Bob Vylan Chants

[The_Fish]

A one state solution just means all the Jews are dead or displaced. 
 

Islamists can’t live peacefully amongst non Muslims. 
 

[SheffJeff]

2 minutes ago, The_Fish said:

A one state solution just means all the Jews are dead or displaced. 
 

Islamists can’t live peacefully amongst non Muslims. 
 

There's been some bonkers posts on here but this one wins!

[SheffJeff]

3 minutes ago, The_Fish said:

A one state solution just means all the Jews are dead or displaced. 
 

Islamists can’t live peacefully amongst non Muslims. 
 

FYI There are about 4 million in the UK.

[The_Fish]

Just now, SheffJeff said:

FYI There are about 4 million in the UK.

there are not 4 million Islamists in the Uk. 
 

Not every Muslim is an Islamist. 

[SheffJeff]

1 minute ago, The_Fish said:

there are not 4 million Islamists in the Uk. 
 

Not every Muslim is an Islamist. 

 

I think I'm misunderstanding the point you're trying to make.

[Nathan Explosion]

34 minutes ago, Spindles said:

Ah well, I guess this beats the annual 'glastonbury gripes' threads and gives us all a way to get our negativity back in gear after the serotonin has been depleted.

 

Looks like the boys won't be playing the US again any time soon.  They put out their own music, so no label to drop them, but I'll be interested to see if this affects their live bookings in anything other than the short to medium term. 

 

Yeah will be interesting to see. They're meant to be headlining Radar Festival this Saturday, the organisers said on Discord over the weekend they'd still be playing but I do wonder if that might change now the fallout has intensified. 

 

I hope not as they're the only thing I'm really interested in that day, and I imagine it'll be a particularly intense performance in these circumstances if it does go ahead!

[The_Fish]

I’m saying Hamas are islamists and if they live in the same place as Jews we are going to end up with a lot of dead Jews. 

[steviewevie]

One state solution is a nice idea but to think that Jews and Arabs will live peacefully in some sort of liberal secular democracy is for the birds. I think likliest one state solution at moment is Israel occupying the lot.

[BobMahelp]

15 minutes ago, The_Fish said:

A one state solution just means all the Jews are dead or displaced. 
 

Islamists can’t live peacefully amongst non Muslims. 
 

Precisely.

[kaosmark2]

This has got way out of hand in the last page or two. Locking it for now to assess. I (or another mod) will unlock it later this evening, possibly with moderated content.

 

Edit: Tomorrow. I'm tired.

Edited June 30, 2025 by kaosmark2

[kaosmark2]

Thread is re-open for now. As ever, please use the report button if you think something is out of order.

[The Nal]

 

[narwhal]

17 hours ago, The_Fish said:

I’m saying Hamas are islamists and if they live in the same place as Jews we are going to end up with a lot of dead Jews. 

I'm saying the IDF are Zionists and it they live in the same place as Palestinians we are going to end up with a lot of dead Palestinians (we have). 

Edited July 1, 2025 by narwhal

[Ayrshire Chris]

The lead story in media outlets, papers and Tv is about a chant and I’m not defending the content, at Glastonbury

The other story further down the  news is about dozens of innocents killed  in an air strike in Gaza including youngsters, an artist and a photographer.

Editorial Priorities? 

[xxialac]

The exact same group that are calling Vylan despicable…

Edited July 1, 2025 by xxialac

[DeanoL]

18 hours ago, BobMahelp said:

 

Why on earth, after everything that the Jewish community has been through in WW2, would anyone dream of thinking that they shouldn’t have ONE safe space on earth to call home and know that they won’t be persecuted or marginalised?

This is exactly what I'm getting at, right. People just jump to stuff. Maybe if Europe wanted the Jewish people to have their own land after WW2, they should have, I dunno, given them some of their own land? Maybe some of Germany might make sense?

 

But instead we went "no, you can have this land" which *was not our land to give*. We basically told them "you can't have our land but we'll support you taking this land instead". 

 

And then 75 years later people get confused as to why it's still an issue.

[DeanoL]

18 hours ago, BobMahelp said:

Also the premise of your argument is that the Jews stole the land in 1948 and that it, by rights, should be Muslim land.

 

However going back further in time it was Jewish land, the Muslims won it centuries ago. 
 

Bringing in another partitioned nation, what about Korea? Should Korea be reunified? If so, should it be controlled by the communists in Pyongyang or the Western allies in Seoul? 

And this is my wider point: what you're saying here. Totally valid. We should be able to discuss if Israel should own that land or not. You might even win me around on the argument. 

But that argument very rarely takes place, as instead it's just stated that if you don't think Israel should exist where it is, that's antisemitism and therefore definitely wrong. 

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

4 minutes ago, xxialac said:

The exact same group that are calling Vylan despicable…

 

A very poor attempt at misrepresenting the meaning of death in this article.

 

The article is talking about Labour serving no fit purpose anymore and becoming irrelevant. 

[steviewevie]

Think there is some confusion what zionist actually means. 

[DeanoL]

18 hours ago, BobMahelp said:

You suggested that Palestinians are the group who “ultimately paid the price” for the holocaust.

 

In my book the actual victims of the holocaust are the ones who “ultimately paid the price”. The Jews, and the communists, and the socialists, and the trade unionists, and the LGBT community and anyone who dared to speak up against the German regime at the time.

 

You would do very well to remember that.

Really good post and agree entirely. Interestingly though some Holocaust scholars in the past have said it's antisemitic to include those other, non-Jewish groups in the "holocaust" as a whole. There are literally people who would call you antisemitic for posting what you just posted. Which is why throwing that term out at other posters is rarely worthwhile.

17 hours ago, The_Fish said:

A one state solution just means all the Jews are dead or displaced. 
 

Islamists can’t live peacefully amongst non Muslims. 
 

3-state solution. Two small states for Jews and Muslims that can't live with anyone else and then a larger one for all the normal people living in that region that just want to get on with their lives and not die. 

[lazyred]

18 hours ago, Spindles said:

I am not speaking for anyone else when I say this, but I have no problem whatsoever with the existence of the state of Israel.  I believe that a solution was required that gave the Jewish people a homeland after the appalling horror of the 30s and 40s.  I take issue with a powerful minority within the Israeli state who have pushed to demonise, dehumanise and destroy the native population that they share the land with.  There is more than just tacit approval from the state for the settler movement, for example, and the recent documentary on the subject included leading members of the settler movement openly stating that they receive state support and encouragement despite being illegal.

 

If it were me I'd be looking to implement a proper 2 state solution and not the crap pseudo partition we have now.  That would mean displacing people though, on both sides and the recognition of the state of Palestine as a nation with agreed borders and all the protection of UN membership and representation.  It wouldn't be popular, but I think it is essential.

I agree with all of the above.  But the security guarantees must  apply to isreal as well as palestine. Chanting river to the sea and death to the idf does not help promote a peaceful settlement. The present isreali govt are also against peace but the govt wont change until the isrealis feel secure. Previous isreali govts have moved settlers from gaza as part of a deal. It can hapoen again however unlikely it seems now. 

[xxialac]

10 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

 

A very poor attempt at misrepresenting the meaning of death in this article.

 

The article is talking about Labour serving no fit purpose anymore and becoming irrelevant. 

No, you are wrong.

 

It is comparable.

 

In fact more eyeballs would have seen that front page headline than would have seen Vylan performing on tv and it doesn’t say The Death of the Labour Party.

 

It says ‘Death to the Labour Party’

Both this and Vylan’s comments are fine as they are aimed at organisations. 

Edited July 1, 2025 by xxialac

[steviewevie]

...and maybe Bob Vylan's thing about working for a f**king zionist was actually more problematic than death to the idf...because people always say he's talking about zionists, not jews, totally different etc etc...but it isn't really is it...

Anyway, his crowd surfing was nice, and he loves his daughter which is nice...not very punk...but nice all the same.

[BobMahelp]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Think there is some confusion what zionist actually means. 

What do you believe that it means? And in what way as people getting confused?

 

Personally I believe in a peaceful two state solution using the 1967 borders, with full recognition of Palestine.

 

I think that means I’m a Zionist, right?

[DeanoL]

1 minute ago, xxialac said:

No, you are wrong.

 

It is comparable.

 

In fact more eyeballs would have seen that front page than would have seen Vylan performing on tv and it doesn’t say The Death of the Labour Party.

 

It says ‘Death to the Labour Party’

Both this and Vylan’s comments are fine as they are aimed at organisations. 

You make a good point, though I also feel there's a difference in that the Labour party are not generally in a situation where they are likely to be killed. The IDF are. Had that article been published immediately after the death of Jo Cox, it absolutely would have been called out in the same way.