Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

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)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Thursday 30 June 2016

David Singer: European Union Acclaims Abbas Whilst Flogging Farage

Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer shines a spotlight on an important aspect of the moral bankruptcy of the bloated tyrannous juggernaut that is the European Union.

He writes:

Brexit proponent Nigel Farage has been branded a liar by the European Parliament (EUP) – but PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas can lie compulsively without the slightest EUP remonstration or rebuke.

Such hypocrisy and double standards surfaced during addresses by Abbas and Farage to the EUP within the last week. Farage told those assembled:
“The biggest problem you’ve got and the main reason the UK voted the way it did is because you have by stealth and deception, and without telling the truth to the rest of the peoples of Europe, you have imposed upon them a political union. When the people in 2005 in the Netherlands and France voted against that political union and rejected the constitution you simply ignored them and brought the Lisbon treaty in through the back door.
What happened last Thursday was a remarkable result – it was a seismic result. Not just for British politics, for European politics, but perhaps even for global politics too.”
Farage taunted the EUP Parliamentarians:
“What I’d like to see is a grownup and sensible attitude to how we negotiate a different relationship. I know that virtually none of you have never done a proper job in your lives, or worked in business, or worked in trade, or indeed ever created a job. But listen, just listen.”
Amid shouts of protest, the President of the EUP, Martin Schulz, interrupted Farage in full-flight with this rebuke:
“Mr Farage – I would say one thing to you. The fact that you’re claiming that no one has done a decent job in their life – you can’t really say that”.
Jean-Claude Juncker – President of the European Commission – put the boot into Farage amidst thunderous applause:
“You lied. You didn’t tell the truth. You fabricated reality.”  

 Abbas’s address contained a litany of lies based on a fabricated reality from the outset:
“I would also like to thank you all for all the different kinds of aid you have given, aiding us in institution-building and helping us establish the bases for a democratic regime which will be stable in the future and which will be able to comply with international criteria for democracy, and in particular we want to establish a proper rule of law and proper respect for human rights.”
EUP parliamentarians – including Shulz and Juncker – silently swallowed these soothing words despite:
* Gazan and West Bank Arabs having been denied the right to vote since 2006 or to choose a President to replace Abbas whose term of office had expired in 2010.
* The “Palestinian National Authority” having been unilaterally disbanded by Abbas by decree on 3 January 2013
* Honour killings and victimisation of gays continuing under Abbas’s regime
* Life imprisonment being imposed for selling land to Jews.
A duplicitous Abbas further claimed:
“Our history has been, frankly, one of a continued existence in this territory since the dawn of civilization until now”
Utter nonsense.

The “Palestinians” were defined for the first time in history in 1964 by article 6 of the PLO Charter:
“The Palestinians are those Arab citizens who were living normally in Palestine up to 1947, whether they remained or were expelled. Every child who was born to a Palestinian parent after this date whether in Palestine or outside is a Palestinian.”
The Arab citizens of Palestine formed part of the “existing non-Jewish communities” in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Exclusively high-jacking the term “Palestinians” constitutes racist-inspired semantic fraud.

Acclaim – not derision or condemnation – was the disgraceful EUP response to these and further outrageous lies.

Farage pointedly told the EUP:

“You as a political project are in denial”

Never were truer words spoken.

Wednesday 29 June 2016

"A Setback in the Fight Against Prejudice": High Court judge upholds British local councils' BDS initiatives

Founded in Britain at the end of 2014, Jewish Human Rights Watch JHRW) first came to public attention when, as I mentioned at the time, it mounted a demonstration outside the anti-Israel NGO War on Want.  More recently, they sponsored a full-page ad in The Guardian in response to one advocating an academic boycott of Israel.

They have also sought judicial reviews against local councils passing BDS resolutions (Leicester City Council,  Swansea City Council and and Gwynedd Council) alleging that those resolutions breached equality law requirements, and “failed to have regard “to the need to eliminate discrimination and harassment of Jewish people”.

 Defence counsel for the councils concerned called this legal action “misconceived”,  brought because JHRW “wants to stop local authorities debating Israel’s actions,” and argued that the councils“were exercising their right to freedom of expression protected by both the common law and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.”

.Yesterday, 28 June, Lord Justice Simon, ruled at the High Court in London that however, said that the councils had nothing unlawful. (If so-minded, you can read the entire ruling, in all its legalese, here).

The JHRW intends to appeal the judge's decision:

Needless to say, the BDS crowd (including War on Want) are cock-a-hoop at the judge's decision.  As gleefully reported here:
'....Rob Stewart, Leader of Swansea Council described the decision as “a victory for freedom of expression and the rights of elected councillors to debate and speak about issues of public interest through notices of motion.”
Stewart added: “It was a difficult decision to go to court on this matter. However, given that this was an issue about the democratic rights of councillors to speak on matters of public interest, we believed there was no other option than to defend that fundamental right in court.”
According to the Swansea Council leader, “as part of the court’s judgment costs have been awarded to the Council and, on behalf of the council taxpayers of Swansea, we will now be seeking to recover them from the applicants.”
Leicester mayor Sir Peter Soulsby, meanwhile, said: “This judgement confirms that councillors have the right to shine a spotlight on a legitimate area of public debate and to discuss issues that are of concern to their electorate.”
 Labour councillor Mohammed Dawood, who proposed the motion, said: “I understand the organisation has the right to appeal but I am very pleased with the result. As a council we have a right to express an opinion and I feel that is what was being questioned.”
Responding to the ruling, War on Want said it was “pleased that the court has rejected attacks on local councils standing up for Palestinians.”
Ryvka Barnard, Senior Campaigner on Militarism and Security at the charity, added that “attempts to stifle grassroots solidarity with Palestinians will not work. We are confident that this ruling will give confidence to more councils to stand up for justice.”....'
Not a squeak, it seems, from Gwynned Council's leader yet.

Monday 27 June 2016

Britain's Peasants' Revolt (videos) (updated)

Like the arrogant political elites of both left and right, the BBC is obviously aghast at the Peasants' Revolt that has delivered responsibility for Britain's destiny back into British hands.

Vox populi (Sky News)

Vox populi  (Channel 4)

Vox populi (Channel 4)

Inter alia, it's running with the canard that Brexit-supporting oldies have betrayed the youngsters' future, as seen,for instance, in this entirely biased piece of nonsense that presents that premise as a given.

 As the distinguished British journalist Charles Moore, who exposes that canard, has observed,
 "Is there any country in the world – apart from Britain – where the British Broadcasting Corporation would greet the return of parliamentary democracy with terror and dismay?"

Douglas Murray talks to Ezra Levant:

The wonderful Professor MacEoin:

In London, predictably, assorted ratbags, tarring Brexiteers with the "racist" brush, show their contempt for the will of the people.

Some turn on a female Canadian reporter for

Meanwhile, American judge Jeanine Pirro takes inspiration from the Brexit vote:

A jaundiced view from an often warped newspaper (friends of Israel should reflect that, by and large, prominent enemies of Israel and their backers on social media voted to remain in the EU, all the better as a tool with which to bash Israel):

For a viewpoint on the impact of Brexit on Israel see here

Pat Condell nails it, as so often:

Saturday 25 June 2016

Glory, Glory, Hallelujah!

Joyful Brexiteers in Pompey; image:The News, Portsmouth
When General de Gaulle vetoed Britain's application to join the Common Market (European Economic Community or EEC) in January 1963, it was much to the chagrin of future prime minister Edward Heath, who as Lord Privy Seal was conducting negotiations on behalf of the Macmillan government,and who eventually saw his vision of Britain in Europe eventuate.

When, in 1975, the British voted to join the EEC they did so because it was sold to them by the Heath government as the economic component of NATO, and in those Cold War days it seemed to many, in effect, "better Brussels than Moscow".  Little did the public realise that what the duplicitous Heath had in mind was a federated Europe, a great political juggernaut of unaccountable faceless bureaucrats ushered in by the 1991 Maastricht Treaty.

Mazal Tov, then, to the British people for voting to leave that corrupt leviathan.  What sore losers the "Remain" camp have proved, with some in it even demanding a second referendum! (See more sore loser contempt for the results here )

I hope to make Brexit the focus of my Elder of Ziyon post this week, so I won't say more now.  But in the course of a good article written on the eve of the referendum vote, J-Wire's Israel correspondent, Michael Kuttner, raises some interesting and hard-hitting points regarding the European Union and Israel:
'Europe has become a major trading region for Israel. However with the chaos caused by a weak Euro, severe economic recessions in many member countries, rampant unemployment especially amongst the young generation and a general malaise as evidenced in France, it is time to turn our trading efforts eastward. This is exactly what Israel has been doing in recent times. Not only is it unwise to put all our trading eggs in one basket, diversification also reduces the probability of boycotts and economic blackmail.
The idea that submerging national feelings of patriotism to some sort of universal attachment to European togetherness has manifestly failed. Today we are facing a virulent resurgence of age-old prejudices against Jews as well as other minorities, with political parties dedicated to ominous echoes from the recent past poised to take power in several countries. A union of countries in the future with an agenda hostile to Jews and prepared to ban Brit Mila (circumcision) and Shechita and Kosher food is far more dangerous than individual countries trying to go it alone.
The EU as it has evolved today believes that it has a divine mission to meddle endlessly in our affairs, assert its non-existent right to impose solutions on Israel which will in effect lead to our demise and to punish us with boycotts and labeling if we do not meekly acquiesce.
 In addition and far more galling the EU provides millions of Euros to the kleptomaniac Palestinian Arab Authority which only this week announced via its Prime Minister that stipends to terrorists who have murdered Israelis and their families will be increased. For good measure he described these terrorists as heroes. Has the EU cut off funding in the face of this? Of course they have not.
In the last few days the EU announced that it was prepared to offer an “unprecedented” package in order to induce a “peace” deal. In other words if bribery can achieve some sort of mythical peace at our expense then no doubt we should grab it. The very notion that more Euros thrown down a black Palestinian-Arab hole can purchase genuine peace while the root problem is hate, delegitimisation and a refusal to accept a legal Jewish presence in the region is totally ignored, merely demonstrates yet again the irrelevance of a union united (except for a few notable exceptions) by only one thing – an unhealthy obsession with the Jewish State and a continuing refusal to recognise the evil intents of those inciting and carrying out terror against Jews.
David Cameron in an appeal to the British Jewish Community this week asserted that only by the UK remaining in the EU can it thwart unbalanced policies against Israel. This is of course arrant nonsense. The current funding of NGO’s which work against Israel continues unabated by UK membership. The continual attempts led by France to force a suicide pact on Israel remain unimpeded by any British membership of the EU. How would that change in the future if “remain” wins?
The free flow across vanished borders of those dedicated to perpetrating terror has already doomed the EU and sealed its long-term fate. That is something British Jews should have thought about when they cast their votes. That and the looming demographic realities should cast serious doubts as to the long-term viability of a union drowning in social unrest, economic stagnation and rising Judeopobia.
Whatever the results of the referendum, the mid to long-term prognosis for this union experiment looks bleak. As I survey a continent soaked in past Jewish blood and suffering I can only be thankful that with all its problems and challenges, Israel remains a haven and island of stability in a world going to pot in more ways than one.'
Read the entire article here

Friday 24 June 2016

David Singer: European Union Should Heed Israel’s Sobering Message

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

The European Union needs to heed the sobering message delivered by Israel’s President – Reuven Rivlin – to the European Parliament on 22 June:
“Currently the practical conditions, the political and regional circumstances, which would enable us to reach a permanent agreement between us – the Israelis and the Palestinians – are failing to materialize.”
Rivlin ascribed this situation to two reasons:
* The Palestinian leadership was divided in at least two.
* In order to achieve a stable and viable agreement, a reasonable regional and economic infrastructure was required whereas the reality was a chaos-stricken Middle East in which uncertainty is the only certainty.
Rivlin criticised the French Initiative to kickstart the negotiations stalled for the last two years as the chronicle of a predictable failure, which would only push the two peoples deeper into despair.

He warned those present:
“Distinguished audience, if the international community really wishes and truly aspires to be a constructive player, it must divert its efforts away from the renewal of negotiations for negotiations’ sake, and toward building trust between the parties, and to creating the necessary terms for the success of negotiations in the future.”
Rivlin laid out four areas where building trust could occur:
“First, harnessing the moderate powers in the region. The cooperation with Jordan and Egypt is a supreme common interest of Israel and the international community as well, in the aim of preventing military bolstering from beyond our borders, and in order to eradicate extremism and preserve the stability of the region….
Second, developing Palestinian economy and infrastructures for quality of life. One cannot speak about a future agreement when people live with a basic existential feeling of having no future, no opportunities, no hope, and no horizon. With the backdrop of economic difficulties in Judea and Samaria, and the situation in Gaza, a broad economic course of action is called for….
Third, investing in joint ventures aimed at creating joint interests….
Fourth and ultimately – education. Increasing stability, developing infrastructures and strategic terms are essential conditions, but are not enough. Creating the conditions for any future agreement requires conditioning hearts on both sides for the possibility of living with mutual respect….”
Rivlin’s message was timely – but could have been more pointed had he stressed that trust building and conditioning of hearts on both sides couldn’t realistically occur whilst:
* The PLO remains the governing authority in Areas “A” and “B” in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank)
* Hamas remains the governing authority in Gaza
* Free elections are denied to their Arab constituencies by Hamas and the PLO.
* Both the PLO and Hamas maintain the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel as their primary goal.
The Arab residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza have been denied any vote since their decision to elect Hamas in 2006 was rejected by the PLO – leading to bitter internecine power struggles that still remain unresolved today.

Certainly if elections were held whilst Hamas and the PLO retained political strangleholds over their respective electorally-starved populations – they might out of genuine fear for their personal safety well opt to continue swallowing the same unpleasant medicine – leaving the peace process in the negotiating void that exists to-day.

Rivlin’s call to harness the moderate powers in the region sends the European Union a message that facilitating direct negotiations between Jordan, Israel and Egypt on the future of Judea, Samaria and Gaza could be meaningful negotiations – not negotiations for negotiations sake – towards ending the 100 years old conflict.

Hopefully the European Union takes note and uses its power, prestige and influence to make such trilateral negotiations become a reality.

Thursday 23 June 2016

In Britain, A Cult of Saints with Feet of Clay

A Yorkshire councillor has been suspended after making a sickening comment relating to a fund opened in memory of  murdered MP Jo Cox.

It's true, however, that  Mrs Cox's murder is being used as a tool with which leftist elements in the "Remain" camp are beating outspoken supporters of Brexit, tarring them with the brush of hate and extremism and portraying them as almost beyond the political pale.

(Predictably, antisemites such as this fellow, followed avidly by certain members of the PSC, have also swung behind this outlook.)

They must not be permitted to suppress debate (Brendan O'Neill warned about that sort of thing here.)
Now the ABC (Australia's answer to the BBC, and just as odiously leftist) is getting into the act.  Consider this ABC Lateline item, for instance, with its cherry-picked images and its emphasis on the case against Britain leaving the EU interwoven with its linkage to Mrs Cox's murder:
'A divided Briton [sic!] will soon vote in a referendum on the nation's European Union membership under a cloud of grief for murdered politician Jo Cox.
Polls are on a knife-edge, with final campaigning underway for the vote that could see the UK leave the EU after 43 years.The deputy leader of the UK's Labour Party, Tom Watson, told Lateline the murder of his colleague and pro-EU politician Ms Cox is on everyone's minds, though he was unsure if it would affect the outcome.
From BBC
"Whatever happens on the result we're going to end up a more divided nation as a result of this debate and we're going to have to do a lot of healing and understanding," he said."We've had more sombre campaigning this week, so I think there'll be more cooler heads when it comes to referendum day [on Thursday local time] but I'm not sure it will affect the outcome or not."Mr Watson said the murder and the Brexit debate had highlighted the need for a more patient and kinder political culture....
Ms Cox was shot and stabbed to death in Leeds in England's north last Thursday, in an attack her husband said was politically motivated.Overnight, her family was to mark what would have been her 42nd birthday with an emotional river tribute and a rally in London.The commemoration in the city's central Trafalgar Square was set to include Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai, with similar events to take place later in cities around the world, among them Beirut, Nairobi, New York and Paris.'
The atmosphere seems to be such that there is a growing cult of Mrs Cox, against which it is heresy to speak.

Mrs Cox, dare it be said, was for all her evident goodness of heart no more a saint than the rest of us.  A former Oxfam employee, she was an anti-Israel activist close to the PSC and other anti-Israel groups, something that even  some of my Anglo-Jewish friends with a deep interest in Israel's welfare have been unaware of, since it has been all but omitted from the mainstream media, including the Jewish media.

 Mrs Cox's widower Brendan, who of course deserves profound sympathy in his loss, and is also becoming part of the cult, is also a leftist activist who has been involved with NGOs unfriendly to Israel.

(Hat tip: Nathan of Plaza)

As for Brexit:

Onya, Boris!

Wednesday 22 June 2016

Michael Danby on Bandt, Hodgins-May, and the Greens' "Policy of Appeasement & Surrender" (video)

Britain's going to the polls to (hopefully) vote in favour of leaving the monstrous European Union, fount of so much mischief, but here in Australia we have our minds mainly on our forthcoming general election.

Here's sitting member for Melbourne Ports Michael Danby telling The Shtick's Henry Greener why it's folly to vote for the anti-Israel "irresponsible Greens," party of Steph Hodgins-May with her "terrible insult" to a sizeable segment of the electorate, namely the local Jews, and of member for Melbourne Adam Bandt, of whom footage is shown at the end of the video addressing APAN (the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network) a few days ago.

(Ten minutes long)

Tuesday 21 June 2016

Of Migration & Invasion

"As a refugee, I too welcome refugees. As a Jew, I am aware of the mitzvah of welcoming the stranger.

As an adult with life experiences, I resent economic invaders who jump queues and try to force themselves into advanced economies where they can benefit from social services.

As a prudent person, I want no part of people who come to my adopted country and demand that I and my fellow citizens submit to the standards of their religion. The same group that tells us that we must not blame them for the terror plans of a small group of them but then not only fail to condemn them themselves, but appoint extremists as religious leaders.

As a father and a grandfather, I condemn parents who have failed to raise children who respond to social issues in a rational and Jewish way."

So says an elderly Holocaust survivor in Sydney, in response to the demands of a group of youngsters calling themselves "Jews for Refugees" that Australia admit all of the illegal "refugees" who have tried to enter Australia by the back door and are now in detention offshore while their applications are considered.

He is absolutely justified, and so, despite the leftist and holier-than-though thought police, are the like-minded people, Jews and non-Jews, who deplore the current invasion of the European Continent by young men of military age posing as "refugees".

The other day, Nigel Farage, leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and a staunch supporter of Brexit (Britain leaving the great bureaucratic tyranny known as the European Union) unveiled a poster in support of his stance that shows a vast crowd of young male migrants pouring into Europe.   It is a genuine photograph of real migrants, not some staged event.  It reflects what has been happening across Europe in the past few months.  Yet it has been condemned (most recently by no less a personage than J.K. Rowling) as "racist" and resembling Nazi propaganda.

What balderdash.

I'm not a particular fan of Farage, but such accusations trivialise genuine racism and undermine democratic debate.

They are attempts to silence those who deplore the creeping islamisation of Europe (sobering new article by Giulio Meotti here)  and what that entails for future generations (not least for women and girls).  Oh, and for Jews.

 The estimable Douglas Murray has once again drawn attention to Europe's migration nightmare here, and how Merkel and the rest of the European "elites" have no idea how to solve this problem that is of their own making.

Also from the Gatestone Institute and The Rebel, this, from Colonel Richard Kemp.

Monday 20 June 2016

Aussie Greens' Policy Imperils Israel (video) & Greens Candidate Digs at Danby's "Duality"

In the lead-up to the imminent Australian federal election (2 July), the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network sent questionnaires to candidates soliciting their attitudes towards Israel and Palestine.

Australian Greens member for Melbourne Adam Bandt (who used to be the Greens' deputy leader under former leader Senator Christine Milne, predecessor to Richard Di Natale) was among those who answered with alacrity, and with the answers APAN hoped to hear.

But there can have been no surprise, given Bandt's and his party's form on the subject.

Nor can there have been surprise at the alacrity with which he agreed to take part in an APAN forum, at which Sophie Ismail, Labor candidate for Melbourne, spoke.

Here's a video showing how dangerous Adam Bandt and the Greens are: frankly, any supporter of Israel who votes for the Greens in the forthcoming election needs his or her head examined.

To quote the uploader, Richard Livingwood:

APAN hosted Australian Greens MP Adam Bandt and Labor Member for Melbourne Sophie Ismail on 13/6/16 for a 1.5 hour discussion on "Palestine & Israel: Adopting a Just Position".

I selected what I believe are the most consequential quotes from Adam. Please be aware that I have cut and pasted these from this discussion and if that has caused them to be misconstrued it is not my intention, in fact I went to great lengths to ensure the quotes were left as they were said as much as possible for a short video.

As the 2016 Federal Election is coming up, I believe that this topic is of great interest to many Australians and they may benefit from understanding more about the stances of our politicians before voting.

I have also annotated this video in parts where I have found information that contradicts their statements as well as where it supports them. I have tried to use sources that are objective as possible knowing full well this is a very contentious topic. Following are the links to the sources referenced in this video.

Australian Greens Resolution Israel/Palestine:

Adam Bandt MP for Melbourne Arms to Gaza Conflict

Hamas Charter:

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

UN Relief Works Agency for Palestinians in the Near East (UNRWA)

2014 Israel-Gaza Conflict

Hamas rocket launch pad revealed near Gaza homes

A further reason to shun the Greens, as sitting federal Labor member for Melbourne Ports Michael Danby, staunch friend of Israel, reminds us ahead of the fight for his seat:

 He has "gone rogue"?!

What does Ms Hodgins-May mean by "duality"?

(Article she links to is here)

Saturday 18 June 2016

An MP Remembered: Jo Cox and Israel
The shocking and horrendous murder of British Labour MP Jo Cox in her Yorkshire constituency is of course a tragedy and an outrage that has caused widespread revulsion and an outpouring of grief both from those who knew the 41-year-old personally and those who did not.

It goes without saying that all decent people, irrespective of creed and political complexion, deplore the evil that took her life, and sympathise with her friends and family, not least her two small children.

As the Jewish Chronicle reports,
'Jewish communal leaders have paid tribute to Jo Cox, the Labour MP who was shot and stabbed in a shock attack in her constituency on Thursday afternoon....
Mrs Cox’s Jewish colleagues expressed sadness at the news. Luciana Berger, the Shadow Minister for Mental Health, tweeted: “Jo Cox was one of the best. A kind, wonderful, passionate, super talented colleague. My deepest condolences to Brendan and the family.”
Paying tribute to her human rights work, Labour MP Ivan Lewis, who is running for Manchester Mayor, tweeted: “Jo Cox changed the world for mums at risk of dying during childbirth and Syrian refugees. We pray for her family and must learn from her humanity.”....
Jeremy Newmark, chair of the Jewish Labour Movement, knew both Mrs Cox and her husband Brendan socially.
He said he had come across Mr Cox, who worked in international aid and development, on projects looking to bridge relations between Jewish community institutions and NGOs like umbrella group Crisis Action.
 Mr Newmark said: “She was a very human politician in every sense. She cared. She cared about issues and people....
UK Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis paid tribute to Mrs Cox. He said: "We're united in grief today at the terrible loss of Jo Cox. Brutally murdered as she served constituents. May her memory be for a blessing."
Jonathan Arkush, president of the Board of Deputies, the representative body of British Jews, said: “We send our condolences and prayers to all of Jo Cox's family after her senseless and tragic murder.”
Tweeted 23 June 2015
The Jewish Leadership Council tweeted: “The JLC is shocked and appalled at the senseless and tragic murder of Jo Cox MP. We send our sincere condolences to her husband and family.”
The Community Security Trust tweeted: "We are shocked and appalled at the attack on Jo Cox MP and our thoughts and prayers are with her and her family."....
In a vigil after her death, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn paid tribute to her work as a parliamentarian and human rights activist.
In a statement, Mr Corbyn said: “Jo was dedicated to getting us to live up to our promises to support the developing world and strengthen human rights.”....'
MPs have closed ranks and prime minister David Cameron has also paid tribute:
"This is absolutely tragic and dreadful news. My thoughts are with Jo's husband Brendan, their two children and their wider family. We've lost a great star, she was a great campaigning MP with huge compassion and a big heart."
Ms Cox has been recalled as a great humanitarian whose memory can best be served by embracing the causes that mattered to her and emulating her in her compassion.

Yet it has to be asked: "How compassionate was she towards Israel in its struggle against Palestinian Arab rejectionism and terror?"

Here's a tweet from 16 April 2015:

 And here's a current comment on it from someone in Pakistan, from where so many of the late MP's constituents originate:
As the Jewish Chronicle notes in the above-mentioned report:
"In the course of her career, she called for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and submitted a piece on the issue for Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East.
In her ‘Unlocking Gaza’a potential: beyond conflict and crisis’ article, she wrote: “The international community should prioritise efforts to stabilise and extend the current ceasefire, end the blockade to kickstart Gaza’s economy and allow greater freedom of movement both into and from Gaza.”
 She called on her party to: “encourage the Israeli government to open up all crossings into and out of Gaza, and urgently allow free and unfettered access to Gaza for goods.”
She also said the Labour Party should “pledge to support a Palestinian national unity government, with Hamas and Fatah ministers, operating in both Gaza and the West Bank,” adding that it should also: “Press for an end to rocket or mortar attacks into Israel. Press for accountability for human rights abuses and violations of international law committed by all sides.”
Ms Cox was sometimes spoken of as a potential Foreign Secretary.  We will of course never know, now, what that would have meant for Israel had she attained that position.

But this and the tweets I have included on this blog suggest that friends of Israel may well have felt dismayed.

Friday 17 June 2016

David Singer: UN Security Council Must Take Military Action Against Islamic State

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer. 

He writes:

President Obama’s continuing refusal to co-sponsor a Security Council Resolution with Russia authorising the use of military force against Islamic State ensures that the horrendous murders in Orlando and Manganville this past week will be repeated with ever increasing frequency anywhere and at any time.

Speaking after a meeting with his National Security Council following the Orlando massacres President Obama stated:
“As we know all too well, terrorist groups like ISIL have called on people around the world and here in the United States to attack innocent civilians. Their propaganda, their videos, their postings are pervasive and more easily accessible than we want.
This individual appears to have absorbed some of that, and during his killing spree, the shooter in Orlando pledged allegiance to ISIL.
As I've said before, these lone actors or small cells of terrorists are very hard to detect and very hard to prevent.
But across our government at every level -- federal, state and local, military and civilian -- we are doing everything in our power to stop these kinds of attacks.”
President Obama was in complete denial so far as his Presidential options were concerned.

Despite a raft of resolutions passed by the Security Council under Article 41 of the UN Charter requiring member States to take a melange of actions against Islamic State – a resolution calling for the use of military action by the United Nations under Article 42 of the UN Charter remains stymied because of America’s opposition to taking such action proposed by Russia.

Article 42 is quite clear in its terms:
“Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.”
 Passing such a resolution would oblige all 193 member States to comply with Article 43(1):
“All Members of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security.” 
 Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued this warning on 18 November last:
“The Security Council needs to give preferential attention to the task of creating a solid legal foundation for the fight against this evil [Islamic State] and for the mobilization of an actual global coalition in response to this common uncompromising challenge for us all”. 
 President Obama preached a similar mantra in St Petersburg on 6 September 2013:
“And I respect those who are concerned about setting precedents of action outside of a U.N. Security Council resolution. I would greatly prefer working through multilateral channels and through the United Nations to get this done.”
Independent and uncoordinated military actions to wipe out Islamic State taken by Russian-led and American-led coalitions have only had limited success.

A minority of UN member States are shouldering the burden of inflicting total defeat – whilst the rest just make pious condemnatory declarations and avert their gaze.

Islamic State’s radicalising of Muslim minds everywhere is endemic and growing and represents a world-wide problem demanding a world-wide response.

How many more San Bernardino and Orlando massacres will President Obama mourn and decry before he agrees to co-sponsor a Security Council resolution with Russia authorising military action against Islamic State?

Thursday 16 June 2016

"When Someone Says They Are Not Anti-Jewish, They Are Only Anti-Israel – That is a Lie" (video)

BDS Norfolk is a genteel and bourgeois-looking collection of dedicated Israel-bashers in and around the English cathedral (and now university) city of Norwich (yes, where the first European blood libel of the Middle Ages occurred).

Note the money symbols
Although many look ready for the pipe and rocking chair, the BDSers there are a dedicated lot, it appears, holding various demos calling for the boycott of Israeli products and an end to arming Israel, with a few stunts along the way.

They have even photographed and plugged the rows of old and oldish books in the cathedral library with "Palestine" in their titles, as if that somehow proves that there was an independent nation so-named until da Joos stole it.

And just look (above) how they've made these coins spin!  It's so naive and laughable it's almost charming!

Anyway, here's World Jewish Congress (WJC) president Ronald S. Lauder addressing the plenary session of "Building Bridges, Not Boycotts," the international summit on the delegitimisation of Israel at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, and affirming his organisation's commitment to the fightback against BDS.

Addressing more than  1,500 students, dignitaries, public officials and representatives of Jewish organisations at the conference convened by, inter alia,  the WJC and Israel’s Mission to the United Nations, Lauder pledged that the WJC “will commit all of our resources, and all of our abilities, to help fight BDS."

 And he observed, inter alia:
"I wonder if all those people who support BDS have the slightest understanding of what this movement really means. Those BDS supporters who join  marches on campus and chant: ‘From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free!’  I wonder if they realize that the River is the Jordan, the Sea is the Mediterranean. These activists are calling for the destruction of the State of Israel. The Muslim groups have their roots in the Muslim Brotherhood ...
Make no mistake. The BDS movement doesn’t support the Palestinian people. It is strictly a campaign to delegitimise Israel, which is simply the latest attempt to deny the Jewish People their right to self-determination. Every other people on earth have the right, but BDS wants to deny that basic right to Jews.... ”
 "[T]he day of the quiet Jew ... of the ghetto Jew are long over," he warned.
As reported here, Lauder has also recently declared:
“Over the last 20 years, and for the first time since the Holocaust, antisemitism is acceptable again.  Unlike the antisemitism of the past, today it comes not just from the Far-Right, but increasingly it comes from the Far-Left. And the new target for this age-old hatred is not the ‘International Jew,’ as Henry Ford called us. Today, it is the Jewish state of Israel, which is constantly vilified throughout the media, on the internet, at the United Nations, and on almost every college campus.
Let’s make one thing crystal-clear right now. When someone says they are not anti-Jewish, they are only anti-Israel, that is a lie. When you hold the only Jewish nation to a different standard than any other country, when you make up lies about the only Jewish nation, its past and its present, and when you want the only Jewish nation on earth to disappear, that makes you an antisemite. Pure and simple...."
 Pertinent new graphics on BDS by Edgar Davidson here

Wednesday 15 June 2016

"The Great Question is Whether They Go Quietly into the Night or Whether They Rebel Against [Islamism]" (videos)

As Donald Trump observed today, Barack Obama seems more outraged over Trump's reaction to the Orlando massacre than over the perpetrator of it.

We're used to leftist-edited footage that portrays the idiosyncratically quoiffured would-be president as a dangerous whacko buffoon.

But in this interview with Fox News's Sean Hannity, which includes denunciation of the Iran Deal and Obama's treatment of Israel, Mr Trump appears positively statesmanlike.

"This could be the all time Great Trojan Horse," he says of his rival's proposed immigration policy....  I'm much better for women than Hillary Clinton is ...."

It's well worth watching.

Meanwhile, also in the wake of the Orlando massacre, Dr Daniel Pipes has beeen telling Canadian broadcaster Ezra Levant of ( *** that he thinks
“The rebellion against Islam and Islamism is growing in Europe ... The great question for France and for the rest of Europe is whether they go quietly into the night or whether they rebel against it”

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog

Tuesday 14 June 2016

Wakey, Wakey to the Islamic Constitutions, Mr Wakeling!

I've  just spotted this post (at left) by a friend on Facebook of a contemptible as-a-Jew Israel demoniser in the UK.

And what a silly (to put it no more strongly) premise it's built upon.

Assuredly, the misconception that Mr Wakeling displays here is certainly not confined to him. If it was, there would be no need to draw attention to the post.

It really should be pointed out, every time somebody makes the kind of assertion that he has here, that there are numerous countries in this world that avow and privilege Islam.

As I wrote, inter alia, some time ago on one of my Tuesday guest posts on Elder of Ziyon:
' [T]here is just one Jewish State on planet Earth and a very significant number of Arab ones, indeed a large number of states that are constitutionally, to a greater or lesser degree, self-defined as Islamic states in which, to some extent at least, disabling legislation against non-Muslims and the operation of sharia law applies.
There is, of course, Saudi Arabia, that most extreme of fundamentalist Arab states, in which no Jews may officially set foot and no churches are allowed, towards which a discrete silence reigns in view of the West’s reliance on the desert kingdom for oil and, Saudi Arabia’s export of Wahhabism notwithstanding, its tacit alliance with the West and Israel:
 “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic State with Islam as its religion. God’s Book and the Sunna of His Prophet … are its Constitution ... Government in Saudi Arabia derives from the Holy Quran and the Prophet’s traditions ... the State protects Islam, it implements its Sharia...”
And then there’s post-Taliban Afghanistan, whose Constitution proclaims:
 “the religion of the State of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam ... The state shall devise and implement a unified educational curriculum based on the provisions of the sacred religion of Islam ... Presidential candidates ... should be ... Muslim.” 
 Post-Saddam Iraq:
 “Islam is the official religion of the state and it is a fundamental source of legislation. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.”
And take Mauretania: its Constitution (1991) declares that country
 “an indivisible, democratic, and social Islamic republic … Islam shall be the religion of the people and of the state … the President of the Republic shall be a Muslim”.
 Or Pakistan, proclaimed as an “Islamic Republic” in 1956, which oversaw a radical islamification of its Constitution in 1985, and the following year foreshadowed the persecution of Christians with the making of blasphemy against Islam a capital offence, and where since 1993 basic constitutional rights are based upon the Quran and Sunna. 
 Or Egypt (“the Egyptian people form part of both the Arab and Islamic community … Islam is the state religion .... The principles of Islamic law form the main source of legislation’), Iran, and Malaysia, where conversion to a religion other than Islam is regarded as apostasy and in Iran liable to capital punishment.
With the exception of Turkey, officially still secular as Ataturk intended yet showing increasing signs of re-islamification under Erdogan, Islam is, I believe I’m correct in saying, entrenched in the constitutions of the remaining Muslim states.'

Sunday 12 June 2016

Bashing Israel & Hamming It Up (videos) (updated)

"Liberal and Progressive" Rabbi Michael Lerner at Mohammed Ali's funeral, inter alia taking swipes at Israel and paying tribute to Islam and The Prophet (and looking like he was about to burst a blood vessel in the process):


You' might think, as I did, that Lerner's remarks would find favour with Israel-haters everywhere.

You might.  But you'd be wrong. Just look at the reaction his remarks have drawn from (wait for it!) Jonathan Azaziah, author of the following vile article, and certain of Azaziah's Muslim (and non-Muslim) friends (including an obsessive Israel-demoniser called Andy Taylor) on Facebook.

Visceral antisemitism, so starkly expressed, so clearly seen. 

 Across the Pond, from our old friend Alex Seymour, Israelophobe extraordinaire,  footage of  members of Richmond and Kingston PSC (what a well-heeled bourgeois bunch they seem, befitting their leafy habitat) at a fair at Ham Common in Surrey on the Saturday of this Queen's Birthday weekend, displaying among their goodies those mendacious maps.

Really, might it not be time for counter-demonstrators to attend such events, bringing with them leaflets that tell the great British public precisely why those maps are deceitful.  (I've linked on my sidebar to two websites that show up those maps for what they are.)

Friday 10 June 2016

David Singer: Palestine – France, Farce and Folly

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer, who writes:

France embarked on a journey to nowhere when it hosted 28 delegations in Paris for a ministerial meeting on 3 June marking the first phase of its initiative aimed at promoting peace in the Middle East. Amid the pomp and ceremony, photo opportunities and handshakes, the final communique revealed:
1. Support was reaffirmed for a just, lasting and comprehensive resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The conflict actually requiring resolution is the Jewish-Arab conflict going back to 1917 – well before Israel’s creation in 1948 – which still sees 20 Arab States today denying the Jews the legal rights vested in them by the Mandate for Palestine to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in its ancient biblical and historical homeland.
Only Jordan and Egypt have recognised and signed peace treaties with Israel.
The “Palestinians” were regarded as part of the “existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” by the League of Nations in 1922 and not recognized as a people by the United Nations in the 1947 Partition Plan.
The 1964 PLO Covenant is their birth certificate. PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s claim on 6 June that the “Palestinians” had a 5000 years old history is farcical.
 Paris remained blinded.
 2. A negotiated two-state solution was reaffirmed as the only way to achieve an enduring peace, with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
That “two-state solution” – first proposed in 1947  – was available at any time between 1948 and 1967, was again offered in 2000/1 and 2008 but was always rejected by the Arabs.
Flogging that dead horse is a waste of time.
The “two-state solution” envisioned by the League of Nations in 1922 and the Peel Commission in 1937 provides the best opportunity for peacefully resolving Jewish and Arab territorial claims in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza.
Guess the delegates were too busy quaffing champagne and tasting canapes to focus on other solutions than the artificially contrived, totally failed and utterly discredited 1947-2016 “two-state” solution.
3. Rebuilding trust and creating the conditions for fully ending the Israeli occupation that began in 1967 and resolving all permanent status issues through direct negotiations based on resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), and also recalling relevant United Nations Security
Council resolutions and highlighting the importance of the implementation of the Arab Peace Initiative.
“Fully ending” the 1967 occupation means kicking 65,0000 Jews out of their homes. What were they thinking – and drinking?
Israel agreed to negotiate with the PLO under the 2003 Bush Roadmap only on the basis of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.
Introducing new negotiating parameters now is incredibly fanciful.
4. Possible ways in which the international community could help advance the prospects for peace, including by providing meaningful incentives to the parties to make peace.
Direct negotiations between Israel, Jordan and Egypt would fit these objectives.
5. The participants highlighted the key role of the Quartet.
The Quartet lost its key role in July 2015 when:
 (i) The Quartet’s representative Tony Blair stood down with no replacement
 (ii) Blair’s office—the Office of the Quartet Representative (OQR) - was renamed the Office of the Quartet (OQ) and its stated mandate was expressed:
“to support the Palestinian people on economic development, rule of law and improved movement and access for goods and people, as they build the institutions and economy of a viable and peaceful state in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.”
Jews became persona non grata overnight as the Quartet’s previously independent non- partisan role was superseded.
 France’s follow-up international conference being organised before the end of the year promises further farce and continuing folly.