Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Dutch parliament passes motion calling ‘From the River to the Sea’ criminal incitement


Kittens Are Jerks

Recommended Posts

Dutch parliament passes motion calling ‘From the River to the Sea’ criminal incitement

The Dutch parliament adopts by a wafer-thin majority a motion that says that chanting “From the River to the Sea Palestine will be Free” is a criminal act of incitement to violence.

The motion, which is not binding, passes thanks to a single vote in a 74-73 split in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of the Dutch Parliament, which has 150 seats. The motion’s author is Maikel Boon, a lawmaker for the Party for Freedom of Geert Wilders, which was the largest in the 2023 elections and recently announced that it has put together a ruling coalition under its leadership.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/dutch-parliament-passes-motion-calling-from-the-river-to-the-sea-criminal-incitement/

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
52 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Dutch parliament passes motion calling ‘From the River to the Sea’ criminal incitement

The Dutch parliament adopts by a wafer-thin majority a motion that says that chanting “From the River to the Sea Palestine will be Free” is a criminal act of incitement to violence.

The motion, which is not binding, passes thanks to a single vote in a 74-73 split in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of the Dutch Parliament, which has 150 seats. The motion’s author is Maikel Boon, a lawmaker for the Party for Freedom of Geert Wilders, which was the largest in the 2023 elections and recently announced that it has put together a ruling coalition under its leadership.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/dutch-parliament-passes-motion-calling-from-the-river-to-the-sea-criminal-incitement/

That's because it is a call to terrorism, political activation, or whatever you call an incitement to violence. It is like the Irish "Up the Ra!" 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pellinore said:

That's because it is a call to terrorism, political activation, or whatever you call an incitement to violence. It is like the Irish "Up the Ra!" 

It is, but there are those who don't see it as such, or do, but argue it's protected speech.

Indeed it wasn't that long ago that a Dutch appeals court ruled that 'from the river to the sea' was protected speech.

Does 'Up the Ra' have something to do with the IRA?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

It is, but there are those who don't see it as such, or do, but argue it's protected speech.

Does 'Up the Ra' have something to do with the IRA?

Yes, they are both political slogans. No one is confused about the meaning if they use them. 'From the river to the sea' means destroy Israel, and 'Up the Ra' means gets the Brits out of Ireland, including the North.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

From the River to the Sea people in greater Israel live under apartheid.

Edited by acidhead
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Anyone who believes that is totally disconnected from reality.

The meaning of 'from the river to the sea', by the way is this:

https://www.ajc.org/translatehate/From-the-River-to-the-Sea

Nice unbiased source there 🙄 Have you thought of asking the people who actually say it, perhaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Setton said:

Nice unbiased source there 🙄 Have you thought of asking the people who actually say it, perhaps?

No need to ask.

The fact that this slogan is paraded side by side with other slogans/chants challenging the legitimacy of Israel and calling for its eradication tells me all I need to know — as does the fact that Hamas claimed it more than a decade ago in their drive to eradicate all Israelis from 'the river to the sea and from the south to the north'.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, acidhead said:

From the River to the Sea people in greater Israel live under apartheid.

Yes, they do. I've been there, years ago, and that is about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Yes, they do. I've been there, years ago, and that is about it.

I've been to Israel numerous times, but one does not have to visit to know that it is nowhere near an apartheid state.

And if it is, it totally sucks at it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I've been to Israel numerous times, but one does not have to visit to know that it is nowhere near an apartheid state.

And if it is, it totally sucks at it.

No, they are good at it. Palestine was Palestinian until they needed somewhere to go after WW2, when it was shown they had overstayed their welcome in Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, pellinore said:

No, they are good at it. Palestine was Palestinian until they needed somewhere to go after WW2, when it was shown they had overstayed their welcome in Europe.

Prior to1948, Palestine was home to a diverse population of Arabs, Jews, and Christians. But before we get into that, why don't we start with your trip to Israel. You implied you saw evidence of apartheid whilst there, so why not tell us when you visited and what that evidence was.

Edited by Kittens Are Jerks
Minor correction.
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
12 hours ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Prior to1948, Palestine was home to a diverse population of Arabs, Jews, and Christians. But before we get into that, why don't we start with your trip to Israel. You implied you saw evidence of apartheid whilst there, so why not tell us when you visited and what that evidence was.

I didn't use the word apartheid myself; I was quoting someone else. It is not apartheid in the sense originally used in referring to S Africa- Palestinians have the vote etc. And Israel is a democracy. But I can't see anyone arguing successfully that the Israeli and Palestinian populations in Israel have parity. 

(And on a separate note, visiting a country as a tourist or even as a govt representative may not give a true picture of the nature of the politics there- for example, the UK has sent several envoys to Rwanda recently who thought it a delightful place to seek asylum.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, pellinore said:

I didn't use the word apartheid myself; I was quoting someone else.

No you didn't. but agreed with the member who did. Same thing.

10 minutes ago, pellinore said:

It is not apartheid in the sense originally used in referring to S Africa- Palestinians have the vote etc. And Israel is a democracy. But I can't see anyone arguing successfully that the Israeli and Palestinian populations in Israel have parity. 

If not like the apartheid in S. Africa, then what kind of apartheid is it? Apartheid typically refers to 'the implementation and maintenance of a system of legalized racial segregation in which one racial group is deprived of political and civil rights'. Is there another definition of apartheid that I'm not aware of? Specifically, what definition of apartheid, for example, would apply to Israeli Arabs who have equal voting rights, are proportionately represented in the Knesset and head all their municipalities, schools, and religious courts?

Does discrimination exist against them? Unfortunately yes, just as it does for minorities in other democracies, but it is not state-sanctioned. Would their human rights be better recognized and protected under an authoritarian Palestinian state, or in any of the neighbouring Arab countries? Egypt doesn't want them. but I heard Hamas is looking for more human shields; Saudi Arabia for more women to oppress, Iran for more dissenters to execute, and Qatar for more gay men to torture.

But hey, if you still want to throw accusations of apartheid around, why not start with the way in which Jews have historically been treated in the Middle East? If there was anything close to the S. African version of apartheid, that would be it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"for example, the UK has sent several envoys to Rwanda recently who thought it a delightful place to seek asylum"

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, itsnotoutthere said:

"for example, the UK has sent several envoys to Rwanda recently who thought it a delightful place to seek asylum"

 

Yes, it is lovely there:

There have been consistent reports of torture being used in Rwanda by both the military and the police. The United Nations has concluded that Rwanda does not have in place the necessary safeguards against torture or the structures to respond to it.

1. The UK Government must adhere to its international legal obligations including the absolute prohibition on torture: the Bill (if enacted) will cause these obligations to be breached.

2. The Bill seeks to assert that Rwanda is free of torture and ill-treatment when the evidence does not support this. Such an assertion is not true just because the Government says it is.

3. The Bill sends out a dangerous signal that the UK is willing to circumvent the rule of law, and so undermines the international rules-based order.  

2023-12-12-Rwanda-Bill-REDRESS-briefing.pdf

Edited by pellinore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

No you didn't. but agreed with the member who did. Same thing.

If not like the apartheid in S. Africa, then what kind of apartheid is it? Apartheid typically refers to 'the implementation and maintenance of a system of legalized racial segregation in which one racial group is deprived of political and civil rights'. Is there another definition of apartheid that I'm not aware of? Specifically, what definition of apartheid, for example, would apply to Israeli Arabs who have equal voting rights, are proportionately represented in the Knesset and head all their municipalities, schools, and religious courts?

Does discrimination exist against them? Unfortunately yes, just as it does for minorities in other democracies, but it is not state-sanctioned. Would their human rights be better recognized and protected under an authoritarian Palestinian state, or in any of the neighbouring Arab countries? Egypt doesn't want them. but I heard Hamas is looking for more human shields; Saudi Arabia for more women to oppress, Iran for more dissenters to execute, and Qatar for more gay men to torture.

But hey, if you still want to throw accusations of apartheid around, why not start with the way in which Jews have historically been treated in the Middle East? If there was anything close to the S. African version of apartheid, that would be it.

Compared to some other countries in the ME and Asia, Israel is a model of human rights- no stoning, throwing people off high buildings, women are allowed equal rights, etc.

The UK is the similar- high standards of human rights, but prepared to overlook them on occasions which suits it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pellinore said:

Compared to some other countries in the ME and Asia, Israel is a model of human rights- no stoning, throwing people off high buildings, women are allowed equal rights, etc.

The UK is the similar- high standards of human rights, but prepared to overlook them on occasions which suits it.

Don't be naive, they all are.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.