In the words of the uploader:
'Egyptian Child Preacher Ibrahim Adham Curses Bush and Obama and Prays for the Destruction of Israel - Al-Rahma TV (Egypt) - October 19, 2012'
'Egyptian Child Preacher Ibrahim Adham Curses Bush and Obama and Prays for the Destruction of Israel - Al-Rahma TV (Egypt) - October 19, 2012'
'Revd Stephen Sizer is the Vicar of Christ Church in Virginia Water, Surrey. He is now the subject of a complaint by the Board of Deputies to the Church of England, for making statements that the Board and most of the Jewish community find utterly offensive, to the point of crossing the line into antisemitism, even if this is neither his motivation nor intention. This is not all, as we also complain of Revd Sizer posting links from his website to articles on racist and antisemitic websites where scurrilous views against Jews and others are published. When this happens, the Jewish community has to act....
On the subject of Revd Sizer posting links to racist websites, the complaint says this:
The matters complained of disclose a clear and consistent pattern of activity on the part of Rev Sizer. The evidence indicates that he spends time trawling dark and extreme corners of the internet for material to add to his website. Rev Sizer re-publishes such items to support the target of his polemical writing, while at the same introducing his readers to the racist and antisemitic websites from where he draws his material. As the evidence demonstrates, there are five instances of this over the 11 month period from July 2011 to June 2012.
Thankfully for relations between British Jews and Christians, Revd Sizer is very much the exception. He displays an obsession with Israel and opposes its identity as a Jewish state. The Jewish people’s belief in national self-determination, or Zionism, is shared with most of the world’s nations – but Revd Sizer displays a deep hostility to Zionism, which he writes about as if it was a term of abuse. It is not difficult to come across his views, as he is an enthusiastic self-publicist who proclaims his preoccupation with Israel on his website, blog, Facebook and flickr pages.
Considering his position as a Church of England vicar, Revd Sizer keeps some strange company. He has shared a platform with and quoted from Holocaust deniers, goes on trips to Iran as the guest of the NEDA Institute which contributes to global efforts to deny the Holocaust and gave an interview with Qods News Agency, a Holocaust denying website. Sizer is also a speaker at the provocatively named Christ at the Checkpoint conference, which features a theology called supersessionism which has antisemitic overtones. It seems that Revd Sizer has few qualms about keeping company with anyone who shares his hostility to Israel, however dubious.
.... We make no complaint about Rev Sizer’s anti-Israel views, nor of his trips to Iran or his supersessionist theology. While we view all of these with concern and distaste, Revd Sizer is entitled to his views and may travel where he wants. But we draw the line at making statements that we regard as antisemitic and advertising the content of racist and antisemitic websites. It is a matter of great regret that we are driven to make this complaint, but the Jewish community should not have to stomach material that we see as crossing the line into antisemitism.
.... [W]e are not seeking to have him stopped from his ministry or dismissed from his job. We only ask one thing, which is that effective measures are taken to prevent him from publishing or re-publishing material that we find to be not merely offensive, but antisemitic."Explained Board president Mr Vivian Wineman:
"Making such a complaint about a Church of England minister is not a step the Board has taken lightly or without a great deal of consideration. This action sends a clear, strong message from our community that we will not remain quiet in the face of actions and remarks capable of being seen as antisemitic even where they are disguised as anti-Zionist attacks on Israel."Vice-President Jonathan Arkush added:
"The evidence disclosed indicates that Rev Sizer spends time trawling dark and extreme corners of the internet. Revd Sizer re-publishes items to support the target of his polemical writing, while at the same time introducing his readers to the racist and antisemitic websites from where he draws his material."Read more here
|An outdoor mural in Birmingham by an award-winning Muslim artist|
"... And most of all, brothers and sisters, I haven't bought any Jewi - er - Israeli produce knowingly since Sabra and Shatila"Whoops! Tut, tut.
".... The idea of Jihad is often misunderstood by non-Muslims who then see Islam as not being a pacifist religion."And surely somebody has overlooked the Arabs' attack on Israel in 1948 (for starters) in telling the kids:
"Muslims may fight in self-defence but are forbidden to begin a fight. The aim of fighting is to create a situation where Muslims are free to worship Allah and live in peace.
One aim of Holy War may be to create a democracy where people are free to live their lives without beliefs and politics being imposed on them. There must be no hatred or vengeance in the fighting. As soon as peace is offered, fighting must stop. Once peace has been restored the differences between people must be resolved."There are sections on the attitudes to war of other religions as well. The obfuscation appears to apply to one religion only...
"Concerned that U.S. policies toward Israel and Palestinians are hampering, not helping the peace process, an organization of Rabbis and peace advocates turn to Hollywood for a new script...a trilogy of satirical videos of which this is the third. For more information, please visit Real Peace Middle East (www.rpme.org)"
"While you have been spending your time endlessly writing them, today I have been out meeting and interviewing Gazans about how Israel's illegal blockade is impacting on their lives. A car dealer, unable to import for more than three years who has lost millions. A shopkeeper whose prices are higher than london or new york because of the blockade. A 30 year old woman who is in agony every day because she can not get the medication for her arthritis. Children whose summer camp was set on fire this week by extremists."That was in 2010, and since then Donnison appears to have gone native.
".... I am a reporter and you are a campaigner. Our jobs are different. You know nothing of my personal views and this is the way it should be" [My emphasis]
|Just one example of Donnison's propaganda|
"He's an activist, not a journalist" [My emphasis]
"Last year, I stood before the United Nations General Assembly to address the Palestinian bid for U.N. recognition of statehood.I believe now, as I did then, that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own.However, I continue to believe that lasting peace will only come from direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians themselves and not from unilateral Palestinian actions at the United Nations.That is why I made it clear that there can be no short-cuts to peace, and called on the world to recognize the legitimacy of Israel and its security concerns as a Jewish, democratic state.
We cannot impose peace or any final status details on the Israelis and Palestinians.Ultimately, it is up to the two parties to take action. Final status issues can only be resolved by the Israelis and Palestinians themselves.What we can do is state frankly what is widely known: that a lasting peace will involve two sovereign, independent states.And I am convinced that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would rather look to the future than be trapped in the past.However, my Administration has made it clear that Israelis cannot be expected to negotiate with a partner that refuses to recognize its right to exist.That’s why it’s imperative that Hamas abides by the Quartet conditions to renounce violence, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements."His response was far more direct four years ago – indicating the parameters of the two-state solution he then envisaged should be the outcome of negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization through it's agreed negotiating entity, the Palestinian Authority (PA).
"The United States cannot dictate the terms of a final status agreement. We should support the parties as they negotiate these difficult issues, but they will have to reach agreements that they can live with. In general terms, Israel clearly must emerge in a final status agreement with secure borders. Jerusalem will remain Israel's capital, and no one should want or expect it to be re-divided. As for refugees, the Palestinians will need to reinterpret the notion of a right of return in such a way that will preserve Israel as a Jewish state, while Israel would likely contribute to international compensation for the refugees.
But these details are for the parties to decide. While negotiations are ongoing, both sides should take steps to improve conditions on the ground, so that people believe they have a stake in the process."The following differences between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 are starkly evident:
• President Obama would find it virtually impossible to criticize the PA acquiring "a state of its own" by demanding as a necessary condition that all 500,000 Jews living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem be expelled from their homes and businesses.
• The Palestinian Arabs' deserved right to a state is timeless - no matter how many offers made by Israel are rejected by the PA. With that kind of Presidential mind set – Arab rejectionism of such a state – first proposed in 1937 and rejected on many occasions since then – is bound to continue without fear of any political consequences from America.
• Whilst direct negotiations still remain the pathway to create any such Palestinian State - the President is apparently prepared to allow those negotiations to continue to be stalled indefintely without any express policy being proposed by him as a possible circuit breaker. Such Presidential inertia can only encourage the PA to prolong the resumption of negotiations until its demands to return to the negotiating table are first agreed on by Israel.
• Whilst President Obama states that he has called on the world to recognise the legitimacy of Israel and its security concerns as a Jewish democratic State, he makes no similar direct call on the Palestinian Arabs.
• Gone are the 2008 pronouncements on secure borders, Jerusalem, and refugees - positions agreed on in an exchange of letters in 2004 between Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President George W Bush. President Obama's abandonment of his predecessor's commitments will only embolden the PA to maintain its rejectionist stance on each of these issues.Ironically, the President's stated policy positions will please many Jewish voters who want to see an end to the two-state solution and futher expansion of Jewish settlement in the West Bank – where sovereignty still remains unallocated.
"... these days the Israelis don’t practise an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, they practise ten eyes for an eye and ten teeth for a tooth. [Sniggers from some in audience.] The idea that a just war requires a use of force to be proportionate seems to be a Christian notion and not a Jewish notion." ["Shame!" from Jonathan Sacerdoti].This seemingly antisemitic remark of Mr Jenkins, who allegedly also spoke elsewhere of the power of the "Jewish lobby, " is discussed here and here
Marking the centenary of the Balfour Declaration in 2017 as a contribution to justice, peace and reconciliation in the Middle East.
Mindful of Britain’s responsibility, the Balfour Project will encourage understanding of what led to the Balfour Declaration, and what flowed from it.
The Balfour Project will facilitate a network of educational, political, religious and humanitarian groups who share this vision.
The Balfour Project network hopes to produce a wide range of multimedia resources suitable for children and adults, and promote a series of international conferences and cultural exchanges to enable participants to engage with empathy those who have been negatively impacted by the Balfour Declaration.
The Balfour Project seeks to contribute to justice and peace in the Middle East, and in particular the resolution of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.Not that the Project is utterly devoid of Jewish involvement, as the inclusion of a familiar Israel-demonising name among its Advisers shows:
"The Balfour Project, in association with the Church of Scotland, is organising a one-day conference on the British involvement in Palestine in the first half of the last century. This is a first step in exploring how to mark the centenary of the Balfour Declaration in exactly five years on 2nd November 2017.
The Balfour Project has been created by a group of academics and activists who believe that this anniversary should not pass unremarked. Mindful of Britain’s responsibility for what has come to pass in the Middle East, the Balfour Project will encourage understanding of what led to the Balfour Declaration, and what flowed from it. Through our website, we plan to facilitate a network of educational, political, religious and humanitarian groups who share this conviction. We aim to stimulate conferences, cultural exchanges and the production of multimedia resources. Above all, we believe that the search for the truth of what took place, and the acknowledgement of wrong-doing, can contribute to justice, peace and reconciliation in the Middle East.
In the morning Dr Mary Embleton, whose special interest is Britain’s involvement in the Middle East, will outline the contradictory promises Britain made to Arabs and Jews, and their consequences for all parties before and during the British Mandate in Palestine. This will be followed by keynote papers from Rev Dr Stephen Sizer, who will talk about the ideas that shaped this period, Professor Mary Grey will talk about the main players and Dr Imad Karam will talk about the consequences for Palestinians today. In the afternoon John Bond OAM, former Secretary of Australia’s Sorry Day campaign, will use the 2008 national apology to Aboriginal Australians to discuss the impact of acknowledgement and apology."See the conference programme here
|Lloyd George and Leo Amery|
(a) it was an advisory opinion only – it was not legally binding (the ICJ is a creature of the United Nations)
(b) the UN General Assembly’s reference to the court condemned Israel in advance
(c) the ICJ judges included appointees of several dictatorships or near-dictatorships, namely China, Madagascar, Sierra Leone, Russia, Venezuela, Jordan, and Egypt (c) the court did not hear Israel’s case
(d) the court invented a new rule of law applicable only to Israel, namely that she has no right of self-defence against terrorists (e) the court is a political tribunal and not a proper court of law.But incredibly – despite the prominence of the ICJ’s Judgment in the Co-Op’s Q+A sheet - at the North London Area meeting of Co-Op members on 20 October, Mr Wardle denied all knowledge of the International Court of Justice, in response to another question about the Co-Op’s Israel policy.
“The Co-Op’s boycott is out-of–step with the opinions of many of its members here in Brighton. A number of us attended the Area Meeting and let the leading figures in the Co-Op know that we are opposed to any boycott of Israeli companies.
It was obvious from the weak answers to our questions that the boycott is ill-thought-through and founded on ignorance about the complexities of the Middle East conflict”.If it’s truth about Israel you’re after, shop somewhere else….'
|An oblique comment on a comment? ... h/t reader P.|
"The motive of the producer was malicious, and reprehensible, and his actions have been repudiated by political and religious leaders, Christian and Muslim leaders in the United States and Europe. So we oppose what he has done totally....
Most secular people and most Christians I have met and spoken to about it are embarrassed by the film and they realized its purpose was destructive and they don’t agree with it. The film doesn't bear any resemblance to what we know of the Prophet’s life and therefore any sensible person will recognize that this film was malicious...."Asked "Would you please elaborate on reason or reasons behind insulting Islamic sanctities?" he made this rather oblique reply:
"It is a complex question and there are number of factors. The reality is that the Western powers especially America have interests in the Middle East, and it’s related to the oil, and raw materials. Oil and its presence in the Middle East, is a significant factor. The creation of the state of Israel, and the power of Zionist lobby is clearly an important influence in American politics. Even today, Benjamin Netanyahu is campaigning through advertisement in America on behalf of Mitt Romney. He is clearly worried that Obama would be re-elected, and will institute measures that negatively will impact Israel. So we have a Zionist lobby, we have oil, and we have competing empires at work in the Middle East, and those must be taken into account."American Muslims should campaign to have insults to their religion outlawed in the United States, he suggested.
"The problem with the law in America, and Europe to some extent, is that it does give people freedom of speech. If people are offended by the film, they have the right to bring a complaint to the police. For example Zionists were offended by some of the things I said about Israel and they complained to the police. If I had offended people’s religious opinions, then I could have been charged in Britain with a criminal act....
If I were a US citizen, I would seek to use my freedom , vote, and my ability to campaign, to ensure that these kinds of events do not take place. I would lobby and encourage Muslim groups in America to have these kinds of actions outlawed."Incidentally, if you're wondering who Michèle Renouf mentioned in the screenshot above (which features a comment preparatory to this link made by reader Ian) is, here and here she is in action.
"With me, you have a Prime Minister whose belief in Israel is unbreakable and whose commitment to Israel’s security is non-negotiable.
I will always stand by the Jewish people. And it is humbling to be here tonight and to be called a friend.
Here in this room, we have many of the people who are determined to build the strongest possible relationship between Britain and Israel.
The business leaders who have taken our trade to well over $8 billion a year and made Britain the second biggest export market for Israel in the world.
The scientists who are taking forward an ambitious programme of joint research as part of the UK-Israel Life Sciences Council, which includes no less than four Nobel Prize winners.
The leading academics who are helping to forge new partnerships between Manchester and the Weizmann Institute, Oxford and Ben Gurion, Cambridge and Tel Aviv.
The hi-tech specialists who are making a reality of the UK/Israel Tech Hub – the first of its kind in the world....
I am a big admirer of what the UJIA does both here in Britain and in Israel. Let me explain why.
First, the Jewish community in Britain is a role model for successful integration because you understand that as well as being part of a community with a common faith you are also part of a wider community – that of our country....
Yes, you can love this country, take pride in its history, celebrate its Olympics, even cry with its football fans every other year. There is no contradiction between being a proud Jew, a committed Zionist and a loyal British citizen."He continued:
"In the past, governments allowed a flawed state multiculturalism that said we should encourage different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream.
I don’t subscribe to that. And neither do you. I believe we have to end the passive tolerance of segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values.
Let’s be clear what that means. It means getting preachers of hate out of our country.
It means proscribing organisations that incite terrorism. And it means zero tolerance for any form of antisemitism, especially on our campuses.
Regarding Iran, Cameron said:
".... Let’s be clear about the facts. Iran is flouting six United Nations resolutions. The Regime’s claim that its nuclear programme is intended purely for civilian purposes is not remotely credible.
And it has shown its violent agenda by exporting terror and violence to Iraq, to Syria, to Gaza, to Lebanon and to many peace-loving countries across the world.
Iran is not just a threat to Israel. It is a threat to the world. Now there are some who say nothing will work – and that we have to learn to live with a nuclear armed Iran.
I say we don’t and we shouldn’t.
But at the same time I also refuse to give in to those who say that the current policy is fatally flawed, and that we have no choice but military action. A negotiated settlement remains within Iran’s grasp.
But until they change course, we have a strategy of ever tougher sanctions. Just today, Britain has secured a further round of new sanctions through the EU Foreign Affairs Council. And these relentless sanctions are having an impact no-one expected a year ago....
The Iranian regime is under unprecedented pressure and faces an acute dilemma. They are leading their people to global isolation and an economic collapse. And they know it.
They know too that there is a simple way to bring sanctions to an end. By giving the international community the confidence we need that they are not and will not develop a nuclear weapon.
I have said to Prime Minister Netanyahu that now is not the time for Israel to resort to military action. Beyond the unpredictable dangers inherent in any conflict, the other reason is this:
At the very moment when the Regime faces unprecedented pressure and the people are on the streets and when Iran’s only real ally in Syria is losing his grip on power a foreign military strike is exactly the chance the Regime would look for to unite his people against a foreign enemy.
We shouldn’t give them that chance. We need the courage to give these sanctions time to work. But let me also say this. In the long term, if Iran makes the wrong choice, nothing is off the table. A nuclear armed Iran is a threat to Israel. And a threat to the world. And this country will work unwaveringly to prevent that from happening."Before alluding to the issue of peace between Israel and the Palestinians he observed:
"... I understand how dark things were for Israel when surrounded by enemies on every border. And I understand how Israelis feel when gas masks are handed out to families; and car parks are converted into bomb shelters.
But I passionately believe that what we are seeing through the Arab Spring need not be a new threat to Israel’s security. Democracy and open societies are not the problem – they can be a big part of the solution.
Yes, there are those who believe that in a volatile region only an authoritarian strong man can maintain stability and security. But when brutal dictators suppress their people in the name of stability, the end result is a region is that more dangerous – not less....
But if the Islamists attempt to undermine the stability of other countries or encourage terrorism instead of peace and conflict instead of partnership then we must and will oppose them. And that is why we will not waver from our insistence that Hamas gives up violence and that the rockets from Gaza must stop. Hamas must not be allowed to dictate the way forwards for Israelis and Palestinians...."And then he said:
"....We can’t advocate democracy and open societies in one breath and then cite the need for stability as an excuse for why the Palestinians shouldn’t renew their democracy too.
It’s now seven years since Palestinians voted for a President and six since parliamentary elections. The Palestinian leadership needs to refresh its mandate and show it has the consent of its people, starting with municipal elections later this month. And it needs to resolve the situation in Gaza and restore to Palestinians a unified, leadership able to deliver peaceful resolution of the conflict with Israel.
So Palestinian reconciliation and Palestinian elections are key points on the path to peace – because without consent there can never be credible negotiation.
It will require great strength and courage to take the hard choices needed to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians.
.... I know it takes two to negotiate. So let me tell President Abbas something very clearly there is no path to statehood except through talks with Israel.
So if the Palestinian plan is simply posturing with the UN rather than negotiating with Israel, Britain will never support it.
And let me say this to the Palestinians too. Britain will never support anyone who sponsors a football tournament named after a suicide bomber who killed 20 Israelis in a restaurant. We will not tolerate incitement to terrorism.
But in the search for peace both sides have to make hard choices. And just as President Abbas has followed through his commitment to non-violence with real progress on the West Bank so Israel needs a real drive to improve life for ordinary Palestinians.
That means more support for economic development in the West Bank, relaxing restrictions on Gaza, ending the demolition of Palestinian homes, and yes, it means meeting Israel’s obligations under the Roadmap and under international law to halt settlement building.
Britain’s position will not change. Settlements beyond the green line are illegal.
I know how hard the concessions needed for peace can be. But the truth is, time is running out for a two state solution – and with it Israel’s best chance to live in peace with its neighbours...."Read the entire speech here
"the West Bank is part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which included both banks of the [Jordan] River"The report added:
"The attendees understood that Prince [Hassan] is working to reunite both banks of the [Jordan] River, and commended him for it."The West Bank and Transjordan had existed as one territorial entity between 1950-67 following Transjordan's occupation of the West Bank in 1948 after the newly declared State of Israel had been attacked by six invading Arab armies.
"Palestine Arabs desire unity between Transjordan and Arab Palestine and therefore make known their wish that Arab Palestine be annexed immediately to Transjordan. They also recognize Abdullah as their King and request him proclaim himself King of the new territory."Wells Stabler, America's charge d'affaires in Transjordan, reported to the Acting Secretary for State in a confidential cable dated 4 December 1948 that following the meeting a large delegation proceeded to the King's winter quarters at Shuneh to present the resolution to the King and request his acceptance. The King had replied that the matter must be referred to his government and that he must also ascertain the views of other Arab states. Although usual jealousies and frictions had been apparent during the meeting, the King believed it to be of significance and might be regarded by him as his mandate from Palestine Arabs.
"We Jordanians must add that practically speaking a settlement must also take into account our perceptions. Small as Jordan is, our country is politically, socially, economically, militarily and historically inseparable from the Palestinian issue"Indeed the fate of Jordan and the West Bank has been tied together ever since both these areas of the former Ottoman Empire were included in the territory covered by the 1922 Mandate for Palestine within which the Jewish National Home was to be reconstituted.
|French antisemitism, 1898 vintage|
"group of desert tribes have stored up more misery for mankind than any other group of people in the history of the planet, and they're doing it to this day".
"In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI described Jerusalem as ‘a crossroads for peoples of many different origins’. It has been such for thousands of years, indeed even before the birth of Jesus the city had suffered battles between Babylonians, Israelites, Philistines, Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Macedonians, Maccabees and Romans.
Today it is the third holiest city in Islam – in Arabic, Jerusalem is most commonly known as al-Quds meaning ‘The Holy’ – and of great importance to Jesus’s followers where more than a dozen Christian communities live side by side in (not always complete) harmony...."This significant omission, contained in the website of a BBC quiz programme hosted by Stephen Fry, is another piece of excrescence uncovered by BBC Watch. See here
"Today, as well as being the spiritual centre of Judaism, it is the third holiest city in Islam. In Arabic, Jerusalem is most commonly known as al-Quds meaning ‘The Holy.’ Jerusalem is also of great importance to Jesus’s followers where more than a dozen Christian communities live side by side in (not always complete) harmony."See here
"‘[The victim, Saad al-Hilli] worked on Airbus, radiation equipment to kill cancer, and lately on satellite systems; but as far as I know he never worked on any top-secret projects,’ says Gary Aked, who spent four years at the Atomic Weapons Establishment in Aldermaston.
Several years ago, though, when visiting his friend for dinner, Mr Aked did see something that may prove to be of great significance.
Mr al-Hilli took him to the study, showed him a bank of four desk-top computers, plus a laptop, and told him how he used them to air his stridently anti-Israeli views in Arab chatrooms.
‘Saad was a very passionate guy and this was something that concerned him,’ he says. ‘He thought the Jews were taking over America and the world, and tried to get me interested in a book about the atrocities committed by the United States on Arabs.’
After 9/11, he recalls, his views became still more extreme. In one breath he would say it was ‘pay-back time’; in the next he would venture that Israel had blown up the Twin Towers to provoke the U.S. into waging war on the Arab world.
All of which brings us to the theory advanced by a respected Middle East security analyst, who declined to be named. He believes the al-Hillis and the French cyclist could have been conspirators in a plot to supply nuclear material to Iran — and been eliminated by state-sponsored Israeli assassins.
At first blush, this may sound the stuff of conspiracy theorists and spy thriller writers. But one commentator who thinks it is plausible is Roger Howard, author of several authoritative books on Middle Eastern affairs, the next of which will examine a chilling assassination programme carried out on European soil by the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad.
Howard says targeting women and children has never been Mossad’s style, and it strains belief they would risk repercussions were they proved to have wiped out an entire family.
But he contends: ‘It is possible something went badly wrong, forcing them to make a snap decision between abandoning the operation and killing innocent bystanders.’
The author also asks an interesting question: is this suggestion any more far-fetched than the notion that the paths of two men, of similar professional backgrounds — one capable of supplying high-level nuclear secrets, the other sympathetic to a regime keen to acquire them — should cross by sheer chance, at the precise moment when the assassin struck?
Whether or not the truth behind this terrible mystery is stranger than fiction, the fear is that the French and English investigators will never unlock the answer.
But the Annecy massacre cannot be left unsolved for ever ..."Shame on David Jones and his headline writer for beating up a supposition that's entirely unsubstantiated and delighting the antisemitic conspiracy theorists among the article's commenters by appearing to lend journalistic respectability to their blood libel.
'to celebrate the contribution of Judaism to the worldwide community, to raise awareness of anti-Judaism within the Christian church, and to challenge antisemitism. Rev Smith is also a member of the Council of Christians and Jews.
The creation of the foundation represents a thawing of Methodist-Jewish relations. In 2010 the Methodist church conference voted to approve a report which [Borad of Deputies' president Vivian] Wineman called “unqualified Israel bashing”.'
"Israel maintains the Palestinians under occupation for more than 45 years, and this inhuman and immoral situation must stop."All the Palestinian Arabs residing in Gaza are under the total administrative and security control of a Hamas dominated Government following Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005.
"Both sides are putting unrealistic conditions to resume negotiations ..."Are they serious? Israel has been offering to return to negotiations with the PA without any preconditions. It is the PA that is refusing to negotiate unless Israel stops building in the West Bank.
"It is urgent that the international community intervenes firmly to bring the Iranian nuclear programme under control and steadily commits to the resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, pushing the parties to immediately establish a true direct dialogue, leading as soon as possible to the creation of a Palestinian state next to the State of Israel, both with secure borders, on the basis of painful compromises for both parts though necessary for peace, as the abandonment of settlements or their exchange against land, the renouncement to the right of return of the 1948 refugees, the sharing of Jerusalem. This is still – but maybe not for long – a possible solution and there are men and women on both sides capable of achieving it. Let us help them do so."Our well-meaning authors seem to be ignorant of the fact that Israel in 2001 and 2008 offered to cede its claims to more than 90 per cent of the West Bank and agreed to a part of Jerusalem becoming the capitol of a Palestinian Arab State – but such offers were rejected. Even land swaps were broached in the latter offer.
"Writers have their part in this fight and we hereby express our determination to take it firmly and objectively. We urge all writers in the world to join us. Together, we can influence decision makers and public opinion and thereby also the course of events, ensuring that the values of peace are strengthened throughout the world. Our methods in this fight are literature, debate and vigilance. Maybe it is not much, but it is our way of maintaining our dignity in a world of violence and cynism."They have been less than objective and their ability to influence decision makers and public opinion with their planned initiative is fanciful.
"Rather than maintaining hope for peace, I see here nothing but a further attempt to renew the old failed approach to deal with the Arabic and Islamic world."The old failed approach has certainly been an unmitigated disaster.