Thursday, November 26, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The Palestinians do not need students and professors on university campuses to tell them that Israel is bad. They have already had enough of this incitement from Hamas, Fatah and other Arab media outlets and leaders.
It is time for the “pro-Palestinian” camp in the West to reconsider its policies and tactics. It is time for this camp to listen to the authentic voices of the Palestinians – those that are shouting day and night that the Palestinians want good leaders and an end to lawlessness, anarchy and financial corruption.
Monday, November 23, 2009
HAMAS says it has reached an agreement with other militant groups in Gaza to stop firing rockets at southern Israeli towns, to prevent retaliatory attacks.
And there you have it. Thanks to the corrupt minds of once respected human rights organisations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International and those that brought you the Goldstone Report, Hamas is so emboldened as to tell the world that it is ceasing rocket attacks not because they are heinous criminal acts against a neighbouring civilian population but in order "to prevent retaliatory attacks".
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Pilar Rahola is a Spanish politician, journalist and activist. She is a passionate defender of the United States and Israel and an indefatigable fighter against anti-Semitism. All these despite being ideologically from the left. Her articles are published in Spain and throughout some of the most important newspapers in Latin America. She is the recipient of major awards by Jewish organizations.
Why don't we see demonstrations against Islamic dictatorships in London, Paris, Barcelona? Or demonstrations against the Burmese dictatorship? Why aren't there demonstrations against the enslavement of millions of women who live without any legal protection? Why aren't there demonstrations against the use of children as human bombs where there is conflict with Islam? Why has there been no leadership in support of the victims of Islamic dictatorship in Sudan? Why is there never any outrage against the acts of terrorism committed against Israel? Why is there no outcry by the European left against Islamic fanaticism? Why don't they defend Israel's right to exist? Why confuse support of the Palestinian cause with the defense of Palestinian terrorism? And finally, the million dollar question:Why is the left in Europe and around the world obsessed with the two most solid democracies, the United States and Israel, and not with the worst dictatorships on the planet? The two most solid democracies, who have suffered the bloodiest attacks of terrorism, and the left doesn't care.
And then, to the concept of freedom. In every pro Palestinian European forum I hear the left yelling with fervor: "We want freedom for the people!" Not true. They are never concerned with freedom for the people of Syria or Yemen or Iran or Sudan, or other such nations. And they are never preoccupied when Hammas destroys freedom for the Palestinians. They are only concerned with using the concept of Palestinian freedom as a weapon against Israeli freedom. The resulting consequence of these ideological pathologies is the manipulation of the press.
The international press does major damage when reporting on the question of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. On this topic they don't inform, they propagandize. When reporting about Israel the majority of journalists forget the reporter code of ethics. And so, any Israeli act of self-defense becomes a massacre, and any confrontation, genocide. So many stupid things have been written about Israel, that there aren't any accusations left to level against her. At the same time, this press never discusses Syrian and Iranian interference in propagating violence against Israel; the indoctrination of children and the corruption of the Palestinians. And when reporting about victims, every Palestinian casualty is reported as tragedy and every Israeli victim is camouflaged, hidden or reported about with disdain.
And let me add on the topic of the Spanish left. Many are the examples that illustrate the anti-Americanism and anti-Israeli sentiments that define the Spanish left. For example, one of the leftist parties in Spain has just expelled one of its members for creating a pro-Israel website. I quote from the expulsion document: "Our friends are the people of Iran, Libya and Venezuela, oppressed by imperialism, and not a Nazi state like Israel."
In another example, the socialist mayor of Campozuelos changed Shoah Day, commemorating the victims of the Holocaust, with Palestinian Nabka Day, which mourns the establishment of the State of Israel, thus showing contempt for the six million European Jews murdered in the Holocaust. Or in my native city of Barcelona, the city council decided to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the creation of the State of Israel, by having a week of solidarity with the Palestinian people. Thus, they invited Leila Khaled, a noted terrorist from the 70's and current leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a terrorist organization so described by the European Union, which promotes the use of bombs against Israel. And so on and so on.
This politically correct way of thinking has even polluted the speeches of president Zapatero. His foreign policy falls within the lunatic left, and on issues of the Middle East he is unequivocally pro Arab. I can assure you that in private, Zapatero places on Israel the blame for the conflict in the Middle East, and the policies of foreign minister Moratinos reflect this. The fact that Zapatero chose to wear a kafiah in the midst of the Lebanon conflict is no coincidence; it's a symbol.
Spain has suffered the worst terrorist attack in Europe and it is in the crosshairs of every Islamic terrorist organization. As I wrote before, they kill us will cell phones hooked to satellites connected to the Middle Ages. An yet the Spanish left is the most anti Israeli in the world.
And then it says it is anti Israeli because of solidarity. This is the madness I want to denounce in this conference.
I am not Jewish. Ideologically I am left and by profession a journalist. Why am I not as anti Israeli as my colleagues? Because as a non-Jew I have the historical responsibility to fight against Jewish hatred and currently against the hatred for their historic homeland, Israel. To fight against anti-Semitism is not the duty of the Jews, it is the duty of the non-Jews.
As a journalist it is my duty to search for the truth beyond prejudice, lies and manipulations. The truth about Israel is not told. As a person from the left who loves progress, I am obligated to defend liberty, culture, civic education for children, coexistence and the laws that the Tablets of the Covenant made into universal principles. Principles that Islamic fundamentalism systematically destroys. That is to say that as a non-Jew, journalist and lefty I have a triple moral duty with Israel, because if Israel is destroyed, liberty, modernity and culture will be destroyed too.
The struggle of Israel, even if the world doesn't want to accept it, is the struggle of the world.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
The government has imposed a partial arms embargo on Israel and failed to vote against the Goldstone report in the U.N . The charities War on Want and Amnesty International U.K. have both promoted a book by the anti-Israeli firebrand Ben White, tellingly called "Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner's Guide." The Trades Union Congress at its annual conference has called for boycotts of Israeli products as well as a total arms embargo.
In the media, the Guardian newspaper has stepped up its already obsessive campaign against the Jewish state to the extent that the paper's flagship Comment is Free Web site frequently features two anti-Israeli polemics on one and the same day. The BBC continues to use its enormous influence over British public opinion to whitewash anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial in the Middle East. Its Web site, for example, features a profile of Hamas that makes no mention of the group's virulent hatred of Jews or its adherence to a "Protocols of Zion"-style belief in world-wide Jewish conspiracies.
Yet, despite all that "the British media and political establishment is apparently cowering under the sway of a secretive cabal of Zionist lobbyists who have all but extinguished critical opinions of Israel from the public domain."
How does that work?
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Compounding the hartred was this letter
Context would give a more balanced view
November 18, 2009
Peter Hartcher's reflection on the Goldstone report fails on a number of counts (''Israel feels tarnished as critics apply apartheid tag'', November 17).
Hartcher repeats the spin of the Israeli Government that vilifies the United Nations, calling it an "international resolution factory". Second, he fails to give any context for why the rockets were fired. He does not mention the decades-long struggle of the Palestinian people; the thousands of Palestinians in Israeli jails or who have lost loved ones due to 60 years of war; or the lack of resolution for the refugees of the 1948 and 1967 wars.
Hartcher fails to acknowledge Richard Goldstone's personal journey of discovery during his fact-finding mission. Goldstone cannot be faulted for his unquestioning support for Israel's security and legitimate right (and moral obligation) to self-defence.
But by visiting Gaza and interviewing Israelis by phone and in Geneva (he was denied permission to enter Israel) he concluded each of the 36 incidents they identified demanded formal investigation by Israel and Hamas.
They included an attack on a mosque that killed 21 people, the demolition of the American School in Gaza (a centre of anti-Hamas teaching) and the attack on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency with white phosphorus. He concluded that the collective punishment of Palestinians by bulldozing greenhouses, farms and destroying sewage treatment works had no military advantage - it was purely punitive.
Hartcher also misrepresents Izzat Abdulhadi, the head of the Palestinian delegation to Australia. Such was my disbelief at what Hartcher said that I called the Palestinian delegation to find out for myself. Mr Abdulhadi told me the Palestinian delegation was disappointed with Australia's stance on Israel and its rejection of the Goldstone report (not satisfied, as Hartcher says).
Let's hope Herald journalists can go on trips to Gaza and the West Bank as well as Israel in future, to help present a balanced perspective of this conflict.
Apart from being a mischievous peddler of untruths, this cold hearted bastard found a way to justify the firing of rockets at schools and kindergartens - at children in the context of a letter purportedly about human rights.
How low can you get?
Monday, November 16, 2009
Saturday, November 14, 2009
I write in connection to a series of articles published in The New York Times in recent weeks regarding the Report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, colloquially referred to as the GoldstoneReport. I am deeply concerned by the subjective and often damning language that The New York Times uses towards Israel as it fails to accurately reflectthe nature and scope of the report.
Over and over, The New York Times’ articles on this matter employ languagethat easily leads the reader to believe that the Goldstone Report foundconclusive evidence that Israel committed war crimes. In Neil MacFarquhar’s“U.N. Council Endorses Gaza Report” (Oct. 16), the article statesthat the Goldstone Report “details evidence of war crimes committed by the Israeli Army...” In Sharon Otterman’s “Gaza Report Author Asks U.S. to Clarify Concerns” (Oct. 22), the Goldstone Report is describedas having “found evidence of war crimes committed by Israel...” In yetanother example --MacFarquhar and Otterman’s “Palestinians, in Reversal, Press U.N. Gaza Report” (Oct. 14) -- the Goldstone Report is once againdescribed as having “found evidence of Israeli war crimes...” These articles reflect only a sample of the many that discuss Israel vis-à-visthe Goldstone Report in conclusive and condemnatory terms.
In stark contrast, a Reuters article carried by The New York Times on Oct. 14,“Israel Urged to Investigate Gaza War Crimes Charges,” describes theGoldstone Report as reflecting “U.N. allegations of possible war crimes.”The description offered by the Reuters piece is a critical component of anyfactually accurate discussion of the Goldstone Report. In sharp contrast,the aforementioned Times articles fail to reflect this vital distinctionas readers will falsely assume that the Goldstone Report found conclusiveevidence of Israeli war crimes.I wish to reiterate Israel’s position that the Goldstone Report is deeply flawed and one-sided as it offers legitimacy to Hamas terrorism and its deliberate strategy to launch attacks, store weapons and use as shieldsthe civilian population and infrastructure of Gaza. At the same time, the report’s mandate predetermined its findings that wrongly condemned Israel’s legitimate exercise of its right to self-defense. The tendency of The New York Times to gloss over such realities must be rectified andI sincerely hope that paper will use accurate and appropriate language toensure that its coverage of the Goldstone Report and the wide Middle Eastis fair and honest.
I remain at your disposal if you would like to further discuss this matter.
Mirit Cohen, Spokesperson, Permanent Mission of Israel to the UN
Thursday, November 12, 2009
"The higher the tide of violence perpetrated by the Palestinians, the greater the fury and blame directed at the Israeli victims. The March 2002 attacks provoked the Israeli invasion of the leading West Bank cities in an attempt to destroy the terror networks, and stop the carnage. Yet the first Australian petition for an academic boycott of Israel initiated by a small clique of Australian academics after this invasion in May 2002 was directed at the victims of terror."Today, even as Hamas and Hizbullah continue to make warlike pronouncements their puppy dogs in the west try to project themselves as part of the peace camp. Hamas has endorsed the Goldstone Report but of course wipes its hands of the necessity to investigate the meagre allegations against it that it committed war crimes (Goldstone turned a blind eye to most of Hamas' war crimes but in an attempt to appear even handed or to salve his conscience he threw in a couple), the likes of Pilger win "peace prizes".
Ridiculous, isn't it.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
The one depicted above which has been placed in Ramallah and Al Bireh apparently suggests that an Israeli businessman has been offered half of the shares in Al Jazeera. The media outlet's chief editor has slammed the billboards claiming that it's all "lies and nonsense". Which just about sums up 50% of the rubbish that comes from Al Jazeera so I suppose everybody's even.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
The remaining concerts are at Brisbane's Conservatorium Theatre (Wed 11 Nov at 7:00pm), Adelaide's Town Hall (Fri 13 Nov at 8:00pm), Sydney's City Recital Hall Angel Place (Sat 14 Nov at 8:00pm), Hobart Town Hall (Sat 16 Nov at 8:00pm) Canberra's Llewellyn Hall (Thurs 19 Nov at 7:00pm) and Melbourne's Recital Centre (Tue 17 Nov at 7:00pm and Sat 21 Nov at 8:00pm).
I'm not into their music to tell the truth but I'm going to show my solidarity with these musicians. Australians must not allow these thugs and bullies who stand against peaceful co-existence to triumph.
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Calling Sir. Richard Goldstone.
Your bosses at the the 57-member Organisation of Islamic Conference have another job for you.
This woman (The mother who brought down the Fort Hood killer) must be brought before a war crimes tribunal for depriving Major Nidal Malik Hasan of his basic human right to have a fair trial (I know he's not dead yet but what sort of a fair trial would he get from the infidels anyway)?
Where is the justice?
PS: If Goldstone's not available, there are many other impartial people who can do the job - peace prize winer, John Pilger perhaps?
Saturday, November 07, 2009
The Goldstone Illusion - What the U.N. report gets wrong about Gaza--and war
Friday, November 06, 2009
In the same article by the Australian's Middle East correspondent John Lyons, Palestinan negotiator Saeb Erekat, who once looked straight at a BBC World news camera and lied that "thousands of Palestinians were massacred in Jenin", told another whopper and that is that the PA is thinking of discarding the two-state solution in favour of a one-state solution.
As if his PA ever supported a two-state solution in the form in which it was intended from UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of November 1947 to Oslo to the present day. The 1947 resolution specified a Jewish State and an Arab State and yet, the PA has steadfastly refused to recognise Israel as a Jewish State.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
But how is this possible when the leader of the mission that carried out the investigation and the author of the very same report Sir Richard Goldstone recently told the Jewish Daily Forward that "If This Was a Court Of Law, There Would Have Been Nothing Proven."
How is this so Sir Richard?
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
An election in Palestine usually means some sort of debate on the issue of making peace with Israel and establishing an independent Palestinian nation and which ends in an exhibition of mud slinging against Israel and the United States by all sides of the Palestinian political sphere because it's important to demonstrate to the Palestinian street that the other side is softer than theirs.
Judging from this offering from the official Palestinian Authority daily accusing US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of taking bribes from Israel and wallowing in "a swamp of lies," the election campaign has begun - Palestinian Authority calls Clinton a corrupt liar.
Sunday, November 01, 2009
In Israel if you want to do something with Palestinians you can do it, but if you are in the Palestinian community, even in London, pressure is put on you not to do it. I want to believe there are people on the Palestinian side who want to have normal relations with Jews and Israelis. There are, but they are pressured not to. We want to support the message that it is possible to do things together.