Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Tuesday, 22 August 2017

Telling the Truth About Antifa (videos)

Diamond and Silk slam the hateful violent fascism of the totalitarian left:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ1fZ0inuNc

Ben Shapiro has the measure of the group:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUXJh65aSoU

Monday, 21 August 2017

David Singer: Trump Must Question Abbas-PLO Commitment to Peace with Israel

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

He writes:

The planned visit to the Middle East at the end of August by President Trump’s Senior Advisor Jared Kushner, Special Envoy for International Negotiations Jason Greenblatt and Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategy Dina Powell, presents a wonderful opportunity for them to test the commitment of the PLO and its leader Mahmoud Abbas to concluding a peace treaty with Israel.

Abbas needs to confirm or reject his following remarks reported on 11 January 2014:
“Referring to Israeli demands to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, Abbas said, “This is a story that we have heard only in the last two years. We won’t recognize and accept the Jewishness of Israel. We have many excuses and reasons that prevent us from doing so.” 
Abbas was speaking during a meeting in his office with dozens of east Jerusalem residents. Israel’s problem is that the Palestinians know more than the Israelis about history and geography, he said.
“We talk about what we know,” he said. “We won’t accept the Jewishness of Israel. We are asking for the 1967 borders.”
Abbas and the PLO should be asked to amplify these remarks by written responses to the following questions:
1. On the Jewishness of Israel:
What excuses and reasons do you have for refusing to recognize and accept the Jewishness of Israel?
2. On the history of Palestine:
Do you accept the historical accuracy of the following statements in Israel’s Declaration of Independence?
“The land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and national identity was formed. Here they achieved independence and created a culture of national and universal significance. Here they wrote and gave the Bible to the world.
Exiled from Palestine, the Jewish people remained faithful to it in all the countries of their dispersion, never ceasing to pray and hope for their return and the restoration of their national freedom.”
3. On the geography of Palestine: 
I. Do you still claim that:
“Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.”
II. Did the boundaries of Palestine during the British Mandate encompass what is known today as Israel, Jordan, Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza?
III. Did 78 per cent of the British Mandate territory become the sovereign independent Arab State called ”The Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan” in 1946?
4. On asking for the 1967 borders:
Are you aware that:
I. the “1967 borders” are in fact the “1949 Armistice Demarcation Lines” delineated under an agreement signed on 3 April 1949 between The Government of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and the Government of Israel (Armistice Agreement)
II. Article VI (9) of the Armistice Agreement provided:
“The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto”.
If Abbas and the PLO can’t provide satisfactory answers – then Trump will be wasting his time trying to jumpstart negotiations – stalled since April 2014 – between Israel and the PLO – since those negotiations will assuredly end up going nowhere like previous PLO – Israel negotiations conducted during the last 24 years. Jailed PLO terrorists and families of deceased terrorists still receive life-time payments for murdering Jews – rebuffing Trump’s demand they cease.

Trump has shown no compunction jettisoning poor performers like Reince Priebus, Sean Spicer, Anthony Scaramucci and Steve Bannon who failed to deliver.

Abbas and the PLO could suffer the same fate if they show no genuine commitment to resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict after 50 years of relentless rejectionism.

Sunday, 20 August 2017

"It's Not Criticism of Israel — It's the Negation of Israel" (video)

In this snappy animation from J-TV, Eylon Levy sets out, eloquently and succinctly, why anti-Zionism is antisemitism.

 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isUT8lKHvXk

Friday, 18 August 2017

Would Brandis & pro-Burqa Bedfellows Expect An Animal To Peer Through a Grill of Mesh?

In the Australian Senate on Thursday, a bizarre-looking, frankly scary, figure with the look of a big black crow sits in the chamber, having been let in with scarcely a concern for security.

An assurance from an acquaintance  that the figure draped in what resembles a garbage bag was who she purported to be was enough to allow the figure to slip in, with no demand that she reveal her face.

The figure was, it soon transpired, indeed the controversial Senator Pauline Hanson, whose wrapping herself in a burqa stunt was performed in order to demonstrate just how lax security in the Australian Parliament is, and to request of Attorney-General George Brandis during Question Time an assurance that, given the terror threat, wearing the burqa be banned in public places in Australia.

As seen on video, George Brandis was not amused by Ms Hanson's stunt and unmoved by her request.  Not that Brandis was unmoved, mark you: his voice trembled and tears bid fair to trickle down his cheeks as he berated Ms Hanson for offending Muslims.

Not a word passed his lips about the offence the grotesque garment called the burqa gives to womankind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDf-5ygFXGk

Conservative columnist Andrew Bolt notes:
'First, Brandis — and Senators of the Left — savaged Hanson for wearing a burqa, but many voters would know these same MPs would have applauded the “courage” of a Muslim MP wearing that alienating sack.
Second, Brandis dangerously elevated the burqa as an important symbol of Islam — a “religious garment”.
Labor’s Penny Wong was as bad, praising the wearing of the burqa as a “sincere act of faith”.
That’s troubling.
Apologists used to claim the burqa was just a backward tribal thing that did not represent nice and sweet Islam at all. But now it apparently does.
Third, Brandis, voice cracking with emotion, then got to the heart of his problem with Hanson’s burqa, and this is not just troubling but alarming.
“It has been the advice of each Director-General of security … and each Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police with whom I have worked that it is vital for their intelligence and law enforcement work that they work cooperatively with the Muslim community,” he blustered.
“To ridicule that community, to drive it into a corner, to mock its religious garments is an appalling thing to do.”
Let me translate: do not mock or criticise the burqa or more Muslims will attack us.
Sorry, but I don’t want us cowed by such threats. The burqa is an abomination, and no threats should stop me from asserting this feminist truth.
Does anyone tell gay activists to stop dressing up as nuns or Christians may blow us up?
What Brandis has in fact said is that Muslims are dangerous, and the burqa represents them.
I hope Brandis is just exaggerating the extremism of most Muslims.
But I certainly know he’s kowtowing to a radical minority who want their women bagged and hidden from view.
That is unacceptable....'
Sure is.  But I'd make an additional point regarding these politicians' motives; they're out to catch Muslim votes, and (as with these pro-Islam wets representing the churches) if women's rights, welfare and dignity have to be sacrificed in order to achieve that aim, then so be it.

Leftist hypocrisy regarding feminism and Islam can be clearly seen in many of the comments on Bolt's article.

One earnest leftist tells those who agree with Pauline Hanson on this issue that they belong in Victorian Britain.  O, how laughable (that is, if it were not so very sad!) A male apologist for that misogynistic oppressive garment the burqa telling those who oppose it that they (and not he) belong in a time and place where women (like females under Sharia today) were in subjugation to patriarchal tyranny!

Inevitably, among the champions of burqa-wearing was Greens leader Richard Di Natale, that weaselly foe of Israel, pictured below (front centre) with some buddies.


As a doctor of medicine, Di Natale cannot be ignorant of the danger to unborn babies the wearing by pregnant women of a garment that blocks out sunshine poses: he has obviously heard of rickets and its causes.  I suppose he's happy with the advice that burqa-clad women compensate by dosing themselves with milk fortified with Vitamin D.

But what about the deleterious effect on women's comfort and eyesight that accompanies being encased in a stifling sack and forced to peer at the world through a grill made of mesh.

Perhaps Senator Hanson should borrow somebody's Fluffy or Fido next time, put its head in a burqa, and watch the reaction of senators to that.

I'll wager that they'll label as cruelty to animals (and rightly so) the cruelty they are content to have women endure.

(Unless, in the case of Fido, they recall something about Muslims considering dogs unclean, of course.)

Thursday, 17 August 2017

"Many Jewish Leaders Concentrate More on Vilifying Trump Than Securing and Promoting Their Communal Interests"

Leftist anti-Zionism in Chicago
Last week, an American nutjob (I can be fairly certain that he or she is American owing to the spelling used) left a hateful comment below one of the posts on this blog:
'Why do Jews hate free speech so much? For example, Mark Zuckerberg, a jew, will censor anything politically incorrect on Facebook and block you from posting for 30 days. Or what about the so called Holocaust? Why aren't we allowed to QUESTION if this "event" actually happened? There is zero physical proof the Holocaust happened and a guy got put in jail in Germany for 7 FUCKING YEARS simply for writing a 44 page book called "Did 6 Million Really Die?"
The younger generation is not fooled by the lies of the Jews. Generation Z, that is people under 18, hang out at free speech sites like 4chan where they discuss the TRUTH. The TRUTH is that the Holocaust never happened, and that Jews control our media, educational institutions, medical industry, big pharma industry, government, and religious institutions. Basically, America and the West is living under a Jewish totalitarian state that HATES free speech.
What is going to happen when this younger generation grows up and truly realizes how badly they have been betrayed by Jews? The Holocaust never happened but already a lot of them, kids only 13 or 14 years old, are saying they wish the Holocaust did happen. You Jews are digging your own graves and the younger generation are not going to tolerate you Jewish fascists any more. Don't be surprised if a new Hitler comes into power as early as 2024 and solves the JEWISH problem once and for all, a FINAL solution. You Jews brought this on yourselves, you fascist scum.'
I allowed the post to remain, as a testament to evil. A subsequent commenter left this witty and incisive message:
'I suggest that this poster pick up his local yellow pages, turn to the section headed "Psychiatrists," and phone for an appointment.'
Yet when I showed the original comment to a friend, who yields to none in his yiddishkayt and his championship of Israel, he amazed me by expressing some sympathy for the nutjob's views.

"Not the stuff about the Holocaust, of course," my friend said hurriedly, "that's just mental, but about the suppression of free speech.  Too many leftwing Jews try to stop others expressing fear over Islam in the West, smearing them as racists, that it gets people's backs up, and creates antisemitism." 

"Well, yes," I conceded, " I myself was threatened with reporting to the Facebook authorities for a supposedly politically incorrect post about mass Muslim migration into Europe and its possible consequences, unless I deleted it." 

I added the name of the person who had made the threat, an Australian Jew who has earned himself the nickname in some circles as Kim Jong-Un for his totalitarian attitude to what others should and should not be able to say online and his aptitude with the delete button.

"And there's this guy who heads the ADL in America who tries to prevent free speech by labelling people Islamophobes", went on my friend.  

"I know! I knnow!That awful Jonathan Greenblatt," I interjected. 

"Yes, well, that attitude stokes antisemitism," my friend replied.

 He may have a point.

The destructive and dangerous leftist-impulse that impels American Jewish "leaders" such as Greenblatt to make common cause with Jewry's enemies is well-captured by the great Isi Leibler in his latest column.  He warns that if this impulse goes on the community may find itself marginalised and on the political outer altogether, this, moreover, at a time when the Trump administration seems divided over Israel.  Inter alia:
' ....Many Jewish leaders concentrate more on vilifying Trump than securing and promoting their communal interests. They unashamedly abuse their Jewish institutional roles to promote far-left and liberal agendas, even labeling their opponents as anti-Semites to achieve their goals....
Leftist antisemites and Israel-haters in Los Angeles
The threats from the radical Right must not be tolerated. Yet despite the massive exposure they received, these fascist and racist groups represent a minute segment of society and their influence is marginal when compared to the leftist anti-Semites. The latter, who are vastly understated, promote the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement and have transformed campuses into anti-Israel and anti-Semitic platforms.
Moreover, there are Jewish community leaders who have allied themselves with far-left campaigns headed by vicious anti-Israel elements, arguing that anti-Israel agitators should not be excluded as partners in broader campaigns for social justice. There are also calls for BDS proponents and anti-Israel Jewish groups to be included in the “big tent.”
The worst organizational offender in this area is the Anti-Defamation League, which lost its credibility after Jonathan Greenblatt, a former aide to President Barack Obama, became CEO and used the organization to promote his liberal agenda. He is supported by leaders of the Reform and Conservative movements who uninhibitedly pursue partisan positions, as though their followers were all anti-Trump zealots. Their toleration of leftist anti-Israel agitators is frequently accompanied by public criticism of Israeli policies....
The ADL ...has been smearing conservatives as anti-Semites ... 
There are many ... examples of acceptance of “progressive” anti-Zionists and anti-Semites ....
It is surely not surprising that, in this environment, access to the U.S. administration by Jewish leaders is lower than it has been in over 50 years....'
 Read it all, here

Terror Tots in Training? (video)

A group of Israeli policemen on the Temple Mount are targetted by tots with toy guns as their presumed mother looks on in amusement and proudly captures the "fun" (8 August) on her mobile:

 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiZUXgV9qvs
 More here

Tuesday, 15 August 2017

Daffy Down Dhimmi

All heads down. Councillor Javid Iqbal sneaks a peak
An obscure rural locality transformed by the Industrial Revolution, Oldham is a struggling former cotton mill town in Lancashire, now part of Greater Manchester.

Long gone are the days when a Conservative parliamentary candidate (Winston Spencer Churchill, no less, in 1900 during the Boer War) could be returned to Westminster for Oldham.  (For its recent election results see here and here)

It elected council reflects the dominance of Labour and the left too.

At least one in four (and climbing) of Oldham's inhabitants is of south Asian, mainly Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslim, background.

Muslims predominate in certain areas of the town, and consequently, as their numbers have risen, so has their voting capacity in those areas and their political clout, with the first Muslim mayor of the town, Mr Ahmad Riaz, holding office from 2002-3.  Since then there have been several other Muslim mayors: Mr Abdul Jabbar (2005), Mr Shoab Akhtar (2008-9), Mr Fid Hussain (2014-15), Mr Ateeque Ur-Rehman (2015-16), and the present incumbent, Mr Shadab Qumer (2017-18).

And a good thing too, some might say, proving that integration is at last proceeding in a polarised town not particularly known for the mixing of its old-stock majority and immigrant-stock minority "communities". (In 2001 there were serious race riots in Oldham.  In 2005 fruitcake Nick Griffin of the BNP contested the Oldham West seat.  In 2012 the town, along with neighbouring Rochdale, was affected by one of the Muslim sex gang scandals that have plagued parts of Britain but about which it has been, and largely is, deemed politically incorrect to speak at length.)

It should go without saying that councils are elected to deal with local issues ("roads, rates and rubbish" in popular parlance), not matters of foreign policy, but from the Oldham council's archived press releases we learn that during Mr Hussain's mayoralty
'A delegation from Oldham has delivered a petition to 10 Downing Street calling for peace in Gaza.
Civic, faith and community leaders presented the 8,303 name petition to a government representative on Wednesday – it calls for an end to all hostilities and the recall of Parliament so the crisis can be discussed and humanitarian aid agreed.
The document, which could be signed via the council website [emphasis added] and at sites across the borough, stated: “We, the people of Oldham, call upon the United Kingdom government and the European Union to act now to protect civilians on all sides and stop the suffering in Gaza.”
National politicians are urged to use their influence to:
 Stop the killing - by achieving an immediate, and sustained, ceasefire
 Save lives - by ensuring access for the humanitarian aid needed by the people of Gaza
 Deliver peace and prosperity for the people of Palestine and Israel – by securing commitment from all parties to a process of dialogue leading to a just, long-term solution
Councillor Arooj Shah, Oldham Council’s Deputy Cabinet Member for Policy and Communications, led the delegation.
Cllr Shah said: “Oldham has a history of supporting innocent civilians who are suffering through war and conflict and I am proud that hundreds of people from across the borough have pledged their support by signing this petition.
“They are telling the government we want an immediate end to the violence in Gaza and that we want our politicians to use their influence to do all that they can to make this happen.
“This is a view shared by communities across Oldham, irrespective of ethnicity or faith.
“Hundreds of men, women and children have already lost their lives and this has to stop immediately.”
An event to discuss the conflict and how local people can make a difference is also planned before the end of September.'
The fact that the Left dominates in Oldham is certainly not irrelevant to the above.

Nor to this:
'Oldham Council has hosted a summit looking at how residents can help those suffering through conflict and prevent war damaging community relations in Britain.
‘Making a difference: A conference to discuss local responses to international conflict’ was held at the Queen Elizabeth Hall on Sunday, October 19 with more than 120 people in attendance.
The need for the conference was identified as a result of concerns from residents about the recent conflict between Israel and Palestine in Gaza. [Emphasis added]
Its aims were to increase the ability of borough residents to respond to international conflict in practical and peaceful ways which aim to stop violence, offer humanitarian assistance and encourage just and lasting peace settlements....'
Nor to the truly jaw-dropping initiative of the council on 27 July this year in the wake of the Manchester terrorist atrocity:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYmoCuUIQ2o

 "At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow" goes a line in a Christian hymn. For Oldham council, it seems, "At the name of Allah, every head shall bow."

"Daffy-down-dilly" begins the line  of a Mother Goose rhyme. Those silly women in particular have made geese of themselves.

They have bowed their blonde heads to a creed that considers persons of their gender inherently inferior. 

I wonder how many of them, and of the other councillors present, scoff at Christianity as patriarchal and superstitious (a not insignificant percentage of agnostics and atheists there, I'd wager), yet have allowed themselves to show obeisance to Islam.

These foolish geese have been the willing victims of da'awa

Why did they not insist on an ecumenical event instead of an Islamic supremacist one?

No doubt they have been hoodwinked by the imam's statement "The Quran says whoever kills a body unlawfully or for creating disorder in the land it is as if he has killed the entire of mankind" into thinking that Islam originated that precept.

It is, of course, a precept of Judaism, made long long before Islam adapted it:
“Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.”  (Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:9; Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 37a)
I seldom look at Pamela Geller's site, much less quote anything by her, but it's worth noting her comments on this extraordinary event in Oldham:
'The imam is parsing the quote taken from verse 5:32 of the “Holy Koran.” But he is ripping it out of context and perverting its meaning. The full passage in the Koran applies to the “Children of Israel,” not to Muslims. And it’s followed in the Koran by 5:33, which calls for “execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land” for those who “wage war against Allah and his messenger, or spread mischief in the land.”
At minute 1:56, the imam cites the daily prayer that curses Jews (those who have angered Allah) and Christians (those who have gone astray).
[Australian scholar of Islam, Anglican cleric] Dr. Mark Durie explains here:
"The Islamic daily prayers include repeated recitations of al-Fatihah, the first chapter of the Qur’an. In these few verses, every Muslim prays that they will be guided on the straight path, not like the Christians (‘those who have gone astray’) or the Jews (‘those who incur Allah’s wrath’). This simple contrast, that whereas Christians have lost their way, Jews have fallen under the anger of Allah, neatly summarizes Islam’s attitude to the Jews. The celebrated commentator Ibn Kathir, whose translated tafsir is popular among English-speaking Muslims, explains the distinction in his discussion of al-Fatihah:
 These two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer should beware of so that he avoids them. … the Jews abandoned practicing the religion, while the Christians lost the true knowledge. This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews, while being described as ‘led astray’ is more appropriate of the Christians. Those who know, but avoid implementing the truth, deserve the anger, unlike those who are ignorant. The Christians want to seek the true knowledge, but are unable to find it because they did not seek it from its proper resources.
This is why they were led astray. We should also mention that both the Christians and the Jews have earned the anger and are led astray, but the anger is one of the attributes more particular of the Jews. Allah said about the Jews, ‘Those (Jews) who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath’ ([Sura] 5:60). The attribute that the Christians deserve most is that of being led astray, just as Allah said about them, ‘Who went astray before and who misled many, and strayed (themselves) from the right path’ ([Sura] 5:77).
Here Ibn Kathir is explaining that, whereas Christians are merely ignorant, Jews know the truth but deliberately reject it, thus thus making themselves objects of Allah’s wrath."
 Despite the inherent misogyny, homophobia and assorted hateful and repugnant verses within the Koran, our unquestioning and uncritical councillors meekly bow their heads as the imam leads them in prayers.
 Unbelievable.'
 Unbelievable indeed. But not in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

Monday, 14 August 2017

David Singer: Trump, Israel, Jordan and PLO Need to Define Palestine’s Boundaries

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

He writes:

President Trump’s attempt to end the Jewish-Arab conflict could well hinge on Israel, Jordan, the PLO and Trump defining the boundaries of former Palestine under the 1922 Mandate for Palestine (Mandate territory).

Defining the territory within which the competing claims of Jews and Arabs must be resolved is a first prerequisite to ending a conflict that has raged for the last 100 years.

False claims still continue to be made that Israel comprises more than 75 per cent of the Mandate territory whilst Judea and Samaria (West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza comprise the remaining 25 per cent. The latest such misleading claim appeared in the following article: 
“On the 14 of May 1948, the state of Israel was declared. By the time Israel and the Arab States signed the Armistice agreement in 1948, Israel had gained control over 75 per cent of mandate Palestine.”
The article further asserts that the 1967 Six Day War was: 
“the beginning of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and annexation of East Jerusalem, territories which together made up the remaining 22 per cent of Mandate Palestine.”
The article fails to inform readers that:
1. In 1946, 78 per cent of the Mandate territory became a sovereign independent Arabs-only, Jew-free State called the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan – renamed Jordan in 1950
2. Israel is only 17 per cent of the Mandate territory
3. Judea and Samaria (West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza comprise the remaining 5 per cent of the Mandate territory.
Israel, the PLO and Jordan have each separately acknowledged this geographically-accurate territorial subdivision of former Palestine- as the following statements make clear:
1. Abba Eban  – Israel's former ambassador to the United Nations – said in Newsweek on 2 December 1974: 
"Palestine comes into modern history as a region extending on both sides of the Jordan, comprising the present sovereign territories of Israel and Jordan and the administered areas of the West Bank and Gaza. Of this original Palestine, 80 per cent became an exclusively Arab domain through the separation of Trans-Jordan from Palestine."
2. Yasser Arafat – the first PLO Chairman – told the New York Review of Books on 25 June 1987:
"Jordan and Palestine until 1945 were one State, actually. After the Second World War, Churchill himself said, “This is Transjordan, and this is Palestine. Before that Jordan was an emirate …completely part of Palestine”
3. Transjordan’s King Abdullah addressed the Arab League meeting in Cairo on 12 April 1948: 
“Palestine and Transjordan are one, for Palestine is the coastline and Transjordan the hinterland of the same country”
Many more similar statements exist from Jewish, Arab and other sources.

If Trump concludes that a second Arab State – in addition to Jordan – is required in the Mandate territory – then Jordan – not only Israel, Judea and Samaria (West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza – should be included in determining that third State’s possible location.

However such a second Arab State – if governed by the PLO – the sole spokesman for the Palestinian Arabs since 1974 – would pose an existential threat to the continued existence of both Jordan and Israel as sovereign independent States – since Article 2 of the PLO Charter expressly states: 
“Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.”
One Jewish State and two Arab States in the territory of the Mandate will exacerbate – not resolve – the conflict.

Jordan – 78 percent of the Mandate territory – must be part of any territorial resolution.

Territorial negotiations – like gridiron and basketball – can only be played out within clearly designated boundaries.

Defining Palestine’s boundaries is indeed the key to Trump succeeding where all others have failed.

Sunday, 13 August 2017

A Day Beside the Danube (video)

A Hungarian television crew introduces us to the sights of Vienna:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GgPZCArdAw

Now, what was it that pro-Israel Jordanian opposition leader Mudar Zahran warned of less than two years ago regarding Europe's "refugee" influx?  Ah, yes!
"This is only the beginning ...This is going to change Europe's culture ..."
And that isn't going to be good for Europe's Jews.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OgncR6cewc

Meanwhile, notes ANSAmed:
'The number of people suspected of Islamic radicalization in France has risen by 60% in two years, reports Le Figaro.
The daily said that there are currently 18,550 cases within the Fichier des Signalements pour la Prévention et la Radicalisation à Caractère Terroriste (FSPRT), which collects reports from the prefect’s office, the police, gendarmerie and the public. Managed by the interior ministry, the system was set up in March 2015 and during the period of the Paris attacks in the same year there were 11,400 people listed.'

Friday, 11 August 2017

"The Enemy Has Changed, The Enemy is More Sophisticated" (video)

"I'm a servant of the Lord," explains British businessman Gerald Ronson, a Jew "in my soul and in my heart".  His two oldest grandchildren live in Israel.

From 2:20 in this J-TV video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffNvF8QR3g) he tells what compelled him to found the Community Security Trust (CST) and from 3:20 he declares his belief that were Jeremy Corbyn to become prime minister antisemitism in Britain would increase:


That antisemitism has become more brazen in Britain than at any stage since the Second World War is seen in this article by the great Melanie Phillips regarding Corbynista Jackie Walker's shameful one-woman show at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival.

Thursday, 10 August 2017

How About Cutting This Off at the Source, Stephen Sizer?

One of Stephen Sizer's very latest Facebook rants:


And a comment on it by the frequently eyebrow-raising Dean Cozzens:


Why don't you give your antisemitic Friends their marching orders, Stephen Sizer?

Tuesday, 8 August 2017

Onwards Christian Zionism!

By  Emanuele Ottolenghi, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and Michaela Frai, a research associate there, a disturbing article on Iranian influence in South America:
'Across the region, Iranian preachers and their local enablers have presented themselves as advocates of human rights and social justice to gain footholds among disenfranchised and marginalized communities in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico, and Peru. Relying on allies such as Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, Iran has established forward operating bases for the spread of their propaganda.'
 The article focuses first on the visit to São Paulo, Brazil of Ayatollah Mohsen Araki, 'who openly calls for the “annihilation of Zionism” and has promoted friendly relations with the Taliban':
 'Araki’s visit is yet another demonstration of how the Iranian regime is busy exporting its own brand of radical Islam, in order to radicalize Shi’a expatriate communities while spreading Tehran’s influence in the region. 
The hosts for Araki’s lecture in Brazil on July 29th were none other than local Hezbollah-linked religious centers that promote Iran’s Islamic revolution. Guests from across the continent included Latin American and Iranian clerics who are disciples of Mohsen Rabbani, Iran’s former cultural attaché in Latin America and the mastermind of Argentina’s 1994 AMIA terrorist attack that left 85 dead at a Jewish center.
Since the 1980s, Tehran has worked diligently to create the infrastructure for both overt and covert operations in the Western Hemisphere. Araki’s visit is part of a well-orchestrated plan to indoctrinate and radicalize existing Shi’a communities while seeking new acolytes among local sympathizers of Iran’s political agenda.'
The authors then describe the baneful impact of Peruvian indigenous rights activist and convert to Shi'a Islam Edwar Quiroga Vargas, founder of several 'Inkarri-Islam' Shi'te cultural centres Inkarri-Islam, and the antisemitism inherent he espouses and promotes.  Alarmingly,
'Quiroga is not an isolated phenomenon, and not only because since 2011, he has opened five more cultural centers across Peru and overseen nearly twenty-five students who have traveled to Iran to attend Rabbani’s religious programs in Qom. Iranian cultural centers and their Iranian-trained local converts promote a similar radical agenda across Latin America and, indeed, globally....
Ultimately, Iran threatens the national security of the U.S. and its allies with its spread of anti-Zionist hatred and Islamic revolutionary rhetoric to the Western Hemisphere. The networks established by Iran do not just promote hate speech; they are intimately involved in criminal enterprises such as narco-trafficking to generate tens of millions of dollars to fund Hezbollah and other Iranian clients....' 
Read the entire article here

All the more reason, then, to esteem and encourage the Christian Zionists in the region.

To quote from a recent article regarding Christian Zionism:
 'Outside of the United States and Western Europe, Pentecostal Chris­tianity has witnessed massive growth since 1980. The advance of Pentecostalism in the Global South constitutes one of the biggest religious developments in the late twentieth century. Brazil and Nigeria have seen the rate of Protestant identification double or triple in recent decades. Many new churches and denominations preach a version of the prosperity gospel that combines individualistic and nation-based blessings. Christian Zionism is often central to Pentecostal understandings of nation-based blessings.
This is true for Renê Terra Nova, currently director of ICEJ in Brazil. Born into a Catholic family, Terra Nova converted to Pentecostal Christianity at the age of twenty and began to attend the Baptist Theological Seminary of North Brazil. In 1990 he broke away from his first church and founded First Baptist Church of the Restoration in Manaus. In his teaching and more than a dozen books, Terra Nova emphasizes “family restoration,” a concept that is flexible enough to relate both to Brazilians’ personal families and to healing God’s family, composed of Jews and Christians. As his website explains, Terra Nova takes as a sacred duty his ministry’s “work in spreading love for Israel and the true root of our faith: ­Jerusalem.” Terra Nova’s literal connection to ­Jerusalem through the massive “caravan” tour groups he leads underpins his emphasis on the prosperity gospel. Through “showing the way to ­Jerusalem,” Terra Nova has “raised the spiritual level of the people, showing that poverty, misery and ruin are stigmata of the past and that the great truth is prosperity: a right of every child of God.” He claims to lead a congregation of 75,000, with church branches throughout central and northern Brazil.'
 Remember, though, one of their leaders, Dr Luis Fernadez Soares of Guatemala, 'expressed concern" at the 2017 Herzliya Conference in June
'regarding the challenges faced by South American Christians who openly express solidarity with Israel in countries “governed by leftist leaders,” who have close relations with Arab nations as well as Iran and the Palestinians.
Solares suggested that evangelical institutions increase their cooperation across countries where they are represented, in addition to ramping up ties with Israeli embassies and local Jewish communities. Israel should foster closer relations with evangelical communities in Latin America and “ask them to pray for Israel and place Israeli flags in their congregations'.
Read more here

Meanwhile, from Bethlehem, one who has long been doing his utmost to undermine Christian Zionism round the globe and who is, incidentally, no stranger to Teheran and to the London studios of Iran's propagandistic Press TV, has been posting numerous photos of scenes from his recent trip to the West Bank (he's just flown back to the UK).  He's gone for glorious Technicolor in most of them, as with the mural portrait below of the murderous old rogue Arafat.

(Hero of yours, Mr Sizer???):



Flatters the old rogue, eh?:


 But one sequence of photos is not in colour:


Unusually, I'm glad to see and say, the vicar has not attracted mere yes-men with this particular propagandistic exercise.  Certainly, there are the usual suspects, who have hastened to share the Ashrawi quotation, but one commenter boldly differs (at the time of posting this no response from Sizer on there has been forthcoming):
"This wall is to stop terror attacks on civilians while we all wait for genuine negotiations. While we wait, should Israel just accept the murder of its people? Yes, the wall inconveniences some Palestinians, but it also saved Israeli lives. Is Palestinian inconvenience a higher priority than Israeli lives?? What an immoral proposition!"
And another commenter, a Facebook friend of Sizer, contends:
"I don't recall black people calling for the eradication of white people, or black people continuously bombing, kniving, shooting and threatening white people. I think apartheid was something very different. Yes the wall is a tragedy. The situation though is very complex. You may see oppression of a suffering people. Others see necessary self protection of a vulnerable state.Remember the holocaust."
 A person with an Arabic name replies: 'Umkhonto We Sizwe (“Spear of the Nation”)'

To which this answer is given:
"Nope. Totally different thing! That was an armed uprising against a pre existing apartheid. Israel meanwhile is trying to protect itself from nearly a century of threat to the jewish people and half a century of denial of its political right to exist."
The commenter continues, taking on several Sizerites, who are unused to dissent on Sizer's thread and who include a woman who declares that "Zionist Jews" were responsible for the Holocaust:
"I quite agree that Israel AND the Palestinians (And surrounding Arab nations) need to do a lot more and a lot better ... BUT ... it is language like "apartheid" here, which does absolutely nothing for either the real historic apartheid of black people, OR for the complex issues facing Israel and the Palestinian people....
Bus bombs, knife attacks, rocket launches, decades of denouncing the state of Israel's right to exist, vitriolic hatred of the Jewish people, repeated statements of surrounding nations to wipe the state of Israel from the earth, ... yes ... the core issues are complex....
[M]y point here was merely that this is not apartheid.
Also, in regard to Hamas and the PA - they may well have verbally recognised the state of Israel's right to exist, but they have done very little to cease the hostilities...
Palestinians are not merely segregated for racial purposes. Not at all. They are segregated for security purposes with very real and very tangible reasons all proven in his with very real and very tangible reasons all proven in historical fact. Apartheid ONLY segregates for racial purposes... The situation is about security first and foremost. And while the "optic" may focus on the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis, there needs to be a widening of that optic to see the treatment of Israel by surrounding Arab nations - who themselves first mistreated those same Palestinians as well and are themselves culpable for the continuing threat towards Israel and the continuing mistreatment of the Palestinians."
Seems to me that that friend of Sizer's should be on the "Board of Reference" of Sizer's so-called "Peacemaker Mediators" instead of the dyed-in-the-wool anti-Israel types who loom large there.

Monday, 7 August 2017

David Singer: Trump, Israel, Jordan and Egypt Can Redress Obama-PLO Debacle

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

He writes:

President Trump continues to ponder the way forward to end the 100-years-old conflict between Arabs and Jews – as negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) – stalled since April 2014 – show no sign of being resumed.

Negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority under the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap - endorsed by Russia, the European Union and the United Nations - were consigned to the graveyard of history after PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas unilaterally disbanded the Palestinian Authority on 3 January 2013.

White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner has been quoted in an off-the-record discussion saying: 
"there may be no solution".
There may however be a solution should Jordan and Egypt – Israel’s immediate neighbours – agree to negotiate with Israel to end the Jewish-Arab conflict.

Filling this potentially explosive negotiating void with Jordan and Egypt will require Trump to first articulate:
1. the parameters and
 2. The fact-based framework
within which such new negotiations should actually be undertaken

The parameters should be restricted to resolving the competing Arab and Jewish claims to sovereignty in the remaining 5 per cent of the territory of the former Mandate for Palestine – Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza – where internationally-recognised sovereignty still remains undetermined (“the disputed territories”).

Conflicting narratives paralysing previous negotiations must be replaced by Trump with a different fact-based framework underpinning any new negotiations  including:

1. Jordan and Egypt:
· signatories to peace treaties with Israel in 1994 and 1979 respectively and
 · the last Arab States to occupy the disputed territories between 1948 and 1967
are the best Arab interlocutors to determine with Israel the allocation of sovereignty in the disputed territories.
2. The PLO Charter calling for the destruction of both Israel and Jordan disqualifies the PLO from participating in such new negotiations.
3. Hamas – designated as a terrorist organisation by Israel and banned in Jordan – must be excluded from these new negotiations.
4. The new negotiations are being undertaken to resolve the “Jewish-Arab conflict” that began in 1915 – not “the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” that began in 1948
5. Sovereignty in the territory of the Mandate for Palestine has already been granted to Israel (17 per cent), Jordan (78 per cent) – with sovereignty in Judea and Samaria [West Bank], East Jerusalem and Gaza (5 per cent) still undetermined.
6. The Jewish people is legally entitled to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in the disputed territories by close settlement under Article 6 of the 1922 Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter  subject to the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish communities living there being safeguarded.
7. Misleading and deceptive language referring to the disputed territories as “occupied territory” or “Occupied Palestinian Territories” fail to recognise that it was Jewish occupation in the disputed territories that was first abruptly ended in 1948 after every single Jew then living there was forcibly driven out by six invading Arab armies and not allowed to return until after the Six Day War in 1967.
Trump has a hard row to hoe in formulating this critical framework  but do it he must if there is to be any hope of advancing peace in the Middle East.

Such Trump-defined parameters and fact-based framework need to then be mutually agreed by Jordan, Egypt and Israel before formal negotiations can commence.

Any fanfare trumpeting yet another round of negotiations without such tripartite agreement will inevitably see those new negotiations being eventually buried alongside the graves housing the failed Oslo-Roadmap and stalled Israel-PLO negotiations.

Trump, Israel, Jordan and Egypt working together can certainly succeed where Obama and the PLO ignominiously failed.

Friday, 4 August 2017

Sizer Says: "I Am Always Made to Feel Very Welcome"

Our old friend the ex-vicar of Virginia Water has landed in the land he loves to slur, and is now in Bethlehem.



Surprised Israel let him in?

In answer to one of his followers who expressed that very thought, our old friend has paid unwitting tribute to the strength of Israeli tolerance and forbearance:



I'd like to share with this Israel-delegitimiser and so-called "Peacemaker Mediator," who seems to evince no sympathy whatever for Jewish links to ancient holy places (remember this?), the words of a rationally-minded  Jerusalem-based rabbi from the Reform tradition on Tisha b'Av this very week:

'Twenty five hours of darkness...
Twenty five hours of memory...
Twenty five hours of recalling how they poured out our blood...
At this hour, we hold in our hearts centuries of Jews persecuted just for being Jews ... tortured, scorned, and driven to pitiless deaths.
And we remember the Temples...
One thousand years of devotion...
One thousand years of encountering God on earth in the heart of Jerusalem.
These are facts of history ... facts that today are tragically denied by much of the Palestinian leadership.
They say that the Temples are a matter of “belief”.
They refuse to accept that centuries before Islam, Jews worshiped God in beautiful structures on that noble mount for more than a millennium.
They will not acknowledge the slaughter, the destruction, and the gruesome losses that Jews experienced.
Know this:
Deniers of history do not genuinely seek peace.
Those who seek to delegitimise the other, and the facts of the past, have little familiarity with olive branches.
There is one thing even more painful than the memories of this day:
That on this day of memory, there are those who seek to deny that our memories have any validity at all.
And so we fast. For the past ... and the present...
'


(Emphasis added)

Wednesday, 2 August 2017

Ben & Gideon Mark Their Diaries: Australian Israel-haters to fly in the big guns

Gideon Levy in full flood
Hot on the heels of the BDS Conference that has just taken place at the University of Sydney, with the usual suspects in place, comes notification by Israel-bashers and -haters Down Under of another chin-wagging onslaught against the Jewish State.

Under the auspices of AFOPA (the Australian Friends of Palestine Association), it's due to take place in Adelaide in late November:
'This year, 2017, marks important anniversaries pertaining to the issue of Palestine. It is the 100 year anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, 100 years of Australian involvement in Palestine, and 50 years of Israeli Occupation. The 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement set the scene by carving up the region into the modern Middle East, and the 1956 Suez Crisis highlighted the geo-political importance of the region. Collectively these significant events have influenced the destiny of the Palestinians and the inhabitants of the region, shaped international and Australian involvement in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).
This three-day symposium seeks to examine Palestine and the West: History, Contemporary Realities and Challenges Ahead.
The focus of this academic symposium will be Palestine in the context of the West, and not the West in the context of Palestine. The central theme will be Palestine, its past, present, and its future.
Historical interventions and their impact on Palestinians will set the scene of the theme of this symposium. Experts in the field will examine the impact of these interventions on contemporary realities within the Palestinian territories and among Palestinians wherever they are found. The symposium will examine Palestine in context of the MENA region from both micro and macro levels. It will cover international and regional developments and their impact on Palestinians within the Palestinian territories, within Israel, those exiled or living in neighbouring countries, or the Diaspora. The impact of 50 years of Israeli occupation, or almost 70 years of Palestinian displacement since 1948 will also be addressed.
 The challenges ahead for Palestinians and the prospects of a just and peaceful resolution will be discussed, as will possible solutions to resolving this core international conflict. 
The Symposium will be inviting a number of Australian and international guests, each scholars or experts in their fields, including:
  Mr Gideon Levy, acclaimed journalist with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, who will deliver the keynote annual Edward Said Memorial Lecture;
    Dr Mohammed Shtayyeh, member of the PLO Negotiation Team
    Dr Peter Slezak, University of New South Wales, Independent Australian Jewish Voices
    Dr Ahmad Shboul AM, University of Sydney
    Mr Ben White, writer, journalist, researcher and activist
    Ms Samah Sabawi, acclaimed Palestinian-Canadian-Australian writer, commentator, playwright and PhD candidate.
    Further speakers to be listed as they are confirmed.[Emphasis added]
As reported by Rachel Baxendale in The Australian on 19 July, 
A smiling Lynch looks on ...
'The University of Sydney has distanced itself from a controversial Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions conference being hosted by its Department of Peace and Conflict Studies, after members of the Jewish community labelled the gathering an “anti-Israel hate-fest”.
The department is holding the conference on July 28-29 in conjunction with lobby group Sydney University Staff for BDS and a range of pro-Palestinian organisations. Conference events include a speech on Palestinian rights under Donald Trump by US Campaign for Palestinian Rights executive director Yousef ­Munayyer, a paper by pro-BDS academic Jake Lynch on the pro-Israel influence in Australia, and a panel discussing anti-Semitism with pro-BDS Jewish speakers Peter ­Slezak, Marcello Svirsky and Vivienne Porzsolt....
...and students take their seats while Hage awaits his cue
NSW Jewish Board of Deputies chief executive Vic Alhadeff said the obsessive focus on BDS by the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies ignored the reality that it does nothing to advance a resolution to the conflict.
 “Then there is the irony that the organisers have scheduled a discussion on working with the Jewish community for a Saturday, automatically excluding ­observant Jews and demonstrating how tokenistic any attempts to understand the Jewish community actually are,” he said.
A spokeswoman for the University of Sydney said the institution was strongly committed to academic freedom and to being a forum for debate on a wide range of issues. “The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions policy is not a university-endorsed policy.”'
 If you're a glutton for punishment (Professor Ghassan Hage for one is a very boring speaker), you can read and see more about the conference here

Al Beeb Defends Women's Rights & Western Values (video)

Um, not.

In some parts of the Muslim world women are severely beaten, even killed, by their male overlords for daring to throw off that abominable tent-like garment, the burqa.
 
In northern lands women who wear it deprive themselves of sufficient sunshine, thereby subjecting their offspring to the risk of rickets.

Western women who have worn this cloth prison as an experiment have reported how stifling and uncomfortable it is.

In several Middle Eastern countries Muslim women, when given the chance, and when not subject to reprisals from Islamic misogynists, have been glad to dispense with it.

In Saudi Arabia and in Iran brave female activists have rid themselves of surplus coverings in public, to strike a blow for female human rights.

In Turkey, women who appreciate the freedoms initiated by Ataturk have joined mass demonstrations against imposition of a conservative dress code.

Yet the BBC, which knows these things well enough, has seen fit to make the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUVWVBrPsTM

No wonder that BBCThree, which made it, is copping flak on Twitter.


Yet there are always the Leftist apologists for Islamic values that reflect the mindset of the BBC itself. 

What a weird lot of feminists these BBC types are.  

As with the ABC here in Australia:

Patriarchy rules  OK.  Just as long as Islamic, not western, patriarchs are doing the ruling.

Tuesday, 1 August 2017

David Singer: Australian Labor Party (ALP) Policy Change Boosts PLO Aim to Destroy Israel and Jordan

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

He writes:

The Resolution of the NSW Labor Party Conference urging the next Federal Labor Government to recognise “Palestine” (Resolution) has given a boost to the political objectives of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) whose Charter calls for the destruction of Israel and Jordan.

Prior to the Resolution being passed its prime mover and shaker – Bob Carr – former Australian Foreign Minister, NSW Premier, Chairman of Labor Friends of Israel turned Patron of Labor Friends of Palestine, tweeted:


Carr’s “no ifs or buts” echoed similar demands passed by the Arab Heads of State (including the PLO) at Khartoum on 1 September 1967 following the Six Day War:
“no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country”
No “conditions” for Carr maybe – but a few headaches for the Federal Australian Labor Party if it is stupid enough to swallow Carr’s poison pill.
1. The Resolution does not identify the location of “Palestine”.
Negotiations between Israel and the PLO extending over the last 23 years have failed to come up with an answer.
Recognising a phantom State is an exercise in futility.
The fact that 136 other member States of the United Nations have gone down this same road has only encouraged the PLO to adopt increasingly more intransigent and rejectionist positions opposing the peaceful resolution of a conflict which has raged for 100 years.
Australia should not get sucked into this mindless vortex.
2. When the Khartoum Conference was held – Article 24 of the PLO Charter then declared:
“This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area. Its activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields.”
An independent Arab State had already been established in 78 per cent of former Palestine in 1946 and called “the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan” (renamed “Jordan” in 1950).
A second Arab State in former Palestine had been proposed in the 1947 UN Partition Plan and rejected by the Arabs. It could have been created at any time between 1948 and 1967 with the stroke of an Arab League pen.
 What possible justification is there for the Australian Labor Party unconditionally recognising such a second Arab State in former Palestine – in addition to Jordan - when the proponent of that State – the PLO – was not even claiming sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza in 1967?
3. According to Carr recognition is needed to save the two-state solution being buried in settlements.
There already is an existing two-state solution in 95 per cent of former Palestine – Jewish Israel and Arab Jordan – underpinned by their 1994 peace treaty.
A PLO-governed State located in the remaining 5 per cent between Israel and Jordan represents a threat to both Jordan and Israel - since the PLO considers Palestine with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate to be an indivisible territorial unit.
There are no Jewish settlements in Gaza following Israel’s disengagement in 2005.
Jewish settlements built on no more than 5 per cent of the territory of the West Bank are legally sanctioned by article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter.
“Buried in settlements” is vintage Carr-overkill.
Hopefully sanity will prevail in the Federal Labor Party.

Two peoples – Jews and Arabs – need two States – not three.

Sunday, 30 July 2017

Sophie, Israel & A Lyons Share of Spleen

Bet that makes her happy!
The ABC's overtly leftist and unashamedly biased-against-Israel Middle East correspondent Sophie McNeill has found a champion in the form of The Australian newspaper's Israel-bashing John Lyons. 

To quote the Guardian Down Under , in "his Middle East memoir Balcony Over Jerusalem" Lyons claims  
'he was subjected to consistent pressure from the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) while based in Jerusalem for the Australian for six years, as were the ABC’s Sophie McNeill and the veteran ABC correspondent Peter Cave....
In 2015, AIJAC sent a file on McNeill to Jewish members of the ABC board, including the then chairman James Spigelman, and this file claimed among other things that she was unsuitable because she had said “one of the saddest things I’ve seen in my whole life is spending time filming in a children’s cancer ward in Gaza”.
The then ABC managing director Mark Scott ordered a detailed response from corporate affairs, which he took to the board.
“I will not cower to the AIJAC,” Scott said, according to Lyons.
Scott was also forced to defend McNeill from attacks at Senate estimates after the dossier was sent to key parliamentarians.
“Before this reporter set foot in the Middle East, there was a campaign against her personally taking up that role,” he said in response to a question from senator Eric Abetz.
“I am saying that she is a highly recognised and acclaimed reporter … she deserved that appointment and she needs to be judged on her work.”
In a letter to the board, Scott wrote: “The article [by AIJAC] demonstrates to Sophie McNeill and the ABC that her every word will be watched closely by AIJAC and she starts on the ground with this key interest group sceptical. We are all aware she will be under even closer scrutiny now. As they seek to influence our coverage, this is a pre-emptive ‘shot across the bows" .....'
Taking aim at Australia's steady pro-Israel foreign policy ("illogical and unhealthy") and at AIJAC and its director Dr Colin Rubenstein, Lyons asserts
“For more than 20 years, Australians have read and heard pro-Israel positions from journalists, editors, politicians, trade union leaders, academics and students who have returned from the all-expenses-paid Israel lobby trips. In my opinion, no editors, journalist or others should take those trips: they grotesquely distort the reality and are dangerous in the sense that they allow people with a very small amount of knowledge to pollute Australian public opinion.”
(What his opinion is of trips sponsored by APAN, the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, is not reported.)

Inter alia, Dr Rubenstein has told the Guardian:
“We did put together a public document explaining why we thought Sophie McNeill … was an inappropriate choice for Middle East correspondent for the taxpayer funded ABC, with its statutory obligations of impartiality.
Everything we do – critiquing media stories; contacting editors, politicians and journalists and explaining our point of view to them; writing our our letters and op/eds; making complaints – are absolutely normal elements of deliberation and debate in a democratic society.
I would call on those who oppose our views, including Mr Lyons, to engage with different views in a democratic, tolerant and constructive spirit, rather than demand, as he appears to be doing, that those who disagree with him be silenced or suppressed.”
He's  absolutely right, of course.

The ABC is Australia's equivalent to the BBC: a national broadcaster upon which objective reporting is incombent in return for public funding, in the ABC's case not out of a licence fee but out of taxes.  But, again like the BBC, it is in the grip of the arrogant repulsive Left, and it promotes its leftwing agenda at will, thumbing its nose at critics and packing the panel and the audience to "flagship" programs such as Q&A (its version of the BBC's Question Time) with a surfeit of leftists.  In fact, if anything, its current affairs output and what it chooses to report and comment on is more brazenly leftist than the BBC's.

Sophie McNeill came to journalism and the ABC from a background of political activism and a determination to continue to pursue that activism.  This is how, six years ago,  she described her view of a journalist's role:
"If you just try to frame stories from the point of view of the people who are really suffering in a situation, be it in Lebanon, if you re hanging out in a Palestinian refugee camp, [or] in Gaza you re hanging out, you know, at the children’s cancer ward. One of the saddest things I’ve seen in my whole life is spending some time filming in a children’s cancer ward in Gaza. I just think if you just – if you look at a situation and you just – yeah, I guess just try to spend time with the people who are – who really don t have any power and it is hard, you know, for them to have a voice. Then that’s, yeah, that’s the kind of journalism I want to do.... Everyone knew what was happening in Gaza ... you saw all the horrific videos ... a lot of people died ... there are no excuses any more..."
 See here

Two years ago AIJAC's Ahron Shapiro observed:
"Any reporting by an ABC employee, including McNeill, is required to follow the following standards:
4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality.
 4.2 Present a diversity of perspectives so that, over time, no significant strand of thought or belief within the community is knowingly excluded or disproportionately represented.
And also
 4.4 Do not misrepresent any perspective.
4.5 Do not unduly favour one perspective over another."
In a substantial article, he traced and analysed historic broadcasts by Ms McNeill that reveal her pattern of blatant partisanship in reportage concerning the Middle East.

He also drew attention to her pro-Palestinian activism.

For example:
'[I]n 2013, McNeill, along with prolific pro-Palestinian photographer Richard Wainwright were the only journalists presented to speak at the Human Rights in Palestine Conference at the ANU [Australian National University] ...
[W] hile living in Beirut in 2007, McNeill filed a story with the notorious anti-Israel website Electronic Intifada.
 Here, the content of the story she filed, which was about Lebanese mistreatment of Palestinians, was in itself not problematic. What is a problem, however, and what should have given ABC pause when choosing McNeill for her current job, is why McNeill chose to work with a website whose raison d’être is to increase popular support for the elimination of Israel and routinely publishes material justifying Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians.
Finally, in 2009 ... and again in 2013, McNeill initiated online campaigns to raise money for her “dear friend” and Gaza fixer, Raed Al Athamneh. Raising money to help someone you work with through a crisis is not necessarily inappropriate. But for a journalist to adopt the Palestinian narrative in their pitch for donations most certainly is.
 For example, she wrote “most of Gaza’s residents are refugees who used to live inside Israel’s borders, but were forced out when the country was created in 1948″.
This revisionist historical narrative that Israel forced out all the refugees – language used by her mentor Pilger – represents an endorsement of the Palestinian narrative that Israel is entirely responsible for the refugee problem, ignores the fact that the vast majority of Palestinians fled and were not forced out and ignores the war that was launched against Israel by the Arab nations and Palestinians who rejected partition.
In this essay, she also made an allegation that Israel “collectively punished” the Palestinians of Gaza, describing the blockade of Gaza as a means of punishing the Strip’s residents who support Hamas. [Emphasis added]
She initiated a fundraising campaign for Raed again in 2013, according to her friend and Australian Gazan Patrick Abboud and an appeal she posted on ABC Triple J Hack’s Facebook page.'
He observed:
'Her reporting does not show a clear record of separating her media career from her activism..
 And there is little doubt that her activism continues and influences her reporting in terms of how she frames stories, particularly about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. ...
What makes this matter even more serious is the fact that the Jerusalem bureau is undergoing changes. While until now there were two ABC Middle East reporters (most recently Hayden Cooper and Matt Brown) as well as some support crew, the ABC says that it is making Jerusalem a Video Journalist bureau later this year. That move, it would appear, would give McNeill substantially more autonomy than previous Middle East correspondents have had.  
The onus now lies on O’Neill [sic] to demonstrate that ABC management was not irresponsible in making the appointment – given her self-described dedication to frame stories from the point of view of the people who are “really suffering” (in her lexicon, the Palestinians) – and whether she can possibly fulfil the statutory obligation of an ABC correspondent to present news with due impartiality and to be fair to all perspectives.'
 Is it any wonder, given her continuing partisanship, that advocates of fair and objective reporting were, and continue to be, dismayed by her appointment to the ABC?