Labor’s excuse:
Greens were deliberately setting up the vote to fail, due to procedural motions in the lower house always being opposed.
Whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean.
It failed 80 votes to 5. The 5 included the 4 Greens MPs and independent MP Andrew Wilkie. The fact that there were only 80 noes makes it hard to say precisely who they were and indicates that everyone was so sure it would fail by a large margin that Labor and the LNP didn’t bother whipping up their MPs to go vote for it. Disappointing that the other independents didn’t bother either.
Half the independents got in on a campaign that they would basically be Liberals except giving a shit about climate change, so we shouldn’t really be surprised. Allegra Spender was out there the other day calling the uni encampments anti-semitic 🙄
He is right to an extent, The Greens would have pushed ahead with the vote knowing full well that it would suffer a near unanimous defeat. For them it would have been partially strategical in the sense that they can point to this result in the future as a clear point of moral difference. It was also clearly a sincere motion though, so Watts and Leeser trying to frame it as anything else is pretty stupid. Particularly when neither them nor their respective parties are doing anything to help the situation here or in Gaza.
He is right to an extent
Disagree. I understand what you’re getting at, but I don’t think it accurately represents what he said. If he had said “the Greens set this up to fail because Labor has no interest in supporting Palestinian statehood”, he would have been right. But he didn’t say it would fail because they don’t support it, he said it would fail because “it’s procedural”.
If Labor had decided to amend it to be more clear in what it would accomplish (because it would not, of course, actually result in the nation of Australia recognising Palestine, just the House of Representatives, a mostly meaningless gesture), or if the Labor Foreign Minister had turned around and recognised it officially through their powers, he would have a point. Heck, I’ll allow Labor to the end of the week for me to say “hey, actually, Labor did the right thing here”. But as it stands right now? Labor has no defence. Anything they try to say is a transparent attempt to avoid saying “we don’t support Palestinian statehood” while holding exactly that position.
Good to see we still have bipartisan support for European colonial genocide after all these years!
Really warms my heart knowing that despite all the division these days parasitic rich fucks can still bond over ignoring the rights of people to the land they live on.
You can see whether your local federal MP voted for this here: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansardr/27640/&sid=0011 - note the Ayes are voting to allow the debate on the motion (the first step to recognition of Palestine), and the Noes are voting to shut it down and not even talk about it.
Conveniently, I already knew how my MP voted, because I live in Ryan. But thanks for the link. I didn’t realise Hansard would be updated that quickly.
Australia is a Judaeochristian settler state, and as such has solidarity with other such states at a foundational level.
At what point do Labor realise “Are we the baddies?”
So Greens once again show how out of touch and destructive they are.
TIL opposing genocide and getting in line with 146 out of 193 UN members is “out of touch and destructive”.
I guess genocide is base of Palestiian politics, not Israel. Israel is just fighting a war now, and they did a lot to avoid it.
UN, just another example of “out of touch and destructive”Israel is just fighting a war now, and they did a lot to avoid it.
That’s just not true, though. Netanyahu’s goal was to intentionally provoke war with Hamas through acts such as West Bank settlement - his government is the most aggressively pro-settlement in recent history - to boost popularity within his far right coalition who reject a two-state solution and want to see Israel annex the West Bank. Netanyahu is being tried for corruption and desperately needs to keep the far right of his coalition on-side to avoid going to prison. By remaining in power, he can attempt to change Israel’s judicial system to stack it in his favour to give himself the best possible chance of avoiding imprisonment.
Israel is just fighting a war now, and they did a lot to avoid it.
Imagine punching somone in the face for decades, they strike back and you bawl abiut them starting it.
It’s like a domestic violence sufferer finally striking back after years of abuse.
genocide is base of Palestiian politics, not Israel.
Israel has been a genocidal state for decades. They’ve just become more “mask off” recently thanks to the casus belli provided to them by an event which anyone could have told you was an inevitable result of Israeli policy. (Policy that literally included propping up Hamas specifically because they’re more extreme than PA and thus were more likely to destabilise things, which Netanyahu had no interest in.)
UN, just another example of “out of touch and destructive”
Love how you just make up irrelevant bullshit because it’s convenient to your genocidal mindset.
Note that I didn’t say anything about what the UN thinks. I mentioned that the vast majority of countries in the world recognise Palestine. I just used UN membership as a proxy for what counts as a country. A convenient but imperfect definition (for example, Palestine and Taiwan).
any support for you claims? Israel done a lot trying to live in peace with Palestinian, and it is ends up with them intentionally killing civilian. What you can do about enemy whose sole position is “Kill all Jews” ? They at war now. Israel do not genocide Palestinian, it wedges a war. There are plenty of arabs and muslims living normal live in Israel. Only very some need to be cordoned in prison city, to stop some them from killing.
I admire your boldness in calling the UN “out of touch and destructive” while not responding to any arguments. No the Liberal party are right, not the rest of the world. Do a basic google search next time, here, I did one for you:
That’s not a Google search! CHECKMATE ANTISEMITE!
I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that the founder of DuckDuckGo is Jewish. So maybe I should use a search engine which is more antisemitic
What are the borders of the proposed Palestinian state?
“From the River to the Sea”?
Who are you asking? If you’re asking me, I’d say the 1947 partition plan. Or at least the West Bank borders from 1967 with the Gaza Strip + extended border with Egypt from the 1947 plan.
I mean, the ideal would be for a peaceful one state solution where neither side is privileged. Maybe even, at least temporarily, a Northern Ireland–style situation where any government is required to have representation of both groups. Because religious ethnostates fucking suck. But Israel has made it painfully clear that they have zero interest in that; they really quite like their apartheid.
Penny Wong has already called for such a two state solution. What was the point of this motion?
I was asking what were Greens proposing? I know many of their constituents chant “from the river to the sea”.
I recall that when Labor first rejected the call for a ceasefire and Greens walked out of Parliament. The document Greens were expecting Labor to sign contained no acknowledgement that the October 7 massacre even happened (let alone condemning it).
A few weeks later the document was amended and Labor signed on.
I was asking what were Greens proposing?
The movement was only to recognise Palestinian statehood, not to define its borders.
Penny Wong has already called for such a two state solution
Well then why hasn’t she actually recognised Palestine, like 146 out of 193 other countries already have?
You still haven’t told me what the borders of that Palestine are.
You haven’t told me why you care. Do you not think Palestine should be recognised as an independent country?
Because I imagine a state needs to be defined physically before it can be recognised. It seems you don’t care enough to track down the statement parliament was asked to sign.
Labor are focused on the hard yards of a 2SS, Greens are trolling with theatre. In fact Greens may not even support a 2SS because it goes against the call of “from the river to the sea”.
It seems you don’t care enough to track down the statement parliament was asked to sign.
I saw the statement before I ever saw the result of the vote. It’s excruciatingly simple.
This House recognise the State of Palestine.
It couldn’t be more simple.
Labor doesn’t support it because they support Israel and the genocide Israel is perpetuating. Or to be more accurate, they’re accepting of genocide as long as it doesn’t upset America. There’s nothing more to it.
The idea that Labor is putting in any sort of “hard yards” is utterly laughable, considering they’re selling weapons to and buying them from the perpetrators of genocide.
