Similarities between Palestinians and black Americans, and “ridiculous and wild” ideas...

8 hours ago

Image Released, EPA

Comment on the image,

Lebanese protesting against the normalization of relations with Israel

The Independent Online published an article by journalist Robert Fisk talking about Lebanon and its return to the tragic headlines.

Fisk says, “Here Beirut returns to a policy of insanity, corruption and violence. Here they are likened to America. The simple Lebanese does not deserve this. The American policy in his small country and Washington’s humiliating support for Israel’s repeated invasions has contributed greatly to the tragedy of Lebanon.”

The veteran journalist and Middle East expert adds that the only Middle Eastern analogy in the United States today is between Palestinians and American blacks. And I know that the first struggle is about nationalism and the second is about racism. But no matter how much the Israelis and their alleged friends try to defame those who compare a white policeman who shoots a black man to an Israeli policeman who shoots a Palestinian, Palestinians and American blacks share one demand: dignity and human rights.

Black Americans, Fisk says, were robbed when their ancestors took slaves four centuries ago, and the Palestinians robbed their land for more than half a century only, but they are struggling for a legitimate cause that brings them together. It is not surprising that supporters of the “BDS” (calling for the boycott of Israel) movement, which supports Palestinian rights, rushed to support the rights of blacks in the United States. You cannot help but notice the reaction of black Americans to the Palestinian tragedy. But most Americans, except for those who know the Middle East from a left-wing perspective, are reluctant to openly discuss the Palestinian issue because they know the cost of criticizing Israel.

A more humane approach to migration

The Financial Times ran an editorial calling for more humane treatment of migrants.


Image Released, EPA

Comment on the image,

Fire in a refugee camp in Greece

The newspaper refers to leaked information that the British government is considering opening centers to study cases of asylum seekers on distant islands or at sea.

The Financial Times describes these ideas as impulsive if not absurd. The newspaper acknowledges that Britain is facing increasing numbers of illegal immigrants, and these numbers affect the votes of the electorate, so the need has become urgent for a more effective control system, but it says that effectiveness does not mean inhuman practice.

The newspaper states that the growing number of immigrants has become an obsession for British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. More than 5,000 immigrants crossed the borders at the end of August this year, compared to 1,890 during the whole of the past year.

The issue of immigration was the subject of the right-wing election campaign. And the slogan of those calling for Brexit, who are the majority of Johnson’s supporters, is to regain control of the country’s borders.

The newspaper says that the reality is that Britain’s exit from the European Union does not facilitate the government’s task in facing waves of immigration, so it is looking at new approaches. The Conservative government is not the first to consider opening remote centers at sea, as it was previously considered by the Labor government of Tony Blair in the year 2000, so that immigrants would not escape from the centers and dissolve into society.

But Australias experience with these centers in Papua New Guinea raises a lot of controversy, as human rights organizations talk about inhumane and arbitrary practices against the residents of these centers.

The Financial Times believes that Britain, as an island facing fewer immigrants than other European countries, is dealing with migrant files on British soil, where rights are respected, a better idea, and the government should coordinate with France, Belgium and the Netherlands to fight migrant smuggling gangs.

Asylum policy Disgusting, savage, and wrong

The Guardian newspaper devoted its editorial also to the issue of immigration and asylum. She described the policy the British government intends to pursue as “disgusting, brutal and wrong.”

Merkel's refugees

Image Released, Reuters

Comment on the image,

Refugees from Syria and Iraq take pictures with German Chancellor Angela Merkel

The Guardian says that the Corona virus epidemic has caused the number of asylum seekers in Britain to decrease to the lowest level in 10 years. Even before the epidemic, the proportion of asylum seekers in Britain was 5 applications for every 10,000 residents, compared to 14 applications for every 10 thousand residents in the European Union combined. Last year, Britain was ranked 17th among European countries.

The newspaper adds that these numbers do not reflect the manner in which Interior Minister Priti Patel deals with the issue of immigration. It is, according to al-Ghadryan, the most hardline interior minister with asylum seekers in decades. It takes pride in this toughness and ruthlessness. All her concern is to deport asylum seekers whatever the means, and she is keen to make headlines more than she is eager to solve the problems of her ministry.

The newspaper refers to information that the government is considering opening centers for asylum seekers in distant islands such as Saint Helena, or in unused ships at sea, or sending them to Moldova, Morocco or Papua New Guinea, and then there was news that the government is negotiating with the Navy from To build floating walls in the English Channel in one of the world’s busiest sea routes.

The Guardian believes that these ideas are not implementable because they are inhuman. And remember that Britain is proud to have signed the Geneva Refugee Convention, which requires states to grant asylum to those who fear for themselves from a real threat to their lives.

Biden was “not convinced” in the first debate

The Daily Telegraph published an article in which it believes that Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden “did not convince” in the first debate with his rival Donald .


Image Released, Reuters

Comment on the image,

Opinion polls say a simple majority gave Biden the lead in the debate

The newspaper states that al-Munatara showed Trump as an eloquent and slanderous argument, as for Biden, he retreated to attack him while he had to use it to his advantage. All he could do was tell his opponent, “Shut up,” with emotion that Trump seems to have intended to provoke him, through his repeated boycotts.

Biden went directly to viewers by looking at the camera rather than facing what he described as a clown.

Opinion polls recorded that a simple majority of 100 million Americans believed that Biden was the one who emerged the winner from the debate, but those opinion polls, according to the newspaper, which said in 2016 that Trump is behind his competition, which means that what happens on election day may be completely different. .

After four years in the White House, most Americans had their idea of ​​Trump. As for the real battle, it will be to win the few votes of the group that have not yet decided their opinion in some states, and if Biden wants to win, he must improve his performance.

These were the details of the news Similarities between Palestinians and black Americans, and “ridiculous and wild” ideas... for this day. We hope that we have succeeded by giving you the full details and information. To follow all our news, you can subscribe to the alerts system or to one of our different systems to provide you with all that is new.

It is also worth noting that the original news has been published and is available at and the editorial team at AlKhaleej Today has confirmed it and it has been modified, and it may have been completely transferred or quoted from it and you can read and follow this news from its main source.

PREV Fighting rages in Gaza’s Rafah after first aid delivery via pier
NEXT Top French university loses funding over pro-Palestinian protests