Selective moral outrage

Trumpeldor

Thanks Melanie
Once again, You unveiled a very touchy issue thats lefties are so eager to conceal
One can also wonder the lack of reactions regarding large scale murders in Darfur-South Sudan,Horn of Africa,former Zaire
People must know that the number of journalists dealing with arab -israeli conflict is far greater than news coverage of whole africa
Which means that- people do not care about black people plights
-the only relevant issue must involve Jews,which demonstrate the overlaying anti semitic agenda of most if not all news agencies !

EDDIE

In this country, the media, especially the BBC/Guardian axis, is partially responsible by being economical with the facts, not checking their sources and never giving context. I sometimes wonder about the background of some of their employees.

seb

An atrocity is only an atrocity if it's committed by America or an American ally. As America is the worst regime in the world, all others are relatively better. Even if the Chechens were dark-complexioned, their butcher, Putin, is hostile to the West and to America. So he's a fighter in the struggle against the imperialism of the so-called democratic world. Get it?

And who else but those moral and intellectual giants, Guardian freedom fighters, would so glibly excuse intra-communal slaughter on the grounds that the particular community lags behind the West?

Celina

We live in a mad world where humans make decisions like headless chickens.
Humans are divorced from their own inner intuitive guidance and listen to the outer authorities who obviously have the "truth"...such as the Jews are twisting American policies to suit the State of Israel- thereby causing all the problems we have now"
When we each of us listen to the quiet voices of our own conscience, we wont be taking on the screeching voices of the hate filled outsiders that predominate and lay blame.
People never have been able to confess to their own

stanley Jerusalem

The Grauniad justification was printed in the way of an 'apology' for their having printed a photo of a car-bombed Beirut hospital with beds hanging in mid air over the street, an action ascribed to Israel. When the next day's Telegraph printed the same pic showing a date at the head of the page of two years earlier with the headline 'PLO bombs Beirut Hospital' the Grauniad justified their mistake with Melanie's reported excuse of 'we don't expect Third World countries to behave in any other way since they hold life cheap whereas we expect better of Israel, a Western democracy. That was their justification, despite Israel being innocent of the event and of their 'crediting' Israel with the outrage.How two-faced can one be? That was in 1982.

logdon

Melanie's penultimate para speaks volumes. Visit Cif and witness the tangles these people get into. This cultural relativity thing is a construct to excuse barbarism or backwardness. However try having the temerity to point that out and you're modded or will receive a storm of ill thought out partisan rubbish. You'll get so called feminists jumping through hoops to shill for Islam but point out the stuff which is going on in Swat and the convolution commences. Nice for a woman living in the fastness of Islington not so if you are an acid disfigured teenage Afghani girl destined to be shunned prior to a short miserable life and early death.

Mladen Andrijasevic

I applaud Bret Stephens’s attempt in trying to quantify the anti-Israel bias. Six years ago I did the same and came up with the conclusion that it was roughly two orders of magnitude. Similar to what Stephens found. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/9112

Vision Aforethought

Totally and utterly spot on. And this is why the left will eventually implode when (and if) it matures and realises it was barking up the wrong tree.

Meanwhile, more evidence that the enemies of freedom are never satisfied and will exploit appeasement or concessions: Despite Sharia law being introduced in the Swat province of Pakistan, the Taliban are now making moves on Islamabad. Reminds one of what happens each time Israel gives up some more land. It's never enough.

justLouise

I'm convinced that if you scratch 9 out of 10 "anti-Zionists" you will find an antisemite. The class warfare-promoting left has a big dollop within it of "rich man antisemitism" - based on their (perceived) notion that Jews are powerful plutocrats.
I used to go on an internet forum that had alot of leftwing Israel-bashers and I asked them why they ignored atrocities in Darfur, Tibet, etc. Stunning silence. But if anybody suggested that they were prejudiced against Jews, they retorted that they could hardly be antisemites when Jews themselves, like Ilan Pappe and those three academics all surnamed Rose for example, were among the ranks of Israel-bashers. For sticking up for Israel I was compared to a Nazi, called "a fevered Jewess", and subjected to harassment.

Peter

All the major news outlets are aware of this contradiction but they know that it looks stupid to talk about 'oppressed' Palestinians and then start telling us how many other Muslims attack and subjugate non-Muslims the world over.

Sudan? Sweep it under the carpet. The dhimmis in Egypt? The same.

Once you put Palestine/Israel into a panoramic view, the absurdity of the mainstream media is exposed for what it is.

They know it. We know it. And they know that we know that they know it.

We also know thanks to the huge losses on the New York Times (American Thinker is carrying constant updates) that more and more people have had enough of this.

Al-Beebzera should by now be in the same boat as the New York Times, only it's funded by poll tax.

Mark

I'm not sure where the evidence is that those on the left automatically disregard some atrocities over others? Most campaigns to get governments to take seriously the horrors of Darfur or Chechyna or Rwanda, or those inflicted on women through genital mutilation you'll find left-of-centre 'hand-wringers'and 'do-gooders' and 'meddling' campaigners for justice and 'human rights' (Mel's bizarre quotation marks) at the forefront. Melanie is just peddling a convenient myth here.

Maurice, MD

The Superior Persons -- including the un-Jew Jews who yearn to joing their ranks --need to feed their moral egos by patronizing those they consider beneath them.

But Jews are not beneath them, and just try patronizing Israelis!

Therefore, the Superior Persons do ot feel superior to them and therefore scorn them.

Yorkshireman, Yorkshire

You simply have to laugh at the moral hypocrisy of the Islamic world and "umma".

When muslims in Palestine are killed (usually attacking Israel) there is outrage, protests, threats and demands for "international action" etc etc despite the genocidal beliefs of Hamas.

Likewise for Afghanistan, campaigns for no military intervention, removal of British Troops, marches, protests and the usual victim culture despite Afghanistan being the base that plotted the 9/11 murders.

Meanwhile when it comes to Kosovo and muslims are being killed in a civil war not involving Britain or America then are campaigns, protests, lobbying by the Islamic world FOR military action against Serbia by Britain and America.

Finally when we come to Sudan, over 250,000 muslims have been raped, tortured and massacred by....other muslims and we don't hear a word. No protests, marches, lobbying etc just silence. The "umma" and Islamic nations are totally silent despite the genocide going on.

The moral hypocrisy and selective outrage of these people is sickening.

john

Once again Melanie you are spot on.

seb

lodgon:
To the degree that half-baked partisan rubbish is entertaining, Comment is Free is worth a visit. It's sad but true that the expression of almost any rational point of view on CiF will get you mobbed by all the posturing shills for tyranny and medieval oppression. Whether you read it and weep or read it and laugh is a matter of taste. But get involved in slanging matches with nutters? You can get that working at Broadmoor.

McSweeney

Well it doesn't make it right but it is probably because the Israel/Palestine issue is of much more significance globally than Russia and Chechnya...

Or were you making a different point?

Ephraim

I sent the vile Today programme the link to this article and sincerely asked if they ever bother to even consider the points raised by the article.

But of course they don't. Beeboid arrogance means they never have to reflect upon their own moral shortcomings and prejudices.

But how I resent being FORCED to pay for this bunch of smug, lying, cheating, stealing, bigots.

Ephraim

@ McSweeney...

I think that is precisely the point. WHY is it of more significance globally? Could it be that it's because joos are involved?

Wm. Hazlitt

I think it right that all atrocities should be condemned and all land grabs resisted. I take it this is what Melanie Phillips is saying.

The other interpretation is that she is asking, why do we wink at the crimes of others, but not at the crimes of Israel. She should try to avoid ambiguity.

It is right that we condemn all atrocities equally. It does not follow that we should not concentrate on those we have the greatest chance of stopping.

States are cynical about what moral causes they espouse. And the public is fickle about the causes it espouses. There are fads and fashions. Tibet gets some attention, despite its hopelessness, because of its rich culture and the Dalai Lama's skill in the media, but the Muslims to the north are ignored.

But Israel is not just a fashionable cause for lefties. It is one of the few instances where protest may make a difference. Israel depends on the US. The US could use its influence with Israel to facilitate a lasting peace that would secure both Israelis and Palestinians.

(Of course, it is a long shot. A majority in the US and UK opposed war against Iraq, and it made no difference. The US and UK went ahead and committed crimes on a scale Israel would struggle to match. Hypocrisy tends to weaken the effect of preaching. Nevertheless, all protest is not pointless. And all protest against the behaviour of the State of Israel is not against the people of Israel, let alone, by some non sequitur, Jewish people around the world.)

patricia

The selective moral outrage is yours, given that you fail to see any whatseover in the deaths of 6000 Palestinians.

Otherwise, the Chechnyans were killed by the Russians.

While the Palestinians were killed, in effect, by us - the US and UK, with whose money, weaponry and blessings, Israel did the deed.

patricia

5000 Palestinians - "all terrorists".

Just wondering there Mel...

Does that include the 400 children and babies? Or is it 5400 all in?

Roy

The sad result of having such a long period of leading media (such as the BBC) misrepresenting the truth to the British people is so profound. We now find we have living in our midst millions of unfriendly, incompatible people living in patriarchal enclaves subsisting on government benefits, wishing for a law to themselves. This is the result, choose whether the ruling thought of the day is turned on its head or not. Karl Marx's misuse of his sources of information was noticed by scholars in the 1880's. He constantly misrepresented other writers or speakers and wrote what became a bible to his followers. A writing full of ignorance and lies. Yet for two pins would have become a ruling phenomenon in the world.

Ephraim

Patricia

Anything to say about the genocidal ideology and behaviour of Hamas and assorted Islamoloons, or does your moral relativism predispose you to ignore any behaviour of everyone who is not "white" (esp American) or Jewish?

And where does that leave you, you vulgar little hypocritical bigot?

Ian C

Such discrimination is not only racist but expressed in the terms of prime amoral elitism. It is an attitude that can be summarised as
'we are better/more civilsed so what they do to each other has no bearing on humanity'.

Incredible for a modern human being to even contemplate such a position that regards humanity as divisable into separate inferior 'classes'. That went out a couple of generations ago, apart from among the "egalitarian elites" it seems.

stanley Jerusalem

It seems to be a source of great comfort that both blatant and crypto-antisemites can comfortably post on this blog knowing it to be preoccupied with the perceived misdemeanours of the only Jewish state in the world, hold up their hands in horror and amazement when accused of partiality and racism and simultaneously manage to miss the other 98% of racial outrages and murders perpetrated elsewhere, the majority of which are by those whom they claim to support and defend.

Harvey

Patricia

Whilst we are playing the numbers game ,should we not hazard a guess at the number of children murdered in Darfur by Arab militia . I would think out of a genocide which so far numbers some half a million , a fifth sounds about right ie 100,000 .Can I put you down for that number so that you can register your shock /horror and prowess at firing off reams of angry posts to whatever passes for the Somali goverments website . Perhaps a demonstration outside their embassy including ' We are all black Somali Tribespeople now'
T shirts for all 3 protestors .

The fact is Melanie has your number and those like you to a T and you dont like it!

bt

Thanks Melanie. This was a great piece! A lone voice of reason amidst this ocean of hypocrisy an double standards.
Than you.

Alex Bensky

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that the world exhibits a delicate moral sensitivity about the perceived sins of Jews, whether real or fanciful, and little, if any, about the sins of others.

Eric Hoffer remarked many years ago that alone of all the peoples in the world, only Jews were expected to act like Christians.

I note that Patricia is upset about Israel's killing of women and children, and whether or not those were the targets her distress is commendable. Has she likewise faulted the people who deliberate hide behind women and children when they shoot at Israelis, launch rockets into Israel, and the like?

Or is her position the common one that absolutely any action against Israel is legitimate resistance and pretty much any reaction by Israel is a crime against humanity?

George Laird

Dear All

Melanie has popped up with a good article to finish the week off; she calls it ‘Our selective moral outrage’.

I would suggest another title; ‘Why are Israeli Jews and their supporters so upset they cannot get to kill in peace and quiet with no one looking over their shoulders’?

“In the Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens asks a very simple and very obvious question. Observing the fact that while some 6000 Palestinians (many if not most of them terrorists) have been killed by Israeli fire since the beginning of their Second Intifada against Israel compared with between 25,000 and 200,000 Chechen civilians (in a population about one third or one quarter the size of the Palestinians) who have been killed by the Russians during that period, he wonders why the world merely shrugs in indifference at the brutalities in Chechnya while dwelling incessantly and obsessively upon Israel”.

Here is why Melanie gets it wrong, the world isn’t interested in Israel rather it is interested in the Palestinians plight. If Israel had acted properly and not behaved like the war criminals they are then it would be a different story.

Here is a classic example why the plight of the Palestinians has so touched the world.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7838465.stm

This should help Bret Stephens!

“He asks: Why, for instance, do high-profile Western writers like Portuguese Nobelist José Saramago make ‘solidarity’ pilgrimages to Ramallah, but not to the Chechen capital of Grozny?”

Why doesn’t he ask him? Could it be that Saramago doesn’t have the time or resources to campaign on every single issue in the entire world?

“Why do British academics organize boycotts of their Israeli counterparts, but not their Russian ones?”

Could it be the power of the media raising conscious? Regardless of who raises what and why, the fact remains the Israelis are war criminals.

“Why is Palestinian statehood considered a global moral imperative, but statehood for Chechnya is not?”

That could be down to politicians and others using the Palestinian plight to further their own agendas.

“Why does every Israeli prime minister invariably become a global pariah, when not one person in a thousand knows the name of Chechen ‘President’ Ramzan Kadyrov, a man who, by many accounts, keeps a dungeon near his house in order to personally torture his political opponents?”

I suspect it could be something to do with the continual killing of innocent Palestinians, the walled ghetto, the killing of children and the destruction of infrastructure. As to Ramzam Kadyrov; he isn’t any better than an Israeli and should be in prison.

“And why does the fact that Mr. Kadyrov is Vladimir Putin's handpicked enforcer in Chechnya not cause a shudder of revulsion as the Obama administration reaches for the ‘reset’ button with Russia?”

Is Stephens speaking for himself?

“I have a hypothesis. Maybe the world attends to Palestinian grievances but not Chechen ones for the sole reason that Palestinians are, uniquely, the perceived victims of the Jewish state”.

Perceived? No; they are victims of the Jewish state; would Stephens say this to Dr Izeldeen Abuelaish? This Palestinian Doctor who worked in an Israeli hospital just had his children murdered; he isn’t a perceived victim.

“That is, when they are not being victimized by other Palestinians. Or being expelled en masse from Kuwait. Or being excluded from the labor force in Lebanon. Things you probably didn't know about, either”.

These people are subject to racism so that makes the Palestinians cause even more important in my opinion.

“Twenty seven years ago, when I was an editorial writer at the Guardian, I asked my senior colleagues there the same question – except that rather than Chechnya I wondered why the paper scarcely covered Arab atrocities against other Arabs. It’s because, they said, third world cultures don’t have the same respect for human life that we do in the west”.

The reason that newspapers cover topical stories is to sell newspapers, newspapers don’t do moral crusades.

“So it would be wrong for us to expect the same standards from them that we do from ourselves”.

I would agree with that point; how can an Israeli expect to have the same standards of the west either regarding decency and human rights. The Israeli state is no better than Zimbabwe, in that country the madness of Mugabe puts blacks first before white Zimbabweans. The upshot of this racist mentality is that the country has suffered in a cesspool of its own making.

“Which was another way of saying that people who happen to live in the third world do not have the same rights to life and liberty as those in the west; which was to say the lives of people in the third world were worth less than the lives of people in the west”.

Perhaps Bret Stephens would have been better off writing an article on what it means to be a second class citizen (arab) in Israel.

“In my book that’s racism, pure and simple. But it’s the default calibration on the morally relativised, ‘anti-racist’ left. Factor in on top of that the particular bundle of resentments and prejudices towards Jews, and you go a long way towards explaining the pathological obsession with Israel and routine neglect of the world’s actual tyrannies and persecutions, which is such a bizarre feature of public discourse in the west”.

This article appears to me to be very foolish; it is like a criminal’s friend complaining about why the Police keep targeting his pal when there are others involved in crime. Stephens doesn’t really claim innocence but rather wants the punishment spread around a bit more.

What kind of mentality is that?

Finally, as I stated above the reason for the outrage is justified as the link tells the world and Israelis everything they need to know, children murdered by artillery fire directed onto their home.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Mark

Stanley, on what do you base your assertion? How are you able to state that someone who believes Israel's action in Gaza to have been wrong can automatically said to be unmoved by the cruelty inflicted on the people of Southern Sudan? What are the parameters by which we draw our response/ Surely not by numbers, as is being wrangled over here, and also surely not by us/them - i.e Arab versus Jew? Wouldn't an attempt to reach some universal agreement on - oh yes, human rights - be more useful?

Tas

Factor in the left's attitude to the creator God and his personal revelation in the Bible, especially when his revelation came through his chosen people,the Jews. That explains a lot too.

Brad Brzezinski

If the 3rd world ... Arabs etc value human life less, why then try and impose solutions on Israel that take no account whatsoever of this "fact."

And for a bit of fun, "explain the Nazis."

stanley Jerusalem

Mark
April 24th, 2009 1:54pm
Of course it would Mark but the forum for such discussion is the UN and the nature of Arab culture, take it or leave it, is to save face at all cost. This is so deeply ingrained in the psyche that it informs all of the 'faux diplomacy' of the last 80 or so years in which Arab nations have been involved.
Can you think of a single instance of an Arab nation saying publicly 'Mea Culpa?'
With a combination of such cultural intransigence and institutionalised feelings of religious supriority is it any wonder that they have such concepts as hudna and taqqiya and we poor saps in the West still harbour romantic images of noble Sheikhs carrying off young white maidens on their magnificent milk-white steeds. Thank you Sam Goldwyn and T.E.Lawrence!

boxermk

The US, The UK, and Israel are the worst regimes on earth. Saddam Hussein, Hamas, Hezbollah, The Taliban, etc., are all legitimate freedom fighters. Hopefully they will bring down the western Imperialist and then we shall see their great contribution to humanity realized. As for Russia killing tens of thousands of Chechens, I think that's also America's fault. We were told during the Cold War by the Left that the Soviet Union was aggressive because of America. If they were right then, then they must be right now. The Left has been right about everything, from Mao, to Pol Pot, to the Soviet Union, to now demonizing a tiny beach of Jews surrounded by millions of mass-murdering Arabs who murder each other in far greater numbers than Israel could ever hope.

Adam B.

To further illustrate the point, since 1997, over 4 MILLION people have been murdered violently in the Dem Rep of Congo. That's more than Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur, Sri Lanka, the violent break up of Yugoslavia and every Arab-Israeli war since 1948 combined - with hundreds of thousands left.

No boycotts.
No emergency sessions at the UN.
No wall to wall coverage (in fact, has anyone seen a single TV report about it?)

No one cares.

Why is that?

A point george laird and patricia are simply incapable of grasping, due to their hatred and tunnel vision.

Peter

Dear All,

George Laird still thinks people come to read this blog to read his rants.

boxermk

Hey, Mark, I have a question, when are you going to call out the Egyptian Arabs for their treatment of Gazans? And Jordanians for their treatment of Palestinians? And Syrians for their treatment of Lebanese? And the Mullahs in Iran for their treatment of Iranians. And the Taliban for their treatment of Afghans and Pakastanis? When?

Mark

Boxermk - how do you know I don't do that? You totally miss the point I'm making. All attacks on human rights are wrong: it isn't a matter of us and them

Ephraim

George Laird

Please tell me why you expect Jews to act more morally than others?

Put another way, which "offends" you more: 3000 Pal deaths (most of them terrorists/combatants) or 250,000 Darfurian deaths (many raped for a little added Islamist colour).

The answer is the former, isn't it, which is precisely why I think you are stinking little bigot and why I could not care less what you say, think, or do

George Laird

Dear Peter

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

I think it is important to hear all sides of the debate.

Now that you have put your contribution in, you should

keep quiet you loser!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

logdon

seb
April 24th, 2009 10:21am

The idea is to lob a fact grenade into the midst of the G's hamasite hordes then stand back. Rise above the heckling and outright puerile insult and remember they get madder than you. I've used the tagline back at them, 'facts are sacred', yet somehow even that quote, the very foundational platform for CiF is lost on them. They are so enraptured by their own sense of self righteousness nothing can stand in the way, especially the truth. One funny encounter pitted me with Inayat Bunglawala in which he spouted his relativist nonsense. My argument that this was a one way street of you'll not find much of that accomodation heading our way was considered so outrageous as to be heresy. True though as exemplified by the Danish cartoons.Come on! Telling us what we can and cannot publish in our own countries? Try that trick in Iran and see how far you get. After that he was silent.

George Laird

Dear All

Adam B talks of "hatred and tunnel vision".

Everyone knows my stance on condemning Hamas for firing rockets into Israel, it is well known.

Adam B hasn't shown the same condemnation for Israeli actions.

Indeed he is completely silent over the murder of Dr Izeldeen Abuelaish's children.

Why is that?

This is an individual who goes around using the New Labour tactic of calling people hypocrites and operates as one of the biggest on this board.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Mark

Maybe we could try to get a serious discussion going on this? I think it's true that people from different sides of political thought can be selective about the human rights abuses they either instinctively, or through prejudice or through defensiveness, get exercised by. This is counter-productive when it ends up with name-calling ('don't talk about those peoples' rights, how about these peoples' rights') or in a tasteless numbers game. It seems to me to be counter-productive, because the only way forward is to try to find a way of agreeing what constitutes a universal code of ethics. In a way this is the point Melanie is trying to make, but she then spoils that point with her own prejudiced attacks on 'the left', or on Obama, thus reflecting her own prejudices. My first post here objected to her sweeping statement that 'the left' are unmoved by, and inactive on, areas of abuse in Darfur, Chechnya and so on. When people turn a blind eye to such abuses, it is either, in the case of individuals, because of the prejudice cited above, or in the case of governments because of expediency and cynical calculation - for example in wanting to keep Putin sweet - a desire which was around long before Obama got elected. And I'd hazard a guess that a very large component of any protest or campaign in the defense of human rights or against their abuse, will come from 'hand-wringing' liberals.

Constantine Markides

Melanie, you write about "the pathological obsession with Israel and routine neglect of the world’s actual tyrannies and persecutions." So then you don't think there is any "actual" tyranny or persecution in the occupied Palestinian Territories? Curfews, killings, torture, harassment, bulldozing of homes and land, siphoning of resources & full-boned military occupation is not enough for you?
I reporting from Lebanon during the 2006 Israeli air strikes. Anyone interested can read my account of that here:
http://www.fourthnight.com/2006/09/beirut-lebanon-war/

Harvey

George

I think you may be in serious danger of believing your own guff .

boxermk

No Mark, I do not miss the point. I know all about how much you care about Human rights. The fact that you single out Israel, which is under constant assault, as even remotely in the list of major Human Rights violators. shows that it's you who are us v. them.
I want Arabs to be happy and prosperous and rich. The idea that you somehow want peace, and us pro-Israel Zio-Nazis want war is the major farce. If we are to believe the Western Left, it's Israel versus everyone else. In a sense they are right, I guess. But don't tell me you care about Human Rights for everyone, because you clearly don't. The arrogance of the ignorant is stupendous. If you truly knew even anything about history, and actually cared about universal human rights, maybe you'd open your eyes to what's going on in Latin America, in communist dictatorships still lingering around the world, to what the Chinese are doing, to what the Russians are doing, the list is endless.....

George Laird

Dear Ephraim

“Please tell me why you expect Jews to act more morally than others?”

I don’t expect, but when people act like pigs then I have no problem speaking out whatever the religion or country they are from.

“Put another way, which "offends" you more: 3000 Pal deaths (most of them terrorists/combatants) or 250,000 Darfurian deaths (many raped for a little added Islamist colour)”.

Murder is murder, so the numbers game is immaterial; do you a Gordon Brown moral compass? Everyone knows that batch was part of a broken consignment.

“The answer is the former, isn't it, which is precisely why I think you are stinking little bigot and why I could not care less what you say, think, or do”.

Bigot?

Oh dear you are simple minded, if this is a PR campaign tactic then you might not know that type of behaviour doesn’t play well in Britain as the Labour Party have recently discovered. So save it for people who care about your opinion; I am not one of them.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Ephraim

@ the hypocrite Laird

Have you ever written anything about Darfur?

No. Thought not.

Which is why you are a stinking little bigoted hypocrite.

Derek BLADES

This blog follows its usual wearisome path. First the enthusiasts - "Spot on Mel.” “ Keep up the good work.” “Only Mel tells it like it is.” Etc. etc.ad nauseam. Eventually a few thoughtful postings appear from the likes of Wm. Hazlitt, George Laird, Mark, Carl, Si, N bravely but wearily making a few commonsense points.

Surely the answers to the complaints raised in Ms Phillip's latest blog are really pretty obvious. First it is simply untrue that lefties complain only about Israel’s violations of human rights. They are at the forefront of campaigns against violations of human rights everywhere. Second, it is an obvious truth that the Israeli-Palestine conflict has been the cause of more global tension and terrorist attacks than the troubles in Tibet, Darfur, and Chechnya put together. Third, those who post on this site come mainly from countries that might just be able to make a difference in the Palestine-Israel conflict but which have much less influence on human rights violations in Chechnya or the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Finally of course Ms Phillip’s blog focuses almost entirely on the Middle East and it would seem a bit odd to use her blog site to sound off about the problems in, say, the Great Lakes Region.

What is not acceptable is for Ms Phillips or her supporters on this blog site to accuse me and others of anti-Semitism or racism simply because we oppose the policies of the Israeli government. That is a cheap shot.

boxermk

I love how the debate is framed as those who are pro-peace and those who are pro-war.

The only people with an Us. V. Them mentality are those who ignore the likes of the North Koreans, the Chinese, the various African Genocide, the various Islamist Genocides and massacres, the Latin American dictatorships, and on and on and on.

Does the left ever dwell in reality? It's so EASY to whine about how we all care about "human rights" and we must all get along. Just don't let any facts and reality and logic get in the way of your rigid template of how you view the world -- and who you pick on for your moral indignation.

hippiepooter

George Laird
April 24th, 2009 3:21pm

"Everyone knows my stance on condemning Hamas for firing rockets into Israel, it is well known."

A legend in his own mind.

Harvey

George Laird to Peter

'Keep quite you loser '

So much for poor Peters Human Rights [ at Glasgow University]

boxermk

Mark, I agree. People who are pro-Obama are not prejudiced - and people who criticize him are.

What about people who are prejudiced against genocide? Or appeasement of mass-murderers? Or people who are prejudiced against Sharia Law? Is that okay?

boxermk

Derek,

the fact that you don't care about Tibetans and Chechens doesn't mean that Israel is the cause of all the major tensions in the world. It just means you are prejudiced against the Sufferings of the Tibetans, which makes the suffering of the Palestinians pale in comparison.

George Laird

Dear Harvey

Lets debate why the Israelis murdered Dr Izeldeen Abuelaish's children.

Why do you think the Israelis tried to murder Dr Izeldeen Abuelaish?

Were his broadcasts about the conditions in Gaza upsetting too many Israelis in positions of power?

Lets talk about the reality not the flannel.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

stanley Jerusalem

Derek BLADES
April 24th, 2009 3:41pm
"What is not acceptable is for Ms Phillips or her supporters on this blog site to accuse me and others of anti-Semitism or racism simply because we oppose the policies of the Israeli government. That is a cheap shot."
Dear Blades,
Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean we aren't out to get you.

Mark

boxermk Less shouting, more thinking?. What makes you think I 'single' out Israel? - you don't know me. Most of my small personal contribution has been to protest against the regime in Iran,and its human rights abuses and persecution of homosexuals. Not a lot compared with people a lot braver and a lot more dedicated than me, but at least something. My general point is that shouting across the barricades is fruitless - if we don't see all human rights as equal then we are truly sunk.

Prof. Ethan

Numbers of dead DO matter. 400,000 dead in Darfur (mostly civilians) is far worse than 6000 dead (mostly terrorists) in Gaza and the West Bank. Several million dead (in DR Congo, and again mostly civilians) is worse than 400,000 dead in Darfur. At some point, as Marx said, quantitative difference becomes qualitative difference.

Therefore, the fact that the engineer of the huge Darfur massacres, al-Bashir, is greeted as a hero at the latest Muslim summit, offers great food for thought. And if the argument is that we hold the west to a different standard of behavior than we do the third world, then indeed one cannot seek to impose on Israel a settlement that ignores the standards of behavior of those third world people. Yet that is what the left manages--simultaneously--to do.

George Laird

Dear Harvery

Here is a link to the Human Rights Act 1998

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_1

Take your time and read through it; you will then see that Peter the loser's human rights haven't been violated.

Can I ask did you go to skool?

If so, was it open when you went?

Or did you go to strip the lead off the roof to sell?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

fred

There are some key diferrences between Russian/chechen conflict and Israel/palestinian conflict.
Firstly Russia sees Chechnya as a break away province. They regard Chechnya to be sovereign Russian territory and CRUCIALLY they see the chechens officially at least as equal RUSSIAN CITIZENS. The problem with Israel unfortunately is that they want the land in what they call Judea/Samaria but not the people. The comparison with Russia would be valid if Israel considered the west bank to ne Israeli territory and the arabs living there to be equal Israeli ctizens. Unfotunately Isael just wants lebensraum in the west bank ie the land but not the people on it who are considered to be inferior..Whatever you say about the russians at least they are willing to offer the chechens full equal russian citizenship. Secondly we in the west can do little about russian human rights abuses but Israeli crimes and atrocities are only possible because of the economic diplomatic political support our govts give to Israel. Therefore we have responsibility to pressure our govts to stop aiding and abetting Israeli criminality. Israel knows this and thats why it spends enormous time and effort trying to win the propaganda / hasbara battle in the west. You cannot say the same about any other conflict. I mean is there a Sudanese or Russian lobbies in the US. Are there Russian and Sudanese equivalents of Aipac trying to trying to lobby US politicians.

Harvey

Constantine

As a reporter surely it is incumbent on you to provide a fair and balanced report. I am sure you are well aware that there are two sides to every story and that context is everything . In the absence of such ,a report is rendered meaningless and becomes nothing but a piece of partial propoganda .Im sure you know this .

Lebannon 2006 was a result of Hezbollah incursion into Israel and the resulting killing and capture of an Israeli patrol on Israels side of the border. It was an unprovoked attack . No doubt Hezbollah were taken aback by the harshness of the Israeli response,after all it was only a few soldiers so whats the big deal.

I have come to understand this having witnessed first hand the different attitudes to life in Israel and across the Arab World . Killing and mayhem is endemic to so many of these countries .Sadly an everyday occurence in places like Irak .It loses all meaning . Who remembers yesterdays car bomb beyond the immediate family . Contrast this with terrorist incidents in Israel which are seared into the collective conscience eg Maalot ,Kiryat Shimona ,Munich Netanya ,ad infinitum .A national memorial to the Holocaust.

For Hezbollah , it was another day at the office ,just a few dead Jews and home for tea.

For Israelis and Jews around the world it was felt personally ,a pain that gnawed at all of us . Not to the same degree as the immediate family but a grief all the same .

And this is something you can never begin to understand .Our lives do not come cheap .They come at a price.

There is another way. There has been since 1948 . Unfortunately Palestinian leaders have failed for their people for 60 years . They have placed the eradication of Israel as first and last on their agenda . Had they put as much energy into building a nation state as they had into acts of terror ,Palestine would by now be a thriving state living in peace and prosperity alongside Israel.

That it is not is to the eternal shame of its leaders and the Arab World .

EDDIE

I really don’t understand why all these anti Israel commentators and Glaswegians bother to read Melanie’s column. I would never bother to go on the net to read all the AL- Jezeera sites (and many others). As a Jew, I know full well that with regards to such sensitive people, hard facts will never alter deep embedded prejudices

long live israel in the mist of jew hatting

Epraim said

"@ the hypocrite Laird

Have you ever written anything about Darfur?

No. Thought not.

Which is why you are a stinking little bigoted hypocrite.".

this has been the issue that over the last few years has changed me from being quite neutral about the middle east issue to being totally pro -israel.

the hate filled left perceives jews like an elite race, they cant stand a single jew alive.

nothing will change that ever.

it doesnt matter how many millions of people die because of war or islamic extremism, darfur, Chechnya , congo, Zimbawe

anything and everything is second to getting rid of them.

people like patricia and the hypocrit laird
WHERE ARE YOU HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP PROTESTS ABOUT ALL THESE COUNTRIES?

I ASKED YOU 2 MONTHS AGO YOU HAVENT PROVIDED ANYTHING, NOT EVEN A LINK

David Lindsay

While Melanie Phillips, like a Bush Era stopped clock, is still banging on in favour of the Islamist terrorist dismemberment of Russia, President Obama is getting on with the serious business of bilateral arms reduction negotiations with that country. What a thing it is to have conservative in the White House for a change.

No wonder that he is so popular among Catholics, white Evangelicals, Cuban-Americans, self-identifying conservatives, and so on. He represents a return to Eisenhower, with his ending of the Korean War, his even-handed approach to Israel and the Palestinians, and his denunciation of the military-industrial complex. To Nixon, who ended the Vietnam War as President Obama will end the Iraq War, and who began détente with China as President Obama is beginning détente with Iran, Cuba and beyond.

To the opposition to Clinton’s unpatriotic job-exportation, unpatriotic sweatshop-importation, and unpatriotic global trigger-happiness, all continued and expanded by the unpatriotic Bush Administration. And, yes, to Reagan’s bilateral arms reduction, one of the very few conservative things that he ever did, indeed quite possibly the only one.

In other words to the viewing of the wider world in strictly realistic terms, "not seeking for monsters to destroy", but instead, for example, calling for Europe to revert to pre-1914 borders and thus end the First World War, an outcome (also advocated by Pope Benedict XV) which would have precluded both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

Such is by definition a return to that rural and Western half of the Republican Party which supported the New Deal, and to those Congressional Republicans (not all, but some) who cast the votes that passed Civil Rights in the face of Dixiecrat resistance.

So no wonder that President Obama is so popular among Catholics, white Evangelicals, Cuban-Americans, self-identifying conservatives, and so on. And no wonder that the organisation purporting to be the Republican Party is not, and has no idea what to do with itself.

Except, perhaps, to behave like a Bush Era stopped clock, still banging on in favour of such things as the Islamist terrorist dismemberment of Russia.

Wilhelm M.

Here are some reasons why Israel is singled out:
http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann0706.html
Hopefully readers of the piece will, if they understand it, stop making the tired old points that Melanie and the WSJ columnist make.

Harvey

George Laird

I do not need to go to school or for that matter Glasgow University to realise you are an inveterate antisemite.

You are an antisemite not because you criticise Israel . Israel is not above criticism and has made and continues to make mistakes which need to be addressed.

You are an antisemite because of your total one track obsession with Israel and the constant diatribe of hate and malice which spews forth from every poisoned missive .

You apply no context , no balance to the Israel Palestine situation. You would have us believe that the Palestines are blameless ,that they are the injured party and you countenance no debate that Israel has the right to defend itself .So much so that you consider the defence barrier that Israel put up an apartheid wall and a land grab .That Israel built the wall to prevent Arab Homicide bombers from crossing an open border in order to immolate themselves and their civilian victims in restaurants ,shopping malls ,buses etc is an irrelevance,it is simply Israel not playing to the rules of the game ie murder and mayhem Arab style .

It is patently obvious to any objective person and that does not include you that if Israel was intent on a land grab ,the wall would have been built as far East as the Jordan and not on the 67 green line thus enclosing all of the West Bank.

You are an antisemite, because as other posters have pointed out already you fail to condemn true genocide such as the half million or so black African Muslim tribespeople massacred ,raped and pillaged by Arab militia .That and a myriad of other Human Rights Violations which are taking place at this very moment throughout the world and particularly within the Arab sphere.

You and your ilk are silent on these issues .Your Human Rights Badge which you proudly brandish at the end of every post is an absurdity and a mirage .It fools nobody .It conceals a one trick antisemite who will take his hate filled agenda to the grave.

fred

Israeli apologists always say WHAT ABOUT DARFUR. This is good evidence of how bogus and insincere they are. For a start the bloodiest conflict in Africa is in the Congo with over 4 million dead but they ignore that because Arabs/mislims are not involved in that conflict. Frankly Israel`s apologists couldn`t give a damn about Darfur they only mention it for propaganda purposes. Their second defence is why are you criticising us for murdering 10 people when the guy down the road is responsible for murdering 100 people. Well as I said the west isn`t responsible for what happened in Darfur or chechnya etc but we in the west are responsible for israeli atrocities because without the support of western govts the gangster/criminal Israeli regime wouldn`t be able to get away with its crimes and would be compelled to enter into genuine and sincere peace talks to end this conflict.

Carl

@ long live israel in the mist of jew hatting: Indeed, Milliners of the world must stand firm!

Carl

Adam B - you introduce "4 million murders in Congo" as an excuse for not condemning Israeli atrocities. You seem to be unaware that this is almost a continental war involving Uganda, Congo, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and those countries interested in grabbing a slice of Congo's resources. If you haven't seen or read reports about this, then I suggest you start to peruse the quality press and media.

C. Gee

Derek BLADES,
You say, "[I]t is an obvious truth that the Israel-Palestine conflict has been the cause of more global tension and terrorist attacks than the troubles in Tibet, Darfur and Chechnya put together."
If this hilarious jumble of opinion, ignorance, non sequitur, error and conceptual contradiction is "an obvious truth", then you are living proof of the harm selective outrage and obsessive reporting on Israel can do.
How wearisome.

Sam Armstrong

"Everyone knows my stance on condemning Hamas for firing rockets into Israel, it is well known"

Delusions of grandeur.

Osming

Dear Wilhelm M
anyone sad enough to follow your link will only wonder at the stupidity of Trent University in appointing someone so infantile as a professor of philosophy.

C. Gee

Willhelm M.
Yes, the venomous rant you refer to does give at least one reason why Israel is "singled out". Anti-Semites like Neumann need to spit on it.

Harvey

Fred

I have no problem with you criticising Israel as long as you criticise the guy down the road .The trouble is you never do .

As for Darfur ,yes we do mention it ,somebody has to,cause it sure is of no interest to the left wing Islamofascist amalgam .Then again why would it be of interest to Islamists as they are the ones committing genocide. Still as with Hitler and Stalin it wont be too long before you are at each others throats . You truly deserve each other -something to do with fleas and dogs .

C. Gee

fred,
"We in the west" are responsible for everything, capitalism, imperialism, fascism, communism, terrorism, Islamism, Arab humiliation, African poverty, Russian expansionism, failed markets, bigotry, exploitation, climate change...
But we must begin somewhere to clean up our act. Do lets start by having American criminals compelling Israeli criminals to relinquish Israel to Arab criminals. Then we should just get off the planet.

Andrew Adams

So Melanie, how many pieces have YOU written about Chechnya?

hadrian

What patronising guff your Guardian colleagues came out with! One law for one crowd and another set of standards for another! That type of moral relativism could be used to justify acceptance of any brutal regime anywhere.
Still, Arab aggression on Arab still goes on, as does Moslem on Moslem with the savage attack on yet another Mosque ( shiite, this time) in Iraq. Islamic fraternal relations one gathers. One does think gullible British Moslems getting so irate at attacks on their 'moslem brothers' shouls consider just who are the culprits in these bloody episodes!

hadrian

Mark- I think you're talking a load of rubbish. Leftists in the forefront of opposition to persecuting and oppresive regimes is not a fact that's obvious to many of us. Many, many areas of brutality go entirely unreported and you'll find serious evangelical Christians are often the ones doing the campiagning to highlight these injustices and to bring relief. Indeed it was leftist nasties who recently tore into one such organisation, Barnabas. I didn't see the Guardian expressing much interest or sympathy for their work.

Augustus

Why do people like 'Fred' call Israel a "gangster/criminal"
regime? It is because the actual elimination of the Jewish state has become a cause celebre among many Westerners today. The only thing which will expiate the original sin of Israel's founding will be the replacement of Israel by a state theoretically comprising the whole of 'historic' Palestine, in which Jews will be reduced to the status of a permanent minority. According to these so-called educated thinkers, the establishment and development of the state of Israel was only achieved by the deliberate and agressive dispossession of its native population. This revisionist claim of premeditated dispossession, and the consequent creation of the longstanding Palestinian
'refugee problem' indeed forms the central plank in the accusations voiced by Israel's alleged victims and their Western supporters. But the exact opposite is the truth. Far from being hapless victims of predatory Zionist assault, it was a series of Arab leaders who from the 1920s onwards have shamefully launched relentless campaigns to obliterate the Jewish national revival. Had these leaders and their counterparts in neighbouring Arab states not placed their reluctant constituents on a collision course with Zionism the Palestinians would have had their independent state ages ago. Instead, blinded by anti-Jewish hatred, and profoundly obsessed with violence, these megalomaniacal extremists transformed the territories placed under their control into effective terror states out of which to launch all-out wars in the worst tradition of Arab repression and dictatorship, thereby plunging the region into a standard of living of unprecedented depths. But the Western anti-Zionists do not call for new Arab leadership. No, they can only call for the dismantlement of the Jewish state, and side with Hamas and the PA, and God knows who else, who refuse to recognize Israel's very existence as a Jewish state.

Arius

Why? It's the usual Jew hatred.

manuel escott

Melanie Phillips should have a look at comments on Haaretz's story on the investigation by some Israeli army colonels into charges of Gaza excesses by the Israeli army. There are very many and most of them are from Jews, among them myself, calling this inquiry what it is--a pathetic whitewash, a charade. In short snother inn the long series of cover-ups by the military there. Ehud Barak, to his shame, immediately endorsed this "inquiry" as reffirming the Israeli army has the most moral in the world. Ms. Phillips should attempt to strike some kiind of balance on the Israel=Palestine issue. Let a little light into what seems to me to be a hermetically sealed mind. Manny

Wilhelm M.

Osming and C.Gee
Thanks for the thoughtful and in-depth responses. Given your high intellectual standards I'll bow to your ability to judge the Trent university philosophy faculty. Still, I suppose you are only folowing the tactics people of your ilk rely on, as adumbrated in Benjamin Ginsberg's The Fatal Embrace. Someone really ought to do a search of the terms "venomous" "rant" "anti-Semite" "self-hater" etc. etc. and see how many times they are used as a replacement for argument here.

Adam B.

I see Carl. So that explains why the media and world governments ignore it?

Adam B.

This post of Melanie's has got the Israel bashers in such a tizzy! They scramble around trying to justify their hypocrisy and double standards, but everyone can see through them.

Derek Blades explains away the double standard by saying that the west can influence Israel, (thus is right to single it out for vitriol - itself an admission of the double standard) whilst it is powerless to influence cases such as Russia in Chechnya or China in Tibet (and so is right to ignore these).

What nonsense! Firstly, it is absurd to suggest Israel is in the same category as these cases. This constitutes such a departure from reality that only the most indoctrinated loon with no perspective could suggest it.

Secondly, are you Derek seriously suggesting that we can do nothing to influnce China, for example? How many Chinese students come to study in the UK and the West? No academic boycotts proposed there. No professors refusing to teach people from the People's Republic. Why is that Derek? Why?

I note that you yourself had no problem working for the Communist butchers of Tianenmen Square. I guress you felt you couldn't "influence" them.

What a hypocrite.

fred

I notice Israeli apologists have ignored the basic and simple point I made explaining difference between the chechen/russian conflict and what israel/palestine conflict. That is that atleast Russia cosiders the chechens to be full equal RUSSIAN CITIZENS. Israel in contrast wants the land but not the People on the land as it regards them to be Arab untermenschen and wants lebensraum in the west bank. You guys have not responded because you know its true and have no rational answer all you guys can do is huff and puff accusing everyone from the pope to bishop tutu to my pet goldfish of antisemitism and jew hatred. Harvey you couldn`t give a damn about darfur you only mention it because it makes you feel so superior over those barbarous arabs/muslims. Hadrian the correct spelling is muslim I suppose you still call black people negroes. Augustus Even by the standards of Mel`s supporters I find your rants particularly tiresome. Where have I called for the elimination of Israel. It is of course criminal/gangster state in that it baheves like a mobster.For example bumping off people it doesn`t like {targetted assasinations] always talking about its deterrance capacity [what mobsters call their street cred] etc.

Maximilian

Wm. Hazlitt [quote]The US could use its influence with Israel to facilitate a lasting peace that would secure both Israelis and Palestinians.

Utter poppycock. It's the Israelis that want the two-state solution, and the Palestinians who are against it. Have you ever bothered to listen to what the Hamas leaders say?

journeyman

There is nothing wrong with the I.Q level of the average "Lefty".I know, I used to be one myself. The problem is their superiority,arrogance,certainty,tribalism,college lock-step crass knee-jerk simplicities and an almost quasi-religious belief in "Left"always equals moral high ground.
In 1939 George Orwell(hero of the left)in one of his critical essays,made a scathing attack on the British/progressive/academic left for "placing western democracy on the same moral plane as Nazi-Germany and Soviet Russia".
He also coined the term "national transferance",meaning the western-leftist habitual desire to empathise with anti-western,anti democratic totalitarian ideologies,partly through being saps for victimhood,grievance propaganda,targetted specifically to appeal to their shame/guilt of the history of western culture as being the root of all evil.
The left staged a marvelous repeat performance in the 60,s with their fetishizing of U,S.S.R,Mao and Castro.
As a finale,the "Left" have chosen another and even more demonical cult to defend against "racist bigotry"which was contrived by a war-mongering,desert bedouin,mandated by God,the Koran and the most respected scholars of Islamic Jurisprudence,to be in a constant state of war with the infidel,until converted or annihilated.

Mustapha Bunn

George.......You are a one track record,mate,and we've all heard it many times.

journeyman

"Lefties"should also take note of the essentially rabid anti-Semitic,anti-non-muslim,nature of Koranic edicts.
Kill them,subdue them or convert them.
Lefties should also swat up on the co-operation in WW2 (before the establishment of the state of Israel)between Nazi-Germany and Islam which raised two divisions of Muslim Balkan troops who gladly assisted in eradicating Jews from the Balkans.
Meanwhile,back at the Crusades.No its not as portrayed in popular Left/Islamic myth,that some loony fanatical Christians went on a hate fest all the way to Jerusalem just for fun.Europe was just pushing Islam out of the South of France and the gates of Vienna and attempting to liberate the non-muslims who had been over run in North Africa and the Middle-East.
The Palestinian cause is a Koranic-manifest destiny religious movement,which is also evident in Phillipines/Nigeria/Thailand/India/Nepal/China/Lebanon.Creating internal havoc in most Muslim countries and hoping the "Left"will assist in gaining a strong demographic base in Europe by denouncing anti-immigration as racist bigotry and portraying Hamas as a movement for liberation.
And by the way,if any Muslim tells you that the Koran states that "there is no compulsion in religion"or Islam is a religion of peace.Tell him that all the nice bits of the Koran were "abrogated"by Allah when Islam became militarily more powerfull.

journeyman

There is nothing wrong with the I.Q level of the average "Lefty".I know, I used to be one myself. The problem is their superiority,arrogance,certainty,tribalism,college lock-step crass knee-jerk simplicities and an almost quasi-religious belief in "Left"always equals moral high ground.
In 1939 George Orwell(hero of the left)in one of his critical essays,made a scathing attack on the British/progressive/academic left for "placing western democracy on the same moral plane as Nazi-Germany and Soviet Russia".
He also coined the term "national transferance",meaning the western-leftist habitual desire to empathise with anti-western,anti democratic totalitarian ideologies,partly through being saps for victimhood,grievance propaganda,targetted specifically to appeal to their shame/guilt of the history of western culture as being the root of all evil.
The left staged a marvelous repeat performance in the 60,s with their fetishizing of U,S.S.R,Mao and Castro.
As a finale,the "Left" have chosen another and even more demonical cult to defend against "racist bigotry"which was contrived by a war-mongering,desert bedouin,mandated by God,the Koran and the most respected scholars of Islamic Jurisprudence,to be in a constant state of war with the infidel,until converted or annihilated.

Maximilian

The BBC has a report from Sri Lanka, where UN estimates civilian casualties at 20,000 so far, comprising 6,000 killed and 14,000 wounded. It’s the lead story for the South Asia region at the moment:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8015818.stm

The BBC reporter provides details of what is happening on the ground, complete with a map of the stretch of shoreline where the Tamil Tigers are thought to be still holding out. The reporter’s studied neutrality is quite striking: there is no moral judgment of any kind, much less any outrage. Neither side has done anything wrong, but then again neither side is in the right, as far as anyone can tell from reading the BBC report.

And another thing. I transcribe in full the closing paragraph:

[quote] The UN and Western nations -- including the US and the UK -- have been pressing for an immediate halt to the fighting to allow time for civilians to leave the war zone safely. [unquote]

I don’t seem to recall the UN and Western nations exerting pressure of that kind during the recent fighting in the Gaza Strip. Why didn’t they, I wonder? Ah, of course . . . It must have be the cruel Israelis who refused to let civilians leave the war zone safely, mustn’t it? No, not the Israelis? Well then, who could it possibly have been?

David, Thailand

George Laird and our other resident inbreds appear unable or unwilling to distinguish between Islamic terrorists invoking their Right to freedom of faith whilst specifically targeting civilians, and Israel having little choice but to confront Allah's Finest demonstrating their other god-given Right to hide behind women and children.

Georgey Boy, time to wake up to the fact that Djoos will be on this earth long after your miserable existence is lost to oblivion. Sadly, this is part of their Human Rights, which you fraudulently profess to support.

"The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it." - Dr Mengele

Barbara

Wilhelm M(arr) quotes from the well-known anti-Semitic, anti-American, anti-decency screed "Counterpunch" and expects us to believe anything in it is true other than the date. What next, quotes from "Spotlight?"

Derek BLADES

C. Gee
April 24th, 2009 6:23pm

You take exception to my statement that "[I]t is an obvious truth that the Israel-Palestine conflict has been the cause of more global tension and terrorist attacks than the troubles in Tibet, Darfur and Chechnya put together." But you do not say why you object.

In his first video after 9/11 Osama bin Laden explained that there were two reasons for the terror attack on America. The first was the Israeli-Palestine conflict and his desire to see Arabs living in peace in their own land. (His second was the presence of American soldiers in Saudi Arabia.) Add the second Intifada, Israel’s war on Lebanon, Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, the imprisonment of hundreds of young Palestinian men by Israel, illegal settlements in the West Bank, and Israel’s war on Gaza and you have a pretty strong case for my assertion above.

Merlyn

70 civilians a day, including over 6,000 children, have been killed on average in the last few months in the fight between Sri Lankan army forces and the Tamil Tigers,

Where are the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, or the UN Human Rights Commission about what is going on in Sri Lanka? Why are we not bombarded daily with images of mothers crying over their dead babies?

This is what Melanie is talking about, the obsessive need to find any Israeli mistake and blow it up disproportionately to the other worse tragedies that are occuring in in this madhouse called planet Earth.
Whilst The IDF will have undoubtedly have some actions they are less than proud of, they did their best to prevent civilian casualties whilst aiming to protect their own people from daily missiles.

Yorkshireman, Yorkshire

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

George,

As you are an ardent campaigner against territorial occupation and for human rights,will you be lending your support to Hamas as they seek to liberate the occupied territory of.... Al Andalus?.Most people refer to it as Spain.

This occupation has been ongoing for over 500 years and I'm sure you'll be eager to support these freedom fighters regain their territory...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19022_Hamas_Demands_Return_of_Seville_to_Islam&only

Ros

Carl: I see. It's a 'continental war involving Uganda, Congo, Rwanda, Zimbabwe...' So it's alright then? No one needs to get involved while the [black] man gets killed.

Wilhelm M.

Barbara
Thanks for carefully examining the content of the argument. Rather proves Ginsberg's point. At my school we were taught to tackle the ball and not the man.

logdon

Where's the outrage over this? Or is using a hospital as a military base acceptable by the left now?

Apr 22, 2009 16:18 | Updated Apr 22, 2009 23:17

Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh operated a command and control center inside Shifa Hospital in downtown Gaza City throughout Operation Cast Lead in January, the IDF revealed on Wednesday.

IDF probes opened following the offensive discovered that Haniyeh and other senior Hamas commanders took over a ward of the hospital, the Gaza Strip's largest, and set up a command center for the duration of the campaign.

Hamas believed that Israel would not target the hospital due to the high risk of collateral damage.

Guards were posted at the entrance to the ward and field commanders took advantage of the humanitarian corridor and cessation of action that the IDF instituted every day for several hours, to enter the hospital and meet with senior Hamas officials to receive instructions.

Senior Hamas commanders also set up a command center in a Red Crescent Society clinic in Khan Yunis and used it as a detention center.

An IDF investigation, conducted by Col. Erez Katz, focused on the targeting of health facilities, vehicles and medical teams. The probe discovered that out of seven medical personnel claimed to have been killed by the IDF, five were Hamas operatives, including a nephew of the Hamas health minister. Two were civilians.

The probe also uncovered a number of cases during which Hamas used ambulances to transport operatives. Testimony by a Gazan medical worker and obtained by the IDF revealed how Hamas forced the Red Crescent to hand over medic and nurse uniforms for its operatives.

During the probe, the army also looked into a complaint filed by the United Nations that the air force had bombed an UNRWA vehicle in the Tel al-Hawa neighborhood in southern Gaza City. The probe revealed that the vehicle was bombed since it did not have markings and was driving at night in an area off limits to civilian vehicles.

Furthermore, the UN vehicle was used to transport a Palestinian anti-tank squad and was bombed after it unloaded the squad. The driver was wounded; he was later identified as the former driver of Hamas co-founder Ahmed Yassin, who was killed by Israel in 2004.

logdon

Here's an insight into how antisemitic hate transcends all logic. They are quite insane!

If every Iranian developed cancer and Israel suddenly developed a cure they'd still allow everyone to die rather than accept the remedy. No doubt the rousing speeches about cancer shahids would pour out of Iran.

You can bet though that the supreme ayatollah's and their henchmen would be on the planes to clinics in Zurich pretty sharpish.

Israeli oranges 'on sale in Iran'
Fears that an Iranian ban on imports from its arch foe Israel was flouted by the sale of Jaffa oranges have sparked an inquiry in Tehran, reports say...Photos released by the Mehr news agency show oranges clearly marked "Jaffa Sweetie Israel PO".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world...ast/ 8017823.stm

Carl

Just for adam B and his unreported war:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1198921,00.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/congos-tragedy-the-war-the-world-forgot-476929.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article5039595.ece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/07/congo

Need I go on?

Derek BLADES

The tireless and tiresome Adam B is at it again. I did not say that that the because the west can influence Israel it is right to single it out for vitriol, nor that because it is powerless to influence cases such as Russia in Chechnya or China in Tibet it is right to ignore these. Those were your words old chap. Read what I said and do not delve for comfort into the dark recesses of your paranoid "mind". (I use the word loosely)

Ricky

George Laird of the "Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University" appears to show little respect for the feelings and human rights of other posters on this site with whom he disagrees. He is personally abusive and pretty well offensive.

How revealing.

Sheila

No, no, George Laird. Peter’s not a ‘loser’ at all. All he did was to point out to you that you somehow think you’re a respected arbiter and thought policeman for what comes out of Melanie Phillips’ head.

Why else do you address us as “Dear All” and sign yourself off as “Yours sincerely, George Laird, The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University”.

Why do you disagree with Peter? Do you seriously think people visit this blog because they give a damn about what you think?

It may be the case that the editor of The Spectator, Matthew D’Ancona, pays you a contribution we don’t know about just so you can come here every day to make us laugh, but no-one in their right mind would pay you a penny to write seriously, George. That’s why you use the pompous web sign-off in the first place. To give yourself some sort of stature you demonstrably don’t have.

Who do you think you’re kidding?

Mark

From Amnesty UK's website today, on Sri Lanka:

''Nearly 650,000 Pakistanis living in Buner district, some 120 kilometres from Islamabad, are now at the mercy of abusive and repressive Pakistani Taleban groups that have taken over the area since 21 April, Amnesty International said from Pakistan today. Buner's takeover follows the Taleban's assumption of power in the neighbouring Swat valley.''

and this:

''Amnesty International is urging the UN Security Council to discuss how best to ensure the protection of civilians, stop enforced disappearances, ensure that internally displaced people are receiving adequate shelter and get international monitors on the ground who can assess the situation first hand and ensure that the humanitarian and human rights crisis is addressed immediately.''

From Human Rights Watch's website, today:

''Human Rights Watch reminded Sri Lanka of its obligations under international law to investigate credible allegations of war crimes, including by members of its own forces, and appropriately prosecuting those responsible. Past Sri Lankan government investigations into allegations of war crimes have led to few prosecutions, particularly in recent years. Human Rights Watch also called on the UN Security Council to establish a Commission of Inquiry into allegations of war crimes by both sides.''

And much more, on both websites on Sudan, Iran, Burundi and many other countries where abuses of basic rights are taking place.

Derek BLADES

Well George, Sheila (April 25) has certainly put you in your place. She asks "Do you seriously think people visit this blog because they give a damn about what you think?" What puzzles me though, Sheila, is that George's postings seem to attract at least as much attention as the Phillips blog itself. Remember too, Sheila, that those who post on this blog-site may be only a small percentage of those who read it. George's postings and those of others who bring a little reason to the dialogue show them that the world is not composed entirely of paranoid bigots. Carry on the good work George.

Carl

@Ros - did I say or infer that? No I didn't, it's just you trying to smear me again. I was simply pointing it out for Adam who didn't seem to know about it. You really are pathetic in your attempt to silence criticism. I know that region very well, do you? Do you even care about it? I can answer that - you don't.

Adam B.

fred, we haven't answered because you have fundamentally misunderstood Melanie's post. Those who screech about Israel are usually silent about, for example, Chechnya. They complain that Israel has killed civilians in its military operations against Hamas and Hizbollah - this appears to be their biggest complaint. Russia has killed many times more civilians in Chechnya, but there are no marches, academic boycotts etc. Whether Russia considers these civilians to be Russian citizens is neither here nor there in this discussion. There are few TV pictures of Grozny, a city which has practically been levelled, yet there is wall to wall coverage of Gaza. Do you think this is because Russia considers Chechens Russian citizens - does this, to you, explain the double standard of the media and the left?

Adam B.

Anything but address the substance of Mel's article, Derek. You say that it is untrue that the left doesn't complain about China or Russia.

Really? To the same degree as they complain about Israel? Where are the marches, the campaigns, the boycotts?

You know that is completely false. In fact, many of the left promote china as a wonderful utopia (Ken livingstone). How do YOU explain the double standard Derek? And how do you explain your own personal double standard, happy to work for the Chinese communist dictatorship?

Furthermore, it is clear that you aren't simply a critic of the Israeli government. You simply hate the Jewish state. Why don't you admit it?

Adam B.

The Israel bashers are very upset - look how they scramble to cover their hypocrisy!

I love it!

stanley Jerusalem

David, Thailand April 25th, 2009 4:39am "The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.- Dr Mengele"

Seen that one before David. About 3,500 years before actually.
Exodus I. 8-12
8. And there arose a new king over Egypt that knew not Joseph :9. And he said to his people: Behold the people of the Children of Israel will become more numerous and stronger than we. 10.Come let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply: and, when any war break out, shall rise against us and join with our enemies to overcome us and depart out of the land 11. Therefore he set over them taskmasters to afflict them with burdens: and they built for Pharaoh cities of Pitom and Rameses, 12.But the more they oppressed them, the more they multiplied and increased.

P.S. Is this a new low? Quoting the human excrement, Josef Mengele?

Derek BLADES
April 25th, 2009 7:58am

"In his first video after 9/11 Osama bin Laden explained that there were two reasons for the terror attack on America. The first was the Israeli-Palestine conflict and his desire to see Arabs living in peace in their own land.
George's postings and those of others who bring a little reason to the dialogue"

And of course you believe Osama and George, don't you Drek?
Which is higher, your IQ or your hat size?

FredrikI

American liberalism is a mental illness, and Brarack Obama belongs to a mental asylum.

Si, N

Again we have the sick roll-call of global trouble-spots, and questioning of the credentials of those who show concern for Palestinian people – that is, those who are paying attention and are aware that there will be no peace for anybody; Arab or Jew, while the dispossession and ethnic cleansing of Palestine continues.

Vile creatures overlook outrageous atrocities such as the Dec/Jan Gaza massacre – and will defend Israel’s right to inflict such massacres - then chant ‘Hebron massacre’, ‘Hebron massacre’ - as though they’re playing some ultimate trump-card. They point to Darfur; anywhere – ‘just leave us to kill in peace’.

What do these wretches care about Darfurians, Congolese, or any ‘other’ for that matter. There are numerous support groups working to raise awareness about those conflicts – if they really gave a damn, like conscionable people, they’d seek out ways to offer support – not just to use other conflicts to deflect attention away from their grubby project. But all they care about - or so they seem to have convinced themselves - is themselves and theirs. Just like severing a nose to spite a face they just want ‘to kill for peace’; not realising or bothering to care that the killing takes them ever further from peace.

They bleat that ‘al-Beeb’ doesn’t focus on other conflicts. Those who are paying attention know that the BBC is equally careless when it comes to reporting Israel/Palestine. The coverage is anodyne in the extreme – crucial context is missing from 99.9% of reports. Occasionally, such as the Dec/Jan Gaza massacre, some criticism of Israel filters through, but still the crucial details: Israel occupying Palestinian land and ethnically cleansing Palestinians, that essential context is absent. The reporting almost always favours Israel.

Despite the voluminous record showing Israeli ill-treatment of Palestinians on a minute-by-minute basis – all carefully documented and freely available - the media just shrugs its collective shoulders and says, ‘hey, this is so complicated and unfathomable; who knows what the hell is going on’?

Meanwhile, those who are paying attention stand aghast at the bloodlust displayed by those who believe they are supporting Israel – when all they are actually assuring is the downfall of Israel.

And when the dimwit says ‘I really don’t understand why all these anti Israel commentators and Glaswegians bother to read Melanie’s column’ – he’s really saying; ‘just leave us to cheerlead the killing in peace’.

Shame

Michael B

To use "selective moral outrage" and "the Left" in the same sentence, even the same paragraph or larger commentary, is very nearly to indulge a tautology, and a trifling one at that. How dullish and media-trained does one's social conscience need to be to fail to be aware of that fact?

Tacitus

To those who profess to defend the actions of the Israeli state - why the double standards when it comes to condemning blockades; indiscriminate massacres; threeatening of nuclear strikes; hostage taking; routine torture etc. etc. ?Seems like many of those who condemn this when done by other countries give Israel a free pass.

C. Gee

fred,
I have noticed that you and Derek BLADES find comments critical of you "tiresome" or "wearisome". I have no wish to enervate you further, so I will only say that just because your goldfish is Jewish, it does not mean it isn't anti-semitic.
Question: Did Jordan or Egypt offer equal citizenship to the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza? Do not let your goldfish tell you they did.

hadrian

EDDIE- I don't know if you'll read this far down the thread but to put the record straight I should like to point out I am a Glaswegian through and through but also an anti-Leftist to the core and I think Melanie is one of the very few commentators today who has her finger right on the pulse and I fully support her defence of Israel though one fully acknowledges the Israelis like everyone else can make mistakes in dealing with extremely difficult neighbours and even in domestic policies. However those 'mistakes' in no way come anywhere near justifying the genocidal mania of their Hamas tormentors.
As for the Palestinians- I think Augustus has said it better then anyone in his post above.

porkbelly

One thing China, Russia and Chechnya have in common (which might also explain the reluctance of the Human Rights Watch crowd to criticize them) is their ruthlessness in crushing, squelching and even murdering those who speak out against them. In which the US, British and other Western governments have been shamefully complicit.

FinanceDoc

Time to remind on the BBCs utter hypocrisy and irrational hatred of Israel which has poisoned the minds of millions of its slavish viewers around the world. From an email exchange I had with BBC editors back in 2005:

Sir

I’d like to bring to your attention a graphic example of why the BBC receives much criticism with regard to its reporting on the Middle East conflict. As I write this letter, the BBC has on its website, two articles about killings in the Middle East and Africa. One story, about a single Palestinian man killed while he approached a border fence is entitled “Israelis Shoot Dead Palestinian”. The other story, about 100 people killed in a bombing raid by the Sudanese government is entitled “Sudan Troops in Darfur Offensive”. The details on the killings do not appear in the headline nor in the following paragraph printed in bold.

If this example of unbalanced reporting were an aberration, one might suggest that it was due perhaps, to poor discretion being exercised by BBC website editors on this occasion. This type of asymmetric reporting however, is routine for the BBC. When Israelis are involved in the deaths of Palestinians — one in this case – the BBC employs direct, active language in the headline and body of its articles to describe the incident and assign unambiguous culpability to Israel. By contrast, when reporting on the killings of Israelis by Palestinians — or in this case, the murder of 100 civilians by the government of Sudan — the language is typically passive and circumspect.

As a frequent reader of the BBC website (and a TV license payer in the UK), I find the BBC’s bias transparent and deeply offensive. It also represent a clear violation of your public charter to be fair and balanced in your reporting.

This was the BBC’s reply:

As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the conflict in Darfur take place in completely different contexts, it is clear that different editorial approaches need to be taken. The Middle East editorial team tries - as far as possible - to address each deadly act of Israeli-Palestinian violence in a balanced and objective way, with a focus the team tries to apply to all the countries in its region, even Iraq. That close-up focus is much less likely in African conflicts of which Darfur is an example which are dealt with by the Africa editorial team.

In addition, headlines are not to used to assign culpability, but rather to sum up the story in as brief a way as possible (in a template of 31-33 characters). This inevitably results in an avoidance of longer words, which may be why there may be a slight imbalance. Nevertheless a search through the BBC News website archive produces headlines where:

1. Palestinians are killed without mentioning an agent:

Five Palestinians killed in Gaza (30/12/2004)

2. Israelis are killed with an agent mentioned:

Suicide blasts kill 11 Israelis (14/03/2004)

3. And where there have been multiple (Palestinian) deaths which are not mentioned in the headline

Major Israeli incursion in Gaza (25/10/2004)

To which I replied:

1. Why should the “focus” of BBC reporting be different for the Middle East than for Africa such that your ME editorial team takes a “close-up focus” while your African editorial team takes a — presumably — “remote” focus? Do the deaths of 100 Sudanese merit less personal attention than the death of one Palestinian?

2. The suggestion that the substantive difference in headlines is due to space limitations is risible. Please note that the headline, “Israelis Shoot Dead Palestinian” contains 31 characters while the headline “Sudan Troops in Darfur Offensive” contains 32 characters. The latter headline could have just as easily read, “Sudan Army kills 100 in Darfur” which would have required only 30 characters and would have been a far more accurate rendering of the incident.

3. The headline you have provided as an example of the BBC identifying an agent, “Suicide blasts kill 11 Israelis” (14/03/2004), does nothing of the sort. In fact, it overtly fails to identify a Palestinian as the perpetrator of the murders.

As demonstrated, your arguments attempting to justify the different handling of the two stories are weak and facile. The truth is that the BBC maintains a distinct editorial bias when reporting news of the conflict in the Middle East, deliberately maligning the Israelis whenever possible. This is an odious practice for any news organisation, but particularly so for one funded by the taxpayer and pledged to a policy of fair and impartial reporting.

Dr Zen

We don't fund Russia, and we consider it a rogue state. There is no Chechen lobby in the States, and there are no Chechen special pleaders writing for the Spectator that I know of.

But you know all this, Melanie. You know perfectly well that it's not antisemitism that drives criticism of Israel. You're not quite dim enough to think otherwise.

Barbara

Tacitus,

Since Israel does not do any of those things, we don't have to defend them. One cannot say the same thing for the Arab apologists who must constantly dance around the proven crimes, violations, inhumane excesses, calls for genocide, misogyny, racism and other vile acts of their pet "victims."

When occasionally a mistake is made, or an individual Israeli commits a crime, that person, even if he is the President of Israel, is called to account. Any normal person understands that this is right, proper, and enough.

We defend Israel from her persecutors, willing executioners, slanderers, and the endless tribe of anti-Semites, liars, hypocrites, and conspiracy seekers who wish to destroy Israel, and usually all Jewry.

Good thing we are up to the task.

Derek BLADES

stanley Jerusalem
April 25th, 2009 6:29pm

I am puzzled why you ask me whether I believe Osama bin Laden. Yes. I do believe him when he says that the Israeli-Palestine conflict was one of the two reasons for the 9/11 terror attacks. If he says that is why he did it, why should I not believe him? The question that interests me is why you or anybody else should not believe him. I will be interested in your answer.

stanley Jerusalem

Derek BLADES
April 26th, 2009 6:43am

stanley Jerusalem
April 25th, 2009 6:29pm
"I am puzzled why you ask me whether I believe Osama bin Laden."
So presumably you can see no reason to disbelieve the statements of Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Josef Stalin, Patrice Lumumba,Idi Amin,Heinrich Himmler and other notables of recent times. After all, what possible reason could they have for lying? Just because they were despots who caused the deaths, directly or indirectly, of millions, doesn't mean their mummies didn't tell them that lying was a sin, and they always did what their mummies told them didn't they?

phil

stanley Jerusalem,as for the blades remarks --if a person lies all the time ,that person will have no conception of what a lie is ,so for a person who seeks the truth to enter into a debate with a liar is rather a waste of time .

Nannette

Derek Blades - immediately after 9/11 Bin Laden said that he attacked because of the infidel in "holy" Saudi Arabia.

He NEVER mentioned Israel nor palestine in those first taped messages.

Merlyn

A non Jewish , and not particularly a Zionist sympathizer once commented to me that what gets to her are the perpetual grafic use of images of Palestinian children in the headlines when it comes to any articles about Israel. It made her feel guilty, manipulated and suspicious all at the same time.
However she failed to get an understanding from these same media sources of how the constant rocket bombardments were affecting the Israeli children.

Merlyn

The Religion of Peace website states "Pakistan is one of at least five Muslim countries in which the number of Muslims deliberately murdered by Islamic fundamentalists in the past year exceeds the number of Palestinian civilians killed in the Hamas conflict with Israel. In the last 12 months, Islamists killed over thirty Muslims for every civilian casualty of Cast Lead."This includes children.

Michael B

"It made her feel guilty, manipulated and suspicious all at the same time."

Precisely.

"However she failed to get an understanding from these same media sources of how the constant rocket bombardments were affecting the Israeli children."

Precisely.

In both cases, that is precisely the effect intended by so many publishers, editors and writers who inhabit and ply their tradecraft within upper and lower echelons of the MSM. Aka Pollywood, a de facto, quasi-institution devoted to underlying deceits and propaganda in general on behalf of the Sunni Arab population in Gaza and the West Bank - aka "Palestinians," other quarters as well, and which evidenced itself perhaps most dramatically via the al-Dura affair.

stanley Jerusalem

phil
April 26th, 2009 11:07am
"stanley Jerusalem,as for the blades remarks" -

'space of is waste a Drek'
Rearrange at your leisure, my friend.

Nannette
April 26th, 2009 12:01pm
"He NEVER mentioned Israel nor Palestine in those first taped messages."
Our Drek never lets the truth get in the way of a good story.

Si. N

Nannette, when you shout, Bin Laden ‘NEVER mentioned Israel nor [P]alestine in those first taped messages’, you are wrong. In fact, Bin Laden’s first public response to 9/11; the 5 October 2001 video-taped message, contains 2 references to Palestine:

‘[i]n these days, Israeli tanks infest Palestine - in Jenin, Ramallah, Rafah, Beit Jalla, and other places in the land of Islam, and we don't hear anyone raising his voice or moving a limb’...

…[t]o America, I say only a few words…neither America nor the people who live in it will dream of security before we live it in Palestine’.

So Derek BLADES was correct in his assertion.

Apology?

Derek BLADES

No no Nannette (April 26th, 2009 12:01pm).

I will not let you get away with that nonsense. I was in my living room watching the televised broadcast from what appeared to be a cave. Bin Laden clearly and carefully mentioned the need for Arabs to live in peace in the West Bank as the first of his "war claims". I was just one of thousands who saw or heard his broadcast and I will not allow you to propagate your shameful lie. Infidel troops in the Holy land was his second complaint. Check your facts Nanette. When you have done so an apology will be in order.

Margaret Muller-Johansson

There is something that the British don't like, success and civilize people
They are against Israel because Israel is one of those country which is not third world and is successful

Carl

Si. N - you get lots of Apologists here, but few apologies.

@Merlyn, I'm so sorry that your friend has had to see graphic images of Palestinian children wounded and killed by the IDF, but far, far sorrier that they actually were.

stanley Jerusalem

Si. N
April 26th, 2009 2:43pm

"Nannette, when you shout,"
Silicon Nitride - You deliberate as befits a statesmanlike demeanour but we the lumpen proletariat SHOUT and you have the chutzpa to demand an apology. What is this? Be nice to bullies and racists week just because Drek got something right by mistake?
He was quoting a psychopath, for God's sake. Perhaps you should cut Drek some slack instead. He's the one who worked for the Murderous Republic of China, not Nannette.

phil

apologies for drek the blade !!! sounds like the gates of hell have opened and the inhabitants are being let out to cheer him on led by by sin and carl .they couldnt get away with that at the Edinburgh festival .-bring back Mel Brooks !!

Adam B.

I'm still waiting for derek Blades to apologise for his ignorant contention that there was no ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab and Islamic nations, and that they all lived happily as dhimmis. I'm not holding my breath...

As for bin laden's blame game, two points.

1. If memory serves, Israel was the fourth reason Bin laden gave for 9/11, in his very first speech after the attacks. He also stated that the attacks were retribution for Iraq (the sanctions as it was before the war), infidel soldiers on Muslim soil (especially in Saudi Arabia), the situations in Kashmir, southern Sudan and just about everywhere. Blades and Sin seem to be implying that were it not for Western (especialy US) support for Israel, then there would have been no attacks. So why were all these other reasons provided as well?

Secondly, for the sake of argument, say that the attacks were exclusively due to US support of Israel (which they weren't). The Israel haters would have us determine our foreign policy so as not to offend terrorists. As long as we do what the terrorists want, we;ll be OK.

This "thinking" lacks any respect for our own democracy, our independence, or any moral compass or backbone.

Michael B

Correction: Pallywood, not Pollywood

Sleeping dolls

This isn't the speech to which some of you refer, but I believe it shines a light:

"But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th, Bush is still engaged in distortion, deception and hiding from you the real causes. And thus, the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.

So I shall talk to you about the story behind those events and shall tell you truthfully about the moments in which the decision was taken, for you to consider.

I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind.

The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.

I couldn't forget those moving scenes, blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses destroyed along with their occupants and high rises demolished over their residents, rockets raining down on our home without mercy.

The situation was like a crocodile meeting a helpless child, powerless except for his screams. Does the crocodile understand a conversation that doesn't include a weapon? And the whole world saw and heard but it didn't respond.

In those difficult moments many hard-to-describe ideas bubbled in my soul, but in the end they produced an intense feeling of rejection of tyranny, and gave birth to a strong resolve to punish the oppressors.

And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children."
http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/1964.cfm

Surely it's obvious, regardless of whether Israel featured in Bin Laden's rationale for his crime or not, it's still a most effective recruitment card for the future.

Nick

Margaret, the British don't like bullies either. We support the underdog.

Israel, with its F16s, nukes and casual disregard for Palestinian lives can never be viewed as the underdog.

Tacitus

Barbara
Thanks for this. But I have to disgree with you - there is much evidence for what I said, and I don't think that ALL the Human Rights Groups (for all their many faults) are raving anti-Semites and fabricators. Israel has, at various times, legalised torture and hostage-taking! As to indiscriminate massacre - just check out Bet'Selem etc. Let's admit to failings and condemn with an even-hand - not least when critics of Israel don't.

Si, N

Stain, you’re all over the shop lad. Nannette shouted, ‘NEVER’ (upper-case you see, denotes shouting). But that’s not important, what matters is Nannette was wrong – just as you were wrong in your initial support for Nannette’s incorrect statement – remember, you said Derek BLADES, ‘never lets the truth get in the way of a good story’ – once the facts were established , you suggested that BLADES had ‘got something right by mistake’. No, he just happens to be paying attention. Whereas you were attempting to misrepresent the record; or demonstrating your ignorance of the facts.

Augustus

The Encyclopaedia of Islam is quite a tome. The New Edition is hailed as a unique and invaluable reference tool, an essential key to understanding the world of Islam, and the authoritative source not only for the religion, but also for the believers and the countries in which they live.

Its opening sentence simply states: "The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general... Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam... Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of Jihad (warfare to spread Islam) can be eliminated."

The great irony is that not only do textbooks in Muslim countries teach hatred and hostility towards non-Muslims (infidels), the same teachers and preachers using those textbooks often fervently try to whitewash Islam when on Western soil. Until the full extent of Islamic ideologies are addressed forthrightly, the West will remain philosophically
unprepared against the threat of radical Islam.

Truthtriumphs

SIN, Blades et al.
OF COURSE Osama bin Laden would give the Israel/Palestine dispute pride of place in his list of "grievances" as his raison d'etre for 9/11 because he well knows that it resonates with the Jew-haters in the West (ie. those like yourselves) more powerfully and emotively than any other so-called reason.
"Criticism" of Israel finds its natural home amongst the anti-semites in the western democracies, and serves the cause of the de-legitimisation of Israel, and thereby the downfall of Jews.
Oh, and SIN and your ideological fellow travellers, you don't love or care for the Palestinians, or any other people, you just hate the Jews.
Any simpleton can see through your faux concern for the Palestinians.

However, your obsession with Israel and the Jews will soon become irrelevant in the larger scheme of things, for even as we write the Taliban is calling the shots in Pakistan---- a nuclear armed nation, and is now only 60 miles from the capital, Islamabad.
That should concentrate the mind, if you have one!

David

"Can I ask did you go to skool?" (sic!) .... a question posed to another reader by George Laird...or was it SiN, or Mr Blades or the caterpillar in "Alice in Wonderland"?....I can't remember. Anyway, feel free to scroll up and find out.
I doubt that even Lewis Caroll could have dreamed up a Mad Hatter's tea party to compete.
Of one thing I am sure and that is that one - and quite possibly all three - of the above will write back saying that I'm an evil, heartless, right-wing neocon, fascist swine and that I should be locked up in their teapot immediately or hunted down mercilessly by The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University ("Off with his head"). Even worse, I might be brought before court with the white rabbit as prosecutor and King and Queen as jury ("`If there's no meaning in it,' said the King, `that saves a world of trouble, you know, as we needn't try to find any....")

Oh well...Coffee anyone?

Yehuda

The following information which has (as far as I am aware) just come to light (in an interview with an Israeli minister) sums up the "bottom line" of the Arab-Israeli conflict: at the Annapolis Conference the supposedly "moderate" "Palestinian Authority" refused to countenance the formula "Two states for two peoples."
No wonder the minister declared that if this is the "moderate" line, there is nothing to talk about.

stanley Jerusalem

Si, N
April 26th, 2009 8:28pm

"Stan, you’re all over the shop lad."
Absolutely lad, on this occasion Silicon; so you may now return to your post as a guardian of truth brandishing the sword of justice, just like the last bloke who used those words in public,{Aitken].

Terry

I've been saying this for years, Melanie.

If the left was at all worried about human rights, ther ewould be millions of them on hte streets protesting agaisnt the likes of Mugabe, the House of Saud, Congo, etc.

The absence of the left on the streets in this respect, contrasts markedly to its an masse support of sadam hussein against the democratic west. Not to speak of its libellous vitriol against Israel (aka 'Jews'). The fact that extreme left wing Jews are the worst offenders makes them most culpable in my opinion. In fact, I regard them as being simple traitors to their own people and to democratic government and civilsied values.

The left is now an evil and hypocritical movement, the termites eating reason, objectivity and civilised values.

We can fight islamofascism if we turn our minds to it. But our quest to save the west from a new Dark Age is constantly being undermined by the western left.

Noah Aaron Bashi

Nick, The Israels have a right to protect themselves from the evil Hamas and Islamic extremism. Bullies? who are the bullies? the British are the biggest bullies in the world, what are you doing in Iraq and Afghanistan? the empire is over...

Yuri Nal

Iraqui Mukbharat and UK Al Queda behind 2001 Hoof and Mouth Epidemic, vengeance for earlier coalition destruction of Iraqui lab that manufactured animal vaccines that the coalition said was being used for biological warfare. The spreaders of the Virus knew that UK sheep were not vaccinated because a positive antibody test (from a vaccination) would make the sheep impossible to export or sell. It was economic warfare against the UK and environmental terrorism. The plotters did not crow about their success because the 9 11 attack was pending (in September of the same year) so they did not want to attract too much attentin to themselves that might de-rail the 9-11 attack.

Derek BLADES

Adam B.
April 26th, 2009 4:42pm

Sleeping dolls (April 26th, 2009 5:58pm) quotes from a subsequent bin Laden speech. "I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind." It really does seem as if the injustices visited on the people of Palestine were at least one of the reasons why he launched the 9/11 terror attacks. Of course, like something calling itself «stanley Jerusalem", (April 26th, 2009 8:52am) you may choose to think that bin Laden was lying. But then you might also believe that pigs may fly.

You ask me "to apologise for [my] ignorant contention that there was no ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab and Islamic nations, and that they all lived happily as dhimmis." Of course I will not do that because I have never contended any such thing. I at least try to get my facts right but I accept that our interpretations of the facts may legitimately differ. Facts are sacred, Adam B, but opinions are two a penny - though in your case ten a penny would be a fairer rate of exchange.

Xneocon

This is precisely the problem with neocons Melanie - that you want to slam Russia at every opportunity, instead of sticking to the topic. Like you give pigeon poop about Chechens. Dishonesty only undermines your cause. Inventing attrocity numbers where it suites you, reveals opportunism, not dedication to democracy.

When it comes to Muslim double-standards, Peter Hitchens is much better at pointing them out. Halabja, Hama, Black September...

patricia

Palestinians are a nation of Suicide Bombers.

And Israel is a nation of Dudley Do Rights.

Phillips' simplicity is her own worst enemy.

Well, one of many.

stanley Jerusalem

patricia
April 27th, 2009 11:05am
"Palestinians are a nation of Suicide Bombers.And Israel is a nation of Dudley Do Rights"

God, what a brain! It would be worth a fortune for transplants. Hardly used at all.

Joan

George Laird are you really a product of Glasgow University? Did a wonderful place like Scotland present you to our unsuspecting world?

phil

stanley Jerusalem
April 27th, 2009 11:28am

patricia
April 27th, 2009 11:05am
"Palestinians are a nation of Suicide Bombers.And Israel is a nation of Dudley Do Rights"

God, what a brain! It would be worth a fortune for transplants. Hardly used at all--------Stanley I can see the scene on petticoat lane --not 99p not even 55 p-just 10p and a bottle of harpic free -trust me!! and the guy was taken away by the fraud squad for cheating

patricia

Phil - you just keep right on with the fiddling while the Middle East burns.

RUTH

Nice to see the standard of debate here is running true to form!

To think I thought this site was serious. Now I just come here for a giggle.

Re. the Neocon post, I don't know in what standing the right wing sits in your green and pleasant land but in the States its shot through.

Say "Neocon" in polite society and you re likely to be reminded of Danny Kaye's quip; "if you put your hand over your mouth you can t put your foot in it"

Little something there for some of your more puerile posters here I think.....

Miranda Rose Smith

Dear Ms. Phillips: Wishing you and your family and everyone on this website a Hag Sameach.

stanley Jerusalem

RUTH
April 27th, 2009 1:45pm

"Nice to see the standard of debate here is running true to form!"
Many thanks for the constructive criticism. Much of the trivial comment is in reaction to the banal, the lying and the outright offensive. Remember
" He who laughs, lasts."
We mark time with amusing ourselves while you giggle. How about a serious observation on the matter in hand? Or perhaps you come here just for a giggle.

phil

RUTH you have been here before without success supporting the gorgeous patricia ,but nevertheless many here will be happy to entertain you and if you decide to say something noxious you no doubt will be in receipt of our combined wit -so why not say something nice and enjoy the freedom to post along with the rest of us .

phil

patricia kind of you to give me permission -its the nicest thing you have ever said here -you ok?

phil

Miranda Rose Smith and the same for you -have a good one -hope you are enjoying the fun here .)

Mark2

There probably is a fair bit of antisemitism (all jews are rich - why should we sympathise") in the left's hatred of Israel. But the main reason is rather its anti Americanism. Israel is the US's ally so it gets it in the neck from the Left.

It doesn't matter how bad your bombing of civilians, abuse of Human rights etc etc - if you are anti USA you get a free pass from the left.

Darfur, Iran, N Korea, Syria, Serbia to name but a few.

phil

Mark2there is not much to choose between the left and the right ,the difference is only which people they choose to hate -Given the chance they would do harm to anyone ,some here pretend to be kind souls but distinguish themselves by hating one side even though they know nothing of the other .try reading the blade who it seems worked for the communist chinese but purports to support human rights -it really could not get dafter .

stanley Jerusalem

Mark2
April 27th, 2009 2:28pm
"There probably is a fair bit of antisemitism (all Jews are rich - why should we sympathise") in the left's hatred of Israel. But the main reason is rather its anti Americanism."
That didn't apply in the 1940's and it hasn't really done so since. I'm afraid it's just the oldest hatred in the World.
It would be illuminating to all of the Israel bashers who air their opinions on this blog to know just how many Muslims have been murdered by Muslims just in the past 20 years. Then we can get down to discussing the genuine and unfortunate non-Hamas victims in the Gaza Strip to be completely proportionate in our condemnation. After all, we wouldn't really want to distract attention from Israel's cruel treatment of them by highlighting the cruel treatment meted out by their own leaders, would we?

Si. N

Staining Jerusalem, when you say, ‘[m]uch of the trivial comment is in reaction to…the lying’, you must surely be referring to your own dishonesty. That is, your very own support for Nannette’s untruth about Bin Laden’s statement. Your attempt to turn the table is pathetic.

Clown

Adam B.

Derek Blades, not only do you suffer from selective moral outrage, it seems you also have selective memory loss. You did indeed deny that the Jews were ethnically cleansed form much of the Arab and Islamic worlds, but I'm glad to see that you have changed your view (haven't you?)

As for Bin Laden, you have, again, missed the point. You seem to be suggesting that if only America hadn't upset the terrorists of al-Qaida by supporting Israel, the 9/11 attacks may not have occurred.

This is utter rubbish. Firstly, Al-Qaida's goal is the elimination of Western values, such as democracy and freedom, equality for women, the very existence of Christians, Hinus and Jews. Al-Qaida believes in the imposition of the Caliphate, of Islamic law throughout the globe. That includes your lifestyle Derek. Now unless you are willing to give up your freedom of speech, which you exercise to such great effect on this blog, then complaining that the US should stop supporting Israel to appease the murderers is completely beside the point. Al-Qaida is a nihilistic terror group, there is no "logic" as you would define it, no single political goal. However, I would take the argument further. Say that the ONLY reason Al-Qaida launched 9/11 was about US support for Israel (which is demonstrably untrue, but the anti-semites like it), does this mean that the US should immediately change its policy, to be dictated to by murderers who hate America anyway and everything it stands for?

Neil Craig

If it were a matter of holding western states to a higher standard the papers would have given far more headlines to the dissection, while alive of at lwast 1,300 Serbs & the sale of the parts to our fos[pitals, all carried piu by NATO police working under a direct NATO authority that was so important to NATO countries that they happily bombed Serb hospitals to obtain it.

It may not be that Israel gets coverage because it is Jewish & NATO doesn't because it is carrying out Hitler's programme but I have yet to see any other credible explanation.

Original Tony

Hello...I'm back!!

phil

Original Tony hola antonio!! where have you been?

stanley Jerusalem

Can somone please translate Neil Craig's last posting. I know I'm dim. Lots of other posters have already told me, but I can't work out what he actually said.[SiN and alana it's called a pre-emptive strike].

phil

Si. N I only address you in extremis but your post at 2.58 is so stupid I have to say something /wit is one thing but this childish stuff is just a mockery for grown ups ,although no one can be sure you are one of those ,please be more respectful to your superiors ,and Stanley is certainly that.

harvey

Xneocon writes
'As if you care pigeon poop about Chechens '

The leftist/ Islamist brigade have now resorted to this last gasp desperate tactic in the absence of a response to the claim that it is only Israel which is singled out for criticism.
So now we cannot mention the truth as it is perceived as a political tool and not genuine concern.As if the Israel bashers care for the Palestinians who are merely the conduit for these malign rascists and antisemites to vent their hate in what they they dress up as anti Zionism.

That the Palestinians have been persecuted in no small measure by Jordan [1970 Black September ] expulsion from the Gulf States , not allowed to work legitimately in Lebanon and Syria,not to mention Egypt and Jordan closing their borders to Palestinians lest they ferment trouble within their own populations.

You will never hear the left protest these injustices . No protest marches to these Arab embassies - nothing .

Pure unadulterated hypocrisy- and antisemitism .

logdon

I'd be intersted in how the Laird of Glasgow and his merry mentalists could interpret this. Of course it's one of so many rants that it passes over most heads. However I'd love to watch the news on al-Beebera if an Israeli MK tried it on against Islam. This tirade you will note isn't about Israel but every Jewish person who lives.

inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzK114-Q8zg&feature=player_embedded

logdon

Talking of Jordan......This is almost a confirming parody of all Melanie argues in her piece. All Islamic grievance roads lead to Jerusalem? I wonder if those hordes descending on Islamabad have that in mind. If so they need a new sat nav. I's the other way!

Jordan: Israel Faces War
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu Jordan: Israel Faces War

Israel faces all-out war within 18 months if it does not come to terms with the Arab world and allow the establishment of a new Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem, according to Jordan’s King Abdullah II.
The Hashemite monarch also declared on America's Meet the Press television program Sunday that threats from Iran and Al Qaeda will fade away once Jerusalem is divided.
His position basically echoed the Palestinian Authority (PA) stand that its demands are a condition for peace and are not a matter for negotiation, despite diplomatic and media language about Israel and the PA each making concessions.
The king responded to virtually every question concerning the Middle East by pointing to Jerusalem. “In Arab and Muslim minds, the most emotional aspect is the Palestinian cause and that of Jerusalem. And from there leads all the other problems,” he argued.
When program host David Gregory asked if it’s not a “fantasy’ to think that the problem of Al Qaeda will disappear so easily, the Jordanian monarch answered, ”What -- what is Al Qaeda’s platform is -- is the plight of the Palestinians in Jerusalem under occupation.”
Gregory challenged him that the terrorist organization may not believe what it says, but King Abdullah II was unmoved. “You can’t really take them that seriously when the core issue, the major grievance in the Arab and Muslim world is solved,” he explained.
He followed the same track concerning Iran and “any crisis you want to talk about…. All roads lead back to Jerusalem.”
The king, who visited U.S. President Barack Obama during his visit to the United States, was equally emphatic and simplistic concerning the Iranian nuclear threat, which worries the Arab world as well as Israel.
Asked by Gregory what is the best way for the U.S. to persuade Iran to retreat from its nuclear program, King Abdullah II responded, "Solving the Israeli-Palestinian problem.” Gregory asked, “That’s it?” and the king explained, "That allows us to then solve the Israeli-Arab-Muslim problem.”
He continued, “Let me go back to saying I think that the challenge we have here in America is connecting the dots. If you have an issue of the threat that Iran poses to Israel, which is what Netanyahu was saying, the best way of solving that problem is solving the core issue, which is the Palestinian problem and that of Jerusalem.
“There’s more of an incentive for the Iranians to continue down that path when there’s an argument that they want to use in front of their people that Palestinians are under occupation.
The Jordanian monarch held out the chance for Israel to make peace with 57 countries that do not recognize Israel today. “Look, Israel, if you solve the Palestinian problem, if you allow us to solve the problems of Jerusalem, we all want to have peace with you.”
He warned that if Israel does not deal with the Arab demands over Jerusalem within the next 18 months, “there will be another conflict between Israel and another protagonist. He charged that outside interference, meaning the U.S., is a requirement to force a peace agreement.
“America is providing a new image of what and how things should be done. And I think that the world has a belief in the president, a lot of faith in what he has to say. Obviously the pressure on the president is to deliver,” he added.
So Israel has to decide, does it want to make a relationship with 57 nations or does it want to stay Fortress Israel?
On the subject of human rights and allegations that Jordan served as a proxy jailer for the U.S. and used brutal methods of interrogation, the king denied all charges. “I went straight back to my director of intelligence at the time and I said, ‘Is there any foundation to this?” King Abdullah II answered. “And he said, categorically, no. So I’d like to think that my people were telling me the truth.”
Comment on this story

stanley Jerusalem

phil
April 27th, 2009 5:10pm
"please be more respectful to your superiors ,and Stanley is certainly that"
Thanks phil but demanding respect from pond life is not an ambition.Sadly the only effect thse antisemites have on the blog is to drive away genuine debaters. Attempts to reason with them are fruitless and pointless and seeking intellectual accommodation a one-way ticket to Frustration Central. In some ways patricia's, carl's and George's rants are preferable as they are less insidiously poisonous and provide light relief for a while.
חג שמח my friend.

Si, N

Stain [Pagliacci], 'pre-emptive strike' or not, your lying and then slyly trying to suggest it's others who are lying is a neat analogue for the Israel/Palestine conflict.

I see Coco has hastened to Pagliacci's defence - laughably insisting on respect - methinks he has pan-stick in his eyes - at any rate he still fails to make a coherent point. Probably still smarting from being shown-up as a liar on a recent thread.

Anyway, keep up the prat-falls boys - though beware, you really do let your side down.

logdon

And it just keeps coming.

Monday, April 27, 2009
Pirates Attack; BBC Leaves Out the Facts

As I've noted before, media coverage in certain places is often so slanted against Israel that you want to laugh at the same time as being outraged. Here's a great example.

A group of pirates attacked an Italian cruise ship off Somalia's coast. The ship was saved by a self-defense effort led by Israeli guards it had on board who fought off the pirates. This story is covered in many places but when the BBC does so, it leaves out the "I" word. Musn't say anything nice about Israelis. Congratulations to the YidwithLid blog for spotting it.

This is the kind of thing I was talking about that separates reporting and analysis from propaganda. If some Iranians, Syrians, North Koreans, or Cubans ran into a burning building and saved some kids, who'd omit the fact of their nationality in an attempt to always portay these countries and people as "bad"?

stanley Jerusalem

Thanks for the credit Logdon!

'The facade cracks'
stanley Jerusalem
April 27th, 2009 10:57am

And isn't it odd that in today's news only the BBC has managed to avoid mentioning that a cruise liner attacked by armed Somali pirates was successfully defended by a crew of armed Israeli security men. Just the BBC. No-one else. Gosh, they're so impartial!

Wagner

Phil is that respect for your superiors or seniors? Seniority would fit in with your paternalistic attitude.

Carl

You people are paranoid! Do we really expect the BBC to list the nationalities of all the security details on ships passing through the Indian Ocean?

Gil

To all the hypocrites out there who maliciously see Israel as the only problem in the world - George Laird etc.: Have you read Mark Franchetti in yesterday's Sunday Times about the massacres that Russian death squads carried out in Chechnya?

So come on you filthy hypocrites, let's here about your marches towards the Russian Embassy, demonstrations etc.

logdon

@stanley Jerusalem
April 27th, 2009 8:01pm

Apologies, Stanley. Didn't see your reference. I actually found it here, copied and pasted word for word. Great site also.
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/

logdon

Carl
April 27th, 2009 8:49pm

Obviously missed this part! Who would, indeed? Not the BBC for a start.

"If some Iranians, Syrians, North Koreans, or Cubans ran into a burning building and saved some kids, who'd omit the fact of their nationality in an attempt to always portay these countries and people as "bad"?/

Ronnie

There seems to be a variable approach to the 'war on Islamist terror and creeping Islamisation' being conducted across the globe.

I am trying to express myself in Melanie's terms and may trip over my hyperbole on occassion.

Israel is at the very forefront of this war and must be supported at all costs - agreed.

We don't really like Russia so Russia cannot likewise be at the forefront of the war, notwithstanding it's proximity to a number of collapsing or collapsed islamic countries. Therefore Russian military action in Chechnya is to be deplored and the Islamist opposition there supported while Israeli military action, in a similar vein, is to be regarded as being faultless.

The Serbs have a similar problem insofar as they have always seen themselves as being leaders in the centuries-old war agaisnst Islam, hence their historic attachment to Kosovo which we loudly deny.

Being defenders of Christendom against the Ottoman expansion, the Serbs rather expected more support from their fellow Christians in the West. Of course they never received any such support and have become perenially bitter and sullen as a result.

Are we still only able to support 'Roman' Christian efforts against the mullahs while ignoring the Orthodox world's role in resisting the perceived spread of Islam?

The great schism is still very much with us.

Derek BLADES

Adam B writes "Al-Qaida believes in the imposition of the Caliphate, of Islamic law throughout the globe."
The “Caliphate” is a vague concept but I think it is now generally taken as referring to the last Caliphate, the Ottoman Empire. This was dismembered by France and the United Kingdom after the First World War and broken up into a number of new, mostly artificial, states which were assigned to French and British spheres of influence. Al-Qaida thinks that was a bad idea and they would like to undo what they see as an act of colonialism. Were they to succeed in rebuilding the old Caliphate I would not personally be bothered although I can understand that Israel under present management might be uneasy at the prospect. However, it is clearly an impossible aim not least because the rulers of these new states have no interest whatsoever in being incorporated into a new Caliphate. Your notion of a global Caliphate is even more far-fetched. Think atheist Russia, protestant North America, secular Europe, Catholic Latin America, atheist China, Hindu India, Buddhist Indochina... All subject to Islamic law? Give us a break Adam B.

stanley Jerusalem

Derek BLADES
April 28th, 2009 7:52am
"Were they to succeed in rebuilding the old Caliphate I would not personally be bothered"
Now then, a mature balanced unemotional response Stanley.
Yeah, Right! Back to the planet Zog, Drek. It's happening as Monsewer Eddie Gray would have said 'Before your very eyes.'
No mercy, no holding back, no prisoners, they are just going for it. Sweet talk and infiltration in the West, suicide bombers in the Mid East and the Sub-continent. They won't stop. Their financers are holding the Western Bankers by the short and curlies and subservience to the almighty Dollar/Pound will follow with the creeping Sharia card.Only massive civil uprising will stop it and stable governments will do absolutely ANYTHING to prevent that, hence the anomalous behaviour of the British Police Force in recent years.
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde
'yesterday it was illegal, today it's tolerated and tomorrow it will be compulsory.'
But don't imagine that being an agnostic Muslim is as easy as being an agnostic Christian. Oh no!

Si, N

Pagliacci, I know you guys are supposed to be funny and all, but debate here – are you serious?

I don’t come here to debate; certainly not with flakey clowns. No, I occasionally make a comment about the apologetics for the barbaric treatment of Palestinians, and the shit-stirring in general. Sometimes I correct the hasbara and lies trotted-out by the likes of you.

Pity shameless wriggling Pagliacci, there is no ‘intellectual accommodation’ to be had with untrustworthy people like you.

As Coco said, ‘stanley Jerusalem […] if a person lies all the time, that person will have no conception of what a lie is, so […] to enter into a debate with a liar is rather a waste of time’.

Yehuda

To all the anti-Zionist posters:
Israel lives, and is celebrating 61 years of independence.
Hitler is dead.
Eichmann is dead.
Artaxerxes is dead.
Antiochus is dead.
Vespasian and Titus are dead.
Torquemada is dead.

The People of Israel lives.

Anti-Zionists: if you don't like it...too bad. Get used to it.

Derek BLADES

stanley Jerusalem (April 28th, 2009 9:41am)
Wow - a real live, walking, talking conspiracy theorist! I have heard about chaps like you but never met one in real life. What's your take on the JFK assassination? And do you subscribe to Yuri Nal's (April 27)view that the 2001 "Hoof and Mouth" outbreak in Britain was a Muslim plot? What about that fiendish leftie conspiracy to take over the BBC? Come on stanley Jerusalem, spill out your innermost fears. It will be a cathartic experience for you. And when it is all over, crawl back under your stone and leave normal citizens in peace.

April 27th posting

Harvey

Derek Blades writes

'The notion of a global Caliphate is even more far fetched '.

That may very well be true but it will not stop Al Qaida and it spawn from using their every endeavour to bring it about.That of course means the continuing use of terrorism ,murder and mayhem unless of course Muslim states accede to their demands .

Having achieved their global Caliphate do you seriously imagine it would stop there . Global Caliphate is exactly what it says it is . The ultimate goal of this malevolent chimera is the establishment of Islam and Sharia in every land under one Islamic banner.

There is no negotiation ,no appeasement,no compromise with this rational.Any such attempt is perceived as a weakness and a precursor to ultimate victory.

If we hold dear our own values ,democracy and way of life then we need to show it .The death rites of this country as a Christian land with Christian values is a tragedy and I say that as a Jew who has enjoyed the freedom and safety that this country has provided my family.

This is not about Islam but about Islamofascism which like every other totalitarian and fundamentilist ideology before it has proved ruinous for humanity.

There is no other course but to face it down with every means at ones disposal . Anything less is unacceptable if we wish to hold on to all that we hold dear . In the 1930s Europe and America learnt the hard way that appeasement of fanatacism does not work . This time is no different .

Si, N

Yehuda, good riddance to that rum bunch.

But to paraphrase; ‘the People of Palestine live’ too. If you don’t like it - too bad. You will have to get used to it – because the people of Israel will never live in peace while denying Palestinians the same.

Si, N

Harvey, when you say, ‘every other totalitarian and fundamentilist ideology before it has proved ruinous for humanity’, I don’t suppose you have Avigdor Lieberman’s fundamentalist ideology in mind at all, do you?

Do you reckon ‘appeasement of [Lieberman’s] fanatacism’ will work for the good of ‘humanity’?

Maybe it's time you started looking closer to home for your demons.

stanley Jerusalem

Derek BLADES
April 28th, 2009 12:31pm
"April 27th posting"
Well at least you got the date right.

stanley Jerusalem

Si, N
April 28th, 2009 12:56pm
"Yehuda, good riddance to that rum bunch.
But to paraphrase; ‘the People of Palestine live too’"

Absolutely! They are called Israelis. The refugees caused by the 1948 War of Independence and left to rot by their caring 'brothers' are Jordanians, Syrians, Iraqis and Egyptians. It was their Egyptian 'Leader' Ahmed Shukairy who called them Palestinians in October 1964. Nobody had used the term prior to that apart from the Romans who invented it 2000 years earlier.

Original Tony

Hi Phil, I've been on a nice two week break; needed to get away from idiots like Carl, Blades, Si,N, George Laird nog al!

Good to see that the battle rages and that we are still backing the winning horse.

Logdon, you hit the nail on the head...it's all about Jerusalem 'the stumbling block' it's called in the Bible.

It's really nice to be back online to have a go at the creeps mentioned above.

Truthtriumphs

SIN.
"The people of Israel will never live in peace while denying the Palestinians the same".
I think you'll find that the murderous aggression is a one way street, from the Palestinian side towards the Israelis.
The world cannot get used to Jews at long last defending themselves, instead of obligingly allowing themselves to be slaughtered, which has been the norm since the time of the Bar Kochba revolt.
If, however, you mean that the Israelis have denied the Palestinians their own state, I think you'll find that this has been on the table several times, only to be rejected by the Palestinian/Arab leadership, even befors the re-establishment of the Jewish state, but, of course, the reason for that the Arabs are not interested in another Islamic state---they just want the end of the Jewish state. Hezbollah, Hamas etc. say so all the time, so you cannot deny it. Peace on their terms means the demise of Israel ie. an unconditional surrender by Israel.
By the way, those of us on this side of the argument are STILL waiting for the answer from you as to why no Palestinian state was created or even mooted when Jordan was in occupation of the West Bank between 1949 and 1967 when nothing and no-one prevented it.
Do enlighten us--- we are all waiting---- surely between you, Patricia, Blades, Hazlitt, Carl, George et al ONE of you can come up with an answer.
We are all eagerly waiting!

Jillsy

I have a completely different theory. All the countries who sat back during the holocaust felt so awfully guilty about what happened to the Jews (especially those who disliked the Jews), despite the fact that many europeans dies in WW2 as well, they work off their own guilt about the holocasut by saying, in effect: "See/ You guys are guilty of murder too and no bettr than us!!!(even though its a totally different situation!"

Sort of displaced expiation of guilt.

Well that's what I reckon anyway.

Jillsy

By the way, why should the Palestinian arabs have a state? Do they need the capacity to kill each other in a wider, officially designated space?

phil

Wagner thank you my boy that is the nicest thing you have ever said .)

thegrandmufti

Spot on Melanie.

The closet Jew haters who post here only reinforce your points.

Augustus

Jillsy, the Palestinian Arabs already have a state. It's called Jordania.

Augustus

Jillsy, permanent status to be determined through negotiation with Jordan perhaps?

Harvey

SiN

Is that the best you can come up with.

In the blue corner Liberman ,a right wing Israeli politician who calls for Israeli Arab citizens to swear loyalty to the state instead of passing round the sweeties and exercising their tongues in sheer delight every time a rocket lands on their fellow citizens. Incidentally US citizens all pledge an oath of loyalty to the state.

And in the red corner Bin Laden and his merry men ,vital stats to include New York ,Bali ,Madrid ,London ,Mumbai,Irak,Afghanistan and still counting .

And the winner is.....

Adam B.

Derek Blades, your post is a classic example of a Western liberal imposing his own mentality on those who think completely differently. It has nothing to do with the Ottoman Empire (any problems with the genocide of the Armenians Derek, as you wouldn't mind seeing it return?) and everything to do with the desire to create a global jihad to exterminate the unbelievers and impose Sharia across the globe. To you, as a western liberal,this seems far fetched. That is utterly irrelevant. To the jihadist, it is not far fetched, and is in fact a holy duty, and dying to bring it about makes you a shaheed, or "martyr." To you, no doubt being received by 72 virgins whilst killing unbelievers is far fetched. It is a genuinely held belief of the suicide bomber at the moment he detonates himself. So what you think is far fetched is neither here nor there. It is what the jihadist believes, and quite sincerely.

Please educate youself about this.

Yehuda

Jillsy: you've absolutely captured the essence of the "Arab/Islamic Middle East", and it's what's been happening day in, day out in Iraq and Afghanistan, among others. That is, wholesale, premeditated, cold-blooded murder of Arabs by...wait for it...fellow Arabs.
And, of course, the mandatory destruction of mosques if they happen to be frequented by the "wrong" Moslem sect.
It is precisely because the anti-Zionists are well aware of the nature of the "Arab Middle East" that they want to deliver the Jews into the hands of these wholesale murderers, hoping that they will solve the Jewish problem once and for all.

Carl

logdon - actually, the person that saved the crusie ship was a Welsh pensioner - all hail the welsh, champions of the free world, defenders of the west etc:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Cruise-Hero-Wyn-Rowlands-Fights-Off-Pirates-With-Deckchair-During-Attack-On-MSC-Melody-In-Seychelles/Article/200904415271792?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_4&lid=ARTICLE_15271792_Cruise_Hero_Wyn_Rowlands_Fights_Off_Pirates_With_Deckchair_During_Attack_On_MSC_Melody_In_Seychelles

Derek BLADES

Carl (27 April) sensibly asks "Do we really expect the BBC to list the nationalities of all the security details on ships passing through the Indian Ocean?"

What puzzles me is why some of the media actually mentioned their nationality. That was a rather unusual thing to have done. Were they trying to curry favour from the Israeli lobby?

John Edwards

Something of an irony here. Bret Stephens, a Canadian, took on the editorship of the Jerusalem Post "to help Israel" by his own admission. So he is hardly in a position to criticise anyone else in the West for taking an interest in the Israel/Palestine conflict. It merely irks him (and Melanie) that we are winning the argument.

Wagner

Look, I totally disagree with Israeli policy, but I state this unequivocally: I am no Jew-hatter.

David, Thailand

In regard to Abdullah's transparently facile arguments that the Palestinians and Jerusalem are at the core of the ME and therefore the world's problems, and his offer to Israel of expedient and temporary recognition by (wow!) 57 countries in return for slitting its own throat, I say show him the door. My father taught me it's best to keep your enemies at arms length, rather than let them get too close under the guise of friendship.

It is easy to be taken in by the hype of media and self-interest. The current Islamic agenda has little if anything to do with Palestinians eager to be suppressed by their own leaders, or a patch of land be it Jerusalem or Israel, and much or all to do with the vicious ideology of total submission, for the elimination of Judaism towards global domination through migration, media, exploitation of democratic niceties, and violence.

Sadly, our gutless leaders would rather sell out the future of civilised Man than concede that we are today at the front end of a religious conflict which, if ignored, will have many if not most of our children's children prostrate themselves five times daily whilst cursing our shortsighted complacency.

Btw, anyone know if the Messiah bowed in the presence of this king, too, or does the Presidential prerogative to humble himself kick in only for oil?

David, Thailand

Possibly, Wagner, but are you a Jew-hater?

;)

Yehuda

Si Ni: the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians live, but they have opted for a culture which has indoctrinated them to a point where they are just dying to die, murdering Jews in the process.
Their problem is not the Jews or Israel: their problem is their refusal to shake off their culture of blame, envy, racism, illusory "honour" which prevents them from recognising the impertive of compromise, and a failure to come to terms with modernity.
Can you lend them a hand to change?

Groovy Times

Blades, your mask slips once again to expose your latent anti-semitism - those nefarious Jews and their cronies are at it again aren't they? This time pulling the strings at the BBC for their own diabolical ends. (Though what they gain from doing so in this instance I'm not quite sure). I've said it once and I'll say it again - no doubt: Israel and the Jews are your moral antithesis, anything you don't like or are in disagreement with automatically falls at the feet of the Zionists. Classic stupidity. Your way of thinking will take it's place in history as another wave of irrational hatred and prejudice against the Jewish people.

phil

Wagner if you had said that months ago ,there would have been no arguments ,sometimes I disagree with Israeli policy too ,but it is only one opinion and the stance that has come across for months is that you are a Jew hater .I am happy to hear that you are not and I now hope you will use rational debate and criticism rather than what has been coming in the past .You would have received very different responses had you clarified your position earlier ,so I will assume that the mispelling was an accident .

phil

Simple really the chechen conflict is drowned out by a worldwide left wing liberal elite ably abetted by a like minded media who hate jews.you read any headline in any paper in this country or any other if Israel accidently hits a hospital in retaliating to a rocket attack they will be shrieking blue murder yet thousands of indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israel are lucky to make the back pages.If you want the chechen conflict to get a higher profile you should convert to Judaism but that will still put you on the wrong side of a sick world and even sicker reporting.The BBC's bias is so blatantly anti zionist I am amazed they have not shut it down.

phil

readers -I am phil and I did not write the last post at 5.22 on may the fourth and I hope Pete will find out who used my name I do not object to some of his conclusions but he must use his own name to publish them .