Aussie Greens See Red, Over Islamophobia "Racism"

There go the Aussie Senate's Greens this afternoon. Showing their attachment to democratic freedom of  speech by walking out on a senator's maiden speech because they don't agree with what she is saying. Yep,on the far right of the picture is Greens leader Richard di Natale,  and on the far left (seemingly unable to resist a parting peep at the cynosure of the assembly) is Lee Rhiannon.

The red-haired lady all eyes and ears are on is, of course, Pauline Hanson.  I hold no brief for her or her political views in general, but the boycott reflects more on the Greens than on her.

How about hate speech against Jews and Israel, Senator?

As reported by the Australian Associated Press:

'Pauline Hanson has declared Australia is in danger of being swamped by Muslims and is calling for a halt to all immigration.

Echoing her first speech to parliament 20 years ago when as the member for Oxley she made the same warning about Asians, Senator Hanson warned Australia would be living under Sharia law if it didn't act.

How very democratic of you, Senator Rice

Muslim neighbourhoods were suffering from an escalation in crime and decline in social cohesion, she said.

She used her first speech to parliament as a Senator on Wednesday night to call for a ban on Muslim immigration, as well as a halt to all immigration.

"We are in danger of being swamped by Muslims who bear a culture and ideology that is incompatible with our own," she said.

"If we don't make changes now there will be no hope in the future.

"Have no doubt we will be living under Sharia law and treated as second-class citizens with second-class rights if we keep heading down the path with the attitude 'she'll be right mate'."

Greens senators walked out half way through her speech, with Liberal senators yelling "stunt" as the minor party left the chamber.

Senator Hanson offered to personally take to the airport anyone not willing to become Australian and give their undivided loyalty to the nation.

She declared Islam was partly a religion but had a political agenda, saying Muslims were imprisoned at almost three times the average rate and unemployed at two to three times the national average.

She warned of radicalisation on the streets and slammed political leaders for urging Australians to be tolerant, insisting more Muslims were going to fight with Islamic State than the Australian army.

"How should we tell the difference? There is no sign saying good Muslim or bad Muslim," she said..

"How many lives will be lost or destroyed trying to determine who is good or who is bad?"

She called for a ban on Muslim immigration, the burqa and construction of new mosques or Islamic schools while insisting existing ones be monitored.

All immigration should be halted until Australia cleaned up its own backyard, she said, insisting Australians were suffering from massive migrant intake....

Greens senators later took to Twitter vowing to call out Senator Hanson's "racism".

Liberal senator Linda Reynolds hit back, tweeting: "we may not all agree with what she says but in Aust she has the right to say it".

Senator Hanson joked about the walk-out in her speech.

"I can feel the Greens cringing - no they've left - at the thought that I could possibly be here for six years."'

Far better, of course, had the Greens, instead of boycotting Hanson's speech from at least the hallfway mark, remained in their place to hear all of what she had to say with a view to rebutting her points in a fair and civilised manner.  But they are too agenda- and gimmick-ridden a bunch to conduct themselves like Liberal former prime minister John Howard.

Reports the ABC:

'John Howard told Lateline that Senator Hanson was "entitled to be treated in a respectful fashion by the rest of the Parliament".

 In response to the Greens walking out, Mr Howard said: "I think that reflects poorly on them".

He told 774 ABC Melbourne earlier that it would be a mistake to generalise Ms Hanson and her supporters as bigots.

"When I was in politics I always thought it was a mistake and it was inaccurate and it was unfair to brand her supporters as racist and it remains my view, and I don't think anything is gained by those allegations," he said.

Mr Howard said the Parliament should deal with the newly elected senator on the merits of individual issues.

"When she was wrong I said so and when she wasn't wrong I didn't say anything," he said.'

Of course, despite their radicalism, despite their feminism, the Israel-bashing Greens are shtum regarding Islam's benighted practices,  lumping all criticism of Islam, even the un-Western misogyny lurking within Islamic teaching and sharia, under the "Islamophobia" veil.
 
 Just another aspect of their sheer hypocrisy, of course.

For Andrew Bolt's thoughts on the speech see here

"Occupied Palestinian Territories": Brandis Riles Rhiannon

In this video veteran pro-BDS stalwart Aussie Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon, the daughter of Stalinist parents, one of them of Jewish extraction, is deliciously put down and accordingly flummoxed by federal Attorney-General George Brandis when she uses the word "occupied" in relation to East Jerusalem and the "Palestinian Territories".

She: "Why did the Australian Ambassador to Israel attend a meeting in occupied East Jerusalem with the Israeli minister for housing and construction; the same minister who is forecasting a 50 per cent increase in settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in the next five years?"

 He: 'Well I think I should say, Senator Rhiannon, that the rather tendentious way in which you've put that question and in particular the use of the word "occupied" is not something that the Australian Government of either political persuasion acknowledges or accepts.'

She: 'So you don't use the term "Occupied Palestinian Territories", even though it's a United Nations term used widely by a number of international agencies, European members et cetera…'

He: 'Well it's used by a lot of people. It's used by a lot of communists too. Weren't you a member of the Communist Party once?'

Naturally, Australia's lefties and leftist press are much perturbed at Brandis's stance and what it implies about current Australian government policy, as seen here and here and here

See also here and  here

(Hat tip: readers Ian and Marvin)

The PLO's Dr Hanan Ashwari denounces Brandis's comments thus:

“It is absolutely disgraceful and shocking that on the 47th anniversary of Israel’s military occupation of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and Gaza, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis is issuing such inflammatory and irresponsible statements that ‘occupied East Jerusalem’ is ‘a term freighted with pejorative implications, which is neither appropriate nor useful.’  Such pronouncements are not only in blatant violation of international law and global consensus, but are also lethal in any pursuit of peace and toxic to any attempt at enacting a global rule of law.

Israel’s illegal annexation of East Jerusalem is beyond ‘pejorative’ and ‘inappropriate’; it is a deliberate and egregious violation, not just of international humanitarian law and consensus, but of the basic norms of responsible behavior that governs relations among civilized states.”

Trying to fabricate or distort the law to fit Israel’s lawless behavior is shameful and dangerous.  Attorney-General Brandis, whether out of ignorance or whether out of blind bias, is trying to render Australia complicit in the Israeli occupation, and is forcing it to become an advocate of international criminal behavior”.

From Eli E. Hertz of the Myths and Facts website, a timely item:

'The term “occupied territory,” which appears in the Fourth Geneva Convention, originated as a result of the Nazi occupation of Europe. Though it has become common parlance to describe the West Bank and Gaza as “occupied territories,” there is no legal basis for using this term in connection to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

[University of Sydney] Professor Julius Stone, a leading authority on the Law of Nations, categorically rejected the use of the term “occupied territory” to describe the territories controlled by Israel on the following counts:

(1) Article 49 relates to the invasion of sovereign states and is inapplicable because the West Bank did not and does not belong to any other state.

(2) The drafting history of Article 49 [Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War] – that is, preventing “genocidal objectives” must be taken into account. Those conditions do not exist in Israel’s case.

(3) Settlement of Jews in the West Bank is voluntary and does not displace local inhabitants. Moreover, Stone asserted: that “no serious dilution (much less extinction) of native populations” [exists]; rather “a dramatic improvement in the economic situation of the [local Palestinian] inhabitants since 1967 [has occurred].”

 See all of Hertz's article here

David Singer On Foreign Interference In The Susiya Case

Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer has another article via the antipodean J-Wire service.  This one is entitled "Palestine – Foreign Interference Dressed Up As Humanitarian Aid".  It may be said to augment his remarks here

Writes David Singer:

'Attempts by foreign governments and international aid agencies to politically influence the outcome of negotiations begun under the Oslo Accords in 1993 now seriously threaten the total abandonment of those Accords.

The battleground for such foreign interference is Susiya village – located in Area C which comprises about 60 per cent of the West Bank – but where only 5 per cent of the current West Bank Arab population live.
Area C has remained  under the total administrative and security control of Israel for the last 45 years.
All the Jewish towns and villages in the West Bank have been established in Area C.
Allocation of sovereignty in Area C was to be determined in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority under the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap of 2002.

Those negotiations have hit a brick wall with the continuing refusal of the Palestinian Authority to resume such negotiations unless Israel places a total ban on further building in the West Bank for the duration of those negotiations.

The Governor of Hebron, Kamel Hamid, has highlighted Susiya’s problems in an open letter – stating

"I would like to draw your attention to the intention of the Israeli authorities to demolish Khirbet Susiya, located south of the town of Yatta in Hebron Governorate. The so-called Israeli “Civil Administration” has distributed final demolition orders on June 12, 2012, to 51 structures in the Khirbet while giving the population only 3 days to object to the decision. The demolition will devastate the lives of at least 160 Palestinians including 60 children. The lawyers of the Palestinian residents of the Khirbet, Rabbis for Human Rights, managed to get a freeze on the demolition for a period of 14 days from the Civil Administration only to find the decision reversed on June 17, 2012."

Susiya has been the subject of many court cases before Israel’s High Court of Justice.

A brief – but incomplete – summary was presented to the Senate of the Australian Parliament by Senator Lee Rhiannon on 26 June 2012:

"Since 1990 there have been a series of demolitions in Susiya and the Israeli authorities have never approved a master plan for Susiya, leaving residents unable to obtain permits for construction. In 2001 all structures were demolished and the residents were forcibly evicted. The residents’ appeal to the High Court of Justice against the action of the Israeli authorities was successful, allowing them to return to their land. In 2011 Susiya had four waves of demolition and, in 2012, the Israeli administration issued a new round of demolition orders."

Surprisingly both the Hebron Governor and Senator Rhiannon fail to mention the current proceedings before the High Court of Justice relating to Susiya and the Court’s decision on 7 June 2012 in relation to the future conduct of those proceedings.

Foreign Governments and aid donors have been pouring millions of dollars into Susiya – despite its long running legal battles and  the continuing uncertainty of tenure for its inhabitants.

Senator Lee Rhiannon told  the Australian Senate:

"Right now many projects financed by overseas aid programs in Susiya in the West Bank are under threat from demolition orders issued by the Israeli civil administration. This includes an AusAID funded health clinic constructed through ActionAid’s local partners. Other projects at risk include a dairy production facility supported by the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the construction of four residential shelters funded with assistance from GVC, an Italian NGO; three animal shelters built in partnership with Save the Children UK and the Union of Agricultural Work Committees; and two water cisterns funded by the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Organisation and Action Against Hunger. Other aid projects which could be demolished include a community centre and a structure used to store sheep’s milk prior to sale, as well as granaries and shelters for sheep and chickens."

Why would these foreign donors risk spending so much money in an area  where they could possibly see the small population living there be declared as squatters and ordered by the Courts to move?  Why commit internationally solicited aid funds to projects where no building approvals have been granted?

Would this money not be better employed in projects throughout the remaining 40 per cent of the West Bank where 95 per cent of the Arab population live under the administrative control of the Palestinian Authority or even in Area C where master plans for Arab villages have been approved by Israel?

The answer can be found in the following statement by the Rabbis For Human Rights:

'At first blush, it may seem that this is "only" about the threat to demolish the entire village of Susya, the homes of these simple cave dwellers of the South Hebron Hills. However, the truth is that the results will affect the fate of hundreds of Palestinian homes throughout the Occupied Territories, perhaps thousands. The outcome may well have an effect on our major appeal to return planning authority for Palestinian communities in Area C to Palestinian hands.'

The erection of illegal Arab structures has gathered pace in Area C as the Palestinian Authority pursues a policy of encouraging illegal land grabs, settlement and building on state lands in Area C.

Such land theft  has consequences – and the Courts are increasingly being approached  to have such activity declared illegal.

Illegal settlement – by either Arabs or Jews – should be regarded with equal severity.

Such conduct can be sought to be justified in the court of public opinion by organized demonstrations in front of demolished shelters using disputed facts – all dutifully recorded on television news and in sensational headlines around the world – or resolved  by the Israeli courts.

Access to the Israeli Court system by Arab residents of the West Bank  has always been available using the services of well funded and well resourced organizations such as Rabbis For Human Rights – whose donors include:.

• Caritas Belgium
• Church of Scotland
• Church of Sweden
• European Commission
• Evangelical Church– Starkenburg West
• Ford Foundation
• New Israel Fund
• Norwegian Church
• Swedish Church

Rabbis For Human Rights are quite blunt and unapologetic as to the outcomes they are seeking in taking up the cudgels in Susiya to try and extend Palestinian Authority influence and control in Area C. They – and foreign governments and aid donors – should let the Court rule on the disputes in Susiya  and indicate their readiness to abide by the Court’s decisions.

Playing politics by building illegal structures that could face demolition is a reckless mismanagement of aid funds.

Foreign governments and aid donors should not try to pretend that their interest in Susiya is purely humanitarian. It clearly is not.'

Crossposted from here

Aussie Greens Senator Defiant Over BDS

The Reginald Theatre at Sydney’s Seymour Centre is to be transformed next month into a German cabaret for Der Gelbe Stern – “The Yellow Star," a one-woman show performed by its co-writer Alexis Fishman.

But, thanks to the fanatical BDS-mongers among extreme lefties and their unlikely bedfellows, that is not the only reminder of 1933 Berlin to be found in, and of course beyond, Australia's most iconic city.

Prominent Labor Member of the House of Representatives and pro-Israel activist Michael Danby, who represents Melbourne Ports, has their measure:

A few months ago, given the outrage over Greens-led inner Sydney Marrickville Council's repellent BDS antics, Greens Party leader Bob Brown distanced himself from their stance.

But old habits die hard, and Marrickville mayor Fiona Byrne, unrepentant, was soon photographed proudly displaying an encouraging letter of endorsement from no less a personage than that old (many would not hesitate to add "antisemitic") rogue Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Similarly, New South Wales Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon, a hard-leftist from way back, remains defiantly attached to the BDS cause.

A few days ago Senator Rhiannon spoke at an anti-Israel event in Sydney.
.
According to an eyewitness she said of the BDS resolution meeting adopted by the NSW Greens State Delegates Council on 8 December 2010:

"It was put forward by the leadership of the Newtown Group and adopted unanimously.  It was a well attended meeting… The State Delegates Council is the key decision-making body of the NSW Greens…The proposal, as required under our rules, had been sitting on our notice paper…for a month so that people could consider it. There were about 60 people in the meeting, 29 local groups represented, 9 groups represented as observers, all our State parliamentary MP’s and passed unanimously...

At the national level the Greens have adopted a boycott on military trade and links with Israel.  One of the pieces of misinformation was that the NSW Greens were going against the national policy. As a Greens MP I don’t do that...

So the boycott [resolution adopted by the NSW Greens in December 2010] was not in contravention of our [the Greens] national policy and actually we do have a position calling on the Australian government to boycott any military arrangements with Israel.

There is a diversity of opinion only about how we take forward the Greens position."

And despite the fact that the Greens have never attempted to boycott China, for example, just Israel, she declared:

"The other thing that we saw coming from the tactics that played out in this period is this attempt to suggest that we, the Greens, wouldn’t take on other countries, that we were only taking on Israel.  Now that is so untrue.  We have a very fine track record. I can say that I would hope and would like it if we could be more active if we had more members. But I am proud of our track record on Tibet, on Burma, on Indonesian issues, on East Timor, on West Papua, on peace in the Pacific, on Sudan.  it’s a really fine record. But again if you read the News Limited papers and many of the other media commentators, you would think that the only country in the world that we paid attention to was Israel. 

“So I am very proud that the Greens adopted our position on the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions."

See Aussie columnist Andrew Bolton's take on this:  http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/rhiannon_backs_the_campaign_that_whips_up_such_familiar_hatred/

As another Aussie commentator, Andrew Landeryou, writes:

"The Greens party’s muddle of half-truths, deceptions and bigotry in their divisive policy on the Middle East that has a scandalous double-standard where every failing of Israel democracy is exaggerated and every disgrace of its misogynist, militaristic and maniacal enemies is minimised must be resolved.

While Bob Brown and the Leader’s office has a publicly-expressed view for Press Gallery consumption, it’s clear from what Rhiannon says that she doesn’t much care what he says or thinks. As a well-organised scion of a tough Stalinist Communist Party family, Rhiannon has the numbers in the New South Wales Greens. That’s enough of a base for her to do what no other Greens parliamentarian would dare: publicly defy Bob Brown." http://www.vexnews.com/2011/07/rhiannon-lets-rip-nsw-greens-senator-defies-federal-leader-bob-brown-on-boycotting-israel/

But there's one piece of good news: cosmetics firm Lush's Australian wing will not be joining its UK counterpart in pushing an anti-Israel agenda.

Hat tip: reader Shirlee

Another Old Aussie Lady On The Flotilla Greets The Folks Back Home (video)

This time it's Vivienne Porszolt, of the so-called Jews Against The Occupation, Sydney.  I'm not sure how many members that group has, but I suspect they could all fit comfortably into the proverbial phone booth.

And again anti-Israel Greens politician Lee Rhiannon has an encouraging word or two.