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)

Tuesday, 25 November 2014

"Rupert Murdoch ... Is A Zionist Jew" & Other Fables: As told by a British party leader

Pippa Bartolotti  is the fanatically anti-Israel leader of the Wales Green Party.  She stood unsuccessfully for leadership of the Green Party of the England and Wales in 2012 in succession to the equally anti-Israel Caroline Lucas, and, again unsuccessfully, for the European Parliament in this year's May elections.

Ms Bartlotti's speeches to the Welsh Greens (see the opening words of one in the link above, for instance) often include references to Israel, despite that having absolutely no relevance to green issues in Wales.

In the video at the foot of this post (a video which consists of a 65-minute demonisation of Israel) Ms Bartolotti centres the narrative of her recent address to an audience in Newport, Gwent entitled "Why Gaza?" largely on her participation in the "Viva Palestina" convoy of 2010.


Here's one of the many photographs that she shows to her audience; it was taken when the convoy passed through Turin:


She also displayed a photo of herself with the "Pace"flag she acquired in Italy, but had the good sense to leave this photo, of herself and the flag of an expansionist Syrian party which was inspired by Nazi symbolism, at home.

Ms Bartolotti's speech contains a number of howlers and half-truths: I nearly entitled this post "Pro-Palestinian politician Pippa picks a pack of pickled porkies" but on reflection I decided that sounds too flippant, for what she is feeding her audience is no laughing matter.

And it's not only in the use of those mendacious maps:


For example:

At about  3:08 she declares, regarding the United Nations of 1947: "The UN, as it is now [!!!], was dominated by Western Powers" 

At about 3:34, with no reference to Israel's invasion by five Arab armies hell-bent on its destruction, she declares that "the so-called War of Independence ... was a very bloody one-sided affair" (with Israel the sole baddie, of course)

At about 6:50 the spin about the Nakba begins, with the Arabs are described as "the indigenous population" and nothing said about how they were duped by their leaders into fleeing their homes ... As throughout, the Arabs are squeaky clean, the Israelis the villains ...

At about 9:29 A reference to Menachem Begun in a peculiar pronunciation (a soft g); can it be that the speaker is not so very au fait with Israeli history after all?

At about 9:40 we have Ariel Sharon blamed for the Sabra and Shatila massacre as if he carried it out

At about 14:21 regarding the Mavi Marmara affair, no context regarding the IHH nor of the vicious beating of Israeli personnel: "It was completely unnecessary to kill anyone let alone ten people"

At about 29:55 A description of the plight of Palestinian refugees in Syria as if their status after all these years is Israel's fault, with nothing said about the Arab rejectionist nations' deliberate policy of using the Arabs who left Israel as pawns ...

At about 43:12 "You have to remember that the Zionist lobby in America is very strong"


At about 50:27, relating to a certain allegedly all-powerful cabal, a howler regarding a certain pro-Israel media mogul of non-Jewish descent on both sides: "Rupert Murdoch ... is a Zionist Jew ..."

At  about 4:23: Hamas is "labelled a terrorist group which is rather strange really"

At about 38:54: "Hamas ... is practically Dad's Army"

And at about 52:20: "They [Hamas] are not a terrorist group"

At about 1:00:59: An off-the-cuff tribute to busy busy busy anti-Israel activist Elizabeth Morley for her letter-writing campaigns alleging wait for it! pro-Israel bias on the part of the BBC.  (This, by the way, is the Elizabeth Morley, of the Aberystwyth Palestinian Solidaity Campaign branch, who, against avowed PSC policy, is not averse to posting links from the antisemitic online Redress such as this grubby piece of racism by Stuart Littlewood):


At 1:02, despite exhortations to BDS as a means to a "proper peace"



commendation of a one-state solution that entails the eradication of Israel from the map: Gaddafi's statement was "eminently sensible":




"A very bloody one-sided affair" indeed.

 Here is the entire video, in the unlikely event that anyone wishes to endure all 65 minutes of it:


Sunday, 23 November 2014

An eloquent answer to BDS ratbags in London's Bond Street (video)

This video, uploaded by inveterate Israel-hater Alex Seymour (aka Seymour Alexander) is described by him thus:
"Saturday's protest in Bond Street against De Beers (and briefly afterwards, Leviev) for their complicity in Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity. No diamonds in the world could be bloodier than Israel's; not a day goes past without news of another child murdered by the cowardly killers known as the IDF; there are plenty other and more accurate names one could call those loathsome Zionist terrorists who think a kipa on their head somehow gives them licence to behave like the German National Socialists they talk so much about."


The video is notable for the wide berth passing pedestrians give to the little gaggle of groupies holding banners and handing out leaflets defaming Israel while vile invective against Israel is screamed by a woman with a theatrical voice (we've seen this thespian manqué before, in similar scenes, along with her grey-haired offsider who boards Tube trains to recite anti-Israel "poetry" to commuters).

Do these protesters have a permit to stand outside a shop and assail shoppers' eardrums, I wonder?

The video's uploader might as well have entitled it "Watch London Pedestrians Stroll On By".

There is however, one pedestrian who demonstrates his contempt for the anti-Israel ratbags with more than a dirty look or a sudden swerve: watch what he does at about 4:29 ...

An eloquent and fitting response, sir.  One worth the risk of a municipal fine.

Saturday, 22 November 2014

"Their Main Goal Is To Eliminate Israel & Establish An Islamic State": Jordanian opposition figure on Palestinian aims (video)

Just posted by Mudar Zahran re Jordan
Here's Mudar Zahran, the Jordanian opposition figure of Palestinian background who's very sympathetic to Israel, interviewed on Brett and Jon Rappaport's current affairs series The Final Say about the current situation in the Middle East. 
"They are ... in their own world when it comes to radicalism and hatred of Israel ...Their main goal is to eliminate Israel and establish an Islamic state."
In that quotation, is Mr Zahran talking about Hamas?

No.  He's talking about the attitude of Palestinians in the West Bank, where he spent this past summer.


The entire interview, not overly long, is worth listening to, but the relevant section starts at about 13:15, when Mr Zahran's interviewer asks him whether there are any genuine partners for peace on the Palestinian side.

Regarding the people of Gaza, he says
 "[T]hey have had enough of Hamas.  They would love to see Hamas go."
 He is scornful of the Kerry Plan and the current vogue for recognising Palestinian statehood..
  "The Palestinian Authority is corrupt and affiliated with terrorism."
"Basically the West is pushing Israel as if [statehood] is going to solve all the problems .... It's a bad idea."
His solution?
 "[T]he only logical option is a Palestinian state east of the river ...."
 Another brave Arab gentleman, speaking earlier this year:


And see this from the son of a Hamas leader, in the current Telegraph

Friday, 21 November 2014

David Singer On Palestinian Violence: "Continuing Jew-hatred Must Extract A Heavy Price"

This video (hat tip: Shirlee), of the bloodied scene following this week's atrocity in a Jerusalem synagogue, contains graphic images.  They are a grim testimony to what two evil men have done in a house of worship to peaceful persons engaged in prayer; nevertheless, some people might feel that they are best kept out of the public domain, so please think carefully whether you wish to view them.



In the immediate wake of that atrocity, and on the theme of how such manifestations of Jew-hatred should be answered, comes the latest article by Australian lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

An obscene reaction by a Palestinian hatemonger
The slaughter of four rabbis with axes, knives and guns whilst praying in a synagogue along with the serious wounding of six other Jews caught in this horrific blood bath – and the murder of a Druze police officer who went to their rescue – is the end result of endemic Jew-hatred:
1. Begun in the 1920 Jerusalem riots
2. Embodied in the 1964 PLO Covenant, and
3. Reinforced in the 1987 Hamas Charter  
 Arab Jew-hatred has continued unabated for the last 90 years since the Jewish people’s right to self- determination was unanimously endorsed by the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the UN Charter.

Alarm bells warning of this week’s massacre should have sounded loud and clear when American Secretary of State John Kerry visited Israel on 2 January following Israel releasing 26 long term Palestinian Arab prisoners convicted of murder and other serious criminal offences.

 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presciently told Kerry on that occasion:
“A few days ago in Ramallah, President Abbas embraced [these] terrorists as heroes. To glorify the murders of innocent women and men as heroes is an outrage. How can President Abbas says – how can he say that he stands against terrorism when he embraces the perpetrators of terrorism and glorifies them as heroes? He can’t stand against terrorists and stand with the terrorists. And I’m wondering what a young Palestinian would think when he sees the leader of the Palestinian people embrace people who axed innocent men and women – axed their heads or blew them up or riddled them with bullets – what’s a young Palestinian supposed to think about the future? What’s he supposed to think about what he should do vis-a-vis Israelis and vis-a-vis the state of Israel? So it’s not surprising that in recent weeks Israel has been subjected to a growing wave of terrorist attacks. President Abbas didn’t see fit to condemn these attacks even after we learned that at least in one case – I stress, at least in one case – those who served and are serving in the Palestinian security forces took part in them.”
Among those 26 prisoners released were:

   1. Yakoub Muhammad Ouda Ramadan, Afana Mustafa Ahmad Muhammad, and Da’agna Nufal Mahmad Mahmoud – convicted of stabbing Sara Sharon, 37, to death in Holon on January 20, 1993.

    2. Abu Mohsin Khaled Ibrahim Jamal – convicted of the ambush and murder of Shlomo Yahya, a 76-year-old gardener, in a public park in Moshav Kadima and stabbing him to death.

    3. Barham Fawzi Mustafa Nasser – convicted for the murder of Morris (Moshe) Edri 65 – a former employer of Nasser who Nasser ambushed and stabbed in the back. 

    4. Muammar Ata Mahmoud Mahmoud and Salah Khalil Ahmad Ibrahim – convicted of murdering Menahem Stern, a history professor at Hebrew University. Stern, 64, a winner of the prestigious Israel Prize, was stabbed to death while walking to work at the university’s Givat Ram campus on June 22, 1989.

   5.  Abu Hadir Muhammad Yassin Yassin – convicted for the murder of Yigal Shahaf – shooting him in the head as he and his wife were walking through Jerusalem’s old city toward the Western Wall.

Netanyahu then told Kerry to his face:
“In the six months since the start of peace negotiations, the Palestinian Authority continues its unabated incitement against the state of Israel. This Palestinian Government incitement is rampant. You see it in the state-controlled media – the government-controlled media – in the schools, in textbooks, in kindergartens. You see it at every part of Palestinian society. So instead of preparing Palestinians for peace, Palestinian leaders are teaching them to hate Israel. This is not the way to achieve peace. President Abbas must lead his people away from terror and incitement, towards reconciliation and peace.”
Kerry failed to address this virulent Jew-hatred motivating Palestinian Arabs to murder Jews - ignored the adulation afforded these convicted murderers by Abbas and remained silent on the rampant incitement conducted on a daily basis against Israel.

Instead – Kerry – apparently languishing in a time warp – sought to provide some comforting reassurance for Netanyahu with these incredibly inane remarks:
“On a personal level, last month I travelled to Vietnam on my first visit there as Secretary of State. And the transformation in our relationship – I was a young soldier who fought there – the transformation in our relationship is proof that as painful as the past can be, through hard work of diplomacy history’s adversaries can actually become partners for a new day and history’s challenges can become opportunities for a new age.”
Kerry’s words have turned out to be a massive misjudgement. 

It is surely time for America and the European Union especially - and for the rest of the international community generally - to take stock and make clear that:
1. no further financial aid will be given in either Gaza or the West Bank
 2. Abbas and his Government will be regarded as persona non-grata 
until:
(i) the insidious Jew-hating provisions in the PLO Covenant and Hamas Charter are repealed
 (ii) Government-controlled media and schools excise all references denigrating and demeaning Jews.
(iii) The PLO is prepared to recognise Israel as the nation state of the Jewish People in any peace agreement signed by Israel and the PLO.
Failure to so act can only see the Jewish-Arab conflict spiralling out of control into a crisis of catastrophic proportions.

Should such Jew-hatred continue – this heavy price must be extracted. 

Thursday, 20 November 2014

Iraqi-born Londoner Orim Shimshon Talks About His Pro-Israel Stance (video)

As easy on the feminine eye as he is on the ear, here's Orim Shimshon, the young Londoner of Iraqi Muslim background who's become the bane of anti-Israel activists in Britain's capital, talking to Canadian blogger Vlad Tepes about his pro-Israel stance.


Keep safe, Orim!

Wednesday, 19 November 2014

More Candy For More Carnage (video)

Remember these unpalatable scenes following the slaughter of the Fogel family in 2011?

Well, here's footage of Gazans in Rafah handing out candy to celebrate the commission of evil deeds against defenceless Israeli Jews.


Hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog

For more on this see here and  here and for two pictorial examples of hate-fuelled adulation of violence by Palestinians following the Jerusalem synagogue atrocity scroll to the end of my previous post.

British Zionist Stalwart Hoffman: "The Last Thing Israel Needs Is The Vilification, Denigration & Falsehoods Routinely Seen From Yachad"

To admit or not to admit to the community's representative umbrella organisation a bona fide Jewish organisation which happens to profess opinions that militate against the broadly accepted Jewish communal ethos?

That is the thorny question that's bedevilled more than one Western Jewish community in recent years.

Take, for example, the case of the Australian Jewish Democratic Society (AJDS). which successfully applied for membership of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) formerly known as the Victorian Jewish Board of Deputies(VJBD) despite a radical leftist agenda unrepresentative of that of the Victorian Jewish community (and for that matter the Australian Jewish community) as a whole.  Thus the AJDS is an affiliate of the JCCV, which is in its turn a constituent of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ).

The admission of the AJDS (slogan: "A progressive voice among Jews and a Jewish voice among progressives") was doubtless not without much soul searching and many  misgivings on the part of JCCV delegates, but, so (as I understand the matter) the persuasive argument went, in a democratic, pluralistic community the AJDS could not be refused membership on any acceptable grounds.

The AJDS still remains an affiliate, despite ( to the ire and dismay of many in what remains a deeply Zionist community) its avowed support since August 2010 of a "selected BDS actions, a position taken subsequent to its initial admission to the JCCV:
'The resolution ... rejected the Palestinian civil society version of Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions (BDS): 
“The AJDS is opposed to any Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign aimed at the breadth of Israeli economic, cultural or intellectual activity”. The AJDS only supports “selected BDS actions designed to bring about an end to the Israeli occupation, blockade and settlement on Palestinian lands lying outside of the June 1967 Israeli borders.”
Unlike the rejected Palestinian full BDS, the AJDS wants to concentrate on those who profit from this very occupation. An example given in the resolution is of boycotting “settlement products”. In this way the AJDS’s stance is similar to that taken recently by the National Council of Churches in Australia. Like the churches, the AJDS has not endorsed some of the other aims of the Palestinian BDS such as the Palestinian Right of Return.
While not reversing the AJDS’s long-term opposition to blanket academic boycotts, the AJDS envisages boycotting “specific Israeli academics openly supportive of the Occupation.” The organisation made it plain that nevertheless decision on any action would still need to be taken on a case-by-case basis.
The AJDS is opposed to any Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign aimed at the breadth of Israeli economic, cultural or intellectual activity. However, the AJDS does support selected BDS actions designed to bring about an end to the Israeli occupation, blockade and settlement on Palestinian lands lying outside of the June 1967 Israeli borders. Such limited and focused BDS support might include boycotts of settlement products and divestment from military Research and Development (R&D) and boycott of industrial/military activities unrelated to Israel’s defence and security. It might also include selected sanctions or boycotts against specific Israeli academics openly supportive of the Occupation.
The AJDS will make any decisions on these matters on a case-by-case basis, and exercise its judgement as to the political/social cost-benefits of any such actions before granting specific endorsement or approval....'
See the ADJS's latest mischief-making here

The question "to admit or not to admit" was faced by the  Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations earlier this year, when the controversial, professedly Zionist, J Street', founded by Peter Beinart, was rejected for admission to that body,  J Street being widely seen as having an agenda that seriously undermines Israel.

Last Sunday (16 November) Britain's version of J Street, Yachad, founded by Hannah Weisfeld, was admitted to membership of the British Board of Deputies by 135:61 votes, achieving the required two-thirds majority by the narrow margin of five votes.  Apparently, of the five members of the Board execitive, only Board vice-president Jonathan Arkush, voted against admission.

Now, since the Board is officially described as “the voice of British Jewry: a cross-communal, democratic, grassroots organization, and thus the authoritative first port of call for Government, media and others seeking to understand Jewish community  interests and concerns”  this result, like that admitting the AJDS to the JCCV,  was a victory for communal pluralism.

But is it a wise and worthy decision? 


Stalwart pro-Israel activist Jonathan Hoffman (pictured), who's both a member of the Board and of the Zionist Federation, has no doubt about the answer to that question.

I reproduce his speech to the Deputies in full:

'So the Constitution Committee thinks that Yachad is “beneficial to the interests of the community”. Nonsense. The welfare of Israel is at the heart of our interests. Indeed our Constitution requires us to "advance Israel's security, welfare and standing." Yachad is the very antithesis of this. Far from advancing Israel’s security, welfare and standing, it undermines it at every opportunity. Let me give you just four examples:
Example One: Yachad’s main activity in Israel is arranging trips into Judea and Samaria with a group called ‘Breaking the Silence’, which does nothing but denigrate and badmouth the IDF, without ever mentioning the terrorists that threaten Israel every day. Here is an account of one person who went on the trip:
"Our leader subjected us to a litany of accusations against Israel. I have studied the conflict and most of his accusations were new to me and did not ring true. Some of his statements I knew to be false. For example he said that the most aggressive act of the PA was in a speech at the UN But I knew that Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade under the direct authority of the PA - had carried out acts of terrorism and that the PA has incited terrorism ever since it was created. Hannah Weisfeld mentioned further talks that Yachad is doing on "the legality of the occupation". Of course Israel’s presence on the West Bank is not illegal but Weisfeld just wanted to put into our minds the thought that it is. She calls Yachad "pro-Israel pro-Peace" but her intention is to reduce the support of British Jews for Israel, and to get Israel out of the West Bank, even as the PA and all Palestinian movements call for Israel's destruction. If Israel withdrew, the level of violence would increase dramatically. It would also kill any chance of a two state solution. In my opinion she is committed to undermining support for Israel and her commitment to a two state solution is a sham. Her slogan "Pro Israel Pro Peace" is pure propaganda, as seen in George Orwell's 1984."
Not my words The words of someone who went on a Yachad trip.
Example Two: Yachad supported the UN upgrade to Palestinian status which was opposed by Israel and every other western country. Every truly pro-Israel organisation believes that negotiations are the only way forward. By wanting to give the Palestinians access to the International Court and to the UN with its inbuilt majority against Israel, Yachad’s action posed a threat to Israel’s security. So does Yachad’s support for the immediate creation of a Palestinian State. Can you imagine how much worse the summer bombardment of Israel would have been, if Yachad had its way, and Palestine was a country, no doubt governed by Hamas, with weapons still more threatening than the missiles which even now can reach Haifa? A month ago we were lobbying MPs to vote against a Palestinian State. To now admit an organisation wanting an immediate Palestinian State would be a complete nonsense.
Example Three: Yachad has never condemned a boycott of Israeli goods.
Example Four: Yachad makes no effort to explain how Hamas targets Israeli civilians. Yachad portrays the Security Fence only as something which harms the Palestinians. Yachad is silent when it comes to the number of Israeli lives the Fence has saved.
To those of you who say that “we need to embrace Jewish organisations with whom we might disagree”, I ask where are your red lines? Would you support membership for Jews for Justice for Palestinans? Or Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods? Surely those organisations are beyond the pale? Well so is Yachad.
No – it is not simply that we ‘might disagree’ with Yachad. It is much worse than that. Yachad blatantly violates our Constitutional obligation to support Israel.
To those who say that rejecting Yachad will damage the standing of the Board, I respond with the example of J-Street in the US. J-Street was rejected for membership of the US Conference of Presidents. Far from damaging the standing of the Conference, it enhanced it in the eyes of many. Here the ZF rejected Yachad’s membership. Has it damaged the ZF’s standing? Of course not. The ZF’s standing has never been higher. The ZF’s rally during the Gaza operation to support Israel attracted thousands.
 I urge you to vote ‘no’ to Yachad membership of the Board. At this time – above all times – Israel needs support from the Diaspora. The last thing Israel needs is the vilification, denigration and falsehoods routinely seen from Yachad."
A powerful speech indeed! 

But sadly not persuasive.

Perhaps Mr Hoffman should have reminded his listeners of the ancient proverb widely, though apparently erroneously, attributed to Euripides:
"Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad."
Meanwhile, against the backdrop of the evil attack on a synagogue in Jerusalem, involving an axe among other weapons, that has left four rabbis dead, the following photo, proclaiming "This is the way from now on", is being widely distributed on Palestinian social media:

 (Hat tip: M.Z.)

And then there's this:

See http://www.meforum.org/4892/murdered-because-they-were-jews