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)

Thursday, 3 September 2015

David Singer: Is Obama Conning 340 Rabbis or 200 Generals?

In this, his latest article, Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer turns his attention again to Obama and Iran.

He writes:

The upcoming debate and vote in the US Congress to endorse the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran (JCPOA) has become even more critical now that President Obama has reportedly secured the necessary votes to veto any Congressional resolution of disapproval.

Congress has been flooded with petitions - ostensibly neither Democrat nor Republican - urging Congressmen to cast their votes by crossing political party lines. 340 Rabbis in their appeal to Congress dated 17 August – have made the following assertions: 
1. The Obama administration has successfully brought together the major international powers to confront Iran over its nuclear ambitions. The broad international sanctions moved Iran to enter this historic agreement. Should this agreement be rejected by the U.S. Congress, those sanctions will end. There will be no new negotiations, as the other member countries are fully in favor of this agreement and have no desire to re-negotiate.
2. We understand that while this agreement blocks Iran’s path to a nuclear bomb, we recognize it does not deal with Iran’s support for terror, but that was never the purpose of these talks. 
 On the other hand some 200 retired generals and admirals in their open letter to Congress dated 25 August – have counterclaimed: 
1. As you know, on July 14, 2015, the United States and five other nations announced that a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been reached with Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons. In our judgment as former senior military officers, the agreement will not have that effect.
2. There is no credibility within JCPOA’s inspection process or the ability to snap back sanctions once lifted, should Iran violate the agreement. In this and other respects, the JCPOA would threaten the national security and vital interests of the United States and, therefore, should be disapproved by the Congress.
3. The agreement as constructed does not “cut off every pathway” for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. To the contrary, it actually provides Iran with a legitimate path to doing that simply by abiding by the deal. JCPOA allows all the infrastructure the Iranians need for a nuclear bomb to be preserved and enhanced. Notably, Iran is allowed to: continue to enrich uranium; develop and test advanced centrifuges; and continue work on its Arak heavy-water plutonium reactor. Collectively, these concessions afford the Iranians, at worst, a ready breakout option and, at best, an incipient nuclear weapons capability a decade from now.
These claims are highly disturbing and require a reasoned and detailed rebuttal by President Obama prior to the Congress vote – especially since President Obama sought to assure America to the contrary in the following statement made by him on 15 July at his Press Conference: 
It [JCPOA] solves one particular problem, which is making sure they don't have a bomb. And the point I've repeatedly made and I believe is hard to dispute is that it'll be a lot easier for us to check Iran's nefarious activities, to push back against the other areas where they operate contrary to our interests or our allies' interests if they don't have the bomb.
The considered opinion of 200 retired generals and admirals cannot be brushed off with a deafening silence from President Obama – nor can those 340 Rabbis who call for support of the President on the basis of an “understanding”.

Before it votes, Congress should demand that President Obama provide it with written reasons substantiating that Iran cannot get the bomb under the terms of the concluded JCPOA.

Who has Obama conned  – the Rabbis or the Generals? Congress – and the world - need to know.

Tuesday, 1 September 2015

More Anti-Israel Agit Prop in London (videos)

Oh, the perils of moving house and being assured by your Internet service provider that everything would be up and running within ten days, only to then learn that the provider in question has run out of space and that you will have to sign on with another.  That's the Aussie provider Dodo for you, at least as far as poor old Daphne's experience is concerned.  So for the next week or even fortnight I shall have to blog from the homes of friends, and inevitably blogging and posting comments will be rather sporadic..

Hence this present post has been put on mainly to show that I'm still alive.

First, footage early in August of the Big Ride for Palestine as the intrepid pedallers all the way from Edinburgh (and locations en route) hove into the home stretch.



Secondly, similar foes of Israel a couple of days ago, in Slough, a bedroom suburb of London that's not known for its beauty, even though it's not that far, as the crow flies, from the pretty village Stoke Poges of Gray's Elegy fame.



Thursday, 27 August 2015

David Singer: Palestine – Changed Narratives Needed To Nurture New Negotiations

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

France is not expected to present its anticipated draft proposal for the declaration of a Palestinian State to the U.N. Security Council in September – having reportedly been criticized both by Israel - which does not want any external solution imposed on it – and by the PLO – which fears the Security Council will not meet its demands.

The Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap are dead and buried – even if the headstone is yet to be ceremoniously unveiled marking the actual date when the collective records, transcripts and secret minutes detailing fruitless negotiations conducted during the last 20 years between Israel and the now-disbanded Palestinian Authority were finally consigned to the graveyard of history.

It is now also becoming increasingly apparent that creating a 22nd independent Arab State between Israel, Jordan and Egypt can:

1. ever peacefully eventuate without Israel, Jordan and Egypt’s express consent

2. be unilaterally imposed on Israel as a result of any resolution passed by the United Nations Security Council contrary to the express terms of its own Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973).

Filling this potentially explosive void will require the groundwork to first be meticulously prepared before any new negotiations can actually be undertaken to try and resolve competing Arab and Jewish claims to sovereignty in the remaining 6% of the territory of the former Mandate for Palestine – Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza – where sovereignty still remains undetermined (”the disputed territories”).

Such groundwork will require the following factual narratives to have been commonly agreed on and adopted by the negotiating parties prior to commencing negotiations to resolve the conflict:

1. Two of Israel’s immediately adjoining neighbours – Jordan and Egypt – have recognised the existence of Israel as a sovereign State in peace treaties signed by them with Israel in 1979 and 1994 respectively. These peace treaties have been honoured and respected during difficult periods when they might have been abrogated. They stand as a tribute to the determination of all three sovereign States to maintain a state of peace and avoid a position of confrontation as differences were resolved. Jordan and Egypt are accordingly indispensable parties to any new negotiations with Israel – if Arab sovereignty is to be established in any parts of the disputed territories.

2. Two of Israel’s other immediately adjoining neighbours – the PLO and Hamas – have since 1964 and 1988 respectively maintained in their respective Charters that the Jews have no claims to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in any part of the territory of the Mandate for Palestine vested in the Jews by the unanimous vote of all 51 members of the League of Nations in 1922. Including either the PLO or Hamas in any new negotiations is pointless and meaningless whilst those Charters remain unrevoked.

3. The on-going conflict needs to be re-branded “the Jewish-Arab conflict” replacing “the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. The current conflict had its origins in the events that took place during World War One – well before the State of Israel was declared in 1948. Marginalising the ongoing conflict by avoiding any consideration of the events that occurred between 1915 and 1948 has operated to paper over any proper discussion of the many opportunities presented to and rejected by the Arabs in relation to gaining territorial sovereignty in the disputed territories during that time - and indeed after 1948. This could impact on the current Arab claims to sovereignty over any of the disputed territories which may have been jeopardised or prejudiced as a result.

4. Recognition that the territory of the Mandate for Palestine is currently under Jewish sovereignty in 17% (Israel), Arab sovereignty in 78% (Jordan) with the remaining 6% comprising the disputed territories.

5. Claims that the building of Jewish settlements in the disputed territory are illegal in international law – based on the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention - need to be reconsidered having regard to the following prior territory-specific piece of legislation – Article 6 of the 1922 Mandate for Palestine – legalising such Jewish settlement: 
“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”
Pursuant to this provision – preserved in 1945 by Article 80 of the UN Charter – Jews have legally settled in the disputed territories between 1922 and 1947 – and since 1967.

6. The continued use of language referring to the disputed territories as being “occupied territory” or “Occupied Palestinian Territories” and the need for Israel to “end the occupation” fails to recognise that it was the Jews whose occupation in the disputed territories was first abruptly ended in 1948 – after every single Jew then living there was forcibly driven out by six invading Arab armies and not allowed to return until after the Six Day War in 1967.

Unless these narratives are changed, nurtured and mutually accepted by the parties before formal negotiations actually begin - one can confidently predict that any fanfare trumpeting yet another round of negotiations will be destined to see those negotiations inevitably end up in their own designated graveyard plot alongside the tomb housing the Oslo-Roadmap failed negotiations.

Negotiations based on shaky foundations without real substance can only guarantee their eventual death throes.

Wednesday, 26 August 2015

"I'm Making A Collection That [Will] Reduce Pro-Israel Deceivers To Silence" Says Mick

I've just moved house, and my internet provider isn't up and running in the new place yet, so my blogposts will be intermittent for the time being.  And that will explain tardiness in posting any comments on exiting posts, for which I apologise.

Anyway, as I sit here on the floor of the previous place, where I can still access the internet, I see that following his latest historically challeneged blooper, about which I blogged last week, our old friend, the Scottish PSC chief, has girded his loins, clutched his claymore, and called the clansmen to action:


 To that end, some of his followers have been obligingly leaving pictures for his gallery.  Here's a selection of what lines the walls.




 Same old ignorance.  Same old double standards (everyone seems to be erecting security barriers these days).  Same old inaccuracies.  Same old libels (the Al Dura incident).

 I think the gallery curator needs to sack the staff, don't you?

Monday, 24 August 2015

Off The Menu: An Aussie brings BDS to Eguisheim

His Facebook page tells us that a certain Australian cafe owner in Eguisheim, Alsace, eastern France, studied at the University of Sydney, the institution that, thanks to certain of its academic staff, has become something of a byword for BDS.

Off the menu at his cafe are these products:


Here are the proprietor's latest posts on Facebook:


As you can see from the above, there's nothing, absolutely nothing, to link this doughty adherent of the BDS movement to antisemitism.

Linking BDS to antisemitism is all a Zionist slur, innit.

(Hat tip: Jean Vercors)

Saturday, 22 August 2015

Moodey News: "Such are the wages of Christian triumphalism and anti-Judaism"

Having an interest in Jewish-Christian relations, I note for the benefit of like-minded readers a current article by the Christian scholar Dexter Van Zile regarding the views of the CEO of the British NGO Embrace the Middle East, Mr Jeremy Moodey, who's been mentioned by me from time to time; for instance here

Dexter Van Zile's analytical piece pays due tribute to the NGO's laudable aims, but pulls no punches in questioning Mr Moodey's stance towards Israel. 

It concludes:
"Moodey's summary judgment of Israel fails to take into account a number of factors such as Israel's efforts to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict in the past few decades, the failure of Palestinians to negotiate in good faith, and the disastrous consequences of Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005. It also fails to take into account ongoing anti-Semitic incitement in Palestinian society. 
Israel is not perfect. But by way of comparison, Israel treats its enemies, minorities and dissidents with greater humanity than any other country or political movement in the Middle East. Israel has a vibrant civil society and human rights community (whose activists show more concern for Palestinian welfare than Palestinian leaders do). Israel maintains these institutions despite having been under attack almost continuously since its founding in 1948. This is due largely to Israel's commitment to Jewish principles that Moodey incessantly uses to indict Israel. 
Moodey's merciless failure to acknowledge Israel's efforts to achieve peace, coupled with his unwillingness to confront the misdeeds of his adversaries is indicative of more than a troubling double-standard. His polemics suggest that he views Israel's enemies, who are intent on destroying Israel, as an instrument of God's wrath against the Christ-denying Jews of Israel and therefore unworthy of condemnation.
Alleged obduracy on the part of Jews has been used to justify violence and hostility toward the Jewish people for centuries and sadly such arguments survive even today when we have the leader of a Christian charity in enlightened Britain no less, making similar arguments that give theological aid and comfort to enemies of the Jewish state in the Middle East.
Such are the wages of Christian triumphalism and anti-Judaism."
Read all of Dexter Van Zile's article here

Meanwhile:

See here and here

Incidentally, Mr Moodey is one of the 118 Facebook friends (they include such luminaries of the anti-Israel movement as Jenny Tonge and Ben White, and the now vanished Stephen Sizer) of the funny fella who calls himself Harriet and spends his time writing strange stuff about Zionists (and belittling Dexter Van Zile) in obscure corners of the internet. 

Mr Moodey  may wish to reconsider his Facebook friendship with "Harriet"; look at the company "Harriet" keeps:




And there's plenty more where that came from.

What did British celebrity David Baddiel write only last month about men who indulge in conspiracy theories?

Ah, yes!:
"Conspiracy theory ... is how idiots get to feel like intellectuals.... And ... it creates a way into something else that’s becoming increasingly popular these days: antisemitism....
Why do so many conspiracy theories boil down to: it’s the Jews wot done it? ...
Those who have always felt that Jews were powerful, controlling and out to destroy the world can now point in the direction of the Middle East and say: there you are.
But for the conspiracy theorists, even the most appalling political and military machinations of Binyamin Netanyahu and the Israel Defence Forces – of Israel itself – are far less important than the creation of what David Aaronovitch, in Voodoo Histories, describes as a new kind of super-Jew: the Zionist. This is not, for the conspiracy theorist, the straightforward hate figure of the left. Rather, it is a character, or more importantly a group, to which all western governments are secretly in hock: unbelievably rich and powerful, and dedicated unswervingly to its own project, which is nothing less than the complete control of the world..."

 Better take up another hobby at your Place, Harriet!

Thursday, 20 August 2015

From A Corbyn Supporter, A Vile Message Beyond The Fringe

As reported in the Jewish Chronicle, Alison Chabloz, a performer at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, will incur no penalty for making the "quenelle" salute, widely regarded as antisemitic.

Ms Chabloz, who posted this photo of herself in action (Edinburgh Castle forms the backdrop) on Twitter, has reportedly made  a number of tweets in the past widely interpreted as antisemitic.
See also here

On her blog, Ms Chabloz has stated her reasons for making the gesture, meant as a taunt to "hardline Zionists" whom she claims harass her online.

Declaring her support for Jeremy Corbyn, whom most anti-Israel Leftists fervently wish to see voted in as Britain's Labour Party leader, she has also written in that blogpost:
 'Nobody denies that the Jews and other groups suffered horrendous atrocities at the hands of the Nazis nor that millions died in camps. It is the method of murder which is under question and if people dug a little deeper into the issue they may discover some interesting facts regards the presumed existence of homicidal Nazi gas chambers.
Indeed, the French Gayssot-Fabius law only came into existence when Professor Robert Faurisson (whose mother, by the way, was a Scot) published his findings on the lack of any physical proof regards homicidal Nazi gas chambers. Faurisson has suffered no less than ten physical assaults by thugs associated with the LDJ (League des Juifs – French equivalent of the JDL, Jewish Defence League) and, like Dieudonné and others, has been punished financially in the French courts for expressing views based on in-depth intellectual and scientific research.
“Did six million really die?” Ernst Zündel published a pamphlet posing the question in 1974 and after two high-profile trials in 1985 and 1988 was eventually sent to solitary confinement for two years in a Canadian jail. Zündel was then extradited to Germany where in 2007 he was finally convicted and jailed for another five years. Like Faurisson, Zündel suffered physical attacks as well as having his home destroyed by a pipe-bomb.
I don’t know the answer to Zündel’s question. With an establishment corrupt to the core and police obfuscation regarding high-profile child abusers ( the Labour peer and former chairman of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Lord Janner, springs to mind ) – is it surprising that so many people are now starting to question official versions of history?'
Corbyn is certainly attracting some charmers, eh?