A Friend Of Palestine Is Not An Enemy Of Israel

Thanks Fahid. Someone who is “pro-Palestine” is therefore necessarily “pro-Israel”, be that implicit or acknowledged.

Before the UN vote to accept Palestine as a member state, I wrote the then foreign Minister, Mr Rudd that the best thing we could do for our ally, Israel, is to help it see the truth of this. By raising the status of Palestinians above that of Israels punching bags, we do not affect Israel, other than to invite them to see what we see in the potential of this much-abused population.

The Labor Party instructed Mr Rudd that Australia was to abstain. The vote failed. Shame. Sorry Israel, we failed you. Now we're stuck with national-security politics ourselves. Vicious cycles that never end are the psychopath politician's, e.g. Mr Yahoo, dream. The peace-process was meant to last forever.

An excellent article by Fahad Ali.

On 17 July 2015 The Age published an article by the humanitarian  Labor MP Maria Vamvakinou entitled ‘Why the ALP should recognize Palestine”:  http://www.theage.com.au/comment/why-the-alp-should-recognise-palestine-20150717-giefx6.html

I attempted to post the following comment but ut was not published by The Age which has an appalling record of pro-Zionist bias and censorship:

"Excellent article by Maria Vamvakinou. What will it take before Labor starts  to behave decently over Palestine? Some horrifying statistics about Apartheid Israel and racist Zionism:

(1)  90% of Palestine has been ethnically cleansed;

(2) 2 million Palestinians  have been killed by violence (0.1 million) or violently-imposed deprivation (1.9 million) since 1936 (Google “Palestine Genocide”) ;

(3) of 12 million Palestinians, 6 million are forbidden to step foot in their own country, 4.3 million Occupied Palestinians  exist without human rights as hostages of genocidally racist Apartheid Israel and only 14%, 1.7 million Palestinian  Israelis, are permitted to vote for the government ruling all of Palestine albeit as Third Class citizens under the  race laws of democracy-by-genocide Apartheid Israel  ;

(4) the 36% of Israeli subjects who are Occupied Palestinians cannot vote for the Government  ruling them;

(5) avoidable deaths in Apartheid Israel’s neighbours – all of which Apartheid Israel has attacked and occupied) total 24 million;

(6) Apartheid Israel has 80-100 nuclear warheads (with the material for 200 more) as compared to the US (4,800),  Russia (5,700), France (290),  China (250), the UK (120), Pakistan (100-120), India (90-110), North Korea (6-8) and Iran (zero) (Google “Arms control Association”);

(6) Australian Israeli dual citizens are free to commit war crimes as foreign fighters  in the Middle East, such crimes including the shooting, tasering, torturing, killing, robbing, kidnapping and bombing Australians in addition to large-scale violation of Australia’s border security by forging passports;

(7) according to Fairfax’s Phillip Dorling the US shares intelligence on Australians with Apartheid Israel.

Decent , anti-racist  Jewish and non-Jewish Australians utterly reject the pro-Zionist, anti-democracy Lib-Labs (Coalition and Labor Right), vote 1 Green and put the Coalition last."

Another naive understanding of the problem of Israel's occupation and genocide from another labour apologist, Fahad Ali. All sound, no fury and definitely no analysis.

If you are so humanist and have a dream why is it not a single, secular state, call it what you may, where equality for all replaces an open air concentration camp that is easily, and regularly, decimated by weapons made in the US and Isarael. Any other time and the Gaza is a tightly embargoed ghetto of misery.

And netanyahooo is not alone. He follows in the footsteps of other zionist leaders who's over-reaching aim is to remove all Palestinians from the land and end any claim they have to a land stolen. There may be a peace movement in Israel but it has come to nought so far and while the zionist project hinges on US suport it does not look like the act of state terrorism, so well invigorated in Israel, will be diminished in the near future.

And the typical labour apologist will say that the duly elected Palestinian government of Hamas is really a terrorist group - but not Israel! Fahed quotes an anguished Israeli and says their security concerns are legitimate as he tries to find two belligerent sides to the Nakba. But the history he neglects to talk about says there is only one villian in this sorry peace and that is Israel and its brutal occupation of Palestine.

Australian governments, both liberal and labour, have never wavered in their support for Israel. Fahad is merely providing future labour governments with the figleaf they need. Maybe next he will start a 'Labour for Refugees' group - but, again, he will only be wringing his hands in pious contemplation of labours many failings.

@ Mazelman

Mate! You just make things up, don't you?

Show me how you concluded that Labour's strategy is to now court the 'Arab and Muslim' vote? What electorates? What percentage is 'Arab or Muslim'? Why aren't they already voting Labour?

Only someone defending zionist israel can be so opportunistic and yet so convinced about their own rightness. (Hint: you can't be, or shouldn't be, both.)

"Much less did I imagine that these cranks would seek to undermine the bipartisan commitment to a two-state solution with a reckless, poorly thought-out and frankly foolish motion urging the immediate recognition of a state of Palestine."

Joe Bullock  - Labor senator for Western Australia as quoted from The Australian 24th July

@swarmi, you are dead wrong. You can't simply dismiss comments as being 'right-wing' as a way of squirming out of an argument.

As for your last missguided assertion "What has religion got to do with it?" let me reproduce an article titled "The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a war of religion, not territory" that was published a couple of years ago in the left-wing Haaretz newspaper to ensure you don't entertain any more donkey illusions:

"Anyone who has ever suffered from a sore throat and fever and didn’t get well within two days surely went to see a doctor. The doctor took a light and tongue depressor, saw a pair of red, swollen tonsils with white dots, and concluded that the patient had a throat infection. And even though such infections are usually viral rather than bacterial, the doctor prescribed antibiotics to be on the safe side. The patient took them (or didn’t), and usually got well in a few days.

If not, the doctor could try a different antibiotic, and then a third and a fourth, until the patient died of old age. But any reasonable doctor would stop and ask himself: What’s wrong here? Why is the patient not getting any better despite my wonderful treatment?

The answer is logical: a mistaken diagnosis. That would explain the lack of response to the treatment, and the frustration.

I wouldn’t have bothered you with this introduction about bacterial throat infections (somewhat anachronistic, I know, since nowadays there are throat cultures) if we didn’t find ourselves in this very situation in the diplomatic sphere. The war between Jews and Arabs in the Land of Israel has been going on for more than 100 years, and most onlookers, analysts and mediators are convinced that it’s a territorial conflict: Jews and Arabs are fighting over the same piece of land, so the logical solution is to divide the land.

This is a reasonable assumption, and therefore (and also for other colonialist reasons), Churchill came to the Land of Israel/Palestine in 1922 and divided the land. He gave the three-fourths of it east of the Jordan River to the Arabs, while the rest remained a British Mandate for establishing a Jewish national home.

The Arabs weren’t enthusiastic, and their response has gone down in history as the 1929 Arab riots. After that, the British sent additional committees that proposed additional divisions of the land, based on various maps. But every effort ended in a bloodbath: waves of terrorism, “incidents” (aka riots), wars and intifadas. Some 23,000 Jews were killed and more than 100,000 Arabs, but no statesman ever stopped and asked himself why every attempt at dividing the land merely increased the war and bloodshed. The answer, of course, is a mistaken diagnosis.

The conflict isn’t territorial (even though it has many territorial symptoms, and we fight over every acre and every house), but a war of religion, a clash of ideologies. And such a conflict can’t be solved by drawing lines on a map. To Muslims, the Land of Israel will forever be waqf land – land that is part of a Muslim religious trust. And even David Ben-Gurion, who wasn’t “religious,” appeared before the Peel Commission in 1937 and brandished a Bible as the source of our absolute right to the Land of Israel.

But despite this, all the “peacemakers” among us keep prescribing the same medicine of “dividing the land” for the wrong disease. Even today, the only diplomatic plan on the table is negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, yet this is the one that has failed time and again.

Next week, a plan called “Two states for two peoples on two sides of the Jordan – is this alternative feasible?” will be placed on the negotiating table. Granted, this will happen only at a conference organized by Professors for a Strong Israel, which will take place at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem. But the conference will hold an in-depth discussion on the following topic: When the “Arab Spring” reaches Jordan, that country will become a Palestinian nation-state. Thus even if the conflict isn’t solved, at least a new factor will have entered the diplomatic equation, which is currently stuck in a blind alley."

@Mattq, from you this piece of oft-touted, politically correct, moral equivalence crying out to be debunked.

Both the Bible and Koran hold equally immoral passages.

The crucial difference is that the Bible today is purely descriptive while the Koran is widely accepted by Muslims as being prescriptive, categorically condemning all dis-believers as infidels or dhimmis. And by the way Christians and Jews don't massacre dozens of people every SINGLE day in the name of Allah.

Mazelman quotes Andrew Bolt and Joe Bullock as credible authorities.

He has also, on previous occasion, been happy to link to "Whitelaw Towers", a 'white nationalist' site, to support his claims.

Now it seems he reckons Israel should get all the land west of the river Jordan.

Wow.