Bob Vylan Chants

[DeanoL]

13 hours ago, steviewevie said:

So...it is death to individuals who are in the IDF now?

 

Well yes, they're the active military of a country that has declared war on another country. If you think that's wrong and want to side with the other country, that means fighting back against said military, and you fight a military by killing the people in it.

 

It's really weird that this is so controversial. Like Israel wants to declare war to justify its own actions, but act like it's in a state of not-war when it faces attacks on *its own military*. 

[tarw]

1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

 

Well yes, they're the active military of a country that has declared war on another country. If you think that's wrong and want to side with the other country, that means fighting back against said military, and you fight a military by killing the people in it.

 

It's really weird that this is so controversial. Like Israel wants to declare war to justify its own actions, but act like it's in a state of not-war when it faces attacks on *its own military*. 

Not sure it’s as black and white as that. All Israelis have to serve in the IDF by law. I would support the “death” of the organisation because it’s rotten to the core and even if it had new leadership its name would still be associated with the atrocities it has committed in the same way the RUC was. 
Some members of the IDF are ideological zealots who want to commit genocide but a lot are only there because they have to be. I would personally serve jail time rather than serve in the IDF but to say that a person deserves to be killed for following the laws of their country is just plain wrong. 

[xxialac]

There’s a lot of obtuseness here.

 

For me, it’s more than justifiable as an artist to use your platform to wish death to an **organisation** that is in an army in a foreign land committing genocide. It’s a form of protest. Vylan’s Glastonbury performance is in this category. 

Not justifiable IMO to direct the chant to all the individuals of an army (which I understand he did at a different event) and even if as here the chance of any repercussions is also effectively nil by virtue of them being in a distant land.

 

Not a totally dissimilar distinction to saying something extreme about wishing death on “The Tory Party” versus wishing death on the members of the cabinet.

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

 

Well yes, they're the active military of a country that has declared war on another country. If you think that's wrong and want to side with the other country, that means fighting back against said military, and you fight a military by killing the people in it.

 

It's really weird that this is so controversial. Like Israel wants to declare war to justify its own actions, but act like it's in a state of not-war when it faces attacks on *its own military*. 

I guess weird when being chanted at Glastonbury which is supposed to be for peace and all that.

[kerplunk]

4 minutes ago, xxialac said:

There’s a lot of obtuseness here.

 

 ...the chance of any repercussions is also effectively nil by virtue of them being in a distant land.

 

 

 

 

 

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/alleged-arsonist-charged-fire-australian-synagogue-123512255

[Blisterpack]

1 hour ago, tarw said:

Some members of the IDF are ideological zealots who want to commit genocide but a lot are only there because they have to be. 

No doubt there are some who fall into both these categories. I would suggest though (based on the experience of friends here and in Israel) that the vast majority of people serving in the IDF are regular - mainly young- people, men and women, who love their country and want to keep it safe. 

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, tarw said:

Not sure it’s as black and white as that. All Israelis have to serve in the IDF by law. I would support the “death” of the organisation because it’s rotten to the core and even if it had new leadership its name would still be associated with the atrocities it has committed in the same way the RUC was. 
Some members of the IDF are ideological zealots who want to commit genocide but a lot are only there because they have to be. I would personally serve jail time rather than serve in the IDF but to say that a person deserves to be killed for following the laws of their country is just plain wrong. 

If those laws require you to kill other people though, I don't see that as wrong.

 

To be clear, I'm not saying that I personally think every member of the IDF deserves to die. Nor am I saying it's a particularly pleasant thing to say or that it's right.

 

But I think claiming that it's a crime, or making someone saying that a national news story for weeks, is completely ridiculous. The whole point of any army is to deal in death. It's to kill and be killed for your country. 

 

Or put another way, whose words will result in more of the IDF dying - Bob Vylan's or Netanyahu's? Because when the latter sends those soldiers out to war, even in situations like in Gaza where they massively out-number and out-gun the opposition, he's sending at least some of them to die. No-one seems to care about that when we're talking about IDF soldiers just being regular people conscripted through national service. 

[xxialac]

26 minutes ago, kerplunk said:

 

 

 

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/alleged-arsonist-charged-fire-australian-synagogue-123512255

If true and as awful as it is, that is down to pure ignorance.

What is being discussed has no basis in anti-semitism. The protest basis is anti-genocide and anti-the instigator of that genocide.

 

If the most ignorant people conflate the two (and we don’t know this is the case) that is on them.

 

I’m exaggerating absurdly to make a point but if an anti paedophile demonstration led to paediatricians being attacked, none of the fault lies with the protestors…

 

[DeanoL]

31 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess weird when being chanted at Glastonbury which is supposed to be for peace and all that.

Well yeah, I agree entirely. It's a peace festival, it didn't fit the Glastonbury vibe at all.

 

But the reality is they're in the middle of a war and while you or I might want to campaign for peace instead of for one side to triumph over the other, it's not wrong for someone to have an opposing view. It's not wrong to want to kill the people who are killing you.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I've made this point previously so please forgive the repetition, but when one side has an army, a navy and an airforce and the other side has neither and is largely composed of unarmed civilians then 'war' is an incorrect term for what is happening.

[Blisterpack]

3 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I've made this point previously so please forgive the repetition, but when one side has an army, a navy and an airforce and the other side has neither and is largely composed of unarmed civilians then 'war' is an incorrect term for what is happening.

Is ‘fighting terrorism’ more accurate? Or is it genocide or bust for you? 
I think there is an argument to accuse Netanyahu personally of turning his country into a terrorist state similar to Iran, that occurred to me when he sort of arbitrarily turned back to the Houthis a couple of days ago. He seems a bit all over the place and that will be seized on in the weeks to come by his opposition parties if he continues that during any Gaza ceasefire. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

4 minutes ago, Blisterpack said:

Is ‘fighting terrorism’ more accurate? Or is it genocide or bust for you? 

 

The latter.  Did you perhaps miss where I said 'unarmed civilians'

[Blisterpack]

1 minute ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

The latter.  Did you perhaps miss where I said 'unarmed civilians'

Are the armed ones fair game? If so, how can they be identified? 
round in circles I know. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

6 minutes ago, Blisterpack said:

Are the armed ones fair game? If so, how can they be identified? 

 

We know the systems that are being used

 

https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

 

Worth paying particular attention to the passages about civilians being fair game.

 

 

Edited July 8, 2025 by CaledonianGonzo

[tarw]

14 minutes ago, Blisterpack said:

Is ‘fighting terrorism’ more accurate? Or is it genocide or bust for you? 
I think there is an argument to accuse Netanyahu personally of turning his country into a terrorist state similar to Iran, that occurred to me when he sort of arbitrarily turned back to the Houthis a couple of days ago. He seems a bit all over the place and that will be seized on in the weeks to come by his opposition parties if he continues that during any Gaza ceasefire. 

I would certainly not call what the Israeli government are doing fighting terrorism!

 

In fact the only justified act that they have done in my view was the putting of IEDs into Hamas pagers. I’m not saying that I support that as it also killed innocent civilians. 
 

As for the rest of their actions- if it looks like genocide, it smells like genocide and is recognised by the UN as genocide then it probably is genocide 

[kerplunk]

10 minutes ago, xxialac said:

The protest basis is anti-genocide and anti-the instigator of that genocide.

 

 

 

But to the subject of the thread - not anti-violence

 

The analogy would be be anti-paedophile demonstrators yelling death to paedophiles. 

 

But the chances of people coming to harm from that are effectively zero right?

 

 

[steviewevie]

Well...some refer to Hamas as a terrorist group, and some as a militia, in reality they are a poltical organisation with a military wing...and the Oct 7th attack could be classed as a declaration of war (although could also they've been fighting a war of resistance for decades etc etc).

And Hamas are still able to fight back, they do still kill some IDF soldiers...probably whilst listening to Bob Vylan.

[steviewevie]

9 minutes ago, tarw said:

In fact the only justified act that they have done in my view was the putting of IEDs into Hamas pagers. I’m not saying that I support that as it also killed innocent civilians. 

that was Hezbollah

[steviewevie]

Hamas used sexual violence as part of 'genocidal strategy', Israeli experts say

[xxialac]

8 minutes ago, kerplunk said:

But to the subject of the thread - not anti-violence

 

The analogy would be be anti-paedophile demonstrators yelling death to paedophiles. 

 

But the chances of people coming to harm from that are effectively zero right?

 

 

Nope.

 

Shouting death to an army is not the same as shouting death to specific individuals. 

[xxialac]

Sigh.

 

It is possible for the international community to stop the genocide through sanctions, prosecutions and ceasing arms sales.

 

That is what the protests’ aims are.

 

 

[steviewevie]

Just now, xxialac said:

Sigh.

 

It is possible for the international community to stop the genocide through sanctions, prosecutions and ceasing arms sales.

 

That is what the protests’ aims are.

 

 

Well for any of that to actually mean anything it has to come from the US.

[kerplunk]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Nope.

 

Shouting death to an army is not the same as shouting death to specific individuals. 

 

 

I just think if you support calls for violence you should own it and not have your head in the sand about the potential consequences

[steviewevie]

Hopefully there's a ceasefire soon, and let's see what it brings. At least will be some respite for Gazans, and at least some hostage families will get bodies back, alive or dead. But, it probably won't last, because they rarely do...and it is possible that this will just grind on for years.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Just now, steviewevie said:

Hopefully there's a ceasefire soon, and let's see what it brings. At least will be some respite for Gazans, and at least some hostage families will get bodies back, alive or dead. But, it probably won't last, because they rarely do...and it is possible that this will just grind on for years.

 

Not had the news on today?