"Obscene and Outrageous": Isi Leibler blasts the ADL's association with J Street

In conversation with Rabbi Mark Golub, veteran world Jewish leader and Jerusalem Post columnist Isi Leibler delivers a sustained and stinging criticism of ADL national director Jonathan Greenblatt for cosying up to "pernicious" J Street, which is doing untold harm to the Jewish People and the State of Israel.

Leibler believes that Greenblatt has not spent sufficient time in Israel, and should do so, seeing what it is enduring for himself rather than choosing to associate with people and ideas that are "undermining" Israel and its national security.

"Israel is standing alone in a sea of barbarism", Leibler says, and if Jewish leaders in the Diaspora stand aside and fail to stick up for Israel against the leftist and Palestinian narrative, "history will condemn them."

 He is askance at the failure of American Jewish leaders strongly and unitedly to stress to Obama that Israel must have defensible borders, and fears that Obama might still give Israel an unacceptable "leaving present".

For more on Leibler versus Goldblatt see here and here and here

No Sounding the Knell of BBC Reporter's Bias

Hallel Yaffa Ariel

In an egregiously one-sided feature (that's her hallmark, as shown time and time again by BBC Watch and other BBC monitoring sites) the BBC's Yolande Knell begins:

"For retired West Bank farmer Issa Hamed, the idea that Jewish settlements are destroying a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict is a no-brainer" 

and goes on to push the Palestinian narrative in what should properly be known, as it always used to be, as the Arab-Israeli conflict, for several paragraphs.

In the course of these, Knell described (en passant, without naming) tragic Hallel Yaffa Ariel, the 13-year-old stabbed to death, by an evil teenager bent on mayhem against Jews and since praised as a shahid, while sleeping in her bedroom in Kiryat Arba, as "an American-Israeli girl".

 The fact that Hallel held American citizenship is of interest to Americans and their newspapers, and that is perfectly understandable (as seen here) but Knell's reference to it is, judging from her past form, in all likelihood merely gratuitous.

 Other BBC reports referred to Hallel as "Israeli".   The suspicion must be that Knell, in her snide propagandistic fashion, was deliberately emphasising the "settler" status of the young victim of Palestinian Arab terror in a sort of "well, what do you expect?" frame of mind. A frame of mind that would seek, though not to condone this frame of mind, then at least to excuse it in some sense as tit-for-tat ...

Of course, Binyamin Netanyahu has a response to that Knellian-type frame of mind, declaring:  

One mother ...

"In the 24 hours before the publication of the Quartet report, Palestinian terrorists stabbed and shot innocent Israelis three times, leaving two dead and others wounded. Today a young father was killed and his wife and children injured when their car was riddled with gunfire. Yesterday a 13 year-old Israeli girl was stabbed to death while she slept in her bed. Not only did the Palestinian Authority fail to condemn this gruesome murder, it referred to the murderer as a “martyr” in official media.

... and another

Palestinian praise for murderers today inspires those who will strike tomorrow. This response reflects the moral bankruptcy of the Palestinian leadership and leaves little doubt about its true intentions.

Israel therefore welcomes the Quartet’s recognition of the centrality of Palestinian incitement and violence to the perpetuation of the conflict. This culture of hatred poisons minds and destroys lives and stands as the single greatest obstacle to progress towards peace.

The report unfortunately says nothing about the payments made by the Palestinian leadership to terrorists and their families. The graver the violence, the greater the payment. This Palestinian practice must stop.

Israel shares the Quartet’s historical commitment to advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace through direct, bilateral negotiations without preconditions.

In previous agreements, Israel and the Palestinians committed to discuss every difficult issue exclusively through direct, bilateral negotiations. Nevertheless, the record shows a history of repeated Palestinian rejection of offers to negotiate and compromise from Israeli governments across the political spectrum. Israel cannot negotiate peace with itself.

Israel also notes the Quartet’s concern about the military buildup in Gaza and the threat posed by Hamas, a genocidal terrorist organization, to both Israeli and Palestinian lives.

We regret the failure of the Quartet to address the real core of the conflict: the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people in any boundaries.

The report also perpetuates the myth that Israeli construction in the West Bank is an obstacle to peace. When Israel froze settlements, it did not get peace. When Israel uprooted every settlement in Gaza, it did not get peace. It got war.

It is troubling that the Quartet appears to have adopted the position that the presence of Jews living in the West Bank somehow prevents reaching a two-state solution. The presence of nearly 1.8 million Arabs in Israel isn’t a barrier to peace; it is a testament to our pluralism and commitment to equality.

Israel rejects any attempt to draw moral equivalence between construction and terrorism. So too do we reject the parallels suggested between the campaign of Palestinian terrorism and the violence of marginal elements in Israeli society. The former is lauded by the Palestinian leadership. The latter is utterly condemned and rejected by Israelis across the board.

 Israel will continue to strive for a genuine, negotiated peace based on Prime Minister Netanyahu’s vision of two states for two peoples. While the report includes numerous factual and policy assertions with which we take issue, Israel will discuss with the Quartet envoys ways to explore moving toward this end."

A pertinent post from Edgar Davidson here See also here
 And here

Meanwhile, for this Muslim lady, all praise

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.

"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:

https://twitter.com/jhrwatch

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.

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?"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-result-7-graphs-that-explain-how-brexit-won-eu-explained-a7101676.html

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 TheRebel.com:

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:

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

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.