Leave Means Leave

As when I posted these tremendous videos regarding Brexit following the Referendum in 2016, I continue to be incredulous that any British patriot, much less any British patriot who supports Israel, could support the "Remain" camp.

Until Britain recovers control of its own borders the crazy pro-Muslim immigration policy favoured by the Macrons and the Merkels of the Continent will impact with all its adversity upon the United Kingdom.

And the subjugation of British laws and policy to the unelected faceless bureaucrats of Brussels and Strasbourg will continue to work its mischief and its evil.

Surely that's common sense.

In the wake of yesterday's massive Commons defeat for Prime Minister May, Nigel Farage had this to say:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=-Y85Vl4UmJo

And no wonder.

Here's the wonderful Pat Condell again:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ULhLzUDz-Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh11RYjheUY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9T4dGAxtO0

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.

Refugees: Rot, Rort & Reason

First of all, here's UKIP's Nigel Farage, speaking last week:

For a splendid example of the sheer perverse rot spewed by leftists, even on the distaff side, here’s feminist (yes, feminist!) Laurie Penny, ranting recently in the New Statesman following her return to Britain after a year away.  Yes, there’s the inevitable condemnation of “Islamophobia” and the inevitable facile and highly contentious analogy between today's "refugee" crisis and  the plight of persecuted European Jewry during the 1930s, and yes, there's the perception that all cultures, even egregiously misogynistic ones, are created equal, and that all migrant groups bring “cultural enrichment” to their host nations. 

“…. It’s not that Britain wasn’t a racist, parochial place before. But the xenophobic, Islamophobic and, most obviously, the anti-immigrant rhetoric has ramped up everywhere.

…. Fascism happens when a culture fracturing along social lines is encouraged to unite against a perceived external threat. It’s the terrifying “not us” that gives the false impression that there is an “us” to defend.

…. The chosen minority must summon the fears of every social class at once. That’s why migrants, the bogeyman of choice, are presented as a paradox, just as the Jews were in the 1930s.

…. Perhaps those of us lucky enough to be European citizens should take a deep breath and realise that maybe, just maybe, our feelings might not be the most important thing here. That maybe if thousands of people are desperate enough to risk death to come to our shores, whether or not we’re entirely comfortable having them move to our area should not be the deciding factor in policymaking.

…. Notionally more compassionate news outlets take care to remind us that immigrants actually “enrich” our culture and bring economic benefits. The fact that this is entirely true does not make it any less of an offensive argument. Migrants do not come to the west from war-torn Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan or any other nation that has been colonised and occupied and then bombed and plundered for resources over centuries of imperial and post-imperial exploitation chiefly to enrich the lives of westerners and liven up our god-awful cuisine with some actual flavour. They come out of fear for their lives. They come for asylum and security and opportunity, and they are perfectly entitled to do so, if not by the law of the land then by the principles of justice and human decency.

…. Europeans are quite capable of sitting calmly in the bubbling water of cultural bigotry until it boils away every shred of compassion we have left. That’s the real threat to our “way of life”.’ 

Compare the above bilge with these admirably clear-sighted passages from an article in the August issue of the Australian conservative intellectual journal Quadrant by editor John O’Sullivan:

“…. Refugees are not the only people on the move.  Economic migrants in their millions want to leave places like Afghanistan, Somalia and Burma and settle in the welfarist West.  Enjoying fewer rights than refugees under international law, they seek either to pass as refugees or to break into the West and establish a modern legalistic version of squatters’ rights.  Unlike the passive DPs of post-war Europe, they come from a potentially limitless pool of future migrants.  Given both their numbers and their willingness to override our immigration and other laws, they plausibly threaten our security, identity and social cohesion, especially under a multiculturalism that treats all cultures as equal or that (in reality) privilege the culture of the Other.

…. International human rights law, UN treaty compliance rules, and the influence of NGOs internationally are now among many constraints on national policy-making.  An alternative structure of law, regulation and political authority competes with national governments in refugee policy and human rights law…. Citizenship, borders, democratic decision-making – these are all subject to external supervision.  Lawyers and activists even assert that governments have no rights to control their borders because migration is itself a human right.

…. Migrants of all kinds, sensing weakness, keep coming.  More drown.  The problem gets bigger.  And worse.

Nations can only be generous if they feel secure.  That was the lesson of World Refugee Year.  Australia has learnt it.  The international community … not so much.”

 Australia has learnt it?  Let's hope so.  Here's Australia's most-read columnist, Andrew Bolt, today, in the wake of emotive calls from Australia's Labor opposition leader, Bill Shorten, and certain other politicians, for the country to admit more refugees; (these demands have been prompted by the tragic drowning of little Aylan, notwithstanding the fact that his father, it's been revealed, was not a genuine asylum seeker but sought German dental care):

"Aylan [Kurdi]’s terrible death does not tell us to open our borders. If anything, it warns us to be wary of the consequences of badly directed “compassion”.

Aylan’s family, while originally from the Syrian border town of Kobani, recently besieged by IS, had actually been living in safety in Turkey for three years....

[C]an the West really take in not just real refugees, but the Third World’s poor as well, including those in search of better dentistry?

And here is the dilemma: the more the West takes in, the more will try to come, too, searching in rich countries for what they cannot find in poor — and the more will drown in trying, just like Aylan. We saw all this from the boats which landed here, before the Abbott Government stopped them. Now Germany sees it.

The “refugees” flooding over its borders have crossed many countries where they’d have been safe .... before finally making it to the rich welfare state they really want....

Germany expects up to 800,000 asylum seekers this year, most of them men who will seek to bring over their relatives and brides, too.

How will Germany assimilate so many? How well will such people — mainly Muslims from much poorer countries — fit in? What will this cost German citizens, in money, jobs and safety?

These are questions no responsible statesman can avoid, for all the demands to show “compassion”. But our own politicians have dodged such calculations in the past, and we have paid for it.

For instance, the Fraser government responded to the Lebanese civil war by taking in thousands of Muslim Lebanese, most with few qualifications and no English.

So kind. Yet the consequences for our security have been dramatic. Of the 21 Australians jailed for terrorism offences, all are Muslim and nine were born in Lebanon or to Lebanese families. Gun crime in the Lebanese enclaves of Sydney is now notorious.

More recently, we responded to the wars in Afghanistan and Somalia by again taking in more Muslim refugees.

Again, it made us less safe. Afghans are heavily recruited into bikie gangs and jihadist groups. One Afghan refugee, Numan Haider, pledged himself to IS and stabbed two police in Melbourne.

Children of Somali refugees have joined jihadists in Somalia. Levels of crime for their community, too, is above the national average — to be expected when many are poor, traumatised and face extra hurdles fitting in. They face racism, too.

True, most Muslim immigrants make fine Australians. But any politician who refuses to consider the safety of fellow Australians when deciding on our refugee intake is betraying their first duty.

That said, Syrians tend to have higher education than people from Somalia and Afghanistan. Many do badly need help, and we have wealth to share.

But let’s not pretend that bringing in people from what’s still an overwhelmingly tribal or sectarian Muslim country carries no risks...."

Read all of Bolt's article here

Meanwhile, in Wales, Greens leader Pippa Bartolotti has a message or two:

More on that football story here

Anglo-Jewish Ostrich Leaders Attempt To Muzzle Israeli Islam Expert Mordechai Kedar

As reader Ian points out in a comment on my previous blog, there has been good news coming out of the UK this week: the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), has rescinded its controversial decision to join the accursed BDS movement, a movement of which, incidentally, a reviewer of the important new book The Case Against Academic Boycotts of Israel writes inter alia:

'.... [T]he BDS agenda is at heart not just pro-Palestinian but anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli, if not actively anti-Semitic. One of the convictions shared by several contributors is that many people sign on to the BDS movement without realizing that it is committed, not to a peaceful two-state solution, but to the end of Israel as a Jewish state. The official BDS movement website (bdsmovement.net) features the unimpeachable slogan “Freedom Justice Equality,” but when you get to its actual demands, they turn out to be as follows:

1. Ending [Israel’s] occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall

2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality

3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194

Most Americans (and most Israelis) would agree to the second item, and many to the first; but the third, read correctly, means putting an end to Israel as a Jewish state. This is a demand that virtually no Israeli Jews, even the most liberal, would accede to, as the BDS movement knows full well. To include this core demand, then, means that BDS is not about resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but prolonging it, and taking sides in it. It follows that any boycott adopted on these terms can never be withdrawn as long as the Jewish state continues to exist.' (Read more here)

To quote Dan Leon, one of the architects who comments below the line here:

"I am very pleased that the RIBA Council came to this conclusion today. 

The issues associated the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are very important indeed and need to be discuss and debated with a view to forging a true and equitable peace for all parties, based on mutual understanding and mutual respect - but the RIBA is not the correct forum for such a debate. It was confirmed as such, being outside the RIBA's remit, and the RIBA have correctly regularised the matter.

For our Institute to seek the exclusion of another country's professional body would have been wholly wrong and counter productive to this end. It would have been negative, and silence any opportunity for engagement and exchange.

It is not necessary to drag up all the arguments again here, but legal opinion confirmed the March motion on Israel as 'discriminatory'. How could that remain on RIBA policy?"

 Elder of Ziyon has a most interesting piece on  the RIBA fracas here

More welcome news this week are tweets by UKIP leader Nigel Farage, still riding the crest of a wave which seems set to drench Tories in next year's May General Election, has been bold enough to declare on Twitter:

And as reported in the Jewish Chronicle, Nigel Farage

'has blamed Muslims for what he called “a sharp rise in antisemitism” in Britain and Europe.

 Speaking during his weekly phone-in show on London’s LBC Radio, Mr Farage told a caller from Highgate: “I have detected quite a sharp rise in antisemitism, not just in this country, but across the rest of Europe too.

“What’s fuelling it is that there are many more Muslim voices, and some of those Muslim voices are deeply, deeply critical of Israel. In fact, some of them even question the right of Israel to exist as a nation.” .... [Emphasis added]

Mr Farage also noted: “It’s quite interesting because there aren’t actually that many Jews in the country - there’s only a few hundred thousand.

“It just shows you what an extraordinary group of people they are, the success they’ve achieved....'

It seems that Farage has dipped his toe where certain elements within the British Board of Deputies fear to tread.

For it's also reported in the Jewish Chronicle, the distinguished and forthright Israeli Professor Mordechai Kedar, an expert on Arab culture and on Islam, who will be addressing the Zionist Federation's Israel Advocacy Conference as well as the meeting illustrated at left, is persona non grata in some quarters:

'The Zionist Federation this week cancelled appearances at three Jewish schools by an outspoken Israeli academic following concerns about his links to an anti-Islamist activist banned from Britain.

Dr Mordechai Kedar, an expert on Israeli Arabs who regularly appears to defend Israel on Arabic stations such as Al Jazeera, was due to begin a speaking tour on Wednesday night.

But ZF chairman Paul Charney said that he had removed the schools from the tour after the intervention of the Board of Deputies.

Dr Kedar, who lectures at Bar-Ilan University, has spoken at events organised by Stop the Islamisation of Nations, founded by the Jewish American Pamela Geller, who was banned from Britain last year in a move supported by the Board of Deputies."

Two of the synagogues at which Professor Kedar (including the Spanish and Portuguses Synaggue in Lauderdale Road) was due to speak have also, it seems, disinvited him.

The case against Professor Kedar addressing synagogues and schools was made in the Jewish Chronicle here by Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, who wrote in part:

'.... In 2012 Dr Kedar was announced as a director of "Stop Islamisation of Nations" (SION). Speakers at SION's conference that year included Tommy Robinson, then a leader of the English Defence League. In 2013, SION's founder Pamela Geller was banned from entering Britain. SION advocated the "immediate halt of immigration by Muslims" into Europe as well as legislation to ban foreign funding of mosques and of departments of Islamic Studies departments in our universities along with a range of further legal restrictions.

From a Manhattan platform of "Stop Islamisation of Nations" beside the EDL, Dr Kedar
mocked multiculturalism:"… [Muslim immigrants into Europe] are multiplying - - somebody said "rats" … and there is [sic] 18 wives and all that …"

This is typical of Dr Kedar's language. On Aljazeera, he taunted his Arab interviewer saying his ancestors had buried theirs daughters alive. This summer, he said during an Israeli Broadcasting Authority interview "the only thing that deters a suicide bomber. If he knows that when he pulls the trigger, or blows himself up, his sister will be raped. That’s it. "

Under attack, he later explained he had been analysing and not advocating. This is not evident from the transcript....'

 It isn't? As I wrote, soon after Kedar made that statement, here:

'[T]wisting the truth comes second-nature to those who hate Israel and seek its destruction.

Take, for instance, what the prominent Israeli scholar Professor Mordechai Kedar, of Bar-Ilan University's Department of Arabic, said early this month on Israeli radio's Hakol Diburim (“It’s All Talk”) following the news that the three kidnapped Israeli teenagers had been murdered :

 “The only thing that can deter terrorists, like those who kidnapped the children and killed them, is the knowledge that their sister or their mother will be raped.

You have to understand the culture in which we live.  The only thing that deters [Hamas leaders] is a threat to the connection between their heads and their shoulders.... Terrorists like those who kidnapped the children and killed them — the only thing that deters them is if they know that their sister or their mother will be raped in the event that they are caught. What can you do, that’s the culture in which we live...

 I’m not talking about what we should or shouldn’t do. I’m talking about the facts. The only thing that deters a suicide bomber is the knowledge that if he pulls the trigger or blows himself up, his sister will be raped. That’s all. That’s the only thing that will bring him back home, in order to preserve his sister’s honor.”

 It is extremely doubtful that the professor was recommending that Israel should resort to such base conduct; as an expert in Arab and Islamic culture he was explaining how Israel's Islamic enemies view the world, and by implication how impotent Israel is given their outlook.'

Mr Pinto-Duschinsky is, of course, entitled to his views.  But equally Professor Kedar is entitled to his, based on long familiarity with Arab culture and with Islam, and to voice them, for, as the rabbi of Hampstead Garden Suburb Synagogue, at which Kedar won't now be speaking, is quoted as saying:

"We probably would have had him and let him explain his comments."

As Paul Charney, chairman of the Zionist Federation, argues:

'What’s worse than a call for a boycott of an Israeli academic?

A call for a boycott of an Israeli academic from within our community.

At the Zionist Federation, we are committed to bringing over expert speakers to educate and enthuse our audiences. We don’t necessarily agree with all their views; we can’t, since our speakers cover the political and religious spectrums, reflecting the diverse backgrounds they come from. But we do think they should all be heard.

Apparently not everyone thinks this way. There has been a concerted effort to smear the reputation of renowned Professor Mordechai (Moti) Kedar prior to his arrival in the UK.

 Dr Kedar’s 25 years in military intelligence and academia makes him an expert in the Islamic and Arabic worlds, and his “crime” is to talk about the disaster that these twin spheres have wreaked in the Middle East.

But a few days after Israel commemorated the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the region, and now when Christians commiserate with their co-religionists facing the same fate, we’re not supposed to talk about this.

For all his forthright views, Moti is in high demand as a commentator across global media – including such lion dens as Al Jazeera Arabic. The Arab world, therefore, is apparently more tolerant of dissenting views than some sections of our community. These self-appointed guardians believe Jewish students must be protected from his views – views that Moti’s own Arab students queue up to hear.

In a country where people will happily condemn Israel in the most disgusting terms, but won’t speak out against Isis because it’s “Islamophobic,” we’re suddenly being asked to fight with one hand tied behind our backs - in case we cause offence.

But if there’s one thing we can learn from Moti, it’s that when it comes to the Middle East, you can’t afford to bury your head in the sand.'

 Update: Unflinching British blogger Edgar Davidson: