Nick Timothy, a Conservative MP, asked Lammy to clarify that “there is not a genocide occurring in the Middle East”, adding that words like “genocide” in connection with Gaza were “not appropriate” and “repeated by protesters and lawbreakers”.
Lammy’s answer began well: “These are, quite properly, legal terms that must be determined by international courts.”
Lammy might have noted that experts, such as the Israeli scholar Omer Bartov and the Lemkin Institute, founded by Raphael Lemkin, who in 1942 invented the term genocide, have already described Israel’s action in Gaza as exactly that. Neither can remotely be described as protesters or lawbreakers.
Instead, Lammy got chummy with Timothy. This should not come as a surprise since Keir Starmer’s Labour has a habit of siding with Tories rather than its own MPs over Gaza.
“I do agree with the honourable gentleman,” said Lammy, before redefining the term genocide in a way that no expert would recognise, let alone accept. The word, the foreign secretary told the House of Commons, was “largely used when millions of people lost their lives in crises like Rwanda, the Second World War, the Holocaust, and the way that they are used now undermines the seriousness of that term”.
We shouldn’t be surprised. Lammy is a cabinet minister in a UK government. You’re not going to get a different answer on this topic. Deselect him if you feel strongly otherwise. These people don’t listen to anything else.
He’s also a hardcore Christian. Listen to his views on assisted dying for example. Whilst still in opposition he was asked about this on Question Time not that long ago. When the topic via Esther Rantzen first came up. He said he would seek council from his constituency and then made it clear that it was his church constituency that he was referring to. Forget about the electorate. His head and heart is firmly aligned with what his congregation wants. I suspect on this matter it is much the same.
largely used when millions of people lost their lives in crises like Rwanda, the Second World War, the Holocaust, and the way that they are used now undermines the seriousness of that term
Nitpick, but Lammy said “the Second Word War and the Holocaust”, the ways they’ve transribed it implies Lammy was saying the Second World War itself was a genocide.
Last summer, he referred to Azerbaijan’s bloody conquest of Nagorno-Karabakh, with the exodus of a terrified Armenian population, as “liberation”.
Excuse me? That’s actually disgraceful.
Longtime ago I had hope for Lammy, but he turned out to be duplicitous and fake .
I once watched him talk to a group of 16-19 yr old students. When asked why he wasn’t backing Corbyn he said he wouldn’t back an ‘old white guy’. Discriminating based on three protected characteristics is no way to talk politics with young people, I found him disappointing.
That captures it nicely. Prepared to hitch a ride on popular issues, but equally bigoted come crunch time.
Because there isn’t a genocide.
It’s trendy to think there is (because it’s the pesky Jews), but there isn’t.
Have you considered immigrating to occupied Palestine then? Useful reminder, since you seem confused: anti-genocide ≠ anti-semitism
Have you considered immigrating to occupied Palestine then?
Lol. What kind of argument is that? I don’t want to move to the USA either. Does that mean a genocide is ongoing there?
Useful reminder, since you seem confused: anti-genocide ≠ anti-semitism
No confusion here. But there is no genocide. And if Israel were hoping for a genocide, they’re not really doing a very good job of it, are they?
