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)

Friday, 9 October 2015

Aussie Ex-Envoy To Israel Rodgers Rubbished On Pro-Palestinian Propaganda

What a silly bit of bile former Aussie ambassador (1994-97)  to Israel Peter Rodgers (now a member of the lobby group Australia Palestinian Advocacy Network) has written in today's The Australian (the reference to Gideon Levy is a laugh in itself!), calling on the Turnbull government to teach Israel some home truths!

It's not behind a paywall, as are many articles in that newspaper, so see it here

His ex-Excellency concludes:
'Late last month, Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas told the UN General Assembly that the Palestinians would no longer abide by the 1993 Oslo Accords. These provided the flimsy scaffold for negotiation of Palestinian statehood. What was remarkable about Abbas’s speech was that it took so many years for him to make it. Oslo’s corpse had long lain in the morgue. All Abbas did was to invite a public viewing.
With depressingly familiar hype, Netanyahu slammed Abbas’s UN speech for its alleged deceit and incitement. He urged Abbas to accept the offer “to hold direct negotiations with Israel without preconditions”. That was a good one coming from a prime minister whose own preconditions include no Palestinian state ever, who plays godfather to the settlement movement, and who has now deemed it reasonable to use live ammunition against rock-throwing Palestinians.
Australia has long been susceptible to the line that the Palestinians are not ready for statehood. The Turnbull government, with seven others (including tiny island states such as the Marshall Islands, Palau and Tuvalu), opposed the raising of the Palestinian flag at the UN. The opposition is not much better. The ALP conference last July decided at last to discuss possible recognition of a Palestinian state if there were “no progress in the next round of the peace process”. As if there were a peace process or the faintest prospect of one.
Australian governments have often spoken proudly of their friendship with Israel.
It’s high time that friendship was put in the service of peace by telling Israel a few home truths about the Gordian knot that is ­occupation and violence.'
Among the commenters,  "Elise" gives His Excellency a well-deserved (verbal) spanking:
'It is strange that at a time when Palestinian terrorists in Israel have been murdering, maiming or trying to murder and maim as many Israelis as possible, Peter Rodgers wants to give Israelis some home truths.
.... Mr Rodgers should stop encouraging and enabling the victim culture of Palestinians and the Palestinian cause to wipe Israel off the face of the map. If he really cared about the welfare of Palestinians he would start by giving Abbas and Hamas some home truths. Instead of blaming Israelis for everything and building up a culture of victimisation and self-harm - how about trying to build a nation state for Palestinians. How about Abbas not referring to 'dirty Jews' visiting Jerusalem sites or paying Palestinian murderers of innocent Israelis of all religions salaries. Instead how about preaching a message of peace and tolerance and using international funds to help under privileged Palestinians.  How about Abbas offering a home to just a few Palestinians from Syria into Ramallah, the capital of his Palestinian State but not that of the Palestinian State of Hamas. There is space there. How about Hamas stops murdering Fatah supporters in Gaza and stops using child labour to build terror tunnels. How about Mr Rodgers asking Abbas to account for the millions of dollars of international aid that he and Fatah members have put into their own bank accounts.
No Mr Rodgers you as a patronising racist don't get to instruct Israelis about your 'home truths' when you refuse to listen to the impassioned pleas of Bassem Eid, a Palestinian human rights campaigner who is begging the world to stop only caring about Palestinians when they can blame Israel for everything. While you and your ilk continue your blame game Palestinians will continue being persecuted by their leaders and by the Arab world as a whole. While you wag your finger self-righteously aid funds meant to better the lives of Palestinians will continue to line the pockets of their billionaire and mult-millionaire leaders and you my dear sir can pat yourself on the back and feel good that you are part of those who will keep Palestinians at the mercy of these haters for years to come.
And Elise in response to a detractor:
'I disagree completely with Peter Rodgers in relation to his manufactured patronising 'home truths' or that there is actually an occupation on the basis of International law. I could go into this on the basis that Gaza was controlled by Egypt and West Bank by Jordan before the Six Day War and that prior to that this was the territory of Britain and before then the Ottoman Empire. Even if you were to believe the nonsense that there was a supposed occupation - Gaza is Judenfrei and Abbas is in charge of most of the West Bank but actually needs Israeli security to ensure that he is not murdered by Hamas operatives in that area.
 The fact that some Jews are living in the West Bank is not the cause of violence or that some Israelis behave badly is not the cause of Palestinian violence. Arab violence towards Jews and the wish to murder Jews was taking place well before the existence of the State of Israel. I remind you that Abbas' favourite mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini was a Nazi supporter who during the 1920s inciting his supporters to murder Jews causing the Hebron massacre on the Jewish Sabbath. Those massacred were not new arrivals but were descendants of the Jews who lived in Israel from before the occupation by the Roman Empire.
 Fast forward today and proof positive that Jews are not the cause of Palestinian violence - look no further than areas where there are no Jews like Gaza. In Gaza Palestinians are more violent than they have ever been before not only towards Israelis in their genocidal aim to wipe all Jews off the face of the map but towards Palestinians as well and of course Egyptians who have now blocked the border between Egypt and Gaza completely.  I could write a well documented thesis about this. Of course ...  if you had read what I have said carefully you would know my views because I have referred to Palestinian victim culture, I have referred to Palestinian leadership's persecution of Palestinians, intolerance and anti-Semitism towards Jews, stealing of aid money due to Palestinian welfare and goodness gracious me I have even referred to a Palestinian human rights campaigner who says that people must stop blaming Israel and start caring about Palestinians. Of course, those supporting Rodgers would disagree because they are indeed the type of people that Bassam Eid blames for allowing the culture to continue.'
And as J-Wire reports here, the Zionist Federation's president, Dr Danny Lamm, has also put Rodgers firmly in his place, saying:
“For a self-proclaimed advocate of “home truths”, Peter Rodgers plays fast and loose with the facts  Per usual, the situation is far more complex than the simple ‘black-and-black’ narrative of Israeli immorality peddled by a semi-professional pro-Palestinian propagandist like Rodgers.
Rodgers recycles unsubstantiated third-hand media reports from anonymous sources to claim that Israel callously refused to prosecute the perpetrators of a horrific firebombing that killed a Palestinian family of four. Of course, he conveniently neglects to mention that Israel has imprisoned three suspected Jewish terrorists under administrative detention since that terrible crime.
 And I use the term ‘suspected’ deliberately because there’s a vast difference between what security agencies might think they ‘know’ and what can be proved in court under the democratic safeguards that protect us all. Would Peter Rodgers prefer for Israel to dispense with the legal niceties of presumed innocence and valid evidence that are essential features of any fair judicial system?"
Meanwhile, here's a nasty piece of antisemitism, posted by a bloke called Sam, apparently from Ramallah, who on his Facebook page describes himself as a journalist at the Palestinian American Council.   The antisemitic post has been shared by a woman called Anita Bruckner who not infrequently posts offensive items to the Facebook group Christian Friends of Palestine.

For Ms Jones-Owens see here

Another example of Sam Ghanayem's mindset:

According to reader P, who has in the past reported one or two posts of Ms Bruckner's, Facebook, having reviewed them, deems them worthy to remain.

Thursday, 8 October 2015

Obama’s Failure to Test Putin’s Sincerity Could Seriously Compromise America’s ME Policy, warns David Singer

Photo credt: Reuters/E.Munoz
Earlier this week I posted Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer's spotlight on Abu Mazen's UN-bedazzling economy with the truth (it's proving a popular read, so please have a look if you've missed it).

And now, here's David's latest article, entitled  "Iraq Exacerbates America-Russia Standoff on Destroying Islamic State".

He writes:

America and its 62 nation coalition is becoming increasingly isolated and irrelevant as Russia maintains its airstrikes in Syria and has now commenced firing cruise missiles from warships in the Caspian Sea 1500 kilometres away.

Russia is presently contemplating entering Iraq if requested by Iraq’s Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi [pictured above, addressing the UN on 30 September]  – who had reportedly indicated last week that he would welcome a Russian bombing campaign to destroy Islamic State’s presence in Iraq.

Abadi then said Russian strikes were a “possibility” but had not been discussed.

Russia’s Foreign Minister – Sergei Lavrov – made Russia’s position clear on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly:
“We are polite people. We don’t come if not invited.”
Lavrov’s comment was clearly critical of the American coalition’s air strikes in Syria having being undertaken without any invitation from President Assad – dubiously being justified by America as legal to defend Iraq’s territorial sovereignty against further incursions by Islamic State from Syria.

Now just one week later Abadi has upped the ante - reportedly saying he would welcome Russian airstrikes in Iraq if they were coordinated with the American-led coalition and that he sought to maintain cordial relations with both America and Russia.

He called the American-led coalition “a small help”– adding:
“This doesn’t mean that I reject the small help. Even the one single bomb would be helpful to me”
President Obama would not have been very impressed with Abadi’s mean-spirited disparaging comment.

The American-led coalition has been bombing Islamic State targets in Iraq for more than a year – but Iraqi officials have repeatedly complained that their efforts are insufficient to decisively turn back Islamic State. The United States has spent more than $25 billion training and equipping Iraq’s military.

Valentina Matviyenko – head of Russia’s Federation Council – the upper house of parliament – said this week:
“In case of an official address from Iraq to the Russian Federation, the leaders of our country would study the political and military expediency of our Air Force’s participation in an air operation. Presently we have not received such an address”
Iraq’s concern at destroying Islamic State has been heightened following Islamic State claiming responsibility for a series of bombings that killed more than 50 people throughout Iraq on 5 October.
Abadi’s wish for Russian intervention to be co-ordinated with the American-led coalition has offered Obama probably the last opportunity to come to an agreement with Russia on forming a legally
constituted armed military force authorized pursuant to a Security Council Resolution under Article 42 of the UN Charter.

Obama’s past insistence that any America-Russia co-operation be conditioned upon President Assad’s removal has stymied any possible earlier attempt.

Abadi’s timely lifeline should be grabbed by Obama before Syria and Iraq slide into an escalating conflict of indescribable carnage. Abadi could invite Russia to come to its assistance without American co-ordination if Obama continues to delay seeking Russia’s co-sponsoring of such a Resolution. Obama should heed President Putin’s advice expressed in his New York Times op-ed on 11 September 2013:
“We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression."
Obama’s failure to test Putin’s sincerity could risk America’s Middle East policy being seriously compromised.

Wednesday, 7 October 2015

Into The Ears of Babes (video)

In Sydney, the distaff side of Hizb ut-Tahrir finds a voice:

A heavy at the main function
More here

More girl power during police swoops on terror suspects' homes in Sydney today in the wake of Friday's murder of a police accountant by a fifteen-year-old Iran-born Iraqi Kurd believed to have been no "lone wolf":

Read and see more here

Monday, 5 October 2015

Fatal Frightful Friday: Chunder Down Under

If anything more than another brings home to us the utter moral bankruptcy of the Left when faced with the terror threat from "radicalised [next, salient adjective conspicuous by its absence] youth" it must be this observation, at left, by the Aussie conservative columnist Tim Blair.

And as always fellow conservative columnist Andrew Bolt has wet left-liberal mealy-mouthedness and pandering to unjustified narratives of victimhood in his sights.

See the video below (a real corker) from his Sunday TV show, in which he contrasts Malcolm Turnbull's "new sensitive language" with the tougher language employed by Tony Abbott.

According to Channel Seven, the 15-year-old Islamic boy who shot police accountant Mr Curtis Cheng to death attended a meeting of the extremist organisation Hizb-ut Tahrir shortly before the fatal deed.

But the head of that organisation refuses to answer reporters' questions relating to that allegation.

Below, brief footage of a Hizb ut-Tahrir rally in the Sydney suburb of Lakemba yesterday.  I believe that there were banners demonising Israel, but don't see them in this footage.  Keep an eye out for Channel Nine footage, which may show more.

Meanwhile, as we learn here, another Islamic extremist group has been out and about on the weekend:
'An extremist Muslim group held a conference at a Melbourne university over the weekend as the country reels from the shooting of a NSW police worker by a radicalised teenager.
Just a day after Friday’s fatal shooting, a controversial conference organised by fundamentalist Islamic group, the Islamic Research and Educational Academy, was held at Deakin University, The Australian reports.
The IREA’s two-day workshops were based on the teachings of Islamic scholars who have recommended the death penalty for homosexuals and apostates, promoted terrorism and preached hatred of Jews and Christians and violence against women.
Media gathered at Deakin’s Burwood campus on Sunday, but the IREA says on its Facebook page they were not allowed inside the venue as “the event was pre-registered”.
The event, dubbed ‘The Art of Da’wah’, was hosted by the ultraconservative Salafist organisation’s president Waseem Razvi....' [Emphasis added]

Sunday, 4 October 2015

David Singer Exposes Abu Mazen's Porkies

A few hours ago I posted an item regarding mendacious Palestinian propaganda and later added a video which perfectly illustrates one of the key contentions made: please take a look.  Meanwhile, in this new article, entitled "United Nations Bedazzled By Abbas Word Wizardry," Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer continues the theme of propagandistic Palestinian falsehoods, focusing on the United Nations' willing beguilement by Mahmoud Abbas.

Writes David Singer:

PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s speech to the UN General Assembly last week contained a concoction of half-truths and outright lies that everyone listening to him should question.

Here are some prize porkies:
1. “The question of Palestine was one of the first just issues brought before the United Nations from the time of its inception, and yet it remains unresolved until this moment”
17 May 1948; Photo: Detroit Jewish News
Abbas failed to mention that it has remained unresolved since then because:
(i) The Arabs did not accept the 1947 UN Partition Plan to partition western Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State – whilst the Jews did.
(ii) The Arabs – instead - unsuccessfully sent six Arab armies to invade Palestine in May 1948 to rout the newly declared Jewish State – Israel – and drive its Jewish population into the sea
(iii) Jordan and Egypt successfully drove out and permanently expelled the Jewish population living in the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria (later termed “the West Bank”) – keeping those areas Jew-free from 1948 until 1967
(iv) No attempt was made between 1948 and 1967 to create the Palestinian state Abbas says he will now accept. That opportunity has been well and truly missed.
2. Abbas described the Palestinian Arabs as “a people that had lived peacefully in their land and made genuine intellectual, cultural and humanitarian contributions to mankind”.
Abbas was gilding the lily.
(i) The Arab riots in Jerusalem in 1920, the Hebron massacre of the Jewish community in 1929 and the Arab riots between 1936 and 1939 give the lie to his claims.
(ii) No genuine intellectual, cultural and humanitarian contributions have been made to mankind by the Palestinian Arabs – unless airline hijackings, suicide vests, and indiscriminate targeting of Jews is what Abbas had in mind
3. “While Palestine was partitioned into two states – according to which Israel was established 67 years ago – the second part of that resolution still awaits implementation.”
Abbas suffers from a selective memory.
(i) Palestine was effectively divided 92 years ago in 1923 – when 78 per cent – originally designated for the Jewish National Home by the 1920 San Remo conference and the Treaty of Sevres – was denied to Jewish settlement by Article 25 of the Palestine Mandate.
(ii) This area subsequently became the Jew-free independent Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan in 1946 – renamed Jordan in 1950 after being unified with Judea and Samaria.
 4. 'We recall here the words of the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1976, when he stated that Israel will become an apartheid state if it continues its occupation of the Palestinian territory and described the Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as “cancer”.'
Abbas misleadingly failed to tell the General Assembly that Rabin’s view had changed markedly just before his assassination in 1995 – after experiencing 19 years of unremitting terrorism and rejectionism by the PLO – telling the Knesset:
(i) The borders of the State of Israel would be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. Israel would not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.
(ii) Jerusalem would be united and would include both Maale Adumim and Givat Zeev as the capital of Israel under Israeli sovereignty
(iii) The security border of Israel would be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term
(iv) Gush Etzion, Efrat, Beitar and other communities in the area east of what was the "Green Line" prior to the Six Day War would be included in the State of Israel;
(v) Blocs of settlements would be established in Judea and Samaria like the one in Gush Katif
(vi) No single settlement would be uprooted in the framework of the Interim Agreement, nor building hindered for natural growth
5. “Palestine is a country of holiness and peace. It is the birthplace of Christ, the messenger of love and peace, and the Isra’ and Mi’raj [ascension to heaven and night journey] of Mohammed”
Abbas omitted any mention of the Jews – the forebears of the Christians.
6. “It is no longer useful to waste time in negotiations for the sake of negotiations; what is required is to mobilize international efforts to oversee an end to the occupation in line with the resolutions of international legitimacy.”
Abbas supposedly supports “resolutions of international legitimacy” – yet the PLO he heads has declared that the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void.
The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and Article 80 of the United Nations Charter are resolutions of international legitimacy that cannot be swept away because Abbas does not like them.
7. "The state of Palestine, based on the 4th of June 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, is a state under occupation, as was the case for many countries during World War II.”
(i) “The state of Palestine” does not meet the legal requirements of customary international law as encapsulated in the 1933 Montevideo Convention.
(ii) There were no borders – only armistice lines.
(iii) How can “Palestine” be a state under occupation since there was no such State in existence prior to 1967?
The applause accorded Abbas in the UN General Assembly indicates how his deceptively misleading word wizardry continues to confound attempts to end the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict.
Exposing its false peddlers must never cease.

Time the United Nations woke up and restored its own credibility.

Professorial Truths Regarding Palestinian Propaganda (updated: relevant video)

Well said, that wag!
In July this year, in a predictably vain attempt to dissuade the ALP (Australian Labor Party) conference from adopting such a motion, the ABC's Religion and Ethics website carried this article by Professor Alan Johnson of BICOM arguing against unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state.

Among the professor's many excellent points were these simple truthes:
'The inconvenient truth is that Israel accepted the case for Palestinian statehood long ago, but it refuses to commit national suicide. So it insists on negotiating three things with the Palestinians:
 genuine mutual recognition - the deal must create two states for two peoples, with Israel recognised as the homeland of the Jewish people, and Palestine as the homeland of the Palestinian people;
security guarantees - so the West Bank does not become a launching pad for a continued terror war on Israel; and
a commitment by the Palestinians that the deal is a final status agreement, or what is called the "end of conflict."
The Palestinians have so far refused to negotiate recognition. They will not accept that Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people. They demand the full and untrammelled "right of return" for millions of Palestinian refugees, and their children and later descendants ad infinitum, which would mean the end of Israel and the creation of yet another Arab state, in which the Jews would have to take their chances as a minority. This is not an especially attractive prospect given the treatment of minorities throughout the Middle East.
Nor have the Palestinians negotiated Israel's legitimate security needs. Instead, the Palestinian Authority has entered a unity agreement with an unreformed and fascistic Hamas, which is committed to Israel's destruction. It is not enough to agree to demilitarization, as the proposers argue. In a collapsing Middle East, with Islamic State taking over in failed states, the ongoing security of the West Bank - the high ground that sits above Israel's population centres - is what must be negotiated.'
In response, the longtime Palestinian lobbyist in Australia, Ali Kazak, wrote this outrageous screed.

Its tone and thrust is exemplified by this despicable allegation: "[T]he aim of Zionism has been to colonise all of Palestine and parts of the neighbouring Arab states, and ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people".

Now, another pro-Israel professor, the peerless Denis MacEoin, has written in characteristic fashion a masterly piece which demolishes Ali Kazak's structure to its very foundations.  Inter alia, he notes:
'As far back as 1906, the young Ben Gurion wrote that "The Jewish settlement is not designed to undermine the position of the Arab community; on the contrary, it will salvage it from its economic misery, lift it from its social decline, and rescue it from physical and moral degeneration. Our renaissance in Palestine will come through the country's regeneration, that is: the renaissance of its Arab inhabitants."
Throughout his life, Ben Gurion made many such comments, constantly pleading with the Arabs to live and work alongside the Jews to create a flourishing state. Why does Kazak mention none of these, but substitutes a falsified, mistranslated, and deceitful quotation to "prove" that the Jews were intent from the beginning on expelling the Arabs?
Written while a civil war launched by the Arabs still raged, and as five Arab nations prepared to invade the new state, Israel's Declaration of Independence reads in part:
We appeal - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.
We extend our hand to all neighbouring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighbourliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East. 
.... In truth, there has been and still is a tiny minority of Zionists who cling to the fantasy of a Jewish state embracing the Biblical region from eastern Egypt to northern Arabia. But to present this as evidence that Zionists as a whole hold such views is deeply misleading. When I say "a minority," I really mean it. After 1967, a movement and political party named The Movement for Greater Israel emerged, and in 1969 it stood in a general election. It received 0.6% of the vote, below the electoral threshold of 1%, and collapsed.
Kazak weaves a fiction of malign Zionist aims to take over territories beyond the borders of Israel, when all the Jewish people as a whole ever wanted to do was have a state of their own.
By 2008, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made the country's position clear when speaking to his cabinet: "Greater Israel is over. There is no such thing. Anyone who talks that way is deluding themselves." It is not hard to conclude that Ali Kazak is one of the deluded.
Kazak's fantasy about a Greater Israel is false, yet he does not so much as breathe a word about the most popular slogan used by Palestinians and their supporters abroad: "Palestine will be free From the river to the Sea." All Palestinian maps show this same thing: a Palestine stretching from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean. The slogan and the maps show one thing: no Israel. To call for the extinction of a people and country is a threat of genocide, something the Jews of all people have never called for and will never urge.
The notion that all Zionists and Jews want to build a Greater Israel has disturbing echoes of one of the hoariest and most frequently dismissed myths of anti-Semitism: that the Jews control everything and have taken over everything from banking to the film industry, to all the wars and revolutions, even entire governments. This was an evil conspiracy theory constructed by the Russian secret police to justify their pogroms and later promulgated by the Nazis to explain their extermination of six million human beings. It is shameful even to hint at it.'
Update: This video of raucous Israel-haters outside the Egyptian Embassy in London yesterday deliciously proves the professor's point about the true aims of the "Free Palestine" crowd:

See what I mean?

Video credit: Seymour Alexander
Read Denis MacEoin's entire article here

Hat tip: Ian G.

Meanwhile, in Australia more pro-Palestinian state recognition propaganda afoot. Better have the corn plasters ready.

An absent-minded dictionary?

Friday, 2 October 2015

"The UK May Have Done A Vote Trade": Saudi Arabia & the UN Human Rights Council (video)

My previous post shows Netanyahu's marvellous speech to the UN.  Here, Hillel Neuer of UN Watch talks to the ABC's Fran Kelly about the latest bizarre and despicable antics connected with the UN:

Hat tip: the encyclopedic Ian

Incidentally, Australia's most-read columnist, the conservative Andrew Bolt wrote yesterday a  blistering article regarding Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop (mentioned in the above video, and also mentioned in my previous post):
'.... Just two weeks as Prime Minister and Malcolm Turnbull is already promising to lick the boots of the tyrants who infest the United Nations.
Yes, the Turnbull Government is asking for the tremendous honour of joining the UN’s Human Rights Commission.
And if we’re really good, Australia may join some of the moral paragons on that body supervising our human rights — China, Congo, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam.
No, that’s not a joke. These countries really are judges on a UN body meant to save us from exactly such thugs, thieves, theocrats and dictators. We will legitimise a pack of hypocrites we should shun and, in joining, will put ourselves at their level.
Sure, the Left is cheering, but check the company we’ll keep. Across the table will be Russia, which has stolen Crimea, invaded Ukraine and supplied to rebels the missile and the men that shot down the MH17 jet carrying Australian citizens.
Also rubbing shoulders with us will be the Saudi autocrats, about to behead and crucify Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who protested for democracy in 2012, when he was only 17. And we’ll nod thoughtfully as the communist autocrats ruling China, Cuba and Vietnam define for us what should be meant by “human rights”.
I hope the UN’s showers are industrial strength.
Don’t believe the sanctimonious drivel about how joining such bodies does not compromise our beliefs. Horse manure....'