Tuesday, July 31, 2007


When it comes to producing drek, the Melbourne Age team of cartoonists knows exactly how to offend even if the offense is confined to only a certain segment of the public. So it's fine for Leunig to depict an Australian Prime Minister kissing American backsides but when it comes to sucking up to some of the world's most contemptible pieces of human garbage by deflecting the blame for their murderous ways on someone else, Bruce Petty of that newspaper (cartoon gallery - July 30) takes the cake.

I wonder what the Age is going to make of the latest news about a new Palestinian opinion poll which "shows Hamas winning only 15 per cent of the vote if elections were held now, compared with 42 per cent for the secular Fatah movement led by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas." To read about the poll don't bother consulting the Age where Jerusalem bureau chief Ed O'Loughlin has been especially pumping Hamas' tyres in recent times while describing Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas as "a quisling".

You will find the news in the Australian under the title - STEEP DECLINE IN HAMAS SUPPORT.

Sunday, July 29, 2007


The UMMAH FORUM is currently discussing whether it's permissible for Muslims to kill women and children.

We know the answer is "yes" because Islamic groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizbullah have no qualms about deliberately killing Israeli women and children and they do so not only because they regard these people as "occupiers" but because the majority of them are Jews.

This of course does nothing to prevent their apologists in the West from shilling for them. John Pilger continues to blog away to his heart's content trying to tell us that people with a history of telling lies and with genocide on their minds have reformed. They really are a bunch of nice guys according to Pilger who even tries to do a whitewash of the Hamas Covenant for them:-

"Hamas's long-standing proposals for a 10-year ceasefire are ignored, along with its recent ideological shift amounting to a historic acceptance of Israeli sovereignty. 'The [Hamas] charter is not the Quran,' said a senior Hamas official, Mohammed Ghazal. 'Historically, we believe all Palestine belongs to Palestinians, but we're talking now about reality, about political solutions ... If Israel reached a stage where it was able to talk to Hamas, I don't think there would be a problem of negotiating with the Israelis [for a solution].'"

Leaving aside the highly dubious remark about Hamas' alleged "ideological shift" and the fact that Hamas hasn't in the past ceased firing or arming itself during "ceasefires", we know that this "ten year ceasefire" proposal is nothing other than a patent attempt to buy time to enable the future annihilation of an entire people including even their women and children who are not immune to their murderous attacks. In these circumstances, Pilger's aprroval of this ten year ceasefire is pure evil.

But Pilger does more than that whenever it comes to the subject of Israel and so, by definition, he is more than evil.

Friday, July 27, 2007


As segments of the far left both here and abroad continue to align themselves with the fascist Hamas movement and its Moslem Brotherhood progenitor (see Antony Loewenstein's blog for some clear examples) this item of correspondence from a Lonely Liberal to Professor Alan Dershowitz:-

Dear Professor Dershowitz,

I am a very politically liberal Jew. However, I find great discomfort with liberal activist organizations when it comes to Israel. Their messages are frequently strident and are often indistinguishable between being anti-Israel and antisemitic. Equally problematic is finding myself in the camp of the neo-cons and other right-wing groups in their support of Israel. Is there no place for a liberal Jew who supports Israel?


Alan Dershowitz replies:

I, too, am a politically liberal Jew who supports Israel, though I am critical of some of its policies (as I am of some policies of every country). You are absolutely right that the hard left has made it politically incorrect to show any support for Israel. Indeed, virulent anti-Israel extremism has become a litmus test for acceptance by the hard left.

I, too, find it impossible to support the neo-cons and other right-wing groups, since I favor the end of the occupation, the two-state solution and Israeli efforts to reach out to pragmatic Palestinians. I also strongly oppose the right on issues of social justice, tikkun olam and separation of church and state.

There is, however, a place for a liberal Jew who supports Israel. We are a proud group that includes Barney Frank, Irwin Cotler, Chuck Schumer, Michael Walzer and many others. The situation you describe is widespread: Liberal Jews who are appalled by the attitude many of their left-wing friends show toward Israel. That is why I am planning to write a memoir entitled "Why I Left the Left But Couldn’t Join the Right." I suspect I speak for quite a few people on this issue.

Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. He is the author of numerous books, including "Chutzpah," "The Vanishing American Jew," "The Genesis of Justice," "The Case for Israel," "The Case for Peace” and, most recently, "Blasphemy: How the Religious Right is Hijacking the Declaration of Independence."

Thursday, July 26, 2007

How the media values lives - a sporting perspective

When Palestinian Arabs lose their lives while attempting to commit terror attacks on Israel, you will always find certain of our media gnashing their teeth and fingerpointing at the Jewish State in an attempt to find the convenient scapegoat for their stupidity. But when 50 Arabs in Irak die as a result of the tumult of celebrations because their nation made the finals of the Asian Cup football tournament, they don't even blink, do they?

Meanwhile, I've heard that the British Union of Journalists is considering boycotting the Melbourne Storm NRL team because of Israel. It seems that one of the Storm's first year players is called Israel Folau and that should be enough to have those pommy journos turning up their wrinkled noses in disgust!

Wednesday, July 25, 2007


Former British prime minister Tony Blair has a difficult task as envoy for the four-power quartet made up of the United States, EU, UN and Russia and it is made doubly so thank to the naysayers who openly question his efforts to help bring about peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians even before he starts the job.

The Telegraph's Tim Butcher highlighted the difficulties he faces in Blair's peace talks doomed, say ex-envoys which was reproduced in yesterday's Melbourne Age. In the eyes of the detractors, the problem is that Blair is dealing only with a Palestine Authority headed by Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas and not Hamas.

Butcher dredges out some has beens whose previous attempts at peace making proved to be abject failures but heaven help us if any of them would ever admit to why they failed or point any blame at the unrepentant hatred and rejection of Israel or the violence of Hamas and the other terrorist groups.

No, to these people, there's one scapegoat for everything that goes wrong - it's always the Israelis.

In order to prove this point Butcher resorts to the usual smoke and mirrors tactic of obfuscation and the omission of pertinent facts. This is what he tells readers:-

"Mr Blair said last week that he saw reviving the Palestinian economy as the key to developing a two-state solution. But Mr Wolfensohn was scathing about Israel and America for failing to back his attempts in late 2005 to develop the Palestinian economy after Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip. He even partly funded the securing of Israeli commercial greenhouses in Gaza so they could be transferred to Palestinian farmers. But Israel closed Gaza's border and halted all exports."

Can you believe that?

Butcher conveniently sidesteps the truth about what really happened to the greenhouses that Wolfenson says he "partly funded".

In fact, they were destroyed by Palestinians before their farmers could produce a single flower or article of fruit for export out of Gaza so why associate the greenhouses with the closure of Gaza's border?

But Butcher also fails to elaborate on why the Israelis closed those borders or about the terrorist threats that preceded the closures. Would any other nation on earth allow their borders to remain open when they are subjected to threats of terrorist attacks?

This article did not find its way into the Mebourne Ageby accident. It's a perfect match because it provides enough blank pages material to demonstrate how a journalist can paint distorted pictures of the events taking place in this troubled region to suit a particular agenda.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007


To my surprise, today's Melbourne Age WORLD NEWS section contains an article, ISRAELI TEXT BOOK TELLS ARAB STORY. Taken from the Los Angeles Times, it's about the Israeli Education Ministry's approval of a school text book acknowledging to the country's minority Palestinian citizens that the Jewish state's creation was a tragedy for them.

The decision serves as a compelling reminder of the maturity of Israeli society and the strength of its democracy. Israeli educators are light years ahead of their Palestinian counterparts who refuse to accept that there are two people living in the region and that each has its own narrative which deserves to be acknowledged.

Readers of the Age would not be aware of the difference between the Israeli and the Palestinian education systems. The newspaper has recently ignored the way Hamas TV's exploits young choldren with its programming which until recently featured Farfour, a genocidal Mickey Mouse character that has now been replaced by a killer bee which preaches hatred of Jews to Palestinian children. The Age has also forgotten to make mention of the contents of schoolbooks distributed by the Palestine Authority filled with racist epithets and calls for the destruction of Israel.

Strange that!

Monday, July 23, 2007



I WISH Ed O'Loughlin would get the whole story and not just part of it ("Israel selects friends and foes", The Age, 21/7).

What has been omitted is that Hamas makes it clear that its goal is to annihilate the state of Israel and to replace it with an Islamist state, with the financial and military support of Iran and Syria. Secular Fatah, on the other hand, is showing willingness to compromise in order to achieve a more equitable two-state solution.

To advocate the support for Islamist Hamas just because it was democratically elected and to downplay the threat it poses to both secular Palestinians and Israelis is not going to help the forces of peace. Rather it prolongs the suffering and the bloodshed.

While the hardship that a blockade can cause to its population is of concern, how is it possible for Gaza to be completely isolated yet able to import plenty of arms but not food?

Rachel Merhav, Bentleigh

Sunday, July 22, 2007


Not all of Britain's Jews are prepared to sit back in denial when their own public broadcaster shills for the propaganda of fascist Islamist terror while painting Jews as inhuman scoundrels who lust for the flesh of gentiles in the manner of a Shylock.

Melanie Phillip takes on THE PROTOCOLS OF THE BBC in the Jewish Chronicle and exposes how the BBC been allowed to become a platform for antisemitic lies and hatred.

Saturday, July 21, 2007


Fairfax Jerusalem Bureau Chief Ed O'Loughlin [pictured left], who seems to be doubling as Hamas' Australian media man these days, continues to bat for the Islamic fundamentalist Hamas movement in today's Melbourne Age - ISRAEL SELECTS FRIENDS AND FOES.

The tenor of his report is that while Hamas and Fatah are both dedicated to murdering Jews, there is something not quite right in the fact that the Israelis have selected the more secular Fatah movement as a partner against the democratically elected Islamists whose only fault appears to be their "refusal to renounce armed struggle or recognise the Jewish state's right to exist."

Of course, O'Loughlin omits to add the mere triviality that Hamas also advocates genocide against all Jews – even those who act as its apologists in the West.

O'Loughlin attempts to prop up his case by parroting the discredited line about Israel's blockade of "the isolated Gaza Strip" and how its population is fast becoming "dependent on emergency food aid because of Israel's decision to shut down all of the enclave's border crossings and external trade." Everything is always Israel's fault!

The problem for O'Loughlin is that his mates at Hamas openly say they have no interest in opening the crossings into Gaza, even for the provision of humanitarian relief for their own people HAMAS SAYS OPPOSES REOPENING ISRAEL-GAZA BORDER CROSSING.

Typically, O'Loughlin deals with this uncomfortable little problem by simply not disclosing it to his readers. Similarly, other important facts are also consigned to the blank pages - such as the news that Hamas has been rearming itself through its "closed border" with Egypt. Melanie Phillips points out that "while Gazans are reportedly starving in a humanitarian crisis (caused by the fact that they themselves are preventing the arrival of food and essential supplies) they are nevertheless managing to supply themselves at the same time with 'import' dimensions of weapons with which to murder Israelis (and each other)."

It's no wonder these truths are inconvenient for the Jerusalem correspondent of the Melbourne Age who is doing his best to give Hamas some credibility as an elected Palestinian government that's painted as being as benign as your local friendly neighbourhood social club.

It might come across that way if you routinely hide news of Hamas' violence against fellow Palestinians and Israeli civilians on the other side of the border via quassam rocket attacks, the pathologically twisted education Hamas is giving to Palestinian children, the incitement to violence in its media and the plain, garden variety, filthy racial hatred it promotes in places like this. And O'Loughlin scratches his head in wonderment as to why Israel opposes a movement that promotes and performs terrorist acts (including cross border kidnappings) against its people, calls for an Islamist-dominated planet and works with antisemites around the world.

O'Loughlin is right. Israel could possibly improve its decision-making when it comes to selecting its friends.

On the other hand, O'Loughlin himself could also do a lot better.

Friday, July 20, 2007


The conspiracy theorists among the extreme fringe of the loony left were blaming the Jews for the death in November 2004 of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat. Now, Ahmad Jibril, Secretary-General of the PFLP General Command reveals that he was told by Abu Mazen's team that Arafat Died of AIDS.

Of course, all this matters little to Mrs. Arafat who is living the good life on that monstrous inheritance which her late husband stole from the Palestinian people or to the BBC’s Barbara Plett who cried her way into journalistic infamy while describing the scene as he was being whisked away by helicopter on his final journey.

Thursday, July 19, 2007


The BBC's partisan pro-Arab Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen never manages to disguise his dislike of Israel. His latest Mid-East Diary is no exception.

Here are a couple of examples:-

"The mighty Israeli army, one of the most technologically advanced forces in the world, had been unable to stop Lebanese guerrilla fighters from Hezbollah firing low-tech missiles into the north of their country."

Low-tech missiles?

Not all low-tech according to Honest Reporting's Backspin which sees things rather differently: 1, 2, 3, and 4.

On the number of casualties in last year's Second Lebanon War -

"It killed 1,187 Lebanese, mainly civilians, and wounded 4,092."

Mainly civilians?

Who knows from where Bowen plucked his figures but I prefer to believe the Israelis who, according to the United Press International Report Analysis: Hezbollah's recovery timetable released soon after the war, "identified 440 dead guerrillas by name and address, and experience shows that Israeli figures are half to two-thirds of the enemy's real casualties." On this basis the true number of Hizbullah casualties would be around 700.

The worst part of all this is that such common errors are often picked up and repeated by journalists reporting in the Australian media who are either too lazy or simply disinclined to discovering the truth. Hence, a lethal (to Jew and Arab alike) terrorist movement like Hizbullah or Hamas, will often be painted in our media as if it were a troop of friendly boy scouts.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007


With thanks to Aussie Dave of Israelly Cool comes the above excerpt from the film The Road to Jenin, by French director Pierre Rehov. Australian aid worker Daryl Jones recounts how she came to Jenin to aid the Palestinian people and tells about the grizzly truths she uncovered during her stay. It's a sad eye-opener and it's all about facts that are consigned by many in the media to the blank pages.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007


I recently attended a children's party in Melbourne and the kiddies watched DVD's of playful cartoon animals. It was educational, pleasant and lots of fun.

Contrast that with the education being given to Palestinian children by the psychos in the Hamas movement who are running things in Gaza these days. Hot on the heels of killing off Farfour the bloodthirsty Mickey Mouse look alike, Hamas has replaced the racist rodent on its children's TV programme with a martyrdom-praising bee - HAMAS TV UNVEILS REPLACEMENT FOR TERROR MOUSE.

Sadly, the poor Palestinian children have little opportunity to avoid being indoctrinated by the sick pathology of Hamas because it refuses to accede to international demands that it recognises its neighbour Israel, stops terrorist activity against it and acts to prevent incitement against the Jewish State. The killer bee is part of its response to those demands.

Another response by Hamas has been its own boycott of Israeli goods and the firing of mortar shells at vehicles bringing Israeli humanitarian assistance to the needy of Palestine as described in this New York Times article.

Meanwhile, Ed O'Loughlin of the Melbourne Age remains silent about the killer bee, the indoctrination and the way in which Hamas has turned the tiny Palestinian enclave of Gaza into a prison for its miserable occupants. He's at it again by dutifully following the Hamas line in Fatah gunmen hand over weapons.

"... the 1.4 million people of Hamas-controlled Gaza have been subjected to a near total blockade in which only the minimum of humanitarian supplies are allowed through Israeli-controlled borders."

Please tell us why, Mr. Ed?

Sunday, July 15, 2007


I recently came across this 2006 article which appeared in Hebrew in the Israeli Newspaper Ma'ariv. It was translated by Imshin and pre dates the recent bloody events in Gaza where hundreds of Palestinians including women and children were killed by their own.


Fact no. 1: Since the establishment of the State of Israel a merciless genocide is being perpetrated against Muslims and/or Arabs.

Fact no. 2: The conflict in the Middle East, between Israel and the Arabs as a whole and against the Palestinians in particular, is regarded as the central conflict in the world today.

Fact no. 3: According to polls carried out in the European Union, Israel holds first place as “Danger to world peace”. In Holland, for instance, 74% of the population holds this view. Not Iran. Not North Korea. Israel.

Connecting between these findings creates one of the biggest deceptions of modern times: Israel is regarded as the country responsible for every calamity, misfortune and hardship. It is a danger to world peace, not just to the Arab or Muslim world.

How the deception works

The finger is pointed cleverly. It’s difficult to blame Israel for the genocide in Sudan or for the civil war in Algeria. How is it done? Dozens of publications, articles, books, periodicals and websites are dedicated to one purpose only: Turning Israel into a state that ceaselessly perpetrates war crimes. In Jakarta and in Khartoum they burn the Israeli flag, and in London, in Oslo and in Zurich hate articles are published, supporting the destruction of Israel.

Any request in Internet search engines for the words “genocide” against “Muslims”, “Arabs” or “Palestinians”, in the context of “Zionists” or “Israel” – will give us endless results. Even after we’ve filtered out the trash, we are left with millions of publications written in deadly seriousness.

This abundance brings results. It works like brainwashing. It is the accepted position, and not just a fringe opinion. Only five years ago we were witness to a international anti-Israeli show in the Durban Convention. Only two years ago we were shocked when a member of our Academia blamed Israel of ‘symbolic genocide’ against the Palestinian people. Much ado about nothing. There are thousands of publications blaming Israel of genocide, and not ‘symbolic’.

Under an academic and/or journalistic umbrella, today’s Israel is compared to the damned Germany of yesteryear. In conclusion, there are those who call to terminate the ‘Zionist project’. And in more simple words: because Israel is a country that perpetrates so many war crimes and engages in ethnic cleansing and genocide – it has no right to exist. This, for instance, is the essence of an article by the Norwegian writer Jostein Gaarder (writer of “Sophie’s World”), who wrote, among other things: “We call killers of children by their name”). The conclusion is that Israel has no right to exist.

The tragedy is that in Arab and Muslim countries a massacre is happening. A genocide protected by the silence of the world. A genocide protected by a deception that is perhaps unparalleled in the history of mankind. A genocide that has no connection to Israel, to Zionism or to Jews. A genocide of mainly Arabs and Muslims, by Arabs and Muslims.

This is not a matter of opinion or viewpoint. This is the result of factual examination, as precise as possible, of the numbers of victims of various wars and conflicts that have taken place since the establishment of the State of Israel up till this time, in which the massacre continues. It is, indeed, death on a massive scale. A massacre. It is the wiping out of villages and cities and whole populations. And the world is silent. The Muslims are indeed abandoned. They are murdered and the world is silent. And if it bothers to open its mouth, it doesn’t complain about the murderers. It doesn’t complain about the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity. It complains about Israel.

This great deception, that covers up the real facts, endures and even grows because of one reason only: The Media and Academia in the West participate in it. In endless publications, books, periodicals and websites Israel is portrayed as a state that perpetrates “war crimes”, “ethnic cleansing”, and “systematic murder”. Sometimes it is because this is fashionable, sometimes it is mistakenly, sometimes it is the result of hypocrisy and double standards. Sometimes it is new and old anti-Semitism, from the left and from the right, overt and covert. Most of the classic blood libels were refuted not long after they came into being. The blood libel of modern times, against the state of Israel, continues to grow. Many Israelis and Jews are accessories to the nurturing of the libel.

The Arab-Israeli conflict

The Zionist settling of this country, which began at the end of the 19th century, did indeed create a conflict between Jews and Arabs. The amount of those killed in various clashes up till the establishment of the State of Israel was no more than a few thousands, of both Jews and Arabs. Most of the Arabs killed in those years were killed in armed struggles of Arabs amongst themselves; such as, for example, in the days of the Great Arab Uprising of 1936 – 1939. That was a sign of things to come. Many others were killed as a result of the harsh hand wielded by the British. Israel never did anything comparable.

Israel’s War of Independence, known also as the War of 48’, left between 5,000 to 15,000 dead from among the Palestinians and citizens of Arab countries. In this war, as in any war, there were indeed atrocities. The attackers declared their goal, and if they had won, a mass extermination of Jews would have taken place. On Israel’s side there were also barbarous acts, but they were on the fringe of the fringe. Less, far less, than in any other war in modern times. Far less than what is being perpetrated every day in these very times, by Muslims, mainly against Muslims, in Sudan and in Iraq.

The next event of importance was the Sinai War of 1956. About 1,650 Egyptians were killed, about 1,000 at the hands of the Israelis and about 650 by the French and British forces.

Next came the Six Day War (1967- IJ). The highest estimates talk of 21,000 Arabs killed on all three fronts – Egypt, Syria and Jordan.

The Yom Kippur War (1973 – IJ) resulted in 8,500 Arab dead, this time on only two fronts – Egypt and Syria.

Then there were ‘smaller’ wars: The first Lebanon war, which was initially mainly against the PLO and not against Lebanon. This was a war in a war. These were the years of the bloody civil war in Lebanon, a war we will discuss further later on. And thus also in the second Lebanon war, in which about a thousand Lebanese were killed.

Thousands of Palestinians were killed during the Israeli occupation of the territories, that began at the end of the Six Day War. Most were killed during the two Intifadas, the one that commenced in 1987 and resulted in 1,800 Palestinian deaths, and the one that commenced in 2000 with a Palestinan death toll of 3,700. In between, there were more military actions that caused further Arab fatalities. If we exaggerate, we can say that these were a few hundred more who were killed. Hundreds. Not hundreds of thousands. Not millions.

The total count reaches about 60,000 Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Among them only several thousand Palestinians, although it is because of them, and only them, that Israel is the target of the world’s anger. Every Arab and Muslim death is regrettable. And it is okay to criticize Israel. But the obsessive and demonic criticism emphasizes a far more amazing fact: The silence of the world, or at least relative silence, in the face of the systematic extermination of millions of others by Muslim and Arab regimes.

The blood price of the Muslims

From here on we must ask: How many Arabs and Muslims have been killed in those same years in other countries, for instance, in Russia or in France, and how many Arabs, Muslims and others, were killed in those same years by Arabs and Muslims. The information gathered here is based on various research institutes, academic bodies, international organizations (such as Amnesty and other bodies that follow human rights), the UN, and governmental agents.

In many cases the different organizations present different and contradictory numbers. The differences sometimes reach hundreds of thousands, and sometimes even millions. We will probably never know the precise number. But even the lowest agreed numbers, that are the basis for the tables given here, present a staggering and horrific picture. In addition, time is too short to survey bloody conflicts that are not even covered in these tables, although these conflicts took a higher human toll than the blood price of the whole Arab-Israeli conflict.

Algeria: A few years after the establishment of the State of Israel, there began another war of independence. This time it was Algeria against France, between the years 1954-1962. The number of victims on the Muslim side is a subject for controversy. According to official sources in Algeria it is over a million. There are research institutes in the west that tend to accept that number. French sources have tried in the past to claim that it is only a quarter of a million Muslims, with an additional 100,000 Muslim collaborators with the French. But these estimates are regarded as tendentious and low. Today there is no question that the French killed nearly 600,000 Muslims. And these are the French, who do not stop preaching to Israel, the Israel that in the whole history of its conflict with the Arabs failed to reach even one tenth of that number, and even then, according to the more severe assessments.

The massacre in Algeria continues. In the 1991 elections the Islamic Salvation Front was voted in. The results of the elections were cancelled by the army. Since then a civil war has been raging, between the central government, supported by the army, and Islamic movements. According to various estimates, there have been about 100,000 victims so far. Most of them have been innocent civilians. In most cases it has been horrific massacres of whole villages, women, children and old people. A massacre in the name of Islam.

Algeria summary: 500,000 to 1 million in the war of independence; 100,000 in the civil war in the 90’s.

Sudan: A country torn by campaigns of destruction, almost all of them between the Arab-Muslim north, that is control of the country, and the south, populated by blacks. Two civil wars have taken place in this country, and a massacre, under government patronage, has been taking place in recent years in the district of Darfur. The first civil war spanned the years of 1955-1972. Moderate estimates talk of 500,000 victims. In 1983 the second civil war began. But it wasn’t a civil war but a systematic massacre suitably defined as ‘genocide’. The goals were Islamization, Arabization and mass deportation, that occasionally becomes slaughter, also for the need to gain control over giant oil fields. We are talking about an estimated 1.9 million victims.

The division between Muslim and other victims is unclear. The large district of Noba, populated by many black Muslims, was served its portion of horrors. The Muslims, should they be black, are not granted any favors. Since the rise to power of radical Islam, under the spiritual guidance of Dr. Hassan Thorabi, the situation has worsened. This is probably the worst series of crimes against humanity since WWII. We’re talking about ethnic cleansing, deportations, mass murder, slave trade, forcible enforcement of the laws of Islam, taking children from their parents and more. Millions have become refugees. As far as is known, there are not millions of publications about the Sudanese ‘Right of Return’ and there are no petitions by intellectuals negating Sudan’s right to exist.

Recent years have been all about Darfur. Again Muslims (Arabs) are murdering (black) Muslims and heathens, and the numbers are unclear. Moderate estimates are talking about 200,000 victims, higher estimates say 600,000. No one knows for sure. And the slaughter continues.

Throughout the atrocities of Sudan, the slaughter has been perpetrated mainly by the Arab Muslim regime, and the great majority of victims, if not all, are black, of all religions, including Muslims.

Sudan summary: 2.6 million to 3 million.

Afghanistan: This is a web of nonstop mass killing – domestic and external. The Soviet invasion, which began on 24th December 1979 and ended on 2nd February 1989, left about a million dead. Other estimates talk of 1.5 million dead civilians and an additional 90,000 soldiers.

After the withdrawal of the Soviet Forces, Afghanistan went through a series of civil wars and struggles between the Soviet supporters, the Mojahidin and the Taliban. Each group carried out a doctrine of mass extermination of its opponents. The sum of the fatalities in civil war, up to the invasion of the coalition forces under American leadership in 2001, is about one million.

There are those who complain, and rightly so, about the carnage that took place as a result of the coalition offensive to overthrow the Taliban regime and as part of the armed struggle against al Qaida. Well, the invasion into Afghanistan caused a relatively limited number of deaths, less than 10,000. Had it not taken place, we would have seen a continuation of the self-inflicted genocide, with an average of 100,000 fatalities a year.

Afghanistan Summary: One million to one and a half million, as a result of the Soviet invasion; about one million in the civil war.

Somalia: Since 1977 this Muslim state in East Africa has been immersed in an unending civil war. The number of victims is estimated at about 550,000. It is Muslims killing mainly Muslims. UN attempts to intervene, in the interest of peace keeping, ended in the failure, as did later attempts by American Forces.

Most of the victims died not in the battle fields, but as a result of deliberate starvation and slaughter of civilians, in bombardments aimed at the civilian population (massive bombardments of opponent districts, such as the bombardment of Somaliland, that caused the deaths of 50,000 ).

Somalia Summary: 400,000 to 550,000 victims in the civil war.

Bangladesh: This country aspired to gain independence from Pakistan. Pakistan reacted with a military invasion that caused mass destruction. It was not a war, it was a massacre. One to two million people were systematically liquidated in 1971. Some researchers define the events of that year in Bangladesh as one of the three greatest genocides in (history - IJ) (after the Holocaust and the Ruanda genocide).

An inquiry committee appointed by the government of Bangladesh counted 1.247 million fatalities as a result of systematic murder of civilians by Pakistan’s army forces. There are also numerous reports of ‘Death squads’, in which “Muslim soldiers were sent to execute mass killings of Muslim farmers”.

The Pakistani army ceased only after the intervention of India, which suffered from waves of refugees - millions – arriving from Bangladesh. At least 150 thousand more were murdered in acts of retaliation after the retreat of the Pakistan army.

Bangladesh summary: 1.4 million to 2 million.

Indonesia: The biggest Muslim state in the world competes with Bangladesh for the dubious title of ‘The biggest massacre since the Holocaust’. The massacre commenced with a communist uprising in 1965. There are different assessments (of the number of fatalities - IJ) in this case as well. The accepted estimate talks of as many as 400 thousand Indonesians killed in the years 1965-1966, although stricter estimates claim the number is higher.

The massacre was perpetrated by the army, led by Hag’i Mohammed Soharto, who seized power in the country for the next 32 years. An investigator of those years points out that the person who was in charge of suppressing the rebellion, General Srv Adei, admitted: “We killed 2 million not 1 million, and we did good work”. For this argument, we will stick to the lower, more accepted estimates.

In 1975, after the end of the Portuguese rule, East Timor announced its independence. Within a short time it was invaded by Indonesia, who ruled the area until 1999. During these years about 100,000 to 200,000 people were killed, along with the complete destruction of infrastructure.

Indonesia summary: 400,000 killed, with an additional 100,000 to 200,000 in East Timor.

Iraq: Most of the destruction of the last two decades was the doing of Saddam Hussein. This is another case of a regime that caused the deaths of millions. Nonstop death. One of the highpoints was during the Iran-Iraq war, in the conflict over the Shat El Arab River, the river that is created by the convergence of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. This was a conflict that led to nothing but large scale destruction and mass killing. Estimates are between 450,000 and 650,000 Iraqis, and between 450,000 and 970,000 Iranians. Jews, Israelis, and Zionists were not around, as far as is known.

Waves of purges, some politically motivated (opposition), some ethnic ( the Kurdish minority) and some religiously motivated (the ruling Suni minority against the Shiite majority), yielded an astounding number of victims. Estimates vary from one million, according to local sources, to a quarter million, according to Human Rights Watch. Other international organizations quote an estimate of about half a million.

In the years 1991 - 1992 there was a Shiite uprising in Iraq. There are contradictory estimates about the number of victims. The numbers vary from 40,000 to 200,000. In addition to the Iraqis that were slaughtered one must add the Kurds. During Saddam Hussein’s reign, between 200,000 to 300,000 of them were killed in a genocide that continued all through the 1980’s and the 1990’s.

Over half a million more Iraqis died from diseases because of the shortage of medicine, which was the result of sanctions imposed after the first Gulf War. Today it is clear that this was a continuation of the genocide perpetrated by Saddam on his own people. He could have purchased medicine, he had enough money to buy food and to build hospitals for all the children of Iraq, but Saddam preferred to build palaces and to distribute franchises to many in the west and in Arab states. This issue is being exposed in the corruption of the UN’s ‘Oil for Food’ project.

The Iraqis continue to suffer. The civil war that is raging there now - even if some would rather not give that name to the mutual massacre of Sunis and Shiites – is costing tens of thousands of lives. It is estimated that about 100,000 people have been killed since the coalition forces took control in Iraq.

Iraq Summary: 1.54 million to 2 million victims.

Iran Summary: 450,000 to 970,000 victims.

Lebanon: The Lebanese civil war took place from 1975 to 1990. Israel was involved in certain stages, by way of the first Lebanon War in 1982. There is no disagreement that a considerable part of the victims were killed in the first two years.

The more assessments talk of over 130,000 killed. Most of them were Lebanese killed by other Lebanese, on religious, ethnic grounds and in connection with the Syrian involvement. Syria transferred its support between various parties in the conflict. The highest estimates claim that Israeli activities were the cause of around 18,000 people, the great majority of which were fighters.

Lebanon summary: 130,000.

Yemen: In the civil war that took place in Yemen from 1962 to 1970, with Egyptian and Saudi involvement, 100,000 to 150,000 Yemenites were killed, and more than a thousand Egyptians and a thousand Saudis.

Egypt committed war crimes by incorporating the use of chemical warfare. Riots in Yemen from 1984 to 1986 caused the deaths of thousands more.

Yemen summary: 100,000 to 150,000 fatalities.

Chechnya: Russia turned down Chechen Republic demands for independence, and this led to the first Chechen war of 1994 to 1996. The war cost the lives of 50,000 to 200,000 Chechens.

Russia put a great deal into this conflict, but failed miserably. This did not help Chechens, because although they had gained autonomy there republic was in ruins.

The second Chechen War began in 1999 and officially ended in 2001, but it has not really ended, and number of the victims is estimated at 30,000 to 100,000.

Chechnya summary: 80,000 to 300,000 fatalities.

From Jordan to Zanzibar: In addition to the wars and the massacres, there have also been smaller confrontations, that have cost the lives of thousands and tens of thousands, of Muslims and Arabs (killed) by Muslims and Arabs. These confrontations are not even taken into account in the tables presented on these pages, because the numbers are small, relatively speaking, even though the numbers of those killed are far higher than the numbers of the victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Here are some of them:

Jordan: 1970 to 1971 the Black September riots took place In the Hashemite kingdom of Jordan. King Hussein was fed up of the Palestians use of the country and their threatened to take control of it. The confrontation, mainly a massacre in the refugee camps, took thousands of lives. According to estimates provided by the Palestinians themselves - 10,000 to 25,000 fatalities. According to other sources - a few thousand.

Chad: Half of the population of Chad are Muslims: In various civil wars 30,000 civilians have been killed.

Kosovo: In the mainly Muslim area of Yugoslavia about 10,000 were killed in the war there from 1998 to 2000.

Tajikistan: Civil war from 1992 to 1996 left about 50,000 dead.

Syria: Hafez Assad’s systematic persecution of the Muslim Brotherhood ended in the 1982 massacre in the city of Hama, costing the lives of about 20,000 people.

Iran: Thousands were killed in the beginning of the Humeini Revolution. The precise number is unknown, but is somewhere between thousands and tens of thousands. The Kurds also suffered at the hands of Iran, and about 10,000 of them were murdered there.

Turkey: About 20,000 Kurds were killed in Turkey as part of the conflict there.

Zanzibar: In the early 1960’s the island was granted independence, but only for a short time. At first, the Arabs were in power, but a black group, made up mainly of Muslims, slaughtered the Arab group, also Muslim, in 1964. The estimates are that 5,000 to 17,000 were killed.

Even this is not the end of the list. There were more conflicts with unknown numbers of victims in former USSR republics with Muslim majority populations (like the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagurno Karabach), and a disputable number of Muslims that were killed in mixed population countries in Africa, such as Nigeria, Mauritania or Uganda (in the years of Idi Amins reign in Uganda, in the decade that began in 1971, about 300,000 Ugandans were killed. Amin defined himself as Muslim, but in contrast to Sudan, it is hard to say that the background for the slaughter was Muslim, and it certainly wasn’t Arab.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

To all the above, one can add this data: The great majority of Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab Conflict were killed as a result of wars instigated by the Arabs and as a result of their refusal to recognize the UN decision regarding the establishment of the State of Israel, or their refusal to recognize the Jews’ right of self-definition.

The number of Israelis killed by Arab aggression has been relatively much higher than the numbers of Arabs killed. In the War of the Independence, for example, more than 6,000 Israelis were killed out of a population that was then made up of 600,000. This means: One percent of the population. In comparison with this, Arab fatalities in the war against Israel came from seven countries, the populations of which were already tens of millions. Israel did not dream, did not think and did not want to destroy any Arab state. But the ostensible goal of the attacking armies was “to liquidate the Jewish entity”.

Obviously, in recent years, the Palestinian victims have received most of the attention of the Media and the Academia. In actual fact, these make up just a small percentage of the total sum of all victims. The total sum of Palestinians killed by Israel in the territories that were conquered is several thousand. 1,378 were killed in the first Intifada, and 3,700 since the start of the second Intifada.

This is less, for instance, than the Muslim victims massacred by former Syrian president, Hafez Assad in Hama in 1982. This is less than the Palestinians massacred by King Hussein in 1971. This is less than the number of those killed in one single massacre of Muslim Bosnians by the Serbs in 1991 in Srebrenica, a massacre that left 8,000 dead.

Every person killed is regrettable, but there is no greater libel than to call Israel’s actions ‘genocide’. And even so, the string ‘Israel’ and ‘genocide’ in Google search engine leads to 13,600,000 referrals. Try typing ‘Sudan’ and ‘genocide’ and you’ll get less than 9 million results. These numbers, if you will, are the essence of the great deception.

The occupation is not enlightened, but is not brutal

Another fact: Since WWII, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the national conflict with the lowest number of victims, but with the world’s highest number of publications hostile to Israel in the media and in the Academia.

At least half a million Algerians died during the French occupation. A million Afghanis died during the Soviet occupation. Millions of Muslims and Arabs were killed and slaughtered at the hands of Muslims. But all the world knows about one Mohammed a-Dura (whose death was regrettable, but there is some doubt whether he was killed by Israeli gunfire at all).

It is possible and acceptable to criticize Israel. But the excessive, obsessive, and at times anti-Semitic criticism serves also as a coverup, and in some cases also as an approval, of the genocide of millions of others.

Occupation is not enlightened and can’t be enlightened. But if we try to create a scale of ‘brutal occupation’, Israel will come last. This is a fact. This is not an opinion.

And what would have happened to the Palestinians if, instead of being under Israeli occupation they were under Iraqi occupation? Or Sudanese? Or even French or Soviet? It is highly probable that they would have been victims of genocide, at worst, and of mass killings, purges, and deportations at best.

But luckily for them they are under Israeli occupation. And even if, I repeat, there is no such thing as an enlightened occupation, and even if it is acceptable and possible, and at times necessary, to criticize Israel, there is no occupation and there has never been an occupation with so few fatalities (indeed, there are other injuries that are not manifested in the numbers of fatalities, such as the refugee problem. This will be discussed in a separate chapter).

Television screen ethics

So why is the impression of the world the direct opposite? How come there is no connection between the facts and the numbers and the so very demonic image of Israel in the world?

There are many answers. One of them is that western ethics have become the ethics of television cameras. If a Palestinian terrorist or a Hizballah man tries to shoot a rocket from the midst of a civilian neighborhood, and Israel retaliates with fire - causing the death of two children - there will be endless headlines and articles all over the world that “Israel murders children”. But if entire villages are destroyed in Sudan or whole cities are erased in Syria, there will be no television cameras in the area.

And so, according to television ethics, Jose Saramago and Harold Pinter sign a petition protesting ‘genocide’ and ‘war crimes’ perpetrated by Israel. They have never read the Geneva Convention either. They probably do not know that, aside for very few exceptions, the actions of Israel against military targets hitting civilians is allowed according to the Geneva Convention (protocol 1 paragraph 52.2). And because these people are so submerged in television ethics, they will not sign any petitions in protest of the genocide of Muslims by Muslims. Murder for the sake of it. They are allowed to do it.

Television ethics is a tragedy for the Arabs and the Muslims themselves. Israel pays dearly because of it, but the Arabs and the Muslims are its real victims. And as long as this blue screen morality continues, the Arabs and the Muslims will continue to pay the price.


There are those that claim that Arab and Muslim states are immune from criticism, because they are not democratic, but Israel is more worthy of criticism because it has democratic pretences. Claims like this are Orientalism at its worst. The covert assumption is that the Arabs and the Muslims are the retarded child of the world. They are allowed. It is not only Orientalism. It is racism.

The Arabs and the Muslims are not children and they are not retarded. Many Arabs and Muslims know this and write about it. They know that only an end to the self-deception and a taking of responsibility will lead to change. They know that as long as the west treats them as unequal and irresponsible it is lending a hand not only to a racist attitude, but also, and mainly, to a continuation of their mass murder.

The genocide that Israel is not committing, that is completely libellous, hides the real genocide, the silenced genocide that Arabs and Muslims are committing mainly against themselves. The libel has to stop so as to look at reality. It is in the interest of the Arabs and the Muslims. Israel pays in image. They pay in blood. If there is any morality left in the world, this should be in the interest of whoever has a remaining drop of it in him. And should it happen, it will be small news for Israel, and great news, far greater news, for Arabs and Muslims.

Saturday, July 14, 2007


It's bad enough that released BBC correspondent Alan Johnston spent his early days of freedom after Hamas secured his release from the clutches of the Army of Islam cuddling up to the Hamas leadership but now the Beeb is giving the thumbs up to viscious anti-Semitic lies on its own website.

According to Harry's Place:

BBC Radio 5 Live message board moderators have refused to remove a posting from the 5 Live website, which states that

"Zionism is a racist ideology where jews are given supremacy over all other races and faiths.

This is found in the Talmud. There is a law called Baba Mezia which allows jews to lie as long as its to non-jews. many pro jewish supporters will cringe at this being exposed because they know it exists, yet they keep quiet about it, hey frip, jla and co The Law of Baba Mezia!! Tsk tsk tsk!

Its in the Talmud."

When I brought the mailing to the attention of the moderator, "The BBC Communities Team" emailed back, stating

"we have decided that it does not contravene the House Rules and are going to leave it on site".

I'm not an expert on the Talmud but I would suggest to the BBC that it has been exposed again for sanctioning racist tripe against Jews. There is no such thing as The Law of Baba Mezia. In my book, he's probably referring to a "Bubbe meiseh" which tranlates into "a grandmother's story" - or an old wive's tale. An example of an old wive's tale is:-

The BBC reports news on Israel fairly and objectively.

ow, I wonder if it were possible that the BBC would ever allow this on its website:.

"Islam is a racist ideology where Muslims are given supremacy over all other races and faiths. This is found in the Koran. There is a law called taqiyya which allows Muslims to lie as long as its to non-Muslims."

Tsk, tsk!!!

Friday, July 13, 2007


British journalist Alan Johnston did his profession no honour by cosying up to Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh after his release by the family of Islamist thugs who usually work in partnership with Haniyeh's Hamas party.

Geoffrey Alderman, a professor of politics & contemporary history at the University of Buckingham, UK tells why in this Jerusalem Post article.

"Excuse me while I do not raise my champagne glass to toast the release, unharmed, of BBC Gazastan correspondent Alan Johnston. Excuse me while I do not endorse UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown's encomium of Mr. Johnston as 'a fearless journalist' whose voice was 'silenced for too long.

Don't get me wrong. I can be the life and soul of the party. I am not averse to a drink or three. But I am very particular as to what or whom I celebrate. And while the release unharmed of Johnston is clearly felt in some quarters to be a cause for mirth and merriment, I just cannot bring myself to embrace the mood of misplaced euphoria that seems to have gripped the United Kingdom."

Alderman explains that the "fearless journalist" failed in upholding any shred of journalistic integrity by becoming a part to the Hamas media circus that surrounded his release.

"Even if Johnston had been threatened that he would forfeit his life unless he launched into a public condemnation of Israel and Britain as the joint authors of all the misfortunes that have befallen the Muslim world, I have to say that I would have expected him, as a professional, to have defended that professional integrity, whatever the risk. But Johnston, sadly, did not rise to the occasion. And the most charitable explanation I can come up with for this extraordinary conduct is that he must actually believe what his captors asked him to say."

Rather than being "fearless", Johnston proved the opposite; that he is weak and cowardly. But in that regard he is merely following the path of his fellow journalists at home in Britain whose cowardly vote to boycott Israel was taken in his absence while he reamined a captive to those Hamas friendly thugs.

If you're wondering what Palestinian journalists in Gaza are thinking about Johnston's love affair with Haniyeh, then consider this news report from the Palestinian Maan Newsagency - Executive Force storms media tower in Gaza City.

"Gaza – Ma'an - The Hamas-affiliated Executive Force on Wednesday stormed the media tower in Tal Al-Hawa, in the south of Gaza City, and stole the car and mobile telephone of Palestine TV satellite channel manager, Muhammad Dawoudi.

Media sources told Ma'an that the Executive Force entered Dawoudi's home in the residential part of the tower and attempted to arrest him, yet dozens of journalists intervened and prevented the arrest.

The Union of Palestinian Journalists has condemned the repeated assaults against journalists, in general, and this attack against Dawoudi in particular.

In a statement to Ma'an, the union declared "such conduct represent a violation of the freedom of opinion", describing the attacks as "ideological terrorism" against journalists."

Thursday, July 12, 2007


On July 12, 2006, at 9:05 a.m., IDF soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev were kidnapped by Hizbullah operatives on the northern frontier. They were taken into Lebanese territory and not heard from since.


Wednesday, July 11, 2007


An Associated Press article by Ben Hubbard entitled "Ramalah an island of Palestinian peace" provides us with an excellent example of how elements of the media would like us to think about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. [Hat tip: Elder of Ziyon]

Hubbard paints a picture of the "normal" Ramallah (the sub-editor who devised the title has problems with spelling as well as analysing the content of the article being described) but, as The Elder points out, "the lead of the story indicates that all the PA territories could be just like Ramallah if it wasn't for those pesky militants. Then, as you read on, you see that Ramallah is the exception - that the entire West Bank is not much different than Hamas' Gaza in outlook."

And, of course, the problem behind all of this is the "occupation".

"We're under occupation," said Sam Bahour, a Palestinian-American business consultant in Ramallah. "It's just a five-star occupation."

So the real culprits are the Israeli occupiers and if only something could be done about them, we would see Palestinian moderation flourish, a proposition that is about as accurate as the claim in the article that "the Islamic militant Hamas is largely absent from this city of 57,000, meaning that Ramallah could provide the best glimpse of what a Palestinian state could look like without Israeli occupation."

In the 2006 Palestinian elections, the Hamas Party (Change and Reform) gained the highest number of votes of all parties in Ramallah. It is hardly "absent" despite what Mr. Hubbard and the AP would have us all think.

With that in mind, it's not possible to let the day go past without commenting on Ed O'Loghlin's effort in today's Melbourne Age. This time, O'Loughlin sets out to demonise the Israelis because of a decision by the United Nations to halt all construction and repair work in Gaza due to an Israeli blockade. He complains that "among the projects halted was an emergency project to shore up the crumbling banks of a sewage settling pond in northern Gaza, which could drown scores of local villagers if the banks collapse. Five people drowned in sewage earlier this year after a smaller pond in the complex collapsed."

Now, here's my problem with O'Loughlin.

Way back in March when those five people drowned in their own sewage, O'Loughlin failed to report on this tragic story. He made no mention at the time of the fact that Israel assisted with the relief effort, that European funds earmarked for the repair project had mysteriously gone missing and that many of the pipes actually purchased for use in upgrading the sewage system were converted so that they could be used to launch quassam rockets at innocent Israelis in Sderot across the border. This is the news that O'Loughlin didn't reveal to Age readers a little over three months ago. Today, he suddenly cares about the Palestinians and makes it appear that somehow, the fault for their plight is entirely with Israel: that Palestine is not "normal" because of the Israelis alone and not because of the actions of the elected Palestinian government whose genocidal intent towards Israel and its Jewish population and its many other failings are constantly swept under the carpet by this reporter.

And that is how the news from this region is delivered in the murky sewers of the Age.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007


Today's Melbourne Age features a report - ARABS TO TALK PEACE IN ISRAEL - that highlights the importance various Arab governments are placing on the need to deal with the phenomenon of the expanding influence of Islamic extremists in the region underscored by Hamas' violent takeover of the Gaza Strip last month.

It is hoped that the proposed meeting of Israeli diplomats with delegates of the 22-nation Arab League will herald a new era of peace in the region.

One should also add the hope that Amy Teibel's report from Jerusalem will also herald a new era of balanced and rational reporting in the Age on the events that take place in this part of the Middle East.

Saturday, July 07, 2007


Times reporters James Hider and Sonia Verma explain that the release of British reporter Alan Johnston didn't come as a result of any new "law and order" strategy instituted by Hamas as some in the media would have you think but rather because holding him was proving to be bad for business for the kidnappers - Kidnappers emerge with their kudos – and weapons – intact.

"Certain members of Mr Dagmoush’s family, including Abu Khatab, had been pressing him to release Johnston. Their reasoning was partly financial: the family’s arms smuggling business had been boycotted by some of its best customers because it was holding the British journalist."

Friday, July 06, 2007


Published in today’s Australian:-

Johnston not the only one

IT must be an incredible relief for the family of BBC journalist Alan Johnston to have him home in Scotland after his release by kidnappers who had held him for four months in Gaza ("Nightmare is over for BBC hostage’’, 5/7).

Amidst the celebrations, I only hope that the world remembers the plight of another innocent kidnap victim in the region - 20-year-old Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who has been held for 12 months - and the nightmare his family is still enduring.

Galya Kay Woollahra, NSW

Check out some of the mumble brained correspondents who inhabit the on line comments section below the letter and go into automatic pilot with their slanderous bile whenever the words "Israel", "Jew", "Palestine" or "Middle East" appear in the letters section. These people surely exist only to defame Israel with mosdtly fabricated allegations about the Jewish State that would make even a science fiction writer blush heavily.

Ms. Kay responds to these fools with the perfect comeback:-

"The intent of my original letter was to remind people that a 20 year-old Israeli (who, like every other 20 year-old Israeli, was serving mandatory national army service) is languishing, injured, in a dungeon in Gaza while the world celebrates the release of Johnston. To regard Shalit’s solider status as a justification for his kidnapping, the stripping of his basic human rights (to liberty, to medical treatment, etc) - must only come from the most intense hatred of the Jewish state. It is saddening that some can only extend their sympathy to Palestinian or British families, but not to their Israeli counterparts.

It is the ultimate in historical ignorance and misguided hypocrisy to presume, and then downplay the scope of the suffering of innocent Israelis in this conflict.

Such a distorted view forces one to question whether this is truly sympathy for the Palestinian side rather than a chance to demonise the Jewish state and its very existence.

It is also absurd to only bemoan the suffering of Palestinians at the hands of Israelis - and conveniently ignore the horrific suffering of Palestinians at the hands of their Arab 'brothers' since 1948, and to this very day in both Gaza and Lebanon."

Thursday, July 05, 2007


If the Melbourne Age ever lets go of its Middle East correspondent Ed O'Loughlin there is always a job available for him in the Hamas PR machine.

In today's Age, O'Loughlin literally gushes his way through an "analysis" of the repercussions of the Islamic fundamentalist Hamas movement's role in securing the release of kidnapped BBC journalist Alan Johnston from the clutches of a rival Islamic fundamentalist group (aka Hamas' partner in crime in, among other things, the abduction of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit).

He is able to make Hamas look good because he has avoided reporting on the Hamas cavalcade of dirty deeds including its role in the recent internal Palestinian violence and bloodshed including the slaughter of innocent civilian bystanders and the incitement to violence against Israel and Jews as epitomised by the Farfour affair. It was no surprise therefore that this news only made it to the blank pages of the newspaper.

O'Loughlin's take on the West's boycott of the Hamas government is scandalous -

"Since Hamas won control of the Palestinian parliament in January last year, the 3.6 million people of the West Bank and Gaza have been subject to a crippling economic and political boycott, intended to force Hamas from power or to make it moderate its hardline anti-Israeli platform."

This is simply untrue.

In the first instance, notwithstanding the boycott, the Palestine Authority has received more international aid since the election of Hamas than it ever did under Fatah.

Secondly, the boycott is not intended to force Hamas from power as he asserts. It is intended to ensure that Hamas recognises previous international agreements made by the Palestinian Authority including its recognition of the State of Israel.

On this issue, surely, the Age can do better than provide us with analysis from sycophantic cheerleaders for Hamas?

Tuesday, July 03, 2007


A plea from Israeli writer, Naomi Ragen

Dear Colleagues and Friends,.

My brother Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury went to court today, June 28th, filled with optimism. The Government of Bangladesh had recently sent the judge and public prosecutor who, until now, had been trying his case, to another part of the country with the result that his trial would have to begin again with a new judge and prosecutor.

We were hopeful that this might result in this judge dropping the charges against Shoaib today. Sadly, it appears that the government has only removed a judge who was hopelessly tainted by his public assertions that he would convict Shoaib regardless of the evidence that might be presented.

Today, the judge stated that he is prepared to proceed quickly, and the prosecutor was prepared with witnesses ready to testify against Shoaib.

You may recall that, in Bangladesh, there will be no jury in this trial on charges of treason, sedition and blasphemy.

Neither will Shoaib's attorneys be permitted to bring any witnesses in his defense. The only option open to the defense is to cross examine the prosecution witnesses..

In addition, the judge has the option of ending the trial and issuing a verdict after only half of the witnesses have been heard. It is safe to assume that the witnesses who can make the most convincing case against Shoaib will be heard first.

If convicted the penalty will be either death by hanging or thirty years in prison, which is, in fact, a death sentence.

This only reason for the present delay is that there is one more appeal to void the charges now pending in the Supreme Court. While the Supreme Court is on vacation, it may or may not be possible for the judge to press for a decision from a jurist in chambers rather than from the full appellate court.

Shoaib Choudhury is on trial because he urges his government to recognize the State of Israel. This is not a crime . He is on trial because of rumors originating in Saudi Arabia that he is a Mossad agent, something so patently ridiculous that no reasonable court would even consider it. Why would a secret intelligence agent publicly proclaim his support for Israel in an Islamic country? The Qur'an states that Allah/God gave the Land of Israel to the Jewish people. His country proclaims that Shoaib's support for Israel is treason because it is in opposition to their policy and that it is blasphemous, a charge they find convenient. He is on trial because he has Jewish and Christian friends and because he publishes their articles in his newspaper.

This is not blasphemy, and it is not a crime. although some extremist Muslims would like to think that it is. He is on trial because he writes plainly about the danger of extremist madrassas teaching children as young as five to hate Jews and Israel. The majority of Bangladeshis cannot afford any other form of education for their children and are willing to send them anywhere as long as they learn to read and write. Every charge against Shoaib is false. Shoaib works tirelessly for interfaith understanding. Bangladesh considers this treason and blasphemy. He has committed no crime at all, except for his attempt to travel to Israel - a minor passport violation for which others have been assessed a fine equivalent to about US $7.00. Yes, seven. Shoaib was imprisoned, tortured and held in solitary confinement for seventeen months. His glaucoma was not treated, and he lost his sight in one eye. During that time, he was never tried. He was released only because of the efforts of his dearest friend and brother in the United States, Richard Benkin and a U.S. Congressman, but without the charges being dropped. Please note that Shoaib takes no public position on matters of Israeli policy. We will begin again. We will not give in to defeatism or despair. There is a new U.S. Ambassador in Dhaka who has scarcely had time to unpack. We cannot give him the luxury of easing into his responsibilities.

Please call your Senators and your Representative in Congress. Tell them this is an urgent human rights concern, a matter of life and death. Remind them that the House of Representatives passed Resolution #64 in support of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury in March of this year by a vote of 409-1. Urge them to call the State Department now. We want our ambassador to Bangladesh to take this to the highest level of government there. The time is past for lower level diplomats to make ineffective gestures supporting Shoaib. These have been appreciated, but they are not enough. we have less than three weeks to save Shoaib's life.

Yes, this is a worst case scenario. There may be further legal delays, but it is equally possible that there may not be. What is absolutely clear is that this new judge and prosecutor are fully prepared to hear the case against Shoaib quickly. In Bangladesh, this is never a good sign.

We must proceed as if the worst will happen, because it is very possible, and then pray that it does not.

Please forward this to others who might contact senators and Representatives. those of you who are clergy, please speak to your congregatons and ask your members to call Congress.

ditional information about Shoaib may be found at http://www.interfaithstrength.com/.

Please let me know what you are doing to help Shoiab. when you call Congress, please tell me who you reach and what you have accomplished. Please do not give in to frustration. It is often difficult to reach our public servants.

Wishing you abundant blessings,
Naomi Ragen.

And in Australia you can contact your Senator here - http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/senators/index.html.

Monday, July 02, 2007


"From the moment of my birth
To the instant of my death,
There are patterns I must follow
Just as I must breathe each breath.
Like a rat in a maze
The path before me lies,
And the pattern never alters
Until the rat dies. "

Lyrics from “Patterns” by Simon and Garfunkel

There's a rumour going around that Fairfax is about to axe the Editor-in-Chief of the ailing Melbourne Age newspaper, Andrew Jaspan. The man is apparently set to return home to bomb-threatened Britain where he will no doubt feel far more at home among Israel boycotting journos.

One wonders whether the changes at the Age are not already being rung in because there has been a discernible change in pattern at the newspaper in recent weeks. The letters section has toned down considerably and anti Israel hate mail has been limited to roughly one letter per weeek - close to an all time low (although pro Israel letters have maintained a steady averge of one below the "anti's").

The proof of a changing pattern at the Age came today when Farfour, the racist Mickey Mouse look-like leapt out of the blank pages of the Age and gained recognition in the print section of the broadsheet for the first time since the story of how Hamas controlled Palestinian TV used the rodent to indoctrinate Palestinian kiddies first hit the world news services. Farfour was shunned for two months by Jerualem bureau reporter Ed O'Loughlin and by the others who intermittently report on the news from the region. We heard not a squeak from them until today when his obituary was finally published in the form of an article written by an anonymous New York Times reporter - Hamas TV decides to keep its mouse shut.

The article must have appealed to whoever edits the Age these days because it still contained plenty of the classic understatement that characterises this newspaper's reportage.

"The character drew wide international criticism for what some said was incitement."

Right then, some say "incitement" as if our anonymous friend from the NYT doesn't have the capacity to judge blatant anti-Semitic incitement for himself/herself.

"After leaving his grandfather, 'Jews' went after Farfour and asked him to hand over the deeds and the key. When he refused, he was beaten to death."

The Mickey Mouse saga has been an embarrasment to the Hamas PR effort just as the Age's Basil Fawlty approach to this conflict (we mustn't talk about Hamas atrrocities dear) during Jaspan's stewardship has been but one example of the Fairfax descent into the appalling journalistic standards that it now upholds.

Thankfully, the pattern will now alter with the demise of the rat.

Sunday, July 01, 2007


A recent oped article from Thomas L. Friedman exposes the hypocrisy of the British boycotters - A Boycott Built on Bias (access required or try here).

Friedman describes a ceremony held for this year's doctoral candidates at Jerusalem's Hebrew University. The ceremony coincided with news of Britain's University and College Union call on its members to consider a boycott of Israeli universities.

"Since the program listed everyone’s degrees and advisers, I looked them up. Rifat got his doctorate in law. His thesis was about International Taxation of Electronic Commerce. His adviser was Prof. D. Gliksberg. Nuha got her doctorate in biochemistry. Her adviser was Prof. R. Gabizon. Taleb had an asterisk by his name. So I looked at the bottom of the page. It said: Summa Cum Laude. His chemistry thesis was about Semiconductor-Metal Interfaces, and his adviser was Prof. U. Banin.

"These were Israeli Arab doctoral students many of them women and one of whom accepted her degree wearing a tight veil over her head. Funny she could receive her degree wearing a veil from the Hebrew University, but could not do so in France, where the veil is banned in public schools. Arab families cheered unabashedly when their sons and daughters received their Hebrew U. Ph.D. diplomas, just like the Jewish parents.

"How crazy is this, I thought. Israel’s premier university is giving Ph.D.s to Arab students, two of whom were from East Jerusalem i.e. the occupied territories supervised by Jewish Israeli professors, all while some far-left British academics are calling for a boycott of Israeli universities.".

Yes, it is crazy but, as Friedman points out, we're dealing with rank anti-Semitism and there has never been any logic behind this or any other sort of racism.