Heard About the Rabbi And Fear?

Jonathan Hoffman of the UK, also a member of the Board of Deputies, attempted to unseat Rabbi Danny Rich from the British Zionist Federation.  Rich is the chief executive of Liberal Judaism and a ZF patron.

As reported:

...ZF joint vice-chairman Jonathan Hoffman tabled the resolution to remove him at a meeting of a national council last week...it is understood that he complained about Rabbi Rich's recent participation in a church event with Peter Kosminsky, the director of The Promise, Channel 4's contentious drama on the birth of Israel, and anti-Zionist Deborah Fink.  He also took issue with Rabbi Rich's view that advocates of a one-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict are not by definition antisemitic.

On that event:

a sixth-form study day at the Gryphon Church of England school, chaired by the Bishop of Sherborne, Graham Kings. The event was focused on Israel and Palestine. But its objectivity and impartiality left much to be desired. Partly organised by the anti-Israeli Palestinian Christian movement entitled "Friends of Sabeel", aided by members of Jews for Justice for Palestinians, its spotlight was unashamedly on the privations allegedly inflicted upon Arabs by Jews in what was once part of Mandate Palestine. The event was planned around last year's controversial Channel 4 series, The Promise, and the guest of honour was its writer, Peter Kosminsky...Other participants in the Sherborne event included Dr Hassan Qasrawi (described on the Salisbury diocesan website as "a Palestinian refugee") and Deborah Fink, a singer and leading Jewish anti-Zionist activist, whose multifarious accomplishments have included demonstrating against a concert by the Jerusalem Quartet in London in 2010...

On the one hand, although the resolution did not pass, Harvey Rose, ZF chairman, commented that the patrons of the ZF, including Rabbi Rich, would be asked to reaffirm their allegiance to the Jerusalem Programme – the World Zionist Organisation's manifesto.

As for Rabbi Rich, on a trip to Israel this week, he responded so:

"Jonathan Hoffman's petty campaign against me does neither him nor the Zionist Federation any credit. Perhaps now that his views have been comprehensively rejected by his ZF executive colleagues, he will find a more constructive cause for his undoubted energy.

"He is in danger of being out of touch with those of us who consider ourselves real friends of Israel, who advocate for Israel in places where others fear to tread."

I am not fully familiar with the particulars, although I am aware of the general malaise that concerns Jonathan, with whom I am familiar. Nevertheless, the good Rabbi should know that if one need fear to tread, there may be a very good reason for that fear.


P.S. After searching around further, I doscovered that on March 21 2010 Rich allowed ICAHD's Jeff Halper the use of the Montagu Centre. The meeting was organised by “Jews for Justice for Palestinians”. And at a meeting at Kingston Synagogue in October 2010 Rich made a comment which alll heard that the ZF was in cahoots with the English Defense League.

Maybe we should fear the Rabbi?

^

UK - No Human Rights Protection for Jews

Thanks to J, I've learned that the United Kingdom's Tel Aviv Embassy issues a

Human Rights: Quarterly Update

and the latest one is here.

It deals with "Israel and the OPTs". If you don't know "OPTs" means "Occupied Palestinian Territories".

As you know, there are Jews living in those areas, whether Her Majesty's Government likes it or not.

The report mentions “price tag” attacks apparently carried out by extreme right-wing groups, the relocation of 30,000 Bedouin from unrecognised villages, death of Palestinian protester Mustapha Tamimi and the disproportionate use of force under any circumstances, Al Walaja village being encircled by the Israeli constructed barrier, house demolitions, children in Silwan being detained and interrogated and also allegations of human rights abuses by Palestinian security forces.

But not a word about Arab attacks on Jews, on Arab incitement, on Arab attacks on Jewish agricultural property.

Jews don't deserve human rights protection?

^

Klutzy Clegg

Here comes Perfidious Albion. Again.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg today described Israeli settlement building as

"deliberate vandalism"...at a press conference alongside Mahmoud Abbas during the Palestinian president's visit to London...

Clegg said he condemned "continued settlement building in the strongest possible terms".

...Asked about the escalation of the rhetoric, he said: "Once you've placed physical facts on the ground that make it impossible to deliver something that everyone has for years agreed is the ultimate destination [peace via a two-state solution] ... it is an act of deliberate vandalism to the basic premise on which negotiations have taken place for years and years and years. And that is why we have expressed our concerns as a government."

"Vandalism"?

Education has improved.

Soil use has improved.

Health and hygiene concerns have improved.

Security has improved.

Environment needs have improved.

The list is long.  Very long of the positive acts and policies of Israel in Judea and Samaria for all residents.

What hasn't improved is the attitude of the Arabs of the territory of the former British Mandate over Palestine towards Jews and Zionism.  And the resulting incitement, hostility and terror they perform.

Mr. Clegg, you are such a vandal of the truth.

And such a klutz.

^

So, What Went On Under the Big Tent?

The Jewish Chronicle report notes:-

Speaking just before the ambassador, MP Ivan Lewis praised the Big Tent's convenor, Rabbi Jonathan Guttentag, and noted that, "far too often, those who claim the mantle of leadership in our community would rather ignore some home truths. And the leaders who have the integrity to speak out in a very moderate and balanced way are sometimes vilified."

Mr Lewis said: "Let us respect our differences, free of some of the rancour and personal vitriol we have seen over the last few weeks."

...Douglas Murray of the Henry Jackson Society told 200 delegates that as an "outside observer" of the Jewish community, he noted that "pro-Israel groups spend more time attacking each other than they do their mutual enemies. "It's like the scene in the Life of Brian when no one remembers who their enemy is," Mr Murray said. The sentiment was echoed in more serious terms by many of the conference's 40 or more speakers.

...The Big Tent, living up to its name, included speakers from a wide range of political positions. [except me] Hannah Weisfeld, director of the left-wing Israel advocacy organisation Yachad, strenuously defended the right of pro-Israel groups to criticise the Israeli government. "I challenge the notion and strongly refute [the belief] that you cannot engage with critics of Israel by admitting Israel's flaws," she said.

But Douglas Murray, who admitted a cross-political effort for Israel was needed, countered: "If this argument for Israel is going to be won - and, let's face it, it is being lost - we need a tool-box approach to doing that. That tool-box will include people who are hammers, and there will be some spanners in it."

...Jewish PR guru Shimon Cohen...told Lorna Fitzsimons he did not agree with a word she had said on positive PR efforts by the Israeli government..."Israel's PR sucks," and urged the audience to try to focus the media on positive Israel stories rather than countering the negative. He also attacked Jewish communal leadership. "When we started Shechita UK, I was told we didn't need it; our leaders would have a quiet word at the top. That is utter rubbish. People matter, opinions matter, voices matter. Thanks to the great Jewish public, a voice got across and we won," he said, urging that the same PR effort should now be made for Israel.

Now, that is refreshing.

^

London's West Bank

I was wondering, if I ever do get to London - and I have every intention to do so (I even have an invitation from the Board of Deputies to appear before them*) - could this venue be an appropriate location for a press conference?

Think of the possibilities.

___________

*
From a November 24 email of the President of the Board, Vivian Wineman

...I had not heard of Yisrael Medad before this conference and understand that he has not been involved publicly in defending Israel on the international scene. The committee decided not to invite him but to invite others with similar views a decision which I did not initiate but with which I agreed and am part of. If Yisrael Medad wishes to come to the UK to promote his views we would of course be prepared to receive him at the Board.

Regards Vivian

^

UK's Hague Expects A "Brave, Courageous" Terror Act?

Announced:

Commenting on the attack today on a bus in southern Israel, the Foreign Secretary William Hague said:

“I unreservedly condemn today’s attack from Gaza on a bus carrying schoolchildren in southern Israel. The initial reports we have received suggest the bus was deliberately targeted and that a 16 year old boy has been critically injured. This is a despicable and cowardly act that stands in stark contrast to people’s desire for peaceful reform across the region. Violence will never deliver peace. I reiterate that Hamas must halt these strikes immediately, and rein in other militant factions in Gaza.

This attack further highlights Israel’s legitimate security concerns...

Wait just a sec. Is he saying there could be a "brave, courageous" attack on Israel?

^

When Israel was "in" Yemen

Reported:

Although the British government remained officially unaware of the operation, MI6 was kept fully informed. On one occasion, the Press got wind of it and questions were asked in the House of Commons, but the Prime Minister, by then Sir Alec Douglas-Home, denied all knowledge of such activities.

A far bigger scandal would have resulted had the Egyptians or anyone else learned that, from 1964, Johnson’s men were being supplied by air-drops of ammunition and arms from Israeli planes, as a result of a top-secret deal between the mercenaries and Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service.

Operation Leopard, as it was codenamed, took place at night with Israeli pilots skilfully flying 14 missions into the high mountains to drop their consignments.  The Saudis would have cut off their funding immediately if they had learned of the Israeli involvement. For the Israelis, though, the co-operation made perfect sense.

Nasser had sworn to destroy Israel, and war between the two countries seemed inevitable. But if the British tied up large numbers of his forces in the Yemen, he would have fewer to deploy against Israel.

When the UK and Israel were friends and allies.

Such nostalgia.

Operation Leopard, it was:

The same was true of incoming arms and ammunition. A more secure means of delivery was needed, and it was the Israelis who provided it - for they, like the Saudis, were eager to keep Nasser distracted elsewhere.


Negotiations were conducted in absolute secrecy, first by the Conservative MP Billy McLean (a close associate of Johnson), who flew privately to Tel Aviv to meet Moshe Dayan, the defence minister, and Meir Amit, head of Mossad. The next envoys were Johnson and his second-in-Command, Tony Boyle, who conferred with Shimon Peres, Director of the Ministry of Defence, and Major General Ezer Weizman, Commander-in-Chief of the Israeli Air Force.

To help preserve security, the mercenaries called Israel "Wales" and Israelis "the Welsh". Later, the operation was known as "Mango", and Israel became "Mango Land". So efficient was the obfuscation that the British Government knew nothing about it. Had word got out, Nasser would have had an immense propaganda coup, and the Saudis would immediately have cut off the supply of gold.

To Israel, it was Operation Leopard, in which a converted Boeing Stratocruiser flew 14 missions into the Yemeni mountains by night, parachuting arms, ammunition and gold directly to the Royalist armies.

The flights were extremely hazardous, for the dropping zones chosen by the mercenaries were among 12,000-foot mountains, and lacked all the navigational aids to which pilots were accustomed. Only small fires and the occasional headlamp purloined from a lorry guided the Stratocruiser in. Major Arieh Oz, pilot on most of the missions, reckons to this day that "for daring, planning and execution, it was a masterpiece of a military operation". His first flight lasted for 14 hours, and he touched down at Tel Nof airforce base, south of Tel Aviv, with only 15 minutes' fuel remaining in his tanks.

The drops undoubtedly did a great deal to bolster Royalist morale, and - though their value cannot be quantified - they certainly increased the difficulties in which the Egyptians found themselves by providing the Imam's followers with rifles, machine guns, explosives, mortar bombs and ammunition. In the course of the civil conflict, Nasser lost 20,000 dead, and came to regard the Yemen as his Vietnam.

The effect on the Six-Day War is equally unquantifiable. There is no doubt that the shattering initial air-strikes in the early morning of 5 June 1967 set Israel on the road to victory; but equally, the fact that 30,000 of Egypt's best troops were still pinned down in the Yemen, and that 20,000 men had been killed there, must have contributed something to the country's defeat. No doubt Israel, with its domination in the air, would have won anyway even if the whole Egyptian army had been present - but the land battle might have been longer and more bloody.

The Israeli high command certainly thought so. Two days after their victory they invited Johnson and Boyle out to Tel Aviv, where they were congratulated by Dayan. They were then flown all over the Sinai battlefield - and they were shocked by the evidence of carnage close beneath them, especially by the sight of wrecked tanks and lesser vehicles packed like lemmings in the Mitla Pass, through which the drivers had vainly tried to escape towards Suez.

^


Read more:

Money, Money, Money

And this is just pounds sterling:

Palestinians: International Assistance

Mr Offord: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 1 December 2010, Official Report, columns 830-31W, on Palestinians: international assistance, to what non-governmental organisations in Israel other than in the west bank or Gaza his Department has provided funds in each year since 2003; and for what purposes such payments were made. [36577]

Alistair Burt: Between 2003-04 and 2009-10 financial years, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has provided nearly £3.8 million to non-governmental organisations in Israel (other than in the west bank or Gaza). Final funding for the current financial year cannot be confirmed.

Our funding supports our strategic policy priorities to:

(a) help manage or mitigate conflicts;
(b) monitor and promote human rights, access to justice and social welfare; and
(c) strengthen the bi-lateral relationship.

The following non-governmental organisations have received funding from the Middle East and North Africa Conflict Pool or the Foreign and Commonwealth Office:

Abraham Fund;
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI);
Bimkom;
Birax;
Breaking the Silence;
B'Tselem;
Council for Peace and Security (CPS);
Economic Co-operation Foundation (ECF);
Gisha;
Friends of the Earth Middle East (FOEME);
HaMoked;
Hand in Hand;
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC);
International Palestinian Centre for Research and Information (IPCRI);
Ir Amim;
Itach-Makki;
Local Government Association (LGA-UK Organisation);
Negev Institute for Strategies of Peace and Development (NISPED);
No Legal Frontiers;
Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI);
Peace Now;
Women for Human Rights;
Yesh Din.

Funny, they are all of one political stripe.

They are all anti-"occupation".

Is that human rights?  With whom can I bi-laterally engage?

Back in September, he prided himself that

...We maintain a regular dialogue with a variety of NGOs

but that was in connection with Sri Lanka and the Tamilis.

In late January, during Burt's visit here:

A statement from the British embassy in Israel said: "The UK has funded many of the organisations which could be probed, and believe that they play a critical role in the region and help contribute towards resolving the conflict between the sides."

That, Minister Burt, I would consider, in the way it is being done, as subversion of Israel' democracy through finance.

This is really not fair, chaps.

Read Danny Ayalon's article on transparency.

(k/t: MH & JH)

^

Is This The British Parliament?

News from London:

Thursday, 27 January 2011 06:57

MPs express horror at torture of prisoners by the Palestinian Authority

That this House expresses grave alarm over recent reports of the torture of prisoners under the custody of the Palestinian Authority

Thursday, 27 January 2011 07:50

Questions for written answer (Lords) by Feb 9 - Middle East

Lord Dykes to ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they intend to make about the President of the Palestinian Authority following election laws and submitting himself for re-election...

And here we were thinking that for the Brits, the Pals can do no wrong.


(Kippah tip: MJ)

^

The UK: The Ugly Kingdom

How does this strike your sensitivities?

Welcome to Palestine, the cradle of civilization, where West meets East, North meets South, and where Judaism, Christianity, and Islam took form.

We welcome you in Palestine and hope that you enjoy our cultural richness, deeply compelling history, and legendary hospitality. Over the centuries millions of people have come to visit this beautiful Holy Land and we are glad to welcome you among them.

Ahlan Wa Sahlan

This appeared in the UK, where this ad appeared:

The UK, where the implication that Jerusalem is in Israel brought down on Israel's Tourism Authority the wrath and prohibition of the advertisement regulation board.

UK = The Ugly Kingdom.

(Kippah tip: UK ZF)


UPDATE

Here:-

Britain’s advertising regulator has launched an investigation following a barrage of complaints over a “Travel Palestine” advert in this month’s National Geographic magazine which appears to blot out the existence of the State of Israel.  The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the UK’s independent regulator of advertising across all media, told The Jerusalem Post on Friday that in the last few days it had received 60 complaints about the advert – published by the Palestinian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities, “the official website for tourism in Palestine” – which appeared in National Geographic’s Traveller magazine.

“I can confirm that the ASA has received 60 complaints about the Travel Palestine ad that appeared in the National Geographic magazine,” an ASA spokesman told the Post. “I can also confirm that the ASA has launched a formal investigation into the ad.”

^

Ah, Britain

.

Reported

LONDON (AP) — A BBC documentary says Saudi textbooks containing anti-Semitic and homophobic material are being used in British classrooms.

The BBC's "Panorama" program found the books in use for weekend education programs teaching the Saudi national curriculum to about 5,000 Muslim children in Britain.

The show, to be aired Monday, says the books include claims that some Jews were transformed into pigs and apes, teach that the penalty for sodomy is execution and show the correct way to chop off the hands and feet of thieves.

The government said it would tighten regulation of part-time classes. Education Secretary Michael Gove says anti-Semitic and homophobic sentiments have "absolutely no place in English education or in public life in Britain."

The BBC:

Saudi school lessons in UK concern government

The government says it will not tolerate anti-Semitic and homophobic lessons being taught to Muslim children in the UK.

BBC Panorama found that more than 40 Saudi Students' Schools and Clubs are teaching the official Saudi national curriculum to about 5,000 pupils.

One text book shows how the hands and feet of thieves are chopped off.

...Education Secretary Michael Gove said there was no place for the Saudi teachings with regard to Jews or homosexuals in Britain: "To my mind it doesn't seem to me that this is the sort of material that should be used in English schools."

...One of the text books asks children to list the "reprehensible" qualities of Jewish people. A text for younger children asks what happens to someone who dies who is not a believer in Islam - the answer given in the text book is "hellfire".

...Neal Robinson, an expert in the Koran, said the context in which the materials are presented comes with risks.

"To present it cold, as it seems to be here, just part of the teaching of Islam, no it's not wise. In the wrong hands I think it is... ammunition for anti-Semitism."

The use of these materials in Britain comes three years after a BBC investigation found a Saudi-funded school in west London was using texts that referred to Jewish people and Christians in derogatory terms. That prompted assurances at the highest diplomatic levels that the materials would be removed...

They just don't learn, it seems.

^

Let's Stretch Ed Milliband's Sinews Why Don't We

The new Labour Party leader, brother of the former leader, son of a Marxist, grandson of someone buried close to Karl Marx, whose mother is pro-Pal., partner of Justine Thornton (who is/was a senior environmental lawyer working for E.On and is pregnant),
Ed Milliband, speaks on Israel:

"As Israel ends the moratorium on settlement building, I will always defend the right of Israel to exist in peace and security. But Israel must accept and recognize in its actions the Palestinian right to statehood.

"That is why the attack on the Gaza Flotilla was so wrong. And that is why the Gaza blockade must be lifted and we must strain every sinew to work to make that happen," he said.

Look at that sinew!

Another yielding "friend of...Israel". Oiy.

Jonathan Hoffman's take.



- - -

Upper Crust and Upper Crumpet - Antisemitism in the UK

Extracted from the extract of Trials of the Diaspora by Anthony Julius

...Diana, Princess of Wales...telephoned me one afternoon and asked me to come to see her at her home in Kensington Palace...

...She was interested in Jews but had no idea about them, save that Jewish men (she had heard) were more likely than the men of her own class and background to treat women decently. She was happy to take Jews to be hostile to everything to which she herself was hostile. She once said to me that she should never have married into a German family.

...As a Jew I was an “outsider”, not “Establishment”, and this confirmed Diana’s own “outsider” status. I was also an “intellectual”, a contrast to the unacademic Diana. My background was middle-middle-class, a contrastwith Prince Charles’s lawyer, Fiona Shackleton, a partner at the royal family’s law firm.

The profiles tended to be uncertain how to assess the significance of my Jewish identity, save that they all took it to be of immense significance. I also started receiving odd letters during this time. Some gave me advice, some chastised me for disrespect towards the monarchy and some were anti-Semitic. It was all rather bemusing, but nothing more than an intermittent, minor distraction from the negotiations themselves.

The piece in the Saturday July 13, 1996 edition of The Daily Telegraph was of an entirely different order...“Unfortunately, her softly-softly approach is at odds with the more bullish attitude of the princess’s solicitor. Anthony ‘Genius’ Julius, 39, is not a divorce lawyer but a specialist in media law, acting for Robert Maxwell and once employed by the Daily Mail.

“His background could not be further from the upper-class world inhabited by his opposite number. He is a Jewish intellectual and Labour supporter and less likely to feel restrained by considerations of fair play...The author went on to speculate about whether I had secured a good settlement for the princess.

...The next day, at the foot of another story about the royal divorce, the following item appeared: “Our royal divorce coverage last Saturday...Intended to compare and contrast their styles, but without in any way seeking to question his professional integrity, we referred to Mr Julius’s background as a Jewish intellectual in a context which we now recognise, to our profound regret, to have appeared pejorative.

“Many readers have taken the strongest exception to this paragraph, making clear that they regard it as a racial slur. In acknowledging the force of this criticism, we offer our sincere apologies to Mr Julius and to all those who took offence.”

...Of course, one could not grow up as a Jew, living in part among Jews, without hearing of anti-Semitism. For Anglo-Jewry in general, anti-Semitism is the background noise against which we make our lives. Almost always barely audible, one then must strain to detect it, although very occasionally it irrupts into a dissonant, heart-stopping din. The question of the extent of my experience of anti-Semitism, then, is perhaps best answered thus: just enough. That is, just enough for it to inform my understanding of the subject but not so much as to overwhelm me...

Read it all!

Long Recall July 19, 1956

According to the web site of The Department for Work and Pensions, the UK has a narrow definition of "Israel" for the purposes of entitlement to State Pension:

Quote:

"Israel - means the territory administered by the Government of Israel on 19 July 1956. Territory which is outside Israel, as defined above, is not covered by the agreement."

First, why was that date chosen? *

Second, since the term "administered" is used, and under international law, Israel is actually administering the former territory of the Mandate, parts of which were to become the "Jewish state" as defined by the UN Partition resolution in addition to parts that were not to be included, in accordance with normative war law procdures, why should expat Britishers living in Israel outside those 1956 borders be discriminated against?

Third, exactly what benefits are not provided to those outside those borders?

---------------

*

Was it this:-

Washington [D.C.] indicated it would provide economic assistance to Egypt
to help build a dam at Aswan on the Nile River. [Egyptian President] Nasser
considered this project essential to his plans to combat the effects of poverty and a soaring population and to develop Egypt economically...American opinion about Nasser was changing, and [U.S.] Secretary of State Dulles was begining to detest him. Dulles and others had little patience with Arab nationalism and were increasingly frustrated, disappointed, and angry at Nasser's 'neutralism' and
unwillingness to follow the American game plan for the region. The last straw for Dulles was Nasser's recognition of Communist China on May 4, 1956. In a meeting on July 19, 1956 with the Egyptian ambassador to the United States, Dulles abruptly withdrew the loan offer and rebuffed the ambassador.

and this:-

The British followed suit the next day.

Or was it this excerpt from the speech in Parliament made by The Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Alan Lennox-Boyd) on that day:-

The right hon. Gentleman said that it is not enough to stake the defence of the West on treaties alone—or words to that effect. I entirely agree with him that settlements other than treaties are essential if we are to bring about tranquillity in the Eastern Mediterranean. But I must confess that I remain continuously puzzled by the inability of the right hon. Gentleman and of some, though by no means all, of his hon. Friends to understand the main strategic considerations which compel Her Majesty's Government...

More Unctuousness and A Bit of Hypocrisy

Some British persons would wish their government to talk to Hamas, as I previously blogged.

Persons? MPs!

Here:

MPs urge ministers to open Middle East peace talks with Hamas moderates [sic!?]

The government is facing fresh calls today from MPs to open contacts with the militant Palestinian Hamas movement in an attempt to inject new momentum into the Middle East peace process.

Commons foreign affairs committee says policy of non-engagement is achieving little

It reiterated its call of two years ago for the government to "urgently" consider ways of engaging politically with "moderate elements" within the group.

The government refuses to talk to Hamas until it accepts the principles of the international Quartet - the United Nations, the United States, the European Union and Russia - of non-violence and acceptance of the existence of the state of Israel.

"There continues to be few signs that the current policy of non-engagement is achieving the Quartet's stated objectives," the committee said.

"We further conclude that the credible peace process for which the Quartet hopes, as part of its strategy for undercutting Hamas, is likely to be difficult to achieve without greater co-operation from Hamas itself. We are concerned that the Quartet is continuing to fail to provide Hamas with greater incentives to change its position."

Well, read this report carefully:

The last two men imprisoned for Provisional I.R.A. offenses were released from prison on Wednesday...Pearse McCauley and Kevin Walsh, walked free from Ireland’s Castlerea prison more than 10 years after they were convicted in the killing by the Irish Republican Army of an Irish policeman guarding a cash delivery van.

...Britain and Ireland continue to incarcerate more than three dozen members of dissident I.R.A. groups opposed to the Provisionals’ 2005 decisions to renounce violence and disarm

So, on the one hand, parliamentarians are demanding in London that their government deal with terrorists ("moderate" my [Michael] foot) but that same government is, on the other hand, presumably with the agreement, tacit or otherwise, of those MPs, most definitely not dealing with their own local terrorists for the reasons Israel won't deal with Hamas and why the British government shouldn't deal with them either.

Such hypocrisy.


P.S.

Check this on the goings-on in the US.

More bad ideas here.

Unctuous UK

Found here:

The UK position on Jerusalem – a key issue in the Israeli / Palestinian Peace Process and an important concern to Muslims, Christians and Jews around the world.

Jerusalem was supposed to be a ‘corpus separatum’, or international city administered by the UN. But this was never set up: immediately after the UNGA resolution partitioning Palestine, Israel occupied West Jerusalem and Jordan occupied East Jerusalem (including the Old City). We recognised the de facto control of Israel and Jordan, but not sovereignty.

Let's reread that, slowly:

...immediately after the UNGA resolution partitioning Palestine, Israel occupied West Jerusalem and Jordan occupied East Jerusalem...

Not really.

a. "Immediately"? No. After the Arab States invasion in May 1948. Up until then, Israel made no moves to occupy anything but protect Jewish residents in the city. Protect from what?

b. Protect from acts of violence that began on December 2, 1947 when Arabs invaded and attempted to occupy portions of Jerusalem, burning down the Commercial Centre where the David's Citadel is today.

The British history above conveniently leaves out the fact that it was the Arab side that rejected the UNGA Partition Resolution, initiated hostilities and caused a war of aggression.

"Occupation"?

Nope. Rightful administration.

And post-1967, even more rightful.


Is there a word unctuousness?

A Subject and His Unwelcome Queen

You'll recall that last year, I managed to be declared a virtual persona noמ grata at official UK Embassy events.

Really. Here. And here.

Well, there's a related development which Daniel Pinner (but read this) deals with in this edited email I received:

Your Majesty, You're Not Welcome


I must confess that I am not entirely surprised.

Item: The British Embassy in Tel Aviv has decided to boycott Israeli companies that invest in Judea and Samaria.

Your Majesty, one of your Ambassadors, Tom Phillips, who represents you in Israel, has recently decided that he would boycott the Kirya Tower in Tel Aviv, because it is partly owned by Africa-Israel whose owner, Lev Levayev, also owns a subsidiary company that has built homes in Judea and Samaria.

Now, I must confess that I am not entirely surprised: the same ambassador, His Excellency Tom Phillips, decided back in July of last year [no, he didn't and in fact, he was somewhat reprimanded - YM] that, even though I am still a British citizen, a subject of the Crown, I am no longer fit to be represented by him, when His Excellency decided to ban "settlers" from British Embassy functions. That is to say, I no longer enjoy your royal protection.

You see, I live in Kfar Tapuach, a "settlement" in the "Israeli-occupied West Bank". To be more precise, I live in the heart of Samaria, just a few miles due south of Shechem. When I go running with my dog to the small hill a few dozen yards from my house, we overlook the city that the Arab occupiers call "Nablus". Because I chose to make my home here, where my ancestors lived millennia ago, I am no longer worthy of the words inscribed in my British passport: "Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary". Unless - we should now add - the bearer happens to be an Israelite living in the heartland of Biblical Israel.

Well, with all due respect to Your Majesty and to His Excellency the British Ambassador to Israel, I am not exactly devastated by the blow. I never really expected your diplomatic services or security forces to look after me or my people, whether in the "West Bank," or "Israel proper," or anywhere else in the world.

I know that Britain was the only country in the entire world to voluntarily declare war against Nazi Germany, and I am aware of Britain's magnificent, impressive war effort during those hideously dark years - a record that will forever stand to Britain's credit - but still, Britain's record concerning Jews during the Holocaust is somewhat dismal. I am too weary to detail, once again, the Royal Air Force's refusal to bomb the railway lines taking Jews to the Nazi death camps even while bombing more distant targets; Martin Gilbert, in Auschwitz and the Allies, has documented this sorry episode far better than I could.

Are you aware that the entire British Empire accepted fewer Jewish refugees than the port of Shanghai? And do you remember the restrictions that the government of your father, King George VI, placed on Jews from Reich-occupied countries finding refuge in Britain? Again, I know that Britain's record in that regard is far better than that of most other countries, but it's not as if there was very stiff competition.

And do you remember that your father's government fought bitterly against Jewish independence anywhere in the Land of Israel? Are you even aware that during and after the Holocaust, when more than ever we needed refuge, and at a time when the God of Israel granted your father the infinite privilege of ruling over the Holy Land, the Royal Navy patrolled these shores to ensure that the survivors of Hitler's accursed inferno would not be allowed home? Are you aware that when the British Army left Haifa, Jaffa, Tzfat (Safed), Lod (Lydda), Ramle, and other places in 1948, they turned the police fortresses with their armouries and weapons over to the Arab forces?

...Well, I suppose that I, and hundreds of thousands of other Jews here in our Holy Land, will just have to get used to the idea that you and your kingdom find the idea of Jews settling their own land most distasteful. Very well, so be it. But I have to tell you, unaccustomed as I am to taking so discourteous a tone to Your Majesty, so long as this policy continues you are no longer welcome in my house here in Kfar Tapuach.

...I understand that you and your government are anxious to appease the Muslims. On reflection, that's probably a wise policy. As much as we Jews had a written history in Shechem back when your ancestors in England were still living in trees, we will still be living here, building our Land and bringing sacrifices and singing psalms to God in our Holy Temple, long after your descendants will be living as dhimmis in the Islamic Republic of Englandistan.

Maybe I'll talk to my third daughter about this as she is a British subject as well.

Remember "Proportionate Response"?

Remember that phrase, from the Second Lebanese War and also Gaza: "disproportionate response"?

That Israel was hitting back too hard against terrorists trying to kill and maim?

I found it again, in another setting:

Britain's envoy to the Middle East on Monday said the United Kingdom would continue its fight against West Bank settlements, but would not mount a broader divestment campaign. "This isn't about boycotting Israel...

...Under a 2005 agreement, products from Israel enter EU states like Britain duty-free. But Palestinians complain that many of those goods, labeled as made in Israel, actually come from West Bank settlements.

Rammell said the inspections were helping British authorities identify producers from the settlements, who are then denied the benefits. "One, you would make sure that it wasn't given a tax-exemption. Two, you would tell that to the producer. And three, you would be alerted to that source for the future," he said.

But Rammell made clear Britain has no plans to join a campaign in some European countries to pressure companies to divest from the settlements. "I'm not sure it's effective. It would be extremely complicated. And I think it's about a proportionate response," he said.

Thank God for proportionality.

Maybe we should start referring to Arab communities in Israel as "settlements"? Would that set the cat among the pigeons?

Are "settlements" only Jewish? Is that racial profiling?

Or would that be too disproportionate?

UK ZF Takes On Foreign Secretary David Miliband

For further info:

Jonathan Hoffman, Vice Chairman ZF, office@zionist.org.uk:




The Press Release:

Property purchase in the ‘Occupied Territories”

The FCO is reportedly adding to the ‘travel advice’ section of its website a warning to prospective purchasers of property in the ‘Occupied Territories’ that a future peace deal could have consequences for the property.

1. The UK government has no legal basis for its oft-repeated assertion that the settlements are “illegal under international law”. The Geneva Convention cannot apply to most of the ‘Occupied Territories’ because they have never been recognised as sovereign territory. For example as part of Mandatory Palestine, Judea and Samaria never belonged to any sovereign state but were occupied and administered illegally by Jordan and Egypt between 1948 and 1967, after the Arab war of aggression against Israel in 1948. And East Jerusalem was captured by Jordan in the War of 1948.

Further, the Geneva Convention was designed to prohibit the forcible transfer of population into occupied territories, such as was practised by the Nazis and USSR before and during World War Two. But the Israeli settlers in the West Bank went there voluntarily. And as a country that was attacked, Israel is entirely within its legal rights to retain territory that continues to be used as a base for attacks against it.

As the late Eugene Rostow (the former US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs who played a leading role in drafting Resolution 242) repeatedly said, far from being illegally settled in the disputed territories, the Jews have every right to be there under international law.

2. The FCO’s reported new advice is also very surprising after the recent close co-operation with the UK government shown by President Peres (here a few weeks ago) and Prime Minister Olmert (here last week), for example in negotiations about new investment in Judea and Samaria, which also involved Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad (also here last week).

3. The ZF is concerned that by raising unrealistic expectations, much of the current rhetoric from the UK government (for example, about “illegality” and the reported warning to prospective purchasers of property) can only encourage terrorism. Indeed in other respects the government’s language is much more careful. For example, it always refers to “withdrawal from settlements” rather than “withdrawal from all settlements” or “withdrawal from the settlements”. This is a correct reflection of the position adopted by most moderate Palestinians who accept that land swaps will be part of any final negotiations.

4. Israel has proved that it wants peace, by negotiating peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan. It has proved that it is prepared to give up land, by withdrawing from Gaza. In the middle of the Annapolis peace process, the ZF believes that it is crucial that the UK government supports the voices of moderation - and not those of extremism.

"Too Far" You've Already Gone

Britain has stepped up inspections of Israeli imports to make sure products from Jewish settlements in the West Bank do not enter duty-free...Britain's envoy to the Middle East, Bill Rammell, said pressuring companies to pull out of the Jewish settlements would be a step too far.

In addition to random inspections of Israeli goods by the British tax authority, Britain has taken the lead in trying to get the European Union to set labelling standards to make clear to consumers which products come from Israel and which come from settlements in the occupied West Bank.

..."This isn't about boycotting Israel. The settlements are not Israel," Rammell said in Jerusalem after meeting Israeli and Palestinian leaders and touring parts of the West Bank.

Source

Actually, the "settlements", as you call them, the communities of revenant Jews resident in areas of the historic Jeweish homeland that the League of Nations and other bodies originally decided was to be the reconstituted Jewish national home are the essence of Israel and Zionism.

You know what?