We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East. (From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

Wednesday, 27 August 2014

What Makes The Welsh Greens' Leader "Think"

Flamboyant, statuesque  and with a flair for courting the limelight, Pippa Bartolotti is leader of the Welsh Greens, and in May tried for a seat in the European Parliament.

One of that monstrous regiment of liberated western feminists who for reasons best-known to themselves appear to prefer the Hamas misogynists to the gender-tolerant Israelis, she is known for her oft-expressed condemnation of Israel, and for her participation in the flotilla/flytilla stunts.

She is also known for making a bit of a fool of herself by displaying a flag with a far-from- blemish-free symbolism:


And for this rant while in transit in Israel in 2011.

On Facebook she's shared this video, of Gazans celebrating the new ceasefire, interpreted by them as a "victory" over Israel (So, h/t to Ms Bartolotti).




Here's a nugget of naive and noisome nonsense that she's also posted on Facebook within the past twenty-four hours.


A sensible riposte from a fellow-countryman of hers that, predictably,  has not gone down well among the leftist Israel-haters who follow her:


Ms Bartolotti is by no means the first leftist Israel-basher to attempt to push an analogy between Anglo-Jews who have served in the IDF and Bristish Muslims who have flocked to the banners of extremist forces in the Middle East from the United Kingdom, "the Yemen of the West" as one journalist is calling it.  (I seem to recall that Stephen Sizer made a remark along those lines of Ms Bartolotti's on Facebook some time ago.) And I doubt she will be the last.

It is, of course, utterly ridiculous to draw a parallel between Jews who have served in Israel's defensive wars and Muslims who have joined the ranks of Jihad.  It is a false analogy that in today's antisemitic climate only serves further to demonise Anglo-Jews and of course Israel itself, and indeed to minimise the repellent preoccupations of the Britons fighting for ISIS.

It marks a fresh low in the Left's ongoing crusade against Israel and Zionism and in the Left's inexplicable love affair with Islam and Islamists.

Update:
That particular virus eems to be catching
 Read more about Yasmin Queshi's remarks here

Tuesday, 26 August 2014

Rooting For The Enemy: Hamas's Jewish Useful Idiots

 http://www.creativecommunityforpeace.com/justice/
'We, the undersigned, are saddened by the devastating loss of life endured by Israelis and Palestinians in Gaza. We are pained by the suffering on both sides of the conflict and hope for a solution that brings peace to the region.
While we stand firm in our commitment to peace and justice, we must also stand firm against ideologies of hatred and genocide which are reflected in Hamas' charter, Article 7 of which reads, “There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!” The son of a Hamas founder has also commented about the true nature of Hamas.

Hamas cannot be allowed to rain rockets on Israeli cities, nor can it be allowed to hold its own people hostage. Hospitals are for healing, not for hiding weapons. Schools are for learning, not for launching missiles. Children are our hope, not our human shields.

We join together in support of the democratic values we all cherish and in the hope that the healing and transformative power of the arts can be used to build bridges of peace.'


It's good to see people from the arts community, including Hollywood A-listers, speaking out against Hamas in this way.  If only more, many many more, would nail their colours to the mast.

What is particularly satisfying about the above list of signatories is that it includes Roseanne Barr, who has, if reports can be trusted, made some unpleasant references to Israel and Zionism in the past but who has been outspokenly supportive of Israel for some time .

An (occasional) Hollywood personality (Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Torch Song Trilogy), the estimable Ben Stein, observed last month:
"The media in this country for a very long time has been contemptuous of Jews and contemptuous of Jewish life.
This was true during the Holocaust, when the media was largely controlled by old, lying, wealthy, white Protestant males, and it's true now when it's controlled by mostly left-wingers....
The media likes to portray Jews as bullies and murderers and . . . it's kind of amazing to me, because so much of the media is Jewish....
[T]here's a deep-seated self-hatred, especially [among] the New York City elite media.
They want to show they're not Jewish by being anti-Israel, and it's not going to work. We know they're Jewish and we know that they're not being fair to their own people, but they'll keep doing it...
Every story about the war in Gaza should begin with 'Hamas started it, Hamas endlessly refuses to have a ceasefire.'
Hamas could have an incredibly prosperous and happy, peaceful partnership with Israel, and they don't, they prefer to fight, they prefer to kill....''
Now, they might seem naive and innocuous enough, but these protesters  (see the videos here and here and here and here) disrupting in relays a fundraising dinner for Israel at the Chicago Hilton on 21 August, at which the city's mayor Rahm Emanuel and Michael Oren (Israel's ex-ambassador to the United States) spoke, are representatives of an odious organisation which effectively gives aid and comfort to Hamas: the bizarrely-named "Jewish Voice For Peace" (JVP).

Bizarrely-named, because as the heading to an article dated 20 August by Yitzhak Santis, Chief Programs Officer at Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor (where he directs the “BDS in the Pews” project) declares
 "Jews abetting Hamas are no voice for peace".

Rooting for the enemy
Sinisterly, JVP keeps its source or sources of funding firmly under wraps; needless to say, if we knew who finances it we would know who pulls its strings.

Writes Santis inter alia:
 '... JVP’s executive director, Rebecca Vilkomerson, describes her group as “the Jewish wing of the [Palestinian solidarity] movement,” with the mission “to facilitate conversations inside the Jewish community… [to] put that wedge in, saying the Jewish community’s not agreeing on these issues.”
 That’s it. JVP seeks to divide American Jews—Israel’s main foundation of international support—so as to reduce or eliminate U.S. backing for Israel for the benefit of Israel’s enemies.  
Undermining Israel ...
JVP is part of the international NGO “soft power” war, whose unrelenting attacks on Israel’s right to self-defense ultimately aid Hamas.
 This global political warfare strategy includes sustained delegitimization campaigns, BDS (boycotts, divestment, and sanctions), and promoting a “right of return” for Palestinians, which means dismantling Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.
... every step ...
 It partners with a wide coterie of radical leftist, Islamist, and Arab ultra-nationalist groups to promote its program. When asked, JVP states that they are “agnostic” about a two-state solution. But that is a smokescreen. The group’s actions demonstrate a clear anti-Israel agenda. [Emphasis added here and below]
A JVP contingent marched at a July 12 “peace” demonstration in San Francisco, where “anti-war” protesters waved Hamas banners and burned an Israeli flag while chanting in Arabic “Ya Hamas, ya habib, udrub, udrub Tel Abib!” (Oh, dear Hamas, strike a blow at Tel Aviv!)  Signs read, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” “From Gaza to Ramallah Forever Intifada,” and “F*** Zionism!” The rally’s advertising demanded an “end to US aid to Israel and to Zionist rule over Palestine.”
... of the way ...
In Los Angeles, JVP teamed up with American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) to “put on a massive die-in street theater.” AMP’s website refers to Hamas as a “Palestinian resistance group.”  In Detroit, JVP protested for the release of convicted terrorist Rasmea Odeh....
JVP calls the current conflict with Hamas “Israel’s war on civilians”—which follows Hamas PR guidelines to describe “anyone killed or martyred” as “a civilian from Gaza or Palestine.”  JVP demands an “end [to] the siege on Gaza,” a central Hamas demand. JVP insists the U.S. “suspend military aid to Israel,” which would also benefit Hamas and other jihadist terrorists. Finally, when JVP supports the call to “Stand Against Zionism Everywhere,” it is clear whose water they are carrying. JVP stands unmasked as anything but a voice for peace.'
Read the entire article (with its links) here 

Monday, 25 August 2014

"O, Scoundrels, Let Me Deliver A Personal Message To You..." (video)

"We are preparing for you an army you cannot match ... to die for the sake of Allah"

With bloodcurdling ferocity a Hamas cleric promises Jihad against the Zionist Entity:


Meanwhile, regarding Australia ...

Sunday, 24 August 2014

Hamas/ISIS: The Blind & The Unblinkered

From the lefty Frontline Club's website: http://www.frontlineclub.com/first-wednesday-16/
We are informed by BBC Watch:
'On September 3rd the Frontline Club – with which the BBC frequently collaborates – will be hosting an event titled “Reporting the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict – Emotion, Bias and Objectivity” which we are informed is already fully booked.
The topic of discussion is promoted as follows:
“The latest chapter in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict has again highlighted the difficulties of covering this complex and deep-rooted conflict that provokes such a strong emotional response from the general public.
The BBC has faced accusation that it is not critical enough of Israel’s actions and that its reporting is one-sided, whereas Channel 4 News has been accused of crossing the line between journalism and campaigning. Is there a middle ground?
In the face of such devastation should we expect correspondents to offer an objective view devoid of emotion? If we encourage correspondents to show more emotion do we risk compromising the credibility and standard of journalism in this country?
Join us as we take a view of the coverage we have seen, talk to the journalists that have produced it and ask what we can learn.”
On the panel selected to provide answers to those questions are Jeremy ‘I see no human shields’ Bowen and Channel 4’s Jon Snow.
 The discussion would doubtless be enhanced were Bowen  (along with his colleague Orla Guerin) to take the trouble to brush up beforehand on the topic of Hamas’ use of human shields and that policy’s role in causing so many of the civilian casualties which he graphically reported during his recent stint in the Gaza strip....' 
But it is not only regarding the existence of human shields in Gaza that the BBC has turned a blind eye.  Beeboids (as the BiasedBBC website has long termed the Corporation's employees) have also chosen to ignore Hamas's similarities to Isis.

The incorrigibly biased Jon Donnison (pictured) might well practise an Orla Guerin-like scowl. For Al Beeb's erstwhile correspondent in Gaza, who's now their man in Australia but who was flown back to his old stomping ground during the present crisis, where he proved just as one-sided as before, has received many a thoroughly deserved, humiliating thrashing from BBCWatch's Hadar Sela.

That highly intelligent Israeli,with her thorough grounding in Israeli history and affairs, her sound knowledge of regional geopolitics, her gift for the written world, and her astuteness, has shown up Donnison's mediocrity, ignorance, and prejudice many times.

See, for example, here and here and here and here

And, not unnaturally, Donnison doesn't like the besting one bit: witness the recent spiteful trying-to-put-a-brave-face-on-things sour grapes tweet below:

Not that being shown up prevents Donnison from persisting in his offences against the BBC Charter and producers' guidelines or motivates his employer to rein him in.  Nor did his egregious bias prevent him from winning a Radio Academy Silver Sony Award for radio journalism of the year for his coverage of the 2012 Gaza/Israel War.

His bias is so overt and so pervasive that it is hardly surprising that some Israel supporters wonder whether this former reporter for BBC Radio Sheffield, who studied French and politics at the University of Edinburgh, was once a member of or influenced in some way by a Palestine Solidarity Campaign branch. 

And like the BBC's biased Jerusalem Bureau chief Paul Danaher, Donnison, who does nothing to conceal his disdain for the Israeli prime minister, on Twitter has pooh-pooed Netanyahu's analogy between Hamas and Isis, and mocked aspects of Netanyahu's postings.  Here's a taste:




Here's a man who could teach Danahar and Donnison much, the exiled Jordanian Palestinian leader Mudar Zahran, who's been visiting Bethlehem at some risk to himself.

This brave pro-Israel figure (if you're on Facebook and/or Twitter please consider following him, for he deserves a wide audience) is a practising Muslim who pulls no punches in condemning the evil that Islamic extremists do.

Moreover, CiF Watch, who reponded to this insolent peevish tweet by Donnison


by pointing out that the true disrespect is Donnison's anti-Israel bias, has many graphic examples that validate the Hamas/ISIS analogy:






Novelist Noah Beck shows that  
'Hamas and ISIS are birds of a feather, but the Western political class and media have very different approaches to them. Here, Hamas offers some friendly advice to ISIS on how to wrap the West around their little finger'
which is a follow-up to his previous piece here

As  distinguished American political scientist Michael Curtis has written:
'The clue to the intentions of Hamas is given in the Hamas Charter of 1988, a mixture of anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel. Using the Avalon Project translation of the Charter or Covenant, one can discern the stated objectives of Hamas. Only a few selections, sometimes in oblique language, are necessary to understand this.
Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it. Hamas (the Islamic Resistance Movement) strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine. The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say, "There is a Jew behind me; come and kill him."
The Hamas Charter gives an answer to all the well-meaning groups and individuals who call for a peace conference. It declares that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgment Day. Rejecting calls for an international conference to solve the “Palestinian” question, it declares that there is no solution for the Palestinian question except through jihad.
Initiatives, proposals, and international conferences are all a waste of time and are vain endeavors.
The mass media will perhaps be surprised to learn from the Charter that Jews have taken control of the world media, news agencies, publishing houses, and broadcasting stations. Objective historians may be surprised that Jews have stirred revolutions in various parts of the world and were behind the French Revolution, the Communist Revolution, and most others. All this for “sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests.”
The Charter informs us of future developments. The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. The Islamic Resistance Movement must prevent this, and to leave the “circle of struggle with Zionism is high treason.”
The question arises: can members of Hamas, who believe that the “Jews are behind each and every catastrophe on the face of the earth,” be genuinely interested in any possible reconciliation with Israel when destruction of the Jewish state is at the core of their concern?'
 Nevertheless, despite the equally bloodthirsty approach of both Hamas and Isis, their priorities, according to this article by Iranian Ali Mamouri, differ with regard to the Zionist Entity:

 ....'Salafists believe that jihad must be performed under legitimate leadership.... Given that there is neither a legitimate leader nor a Salafist-approved declaration of jihad in Palestine, fighting there is forbidden.
In addition, for Salafists, if non-Muslims control Islamic countries and apostates exist in the Islamic world, the Islamic world must be cleansed of them before all else. In short, the purification of Islamic society takes priority over combat against non-Islamic societies. On this basis, Salafists see conflict with an allegedly illegitimate Hamas government as a first step toward confrontation with Israel. Should the opportunity for military action present itself in the Palestinian territories, Salafists would fight Hamas and other factions deemed in need of “cleansing” from the land and engage Israel afterward....
Salafists today see that their priority as fighting Shiites, “munafiqin” (dissemblers, or false Muslims) and apostates, whom they call the “close enemy.” During the current war in Gaza, a number of IS fighters have burned the Palestinian flag because they consider it a symbol of the decline of the Islamic world, which succumbed to national divisions through the creation of independent political states. In Salafist doctrine, the entire Islamic world must be united under a single state, an Islamic caliphate, which IS declared in late June.
Salafist groups active in Gaza have engaged in various rivalries with Hamas there, but they have not succeeded in establishing a foothold of any significance. Some groups have posted video clips acknowledging their support for IS following the group’s recent victories in Iraq and Syria. The main dispute between Hamas and Salafist groups rests on their disparate principles. Hamas is more realistic and pragmatic than the jihadist Salafists. The former has political priorities in liberating Palestinian land, whereas the latter has religious priorities in the establishment of a totalitarian Islamic caliphate and considers the Israeli issue secondary to this central goal.'

 But to quote from another fine piece by Michael Curtis:
'....Along with the Muslim Brotherhood, [ISIS and Hamas] are Islamic extremist groups, violent in their ruthless pursuit of objectives – ISIS to create a caliphate empire, and Hamas to eliminate the State of Israel.
The brutality of ISIS, now transformed into an Islamic state with a caliph, is apparent after its conquest of about a third of Syria, including the oil-rich eastern part, and much of north and central Iraq. Its ruthlessness and brutality are well-documented. That ruthlessness includes making decapitation an art form, executing dozens of Iraqi security forces, and cutting heads of Syrians.
It has imposed sharia law, banned music, separated boys and girls in school, and forced women to wear the niqab, or full veil....
Though the Obama administration has not proposed this, the present conflict provides the opportunity for the existing semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan, set up in 2005, to be transformed into a Kurdish state, long overdue since promised by Britain and France in 1920.
 If the Western democracies appeared for too long to be unaware of the scale of the danger of Islamist ISIS, many, especially those in the mainstream media and the churches, seem equally oblivious to the real nature and danger of Hamas.  
They have not accepted that the real contemporary struggle is between an extreme and regressive Islamist group, linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and interested in the killing of Jews and the creation of a caliphate state, and the existence and survival of democratic Israel....
There is now little doubt that much of the hostility against Israel has been transformed into prejudicial anti-Semitism. The level of violence and the number of attacks on individual Jews and Jewish institutions, synagogues, school, stores, Holocaust memorials, and cultural events has made those institutions resemble armed fortresses. A crowd mentality of hatred has made decent individuals afraid to speak out....
Western public opinion, the media, and the academic world should recognize the existing struggle between an Islamist threat that would end the tolerance and civil liberties in the societies its forces might control, and democratic countries, with all their faults and problems, trying to resist that threat.
The choice should not be difficult, even for the New York Times.  It certainly should not be suicide. '
 Read the entire article here


 As for Aussie Muslims who support ISIS, and the attitude to such goings-on by certain leftists, read Andrew Bolt here

"Hamas, We're Thinking Of You ..."

"... Keep fighting", she says
Wrote British journalist Daniel Finkelstein (now a life peer) in The Times (London) last Thursday:
'For most of my life, antisemitism was not an issue. Now it is....
 I know what this country is and I love it. I intend to live here all my life and die here ...And I am confident I will be left in peace to do that.
Yet just recently, things are a bit different. Almost every Jew feels it. I know I’m not alone....
Two things changed this. And the first was 9/11.
When baffling events happen, planes coming out of a clear blue New York sky, people look for an explanation, a wrong that can be righted, an appeal that can be made to reason. And very often in history, the answer involves doing something about the Jews. I’m just saying. It does.
So it was after the twin towers came down. I had just started writing for The Times and I began to get antisemitic correspondence....
[N]ow it would be unthinkable to organise a Jewish event of any kind without really quite strict security. My son goes to a Jewish primary school, as his brothers did before him. We have proper security there. My child goes to school behind several sets of very high, electronically controlled gates and bars, and a guard. None of the parents regards that as unnecessary.
The other thing that changed was the rise of electronic correspondence and social media. This enabled antisemites to get in touch with me and with each other....
All this has been going on for quite a while. Yet there is no question about it, Gaza has made things worse....
[M]uch anti-Zionism is entangled with antisemitism.... There is much that is antisemitic in intent and much that is antisemitic in effect.
It is antisemitic to suggest that the world is being dominated by the great pariah state of Israel, defending its own interests through money and power. It is antisemitic to suggest that the “Zionists” control the media. It is antisemitic to elevate the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians high above all the wrongs being done, not least to Palestinians, by neighbouring states.
Anyone who doesn’t appreciate that at least part of this is fuelled by doctrine that preaches hatred against Jews is as ignorant as someone who suggests that all of it is....
[The protesters] hold out the implicit threat that you can live here in peace — here, in Britain — but not if you want to support Israel....
And when Jews see young men giving reverse Nazi salutes in France and protesting outside synagogues and harassing Jews, it’s no wonder we feel uncomfortable. And I worry — for the first time in my life, I do, I worry — about walking to synagogue on the Jewish new year.
....[M]ost of us Jews, wherever we are in the world, have a niggling feeling that perhaps it might be a good idea to keep a suitcase packed, and many of us have had, at least once, a conversation about where we would go if we had to.
I don’t have such a suitcase. I won’t need it, I know I won’t. But If I told you that I didn’t understand it, I’d be lying.'
Watch this video (hat tip reader and resource extraordinaire Ian) to see the sheer venom and ignorance that drives the anti-Israel demonstrations connected with Operation Protective Edge:



And watch here for middle-aged women, including some in the video above, as well as the deluded fan pictured above with her hair hidden under a keffiyeh) sending messages of support to terror group Hamas, whose only concept of equal opportunity for women is as suicide bombers, mothers of suicide bombers, and human shields!

Be sure to see also  here

Friday, 22 August 2014

David Singer: Why The "Canberra Declaration On Gaza" Is A Dud

Signatory Sylvia Hale pickets the Israel Film Festival in Sydney yesterday
This, the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer, is entitled "Gaza – Australian Politicians Duped By Dud Declaration".

He writes:

The Canberra Declaration on Gaza signed by 77 current and former Federal and State parliamentarians [including former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser] displays their total factual ignorance and political naiveté concerning the war raging between Hamas and Israel for the last six weeks.

The Declaration has been “Published courtesy of Kohram”.  Kohram is a 24/7 online Hindi and English News and Views website based in Delhi, India. It offers real information relating News Analysis, World Wide News, Politics, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Industry and Feature Articles on Education.

Another picketer
Australian politicians acknowledging assistance from an Indian media website seems a strange circumstance indeed. The Declaration was created by Maiy Azize, a Canberra-based health and social policy analyst. She is a parliamentary advisor in health and community services and campaigner for @GreensMPs. Twenty-one of the Declaration’s signatories are parliamentarians representing the Greens Party. The header image is attributed to Nakshab Khan and was featured in an article written by him for Kohram on 13 July headlined “Will Israeli Offensive Achieve Anything In Gaza?”

Khan wrote:
“Israel always justifies its aggression on the Gaza strip by blaming Hamas militants for firing crude rockets on the Jewish nation’s southern territories.”
Khan was apparently unaware that in the five weeks preceding 8 July 234 rockets had been launched from Gaza into Israel reaching as far as Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Hadera – sending hundreds of thousands of civilians scurrying into air raid shelters and disrupting normal life in Israel as well as threatening its tourist industry in the peak summer season. Long range rockets such as the M-302 were employed – the same missiles confiscated from the KLOS-C weapons seizure.




Israel’s inherent entitlement to self-defence under article 51 of the United Nations Charter to prevent the indiscriminate firing of these rockets into Israeli population centres – each rocket an internationally acknowledged war crime – was not worth a mention in Khan’s article.

Australian politicians need to be very careful about their names being identified with a document whose origins are so murky – a Declaration that itself is deceptive and misleading in the following respects:

1. It claims to bear the signatures of members of Australian federal and state Parliaments – yet five of the 77 signatories are former members of those parliaments.

2. Although titled “Canberra Declaration on Gaza” and updated to 4 August it supports
“an immediate cessation of hostilities and a ceasefire deal which includes an end to Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories and to the blockade of Gaza”
The Declaration ignores any reference to Hamas having rejected a ceasefire deal proposed by Egypt on 16 July and accepted by Israel – and to a number of ceasefire agreements broken by Hamas since then. The Declaration ignored the findings of the 2011 United Nations Palmer Report which found that Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza complied with the requirements of international law and recommended that Israel should continue with its efforts to ease its restrictions on movement of goods and persons to and from Gaza in accordance with Security Council resolution 1860 –  all aspects of which should be implemented.

3. The Declaration omitted to include the following underlined words :
“We call on all Australian politicians to also support the United Nations Human Rights Council's decision to launch an independent inquiry into purported violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, in the context of the military operations conducted since 13 June 2014
4. The Declaration alleged that the rockets fired into Israel were “imprecise” and “cannot be compared with the broad-scale bombing of Gaza by Israel”.

A grossly misleading allegation indeed – echoing Nakshab Khan’s spurious claim – considering Hamas rockets were landing all over Israel – whilst Israel’s response was limited to specific targeted areas within Gaza.

5. The Declaration asserted that:
“Collective punishment is not permitted under the Geneva conventions and is a war crime”.
Whilst not specifically accusing Israel of perpetrating this crime, it is clear that the entire civilian population of Israel was being targeted by the broad-scale Hamas barrage of rockets – whilst large parts of Gaza’s civilian population were not being affected by Israel’s actions.


6. The Declaration claimed that hospitals and places of worship were among the Israeli military's targets – but ignored mentioning that such places were used to conceal underground tunnels and weapons and their use as command centres by Hamas.

7. The Declaration concluded:
“The international community including Australia has a vital responsibility to put pressure on Israel to end its current military attack on Gaza and broker a solution of justice and peace.”
Why no pressure on Hamas – especially as Israel had agreed to end its military attack on Gaza three weeks previously and subsequently on a number of other occasions – only to see them broken by Hamas?

8. The Declaration – like Khan’s article - makes no mention of Israel’s inherent right of selfdefence.

Those parliamentarians who signed this Declaration have some explaining to do to their constituents.

I wrote to Senator Lee Rhiannon – one of two named parliamentarians to contact about signing this Declaration – requesting she comment on my criticisms of the Declaration.

Regrettably at the time of writing this article no response has been received.

Seventy-seven out of a possible 598 Federal and State politicians have signed – which attests to the savvy political acumen of those 521 who have refused to be duped by this dud Declaration.

Thursday, 21 August 2014

"If We Abandon Israel Today Then One Day – Too Late – We Will Realise That ... What We Abandoned Was Ourselves"

"I love you Douglas Murray. You speak the truth no matter how unpopular that truth is."
Thus writes a lady of discernment, one Persephone Jones.
"Thank you Douglas and thank you the Daily Express. I am hopeful that the penny is finally dropping and that people will now start to join up the dots. The UK stands at the forefront of a tsunami of terror that is about to hit and that it is ill prepared for. This is 1939 all over again. No, I am not being dramatic. We, along with the rest of the Judeo/Christian world are in imminent and terrible danger. Just like 1939 we cannot face the blindingly obvious and are paralyzed by fear - because we refuse to
accept the ghastly truth that we have over 2 million Muslims living in this country and we don't know what they are really thinking. We know something doesn't feel right and we simply don't know what to do.
I do not fear for Israel - of all countries they know exactly who their enemy is and how to confront them. Maybe they will in the end save our civilization, despite their vilification at the hand of their so called friends. Maybe not.
Either way it is the UK that is in real trouble and the rise in Islamic inspired anti-semitism is the first sign of it."
Thus, quite understandably, writes somebody else.

They are among the commenters on a typically courageous and perspicacious article (on the menace posed to all of us by "the black flag of jihad") by the British pundit Douglas Murray that appears today's Daily Express.

In it, Murray, deploring the antisemitism that Operation Protective Edge has unleashed, observes inter alia:
'There are those who think that Israel is somehow the cause of the world’s problems, or that in defending themselves from Islamic extremists Israel is somehow causing Islamic extremism. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The extremists of Hamas are the ideological bedfellows of the extremists of ISIS who are rampaging through Syria and Iraq, crucifying and beheading as they go....
They also share the exact same ideology – if not yet the same means – as those people who were found in Birmingham earlier this year teaching British pupils to hate wider British society and cut themselves off from non-Muslims.
Hyde Park, London
 But it is this last part of the equation which many people seem so incapable of dealing with. They see the millions of Muslims who have come to our continent and see how many of them are radical. But it is a problem they fear they cannot deal with....
... The problem of anti-Semitism, and Islamic anti-Semitism in particular today, is undoubtedly a problem for Jewish people. But it is only a problem for them first. It is a problem for all of us next.What is it that lies behind this terrible Hamas-driven rage against Israel?  What lies behind the desire for Israel to disappear? Today the world is finding out.  
Wakefield, Yorkshire
Because behind the flags of Hamas and Hezbollah which have flown at anti-Israel demonstrations in recent weeks is another flag. The black flag of jihad – the black flag most recently being waved in Iraq and Syria by ISIS....
The ambition of the jihadists – from al-Qaeda to Hamas, Hezbollah, Boko Haram and more – is to subjugate the entire world. ...
 [I]f we abandon Israel today then one day – too late – we will realise that in fact what we abandoned was ourselves."

See all of Murray's compelling article here