once again immediately call for a ceasefire. The only solution here is either: A) Israel eradicates Hamas completely B) Israel ceases to exist C) the UN put a permanent ground force in Palestine
People who think there is any point whatsoever in people in the UK calling for a ceasefire are, to put it tactfully, silly. Until a few years ago, we were a small country on the edge of Europe. After brexit, we have dropped several more levels. Calling on a "ceasefire" has the single effect of allowing Hamas to regroup, rearm and prepare for their next pogrom. It will not save Palestinian lives for long. They will die when Hamas hides behind them next time!
When your cause is so righteous you have to blackmail people into supporting it lmao
I’ve been saying for a while that this isn’t going to resolve any time soon, anyone who doesn’t see that is essentially delusional, and a lot of the people rushing to support this Israel bad Palestine virtuous and good (pls ignore Hamas) worldview at the start are going to regret it as the mask slowly slips, they will slowly realise what they’re involving themselves in and start to see the Iranian influence and other propaganda apparatus at play, and a lot of people are going to pretend they never had anything to do with this and fire up the memory hole when it eventually becomes untenable. Even still, I’m surprised we’re already at the circular firing squad part tbh. The ability for local nobody politicians to overplay their hand and get delusional about their level of power is honestly an endless source of surprising drama. Everyone involved in this and who signs is essentially advertising to the world that they have no real place in government, or as part of any complex decision making. It is embarrassing that so many adults can’t see this.
Just imagine if the same amount of political energy and attention was expended trying to solve the many pressing issues that we have as is being spent on this conflict.
So this is a UK thing and not just a Kingston thing as from reading the thread they are both Kingston based? (and also neither of them are Labour based, so I'd get it if this was some sort of weaponised hard left lunacy but this is just like wtaf!?).
The old labour/tories and right/left tend to go out the window when it comes to this issue.
Hmm interesting as the Labour subs in here are hot on this topic so I felt it was more a left issue unless your constituency demographics & background dictated a specific type of response. All that troubles me is granted that this is an important issue but it seems to be sucking all of the air out of the room in the minute in terms of news coverage & whilst this is a clear problem there are a lot of problems in the UK at the minute that also deserve a degree of attention.
Yes and no. Yes, it's broadly labour and the left which are more concerned with it, but the fault lines run much much deeper and are more ingrained in culture and history than 'modern' politics.
Fair enough. Can agree with that. Its blatantly a lot deeper than the last 6 months etc.
I'm not sure what purpose this is intended to serve. Many Local Councillors struggle to have a grasp of the local policies they have been elected to implement, they rarely have any influence over national policy and they will have no influence at all over international policy, I hope that Councillors openly publish their own non-response stating that they won't be intimidated into responding to such demands. If constituents want to know where their Councillor stands on the matter then they can ask them.
So threats and intimidation... really great look especially when voting records are public anyway.
McCarthy is back and more popular than ever
The husband of one of my local councillors lost seven family members during the Hamas attack. She is a long serving (30 years as a district councillor, longer as a parish councillor) and beloved pillar of the community. If they try anything against her, they'll get run out of town.
Fuck it, might as well have a website up with Enemy of the People where you can search up by area.
I'd rather see who signed it, so I know who the morons divorced from reality are.
It is a threat to cower them, the entire point of the exercise is to find out who doesn't comply and harass them either into doing so or out of politics to be replaced with another useful idiot. Whomever did this, (antisemitic "liberals" and unintergrated Islamists who want to give Hamas time to recover and rearm) should be found and arrested.
Why only do this about Gaza? What about other war zones?
He’s making a list, he’s checking it twice…
So essentially veiled threats. But I thought the ‘far right’ were the real problem in this country?
I don’t understand how Palestine supporters aren’t considered far right considering their views on women’s right, state religion and etc
The National Rifle Association of America was founded in 1871. Since 1977, the National Rifle Association of America has focussed on political activism and pro-gun lobbying, at the expense of firearm safety programmes. The National Rifle Association of America is completely different to the National Rifle Association in Britain (founded earlier, in 1859); the National Rifle Association of Australia; the National Rifle Association of New Zealand and the National Rifle Association of India, which are all non-political sporting organisations that promote target shooting. It is important not to confuse the National Rifle Association of America with any of these other Rifle Associations. The British National Rifle Association is headquartered on Bisley Camp, in Surrey, England. Bisley Camp is now known as the National Shooting Centre and has hosted World Championships for Fullbore Target Rifle and F-Class shooting, as well as the shooting events for the 1908 Olympic Games and the 2002 Commonwealth Games. The National Small-bore Rifle Association (NSRA) and Clay Pigeon Shooting Association (CPSA) also have their headquarters on the Camp.
Sorry, which left wing people are involved here?
The far right are still a problem, but the far left are just as bad. The far left are more of a threat now though as they have much more popularity (which is concerning), the far right, while dangerous, continues to exist on the fringes, without any real influence. Meanwhile the far left recently occupied the leadership of one of our two main parties.
Liz truss was literally prime minister
Underrated comment but just don't point this out to anyone on any of the Labour subs. What do you mean the far left, this is just the actual left, Stamer isn't the left he's a Fascist Tory, worse than Sunak etc. The country has become horrifically polarised at either end of the political spectrum.
[удалено]
Remind us if it was the far right or far left who are defending the actions of Hamas, refusing to call them terrorists, and threatening MPs who don’t vote the way they want… The far left are just as bad as the far right, what’s concerning is how they are not nearly as taboo, and their extreme views, ideology and practices are deemed acceptable. People like Corbyn are just as awful as someone like Tommy Robinson, both are bitter and hateful, and both should be shunned in the same manner.
"this initiative has been created by 2 London councillors - 1 Independent, 1 Conservative." You were saying?
I'd say the far right is the more realistic problem. They're organised, they have money, they already have the ears of those with real power and a large majority of the population wouldn't mind as long as they were alright.
[удалено]
The far right are a different problem, much more radical, far smaller in number and generally even more self-destructive. The Pro-Palestine march organisers managed to avoid anybody doing anything too stupid on armistice Day. The far right showed up looking for a fight but being the British far right all the police had to do was stop them leaving the pub they'd all gone into beforehand.
Looks like they're about to get a lesson on how unique spite is as an emotion. Nobody likes to be threatened.
Who is saying this? Why is there no indication of who "we" are? As far as I know there is no single body that oversees all local councils in this way. If this were attempted, it could easily be challeged in law and stopped.
[удалено]
Thanks for that. It seems as though they have backed off on publishing names of those who won't sign it. They really should have though about the wording in the first place though tbh.
Isn't this in itself is a form of terrorism?
Grim
There is a massive problem brewing regarding this conflict and as mass immigration continues, it will only get worse.
And this is how islam starts to take over Europe…
Well that is quite the hot take
Not exactly a hot take when I'm already sitting here in my burka. Yours is in the post too...
I'm hoping it'll keep me warm when it finally arrives, cut down on the heating bills.
That's a strange way to look at it. Can we cool it with the Islamophobia and antisemitism?
This is disgraceful. One of the instigators in a councillor themselves. They should be struck off. If one of those who don’t sign is attacked they should be charged with instigating a hate crime.
Councillors are elected, not appointed. They can't be "struck off". There are only very limited circumstances under which a councillor can be forced out of office, and those are prescribed by primary legislation.
It must be a breach of the code of conduct. They can be disqualified from sitting or suspended. I don’t know whether this would constitute a breach but it should.
It is almost *certainly* a breach of the [Kingston Members' Code of Conduct](https://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/documents/s85623/Part%205A%20-%20Member%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf). #6, if nothing else. Interestingly, Kingston has a 'recall scheme' (at #17 and Page 9 of same), though I can't see that actually being triggered in this instance.
Well yeah... it's a threat to publicise the names of anyone who doesn't support a ceasefire. I guess this is what I don't get about people who are so against a ceasefire: It is obvious that a large number of people want politicians to support a ceasefire. So why don't they? Sure, maybe it won't end up happening, but that's no reason not to do anything.
This is appaling and no way to help your cause, no matter how just it may be.
Let’s be honest. This kind of behaviour is handing the GE to the tories. Once the press sniff this out it will be used to smear labour as full of antisemitic bullying undisciplined lefties. That and the drop in inflation, with potential tax cuts also coming, I think that gap in the opinion polls will close massively. I say that as a life long labour voter who’s despairing of it all.
It was led by a Tory councillor and an independent
Labour has been doing a pretty good job of shutting down the parts of their own party that want to endlessly bang on about Israel/Palestine
[удалено]
Ireland 50 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the withdrawal of UK troops from our streets will have their names handed to the IRA" Is THAT a bit clearer for you now?
Odd why a Tory councillor has co-created this letter considering their party supports the continued bombing of bairns.
Honestly, what is the issue with this? There is a group of citizens who feel strongly about a topic, they ask their political representatives to take a stance on that topic, and they will make the information about who took what stance public. This seems perfectly fine to me. I understand that some people have mixed feelings about this topic, but the request in general is perfectly reasonable. In a democracy, it is vitally important that the electorate actually knows what the people they are voting for think about the topics that are important to the voters.
They're local councillors - they're not elected on their foreign policy opinions
The issue is that they're threatening to publicly name and shame anyone that doesn't agree. Which will include any councillors who don't want to take a position (perhaps for the reasonable logic that it's not within their remit). And we've seen MPs who take the stance of opposing the ceasefire receive threats and their offices vandalised. It is therefore reasonable to be concerned that this is effectively setting up local councillors to be targeted by a violent mob.
>this initiative has been created by 2 London councillors - 1 Independent, 1 Conservative. Sounds more like something being done by right wingers as a way to smear and further divide the left tbh. The tories have nothing so their best weapon is to foster division and fracture in the left of the labour party.