Comments by "Helen Trope" (@heliotropezzz333) on "The Rational National" channel.

@darong6852 Israel continues to evict Palestinians from their land in East Jerusalem. That's what sparked the conflict as well as the attack on the Mosque in Israel. Netanyahu is trying to fend off criminal charges against him for corruption for bribery, fraud and breach of trust. I believe this is his way of trying to distract from that, though he always has been a warmonger with aggressive intentions towards Palestine. The Israelis signed up to the Oslo Agreement (1993) designed to bring peace by providing for a two state solution (which includes a Palestinian State) yet Israel continues to encroach on land intended by the agreement to be part of the Palestinian State, evicting Palestinians and replacing them with Jewish settlers. Israel recently declared itself a Jewish State which removes the rights of non Jews in Israel.
27
@compton1808 The video didn't start from the beginning of things then. What sparked the conflict was 1) Israel evicting Palestinian families from East Jerusalem to give the land to J*wish settlers and 2) The Israeli attack on a M*sque inside Israel. Hamas then retaliated but Netanyahu knew those actions would spark conflict. He has been indicted for crimes and is trying to avoid the consequences. Also it's a bit of a David and Goliath affair as Israel has a defence system that takes down most of H*mas's missiles. H*mas does not. H*mas has asked for a cease fire but Israel has refused.
7
@mikhailkrasnopolskiy2001 The ones being attacked are not in the Jewish state, they are in Gaza, a 20 mile strip where everything is controlled by Israel and the Gazans have no democratic control over that. Also Israel recently declared itself a Jewish state which makes non-Jews non citizens. What rights do they have now?
6
@hasti26 It's more complicated than that: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-palestinians-sheikh-jarrah-eviction-east-jerusalem-explained/
4
@deuspiter4568 Yemeni people will appreciate it most I suspect as long as the war winds down.
3
What worries me is that whatever Congress does, Trump and Musk will ignore it and 'fix' the next election. That's if they allow another election.
3
It's Keynesian economics.
2
@mikhailkrasnopolskiy2001 Palestinians never had a state of their own true, but since Jews have established a state of their own in what was formerly called Palestine, and have now declared it a Jewish state it seems only fair for Palestinian Arabs to have a state of their own and in fact Israel signed up to that in 1993 in the Oslo peace agreement. Israel continues to take over land that was designated for a Palestinian State in that agreement. Also you know that this latest round of conflict was sparked by Netanyahu evicting Palestinians from East Jerusalem to replace them with Jewish settlers and then attacking a Mosque in Jerusalem. He knew very well it would spark conflict. I think he is trying to avoid the consequences of his indictment for fraud etc. Hamas retaliated but Israel has a defensive shield that can stop most of those missiles. Gaza has no such shield to stop Israeli missiles so they take much more damage. Hamas has asked for a cease fire and Israel has refused.
2
@nurieln Go on then. Tell me which of those facts are false?
2
@nurieln I think Israel is the only state that's declared it belongs to a race, religion or ethnic group as opposed to the people who live there and were born there. That is a form of racism and if that's the point of it, it says a lot about the attitudes of the Israeli government. They've got along since the creation of Israel until recently, without making such a declaration. I know the tenants evicted in that particular case had not paid rent. I don't know why they had not paid rent (poverty or objection to forced ownership of Palestinian land?), but Israel has a record of illegally evicting Palestinians from their land in favour of Jewish settlers and it's this record that makes continuing evictions of Palestinians so inflammatory. Israel has been taking over land that was designated to be part of a Palestinian state in the Oslo agreement that the Israeli government signed up to. I think it's you who has a one sided view of things. I would wish only good things for Israel if it would act in a reasonable manner.
2
@nurieln A Jewish homeland does not have to exclude all others and practice racism against others. You never commented on my other point that Israel (under Netanyahu's orders) attacked a Mosque before the rocket firing started. What has Israel done to comply with the Oslo agreement? It carried on occupying land that was designated for the Palestinian state under the Oslo agreement and evicting Arab owners of the land in favour of Jewish settlers. The international community in the form of the UN gave part of Palestine to become a Jewish homeland (Israel) but it also condemned and regardsed as illegal, the continued occupation of the lands owned and occupied by Palestinians and the eviction of those people from their lands, replacing them with Jewish settlers. Israel is proud to cite the former actions of the UN but ignores the UN's condemnation of its illegal actions. Israel is selective in what it quotes as justifications of its actions. That is blind and one sided.
2
People call him out on lies but he just tells more lies saying he didn't lie or someone twisted his words or it's fake news. Some people find it hard to take in lying on that scale. They start to believe it's not possible and it's just fake media attacking him, I guess. Also some people want to believe him and are very selective in what news channels they watch.
2
I't's anti Semitic not anti Semetic by the way. (You pronounce it as if it's Semetic). You can't criticise the Israelis. You can't criticise the Saudis. You can't criticise the Russians or the Chinese and you get the impression that elements in the US would love to shut down debate there as well. However, Israel manages to shut down criticism outside of its country too.
2
British elections are not just about choosing the P.M. Elections choose the governing party and the leader of that party automatically becomes P.M. Many people may make their choice based on who the leader is, or which national party they favour, but basically they are voting for an MP in their local constituency.
1
The Rational National. My comment was not addressed to you but it was in response to the guy on the video who says the UK is electing their P.M.
1
Who? Bernie has principles and beliefs. He's not a money grabber like Musk or Trump.
1
To me 'Tucker' always sounds like cockney rhyming slang.
1
Sounds like he's been drinking.
1
One difference is that the population of the USA is allowed to protest against the USA human rights abuses listed by Jeffrey Sachs and these can be openly mentioned, but the Chinese population is not allowed to protest against any Chinese human rights abuses and information about them on the internet is blocked in China.
1
David McConville. Spot on analogy.
1
Fuarian. Yes, People used to resign when caught telling a lie.It was a big deal to do it in public office. Now people just carry on, like, whatever! Standards and principles have gone.
1
@cameronneff6002 The Socialists didn't give people anything because they haven't been in power in the US. You have to vote for an elect people before they can do anything for you.
1
@cameronneff6002 Socialism doesn't exist in those countries. Why would you think they are socialist? The countries with mixed capitalist and socialist policies that come high in happiness surveys are the scandinavian countries - Norway, Sweden, Denmark. Collectively through taxes, if people vote for it, there can be a health system that looks after everyone and the very vulnerable can be looked after.
1
@cameronneff6002 I know Russia was communist up until Gorbachev took over. I know it isn't communist now. Putin sold off all the state assets. China is a state capitalist dictatorship. It's not really communist. It doesn't believe in equality and it does have private companies https://www.chinacheckup.com/blogs/articles/how-many-companies-in-china. I am talking about democratic socialism. You don't seem to know much about that or which countries can be described as that. I suggest you do some research on google.
1
@cameronneff6002 There is no pure capitalist country. If there was there would be a revolution because of the conditions it would cause. Capitalist countries to a greater or lesser extent already have some welfare or social democratic policies to prop them up. There are people willing to work who can't find jobs or can't find them quickly enough to manage financially in the interim and there are people who can't work because they are sick or disabled through no fault of their own. People can have children before disaster strikes them. Scandinavian countries manage to have good economies as well as good welfare systems and come high up on happiness surveys. Going down the route of leaving people to starve is barbaric but I understand there are plenty of Americans who would be quite content with such a system. There will be people who try to 'play the system' but it's quite a tough system in the UK already. If you don't apply for jobs every day on benefits, you are sanctioned by losing benefits for weeks and if you don't accept a job offer you are sanctioned by losing benefits. There are even targets for sanctioning by benefits offices. One poor guy who was an ex-soldier with mental health problems and type one diabetes was sanctioned by having his benefits cut off because he didn't attend a meeting he wasn't notified of (and that's not unusual). Unable to pay his electricity bills or buy food, he was unable to keep his insulin cool (as required) in a fridge and lack of food played havoc with his diabetes and he died from poorly controlled diabetes. There are lots of cases like that. It's no easy life for anyone claiming benefits.
1
@cameronneff6002 We have the benefit of the NHS (National Health Service) because people are willing to pay for it through taxation, and it's not just about you paying for other people. It's about others also paying for you if you should need help. It's a social insurance system really where all the admin is done for you and the worry about being able to afford treatment if you need it is taken away. That is really worth having. There will always be some people who try to cheat a welfare system but that doesn't mean that overall it isn't worth doing. Basic education is free (primary and secondary (high school), paid for by taxpayers and that's worth doing too. Imagine what society would be like if only a small percentage of people were educated. Cuba doesn't operate in any level playing field because the USA has kept up a trade embargo against it for many decades now. Nevertheless they have achieved remarkable results in education and healthcare considering that, and when you compare it to some other countries in the region, and it wouldn't leave you to die without treatment as in the US if you have no insurance and no means of paying. Greece only voted in a socialist government after they got into financial difficulty - partly their own fault - the Greeks are big tax avoiders, so they could not afford their welfare state, and there was no efficient enforcement of tax collection, and it was partly a result of being in the EU which forces countries to meet certain financial requirements that suit some countries more than others. Hard working people supporting themselves are the backbone of society and families, I agree, but that doesn't mean there can't be sensible arrangements to improve life and society for all, without being too much of a burden on working individuals. You don't mention that the US keeps spending billions of taxpayers money on wars, without asking you whether that's how you want your money spent. There are choices to be made when it comes to what to spend taxpayers money on.
1
To be fair to Keir Starmer, the Tories and their media supporters have over the years successfully divided the working class against each other. Starmer is trying to appear like the person who wants a negotiated solution so as not to alienate other sections of the working class and the middle class. However he knows, and the Union knows that the people who want to prolong this strike are the government, and they won't negotiate because they want to break the RMT union. They have a cuts agenda for the railways including cuts in safety areas such as maintenance. The government is controlling the negotiations but not negotiating directly and pretending it's not down to them but down to the rail companies who are the ones negotiating directly with the unions, when the government allows them to, but it doesn't allow them to compromise in order to settle the dispute. Starmer does attack the government for their lack of willingness to negotiate to end the strike. The reason the government can control the rail companies is that the government took over control of the railways during Covid times, because it was not profitable for the rail companies to continue and they would have walked away from their contracts. Now the government collects all the rail revenue and pays the companies flat fees for managing the railways. Mick Lynch says the companies are willing to settle with him to end the strike but the government has told them not to. You can see in media interviews that whenever the Union reps (including Mick's Assistant) try to explain the detail, the interviewers often talk over them to try and block their message.
1
They are much more forgiving about Trump saying it than when they thought Biden said it.
1
The difference between Labour and the Tories is that Labour want the NHS to be funded adequately and stay as public provision. Tories believe in public funding of the system (for now) but are doing their best to get as much private provision into the system as possible. Ultimately they see the NHS as just a brand. Labour does not believe profits should be made from people's ill health. Does Trump even remember when he contradicts himself I wonder? Why isn't what's good for his friend, good for US citizens?
1
He sure looks as though he's being probed in the thumbnail.
1
Ageism.
1
His name reminds me of the Scottish saying 'it's a braw bricht moonlicht nicht the nicht'
1
Piers Morgan is working for Rupert Murdoch and his show on Talk TV in the UK is also featured on Sky Australia and Fox news in the US. All very right wing and anti-union.
1
I really try not to buy from Amazon and actually I'm not much tempted these days because in terms of the quality of what it offers it's gone downhill. One possible solution to not having enough time to pee is to use the zen box, but I suppose Amazon spy on people in these boxes.
1
A visual display of climate change over time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RygVNrKMs0
1