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)

Friday, 30 January 2015

Stephen Sizer: “Encouraging research and debate on all aspects of [9/11] is not anti-Semitic"

Reverend Sizer (he's the clean-shaven one)
The London Jewish News is a popular and deserving competitor to Anglo-Jewry's supposed newspaper of record, the Jewish Chronicle.

It carries a report regarding Stephen Sizer's despicable action in linking to a grossly antisemitic article that laid the blame for 9/11 on Israel and a number of named Jews (I posted about this here).

The report, out today, tells that, following overtures from Mr Jonathan Arkush, vice-president of the British Board of Deputies, Sizer has removed that link.

Posted on 20 January (as shown at right) the link to the article (see my above-mentioned post for that) remained on Facebook for over a week, attracting a total of 60 comments, many of them antisemitic, and at least two "shares".  Disturbingly, not one of Sizer's followers suggested to him in those comments that the post should be taken down. 

The London Jewish News quotes Mr Arkush, a London barrister, thus:
“Posting, and giving approval to, an article which in effect accuses Jews of responsibility for the 9/11 atrocity is unquestionably anti-Semitic, just as it is beyond absurd...."
It reports that while Mr Arkush has "welcomed" Sizer's removal of the link, Mr Arkush also notes that he is
“extremely concerned that a Church of England minister could possibly have considered it appropriate or becoming to his position to advertise such racist nonsense”
and that Mr Arkush observes
“The church should be taking action. He is one of their ministers. It should not be left to the Jewish community to have to protest and be forced to take action from outside.”
Sizer reportedly told the paper via email when contacted by them:
“I would welcome articles you can recommend refuting the allegations.” 
The paper goes on:
'Noting that many Americans feel 9/11 was “an inside job,” Sizer added: “It is essential the public become convinced of what happened before and after 9/11. Inevitably the truth will upset many people if it is shown by further investigation that the official explanations are shown to be deficient.” He added: “Encouraging research and debate on all aspects of [9/11] is not anti- Semitic… Suppressing discussion on such grounds will fuel suspicion, not remove it.”...' [My emphasis]
Read more here

 And there's a big article about this unsavoury post of Sizer's in the London Evening Standard that shows the diocese of Guildford is finally on the case!

Another big article in the UK Daily Telegraph

More fame (or infamy) 

Al Beeb carries the story

Cof E statement here  (it misdates the date Sizer posted the link as 29, rather than 20, January)

The Times of London, most of it behind a paywall, and similarly misdating the link:

From the Daily Telegraph inter alia:
 'The Bishop of Dorking, the Right Revd Ian Brackley, said the Diocese of Guildford, which includes Dr Sizer’s Virginia Water parish, is urgently investigating. 
“I want to reassure everyone that we are taking this complaint extremely seriously,” he said. 
“Immediate steps are being taken to investigate and we are in contact with Dr Sizer as well as the Board of Deputies.” 
A spokesman for the Church of England added: “These comments would rightly be seen as unacceptable whenever they were posted. 
“It is a matter of deep sorrow and shame that they have been posted in this week of all weeks. 
“The Diocese of Gui[d]lford, where the Rev Sizer is licensed, is taking immediate steps to investigate .... 
But Dr Sizer was unrepentant. He told The Telegraph: “I was encouraging debate, I was neither saying Israel did it or that they didn’t.”
He added: “I think they are trying to discredit me – they have tried several times to do that and they have seized on one little link to an article.
“With hindsight I wouldn’t have put it on [Facebook] if I had known it was going to happen.”...' [My emphasis]
 (Incidentally, I contacted the Jewish Chronicle not long after I first saw Sizer's post of 20 January and blogged about it.  They could have had a scoop. However, "the organ of Anglo-Jewry" was not interested in reporting about it, nor did their reporter ever, as far as I can tell, tweet it, as he told me he might.  Poor show, JC.  Very poor show.)

Thursday, 29 January 2015

"We Don't Proselytise, We Don't Fly Planes Into Buildings ...": British national treasure Maureen Lipman on rising antisemitism

Yorkshire-born Anglo-Jewish actress, writer, and humorist Maureen Lipman, an outspoken champion of Israel, was born the year following the end of the Second World War (although for reasons better known to itself the Daily Mail gives her age as 71).

On a north London pavement
 Like her contemporaries, the woman often described as a "British National Treasure"  grew up during a time when antisemitism appeared to have virtually expired, as people contemplated the unparallelled genocidal wickedness to which antisemitism led.

Today, of course, antisemitism has proved, both in Britain and other parts of Europe, that it was not at death's door but only slumbering after all, and none too deeply at that.

Maureen Lipman, in an interview with LBC Radio on Holocaust Memorial Day, has revealed that the rise in antisemitic incidents in Britain in recent months has not only left her "very depressed" but has alarmed her enough to consider moving to New York or Israel:
 “When the going gets tough, the Jews get packing.  It’s crossed my mind that it’s time to have a look around for another place to live....
My kids are very bored with me.  But it is only in the last few months that they have to begun to say: ‘Mum, you may have something’....
When the economy dries up, then they turn on the usual scapegoat: the usual suspect – the Jew.
There is one school of thought that says it’s because of Israeli policies in the West Bank – it isn’t. There’s been antisemitism for the past 4,000 years....
There are 245,000 Jews in the country. What’s to fear? We don’t proselytise, we don't fly planes into buildings, we generally keep on the right side of the law.... We give and give and give ...’
Stephen Spielberg, too, spoke out on Holocaust Memorial Day on burgeoning antisemitism.

Read more here (with videos)

Wednesday, 28 January 2015

Louisiana Governor Warns Against Immigration To America By Those Who Defy Western Values (video)

A not inappropriate follow-up to my previous post, here's Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal, whose parents migrated from India and embraced the values of their new country, warning that immigrants who move to America with no intention of subscribing to its democratic values based on the Judeo-Christian ethos pose a threat to the nation in the same way as such immigration poses a threat to western Europe:

(Hat tip: Vlad tepes blog)


Pat Condell: "It's Muslim Antisemitism, Progressive Jews, and Not The Far Right ..." (video)

Here's that frank-talking man again, on the major source of antisemitism in Europe, and urging others to be as on-the-bullseye as he is in identifying it, publicly:

Hat tip: reader Ian


Tuesday, 27 January 2015

Obama Spokesman On Avoiding The Term "Radical Islam"

".... Today we bow our heads in memory of the victims in Paris. However, as representatives of an ancient and proud people, we stand tall against evil because we can overcome it. "The more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread" – because truth and justice are on our side. And here is the truth: Our shared enemy is Radical Islam, not Islam and not just radicals – Radical Islam. This form of Islam has many names: ISIS, Hamas, Boko Haram, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, al-Shabab, Hezbollah; but they are all branches from the same poison tree.

Although the various factions of Radical Islam are given to local bloody conflicts, including amongst themselves, they all share the same aspiration: To impose a dark tyranny on the world, to return humanity one thousand years to the past. They trample anyone who does not share their path, first and foremost their Muslim brothers, but their greatest hatred is saved for Western culture, that same culture that respects freedom and equal rights – all the things they so despise.

For this reason it is not a coincidence that Radical Islam has sought to destroy Israel from the very day it declared its independence: Because Israel is the only Western democracy in the Middle East, because Israel is the only place that is truly safe for Christians, women, minorities, that respects all human rights.
Well, here is another truth: Radical Islam does not hate the West because of Israel. It hates Israel because it is an organic part of the West. It rightly views Israel as an island of Western democracy and tolerance in an ocean of fanaticism and violence that it wishes to impose on the Middle East, Europe and the entire world.

Israel is not under attack because of this or that detail of its policies, but rather because of its very existence and nature. But we are not the only ones under attack. Look around you: The entire world is under attack, the entire world – the Twin Towers in New York, the subways in London and Madrid, tourists in Bali, students at schools in Russia and Pakistan, a hotel in Mumbai, the mall in Nairobi."

So said Bibi Netanyahu during his stirring speech at the Grand Synagogue, Paris, following the .Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Cacher killing spree.

On "Meet The Press" on Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough explains why the phrase "Radical Islam", which of course Bibi uses several times there, is best avoided:


Meanwhile, as reported here:
'The head of BBC Arabic has instructed editors not to use the word "terrorist" to describe the Islamist gunmen who murdered 12 people at the Paris offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine.
Tarik Kafala told the UK's Independent newspaper that the term "terrorist" is too "loaded," and said the decision was in-line with the BBC's overall policy on reporting such attacks.
"We try to avoid describing anyone as a terrorist or an act as being terrorist. What we try to do is to say that 'two men killed 12 people in an attack on the office of a satirical magazine'. That’s enough, we know what that means and what it is," said Kafala.
"Terrorism is such a loaded word," he added. "The UN has been struggling for more than a decade to define the word and they can’t. It is very difficult to. We know what political violence is, we know what murder, bombings and shootings are and we describe them. That’s much more revealing, we believe, than using a word like terrorist which people will see as value-laden." .... 
Although Kafala's statement came as a surprise to some, the refusal by the BBC to use the word "terrorist" has long been a point of contention, particularly in its coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict....
However, while consistently reticent about referring to individuals as "terrorists," some have noted that while some attacks - including those against Charlie Hebdo - are often referred to as "terror attacks" or "terrorist attacks", equally brutal attacks against Israeli targets are simply referred to using the the more "neutral" term "militant attacks."'
 See reactions to Kafala's directive here

Monday, 26 January 2015

Are You Sitting Down? Iran Issues Report On Human Rights Violations

Glory, glory, Hallelujah!!!

The Farsi News Agency reports today that Iran has published a report on human rights violations during 2013 and 2014.

Let's give credit where it's due: this is a most noble and long overdue gesture on the part of a country in which human rights violations are frequent and monstrous.

A country that  punishes homosexuals with the noose and is not averse to hanging women, stones women for adultery, persecutes apostates, dissidents, and members of religious minorities even to the death.

And so on.

A country that has now bitten the bullet and exposed such horrific and unconscionable occurrences.

See for yourself:

More here

Sunday, 25 January 2015

David Singer: Yemen Crumbles, Iraq Stumbles, America Fumbles ...

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

He writes:

There are some 60 States in the American-led coalition pledged to degrading and destroying Islamic State – but only 21 – regarded as “key members” were at the Conference in London on 22 January – which UK Foreign Minister Philip Hammond described in these terms:
“Today, 21 key members of the global coalition met in London to review and discuss our efforts to degrade and defeat ISIL not just through military force, but by addressing the underlying narrative of the organization, its financing, its flow of foreign fighters, and by reasserting our commitment to Iraq. In total, over 60 countries have signed up to the global coalition, showing the international will and commitment to combat this threat.”
US Secretary of State John Kerry was at pains to clarify why the other 39 States had not joined the talk-fest:
 “And all the coalition partners are continuing to make vital contributions .., and we mean all 60. Whether it’s sheltering refugees, training, advising Iraqi troops on the front lines, or speaking out against Daesh’s [Islamic State – Ed.] hateful, false ideology, we appreciate the contribution of every single member, each of whom has chosen one line of effort or another.
 But we also recognize the need to, as effectively as possible, be able to coordinate all of these contributions. And that’s what the small group that came here today set out to do. The small group will continue to meet on a regular basis and continue, obviously, to consult with the full 60 members of the coalition, who will meet again as a full membership.”
The non-participation of the world’s remaining 133 States in the American-led coalition did not escape Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi’s attention – as he wryly noted:
 “Daesh is a terrorist organization. It knows no race, no religion, no region. It spares nobody, so everybody must be facing Daesh.”
Al-Abadi was therefore being more than a little cynical when he stated:
 “that Iraq is not alone, the Iraqi people are not alone, but the entire world stands with Iraq”
One can only ask: why then are these 133 reluctant States not members of the American-led coalition? Are they prepared to let the other 60 States do the heavy lifting for them whilst they just sit by and watch? Will they only be motivated to join the American-led coalition when Islamic State comes knocking at their door?

Pointedly, the Joint Press Availability with UK Foreign Secretary Hammond and Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi – issued by the US State Department following the London Conference – made no mention of any discussion having taken place at the Conference concerning Yemen’s dramatic cave-in this week – resulting in the resignation of Yemeni President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi after having being held captive following a concerted assault waged by Houthi rebels.

Yemen had been allowing the United States to wage counter-terror drone strike operations targeting Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula from Yemen’s sovereign territory.

Membership of Al-Qaeda and Islamic State was respectively claimed by the perpetrators of two horrific massacres in Paris last week at the offices of publisher Charlie Hebdo and a Kosher supermarket – resulting in the murder of seventeen people whilst putting France on a state of highest alert to counter any further possible terrorist attacks in their wake.

The events in Yemen represent a spectacular collapse of President Obama’s policy for similarly countering Islamic State in Iraq – by training supplying and using Iraqi forces to fight Islamic State on the ground whilst the coalition counters Islamic State from the air.

President Obama laid out this policy on 10 September 2014 – citing Yemen as an example of how that policy was working:
 “Now, it will take time to eradicate a cancer like ISIL.  And any time we take military action, there are risks involved –- especially to the servicemen and women who carry out these missions.  But I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.  This counter-terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist, using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground.  This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.  And it is consistent with the approach I outlined earlier this year:  to use force against anyone who threatens America’s core interests, but to mobilize partners wherever possible to address broader challenges to international order.”
Could Yemen’s fate herald the Iraqi Government’s possible collapse?

Al-Abadi ominously told the London Conference:
 “Another issue, which is being discussed today, is the fiscal problem for Iraq. You know oil prices have dropped to about 40 percent of their level last year. Iraqi economy and budget relies 85 percent on oil, and this has been disastrous for us…
… We don’t want to see a reverse of our military victory because of our budget and fiscal problems and we have been assured that every member of this coalition will stand with Iraq in its fight against Da’esh “
How long will it take Obama to understand that Islamic State can only be comprehensively defeated by military action undertaken on the ground by a properly equipped and authorised United Nations international force?