David Singer: United Nations Rewrites Balfour Declaration Parliamentary Debate Records

Here's the outcome of a fine piece of sleuthing: the latest important article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

An official United Nations document published by the Division for Palestinian Rights of the United Nations Secretariat contains a deliberately altered record of a 1922 parliamentary House of Lords debate on the Balfour Declaration.

The Balfour Declaration – dated 2 November 1917 – called for the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people – it being clearly understood that nothing would be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The Balfour Declaration was subsequently written into international law after being incorporated into the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine on 24 July 1922.

The upcoming centenary of the Balfour Declaration has prompted a concerted international campaign calling on the British Government to apologise for another Government’s decision taken 100 years ago. Baroness Anelay – Minister of State (Foreign Commonwealth Office) – told the House of Lords on 3 April 2017 that no such apology would be forthcoming.

The UN’s rewriting of Parliamentary debate records actually came to light whilst I was researching the source of a quote appearing in four articles by Stuart Littlewood provocatively headlined

 1. “Who will Finally Heal the “Running Sore in the East”?

 2. “Will the Royal Family Celebrate 100 Years of Shame by Endorsing Israel?”

 3. “Despicable Balfour: A story of betrayal” 

 4. “Jeremy Corbyn: the antidote to the Blairite “virus” and Zionist snake-bite”

All four articles contained the following quote purportedly made in 1922 by a bitter opponent of the Balfour Declaration – Lord Sydenham:

“The harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country… may never be remedied… What we have done is, by concessions, not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, to start a running sore in the East, and no one can tell how far that sore will extend.” 

My research eventually led to a United Nations Study titled “The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem: 1917-1988”  – the Foreword stating:

“This study has been prepared by the Division for Palestinian Rights of the United Nations Secretariat for, and under the guidance of, the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, in pursuance of General Assembly resolution 32/40 B of 2 December 1977.” 

This UN Study claimed Lord Sydenham had said:

"... the harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country - Arab all around in the hinterland - may never be remedied ... what we have done is, by concessions, not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, to start a running sore in the East, and no one can tell how far that sore will extend" 

sourcing this quote to British Hansard  – the official record of parliamentary debates.

However Hansard records Lord Sydenham actually saying on 21 June 1922:

“What we have done is, by concessions, not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, to start a running sore in the East, and no one can tell how far that sore will extend. Zionism will fail, the experiment to which the noble Earl referred will fail, but the harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country—Arab all round in the hinterland— may never be remedied.”

Deliberately rewriting Hansard raises the distinct possibility there may be other similar such instances in this UN Study.

A full investigation by the United Nations Secretariat to discover the reason is urgently required.

An immediate retraction, correction and apology must be made by the UN Secretariat.

'In an Emotionless Expression He Said "I'd Kill Her"'

Thus, according to the Jihad-aware Indian-born Canadian Christian scholar Ravi Zacharias, is how a Muslim professor in Bethlehem replied when asked by Zacharias how he'd react if his daughter wished to follow a faith other than Islam.  (5:58)

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnkPVWAF-9k

To quote the uploader:

'This is an uncut version of the raw interview with author and scholar Dr. Ravi Zacharias from the documentary "A Cry From Iran" (about Martyr Bishop Haik Hovsepian) on the topic of Islamic extremists and persecuted Christians, produced and released by Hovsepian Ministries.

Meanwhile, a revealing video on the incursions of the Muslim Brotherhood into North America and its attitude to Hamas and Hezbollah:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPGBq4zGVJI

To quote the uploader:

'In episode 13 of The Third Jihad, Clarion Project exposes numerous groups such as CAIR, ISNA and the Muslim Students Association that would not condemn 9/11, Hamas and Hezbolla. Their parent group, the Muslim Brotherhood, is responsible for global terror and nurturing many well known terror organizations.'

And the Sarsour train trundles on ...

As does the United Nations' hypocrisy and ludicrosity:

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh6r89JebTo

To quote the uploader:

'The Geneva-based human rights group UN Watch condemned the U.N.'s election of Saudi Arabia, "the world's most misogynistic regime," to a 2018-2022 term on its Commission on the Status of Women, the U.N. agency "exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women."'

It would be funny if it were not so disgustingly, so despicably, sad.

Maps, Shmaps, Mr Suarez

American violinist and propagandist against Zionism Tom Suarez, who as described by David Collier unabashedly maligned Israel in a talk at that bastion of Israel-hatred the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), London late last year, calling Zionism "a fascist cult", has become excited by some maps.

Like other anti-Zionists before him, he seems to think that the dastardly Zionists will be routed by this revelation:

Sigh.

They don't seem to understand, the Israel-hating brigade, that no matter how many maps and artefacts (and newspapers, posters, football teams, orchestras from the, er, Yishuv!) they trot out with the word "Palestine" embossed upon them the fact remains that there was never a sovereign state of Palestine.

When will these people get it through their heads that the issue is not whether the name Palestine was applied to the Holy Land (it was, by the Romans, in order to erase the Jewish connection with Eretz Israel) but whether there was a sovereign state of Palestine as pro-Palestinian activists such as themselves maintain (there was not, of course, for since its invasion by Romans that land has always been ruled by someone else, latterly the Ottoman Empire, of which it was a backwater)?

Meanwhile, London's School of Oriental Studies (now SOAS), which began life in the first half of lst century as the SOS with a Jewish lecturer in Hebrew, and has since developed into one of the most vicious anti-Israel and antisemitic UK campuses, has Israel's ambassador to the Court of St James in its line of fire:

 'As Mark Regev prepares to speak at SOAS later this month, students have called a protest against his proposed visit

Palestinian students and student societies across SOAS have called a protest on 27 April in response to the proposed visit of Israeli Ambassador Mark Regev. Many staff and students are particularly incensed that management has entered direct negotiations with the Embassy, despite the fact that the visit was initially proposed by two students societies: the UN Society and the Jewish Society.

SOAS management has also agreed to have the Israeli Embassy control security for the event, including allowing the Embassy to take details of everyone entering the meeting. Palestinian students wrote a letter to management outlining their concerns over free speech and safety, which was ignored.

Over one hundred staff members have signed a letter to management strongly opposing the event, and any event that takes place on campus and seeks to normalise the actions of the Israeli state or any other repressive regime. The letter also affirms solidarity with the Palestinian people and in the fight for justice. Here we reprint the statement prepared by student societies at SOAS, and support the call to protest on 27 April at 4pm opposing the presence of Mark Regev on campus.

It has come to our attention that the Israeli Ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev, will be coming to SOAS on the 27th of April at 19:00. Mr Regev is a well known former spokesperson for the Israeli state who came to international prominence through his defence of the brutal and repeated attacks on the besieged Gaza Strip, including the many violations of human rights and international law carried out throughout these operations.   

Firstly [no such word, not-so-learned learned ones; the word you need is 'first'], Mr Regev will be speaking at our University as an official representative of the Israeli state, not in a personal capacity. He is being given the cover of an academic setting to put forward official state positions on the on-going expansion of illegal settlements, the siege of Gaza, land thefts, and discriminatory laws imposed on Palestinian citizens of Israel. This is not an academic debate, informed by fact and reason, it is an official exercise in state propaganda.  

This comes flying in the face of a landslide (73%) SOAS vote that included the entire SOAS community, contract staff, academic staff and students, in favour of endorsing the Palestinian call for an academic boycott of Israeli institutions.The Palestinian Campaign for Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) guidelines, explicitly state the refusal to host official representatives of the Israeli state.   

The response to the announcement of the event only confirms the SOAS community’s stance. For example, over 100 members of the academic staff have already signed a statement rejecting Mr Regev’s presence on campus. 

Secondly, through allowing this event to take place, the school is failing to uphold its basic duty of care to staff and students, Palestinians in particular. Israel’s latest "anti-boycott law" stipulates that individuals (both foreign nationals and Palestinians who hold foreign passports) who publicly support the Palestinian call for Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) for justice and equality, can be banned entry into the country.   

This law is a blatant breach of free speech and academic freedom. It puts SOAS community in an extremely precarious situation, especially since a number of current staff and students have been denied entry into Israel/Palestine. This is despite the repeated efforts by the school to address these questions of academic freedom. Additionally, this law is yet another example of many attempts to dehumanise Palestinian narratives and criminalise movements and individuals striving to hold Israel to account for its violations of international law and human rights. 

The environment created by this event is unsafe for Palestinian students, many of whom have suffered directly at the hands of the Israeli security services. The Ambassador will be accompanied by  armed  embassy  security  personnel (whether the arms are concealed or carried openly). Many students fear for their safety with Israeli security personnel roaming our campus. Palestinian staff and students would be subject to the same questioning and searching they suffered living under military occupation in Palestine should they attend a public event.

Thirdly, SOAS management cannot guarantee that this event will take place within the acceptable boundaries of academic freedom and free speech, free from intimidation of all participants. The School has ignored a letter of concern by Palestinian students who asked how the School proposes to guarantee that information about attendees will not be passed on to the embassy through the ticketing mechanism, and how the School proposes to deal with the presence of armed security personnel on  campus. It is completely abhorrent that SOAS administration has stated that this visit can go ahead without consulting Palestinian students and staff as part of the risk assessment for the event. Effectively excluding Palestinians from this event.  

Indeed, in their latest correspondence to staff, SOAS management claims to be upholding the right to free speech while also taking into account the concerns of all those affected by the event. It is clear that this is not the case as SOAS administration has effectively ignored letters from staff and Palestinian students and refused to engage with Palestinian students especially.

In response, the SOAS community calls on all students, trade unionists, and concerned individuals who believe in the importance of democracy, the right to academic freedom, educational environments free from intimidation and physical threats, and justice for the Palestinian people to join the ‘Apartheid Off Campus’ day on the 27th April in the afternoon at SOAS. A day where the SOAS community will celebrate its diversity and struggles with teach-outs on resistance movements, the situation in Palestine and their relevance in the UK today from 16:00.   

Signed:  •  SOAS Decolonising Our Minds Society •  SOAS Justice For Cleaners •  SOAS Fractionals For Fair Pay •  SOAS Labour Society •  NUS Black Student Campaign  •  SOAS LGBTQ Society •  SOAS Syria Society •  SOAS Palestine Society •  SOAS Israel Society •  SOAS Islamic Society  •  SOAS Iraqi Society •  SOAS Ahlubayt Islamic Society •  SOAS Transnational Diplomacy Association •  SOAS Men’s Football Club •  SOAS Against Human Trafficking •  SOAS Canadian Society •  SOAS Kashmir Solidarity Movement •  SOAS Afghan Society •  SOAS Teach First Society •  SOAS Albanian Society •  SOAS Martial Arts Society •  SOAS Spoken Word Society •  SOAS Kurdish Society •  SOAS MENA Society •  SOAS Goes to Calais •  SOAS Ceilidh Band •  SOAS Herb Society •  SOAS Origami society •  SOAS Shia Theology Society •  SOAS East Africa Network •  SOAS Yemen society •  SOAS India Society •  SOAS Mehfil e Urdu  

 What a shower!

An op-ed here

More Reasons for a "Phobia"

Another instance of the "cultural enrichment" that Islam exports to western countries and which western feminists, with a few honourable exceptions, so studiously ignore.  I wish I could dub him an Olde Tyme preacher but he is preaching misogyny for the here and now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTlMX9Gu1o0

To quote the uploader, Memri.org:

'In a fatwa session posted online, Kuwaiti sheikh Othman Al-Khamis cited the Quranic verse pertaining to wife-beating, and said: "The beatings must not be hard. It is more of a psychological beating, the purpose of which is to humiliate the wife." He further explained that "he shouldn't break her bones, and he shouldn't beat her on the face." A video of his statements was posted on his YouTube channel on January 31.'

Another Islamic expositor, this one based in Norway:

                                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaaqqLEc01U
To quote the same uploader:

'Mullah Fateh Krekar, former founder and leader of the Sunni terrorist group Ansar Al-Islam, said that "all the world’s powers combined" cannot beat the ideology of the Islamic State organization. Mullah Krekar, whose original name is Najmaddin Faraj Ahmad, arrived in Norway in 1991 as a refugee and has been living there since. In an interview with NRT TV, a channel frannel from Iraqi Kurdistan, Krekar said that if the Islamic State is eliminated, a similar group will emerge, because its ideology is rooted in literary sources that are unchangeable, like the Quran and the Hadith. He labeled President Trump's policies "false bravado" and challenged him to send his "most courageous men" to Libya to fight the "lions of Islam." The interview aired on February 20.'

Rex Tillerson on the Iran Threat (video)

The US Secretary of Stare on the threat of Iran's "provocative actions" to the United States, Israel, and the world:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVWzwAU2DuE

"We Are Witnessing Nothing Less Than an International Conspiracy against Israel" (video)

During the last days of the Obama presidency, a great British philosemite speaks, describing Israel as "one of the greatest nations in the whole world":

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1n4H5gtBXA

The speech is a few months old but essentially no less relevant for that.

During Easter week, a compatriot of Colonel Kemp appears to have jumped on board the Jesus-was-a-Palestinian bandwagon:

Shome mishtake shurely.

"We're Not Racists, We're Not Fascists, & We're Not Far Right" (video)

"We need to put voices like mine in the House of Commons."  So declares British campaigner against Islamic misogyny and creeping sharia Ann Marie Waters, and who, having heard her calmly delivered yet urgent message, spoken earlier this year, can blame her?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3501pCQT20g

We need more voices like hers in influential positions in the West in general, of course, people who tell the truth about Islamic misogyny and refuse to jump through politically correct hoops on its behalf, people like American Professor Phyllis Chesler, whose recent shameful and ludicrous treatment has been well-described by Professor Richard Landes here

Women like the writer of this article on the terrible plight of women in Afghanistan

People who can respond to and neutralise the apologetics for Islam such as characterises this BBC report by Clarissa Sebag-Montefiore entitled "Urban Burqa: An artist's striking critique of Islamophobia"

People who write robust articles about radical Islam such as this one

People like Australia's most widely read columnist Andrew Bolt, who today absolutely demolishes preposterous claims by Islam's apologists, following this weekend's airing of an embarassing (to Islam and its leftist allies) Hizb ut-Tahrir video, that violence against women in Islam is not allowed:

'Sure [he concludes], most Muslims probably oppose domestic violence, and many imams say other passages of the Koran recommend mercy. But I’d suggest most also know Mohamed gave men control over their wives and let them beat the disobedient, which is exactly what Keysar Trad, head of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, conceded in an interview with me earlier this year.

Trad confirmed that beating wives was “step three” after counselling, but urged: “Before you even consider using your hand, before you consider an act of violence, have you checked box No. 1?”

But when you point all this out, quoting the Koran, apologists protest.

Silma Ihram, a convert from the Australian Muslim Women’s Association, even claimed on Sky News we had “no right” to quote the Koran like this: “That is for a scholar to do and not for you or me.”

More evasion, I’m afraid. You see, the most authoritative scholars confirm the Koran’s plain words.

Take Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars: “If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife”, he should counsel her or stop sleeping with her. But “if this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive areas”.

Or take Sheik Ahmad al-Tayyeb, Grand Mufti of the Egypt’s famed Al-Azhar Mosque and voted the “most influential Muslim in the world” by the Muslim 500 magazine: “With regard to wife beating ... in a nutshell, it appeared as part of a program to reform the wife …

“By Allah, even if only one woman out of a million can be reformed by light beatings ... It’s not really beating, it’s more like punching ...

“It’s like shoving or poking her. That’s what it is.”

I’m glad apologists say that’s not how they understand the Koran, but they shouldn’t pretend that’s not what Mohamed preached.

Otherwise, it seems they’re fooling themselves … or us.'