Little surprises me about the ABC, which is the equivalent of the BBC and equally leftwing and politically correct.
And I see that my impression of the interview has been borne out by the popular Australian columnist Andrew Bolt and by many commentators on his column concerning the interview (hat tip: reader Ian):
'How does it work in the ABC’s world?:
Terrorist: I am going to kill you and all your children.
ABC presenter: Can we haggle here?
[Bolt then quotes the genocidal antisemitic Hamas Charter at length]
But from 7.30 last night:
LEIGH SALES: ...(H)ow will you have a two-state solution if you’re not prepared to negotiate with Hamas?
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: Well, I don’t negotiate with people who want to destroy me ... People who are out to destroy you are not candidates for negotiation. You make peace but only with an enemy that wants peace. An enemy that wants to eradicate you from the face of the Earth: there’s nothing to negotiate about. We want to talk to those Palestinians who reject Hamas. That’s why I’ve asked president Abbas to reject Hamas and espouse peace. You can’t have Hamas and peace. You have to choose one or the other. We choose peace.
LEIGH SALES: But you have to negotiate with who is the representative of 1.8 million Gazans and that is Hamas, otherwise there is no prospect for a two-state solution?
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: Hamas is not the representative. Hamas is their jailer. Hamas has oppressed them. There was only one election in Gaza: once. After that, there are no elections; there are executions. Hamas executed dozens of Palestinians who don’t agree with them during the last war that they forced on their people, using them as civilian shields and when people protested they put a bullet in their heads… They don’t represent anyone in Gaza. They rule them with an iron fist. This is a terrorist tyranny. I will not accord them any legitimacy. Neither should anyone else.'Read more here
* * *
|And we are all anti-"The Zionist Project" eh?|
Defined by my dictionary as:
"1. Deprived of the rights of citizenship, especially of the right to vote; 2. Deprived of a privilege, right, or power".
Rather like the plight of women in Afghanistan under the Taliban, then, huh?
Yet, on the ABC and elsewhere, pundits are trotted out who misuse that very word, purloining it to describe the present position of Muslims in Australia!
There was such a commentator today on the ABC, who did exactly that; he was invited on to talk up "Islamophobia" and the "fear" in Australian Muslim circles following the recent terror raids and the reported attempted murders yesterday of two police officers (seriously slashing one) by an 18-year-old Afghan Australian recruit to extremism who one of the victims shot dead.
|Australian Jewry's enfant terrible adds his ten cents' worth|
Observes Andrew Bolt's column today, inter alia:
'Two policemen are stabbed in Melbourne after offering to shake the hand of a Muslim terror suspect and who do Muslim leaders attack?
Yes, the police. Again.
The Islamic Council of Victoria’s reaction yesterday is a disgrace and only too typical of the Muslim leadership that has so betrayed Australia....
It seems impossible to deny the role of Islam in this confrontation. It seems implausible to blame anyone but Haider himself for what followed.
Pardon? Who else’s fault could it have possibly been?
The ICV compounded that implied slur of the police by demanding “a full and objective investigation into this incident to ensure that such a tragedy is never repeated”.
If it were calling for an investigation into Islam, Islamic radicals and apologists in bodies like the ICV, I would agree.
Let’s get the role of Islam out in the open.
But, no, for the ICV the fault lies not with Islam but a few criminals it claims misrepresent the faith — and especially with Australian society, which had “to deal with the root causes of alienation and disaffection of people such as this”.
The Lebanese Muslim Association yesterday agreed Muslims were feeling marginalised and “picked on” and “root causes” here needed addressing.
Our fault, then? That’s an excuse jihadists would want to hear.
But how strange. We actually have about as many Buddhists as Muslims, yet only Muslims warn they are so “alienated” that we must expect terror attacks unless we change.
This absurdly inflamed sense of victimhood — this blaming of non-Muslims — is now so common among Muslim leaders that we must conclude it is not just a misjudgment but a tenet of their ideology....
Yes, for our Muslim leaders it seems the root cause of Islamic terrorism is never Islam and always the West. And so often there’s the same implied threat: change or risk death — said either as a demand or prediction, depending on whether the speaker is an extremist or moderate....'Read the rest here
Incidentally, from an Aussie academic who back in 2002 concocted a pro-BDS petition with (part-Jewish) leftist academic John Docker, a curious observation today: