I am sure your post will be deleted but you are 100% correct to be so angry. If I have any criticism it is that you should no longer expect these groups to react, you are perfectly able to act alone - probably safer and better than if you acted in a reluctant group.

No Borders, AF et al, anyone who opposes support for the civilian victims in Gaza for such petty and uninformed reasons can consider themselves known collaborators. Named shamed and soon to be maimed.

... on having the guts to say this. The privileged white smugness of some 'activists' in Manchester is just as offensive and ideologically exploitative as the tedious Trot and FRFI bastards whose only real interest in the massacre in Gaza is that it gives them more opportunities to flog papers.

i can guarantee that people in manc. no borders have been involved in protests about gaza, but prob. not as no borders...what would be the platform exactly?...i work with bristol no borders and have been doing stuff about gaza but never occurred to us that we should dot it as no borders...it would just confuse the issue... other than putting on some of the agit. prop that we were against all state violence, even anarchist protest has focused on getting israel to stop killing Palestinians(now!) rather than any complicated anarcho-analysis.

"other than putting on some of the agit. prop that we were against all state violence"

When did the Palestinians get a state?

Congratulations to No Borders for not compromising their principles on this matter. Supporting the abolition of nation states and the free movement of population is completely incompatable with supporting the establishment of a nation-state within strictly defined borders which extends citizenship to one or another ethnic group (whether Jews who have never seen the place or 'Palestinians' born and raised in Lebannon or Jordan).

Palestine isn't an internationally recognised state, so what? The original poster seems to want to both support Palestinian nationalism as a "priveledge of the oppressed" but deny that such nationalism is possible because Palestine is not a "nation". In case he/she hadn't noticed, Scotland and Quebec aren't internationally recognised states, but Scotting and Quebecois nationalism are pretty established things. And who is "oppressed" here? Some Fatah/Hamas bureaucrat in a PA office organising the suppression of strikes and his political rivals? Or the Palestinian civilians supported in the text No Borders Manchester are promoting?

Indymedia readers might be familiar with Danny's antics and fondness for making vague threats over the internet. If they are interested, the AF statement distributed by No Borders expresses solidarity with the civilian population of Gaza and describes the bombing as an "atrocity which must end immediately" is available here:  http://libcom.org/library/no-state-solution-gaza . Danny has already established is contempt for reality before.

This "middle class" insult is pretty funny too. I can't talk for No Borders, but shit, I might make £13,000 this year, what an oppressive bastard I am! Maybe these people will be happier reading something from a self-employed electrician on £40,000 year!

The leaflet produced by Man and Shef AF and distributed by No Borders in Manchester condemned Israel's actions in the first paragraph. Here, I'll copy and paste it for you:

"One thing is absolutely clear about the current situation in Gaza: the Israeli state is committing atrocities which must end immediately. With hundreds dead and thousands wounded, it has become increasingly clear that the aim of the military operation, which has been in the planning stages since the signing of the original ceasefire in June, is to break Hamas completely. The attack follows the crippling blockade throughout the supposed ‘ceasefire’, which has destroyed the livelihoods of Gazans, ruined the civilian infrastructure and created a humanitarian disaster which anyone with an ounce of humanity would seek an end to."

Pretty clear I think.

The position is not as clear cut as 'Israel bad Palestine good', because there is plenty to be said about Hamas that reaches beyond 'victory to the resistance'.

The anarchist position is internationalist. Therefore we reject Palastinian nationalism just as openly and clearly as we reject Israeli nationalism. Nationalism of any sort hides class differences; it pretends that those who rule and those who are ruled have anything in common. They don't. So please don't be surprised when a group who calls for the abolition of all borders and states agrees that nationalism is something to be opposed. Here's a bit more for you, before you lose it and threaten to 'maim' us or something.

"... against the divisions and false choices set up by nationalism, we fully support the ordinary inhabitants of Gaza and Israel against state warfare – not because of their nationality, ethnicity, or religion, but simply because they're real living, feeling, thinking, suffering, struggling human beings. And this support has to mean total hostility to all those who would oppress and exploit them –the Israeli state and the Western governments and corporations that supply it with weapons, but also any other capitalist factions who seek to use ordinary working-class Palestinians as pawns in their power struggles. The only real solution is one which is collective, based on the fact that as a class, globally, we ultimately have nothing but our ability to work for others, and everything to gain in ending this system – capitalism – and the states and wars it needs ."

Full text posed here:  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/418475.html

I'd just like to say myself and many other members of my group have been involved in palestinian solidarity protests, again not as no borders.
Just because we belong to a group doesn't mean it is always going to be relevent for every protest we go to, of course migration/war/climate/politics/economics/etc are all linked, but sometimes not in a direct enough way to warrant a certian bannar at a protest. Especially if however much you support a campain its main thurst calls for something (establishment of a nationstate) that is at the heart of what your organisation campains against. Altho obviously the majority of people are pragmatic enough to understand that aims like this can be nessacary, especially when they are supported by the vast majoirty of the people who will be most affected by them.

"Especially if however much you support a campain its main thurst calls for something (establishment of a nationstate) that is at the heart of what your organisation campains against."

Well it seems to me that the PSC was calling for an end to slaughter, and the STWC promised they would be "escalating our campaign to bring this atrocity to an end". The MAB was advertising demos to "Stop Gaza slaughter"

So it would be helpful if you could let us know who was putting out calls for the establishment of a nationstate. Surely the 'main thrust' would be the calls of the 3 main organisers of the event?

As a member of No Borders I have been struggling to find a way to show my absolutely unwavering solidarity with people in Gaza since the attacks began whilst at the same time holding onto my beliefs about the causes and solutions (or false solutions) for the situation in Palestine. As another member has already pointed out many people in No Borders have attended vigils, demos in Manchester and all over the UK and supported actions by the AF and others who have offered a more radical response to the conflict.

I am really very sad that people think that we are putting politics first before sollidarity with people in Gaza when, in fact, by refusing to be a part of what appears to be the mainstream discourse of nationalism and state solutions we are showing our absolute solidarity with PEOPLE in Gaza and not with any group or idea that claims to represent the needs of real people and which ultimatley cannot (nations/states..)

Personally I would like to think that as a progressive movement we can find ways to reject nationalism and religious fundamentalism and have a people driven and people focused movement for oppressed groups all over the world.

We shouldn't compromise our politics and our beliefs, there will always be a crisis and we will always be in the minority and we have to work together.

It is interesting to see the smear tactics of the simplistic anti-imperialist left in mcr. You say that no borders are 'collaborators', that they oppose support for civilians in Gaza (where did you get that idea from?), that we will be 'named and shamed'.

So it's like your either with us or against us? Who said this again?

I think no borders have a lot of work to do in mcr, with that simplistic nationalistic mindset in the activists scene there.

So we should attack the climate camp for not dropping opposition to the third runway for Gaza solidarity campaigning? I see the CWU's frontpage story is about opposition to postal service privitisation, not Gaza - those middle class ***** ! Feminist fightback are advertising a gender / race / class / capitalism conference on the front of their web-page, not Gaza vigils - they should be 'maimed'.

People from all these organisations are no doubt doing Gaza solidarity campaigning, just as most likely many people from Manchester No Borders have been: take a look on the Manchester no Borders blog for example, 2nd post down, title "Solidarity with Gaza Victims."

" we support the anarchist/anti-authoritarian presence at the Palestinian Solidarity demo this Saturday at Hyde Park. If you were thinking of travelling down look out for the red and black flags and massive red and black banner."

 http://nobordersmanchester.blogspot.com/

Did you somehow miss this?

This doesn't look like a boycott of Gaza solidarity actions, this looks like Manchester No Borders ENCOURAGING active solidarity campaigning.

The fight for social justice has many, many fronts, this belief that Palestine is THE single most important thing to campaign on, and any person or organisation that doesn't make it their campaigning priority must be lacking solidarity with oppressed people, is utterly absurd.

Even more so is the proposition that people attempting to discuss issues of religion and nationalism in the process of solidarity campaiging are being "offensive and ideologically exploitative."

Perhaps it is no wonder some people are steering clear of the vigils.

Nationalism must be challenged from the outset, whilst we do solidarity work.

I've seen the forces of nationalism and religion stirred up by politicians in the Balkans, and then of course getting 'out of control' to the point where real nasty shit and atrocities happened in the name of nationalism.

We can of course work alongside people who are nationalist, or haven't thought about it but just wave the Palestinian flag, but we must challenge dangerous ideas when we can.

When on one of the vigils I challenged the man with the mic over the dodgy chant "from the river to the sea", in the most supportive 'I understand the idea of a one-state solution but the words can be taken as anti-semitic, linking in with calls to push Jews into the sea' kinda way, he and the others who came and talked to me as a result all just weren't even able to listen. That's already entering danger territory for me, and we're not even under direct rocket attack ourselves!

So go to protests ( https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/418702.html), read what's happening there (Al Jazeera live stream or  http://talestotell.wordpress.com) and find other ways to give as direct solidarity as possible, but open your mouth when new injustices seek to take the place of old ones.

" but the words can be taken as anti-semitic, linking in with calls to push Jews into the sea' kinda way,"

So, why not conflate nationalism and religion (or perhaps you think its a race?) now? If you can actually stretch the logan "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" to mean running the occupation forces into the sea - that'd be the zionists and Israelis, many of them immigrants, that we'd be talking about, no?

Is it Jews who are doing the killing in Gaza right this minute? We should be told.....

I have to say, I find anarchists making a meal out of Hamas being a "democratically elected government" a bit odd. The Labour government are the democratically elected government of the UK, should we stop criticising them, too?

I'm not conflating religion and nationalism - what I was talking about in the Balkans was that the two (different) forces of r & n etc etc...better now?! (FFS)

But, 'stop the slaughter', it is you who should be more careful with your language, because what you've written is virulent anti-semitic shit. Fuck right off.

And I agree with jhaaglund, though I think it's less anarchists and more others who go on about Hamas being elected - after all Hitler was democratically elected too. There's obviously a moral line we have to draw somewhere.

"I'm not conflating religion and nationalism - what I was talking about in the Balkans was that the two (different) forces of r & n etc etc...better now?! (FFS)"

So, when you took this speaker up for the call "From the river to the sea" for words which "can be taken as anti-semitic, linking in with calls to push Jews into the sea' kinda way", you weren't conflating religion and nationality?

It is apparently okay to say that Palestinians want to drive the 'Jews' into the sea - and yet it is not okay by with you to call the people killing Gazans 'Jews'. And yet we are in fact talking about the same people - zionists and Israelis. They are there because they are zionists, and they are killing Gazans because they are zionists. There are plenty of Jews who have nothing to do with the occupation of Palestine, or the killing of Palestinians.

"A whopping 94% of the public support or strongly support the operation while 92% think it benefits Israel's security, according to the Tel Aviv University survey."
 http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1231950849022

As 20% of the Israeli population are Palestinians, it must be assumed that the study was limited to Jewish citizens - after all Israeli Palestinian parties have been banned from the elections due to Israeli Palestinians opposing the offensive.

"he and the others who came and talked to me as a result all just weren't even able to listen."

I think its you that might have a problem with not being able to process logical arguments.