Trump's Man Smashes it in East Jerusalem

"For years, Palestinians in the crowded East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Silwan have complained that the walls of their homes were settling and cracking, disturbed by an underground archaeological dig led by a right-wing Jewish settler group. When that dig was officially unveiled... with the ceremonial smashing of a brick wall, it was President Donald Trump's ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, who swung the first sledgehammer. The reverberations were literal and metaphorical. US ambassadors to Israel, to avoid being seen as taking Israel's side in the conflict with the Palestinians, have avoided public appearances in East Jerusalem. Israel captured East Jerusalem from Jordan in 1967 and annexed it. Most of the world considers it illegally occupied, and the Palestinians want it as the capital of a future state.... But [Friedman's] starring role at the event run by the City of David Foundation yesterday was more provocative... Over the years, the group has moved hundreds of Jews into Silwan, a neighbourhood with with about 5000 Palestinians. At the same time, it has led a sprawling excavation of an area of Silwan called Wadi Hilweh, where archaeologists [names please] say they have unearthed the original boundaries of biblical Jerusalem. Yesterday's event represented the opening of what the group is calling the Pilgrimage Road, an underground passageway that leads from the Pool of Siloam, where the group says ancient Jewish pilgrims would cleanse themselves, to the point at which they would ascend the Temple Mount... 'Here we have this powerful, irrefutable, undeniable evidence,' Friedman told the guests, which included Israeli and US diplomats and lawmakers, the billionaire Republican donors Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, and Sara Netanyahu, wife of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Friedman added, 'Were there any doubt, and to me there never was, about the accuracy, the wisdom, the propriety of President Trump recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, I certainly think this lays all doubts to rest'." (US smashes diplomatic barrier, David M. Halbfinger, The New York Times/Sydney Morning Herald, 2/7/19)

Two other individuals, apart from the mob above, deserve dishonourable mentions in relation to their cavalier attitudes towards Israeli activities in East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements:

The first is Geraldine Brooks, Australian-born novelist and Catholic convert to Judaism following her marriage to the late US writer Tony Horwitz. Brooks' best-seller, The Secret Chord (2015), has lent credence to the City of David Foundation's tunneling. See my two posts The Tunnel Vision of Geraldine Brooks for details.

The second is former Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop, who is on record as saying, "I would like to see which international law has declared [Israeli settlements] illegal." (See Lawyers caution Bishop, John Lyons, The Australian, 27/1/14 in my 28/1/14 post Just How Bright is Julie Bishop?)

Why Aren't Australian Journalists Backing Julian Assange? 5

On Thursday 20/6/19, Phillip Adams ran a program called The Assange indictment: will the US be able to extradite Julian Assange? It was an interview with international lawyer Geoffrey Robertson who represents Assange. It is of consuming interest to all concerned, as I am, with Assange's plight. Please read it from beginning to end:

Phillip Adams: I promised that Geoffrey Robertson would be on the program tonight to talk about the plight of my friend Julian Assange, and the response to that has been quite extraordinary. A vast bombardment of emails and social media. One of the emails came from an ex-foreign minister of Australia, Bob Carr, and I want to read you the part of it that's relevant. It's a very long email: 

'I look forward to hearing your interview with Geoffrey Robertson about Assange. Up to now I've been an Assange critic. The failure to do redactions, not facing up in Sweden. But the American indictment stops one not short of capital punishment, at 175 years, and it threatens media freedom in exposing abuses, and above all, for Australians, it serves up one of our citizens into the maw of the hideous American justice system. I am meeting with his Australian lawyers next week."

PA: Now before I actually talk to Geoffrey, I just want to remind you what an extraordinary fellow he is. [Note that I've omitted Adams' lengthy tribute to Robertson for reasons of space.]

GR: Very good to be talking to you once again, Phillip.

PA: Now let's do a hypothetical. If every thing goes wrong, what's the worst case scenario for your client?

GR: Oh, he dies in an American supermax. That is what is intended by the current regime. There is no doubt... this takes us back to 2010 when he produced the initial Iraqgate revelations showing the helicopter killing and the aerial manslaughter of a couple of Reuters journalists, some children, and revealed to the world the extraordinary detail of corruption throughout the Middle East, and the misbehaviour in some cases of American troops. Now at that time the Americans convened a Grand Jury in secrecy. Now I had a few high connections with the Obama administration, and I said to them do you really want him because there are dangerous precedents here for The New York Times and newspapers around the world, and they said, in a word, we don't want him but the Pentagon does, and the Pentagon may eventually get its way. And now it's got its way. Julian is in a terrible plight. He's not well, he's banged up in prison for the foreseeable future. The danger is that he will be extradited to America, embroiled in court proceedings. He's charged with conspiring with Chelsea Manning - she got 35 years before she was pardoned by Obama at the end of his run. I don't think that Julian will be pardoned by President Trump. It is US capital punishment in a roundabout way because unless the British courts spring him on one argument or another, the Trump administration is determined to argue that the First Amendment, which famously protects American newspapers and publishers, does not apply to Australians or to non-Americans, which puts American papers in difficulty because so many of their contributors and journalists are non-Americans. But in this particular case, a privilege which is given to all American papers in the public interest, free speech is going to be denied to Julian Assange because he's an Australian.

PA: You represented him previously in a case which he lost. Let's remember that.

GR: Yes, a case we would have won, and I stayed in it because we got the court to rule that he would be tried in secret in Sweden, and I couldn't imagine the Supreme Court of Britain would allow someone to be extradited to Sweden to be tried in secret. But in a foolish, in retrospect, attempt to cosy up to the Swedes and get some release from them, he dropped that point of law and so he lost. But he's been at the Ecuadorian embassy in London for 7 years. I saw him about a week before he was thrown out and he was worried then. He knew that Mike Pence had been in Ecuador, and a much needed loan had been extended to Ecuador, and he feared he would be the collateral. And of course a week or so later he was thrown out. The behaviour was disgraceful, I have to say. They kept his private notes, his legal notes, and showed them to the Americans and the CIA before they returned them, and on every score this isn't the way you treat people you've given asylum to for 7 years. But that's now a thing of the past, and I think next February the proceedings will commence once he's served his term for bail-breaking. He got 6 months for that and he'll have to stay in prison and no doubt will not get bail while he's fighting extradition.

PA: Geoffrey, there may be prosecutorial overreach here. There are 18 charges for heaven's sake. What are the most significant ones?

GR: Well, the most significant one in terms of years in prison are the charges in the Espionage Act, which is a 1921 American law that is basically for spying, and of course for disloyal Americans. But Julian is not an American citizen so it's an inappropriate act, an attempt at an exhorbitant jurisdiction because he didn't do any of the publishing while in America. He did it outside America. But the Americans do have this, and when I was an international appeal judge I used to be irritated by the American fixation on sentences that far exceed the amount of years that the defendant has to live. They sentence people to 100 years in prison. As you say, those charges add up to 175 years, and they're quite capable as they showed in Chelsea Manning's case of having a 50 or 60 year sentence. But in effect the result will be the complete silencing of someone who was a troublemaker as far as they were concerned. But they will effectively silence him for the rest of his life and he will die in an American supermax.

PA: Another part of the email from Bob Carr raises the issue of what a [British] Labour government would do with this - curtail the extradition, even send him back here. What do we do then? Is it true the incumbent government makes a difference in this case?

GR: Oh it does, a complete difference. Actually, to some extent it is a political rather than a legal decision, and this present government [in the form of] Sajid Javid, who's a rather nasty politician, unfortunately because he's the first Muslim politician that has risen to a secretary of state level. He's already shown his teeth by being prepared to have some ISIS Britons dealt with by the death penalty, which hitherto Britain had totally set its face against, and of course he refused to take back that woman whose baby died. So he couldn't wait once the Swedish courts had dropped the case, in effect, or the Swedish prosecutors had fumbled their extradition request. He didn't wait to grant America the extradition right over Julian Assange, and so now the court battle will begin next year. But I do think it's a serious problem for freedom of speech. It doesn't matter whether you love or like or dislike Julian Assange. [Note that I've omitted Robertson's account of former free speech battles for reasons of space.] The question is he is in the process of being crushed by the mighty state, the Goliath that he acted as a David with some slingshot to show what it was up to.

PA: Nonetheless the demonisation of him has not helped. Even in Australia there are people I would have thought would be manning the barricades. Peter Greste, for example, who as you know was in an Egyptian slammer. They were not that sympathetic. The Washington Post, for heaven's sake, has just published the most appallingly aggressive attack on Assange, insisting that he's got to face the music. This poisons the whole process.

GR: I have to say that wiser voices have been heard in America. Jim Goodale, who is the real hero of the Pentagon Papers case. He was the brilliant lawyer for The New York Times. He's come out of retirement saying this is the greatest battle for freedom of speech since the Pentagon Papers, and in some respects more important. The Columbia Journalism Review has come down emphatically on Assange's side. So I think there are wiser voices, but the demonisation has been extraordinary. These proceedings in Sweden, for example, are always called rape proceedings as though there was some violent force being alleged. There's not. It's a charge which the Swedes  call 'minor rape', which is a contradiction in terms as far as we're concerned. Basically it amounts to an allegation that he had consensual sex without wearing an agreed condom. Now that's a million miles removed from our concept of rape as an offence of force and violence, but it's used against him. And the Ecuadorian claim that came straight from a black propaganda that he would smear his room with excrement is ludicrous. He is a fastidious Australian who has always shown respect in my company to the Ecuadorians, and that was a pure lie which went around the world.

PA: I have visited him in the embassy and he was, as you say, fastidious. Had to be in a tiny, claustrophobic space. One of the problems in this country is that neither side of politics have shown the slightest interest or sympathy.

GR: I think he's won some award. If you look at him objectively, he's made a lot more information available. Hardly a week goes by when you don't see sourced some WikiLeaks revelation. We know a lot more, and not all of it of course is anti- the United States. One of the ironies I find in this case is that he released the cables which were not top secret. They were secret but not classified in a way that would mean that a source or human life was in danger if they were released. They were available to 3 million Americans and what they showed was that American foreign policy, at least the CIA-sourced view of the world, was pretty accurate in exposing, or at least being aware of, the level of corruption in many countries. So he has made a lot of information available, most of it of genuine public interest, and for that he's going to be, in effect, crushed to death if the Americans get their way. I hope that they won't. I mean he's got arguments that may prevail and I think although the British have not shown themselves very unbiased so far, he comes up before some tinpot magistrate who described him as a narcissist and a coward, which Julian Assange certainly isn't. And so you've got that prejudice here. I mean, even in the literary field he eats with his fingers said one book about him, completely unaware of the Australian tradition of BBQing. But this is something all Australians should be aware of, that he is being discriminated against both as a person and an Australian.

PA:  I wanted to make the point before we've got a PM and a FM and the Opposition, none of them are speaking out. Is there anything Australia can do?

GR: Well I did have a number of meetings with Julie Bishop who I think was as sympathetic as she could be and arranged for his Australian passport to be renewed. I think there must come a point at which - I mean the man is sick. I haven't been able to visit him yet in his prison but his solicitor has said in court he's been too ill to be produced, and of course, the UN delegate who did see him issued a very stark warning about his health. So I think that is the first thing that Australia must do. The evidence is clear that he's unwell and that he's not being treated properly in prison and that is something that really the Australian government should make a protest about and an inquiry."

Shorten: 'We Can't Waste Talent'

Good grief!

First this:

"Those close to Shorten and Labor's foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong say things are shaping up well for former foreign minister Julie Bishop - should she want a job... Wong has already described Bishop as 'a very effective diplomat'... Another name in the race, even if by his own suggestion: former communications minister turned gambling lobbyist Stephen Conroy." (Chatter reaches fever pitch on plum overseas postings, CBD, Kylar Loussikian/Samantha Hutchinson, Sydney Morning Herald, 14/5/19)

Then this:

"Labor leader Bill Shorten has left the door open to offering former foreign minister Julie Bishop a job if Labor wins government. In a pitch to West Australian voters at a business breakfast yesterday, Mr Shorten praised the high-profile Perth Liberal, saying he thought of her 'very highly'. Asked if she would be offered the position of ambassador to the United States when it becomes vacant next year, Mr Shorten first acknowledged Ms Bishop had said she wants to work in the private sector. He then added: 'I'll certainly be talking to her. I know that her and Penny [Wong] have a very good working relationship... I will always rate her highly. I'm not going to put a name against a label because we haven't even won. But I'm saying to you unreservedly here, I've got a lot of respect for her. Chloe and I know her well. She's a good person... we can't waste talent'." (Shorten considers Bishop for US ambassador role, Judith Ireland, Sydney Morning Herald, 16/5/19)

Bishop? Conroy? Any more spent LibLabs out there, desperately seeking relevance under a possible Shorten regime? I shudder to think.

Bishop first. Her reported comment of January 2014, in Israel, questioning the illegality of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, namely, "I would like to see which international law has declared them illegal," should rule her out, both on the grounds of ignorance of international law and common knowledge, not to mention elementary decency. She it was, too, who withdrew Australian funding from the Palestinian Authority on the grounds that it could be given to "Palestinian criminals" in July last year. As the head Labor Zionist, Shorten's words are predictable, but what does Bishop and Wong's alleged "very good personal relationship" tell us about the latter?

Conroy? Good God! Assessed by the astute Bob Carr as having "an umbilical attachment to Israel," Conroy, alone in the Labor Party in 2003, endorsed the Bush/Blair/Howard war of regime change in Iraq.

A Far Too Charitable Assessment

"The Foreign Minister's July 2 decision on the [direct] aid sparked an angry response from Palestinian Authority senior adviser Nabil Shaath, who described Australia as 'worthy of being spat on' and 'servants of the US'." (Aid cut despite pledge on terror, Andrew Burrell, The Australian, 25/7/18)

On Planet Trumble...

On Planet Trumble, where up is down and right is wrong, the more Palestinians Israel murders and maims, the more the Palestinians must be punished:

"Australia has ceased providing direct aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA), with Foreign Minister Julie Bishop saying the donations could increase the self-governing body's capacity to pay Palestinians convicted of politically motivated violence. Ms Bishop said funding was cut to the World Bank's Multi-Donor Trust Fund for the Palestinian Recovery and Development Program after writing to the Palestinian Authority in late May seeking assurance that Australian funding was not going to Palestinian criminals. Australia sends about $10 million in aid to Palestine territories [?]. It will now direct its funds through the United Nations." (Australia ends direct aid to Palestinian Authority, abc.net.au/news, 3/7/18)

On Planet Trumble, Israel pulls its parliamentary strings:

"Concerns have been raised by some Coalition politicians, including backbencher Eric Abetz,* that the money sent through the World Bank had gone towards funding violence in the region."

 On Planet Trumble, foreign minister Bishop can see no valid reason for not funding the PA directly, but cuts it anyway:

"Ms Bishop said she was confident no Australian funds had been used inappropriately. 'I am confident that previous Australian funding to the PA through the World Bank has been used as intended,' she said in a statement. 'However, I am concerned that in providing funds for this aspect of the PA's operations, there is an opportunity for it to use its own budget to [fund] activities that Australia would never support. Any assistance provided by the Palestine Liberation Organisation to those convicted of politically motivated violence is an affront to Australian values and undermines the prospect of a meaningful peace between Israel and the Palestinians'."

On Planet Trumble, Australia takes its cues from the US, which takes its cues from Israel:

"In March, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the US Government for passing a law that suspended some financial aid to the Palestinians over the stipends paid to families of Palestinians killed or jailed in fighting with Israel. Mr Netanyahu said the Taylor Force Act, named after an American killed in Israel by a Palestinian in 2016, a 'powerful signal by the US that changes the rules' by cutting 'hundreds of millions of dollars for the Palestinian Authority that they invest in encouraging terrorism'."

On Planet Trumble, USraeli perpetrators are the victims and Palestinian victims are the perpetrators:

"The Palestinians say the families are victims of violence."

Strange place, Planet Trumble.

[*See my 2/6/18 post Australia's Senate Hard at Work.]

Another Zionist Attack on Australian Aid to Palestinians

You'll recall the case of World Vision's Gaza director Mohammed El-Halabi, seized by the Israelis in 2016 and falsely accused of diverting Australian aid money to Hamas, despite neither the Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade nor World Vision Australia finding any evidence for the accusation. (See my 23/3/17 post The Halabi Affair.) (And incidentally, here it is, June 2018, and, search as I may on the Internet, I can find no reference to what has happened to El-Halabi.)

Now, another Australian aid organisation, the ACTU's Union Aid Abroad - APHEDA, has come under attack by the usual suspects for the heinous crime of helping dispossessed and colonised Palestinians.

'Venomous' doesn't begin to describe Murdoch's Daily Telegraph. "TERROR EXCLUSIVE" shrieked its front page yesterday, "Audit into jihadi links to Aussie aid - GAZA DRIP." (That final shriek, btw, gets my nomination for any 'Lamest MSM Pun of the Year' competition currently in contemplation.)

That was followed by this opener from "national political editor," Sharri Markson:

"An urgent investigation is under way after revelations millions of taxpayer dollars are being funnelled to a Palestinian aid organisation in the Middle East that employed a leader of a terrorist group. The Daily Telegraph can today reveal the money web that sees cash move from the Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade through a Sydney-based charity to a Palestinian aid organisation which employed the leader of a vicious jihadi group known as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The PFLP has masterminded plane hijackings and suicide bombings, and is on the official terror lists of the US, the European Union and Canada. In total, $21 million of DFAT funding has been given to a charity set up by the unions, Union Aid Abroad-APHEDA, which has funnelled millions through to the Ma'an Development Centre - whose project co-ordinator in Gaza was the recently killed PFLP leader Ahmed Abdullah Al Adine. He was hailed a martyr at his funeral, which was guarded by at least a dozen PFLP terrorists. Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop last night said a 'full audit of funding' to Union Aid Abroad had been ordered."

Describing the Marxist PFLP* as "a vicious jihadi group" is just the kind of cheap propaganda you'd expect from Markson, once described by former Labor politician, now Murdoch columnist for The Australian, Graham Richardson (in a model of understatement) as someone who can be "irritating and sometimes go too far."

Two things should always be kept in mind whenever Israelis, or their fifth columnists in places like Australia, start banging on about 'Palestinian terrorism'. 

The first is that the Palestinians, like all occupied people, have the legal right, in the words of UNGA resolution 37/43 of 1982, to resist occupying forces "by all available means, including armed struggle." 

The second is that for Zionists to bleat about 'Palestinian terrorism' is the very height of hypocrisy. Not only did they use terror in their ruthless, armed takeover of British Mandate Palestine, but they have continued using it on a daily basis against defenceless Palestinians and others ever since.

The Israelis have, of course, long been gunning for both APHEDA and World Vision Australia, as this propaganda piece from Jason Edelstein of NGO Monitor, published in Murdoch's Australian in 2012, indicates:

"In a new report, Shurat HaDin (Israel Law Centre) presents 'conclusive evidence' that a Gaza-based organisation supported by two Australian groups is linked to the Popular Front for the liberation of Palestine terror group. The report explains that the Australian Agency for International Development and World Vision Australia are 'providing financial aid and other forms of material support to the Union of Agricultural Work Committees, an agency of the proscribed terror organisation the PFLP... As NGO Monitor has shown, APHEDA... engages in activities that fuel the conflict and do not promote humanitarian objectives. APHEDA campaigns for a one-sided and immoral arms embargo that would impair Israeli defence against terror attacks, uses demonising 'apartheid' language, endorses the so-called Palestinian 'right of return' and partners with organisations promoting BDS and 'lawfare' tactics. Its Middle East tours have served as the basis for promoting BDS campaigns in Australia." (No peace in hidden agenda of aid agencies, 30/3/12)

[*For George Habash and the PFLP see my 6/5/18 post Gideon Levy: 'Habash Was Right'.]

Malcolm's Party

It has been said that the fish stinks from the head down. Well, you can smell the head of Australia's governing Liberal Party a mile away. Get a whiff of this:

Last year...

"Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is the highest paid politician in the OECD... Mr Turnbull's base pay rose to $527,854 after the independent Remuneration Tribunal ordered a 2% pay rise for politicians last year, delivering him a $10,000 jump." (Turnbull's pay highest of any OECD leader, Eryk Bagshaw, The Sun-Herald, 27/5/47)

Next month...

"Malcolm Turnbull will pocket a pay rise of more than $10,000 next month after the independent Remuneration Tribunal decided to lift salaries for federal politicians by 2%... The decision will see the Prime Minister's annual income rise to $538,460... " ($10k top-up for Turnbull as pay lifted for MPs, Joe Kelly, The Australian, 14/6/18)

Then, of course, there's the awful stench of the party's rank and vile:

"The [Liberal Party's] council... voted, by a narrow margin of 43 to 31 votes, to relocate the Australian embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a highly contentious move opposed by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop during the debate." (Liberal Party council votes to sell off the ABC, David Crowe, smh.com.au, 16/6/18)

Smelling salts, anyone?

Australia's Senate Hard at Work

So good to see our talent in the Senate hard at work serving Australia the state of Israel, and earning every cent of their near $200,000 p.a. salary.

Senator Leyonjelm, you'll remember, recently returned from the apartheid state, determined to put pressure on the Australian government to end our funding for the United Nations Relief & Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which, quite coincidentally of course, just happens to be on Israel's to-do list. (Parenthetically, given Evatt's role in the partition of Palestine in 1947, which gave the Zionists all the excuse they needed to go on the warpath and create the very problem UNRWA was set up to deal with, I'd say helping fund it is the least we can do for our part in this ongoing crime against humanity.)

But Leyonjelm's just an unproven, raw recruit in the ranks of those Australian senators who've got the hots for Israel. If you really want to see a master at work, check out Tasmanian Liberal senator Eric Abetz's latest (31/5) media release:

"Liberal Senator Eric Abetz has welcomed Foreign Minister Julie Bishop's letter to the Palestinian Authority asking them to explain whether Australian aid funding is creating space within their budget to fund the so-called Martyr's [sic] Fund. Senator Abetz, a Member of the Australian Senate's Foreign Affairs Committee, has long advocated for the Australian Government to use its influence in an effort to end the Martyr's [sic] Fund which rewards the families of Palestinian terrorists who kill or harm Israeli citizens, including civilians. In 2017-18, Australia is providing more than $43 million in aid to the Palestinian territories. 'The Palestinian Martyr Fund [?] not only encourages murder and terror attacks, it is a major barrier to peace in the Middle East. The 'please explain' issued by the Foreign Minister is a strong and very welcome action that will hopefully apply pressure to the Palestinian Authority to end this murderous programme,' Senator Abetz said. 'Australia's strong defence of Israel in the United Nations shows a clear determination by the Government to back Israel as the only free and democratic nation in the Middle East. I am very pleased that the Foreign Minister has taken on board the representations made by myself and colleagues on this important issue which goes to the heart of our Australian values. Should the Palestinian Authority continue to fund murder and attacks through this or other PA funds, I am hopeful that the Australian Government will take the further step of pausing all Aid until the programme is eliminated,' Senator Abetz concluded." (Government issues 'please explain' to Palestinian Authority, abetz.com.au)

Bishop & Wong on Gaza Massacres

Vile doesn't begin to describe this tweet by Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop:

"We express our deep regret and sadness over loss of life and injury during #Gaza protests. Australia urges Palestinian protesters to refrain from violence. Israel should be proportionate in response." (15/5)

And piss weak doesn't begin to describe this one from Australian shadow foreign minister Penny Wong:

"The deaths and injuries of Palestinian protesters in Gaza overnight are both shocking and tragic." (15/5)

Jerusalem Tweets

Jeremy Corbyn - Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, including occupied Palestinian territory, is a reckless threat to peace. The British Government must condemn this dangerous act and work for a just and viable settlement of the conflict. (6/12/17)

Meanwhile, on another planet entirely:

Malcolm Turnbull - 0
Bill Shorten - 0
Julie Bishop - 0
Tanya Plibersek - 0

What an Inspiration She Is!

"The Australian government encourages the people of Africa to see us as an open-cut mine for lessons learned, for skills, for innovation and, I would like to think, inspiration." - Julie Bishop quoted in Australians ripping $40b out of Africa, Eryk Bagshaw, The Sun-Herald, 10/9/17)

A Woman Who Can't Say No

"Julie Bishop... has produced not a single sentence of substance or originality while in the portfolio." (Greg Sheridan, Bishop's errors of judgment compound the Coalition's woes, The Australian, 14/2/11)

Damn right, Greg!

In evidence:

When asked by the immediate past president of Zionism Victoria, Sam Tatarka, if Australia would open a consulate or high commission in West Jerusalem, Australia's foreign minister, Julie Bishop responded that "if she could overcome the cost and security issues," she would "consider" it. ('A significant step', The Australian Jewish News, 24/8/17)

A simple 'No' (preferably with a roll of the eyes) would have been quite sufficient.

The Real Julie Bishop

Age columnist Sarah Gill, although beginning to have her doubts following Julie Bishop's recent meeting with President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines ("At this juncture, what's called for is not an expression of 'concern'... but a point-blank repudiation of Duterte's drug war - its mission and its methods."), has obviously been a great fan of our sleek and stylish foreign minister:

"Underneath it all, I think Bishop cares a great deal about human rights. I believe in the authenticity of her desire to eradicate the death penalty globally - although it's not clear the matter was broached with Duterte, who is on the verge of reinstating it. I also believe in her sincerity when she speaks of fundamental freedoms, or argues passionately for democracy, or insists that human rights are inextricably linked to prosperity and regional stability." (We turn blind eye to regional atrocities, Sydney Morning Herald, 3/4/14)

Frankly, foreign ministry press releases can only take us so far with these professional politicians. It's the unscripted, on-the-hop, quip which best takes us to the "underneath it all." As in:

"I would like to see which international law has declared [Israeli settlements] illegal." (Julie Bishop, quoted in Israeli lawyers caution Bishop, John Lyons, The Australian, 27/1/14)

Latest Bishop Robocall

Hello, you've reached the office of the world's Australia's most stylish robot foreign minister, Julie Bishop. If you'd like to know the government's position on [...] Israeli settlements, press 8... You have pressed 8. The Australian Government is unconcerned about the significant recent settlement announcement in the West Bank. We continue to call on both sides to avoid unilateral actions that diminish the prospects of a negotiated two-state solution. Thank you.

Politics in the Age of the Robocall

Hello, you've reached the office of Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop. If you'd like to know the government's position on the Israel/Palestine conflict press 1. For Syria, press 2.... You have pressed 1. The Coalition Government has consistently not supported one-sided resolutions targeting Israel. The most important priority must be a resumption of direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians for a two-state solution as soon as possible. Thank you.

Turnbull 'Govt' an Ethical & Moral Black Hole

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)

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.]

The Unprecedented Ignorance of Julie Bishop

"The violence and the atrocities going on in Aleppo are unprecedented... like nothing we've seen in our lifetime." (Julie Bishop, in Bishop calls for Syria arms ban, David Wroe, Sydney Morning Herald, 3/10/16)

Especially the bombing of that hospital, eh Jules? Curse that butcher Asad! And yet, which country is usually singled out for blame whenever there's a blue on in the Middle East? That's right, Israel! Our very bestie over in that neck of the woods. Bloody anti-Semitism if you ask me!

Now you and I know Israel has been involved in some pretty nasty punch-ups over the years, strictly in self-defence, of course. After all, it's a pretty tough neighborhood over there, hey? In any case, I think it's safe to say that there's one thing at least our Israeli friends have never ever done, and that's target hospitals, right, Jules? Not like that butcher, Asad, and his Russki mates.

Oh, wait...

"It was at Akka Hospital [in West Beirut in 1982*] that I learnt my first word in Arabic: 'halas' - 'finished.' The school of nursing and the Arab centre for research and specialist treatment of injuries were both 'halas'. And the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) had not lost just one hospital: thirteen clinics and nine hospitals all over Lebanon had been destroyed in this way. Only Gaza Hospital, for a reason I was to discover three years later, was still standing. At the height of the air raids, when the Palestinians found out that every single PRCS hospital and clinic was a bomb target, they put three Israeli soldiers captured in south Lebanon on the upper floors of Gaza Hospital, and radioed a message to the Israeli Army saying that any further military action on Gaza Hospital would result in Israeli lives being lost. That saved Gaza Hospital from further destruction. One of the staff who spoke English told us that Akka Hospital had been a five-storey building before the Israeli air raids." (From Beirut to Jerusalem: A Woman Surgeon with the Palestinians, Dr Swee Chai Ang, 1989, pp 22-23)

[*Bishop, 60, was a partner in the Adelaide law firm Mangan, Ey & Bishop in 1982.]

Why Netanyahu? Why Australia?

So why has the Turnbull government invited Benjamin Netanyahu to visit Australia next year? Sure, there's the perennial need to keep party coffers topped up, partly through Zionist money, but surely Netanyahu's malignant presence here isn't the price they (and we) have to pay for that?

It's worth noting that Israel's Public Security Minister, Gilad Erdan, is currently in London seeking the British government's cooperation in tackling the growth of the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) movement. He is reported as saying that:

"Great Britain is the world center of the anti-Israel BDS campaign... I'm going [to Britain] to battle the boycott and delegitimization in every arena, and to discuss with members of the British government - which is also committed to fighting boycotts - ways to strengthen our cooperation against [the] anti-Semitic boycott campaign... I will meet with government officials and law enforcement in order to form a front of democratic countries against the worldwide threat, which includes targeted action against incitement on the Internet." (Israeli minister says Brits will 'pay the price' for anti-Semitic boycotts, rt.com/uk, 7/9/16)

Remember too that Julie Bishop, extender of the invitation, declared back in 2013 that "the Coalition will institute a policy across government that ensures no grants of taxpayers' funds are provided to individuals or organisations which actively support the BDS campaign." (Libs to cut funding for anti-Israel activists, Ean Higgins, The Australian, 25/5/13) (See my 26/5/13 post Bishop Takes Axe to Human Rights Activism.)

Government invitations to war criminals to drop in for a cuppa are one thing, allowing them to lobby for restrictions on our democratic right to protest their criminality is quite another.

The Teflon Lady

Curious how, with regard to the current hot-button issue of Chinese political donations, the msm is focusing almost exclusively on the relatively insignificant figure of Sam Dastyari while ignoring FOREIGN MINISTER JULIE BISHOP.

After all:

"A... report by Fairfax Media said the Western Australian division of the Liberal Party had benefited to the tune of half a million dollars in the past couple of years from donations from Chinese businesspeople with links to the foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop." (On political donations, Canberra is sleepwalking into its own integrity crisis, Katherine Murphy, The Guardian, 2/9/16)