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
Saturday, December 9, 2017
Thursday, December 7, 2017
There Goes Jerusalem 2
What a fizzer Trump's speech on the US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital was!
Completely ignoring what international law has to say on the matter (Israel is a "belligerent occupant"), Trump essentially said little more than that since Israel has occupied (he didn't use the 'o' word of course) East Jerusalem since 1967, far from having a problem with that, we recognise the fact. IOW: occupiers rule, OK?
As for what we'd been led to believe by the Guardian - that he would, in part, "base his decision on ancient history," the only mention of that came with a reference to Jerusalem as "the capital the Jewish people established in ancient times."
Not, of course, that what "the Jewish people" did or didn't do "in ancient times," has anything to do with the current status of East Jerusalem. Still, I was sort of hoping for a spot of light relief if Trump had gone down that path. Had he done so he would presumably have alluded to 'the Jerusalem of Kings David and Solomon.'
Only, of course, to be contradicted by the archaeological record. In the words of Israel's foremost archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein:
"But is the ridge south of the Temple Mount the location of the actual City of King David? This is one of the most excavated spots on the face of the earth, but so far fieldwork has not yielded any monuments from the 10th century BCE, the time of King David. Recent claims by an archaeologist working at the site regarding the supposed discovery of the palace of King David and the city-wall built by King Solomon are based on literal, simplistic readings of the biblical text and are not supported by archaeological facts." (In the eye of Jerusalem's archaeological storm - the City of David, beyond the politics and propaganda, Israel Finkelstein, forward.com, 26/4/11)
PS (8/12/17): The following nonsense appeared in The Australian of 7 November: "Archeological [sic] evidence objectively demonstrates the connection of Jerusalem to the Jewish people for more than 3000 years. Antiquities don't lie, relics don't have political agendas. Yet while the science of climate change is embraced as gospel by the UN, the scientific proof og ancient Jewish habitation of Jerusalem is not." (History backs Jerusalem as Israel's capital, Kate Ashmor)
Completely ignoring what international law has to say on the matter (Israel is a "belligerent occupant"), Trump essentially said little more than that since Israel has occupied (he didn't use the 'o' word of course) East Jerusalem since 1967, far from having a problem with that, we recognise the fact. IOW: occupiers rule, OK?
As for what we'd been led to believe by the Guardian - that he would, in part, "base his decision on ancient history," the only mention of that came with a reference to Jerusalem as "the capital the Jewish people established in ancient times."
Not, of course, that what "the Jewish people" did or didn't do "in ancient times," has anything to do with the current status of East Jerusalem. Still, I was sort of hoping for a spot of light relief if Trump had gone down that path. Had he done so he would presumably have alluded to 'the Jerusalem of Kings David and Solomon.'
Only, of course, to be contradicted by the archaeological record. In the words of Israel's foremost archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein:
"But is the ridge south of the Temple Mount the location of the actual City of King David? This is one of the most excavated spots on the face of the earth, but so far fieldwork has not yielded any monuments from the 10th century BCE, the time of King David. Recent claims by an archaeologist working at the site regarding the supposed discovery of the palace of King David and the city-wall built by King Solomon are based on literal, simplistic readings of the biblical text and are not supported by archaeological facts." (In the eye of Jerusalem's archaeological storm - the City of David, beyond the politics and propaganda, Israel Finkelstein, forward.com, 26/4/11)
PS (8/12/17): The following nonsense appeared in The Australian of 7 November: "Archeological [sic] evidence objectively demonstrates the connection of Jerusalem to the Jewish people for more than 3000 years. Antiquities don't lie, relics don't have political agendas. Yet while the science of climate change is embraced as gospel by the UN, the scientific proof og ancient Jewish habitation of Jerusalem is not." (History backs Jerusalem as Israel's capital, Kate Ashmor)
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
There Goes Jerusalem 1
OFFS:
"Donald Trump will declare formal recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on Wednesday the White House has said, breaking with years of precedent and potentially leading to unpredictable consequences for the Middle East... In his remarks to be delivered in a diplomatic reception room in the White House, Trump will base his decision on ancient history and current political realities that the Israeli legislature and many government offices are in Jerusalem." (Trump to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move US embassy - White House, Julian Borger & Peter Beaumont, theguardian.com, 6/12/17)
Can't wait to hear about the "ancient history"!
"Donald Trump will declare formal recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on Wednesday the White House has said, breaking with years of precedent and potentially leading to unpredictable consequences for the Middle East... In his remarks to be delivered in a diplomatic reception room in the White House, Trump will base his decision on ancient history and current political realities that the Israeli legislature and many government offices are in Jerusalem." (Trump to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move US embassy - White House, Julian Borger & Peter Beaumont, theguardian.com, 6/12/17)
Can't wait to hear about the "ancient history"!
Shakespeare's Romper Stomper II
"Romper Stomper's TV revival will have its world premiere in South Melbourne tonight and the latest instalment in the white supremacist saga has already put multicultural and Muslim leaders on tenterhooks... Romper Stomper creator Geoffrey Wright said storytellers had to avoid giving in to political correctness. 'Are people concerned if someone watches a show like this, they'll have their head turned? Nobody thinks Shakespeare's Richard III is an endorsement of child killers'." (Disquiet over Romper remake, Richard Ferguson, The Australian, 5/12/17)
I knew William Shakespeare. William Shakespeare was a friend of mine. Mr Wright, you're no William Shakespeare.
I knew William Shakespeare. William Shakespeare was a friend of mine. Mr Wright, you're no William Shakespeare.
'Acceptable Opinion': The China Lobby
I love word association games, don't you? Imagine you're engaged in one with an Australian journalist and you said, 'lobby'. What's he/she going to say?
Why, 'China' of course:
"In a 2015 interview with the China Economic Net website... Senator Dastyari is quoted as extending his 'warm congratulations' to the Chinese people on the anniversary of the 'Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War'. Swinburne University China expert John Fitzgerald said the phrase... was a 'loaded term'. Dr Fitzgerald claimed Senator Dastyari... must be speaking from dot points drafted by someone with close links to the Chinese communist party or government - a minder or go-between'... " (Dastyari under pressure as Chinese interview surfaces, James Massola & Nick McKenzie, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/12/17)
Apparently, the hordes of Labor and Liberal politicians who flock to Israel lobby-organised 'Independence Day' gigs and there declare their undying love for all things Israel simply aren't on our journalists' radar. Presumably, that's because, when it comes to Israel, no Israel lobby-generated PR dot points are required as our politicians always speak straight from the heart!
Now, surprise, surprise here's another piece on China - same paper, same edition:
"As New Zealand sinologist Anne-Marie Brady of Canterbury University has written: 'The Chinese government's foreign influence activities have accelerated under Xi. The focus of media attention has been on Australia, but the People's Republic of China's attempts to guide, buy, or coerce political influence abroad are widespread.' But why?... 'At its core,' says an American expert on China's influence operations, Peter Mattis, 'to survive, the party has to manipulate the ideas around it. What questions are asked, what's on the spectrum of acceptable opinion, there's a consistent effort to shape that." (Hexing Beijing's 'magic weapon', Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/12/17)
Of course, the Israel lobby doesn't have to put quite the same effort into manipulating the ideas around it - what questions are asked, what's on the acceptable spectrum of opinion etc, etc. And that's because it's got journalists like Hartcher (rambammed 2010) parroting their lines and/or avoiding altogether the kind of in-depth discussion he devotes here to Chinese influence. (And this despite the fact that he once quoted an "Australian official" who told him that it wouldn't matter who Australia's prime minister was because the Israelis had us "by the balls... partly because of the strength of the Israel lobby.")*
Silly me - I would have thought that if a foreign power could be described by a government insider as having us by the balls the matter would be deserving of some journalistic scrutiny, but then that's why I'm not the Herald's international editor, right?
[*See my 22/6/10 post The Best Israel Policy Money Can Buy.]
Why, 'China' of course:
"In a 2015 interview with the China Economic Net website... Senator Dastyari is quoted as extending his 'warm congratulations' to the Chinese people on the anniversary of the 'Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War'. Swinburne University China expert John Fitzgerald said the phrase... was a 'loaded term'. Dr Fitzgerald claimed Senator Dastyari... must be speaking from dot points drafted by someone with close links to the Chinese communist party or government - a minder or go-between'... " (Dastyari under pressure as Chinese interview surfaces, James Massola & Nick McKenzie, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/12/17)
Apparently, the hordes of Labor and Liberal politicians who flock to Israel lobby-organised 'Independence Day' gigs and there declare their undying love for all things Israel simply aren't on our journalists' radar. Presumably, that's because, when it comes to Israel, no Israel lobby-generated PR dot points are required as our politicians always speak straight from the heart!
Now, surprise, surprise here's another piece on China - same paper, same edition:
"As New Zealand sinologist Anne-Marie Brady of Canterbury University has written: 'The Chinese government's foreign influence activities have accelerated under Xi. The focus of media attention has been on Australia, but the People's Republic of China's attempts to guide, buy, or coerce political influence abroad are widespread.' But why?... 'At its core,' says an American expert on China's influence operations, Peter Mattis, 'to survive, the party has to manipulate the ideas around it. What questions are asked, what's on the spectrum of acceptable opinion, there's a consistent effort to shape that." (Hexing Beijing's 'magic weapon', Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/12/17)
Of course, the Israel lobby doesn't have to put quite the same effort into manipulating the ideas around it - what questions are asked, what's on the acceptable spectrum of opinion etc, etc. And that's because it's got journalists like Hartcher (rambammed 2010) parroting their lines and/or avoiding altogether the kind of in-depth discussion he devotes here to Chinese influence. (And this despite the fact that he once quoted an "Australian official" who told him that it wouldn't matter who Australia's prime minister was because the Israelis had us "by the balls... partly because of the strength of the Israel lobby.")*
Silly me - I would have thought that if a foreign power could be described by a government insider as having us by the balls the matter would be deserving of some journalistic scrutiny, but then that's why I'm not the Herald's international editor, right?
[*See my 22/6/10 post The Best Israel Policy Money Can Buy.]
Tuesday, December 5, 2017
Christian Wahhabis...
... in 4th/5th century Syria:
"Decades before the laws of the land permitted them to, zealous Christians began to indulge in acts of violent vandalism against their 'pagan' neighbours. The destruction in Syria was particularly savage. Syrian monks - fearless, rootless, fanatical - became infamous both for their intensity and for the violence with which they attacked temples, statues and monuments - and even, it was said, any priests who opposed them. Libanius, the Greek orator from Antioch, was revolted by the destruction that he witnessed. 'These people,' he wrote, 'hasten to attack the temples with sticks and stones and bars of iron, and in some cases, disdaining these, with hands and feet. Then utter desolation follows, with the stripping of roofs, demolition of walls, the tearing down of statues, and the overthrow of altars, and the priests must either keep quiet or die... So they sweep across the countryside like rivers in spate.' Libanius spoke elegiacally of a huge temple on the frontier with Persia, a magnificent building with a beautiful ceiling, in whose cool shadows had stood numerous statues. Now, he said, 'it is vanished and gone, to the grief of those who had seen it' - and the grief of those who now never would. This temple had been so striking, he said, that there were even those who argued that it was as great as the temple of Serapis - which, he added with an irony not lost on later historians, 'I pray may never suffer the same fate.'*
"Not only were the monks vulgar, stinking, ill-educated and violent they were also, said their critics, phoneys. They pretended to adopt lives of austere self-denial but actually they were no better than drunken thugs, a black-robed tribe 'who eat more than elephants and, by the quantities of drink they consume, weary those that accompany their drinking with the singing of hymns.' After going on their rampage these men would then, he said, 'hide these excesses under an artificially contrived pallor and pretend to be holy, self-denying monks once again.' Drunks they might have been but, as Libanius saw, they were ferociously effective. 'After demolishing one [temple], they scurry to another, and to a third, and trophy is piled on trophy' - and all this 'in contravention of the law'." (The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World, Catherine Nixey, 2017, pp 107-08)
I'm now reading Catherine Nixey's ground-breaking, Christians-behaving-badly, history, and, guess what: plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose. Who'd have thought? The ideal Christmas gift!
[Destroyed by a Christian mob led by Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, in AD 392.]
"Decades before the laws of the land permitted them to, zealous Christians began to indulge in acts of violent vandalism against their 'pagan' neighbours. The destruction in Syria was particularly savage. Syrian monks - fearless, rootless, fanatical - became infamous both for their intensity and for the violence with which they attacked temples, statues and monuments - and even, it was said, any priests who opposed them. Libanius, the Greek orator from Antioch, was revolted by the destruction that he witnessed. 'These people,' he wrote, 'hasten to attack the temples with sticks and stones and bars of iron, and in some cases, disdaining these, with hands and feet. Then utter desolation follows, with the stripping of roofs, demolition of walls, the tearing down of statues, and the overthrow of altars, and the priests must either keep quiet or die... So they sweep across the countryside like rivers in spate.' Libanius spoke elegiacally of a huge temple on the frontier with Persia, a magnificent building with a beautiful ceiling, in whose cool shadows had stood numerous statues. Now, he said, 'it is vanished and gone, to the grief of those who had seen it' - and the grief of those who now never would. This temple had been so striking, he said, that there were even those who argued that it was as great as the temple of Serapis - which, he added with an irony not lost on later historians, 'I pray may never suffer the same fate.'*
"Not only were the monks vulgar, stinking, ill-educated and violent they were also, said their critics, phoneys. They pretended to adopt lives of austere self-denial but actually they were no better than drunken thugs, a black-robed tribe 'who eat more than elephants and, by the quantities of drink they consume, weary those that accompany their drinking with the singing of hymns.' After going on their rampage these men would then, he said, 'hide these excesses under an artificially contrived pallor and pretend to be holy, self-denying monks once again.' Drunks they might have been but, as Libanius saw, they were ferociously effective. 'After demolishing one [temple], they scurry to another, and to a third, and trophy is piled on trophy' - and all this 'in contravention of the law'." (The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World, Catherine Nixey, 2017, pp 107-08)
I'm now reading Catherine Nixey's ground-breaking, Christians-behaving-badly, history, and, guess what: plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose. Who'd have thought? The ideal Christmas gift!
[Destroyed by a Christian mob led by Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, in AD 392.]
Saturday, December 2, 2017
Ziopedia?
Spot the interesting phrase:
"These four anniversaries [31/10/17 Beersheba; 2/11/17 Balfour; 29/11/47 Partition; Sadat in Jerusalem 19/11/77] outline an amazing story - perhaps the 20th century's most successful and inspiring story of self-determination and an ethnic people building a thriving new nation-state." (Out of the Great War was born a great new democracy, Colin Rubenstein, The Australian, 29/11/17)
IOW, providing one accepts, against all the evidence, the Zionist claim that Jews are an ethnic group, Israel is an ethnocracy. If, however, one insists, correctly, that Jews are a religious group, then Israel should be defined as a theocracy. Either way, its polity is completely at odds with our own multi-ethnic and multi-religious conception of the state, a matter our Israel-loving politicians seek to gloss over at every turn.
***
In any case, while googling the term 'ethnic group', I noted this downright peculiar definition on Wikipedia: "An ethnic group is a group of people who are considered to be the same in some... ways. They may all have the same ancestors, speak the same language, or have the same religion."
The same Wikipedia entry also goes on to refer to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976), and specifically Article 27, as "ensuring the rights of ethnic groups." One may be forgiven, therefore, for assuming that Article 27 of the ICOCAPR supports Wikipedia's definition of 'ethnic group' as including religion.
If, however, we look up Article 27, we read: "In those states in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist... " As can be seen, ethnic minorities and religious minorities are clearly separate categories.
The question arises, therefore: has this particular Wikipedia entry been the subject of a Zionist makeover? (Note too, Rubenstein's reference to "self-determination." This fundamental political right (routinely denied the Palestinians) is the thrust of ICOCAPR's Article I(1): "All peoples have the right of self-determination.")
Finally, compare the Wikipedia definition with that of the Encyclopedia Britannica: "Ethnic group, a social group or category of the population that, in a larger society, is set apart and bound together by common ties of race, language, nationality, or culture." (britanicca.com)
Religion is nowhere to be found.
FYI: See my 11/3/17 post Wikipedia Warning.
"These four anniversaries [31/10/17 Beersheba; 2/11/17 Balfour; 29/11/47 Partition; Sadat in Jerusalem 19/11/77] outline an amazing story - perhaps the 20th century's most successful and inspiring story of self-determination and an ethnic people building a thriving new nation-state." (Out of the Great War was born a great new democracy, Colin Rubenstein, The Australian, 29/11/17)
IOW, providing one accepts, against all the evidence, the Zionist claim that Jews are an ethnic group, Israel is an ethnocracy. If, however, one insists, correctly, that Jews are a religious group, then Israel should be defined as a theocracy. Either way, its polity is completely at odds with our own multi-ethnic and multi-religious conception of the state, a matter our Israel-loving politicians seek to gloss over at every turn.
***
In any case, while googling the term 'ethnic group', I noted this downright peculiar definition on Wikipedia: "An ethnic group is a group of people who are considered to be the same in some... ways. They may all have the same ancestors, speak the same language, or have the same religion."
The same Wikipedia entry also goes on to refer to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976), and specifically Article 27, as "ensuring the rights of ethnic groups." One may be forgiven, therefore, for assuming that Article 27 of the ICOCAPR supports Wikipedia's definition of 'ethnic group' as including religion.
If, however, we look up Article 27, we read: "In those states in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist... " As can be seen, ethnic minorities and religious minorities are clearly separate categories.
The question arises, therefore: has this particular Wikipedia entry been the subject of a Zionist makeover? (Note too, Rubenstein's reference to "self-determination." This fundamental political right (routinely denied the Palestinians) is the thrust of ICOCAPR's Article I(1): "All peoples have the right of self-determination.")
Finally, compare the Wikipedia definition with that of the Encyclopedia Britannica: "Ethnic group, a social group or category of the population that, in a larger society, is set apart and bound together by common ties of race, language, nationality, or culture." (britanicca.com)
Religion is nowhere to be found.
FYI: See my 11/3/17 post Wikipedia Warning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)