Hate to break it to you, but that's what the evangelicals and fundies -- and the conservative politicians they funnel endless money and votes to -- are going for. They literally believe this is the prelude to the Rapture, tribulation, and battle of Armageddon.
www.thenation.com
Fortunately, it's not going to happen just yet, just like it didn't last time.Hate to break it to you, but that's what the evangelicals and fundies -- and the conservative politicians they funnel endless money and votes to -- are going for. They literally believe this is the prelude to the Rapture, tribulation, and battle of Armageddon.
American Evangelicals Await the Final Battle in Gaza
For some believers, the news from the Middle East is a prelude to Armageddon and Rapture.
Final tally is 13 in favour, 1 opposed (US), and one abstention (UK). US complained that the resolution didn't specifically condemn Hamas.
Israel's actions are making literally any other country look saintly right now.
Labour's purpose is not to campaign for the Palestinians. Its purpose is to represent the British left wing, with a primary objective of winning elections in the UK to do so. Given the media hammering it was taking - much of which can be laid at the feet of Jeremy Corbyn's catastrophic leadership failings - it was well in its way to failing on that objective. At the point Labour betrays the interests of the people it represents just so it can make the right noises about an issue it has effectively no influence over, it is doing something very badly wrong.
you don't represent the interests of the British left wing by capitulating to the British right wing or letting Zionists direct a purge of your party.
Funnily enough, that is beginning to sound like antisemitic conspiracy theory - those devious Jews, orchestrating a purge of the Labour Party!
The Labour Party under Starmer is frequently (mostly?) purging (anti-Zionist) Jews. But it's interesting how your mind works, I guess.
A clear and strong response against antisemitism is actually incompatible with what Corbyn's critics wanted or would ever accept, as the equation of Israel or Zionism with Judaism is itself antisemitic. It was demanded of Labour that they affirm a contradiction and enforce that contradiction-- or silence-- on their members.
Is the British public really that impressed by the babbling of Piers Morgan?
Nice attempt at deflection. There's nothing about Piers Morgan that meant Jeremy Corbyn couldn't do the simple task of acknowledging Hamas are terrorists on TV.
If at any point you equate anti-zionism with antisemitism, you've lost the plot. That's the line of war crimes enthusiasts.
Just because you can do something does not mean that you should.
It's hard to tell, though, isn't it? After all, plenty of antisemites really have been using "Zionist" as a plausibly deniable way to mean "Jew" for decades. So when you want to mischaracterise Labour clearing out the Corbynite faction as the work of "Zionists" rather than the much wider political reasons it was actually done for, then you're inviting difficult questions.
Sure. But where does "should" apply? The the best interests of Jeremy Corbyn's ego and the best interests of the Labour Party are not the same thing. Of course, he does not officially represent the Labour Party any more (although unofficially in many people's minds will, because he was recently leader of it), but the problem is that he was like that when he led it, too.
Piers Morgan is wallowing in the least-watched TV channel of its type (news/opinion), which is essentially Rupert Murdoch's (second?) attempt to create a British Fox News. With the difference that the UK version is the least watched news/opinion channel, very unlike Fox in the USA.
