You'd think that Australia's foreign minister, Julie Bishop, having once said this - "I would like to see which international law has declared [Israeli settlements] illegal" (1/2014) - would at least have the sense to keep her mouth shut now that UNSC resolution 2334 (22/12/16) has ruled definitively that these settlements have "no legal validity" and constitute "a flagrant violation under international law."
But no. Bishop "said in a statement on Thursday that Australia was not a member of the Security Council and was not eligible to vote on the resolution. However, she said, 'in voting at the UN, the Coalition government has consistently not supported one-sided resolutions targeting Israel'." (Bishop's backing Israel over UN resolution, Peter Martin, Sydney Morning Herald, 30/12/16)
And PM Turnbull?: "Stating that a two-state solution 'can only be negotiated between the parties,' he said, 'It is not assisted by one-sided resolutions made at the councils of the United Nations or anywhere else, and that is why Australia has not, and does not, support one-sided resolutions." (Turnbull slams 'one-sided' UN resolution against Israel, The Australian Jewish News, 30/12/16)
As Mike Carlton commented in a tweet on the subject: "No surprise there. This gutless Turnbull 'government' is an ethical and moral black hole." (30/12/16)
Friday, December 30, 2016
Greg Sheridan: Still Channeling Auntie Poppy After All These Years
The human mind, like God, works in mysterious ways. Be that as it may, one such mind, that of Greg Sheridan, the foreign editor of The Australian, works (if that is the appropriate word), not so much in mysterious as in downright peculiar ways. An explanation for this may be found in his formative years. In the beginning were the words, and the words were, alas, Auntie Poppy's:
"Auntie Poppy always told me I must never forget that the Jews were God's chosen people... Dad and Auntie Poppy were always pro-Jewish and pro-Israel." When We Were Young & Foolish: A Memoir of My Misguided Youth with Tony Abbott, Bob Carr, Malcolm Turnbull, Kevin Rudd & Other Reprobates (2015)*
As though brought down from Mt Sinai, engraved in stone, there was no looking back for the nerdy Catholic nipper. Hence:
"Barack Obama's presidency is ending with a fine contempt for democracy as he exhibits every trait of hubris, arrogance and disregard for the messy business of elections and democratic mandates in his efforts to tie the hands of his successor on contentious policy that Obama was never willing to take to the electorate, or put before congress. On two contentious issues - Israeli settlements and offshore drilling in the Arctic - Obama is taking actions directly against the spirit and practice of democracy by using bureaucratic and legal manoeuvres to try to put policy decisions beyond democratic revision. Obama chose to wait until after the presidential elections to take these steps.
"Obama, with Hillary Clinton, was always the best advertisement for Donald Trump, even more so now, for Obama, at the extreme end of lame duckery, demonstrates a peerless elite disregard for democratic process and the messy and inconvenient business of electoral results. It is Obama, not Trump, who pioneered American weakness and retreat from leadership.
"Obama has been kind to America's enemies, but he is a dangerous friend. America's allies, in this case Israel, have been his chief victims. By abstaining, Obama allowed a resolution to go through the Security Council that the US had always previously vetoed. It is a non-sided and expansively worded condemnation of all Israeli settlements outside the lines of the state of Israel as it existed before the 1967 war. On its face, the resolution makes no sense as the land the resolution chiefly concerns was never officially Palestinian land but, before 1967, belonged to Jordan. Israel has always accepted that the final status of this land must be worked out in negotiations and has made at least three serious offers to give more than 90% of the land in question to a new Palestinian state. In exchange, the Palestinian leadership must accept that this is an end of claims, must recognise the legitimacy of Israel, and must commit to its future security. The Palestinians have not been able to meet these conditions.
"No one who lives in the real world thinks the Israel-Palestine dispute can be solved in today's environment of a Middle East in flames. Let's be quite clear about this. Obama, with extreme irresponsibility, is licensing a new wave of global anti-Semitism... " (Obama delivers last-minute hit to democracy, The Australian, 27/12/16)
[*See my 3/8/15 post Greg Sheridan: The Making of a Gentile Zionist.]
"Auntie Poppy always told me I must never forget that the Jews were God's chosen people... Dad and Auntie Poppy were always pro-Jewish and pro-Israel." When We Were Young & Foolish: A Memoir of My Misguided Youth with Tony Abbott, Bob Carr, Malcolm Turnbull, Kevin Rudd & Other Reprobates (2015)*
As though brought down from Mt Sinai, engraved in stone, there was no looking back for the nerdy Catholic nipper. Hence:
"Barack Obama's presidency is ending with a fine contempt for democracy as he exhibits every trait of hubris, arrogance and disregard for the messy business of elections and democratic mandates in his efforts to tie the hands of his successor on contentious policy that Obama was never willing to take to the electorate, or put before congress. On two contentious issues - Israeli settlements and offshore drilling in the Arctic - Obama is taking actions directly against the spirit and practice of democracy by using bureaucratic and legal manoeuvres to try to put policy decisions beyond democratic revision. Obama chose to wait until after the presidential elections to take these steps.
"Obama, with Hillary Clinton, was always the best advertisement for Donald Trump, even more so now, for Obama, at the extreme end of lame duckery, demonstrates a peerless elite disregard for democratic process and the messy and inconvenient business of electoral results. It is Obama, not Trump, who pioneered American weakness and retreat from leadership.
"Obama has been kind to America's enemies, but he is a dangerous friend. America's allies, in this case Israel, have been his chief victims. By abstaining, Obama allowed a resolution to go through the Security Council that the US had always previously vetoed. It is a non-sided and expansively worded condemnation of all Israeli settlements outside the lines of the state of Israel as it existed before the 1967 war. On its face, the resolution makes no sense as the land the resolution chiefly concerns was never officially Palestinian land but, before 1967, belonged to Jordan. Israel has always accepted that the final status of this land must be worked out in negotiations and has made at least three serious offers to give more than 90% of the land in question to a new Palestinian state. In exchange, the Palestinian leadership must accept that this is an end of claims, must recognise the legitimacy of Israel, and must commit to its future security. The Palestinians have not been able to meet these conditions.
"No one who lives in the real world thinks the Israel-Palestine dispute can be solved in today's environment of a Middle East in flames. Let's be quite clear about this. Obama, with extreme irresponsibility, is licensing a new wave of global anti-Semitism... " (Obama delivers last-minute hit to democracy, The Australian, 27/12/16)
[*See my 3/8/15 post Greg Sheridan: The Making of a Gentile Zionist.]
Thursday, December 29, 2016
Netanyahu Threatens War on New Zealand
Clearly, Netanyahu's mask is slipping. As you read the following detailed Israeli account of what went on behind the scenes in the lead up to last Friday's UNSC vote on the illegality of Israel's settlement project in the West Bank, bear in mind:
a) that it is only because of the abject failure of Western governments to stand up to Israel's criminality and bullying decades ago that has led to this;
b) that it was only in September that Obama approved the largest aid package in history for Israel, an unconditional $38 billion over the next 10 years; and
c) that the Turnbull government has issued an invitation for the man who has declared war on NZ to visit these shores early in 2017.
Britain pulled the strings and Netanyahu warned New Zealand it was declaring war: new details on Israel's battle against the UN vote, Barak Ravid, Haaretz, 28/12/16:
"Last Friday, a few hours before the UN Security Council vote on the settlements, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu phoned New Zealand's foreign minister, Murray McCully. New Zealand, together with Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela, was leading a move to resubmit for a vote the resolution from which Egypt had backed down the day before. A few hours earlier, a senior official in the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem called New Zealand's ambassador to Israel, Jonathan Curr, and warned that if New Zealand's move came to a vote, Israel might close its embassy in Wellington in protest. Ambassador Curr noted this and reported it to his government, but when dawn came in New York Israel understood that things were still moving ahead. Netanyahu's phone call to McCully was almost his last attempt to prevent the vote, or at least postpone it and buy a little time. Western diplomats say the conversation was harsh and very tense and Netanyahu let loose with sharp threats, perhaps unprecedented in relations between Israel and another Western country. 'This is a scandalous decision. I'm asking that you not support it and not promote it,' Netanyahu told McCully, according to the Western diplomats, who asked to remain unnamed due to the sensitivity of the matter. 'If you continue to promote this resolution from our point of view it will be a declaration of war. It will rupture the relations and there will be consequences. We'll recall our ambassador to Jerusalem.' McCully refused to back down from the vote. 'This resolution conforms to our policy and we will move it forward,' he told Netanyahu.
"Just one month earlier, when McCully visited Israel and met with Netanyahu, he found the latter an entirely different man. Netanyahu was pleasant, friendly and overflowing with warmth. He showed McCully the famous PowerPoint presentation that he had shown in a round of background briefings for the media last summer. Laser pointer in hand, Netanyahu told McCully that Israel was expanding its foreign relations, breaking through in the region and making friends in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The Western diplomats said that McCully, who over the past two years had been consistently pushing the Israeli-Palestinian issue in the UN Security Council, spoke with Netanyahu about the resolution his country wanted to promote. It was a much softer and more moderate version than the motion that passed last Friday. New Zealand's resolution did talk about freezing construction in the settlements, but also about freezing Palestinian steps in the UN and the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and called for direct negotiations without preconditions. Netanyahu rejected this outright. If it were up to him, the Palestinian issue would not have come up in the meeting at all. His message to McCully was similar to what he said endlessly in public over the past few weeks. The world doesn't care too much about the Palestinian issue. The automatic majority against Israel in the UN is about to become a thing of the past. 'The vote Friday proved differently and showed that Netanyahu's assessment was wrong,' a Western diplomat said.
"Discussions with Western and Israel diplomats reveal many interesting details about some of what happened behind the scenes at UN headquarters in New York between Thursday afternoon, when Egypt announced it was backing down from the resolution on the settlements, and Friday morning, when New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela announced that they would continue to push for a vote. From the moment Egypt backed down on Thursday, the Western and Israeli diplomats say, New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela were pressured to move ahead anyway. The Palestinians were the first to exert pressure, but they were joined by some of the Gulf States and Britain. The Western diplomats said that the British encouraged New Zealand to continue pushing for a vote even without Egyptian support. The British had become active regarding the resolution a few days earlier. The Israeli diplomats say that from information that reached the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, British legal figures and diplomats had been working directly with the Palestinians on the wording of the resolution even before it was distributed by Egypt the first time on Wednesday evening. According to the Israeli diplomats, the British did this secretly and without informing Israel. The suspicion in Jerusalem is that the British had been working during all those days for the Americans to make sure the resolution was to US President Barack Obama's liking, but without the need to intervene directly in formulating it."
a) that it is only because of the abject failure of Western governments to stand up to Israel's criminality and bullying decades ago that has led to this;
b) that it was only in September that Obama approved the largest aid package in history for Israel, an unconditional $38 billion over the next 10 years; and
c) that the Turnbull government has issued an invitation for the man who has declared war on NZ to visit these shores early in 2017.
Britain pulled the strings and Netanyahu warned New Zealand it was declaring war: new details on Israel's battle against the UN vote, Barak Ravid, Haaretz, 28/12/16:
"Last Friday, a few hours before the UN Security Council vote on the settlements, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu phoned New Zealand's foreign minister, Murray McCully. New Zealand, together with Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela, was leading a move to resubmit for a vote the resolution from which Egypt had backed down the day before. A few hours earlier, a senior official in the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem called New Zealand's ambassador to Israel, Jonathan Curr, and warned that if New Zealand's move came to a vote, Israel might close its embassy in Wellington in protest. Ambassador Curr noted this and reported it to his government, but when dawn came in New York Israel understood that things were still moving ahead. Netanyahu's phone call to McCully was almost his last attempt to prevent the vote, or at least postpone it and buy a little time. Western diplomats say the conversation was harsh and very tense and Netanyahu let loose with sharp threats, perhaps unprecedented in relations between Israel and another Western country. 'This is a scandalous decision. I'm asking that you not support it and not promote it,' Netanyahu told McCully, according to the Western diplomats, who asked to remain unnamed due to the sensitivity of the matter. 'If you continue to promote this resolution from our point of view it will be a declaration of war. It will rupture the relations and there will be consequences. We'll recall our ambassador to Jerusalem.' McCully refused to back down from the vote. 'This resolution conforms to our policy and we will move it forward,' he told Netanyahu.
"Just one month earlier, when McCully visited Israel and met with Netanyahu, he found the latter an entirely different man. Netanyahu was pleasant, friendly and overflowing with warmth. He showed McCully the famous PowerPoint presentation that he had shown in a round of background briefings for the media last summer. Laser pointer in hand, Netanyahu told McCully that Israel was expanding its foreign relations, breaking through in the region and making friends in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The Western diplomats said that McCully, who over the past two years had been consistently pushing the Israeli-Palestinian issue in the UN Security Council, spoke with Netanyahu about the resolution his country wanted to promote. It was a much softer and more moderate version than the motion that passed last Friday. New Zealand's resolution did talk about freezing construction in the settlements, but also about freezing Palestinian steps in the UN and the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and called for direct negotiations without preconditions. Netanyahu rejected this outright. If it were up to him, the Palestinian issue would not have come up in the meeting at all. His message to McCully was similar to what he said endlessly in public over the past few weeks. The world doesn't care too much about the Palestinian issue. The automatic majority against Israel in the UN is about to become a thing of the past. 'The vote Friday proved differently and showed that Netanyahu's assessment was wrong,' a Western diplomat said.
"Discussions with Western and Israel diplomats reveal many interesting details about some of what happened behind the scenes at UN headquarters in New York between Thursday afternoon, when Egypt announced it was backing down from the resolution on the settlements, and Friday morning, when New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela announced that they would continue to push for a vote. From the moment Egypt backed down on Thursday, the Western and Israeli diplomats say, New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and Venezuela were pressured to move ahead anyway. The Palestinians were the first to exert pressure, but they were joined by some of the Gulf States and Britain. The Western diplomats said that the British encouraged New Zealand to continue pushing for a vote even without Egyptian support. The British had become active regarding the resolution a few days earlier. The Israeli diplomats say that from information that reached the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, British legal figures and diplomats had been working directly with the Palestinians on the wording of the resolution even before it was distributed by Egypt the first time on Wednesday evening. According to the Israeli diplomats, the British did this secretly and without informing Israel. The suspicion in Jerusalem is that the British had been working during all those days for the Americans to make sure the resolution was to US President Barack Obama's liking, but without the need to intervene directly in formulating it."
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Look Who's Talking About 'the Aussie Way'
Every so often the mainstream press 'treats' us to a homily by Vic Alhadeff, chief executive of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies. This time around it's The Australian's turn. In Respect for the faiths of others is the Aussie way (24/12/16), Vic lectures us on Aussie values. The only problem is that Vic, as a prominent Israel lobbyist, is also a supporter of Israeli values, which sort of cruels his pitch, know what I mean? He begins with the following anecdote:
"Some time ago I was asked to get involved in a dispute that had arisen at a public school over the prominent placement of a Christmas tree in the school foyer. The pupils were encouraged to place beneath the tree a small gift that would be forwarded to Bear Cottage, a hospice that provides palliative care to children... The parent of one of many non-Christian pupils at the school objected vehemently to the prominence accorded to the tree and what she regarded as undue and inappropriate celebration of Christmas, given that the school was made up of families of numerous ethnic and faith traditions. I was invited to participate in a meeting with the school principal, the Department of Education and the aggrieved parent. My role was to facilitate a compromise that would ideally satisfy the policies and practices of the school while mollifying the parent and answering her concerns. The meeting was convened in the school office, with the parent setting out her objections to a Christmas tree being given pride of place in the entrance, requiring the non-Christian pupils to walk past it on arrival at school every day, which she argued was an affront to their respective faiths... My response to the impasse was that the hallmark of this greatest of countries is that we overwhelmingly embrace differences and respect diversity. We are a robust and healthy democracy that enshrines such principles as equality for all, the rule of law, an independent judiciary, a free press, equality for men and women and multiculturalism."
Needless to say, I had problems with this anecdote on several levels:
1) If Alhadeff's account is correct, the Christmas tree was really nothing more than a worthy attempt by the school principal and staff to encourage the students to think about other kids less fortunate than themselves, nothing more, nothing less.
2) As for the parent who "objected vehemently," I found myself wondering why the principal didn't simply inform her that Christmas trees have no particular religious significance, and that charity, not religion, was the object of the exercise. (He/she might also have asked her whether she avoided taking her children to the local mall for the entire duration of the silly season.)
3) The objecting parent is coyly described as "non-Christian." Although she might conceivably have been an Anglo with an atheist bee in her bonnet, Alhadeff's silence on the matter will have had the paper's readers jumping to the conclusion that she was in fact a Muslim, in which case, he leaves himself open to an accusation of dog-whistling.
4) Why was Vic Alhadeff involved in the matter?
Although he has been CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies for as long as I can remember, for a brief period (December 2013 - July 2014) Alhadeff wore another hat, having been appointed chair of the NSW Community Relations Commission (CRC) by former NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell. (O'Farrell, you'll recall, lost his job in April 2014 after misleading an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) investigation, when he claimed that he simply couldn't remember receiving a $3,000 bottle of Penfold Grange Hermitage from a business associate - despite having written him a thank you note.) Alhadeff's appointment, incidentally, was preceded by O'Farrell's presentation, at an Israeli Independence Day function in May 2013 of "an effigy of himself bearing the name Baruch O'Farrell" to the then Israeli ambassador, Yuval Rotem.*
Alhadeff himself came unstuck as Community Relations Commissioner during Israel's last major bout of bloodletting in the Gaza Strip in July-August 2014. Casting his CRC cap aside, he fired off an incendiary email to his Jewish 'constituents' headed Israel Under Fire. After accusing Hamas of "violating international law and engaging in war crimes as its militants launch rockets indiscriminately at civilians from civilian areas," he wrote that "Israel has made it clear that it is not interested in further escalation, but will do whatever is needed to defend its citizens. All options are on the table."**
Two weeks later, after coming under fire from the Arab community leaders, he resigned, claiming the matter had become "a distraction to the work of the CRC."
5) Most likely, no one involved in Alhadeff's intervention was aware of his typically liberal Zionist habit of running with the multicultural Australian hare while hunting with the monocultural Israeli hounds. Still, for the proverbial (but politically conscious) fly-on-the-wall, the spectacle of a leading apologist for the ethnocratic, apartheid state of Israel, babbling on about diversity, equality and multiculturalism, must have been quite something.
[*See my 9/5/13 post Barry to Baruch in 60 Seconds; See my 28/7/14 post Vic Alhadeff: Multicultural in NSW, Monocultural in Israel.]
"Some time ago I was asked to get involved in a dispute that had arisen at a public school over the prominent placement of a Christmas tree in the school foyer. The pupils were encouraged to place beneath the tree a small gift that would be forwarded to Bear Cottage, a hospice that provides palliative care to children... The parent of one of many non-Christian pupils at the school objected vehemently to the prominence accorded to the tree and what she regarded as undue and inappropriate celebration of Christmas, given that the school was made up of families of numerous ethnic and faith traditions. I was invited to participate in a meeting with the school principal, the Department of Education and the aggrieved parent. My role was to facilitate a compromise that would ideally satisfy the policies and practices of the school while mollifying the parent and answering her concerns. The meeting was convened in the school office, with the parent setting out her objections to a Christmas tree being given pride of place in the entrance, requiring the non-Christian pupils to walk past it on arrival at school every day, which she argued was an affront to their respective faiths... My response to the impasse was that the hallmark of this greatest of countries is that we overwhelmingly embrace differences and respect diversity. We are a robust and healthy democracy that enshrines such principles as equality for all, the rule of law, an independent judiciary, a free press, equality for men and women and multiculturalism."
Needless to say, I had problems with this anecdote on several levels:
1) If Alhadeff's account is correct, the Christmas tree was really nothing more than a worthy attempt by the school principal and staff to encourage the students to think about other kids less fortunate than themselves, nothing more, nothing less.
2) As for the parent who "objected vehemently," I found myself wondering why the principal didn't simply inform her that Christmas trees have no particular religious significance, and that charity, not religion, was the object of the exercise. (He/she might also have asked her whether she avoided taking her children to the local mall for the entire duration of the silly season.)
3) The objecting parent is coyly described as "non-Christian." Although she might conceivably have been an Anglo with an atheist bee in her bonnet, Alhadeff's silence on the matter will have had the paper's readers jumping to the conclusion that she was in fact a Muslim, in which case, he leaves himself open to an accusation of dog-whistling.
4) Why was Vic Alhadeff involved in the matter?
Although he has been CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies for as long as I can remember, for a brief period (December 2013 - July 2014) Alhadeff wore another hat, having been appointed chair of the NSW Community Relations Commission (CRC) by former NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell. (O'Farrell, you'll recall, lost his job in April 2014 after misleading an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) investigation, when he claimed that he simply couldn't remember receiving a $3,000 bottle of Penfold Grange Hermitage from a business associate - despite having written him a thank you note.) Alhadeff's appointment, incidentally, was preceded by O'Farrell's presentation, at an Israeli Independence Day function in May 2013 of "an effigy of himself bearing the name Baruch O'Farrell" to the then Israeli ambassador, Yuval Rotem.*
Alhadeff himself came unstuck as Community Relations Commissioner during Israel's last major bout of bloodletting in the Gaza Strip in July-August 2014. Casting his CRC cap aside, he fired off an incendiary email to his Jewish 'constituents' headed Israel Under Fire. After accusing Hamas of "violating international law and engaging in war crimes as its militants launch rockets indiscriminately at civilians from civilian areas," he wrote that "Israel has made it clear that it is not interested in further escalation, but will do whatever is needed to defend its citizens. All options are on the table."**
Two weeks later, after coming under fire from the Arab community leaders, he resigned, claiming the matter had become "a distraction to the work of the CRC."
5) Most likely, no one involved in Alhadeff's intervention was aware of his typically liberal Zionist habit of running with the multicultural Australian hare while hunting with the monocultural Israeli hounds. Still, for the proverbial (but politically conscious) fly-on-the-wall, the spectacle of a leading apologist for the ethnocratic, apartheid state of Israel, babbling on about diversity, equality and multiculturalism, must have been quite something.
[*See my 9/5/13 post Barry to Baruch in 60 Seconds; See my 28/7/14 post Vic Alhadeff: Multicultural in NSW, Monocultural in Israel.]
Monday, December 26, 2016
Time to Review Israel's UN Membership
Have you ever wondered how the Zionist entity, which ethnically cleansed 78% of Palestine in 1948, managed to gain admission as a member in the United Nations?
John Quigley's new book, The International Diplomacy of Israel's Founders: Deception at the United Nations in the Quest for Palestine (2016) reminds us, yet again, that in their drive for exclusive control over Palestine, no lie is too big for Israel's rulers, and that, where Israel is concerned, US myopia and delusion know no bounds.
On the subject of UN General Assembly Resolution 273 (Admission of Israel to membership in the UN) of May 11, 1949, Quigley writes as follows:
"Warren Austin, the US delegate [to the UN], announced as he had in the Ad Hoc Political Committee (AHPC), that the US would vote for Israel's admission. Austen referred to the discussions of Israel's application in the AHPC... 'The long discussion of Israel's application,' Austen said, 'was evidence of the general deep-rooted desire for a just solution of questions relating to Palestine, and especially those of Jerusalem and the Arab refugees'.
"So the US was solid for Israel, even though what Austen was saying about Israel's desire for solutions was directly contrary to what Mark Ethridge [US representative on the Conciliation Commission for Palestine] was reporting to President Truman. The discussion in the General Assembly went well for Israel... While the resolution did what [Abba] Eban [representing Israel's Jewish Agency] asked, by finding Israel to be peace-loving and on that basis admitting it to membership, it also recited Israel's commitments that formed the basis for the General Assembly's decision to admit Israel, as well as the General Assembly's prior resolutions that imposed obligations on Israel. Resolution 273 read:
'Having received the report of the Security Council on the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,
'Noting that, in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter, [...]
'Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it 'unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them... ,
'Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948 and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions,
'The General Assembly... 1. Decides that Israel is a peace loving State which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations; 2. Decides to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.'
"The General Assembly thus was explaining that its decision to admit Israel was premised on the commitments Eban had made to the AHPC in regard to repatriation and to Jerusalem. The reference to the resolution of '29 November 1947', the partition resolution, was pointed, because that resolution specified that a Jewish state, were it to be formed, must accord equality without reference to ethnicity. The reference to the resolution of '11 December 1948' similarly meant obligations for Israel, in particular the obligation to repatriate the displaced Arabs.
"Resolution 273 was unusual in UN practice. General Assembly resolutions admitting a new member typically recite only that the Security Council has has received membership. They make no mention of dialogue with the applicant state preceding admission, and no mention of commitments the state may have made in order to secure admission. By its reference to commitments made by Israel, the General Assembly was indicating that it would not have decided to admit absent those commitments." (pp 133-35)
Of course, as we've known for decades, Israel was never serious about honouring either commitment. With this in mind, and given its record in violating countless UN resolutions, and general contempt for international law, Israel's continued membership in the UN should be up for review. As it stands, it not only serves to discredit that body in the eyes of the world, but also does irreparable damage to the reputation of the United States, given its self-imposed role as Israel's principal UN fig leaf.
John Quigley's new book, The International Diplomacy of Israel's Founders: Deception at the United Nations in the Quest for Palestine (2016) reminds us, yet again, that in their drive for exclusive control over Palestine, no lie is too big for Israel's rulers, and that, where Israel is concerned, US myopia and delusion know no bounds.
On the subject of UN General Assembly Resolution 273 (Admission of Israel to membership in the UN) of May 11, 1949, Quigley writes as follows:
"Warren Austin, the US delegate [to the UN], announced as he had in the Ad Hoc Political Committee (AHPC), that the US would vote for Israel's admission. Austen referred to the discussions of Israel's application in the AHPC... 'The long discussion of Israel's application,' Austen said, 'was evidence of the general deep-rooted desire for a just solution of questions relating to Palestine, and especially those of Jerusalem and the Arab refugees'.
"So the US was solid for Israel, even though what Austen was saying about Israel's desire for solutions was directly contrary to what Mark Ethridge [US representative on the Conciliation Commission for Palestine] was reporting to President Truman. The discussion in the General Assembly went well for Israel... While the resolution did what [Abba] Eban [representing Israel's Jewish Agency] asked, by finding Israel to be peace-loving and on that basis admitting it to membership, it also recited Israel's commitments that formed the basis for the General Assembly's decision to admit Israel, as well as the General Assembly's prior resolutions that imposed obligations on Israel. Resolution 273 read:
'Having received the report of the Security Council on the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,
'Noting that, in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter, [...]
'Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it 'unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them... ,
'Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948 and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions,
'The General Assembly... 1. Decides that Israel is a peace loving State which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations; 2. Decides to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.'
"The General Assembly thus was explaining that its decision to admit Israel was premised on the commitments Eban had made to the AHPC in regard to repatriation and to Jerusalem. The reference to the resolution of '29 November 1947', the partition resolution, was pointed, because that resolution specified that a Jewish state, were it to be formed, must accord equality without reference to ethnicity. The reference to the resolution of '11 December 1948' similarly meant obligations for Israel, in particular the obligation to repatriate the displaced Arabs.
"Resolution 273 was unusual in UN practice. General Assembly resolutions admitting a new member typically recite only that the Security Council has has received membership. They make no mention of dialogue with the applicant state preceding admission, and no mention of commitments the state may have made in order to secure admission. By its reference to commitments made by Israel, the General Assembly was indicating that it would not have decided to admit absent those commitments." (pp 133-35)
Of course, as we've known for decades, Israel was never serious about honouring either commitment. With this in mind, and given its record in violating countless UN resolutions, and general contempt for international law, Israel's continued membership in the UN should be up for review. As it stands, it not only serves to discredit that body in the eyes of the world, but also does irreparable damage to the reputation of the United States, given its self-imposed role as Israel's principal UN fig leaf.
Sunday, December 25, 2016
UNSC Resolution Whatever
UN Santa Claus: Here you go Occupied Palestinians, here's your Christmas prezzie:
"Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;"
Occupied Palestinians (deflated): But UN Santa, we've got stacks of these already. How about something new for a change?
UN Santa Claus: Listen up, you ingrates, you're damn lucky. You only got this because the US finally coughed up for it! Now STFU, or I'll sool the PA dogs onto you:
"Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,"
UN Santa Claus: Oh, and give poor old Israel a break from your constant whining, OK?
"Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;"
"Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;"
Occupied Palestinians (deflated): But UN Santa, we've got stacks of these already. How about something new for a change?
UN Santa Claus: Listen up, you ingrates, you're damn lucky. You only got this because the US finally coughed up for it! Now STFU, or I'll sool the PA dogs onto you:
"Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,"
UN Santa Claus: Oh, and give poor old Israel a break from your constant whining, OK?
"Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;"
Saturday, December 24, 2016
Liberal Zionism Exposed... in the New York Times
I've read many opinion pieces which tackle the toxic ideology of political Zionism head on, but never in any mainstream press outlet. Israeli writer Omri Boehm's Liberal Zionism in the Age of Trump, which appeared in the New York Times of December 20, is the first, to my knowledge, of its kind.
It comes, of course, in the wake of Donald Trump's election and the emergence into the public arena of fellow travellers such as right-wing extremist Stephen Bannon (now Trump's chief strategist), and the fuehrer of the neo-Nazi alt-right, Richard Spencer, who espouses white supremacism in the way that Zionists (while, of course, avoiding the term) espouse Jewish supremacism, and who has, in fact, referred to his white supremacist ideology as "white Zionism."
Boehm exposes the contradiction that lies at the heart of American liberal Zionism - the pretence that liberal Zionists can advocate ethnic inclusion in the US but support ethnic exclusion in Israel by denying the Palestinian right of return and insisting that "Israel has the right to ensure that Jews constitute the ethnic majority in their country." (Boehm's italics) IOW, American Jews (and Australian Jews for that matter) can not, logically, be both liberals and Zionists.
Boehm also points out that "The idea that Israel is the Jews' own ethnic state implies that Jews living outside of it... enjoy a mere diasporic existence," "inhabit a country that is not genuinely their own," and that, "given this logic, it is natural for Zionist and anti-Semitic politicians to find common ideas and interests." He concludes his piece with the following (unprecedented for the mainstream press) observation:
Boehm exposes the contradiction that lies at the heart of American liberal Zionism - the pretence that liberal Zionists can advocate ethnic inclusion in the US but support ethnic exclusion in Israel by denying the Palestinian right of return and insisting that "Israel has the right to ensure that Jews constitute the ethnic majority in their country." (Boehm's italics) IOW, American Jews (and Australian Jews for that matter) can not, logically, be both liberals and Zionists.
Boehm also points out that "The idea that Israel is the Jews' own ethnic state implies that Jews living outside of it... enjoy a mere diasporic existence," "inhabit a country that is not genuinely their own," and that, "given this logic, it is natural for Zionist and anti-Semitic politicians to find common ideas and interests." He concludes his piece with the following (unprecedented for the mainstream press) observation:
"Nothing demonstrates this alliance better than the appointment of David Friedman to be the United States ambassador to Israel. Friedman, an ardent supporter of Israel's occupation project, has argued that J Street's liberal Zionist supporters, who are critical of the occupation, are 'worse than Kapos' - the Jews who collaborated with their Nazi concentration camp guards. In fact, however, it is Friedman's own politics - and the politics of the government he supports - that's continuous with anti-Semitic principles and collaborates with anti-Semitic politics.
"The 'original sin' of such alliances may be traced back to 1941*, in a letter to high Nazi officials, drafted in 1941 by Avraham Stern, known as Yair, a leading early Zionist fighter and member in the 1930s of the paramilitary group Irgun, and later the founder of another such group, Lehi. In the letter, Stern proposes to collaborate with 'Herr Hitler' on 'solving the Jewish question' by achieving a 'Jewish free Europe.' The solution can be achieved, Stern continues, only through the 'settlement of these masses in the home of the Jewish people, Palestine.' To that end, he suggests collaboration with the German's 'war efforts,' and establishment of a Jewish state on a 'national and totalitarian basis,' which will be 'bound by treaty with the German Reich.'
"It has been convenient to ignore the existence of this letter, just as it has been convenient to mitigate the conceptual conditions making it possible. But such tendencies must be rejected. They reinforce the same logic by which the letter itself was written: the sanctification of Zionism to the point of tolerating anti-Semitism. That's the logic that liberal American Jews currently have to fight, but it will prove difficult to uproot. Stern is memorialized in street names in every major Israeli town, and it is not unreasonable to assume that Yair Netanyahu, the prime minister's son, whose father celebrated Stern as a mythical model of Zionist struggle, is called by Stern's nom de guerre."
[*Actually, political Zionism's 'alliance' with anti-Semitism goes back to Zionism's founder Theodor Herzl, who wrote in his diary that "The anti-Semite will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies."]
"The 'original sin' of such alliances may be traced back to 1941*, in a letter to high Nazi officials, drafted in 1941 by Avraham Stern, known as Yair, a leading early Zionist fighter and member in the 1930s of the paramilitary group Irgun, and later the founder of another such group, Lehi. In the letter, Stern proposes to collaborate with 'Herr Hitler' on 'solving the Jewish question' by achieving a 'Jewish free Europe.' The solution can be achieved, Stern continues, only through the 'settlement of these masses in the home of the Jewish people, Palestine.' To that end, he suggests collaboration with the German's 'war efforts,' and establishment of a Jewish state on a 'national and totalitarian basis,' which will be 'bound by treaty with the German Reich.'
"It has been convenient to ignore the existence of this letter, just as it has been convenient to mitigate the conceptual conditions making it possible. But such tendencies must be rejected. They reinforce the same logic by which the letter itself was written: the sanctification of Zionism to the point of tolerating anti-Semitism. That's the logic that liberal American Jews currently have to fight, but it will prove difficult to uproot. Stern is memorialized in street names in every major Israeli town, and it is not unreasonable to assume that Yair Netanyahu, the prime minister's son, whose father celebrated Stern as a mythical model of Zionist struggle, is called by Stern's nom de guerre."
[*Actually, political Zionism's 'alliance' with anti-Semitism goes back to Zionism's founder Theodor Herzl, who wrote in his diary that "The anti-Semite will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies."]
Friday, December 23, 2016
Israel Wears the Pants
Yet another confirmation of the fact that the US-Israeli relationship is historically unique in its reversal of the traditional superpower-client state relationship; Israel is the superpower and the United States is the client state:
"On Thursday Netanyahu... urg[ed] the US to veto [a United Nations Security Council] resolution [calling Israel's West Bank settlements a 'flagrant violation' of international law]. 'Peace will come not through UN resolutions, but only through direct negotiations between the parties,' he said.
"The move also prompted the intervention of US president-elect Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital, who said in a statement that Washington should use its veto to block the resolution. 'The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council, regarding Israel should be vetoed,' the Republican said in a statement. 'As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,' he said." (UN abruptly postpones vote to halt Israeli settlements 'indefinitely', Peter Beaumont, theguardian.com, 23/12/16)
"On Thursday Netanyahu... urg[ed] the US to veto [a United Nations Security Council] resolution [calling Israel's West Bank settlements a 'flagrant violation' of international law]. 'Peace will come not through UN resolutions, but only through direct negotiations between the parties,' he said.
"The move also prompted the intervention of US president-elect Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital, who said in a statement that Washington should use its veto to block the resolution. 'The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council, regarding Israel should be vetoed,' the Republican said in a statement. 'As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,' he said." (UN abruptly postpones vote to halt Israeli settlements 'indefinitely', Peter Beaumont, theguardian.com, 23/12/16)
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Australians in a 'Dark & Distrustful Mood'
On Malcolm Turnbull:
"The oceans are heating up, the glaciers are shrinking, weather extremes are becoming common. More coal mines are offered. The poor are becoming poorer as their working conditions are both illegally, and increasingly legally, undermined and their support systems in the form of Medicare and pensions and housing are steadily eroded, and the rich pocket the benefits. Ethics are abandoned as we destroy the lives of refugees and asylum seekers. So what better time to reintroduce the compelling urgency of a debate on a republic for Australia? That should fix things." Gabi Duigu, Cammeray, Sydney Morning Herald, 19/12/16
On Bill Shorten:
"Less than 10% of the people who participated in the [Australian National University's Australian Election Study (AES)] said the Labor leader was intelligent or knowledgable. About three times as many people described Malcolm Turnbull in those terms. Of the 9 perceived qualities of political leaders participants were asked about, Mr Shorten ranked higher than the Prime Minister on only one - compassion. People thought he was less trustworthy, decent, sensible, inspiring or honest than Mr Turnbull... Mr Shorten also has the dubious honour of sharing the lowest individual score of any leader in the past 30 years on any characteristic - only 3.7% of people said they found him an inspiring leader. He shared this score with Tony Abbott, who attracted this rating after the 2010 election campaign." (Despite slog Shorten gets brutal review of capability, Stephanie Peatling, Sydney Morning Herald, 21/12/16)
On democracy:
"Australians' satisfaction with democracy has collapsed to its lowest level since the Whitlam dismissal, according to a major study [AES] that shows the country in an increasingly dark and distrustful mood about politics and the economy." (Faith in democracy at lowest ebb: survey, Matthew Knott, Sydney Morning Herald, 21/12/16)
"The oceans are heating up, the glaciers are shrinking, weather extremes are becoming common. More coal mines are offered. The poor are becoming poorer as their working conditions are both illegally, and increasingly legally, undermined and their support systems in the form of Medicare and pensions and housing are steadily eroded, and the rich pocket the benefits. Ethics are abandoned as we destroy the lives of refugees and asylum seekers. So what better time to reintroduce the compelling urgency of a debate on a republic for Australia? That should fix things." Gabi Duigu, Cammeray, Sydney Morning Herald, 19/12/16
On Bill Shorten:
"Less than 10% of the people who participated in the [Australian National University's Australian Election Study (AES)] said the Labor leader was intelligent or knowledgable. About three times as many people described Malcolm Turnbull in those terms. Of the 9 perceived qualities of political leaders participants were asked about, Mr Shorten ranked higher than the Prime Minister on only one - compassion. People thought he was less trustworthy, decent, sensible, inspiring or honest than Mr Turnbull... Mr Shorten also has the dubious honour of sharing the lowest individual score of any leader in the past 30 years on any characteristic - only 3.7% of people said they found him an inspiring leader. He shared this score with Tony Abbott, who attracted this rating after the 2010 election campaign." (Despite slog Shorten gets brutal review of capability, Stephanie Peatling, Sydney Morning Herald, 21/12/16)
On democracy:
"Australians' satisfaction with democracy has collapsed to its lowest level since the Whitlam dismissal, according to a major study [AES] that shows the country in an increasingly dark and distrustful mood about politics and the economy." (Faith in democracy at lowest ebb: survey, Matthew Knott, Sydney Morning Herald, 21/12/16)
Wednesday, December 21, 2016
The Syrian Tooth Fairy
When it comes to Syria, it seems that ms journalists can even manage a belief in the tooth fairy:
"Bana Alabed is a 7-year-old Syrian girl with outsized optimism and lustrous brown hair that tumbles past her waist. She enjoys reading about dinosaurs, practicing English with her mom, and playing with her two little brothers... She recently lost a tooth, but the tooth fairy never came, because she lives under siege in eastern Aleppo. 'The tooth fairy is afraid of the bombing here,' she said. 'It ran away to its hole. When the war finishes it will come.' Bana's thoughts are broadcast by her mother, Fatemah, on a Twitter account that she launched earlier this year. It has already amassed more than 200,000 followers. Many news organizations published stories on the earliest tweets and videos, and a Danish reporter brought up Bana's case during an in-person interview with Syria's President, Bashar al-Assad, who dismisses it as 'a game of propaganda'." (Bana Alabed, Twitters child witness to the battle for Aleppo, Ben Taub, The New Yorker, 6/12/16)
Whether the following bucket of cold water was enough to sober Taub up or not is anyone's guess:
Rania Khalek @RaniaKhalek Dec 7 @bentaub91 FYI there is no tooth fairy in our culture. This is a very strange line. The tooth fairy is a western thing.
Still, here's another just in case:
"Shame on this woman. Shame on this terrible mother of Bana in Syria. I don't know the circumstances but she should be ashamed to make a statement to the camera and to hold her little child as a prop. I don't know anything about this Fatima but I know that she is one lousy mother. I also notice that her English on Twitter is far better than her spoken English on camera. Notice how Bana seems to be prodded to speak? I can't believe that the insensitive Western reporters are in fact circulating such videos which are not only exploitative of a child but even endangering her by using her as a propaganda prop. But then again, this is by the NBC correspondent [Richard Engel] who still praises the Syrian rebels who kidnapped him and who produced a false spectacle about his release. Fatima can only be forgiven if some man or men behind the cameras are forcing her to engage in this terrible behaviour." (Don't blame Bana - a little child - blame her shameless & terrible mother who exploits her child for the cameras, The Angry Arab News Service, 18/12/16)
"Bana Alabed is a 7-year-old Syrian girl with outsized optimism and lustrous brown hair that tumbles past her waist. She enjoys reading about dinosaurs, practicing English with her mom, and playing with her two little brothers... She recently lost a tooth, but the tooth fairy never came, because she lives under siege in eastern Aleppo. 'The tooth fairy is afraid of the bombing here,' she said. 'It ran away to its hole. When the war finishes it will come.' Bana's thoughts are broadcast by her mother, Fatemah, on a Twitter account that she launched earlier this year. It has already amassed more than 200,000 followers. Many news organizations published stories on the earliest tweets and videos, and a Danish reporter brought up Bana's case during an in-person interview with Syria's President, Bashar al-Assad, who dismisses it as 'a game of propaganda'." (Bana Alabed, Twitters child witness to the battle for Aleppo, Ben Taub, The New Yorker, 6/12/16)
Whether the following bucket of cold water was enough to sober Taub up or not is anyone's guess:
Rania Khalek @RaniaKhalek Dec 7 @bentaub91 FYI there is no tooth fairy in our culture. This is a very strange line. The tooth fairy is a western thing.
Still, here's another just in case:
"Shame on this woman. Shame on this terrible mother of Bana in Syria. I don't know the circumstances but she should be ashamed to make a statement to the camera and to hold her little child as a prop. I don't know anything about this Fatima but I know that she is one lousy mother. I also notice that her English on Twitter is far better than her spoken English on camera. Notice how Bana seems to be prodded to speak? I can't believe that the insensitive Western reporters are in fact circulating such videos which are not only exploitative of a child but even endangering her by using her as a propaganda prop. But then again, this is by the NBC correspondent [Richard Engel] who still praises the Syrian rebels who kidnapped him and who produced a false spectacle about his release. Fatima can only be forgiven if some man or men behind the cameras are forcing her to engage in this terrible behaviour." (Don't blame Bana - a little child - blame her shameless & terrible mother who exploits her child for the cameras, The Angry Arab News Service, 18/12/16)
Tuesday, December 20, 2016
Jesus Wept...
To borrow the words of Mike Carlton's tweet (18/12/16), "Oh FFS. If you wanted an example of the utterly barren, impotent irrelevance of Australian politics, here it is:"
"Federal MPs from both sides of parliament have come together to visit Israel and Palestine. Trade Minister Steve Ciobo has led the Australian delegation to the Australia Israel UK Leadership Dialogue... With him are former prime minister Tony Abbott, Victorian Liberal MP Tim Smith, Federal Labor leader Bill Shorten, accompanied by his wife Chloe, and Opposition defence spokesman Richard Marles. The group enjoyed a jog around Jerusalem." (The running group you wouldn't expect to see: MPs come together in Jerusalem, news.com.au, 18/12/16)
Jesus wept...
Palestine came in the form of Palestinian PM Rami Hamdallah, but all these clowns could find to talk about was... Daesh:
"Mr Shorten said he was encouraged by the Palestinian's comment that Daesh members were 'terrorists using religion as a pretext for crime'." (Bill Shorten & Tony Abbott unite in Middle East, news.com.au, 19/12/16)
(Of course, the US-backed Jewish State in the Levant (JSIL) has not, is not and will never use RELIGION as a pretext for CRIMES.)
Then Shorten added: "What it showed me was there was not a homogeneity, there is not one Islam."
What a revelation! So Short-on-brains has had to travel to the other side of the world (at taxpayers' expense) to learn from one of Israel's humble servants in its West Bank bantustan that there are as many shades of Islam as there are of Christianity?
(Of course, quite what this obsessional focus on religion has to do with the bleeding reality of Israeli boots on Palestinian backs and necks is anyone's guess.)
But back to homogeneity. How's this for good old LibLab homogeneity: "Mr Abbott said of the engagement: 'It was at its most interesting, as Bill said, talking about Daesh."
Which he followed with: "I think he was probably at his most evasive when talking about the real prospects for a genuine accommodation between the Palestinians and the Israelis."
Real prospects for a genuine accommodation... ? Crazed Bible-bashing Israeli Daesh (from New York!) are marauding throughout the West Bank, torching Palestinian homes and orchards, and this knuckle-dragging, North Shore bonehead, whose homework on the subject consists of reading Daniel Silva thrillers, is banging on about the real prospects for a genuine accommodation between the Palestinians and the Israelis???!!!
Jesus wept...
Abbott continued: "Nevertheless he certainly appeared on the basis of today's discussion to be thoughtful and reasonable. I guess the challenge is, it's one thing to be thoughtful and reasonable in a public discussion in English, another thing to be thoughtful and reasonable in a public discussion in Arabic. I think that's always been the difficulty."
What more can I say? Here's the White Man telling us that the Indians speak with a forked tongue. Seriously.
Jesus wept...
"Federal MPs from both sides of parliament have come together to visit Israel and Palestine. Trade Minister Steve Ciobo has led the Australian delegation to the Australia Israel UK Leadership Dialogue... With him are former prime minister Tony Abbott, Victorian Liberal MP Tim Smith, Federal Labor leader Bill Shorten, accompanied by his wife Chloe, and Opposition defence spokesman Richard Marles. The group enjoyed a jog around Jerusalem." (The running group you wouldn't expect to see: MPs come together in Jerusalem, news.com.au, 18/12/16)
Jesus wept...
Palestine came in the form of Palestinian PM Rami Hamdallah, but all these clowns could find to talk about was... Daesh:
"Mr Shorten said he was encouraged by the Palestinian's comment that Daesh members were 'terrorists using religion as a pretext for crime'." (Bill Shorten & Tony Abbott unite in Middle East, news.com.au, 19/12/16)
(Of course, the US-backed Jewish State in the Levant (JSIL) has not, is not and will never use RELIGION as a pretext for CRIMES.)
Then Shorten added: "What it showed me was there was not a homogeneity, there is not one Islam."
What a revelation! So Short-on-brains has had to travel to the other side of the world (at taxpayers' expense) to learn from one of Israel's humble servants in its West Bank bantustan that there are as many shades of Islam as there are of Christianity?
(Of course, quite what this obsessional focus on religion has to do with the bleeding reality of Israeli boots on Palestinian backs and necks is anyone's guess.)
But back to homogeneity. How's this for good old LibLab homogeneity: "Mr Abbott said of the engagement: 'It was at its most interesting, as Bill said, talking about Daesh."
Which he followed with: "I think he was probably at his most evasive when talking about the real prospects for a genuine accommodation between the Palestinians and the Israelis."
Real prospects for a genuine accommodation... ? Crazed Bible-bashing Israeli Daesh (from New York!) are marauding throughout the West Bank, torching Palestinian homes and orchards, and this knuckle-dragging, North Shore bonehead, whose homework on the subject consists of reading Daniel Silva thrillers, is banging on about the real prospects for a genuine accommodation between the Palestinians and the Israelis???!!!
Jesus wept...
Abbott continued: "Nevertheless he certainly appeared on the basis of today's discussion to be thoughtful and reasonable. I guess the challenge is, it's one thing to be thoughtful and reasonable in a public discussion in English, another thing to be thoughtful and reasonable in a public discussion in Arabic. I think that's always been the difficulty."
What more can I say? Here's the White Man telling us that the Indians speak with a forked tongue. Seriously.
Jesus wept...
Monday, December 19, 2016
Caricaturing Reality
Does Fairfax cartoonist Cathy Wilcox, I wonder, actually read the paper she works for (or any paper for that matter)?
Her 15/12/16 cartoon on Aleppo shows a sea of corpses stretching as far as the eye can see. She depicts Asad and Putin standing among them, with the former (clutching a gun) saying, "There. We saved Aleppo."
In the unlikely event that she read today's Sydney Morning Herald (Telegraph, London, Reuters) report on Aleppo, did these words give her pause for thought:
"Reports and rumours continued to swirl of field executions by Shiite militia fighters against civilians... Several Aleppo residents said they had heard of people being shot dead at a Hezbollah checkpoint, but the story could not be confirmed." (Cold the new killer for youth of Aleppo, Raf Sanchez, 19/12/16)
Her 15/12/16 cartoon on Aleppo shows a sea of corpses stretching as far as the eye can see. She depicts Asad and Putin standing among them, with the former (clutching a gun) saying, "There. We saved Aleppo."
In the unlikely event that she read today's Sydney Morning Herald (Telegraph, London, Reuters) report on Aleppo, did these words give her pause for thought:
"Reports and rumours continued to swirl of field executions by Shiite militia fighters against civilians... Several Aleppo residents said they had heard of people being shot dead at a Hezbollah checkpoint, but the story could not be confirmed." (Cold the new killer for youth of Aleppo, Raf Sanchez, 19/12/16)
Saturday, December 17, 2016
Pauline Hanson MK
Hating Hansonism in Australia:
"We know that in the Holocaust's aftermath, 58% of Australians opposed Jews being granted asylum down under... Today it is hard to imagine Australia without its significant Jewish contribution. Twenty years ago, Hanson spread her anti-Asian agenda, suggesting some 'invasion' was to blame for job and economic insecurity facing Australians. She was wrong. Australians of Asian extraction are well integrated and good citizens. In 2016, with similar job and economic insecurity abounding, Hanson has now raised the bogey of Islam." (Not in our name: Melbourne's Jewish community does not support One Nation, Nick Dyrenfurth & Dean Sherr, theguardian.com, 16/12/16)
Hearting it in Israel:
"The Palestinians will have to make concessions... This means finally accepting that the 1948 Palestinian refugees will only return to the Palestinian state and not to Israel." (The enemy within: the far-Left hijacked the Palestinian cause, Nick Dyrenfurth, The Australian, 11/11/09)
"We know that in the Holocaust's aftermath, 58% of Australians opposed Jews being granted asylum down under... Today it is hard to imagine Australia without its significant Jewish contribution. Twenty years ago, Hanson spread her anti-Asian agenda, suggesting some 'invasion' was to blame for job and economic insecurity facing Australians. She was wrong. Australians of Asian extraction are well integrated and good citizens. In 2016, with similar job and economic insecurity abounding, Hanson has now raised the bogey of Islam." (Not in our name: Melbourne's Jewish community does not support One Nation, Nick Dyrenfurth & Dean Sherr, theguardian.com, 16/12/16)
Hearting it in Israel:
"The Palestinians will have to make concessions... This means finally accepting that the 1948 Palestinian refugees will only return to the Palestinian state and not to Israel." (The enemy within: the far-Left hijacked the Palestinian cause, Nick Dyrenfurth, The Australian, 11/11/09)
Friday, December 16, 2016
Compare & Contrast:
1) "Long after the West has defeated Islamic State, the jihadist threat will remain. For the past 40 years, Western immigration policy has been based on multicultural ideology. Its consequence is clear, Islamism has become a Western condition. Successive governments have diluted Western values to the point where they are no longer taught in schools. The result is a population unschooled in the genius of our civilisation whose youth cannot understand why it is worth defending. Multicultural ideology must give way to a renaissance of western civilisation in which Australian exceptionalism is celebrated and Islamism is sent packing." (West proves not all cultures are equal, Jennifer Oriel, The Australian, 12/12/16)
2) "The Austria-Hungary of before the First World War was a mosaic or, perhaps, better, a crazy quilt, of peoples: of Austrians and Hungarians and Czechs and Slovaks, of Poles, Italians and Ukrainians and of a score of other nationalities. The Austrians and Hungarians held the others in a bondage that was all-too-strait. But it was not strait enough for Hitler. There was much in this pre-war Austria-Hungary, in fact, of which this strange youth from the provinces disapproved, much he bitterly hated... What was principally wrong with Austria-Hungary nationally, these [Viennese middle class] views held, was that the 'superior' 'Nordic' and Germanic Austrians, instead of constituting a worthy component part of the neighboring Reich, as they should have done, ruling, as such, the 'inferior' peoples around them, were instead allowing the 'inferior' nationalities to insist upon their own identities as peoples, to urge their national pretensions and, indeed, to challenge the rule of their Germanic masters and even threaten the ruling nation's very existence." (People Under Hitler: What Personal Life is Like Where the Nazis Rule, Wallace R. Deuel, 1942, pp 70-71)
2) "The Austria-Hungary of before the First World War was a mosaic or, perhaps, better, a crazy quilt, of peoples: of Austrians and Hungarians and Czechs and Slovaks, of Poles, Italians and Ukrainians and of a score of other nationalities. The Austrians and Hungarians held the others in a bondage that was all-too-strait. But it was not strait enough for Hitler. There was much in this pre-war Austria-Hungary, in fact, of which this strange youth from the provinces disapproved, much he bitterly hated... What was principally wrong with Austria-Hungary nationally, these [Viennese middle class] views held, was that the 'superior' 'Nordic' and Germanic Austrians, instead of constituting a worthy component part of the neighboring Reich, as they should have done, ruling, as such, the 'inferior' peoples around them, were instead allowing the 'inferior' nationalities to insist upon their own identities as peoples, to urge their national pretensions and, indeed, to challenge the rule of their Germanic masters and even threaten the ruling nation's very existence." (People Under Hitler: What Personal Life is Like Where the Nazis Rule, Wallace R. Deuel, 1942, pp 70-71)
Thursday, December 15, 2016
Some Questions for Paul McGeough
Fairfax's Paul McGeough on the fall of Aleppo:
"Leaflets recently dropped to the 250,000 to 300,000 residents still in Aleppo's eastern quarter read: 'If you don't leave these areas quickly, you will be annihilated. Save yourselves - everyone has left you alone to face your doom.' True words in that last phrase, and the emphasis is mine." ('Save yourselves': Aleppo residents await dark end game, 14/12/16)
Sorry to spoil your story, Paul, but that Human Rights Watch translation of the Syrian army leaflet is quite misleading (for reasons best known to HRW). The Angry Arab has posted a copy of the original leaflet in Arabic as well as his own translation (30/11/16). Here's mine:
"Read this very carefully. It's your last hope. Save yourselves. If you don't evacuate these areas now, your fate will be sealed. We have provided a safe passage for you to leave. Decide now. Save yourselves. You must understand that you have been abandoned and left to face your fate alone, and that no one will come to your aid. General Command of the Army & Armed Forces."
So where's the annihilation and where's the doom? Who's behind these embroideries? And why?
In an age of spin and disinformation, shouldn't you be a bit more cautious before running with this kind of stuff?
I notice Asad gets most of your stick. You variously describe him as "mimicking Moscow's utter destruction of the city of Grozny," displaying "dictatorial inflexibility," and allegedly being unable to "cope with a bunch of kids daubing anti-regime slogans on a wall in 2011."
Is it really all as as simple as that?
What about your "mishmash of rebel groups, whose levels of radicalisation range from zero to friends of al-Qaeda"?
Who are they? Where do they come from? And are they your idea of an alternative to Asad?
And what about your "Gulf States and others who'll happily fund and arm the rebels, if only for the pleasure of putting a burr beneath the saddle of Damascus, Moscow and Tehran"?
Putting burrs beneath saddles?
Seriously, now, Paul, please tell us just what compelling reason this lot have for feeding the flames in Syria? It better be good!
"Leaflets recently dropped to the 250,000 to 300,000 residents still in Aleppo's eastern quarter read: 'If you don't leave these areas quickly, you will be annihilated. Save yourselves - everyone has left you alone to face your doom.' True words in that last phrase, and the emphasis is mine." ('Save yourselves': Aleppo residents await dark end game, 14/12/16)
Sorry to spoil your story, Paul, but that Human Rights Watch translation of the Syrian army leaflet is quite misleading (for reasons best known to HRW). The Angry Arab has posted a copy of the original leaflet in Arabic as well as his own translation (30/11/16). Here's mine:
"Read this very carefully. It's your last hope. Save yourselves. If you don't evacuate these areas now, your fate will be sealed. We have provided a safe passage for you to leave. Decide now. Save yourselves. You must understand that you have been abandoned and left to face your fate alone, and that no one will come to your aid. General Command of the Army & Armed Forces."
So where's the annihilation and where's the doom? Who's behind these embroideries? And why?
In an age of spin and disinformation, shouldn't you be a bit more cautious before running with this kind of stuff?
I notice Asad gets most of your stick. You variously describe him as "mimicking Moscow's utter destruction of the city of Grozny," displaying "dictatorial inflexibility," and allegedly being unable to "cope with a bunch of kids daubing anti-regime slogans on a wall in 2011."
Is it really all as as simple as that?
What about your "mishmash of rebel groups, whose levels of radicalisation range from zero to friends of al-Qaeda"?
Who are they? Where do they come from? And are they your idea of an alternative to Asad?
And what about your "Gulf States and others who'll happily fund and arm the rebels, if only for the pleasure of putting a burr beneath the saddle of Damascus, Moscow and Tehran"?
Putting burrs beneath saddles?
Seriously, now, Paul, please tell us just what compelling reason this lot have for feeding the flames in Syria? It better be good!
Tuesday, December 13, 2016
What Turns Tony Abbott On
If the old adage 'you are what you eat' is true, how much more so is 'you are what you read'? So what's Tony Abbott reading these days? Thrillers, apparently:
"'Something I haven't done for years I've been able to do a bit of over the last 12 months and that is to read thrillers. I've started reading some of the Daniel Silva books,' he said, praising the American novels as fascinating and 'high pressure yarns'. 'The hero is an Israeli secret agent and he gets up to all sorts of adventures all around the world, whether it's dealing with dodgy priests in the Vatican or Islamist terrorists. One way or another, he's busy,' Mr Abbott said." (Fifty Shades, thrillers & war: bookworm Abbott, Fergus Hunter, Sydney Morning Herald, 12/12/16)
Daniel Silva is described by Wikipedia as a US Roman Catholic convert to Judaism who lives in Florida. Adam Kirsch, writing at tabletmag.com, describes him as "thrilling to the romance of Israeli power," and "relish[ing] the idea of Israel as the champion of Jews worldwide - the tough Zionist Jews who come to the rescue of soft Diaspora Jews." (The unsettling exploits of Daniel Silva's Mossad superspy, 3/8/16)
IOW, just the kind of peddler of puerile pulp nonsense for a halfwit like Abbott.
To give you some idea of just where Silva is coming from and just how appalling he is (and how Zionists conflate the Islamic State phenomenon with Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation and colonisation), here he is on something called 'The Hugh Hewitt Show':
HH: "The other thing that's genuinely spooky, Daniel Silva, about The Black Widow [Silva's latest concoction], ... this past Sabbath, Jews around the world and people who support the state of Israel are grieving the death of Hallel Ariel, a 13-year-old American stabbed to death in her West Bank home as a result of a young Palestinian acting spontaneously. And throughout The Black Widow there is this background murmuring of the reality of life in Israel today, which informs The Black Widow... And it's in the headlines... today, in a way, because it's an American victim, that maybe they... normally aren't aware of it, and it's explained in The Black Widow. That's also spooky.
DS: Well, I was in Israel working on the book when this... started to percolate. And Gabriel Alon [Silva's Mossad hero] is a great lover of Jerusalem, as I explain in this novel, and I am a great lover [of Jerusalem]. And I go all over the place in Jerusalem, including into neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, the Palestinian area in East Jerusalem. And, you know, every day when I was there last summer, it would be some little incident somewhere around the Damascus Gate in the Muslim quarter of the Old City... one of the things that people don't realize about East Jerusalem is that there are sort of abutting neighborhoods of religious Jews right up against Palestinian areas. And... there's a lot of friction there. And I just had a sense that something was about to really happen there. And then, you know, I would go to the Damascus Gate, and a few hours later someone would be stabbed, and I had just been there with my son... you know, feeling like a complete idiot. And then it's really broken out into the open. And I think it's symptomatic, unfortunately, of the remarkable job that the Israeli Security Services have done in shutting down the Palestinian terrorist networks." (hughhewitt.com)
Of course, there's no mention of Israeli settlers invading Palestinian homes, or of a Palestinian community under a turn-of-the-screw occupation. God forbid that any note of reality should disturb this charmed circle. Spooky!
"'Something I haven't done for years I've been able to do a bit of over the last 12 months and that is to read thrillers. I've started reading some of the Daniel Silva books,' he said, praising the American novels as fascinating and 'high pressure yarns'. 'The hero is an Israeli secret agent and he gets up to all sorts of adventures all around the world, whether it's dealing with dodgy priests in the Vatican or Islamist terrorists. One way or another, he's busy,' Mr Abbott said." (Fifty Shades, thrillers & war: bookworm Abbott, Fergus Hunter, Sydney Morning Herald, 12/12/16)
Daniel Silva is described by Wikipedia as a US Roman Catholic convert to Judaism who lives in Florida. Adam Kirsch, writing at tabletmag.com, describes him as "thrilling to the romance of Israeli power," and "relish[ing] the idea of Israel as the champion of Jews worldwide - the tough Zionist Jews who come to the rescue of soft Diaspora Jews." (The unsettling exploits of Daniel Silva's Mossad superspy, 3/8/16)
IOW, just the kind of peddler of puerile pulp nonsense for a halfwit like Abbott.
To give you some idea of just where Silva is coming from and just how appalling he is (and how Zionists conflate the Islamic State phenomenon with Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation and colonisation), here he is on something called 'The Hugh Hewitt Show':
HH: "The other thing that's genuinely spooky, Daniel Silva, about The Black Widow [Silva's latest concoction], ... this past Sabbath, Jews around the world and people who support the state of Israel are grieving the death of Hallel Ariel, a 13-year-old American stabbed to death in her West Bank home as a result of a young Palestinian acting spontaneously. And throughout The Black Widow there is this background murmuring of the reality of life in Israel today, which informs The Black Widow... And it's in the headlines... today, in a way, because it's an American victim, that maybe they... normally aren't aware of it, and it's explained in The Black Widow. That's also spooky.
DS: Well, I was in Israel working on the book when this... started to percolate. And Gabriel Alon [Silva's Mossad hero] is a great lover of Jerusalem, as I explain in this novel, and I am a great lover [of Jerusalem]. And I go all over the place in Jerusalem, including into neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, the Palestinian area in East Jerusalem. And, you know, every day when I was there last summer, it would be some little incident somewhere around the Damascus Gate in the Muslim quarter of the Old City... one of the things that people don't realize about East Jerusalem is that there are sort of abutting neighborhoods of religious Jews right up against Palestinian areas. And... there's a lot of friction there. And I just had a sense that something was about to really happen there. And then, you know, I would go to the Damascus Gate, and a few hours later someone would be stabbed, and I had just been there with my son... you know, feeling like a complete idiot. And then it's really broken out into the open. And I think it's symptomatic, unfortunately, of the remarkable job that the Israeli Security Services have done in shutting down the Palestinian terrorist networks." (hughhewitt.com)
Of course, there's no mention of Israeli settlers invading Palestinian homes, or of a Palestinian community under a turn-of-the-screw occupation. God forbid that any note of reality should disturb this charmed circle. Spooky!
Monday, December 12, 2016
Everything to Hide
Back in 2011, Labor's Shadow Minister for CIA (Covering Israel's Arse) moved a motion in federal parliament:
"Amid all the rancor of that final sitting last week, Labor's Michael Danby introduced to the House of Representatives a motion that highlighted the best in public debate. He called on Parliament to recognise each July 11 as Srebrenica Remembrance Day, as a reminder of the evil that led to the genocide of more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys at the hands of the rebel Serb forces of Ratko Mladic in Bosnia in 1995. 'It was,' Danby said, 'what the Russians would call an act of pamyat - memory'." (Rising from the mire, Paul Daley, The Sun-Herald, 27/11/11) [See my 28/11/11 post Fine & Danby.]
I wonder if Danby, who'll happily discourse on every human rights abuse under the sun, unless of course it occurs between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, would have moved his motion if he'd known about this:
"Israel's Supreme Court last month rejected a petition to reveal details of Israeli defense exports to the former Yugoslavia during the genocide in Bosnia in the 1990s. The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the country's foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public interest in knowing that information, and [lead to] the possible prosecution of those involved. The petitioners, Attorney Itay Mack and professor Yair Oron, presented the court with concrete evidence of Israeli defense exports to Serbian forces at the time, including training as well as ammunition and rifles. Among other things, they presented the personal journal of General Ratko Mladic, currently on trial at the International Court of Justice for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Mladic's journal explicitly mentions Sebia's ample arms ties with Israel at the time. The exports took place long after the UN Security Council placed an arms embargo on various parts of the former Yugoslavia, and after the publication of a series of testimonies exposing genocide and the creation of concentration camps. The Israeli State Attorney's reply and the court's rejection of the petition are a de facto admission by Israel that it cooperated with the Bosnian genocide: if the government had nothing to hide, the documents under discussion would not pose any threat to foreign relations." (Supreme Court rules against exposing Israel's role in Bosnian genocide, John Brown*, 972mag.com, 5/12/16) [*The pseudonym of an Israel academic and blogger.]
And will he, I wonder, have anything to say from now on about the following nasties?:
"Earlier this year, the same Supreme Court rejected a similar claim regarding defense exports during the Rwandan genocide... The state faces a series of similar requests regarding its collaboration with the murderers of the Argentinian Junta, Pinochet's regime in Chile, and Sri Lanka." (ibid)
At any rate, it looks as though we're going to be hearing a lot more of this sentence: "The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the country's foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public interest in knowing that information, and [lead to] the possible prosecution of those involved."
"Amid all the rancor of that final sitting last week, Labor's Michael Danby introduced to the House of Representatives a motion that highlighted the best in public debate. He called on Parliament to recognise each July 11 as Srebrenica Remembrance Day, as a reminder of the evil that led to the genocide of more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys at the hands of the rebel Serb forces of Ratko Mladic in Bosnia in 1995. 'It was,' Danby said, 'what the Russians would call an act of pamyat - memory'." (Rising from the mire, Paul Daley, The Sun-Herald, 27/11/11) [See my 28/11/11 post Fine & Danby.]
I wonder if Danby, who'll happily discourse on every human rights abuse under the sun, unless of course it occurs between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, would have moved his motion if he'd known about this:
"Israel's Supreme Court last month rejected a petition to reveal details of Israeli defense exports to the former Yugoslavia during the genocide in Bosnia in the 1990s. The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the country's foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public interest in knowing that information, and [lead to] the possible prosecution of those involved. The petitioners, Attorney Itay Mack and professor Yair Oron, presented the court with concrete evidence of Israeli defense exports to Serbian forces at the time, including training as well as ammunition and rifles. Among other things, they presented the personal journal of General Ratko Mladic, currently on trial at the International Court of Justice for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Mladic's journal explicitly mentions Sebia's ample arms ties with Israel at the time. The exports took place long after the UN Security Council placed an arms embargo on various parts of the former Yugoslavia, and after the publication of a series of testimonies exposing genocide and the creation of concentration camps. The Israeli State Attorney's reply and the court's rejection of the petition are a de facto admission by Israel that it cooperated with the Bosnian genocide: if the government had nothing to hide, the documents under discussion would not pose any threat to foreign relations." (Supreme Court rules against exposing Israel's role in Bosnian genocide, John Brown*, 972mag.com, 5/12/16) [*The pseudonym of an Israel academic and blogger.]
And will he, I wonder, have anything to say from now on about the following nasties?:
"Earlier this year, the same Supreme Court rejected a similar claim regarding defense exports during the Rwandan genocide... The state faces a series of similar requests regarding its collaboration with the murderers of the Argentinian Junta, Pinochet's regime in Chile, and Sri Lanka." (ibid)
At any rate, it looks as though we're going to be hearing a lot more of this sentence: "The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the country's foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public interest in knowing that information, and [lead to] the possible prosecution of those involved."
Sunday, December 11, 2016
Time for Greg Sheridan to Move On?
It just keeps getting better and better at Murdoch's Australian:
"Renowned political journalist Simon Benson has joined The Australian as national affairs editor. A news breaker with a formidable range of contacts, Benson has routinely set the agenda on seismic political developments ranging from the Rudd coup to breaking the story of the bid to remove Tony Abbott. The award-winning journalist was national political editor at Sydney's The Daily Telegraph, where he spent more than two decades in senior positions, including NSW state political editor." (Benson national affairs editor, The Australian, 9/12/16)
But really, the Australian is being too modest with respect to Simon. His real forte is obviously foreign affairs:
"Like any normal Sydney family [the people of Sderot] worry about the rising cost of living - mortgage repayments, power prices, grocery bills. But they have an extra burden. Three kilometres away... is the city of Gaza, where 1.5 million Palestinian families live under the grip of terror imposed by Hamas and its jihad brigades intent on erasing the Zionists from the land they claim to be Palestine." (See my 19/11/12 post Israel Lobbyist Asks: Why do we bother?)
Look out, Greg Sheridan...
"Renowned political journalist Simon Benson has joined The Australian as national affairs editor. A news breaker with a formidable range of contacts, Benson has routinely set the agenda on seismic political developments ranging from the Rudd coup to breaking the story of the bid to remove Tony Abbott. The award-winning journalist was national political editor at Sydney's The Daily Telegraph, where he spent more than two decades in senior positions, including NSW state political editor." (Benson national affairs editor, The Australian, 9/12/16)
But really, the Australian is being too modest with respect to Simon. His real forte is obviously foreign affairs:
"Like any normal Sydney family [the people of Sderot] worry about the rising cost of living - mortgage repayments, power prices, grocery bills. But they have an extra burden. Three kilometres away... is the city of Gaza, where 1.5 million Palestinian families live under the grip of terror imposed by Hamas and its jihad brigades intent on erasing the Zionists from the land they claim to be Palestine." (See my 19/11/12 post Israel Lobbyist Asks: Why do we bother?)
Look out, Greg Sheridan...
Saturday, December 10, 2016
The Australian War Memorial's Latest Exhibition
The following post comes from Australia's Honest History website (honesthistory.net.au):
"The Australian War Memorial has opened a permanent display on the Holocaust (SBS report.) The exhibition, The Holocaust: Witnesses & Survivors, builds on the memories of 30,000 Holocaust survivors who made their homes in Australia after World War II. Many of the artefacts came from the Jewish Holocaust Centre in Melbourne. Honest History has previously been critical of the War Memorial's indifference to events not directly affecting Australians; it looks forward to doing a review of this new exhibition." (Australian War Memorial opens permanent display on Holocaust, 30/11/16)
The post appends the text of a speech given by Dr Brendan Nelson, the memorial's director (and former Liberal Party leader!). It opens with these words:
"Six million people... That is how many people were exterminated in the worst genocide of the twentieth century. Jews, Roma, gypsies, the disabled and political prisoners..."
It seems that Nelson is oblivious to the fact that Roma and gypsies are one and the same people.
"... But almost all were Jews... "
It seems he's equally oblivious of the fact that the Nazi genocide is generally estimated to have involved around 11 million deaths, and included gays, priests, the disabled, communists, trade unionists, Jehovah's Witnesses, anarchists, Poles and Russians.
"... Jewish identity has been shaped by three things: Anti-Semitism, still a virulent and repugnant force in many parts of the world. The Holocaust or 'Shoah'. The embattled nature of the state of Israel for whom existence is a daily struggle..."
That last sentence, in particular, should act as a warning light for whoever it is from Honest History who is intending to review this exhibition. Zionism's shameless strategy of using the suffering of European Jewry under the Nazis as a shield against criticism of the apartheid state and its crimes against the truly embattled Palestinian people, for whom existence is a daily struggle, is sadly in evidence in Nelson's speech. The question arises: Is it also in evidence in the exhibition?
"The Australian War Memorial has opened a permanent display on the Holocaust (SBS report.) The exhibition, The Holocaust: Witnesses & Survivors, builds on the memories of 30,000 Holocaust survivors who made their homes in Australia after World War II. Many of the artefacts came from the Jewish Holocaust Centre in Melbourne. Honest History has previously been critical of the War Memorial's indifference to events not directly affecting Australians; it looks forward to doing a review of this new exhibition." (Australian War Memorial opens permanent display on Holocaust, 30/11/16)
The post appends the text of a speech given by Dr Brendan Nelson, the memorial's director (and former Liberal Party leader!). It opens with these words:
"Six million people... That is how many people were exterminated in the worst genocide of the twentieth century. Jews, Roma, gypsies, the disabled and political prisoners..."
It seems that Nelson is oblivious to the fact that Roma and gypsies are one and the same people.
"... But almost all were Jews... "
It seems he's equally oblivious of the fact that the Nazi genocide is generally estimated to have involved around 11 million deaths, and included gays, priests, the disabled, communists, trade unionists, Jehovah's Witnesses, anarchists, Poles and Russians.
"... Jewish identity has been shaped by three things: Anti-Semitism, still a virulent and repugnant force in many parts of the world. The Holocaust or 'Shoah'. The embattled nature of the state of Israel for whom existence is a daily struggle..."
That last sentence, in particular, should act as a warning light for whoever it is from Honest History who is intending to review this exhibition. Zionism's shameless strategy of using the suffering of European Jewry under the Nazis as a shield against criticism of the apartheid state and its crimes against the truly embattled Palestinian people, for whom existence is a daily struggle, is sadly in evidence in Nelson's speech. The question arises: Is it also in evidence in the exhibition?
Friday, December 9, 2016
Moral High Ground? What Moral High Ground?
American historian Fredrik Albritton Jonsson spruiks Indian novelist Amitav Ghosh's new book, The Great Derangement: Climate Change & the Unthinkable:
"The title captures his scathing diagnosis of the condition of literature and culture in the age of the Anthropocene. Why is it, he asks, that the literary world has responded to climate change with almost complete silence? How can we explain the fact that writers of fiction have overwhelmingly failed to grapple with the ongoing planetary crisis in their works? For Ghosh, this silence is part of a broader pattern of indifference and misrepresentation. Contemporary arts and literature are characterized by 'modes of concealment that [prevent] people from recognizing the realities of their plight'." (The Holocene hangover: it is time for humanity to make fundamental changes, theguardian.com, 8/12/16)
How true! After all, it doesn't get much more bleeding obvious than anthropocentric climate change, right? And what are all these scribblers scribbling about? Something else, damn it! Obviously, they need a bloody good whipping, and Ghosh's decided he's just the man to give it to them - hard:
Silent novelists? LASH!
Novelists who fail to grapple with the issue? LASH!
Indifferent novelists? LASH!
Reality-avoidant novelists. LASH!
But wait, what about something just as bleeding obvious? Like Israeli apartheid, for example?
Ah, but that's different.
Back in 2010, Ghosh was 'awarded' Israel's $US1m Dan David Prize, and when those who know apartheid when they see it asked him not to go there, he told them he was "disappointed" with them for running a "campaign of admonition," and declared, "We cannot let others decide for us and we cannot yield to such demands. If a reader from Israel wants to reach out to us, how can we not engage him?" (What Amitav Ghosh said at Dan David prize ceremony, rediff.com, 12/5/10)
"The title captures his scathing diagnosis of the condition of literature and culture in the age of the Anthropocene. Why is it, he asks, that the literary world has responded to climate change with almost complete silence? How can we explain the fact that writers of fiction have overwhelmingly failed to grapple with the ongoing planetary crisis in their works? For Ghosh, this silence is part of a broader pattern of indifference and misrepresentation. Contemporary arts and literature are characterized by 'modes of concealment that [prevent] people from recognizing the realities of their plight'." (The Holocene hangover: it is time for humanity to make fundamental changes, theguardian.com, 8/12/16)
How true! After all, it doesn't get much more bleeding obvious than anthropocentric climate change, right? And what are all these scribblers scribbling about? Something else, damn it! Obviously, they need a bloody good whipping, and Ghosh's decided he's just the man to give it to them - hard:
Silent novelists? LASH!
Novelists who fail to grapple with the issue? LASH!
Indifferent novelists? LASH!
Reality-avoidant novelists. LASH!
But wait, what about something just as bleeding obvious? Like Israeli apartheid, for example?
Ah, but that's different.
Back in 2010, Ghosh was 'awarded' Israel's $US1m Dan David Prize, and when those who know apartheid when they see it asked him not to go there, he told them he was "disappointed" with them for running a "campaign of admonition," and declared, "We cannot let others decide for us and we cannot yield to such demands. If a reader from Israel wants to reach out to us, how can we not engage him?" (What Amitav Ghosh said at Dan David prize ceremony, rediff.com, 12/5/10)
Thursday, December 8, 2016
The Fish Rots from the Head Down
A Red Cross survey of 17000 people reveals that "nearly one quarter of Australians think torturing enemy soldiers is justifiable," and that "faith in the Geneva Convention is fading." (Faith in 'laws of war' slipping dangerously, says Red Cross, David Wroe, Sydney Morning Herald, 6/12/16)
Assuming that the average Australian even knows what the Geneva Convention is, given that we have a government which tortures asylum seekers,* and a foreign minister who once quipped, on the subject of Israeli settlements being illegal under international law, "I would like to see which international law has declared them illegal,"** it would seem that we have here an open-and-shut case of the fish rotting from the head down.
[*"The Torture Convention prohibits subjecting people to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The [UN] report confirms that by leaving people locked up indefinitely in appalling conditions on a remote island, Australia is failing to meet this basic standard." (UN finds Australia's treatment of asylum seekers violates the Convention Against Torture, hrlc.org, 9/3/15);**See my 20/1/14 post Believe It or Not.]
Assuming that the average Australian even knows what the Geneva Convention is, given that we have a government which tortures asylum seekers,* and a foreign minister who once quipped, on the subject of Israeli settlements being illegal under international law, "I would like to see which international law has declared them illegal,"** it would seem that we have here an open-and-shut case of the fish rotting from the head down.
[*"The Torture Convention prohibits subjecting people to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The [UN] report confirms that by leaving people locked up indefinitely in appalling conditions on a remote island, Australia is failing to meet this basic standard." (UN finds Australia's treatment of asylum seekers violates the Convention Against Torture, hrlc.org, 9/3/15);**See my 20/1/14 post Believe It or Not.]
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
Turkish Designs on Northern Syria
Hm...
"Now, prompted by domestic strife and external realpolitik, Mr Erdogan appears to be downsizing his aims and recasting Turkey in a peacemaking role while aiming to secure, with Russia's tacit approval, a large area of northern Syria as a semi-permanent buffer zone under its control. Turkish forces and allied rebel militias have seized an area of 2000sq km in northern Aleppo province since launching a cross-border operation in August to dislodge Islamic State from the frontier. They are now closing in on al-Bab, the last ISIS-held town between Aleppo and Raqqa. According to Turkish government sources, that is where they will stop and where renewed diplomatic ties will take over." (Putin, Erdogan carving up northern Syria, Hannah Lucinda Smith, The Times/ The Australian, 3/12/16)
If this report is correct, it wouldn't be the last time Turkey took a bite out of Syria. The story of the north-western Syrian province of Alexandretta (now Iskanderun), is instructive. In the 1930s, Turkey laid claim to Alexandretta on the grounds that it was Turkish (although less than half the population were Turks). France (which then ruled Syria under a League of Nations Mandate) and Turkey agreed to have the status of the province determined by the League Council, and, in January 1937, a settlement was reached in Turkey's favour. In the words of historian A.L. Tibawi, the settlement's: "... essence was to constitute the district of Alexandretta as a separate political entity with full internal independence under a statute and a fundamental law of its own. Its connection with Syria was restricted to customs and monetary matters, and its foreign affairs which were to be conducted by Syria after independence." (A Modern History of Syria, Including Lebanon & Palestine (1969), p 353)
Now here's where it gets really interesting:
"In the summer of 1938 when elections for an assembly were to be held under the new dispensation, France was more occupied with the larger problems of Germany... and gave way to Turkish pressure on a number of vital matters including the co-operation of Turkish troops for the maintenance of order during the elections. By this and similar means the Turkish minority won 22 out of the 40 seats. When the assembly met for the first time it elected a Turk for a speaker, another Turk for head of the state, renamed the territory the Republic of Hatay, and appointed an all-Turkish cabinet.
"Not content with these victories, the Turkish government exploited the strained world situation to an even greater extent and pressed for the annexation of Hatay. Britain and France were very eager to secure if not a Turkish alliance at least Turkish neutrality in a European conflict that seemed inevitable. It is said that Britain, who had given Turkey a big credit loan for rearmament, persuaded France to sacrifice Alexandretta as a price for gaining Turkish goodwill. France capitulated by signing an agreement in June 1939, ceding the territory to the Turkish Republic. This was clearly a grave violation of article 4 of the mandate which stipulated that the mandatory was required to see that 'no part of the territory of Syria and Lebanon is ceded or leased or in any way placed under the control of a foreign power'." (ibid)
One to watch...
"Now, prompted by domestic strife and external realpolitik, Mr Erdogan appears to be downsizing his aims and recasting Turkey in a peacemaking role while aiming to secure, with Russia's tacit approval, a large area of northern Syria as a semi-permanent buffer zone under its control. Turkish forces and allied rebel militias have seized an area of 2000sq km in northern Aleppo province since launching a cross-border operation in August to dislodge Islamic State from the frontier. They are now closing in on al-Bab, the last ISIS-held town between Aleppo and Raqqa. According to Turkish government sources, that is where they will stop and where renewed diplomatic ties will take over." (Putin, Erdogan carving up northern Syria, Hannah Lucinda Smith, The Times/ The Australian, 3/12/16)
If this report is correct, it wouldn't be the last time Turkey took a bite out of Syria. The story of the north-western Syrian province of Alexandretta (now Iskanderun), is instructive. In the 1930s, Turkey laid claim to Alexandretta on the grounds that it was Turkish (although less than half the population were Turks). France (which then ruled Syria under a League of Nations Mandate) and Turkey agreed to have the status of the province determined by the League Council, and, in January 1937, a settlement was reached in Turkey's favour. In the words of historian A.L. Tibawi, the settlement's: "... essence was to constitute the district of Alexandretta as a separate political entity with full internal independence under a statute and a fundamental law of its own. Its connection with Syria was restricted to customs and monetary matters, and its foreign affairs which were to be conducted by Syria after independence." (A Modern History of Syria, Including Lebanon & Palestine (1969), p 353)
Now here's where it gets really interesting:
"In the summer of 1938 when elections for an assembly were to be held under the new dispensation, France was more occupied with the larger problems of Germany... and gave way to Turkish pressure on a number of vital matters including the co-operation of Turkish troops for the maintenance of order during the elections. By this and similar means the Turkish minority won 22 out of the 40 seats. When the assembly met for the first time it elected a Turk for a speaker, another Turk for head of the state, renamed the territory the Republic of Hatay, and appointed an all-Turkish cabinet.
"Not content with these victories, the Turkish government exploited the strained world situation to an even greater extent and pressed for the annexation of Hatay. Britain and France were very eager to secure if not a Turkish alliance at least Turkish neutrality in a European conflict that seemed inevitable. It is said that Britain, who had given Turkey a big credit loan for rearmament, persuaded France to sacrifice Alexandretta as a price for gaining Turkish goodwill. France capitulated by signing an agreement in June 1939, ceding the territory to the Turkish Republic. This was clearly a grave violation of article 4 of the mandate which stipulated that the mandatory was required to see that 'no part of the territory of Syria and Lebanon is ceded or leased or in any way placed under the control of a foreign power'." (ibid)
One to watch...
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
What is it with Geraldines?
In reference to Islamic State's destruction of the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra, "Pullitzer prize-winning author," Geraldine Brooks (who has toured "controversial digs" under occupied Arab East Jerusalem)* has been quoted as saying:
"When you see this determination to eradicate the records of any previous culture or way of thinking, it is such an arid and soul-destroying way of being. It is profoundly devastating. It is almost a weapon of morale against the people you are fighting, because these are the things that are fundamental to yourself and your culture. It would be like someone shelling the Sydney Opera House." (Battle to block the barbarians at the gates of a global cultural heritage, Peter Munro, Sydney Morning Herald, 3/12/16)
Or destroying the Haram ash-Sharif, eh Geraldine?:
"Liberating the Temple Mount from Arab (Islamic) occupation. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque were placed on this Jewish or biblical holy site as a specific sign of Islamic conquest and domination. The Temple Mount can never be consecrated to the Name of G-d without removing these pagan shrines. It has been suggested that they be removed, transferred to, and rebuilt at Mecca." (Objectives of the Temple Mount Faithful, templemountfaithful.org)
Nobody does euphemism quite like the Israelis. That last sentence is a classic of the genre.
[*See my 5/10/15 post The Tunnel Vision of Geraldine Brooks 1.]
"When you see this determination to eradicate the records of any previous culture or way of thinking, it is such an arid and soul-destroying way of being. It is profoundly devastating. It is almost a weapon of morale against the people you are fighting, because these are the things that are fundamental to yourself and your culture. It would be like someone shelling the Sydney Opera House." (Battle to block the barbarians at the gates of a global cultural heritage, Peter Munro, Sydney Morning Herald, 3/12/16)
Or destroying the Haram ash-Sharif, eh Geraldine?:
"Liberating the Temple Mount from Arab (Islamic) occupation. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque were placed on this Jewish or biblical holy site as a specific sign of Islamic conquest and domination. The Temple Mount can never be consecrated to the Name of G-d without removing these pagan shrines. It has been suggested that they be removed, transferred to, and rebuilt at Mecca." (Objectives of the Temple Mount Faithful, templemountfaithful.org)
Nobody does euphemism quite like the Israelis. That last sentence is a classic of the genre.
[*See my 5/10/15 post The Tunnel Vision of Geraldine Brooks 1.]
Monday, December 5, 2016
Tzachi the Baptist, Bibi Christ & His First Coming
If Superman is faster than a speeding bullet, then Israel's visiting Superman (Aren't they all?) National Security & Foreign Affairs Minister, Tzachi Hanegbi, is slower than glacial speed:
"Laconic and soft-spoken, Hanegbi nonetheless has a reputation as a hard man in Israeli politics. He gradually has moved from the right to the centre, and is now a passionate advocate of the two-state solution." (Israelis see hope in switch to Trump, Greg Sheridan, 3/12/16)
Thanks for that, Greg,
To begin with, the Palestinian West Bank was occupied in 1967. That's almost 50 years ago.
The Palestinians adopted the two-state solution at the Arab Summit in Fez in 1982. That's 34 years ago.
And again at the Madrid Conference of 1991. That's 25 years ago.
And again at the Oslo Accords in 1993. That's 23 years ago.
And again, at the 2002 Arab League Peace Initiative. That's 14 years ago.
But NOW Hanegbi's "a passionate advocate of the two-state solution"?
Will wonders never cease?
Greg must've been so impressed that he forgot to mention 1) settlements; 2) the West Bank Wall; 3) occupied East Jerusalem; 4) the Jordan valley etc etc.
OK, so William Blake could see "A World in a Grain of Sand/ And a Heaven in a Wild Flower." But what about our Greg? He can see Passion in a Block of Ice!
Just imagine what he's going to see when "the one who comes after [Hanegbi], the straps of whose sandals [he is] not worthy to untie" gets here:
"Hanegbi's visit is a precursor to the planned visit of Netanyahu early next year, which will be the first time a serving Israeli prime minister has come to Australia. Hanegbi believes it will take the relationship into a new dimension of much broader and deeper practical co-operation."
I swear, the fabled Second Coming will be an anticlimax after this!
"Laconic and soft-spoken, Hanegbi nonetheless has a reputation as a hard man in Israeli politics. He gradually has moved from the right to the centre, and is now a passionate advocate of the two-state solution." (Israelis see hope in switch to Trump, Greg Sheridan, 3/12/16)
Thanks for that, Greg,
To begin with, the Palestinian West Bank was occupied in 1967. That's almost 50 years ago.
The Palestinians adopted the two-state solution at the Arab Summit in Fez in 1982. That's 34 years ago.
And again at the Madrid Conference of 1991. That's 25 years ago.
And again at the Oslo Accords in 1993. That's 23 years ago.
And again, at the 2002 Arab League Peace Initiative. That's 14 years ago.
But NOW Hanegbi's "a passionate advocate of the two-state solution"?
Will wonders never cease?
Greg must've been so impressed that he forgot to mention 1) settlements; 2) the West Bank Wall; 3) occupied East Jerusalem; 4) the Jordan valley etc etc.
OK, so William Blake could see "A World in a Grain of Sand/ And a Heaven in a Wild Flower." But what about our Greg? He can see Passion in a Block of Ice!
Just imagine what he's going to see when "the one who comes after [Hanegbi], the straps of whose sandals [he is] not worthy to untie" gets here:
"Hanegbi's visit is a precursor to the planned visit of Netanyahu early next year, which will be the first time a serving Israeli prime minister has come to Australia. Hanegbi believes it will take the relationship into a new dimension of much broader and deeper practical co-operation."
I swear, the fabled Second Coming will be an anticlimax after this!
Sunday, December 4, 2016
Q&A With Clueless Christensen & Peter Hartcher
Q - George Christensen: "Where are the balls in Australian politics? Where have they gone?" (The leader of the opposition, Matthew Knott, Good Weekend, 3/12/16)
A - Peter Hartcher: George, mate, they're in Israel's hands. As that "Australian official" I quoted back in 2010 told me: "It wouldn't matter whether it was John Howard or Kevin Rudd or Tony Abbott in the prime minister's chair, they know we wouldn't sever relations. They know they've got us by the balls, partly because of the strength of the Israel lobby'." (Betrayed PM should not be taken for granted, Sydney Morning Herald, 26/1/10)
A - Peter Hartcher: George, mate, they're in Israel's hands. As that "Australian official" I quoted back in 2010 told me: "It wouldn't matter whether it was John Howard or Kevin Rudd or Tony Abbott in the prime minister's chair, they know we wouldn't sever relations. They know they've got us by the balls, partly because of the strength of the Israel lobby'." (Betrayed PM should not be taken for granted, Sydney Morning Herald, 26/1/10)
Saturday, December 3, 2016
Murdoch's Australian: What Lurks Within
Anthony Klan is a 'journalist' for Murdoch's Australian.
1) Here's the opening line of his recent "EXCLUSIVE," Federal cash 'went to Hamas' (28/11/16):
"The Australian government has been one of the largest funders of the Hamas terror organisation in Gaza over the past seven years, Israeli authorities allege."
2) Now here's the explanatory footnote at the end of the article:
"The author travelled to Israel with the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies as part of a journalists delegation from November 5-10. He stayed in Israel self-funded for two weeks, during which time he researched and produced this article."
3) The first and last columns of Klan's 6-column article enclose a commentary by the Australian's Paul Maley, (Why one man's arrest is such a big deal for our nation) on the arrest of Australian Islamic State groupie Neil Prakash.
Take-home question:
Having noted just these three features of Klan's piece, do we really need to read the thing?
1) Here's the opening line of his recent "EXCLUSIVE," Federal cash 'went to Hamas' (28/11/16):
"The Australian government has been one of the largest funders of the Hamas terror organisation in Gaza over the past seven years, Israeli authorities allege."
2) Now here's the explanatory footnote at the end of the article:
"The author travelled to Israel with the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies as part of a journalists delegation from November 5-10. He stayed in Israel self-funded for two weeks, during which time he researched and produced this article."
3) The first and last columns of Klan's 6-column article enclose a commentary by the Australian's Paul Maley, (Why one man's arrest is such a big deal for our nation) on the arrest of Australian Islamic State groupie Neil Prakash.
Take-home question:
Having noted just these three features of Klan's piece, do we really need to read the thing?
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Israel is a Democracy & Other Fairy Tales
In reacting against the hypocrisy of Americans (and Australia's little Americans) over Fidel Castro's death, Sydney Morning Herald columnist Ruby Hamad argues, with the best of intentions, that:
"Israel is both a democracy (flawed but a democracy nonetheless) and an oppressive occupier that gets away with shocking human rights abuse. Yasser Arafat was indeed resisting this Israeli oppression and occupation, and in doing so he turned a blind eye to terrorism and the victimisation of innocent Israelis." (All heroes have their dark side, no matter what side they're on, 30/11/16)
However, these two sentences are more fairy tale than fact:
1) Israel is a democracy. Palestine had an indigenous majority and a non-indigenous settler minority up to 1948. The settler minority then drove out the indigenous majority and has refused to allow them back in ever since. Only when those driven out (and therefore disenfranchised) in 1948 are allowed back and given the vote, will Palestine/Israel be a democracy. All it is now is an ethnocracy, just like white South Africa before apartheid was consigned to the dustbin of history.
2) Arafat is a terrorist. You simply cannot place the reactive, retail violence of an occupied, oppressed, and colonised people on the same level as the wholesale violence of those who occupy, oppress, and colonise them. International law rightly recognises the right of an occupied, oppressed, and colonised people to resist occupation and colonisation by any means. It does not, however, recognise anyone's right to occupy or colonise another people's land. Arafat was not a terrorist. He was a freedom fighter. The settler-colonial apartheid state of Israel is the only terrorist here.
"Israel is both a democracy (flawed but a democracy nonetheless) and an oppressive occupier that gets away with shocking human rights abuse. Yasser Arafat was indeed resisting this Israeli oppression and occupation, and in doing so he turned a blind eye to terrorism and the victimisation of innocent Israelis." (All heroes have their dark side, no matter what side they're on, 30/11/16)
However, these two sentences are more fairy tale than fact:
1) Israel is a democracy. Palestine had an indigenous majority and a non-indigenous settler minority up to 1948. The settler minority then drove out the indigenous majority and has refused to allow them back in ever since. Only when those driven out (and therefore disenfranchised) in 1948 are allowed back and given the vote, will Palestine/Israel be a democracy. All it is now is an ethnocracy, just like white South Africa before apartheid was consigned to the dustbin of history.
2) Arafat is a terrorist. You simply cannot place the reactive, retail violence of an occupied, oppressed, and colonised people on the same level as the wholesale violence of those who occupy, oppress, and colonise them. International law rightly recognises the right of an occupied, oppressed, and colonised people to resist occupation and colonisation by any means. It does not, however, recognise anyone's right to occupy or colonise another people's land. Arafat was not a terrorist. He was a freedom fighter. The settler-colonial apartheid state of Israel is the only terrorist here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)