Once HRW Is Relying On ICERD To Define What Racial Discrimination Is, They Must Then Include the Very

spiked-online.com

The strange reluctance to see Jews as victims

Even the sight of three emaciated hostages was not enough to shake the lie that Jews are oppressors.

by Brendan O'Neill

There was actually something worse than moral indifference following the release of these cadaverous men – there was moral deflection. Anti-Israel activists clogged up social media with images of released Palestinian prisoners. None looked anywhere near as sickly as the three Israelis, yet the message was as clear as it was sinister: ‘Never mind those Jews, look at these Palestinians.’ Like 21st-century Lord Haw-Haws, they endeavour to distract the world’s attention from the crimes of a fascistic army.

The BBC couldn’t resist implying a moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel. Following the release of the three Israelis, it said there are ‘concerns about the condition of hostages on both sides’. Hostages? It is a scandal that our public broadcaster is referring to Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, some of whom are guilty of acts of extreme violence, as ‘hostages’. It later walked back its comments, issuing an on-air correction. CNN, too, seemed incapable of focussing on the shocking condition of the three Israelis. Released Palestinians have also looked ‘emaciated’ and ‘weak’, it rushed to say. You can almost hear the thought process: ‘People are sympathising too much with Israel – quick, dig out an image of Palestinian pain.’

It’s like our opinion-forming classes have an instinctual aversion to empathy for Israelis. It makes them nervous. It threatens to unravel their morally infantile narrative about Israel being the most beastly of states and the Palestinians being the most oppressed of peoples. So they fiercely police public compassion, ensuring that even the dystopic image of Jews starved by sworn Jew-haters is countered by a reminder that Palestinians have a hard time, too. There is a ‘strange reluctance to see Jews as victims’, in the words of Hadley Freeman. Jews, alone among minority groups, are ruthlessly deprived of victim status, in this case to sustain the cultural elites’ self-flattering narrative about problematic Israel and benighted Palestine.

The sick reality is that there are people out there who will have seen those three stricken Jews not as brutalised human beings deserving of our solidarity, but as an unwelcome intrusion into the childish morality tale about Israel-Palestine. As a vexing reminder that things are more complicated than we are told. As stark, gaunt proof of the crimes against humanity committed by Hamas, which were the source of this war that our cultural elites shamelessly blame on Israel. This is how intense Israelophobia has become in influential circles – they are now willing to sacrifice Jews to ideology, to discourage solidarity with wronged, ravaged Israelis in order that their moral narrative might be protected against the impertinence of nuance. In the past, people looked the other way when Jews were dehumanised because they wanted to save their skins – now they do it to save their fake virtue.

Source

After last weekend’s Black Lives Matter demonstrations, a heart-warming picture emerged on the internet. A kind-faced, suit-clad, elderly white man with a sign saying, ‘Racism is a virus, we are the vaccine’, sat deep in thoughtful conversation with a young Black woman. The image went viral on Facebook and Twitter garnering millions of views and hundreds of thousands of likes and shares. An apparent beacon of hope against racism.

One minor issue. That kindly, elderly man? His name is Jim Curran, an Irish nationalist and regular attendee at meetings of the Far Right/Left crossover group, Keep Talking. This extremist organisation was recently exposed by the CST and Hope Not Hate. They detailed how extremists from across the political spectrum (ex-Labour members Elleanne Green and Peter Gregson, Gill Kaffash and Tony Gratrex formerly of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and convicted Holocaust Denier Alison Chabloz and former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke compatriot, James Thring) met to obsess over antisemitic conspiracy theories: from the ‘Jews did 9/11’ to outright Holocaust denial.

…Curran’s identity been brought to my attention by antisemitism researcher, David Collier, I tweeted at two top accounts who were sharing the picture to explain Jim Curran’s background.

Their response? To block me. And not just me, but everyone raising the issue.

Meanwhile, when I tweeted the woman in the picture, Rosie Smith, she said: “He is an activist and a beautiful man. Spoke some real deep truths”. And then – chillingly – “His words brought me to tears. He said the genocide the news [sic] went through, was nothing on slavery and what black people endured and are still enduring”.

It seems Jim Curran had literally been dripping Holocaust denial into her ear, at an anti-racism rally.

Ms Smith went on to say: “I…judge him on our convo and from his vibe and his work. The jews are not innocent, #israelosnotinnocent they deal with mad racism!”. And also blocked me.

Despite the fact that concerns about Mr Curran were now flowing around social media, a series of prominent media and social justice organisations were more interesting in promoting the romantic narrative that than the messy truth. The Labour group, Momentum, posted the picture on their Facebook page with the caption “more of this please” and a leading figure in Amnesty UK shared it. Pro-Europe organisation, Best for Britain, defended their decision to promote the image on their Facebook page (to my utterly jaw-dropping disbelief) saying:

“Some people have identified that the old gentleman in the photo is a holocaust denier. We believe that this fact makes it even more important to share this image. It is worth applauding the fact that these two people from different generations have found common ground, and had a friendly conversation in the middle of a day of violent protests.” (My italics).

A common ground of Holocaust denial and antisemitism? No. I don’t think that’s to be applauded, Best for Britain, not really, no.

…At a time when there is so much positivity about tackling racism in this country, this whole series of events shows something deeply rotten. We’re at the stage where actual Holocaust Denial is dismissed or downplayed for ‘the greater good’ or because it’s inconvenient to ‘the narrative’. The romance of the picture more important than the truth. Something as a campaigner with Labour Against Antisemitism I’m all too familiar with. Corbyn fraternising with the IRA and Hezbollah? Mere details. Jeremy is a good man, a life-long anti-racist.

It’s easy to understand why antisemitism is so attractive to the modern Left. It pits ‘rich white Jews who benefit from the Holocaust and oppress the Palestinians’ at the top of the pile against poor, dispossessed people of colour. It makes Jew-hate edgy, striking back against ‘the man’. Making it a zero-sum game, that Jews can’t win.

Calls have been made to incorporate Britain’s colonial exploits and Black History into the mainstream history curriculum. I wholeheartedly agree. But going by recent days, the history of the Jews and antisemitism needs to be right along beside it.

The right of return

I was privately asked about a post implying that Israel is refusing to allow the right to return to Palestinians that have been displaced even though Jews have had the right of return for a while now. I thought I’d answer in a post.

Let me address this by first of all pointing out that Palestinians currently do have the right to return… to the Palestinian-controlled territories. If an American Palestinian wants to move to Ramallah, Israel has no say in the matter, meaning in effect the Palestinians have the right of return to those parts of the historical Land of Israel.

Which means that when Palestinians keep talking about the right of return, they’re not talking about the right to return to their own self-governed territories, they’re talking about the right to return to the territories which make up the State of Israel. The Jewish Virtual Library has a good summary on how in international law, the right of return only applies to individual nationals, it’s not an obligatory right that has to be granted to entire groups of people. That means that every country which does grant a right of return to an entire group of people does so because it chooses to, not because it is compelled by international law. In other words, it does grant this right when it believes it’s in the best interest of the country or of the population the country is meant to serve. When Palestinians demand the right of return not to the parts of the land that they govern, but to the parts which make up the State of Israel, it’s equivalent to country X demanding that country Y will grant automatic citizenship to descendants of country X instead of country X giving those people a right of return to its own borders. That’s something that doesn’t exist anywhere in the world. And, in fact, if country X did try to make such a demand, country Y would likely see this as a threat, because of the way that a big concentration of nationals loyal to another country had been used along history. This is how Hitler used the people of German descent who were living in Czechoslovakia to take over Sudetenland (and later using this initial split of the country to take over all of Czechoslovakia), or how Russia has used the substantial population of Russian descent living in the eastern parts of Ukraine to demand those territories.

To make the current situation clearer, I’ll add that many Jews were originally from territories that are now under Palestinian control (meaning they were displaced from those places, not from the parts of the Land of Israel which today make up the Jewish state). Those Jews don’t have a right of return to those parts of the Land of Israel either, they can’t return to Gaza, they can’t return to areas A and B of Judea and Samaria, they can’t return to Jewish communities that existed on the eastern side of the Jordan river and which were ethnically cleansed by the Jordanians as a part of Jordan’s actions against Israel during the latter’s War of Independence (despite reaching a peace agreement between Israel and Jordan, signed in 1994). To be accurate, even within the State of Israel, Jews don’t have a free right of return to every place they used to inhabit. In antiquity, all of Israel used to be Jewish. Even in later times, there still were Jewish communities in places like ShefarAm, Nazareth, Pekiin and Huseifa, all places that were originally Jewish towns. They are today all under Israeli rule, but the Jews don’t get to return there. The demographics of these places had been irreversibly changed.

Certainly when we look at borders between countries, two states for two people where each gets to self-govern means the right of return is and will remain limited geographically for both groups.

If the right of return won’t be limited, it’s clear which of the two groups will become the minority, losing in practice the right to self-determination. Because it has to be emphasized that the right to self-determination is not considered a right that is fulfilled when a group of people is a minority. As long as a group is a minority, its power to determine its own fate is dependent, either (in a democracy) on the good will of the majority (for example, in the 1920′s and early 1930′s in Germany, Jews who made up 0.8% of the German population didn’t get to decide who will lead their country, they were dependent on the majority of Germans voting against the Nazis… and we all know how that turned out) or it’s dependent on the minority’s use of force to override the majority (which is the case in Syria, for example, where the Alawi minority reigns over the Sunni majority through the use of force. We all saw how bloody that got during Syria’s civil war, and nobody wants that for Israel). If the Palestinian right of return were to be applied without limitation to the entire Land of Israel, it would be the Jews who would become a minority and lose the right to self-determination.

This is why the push for the right of return of Palestinians to all of Israel is considered such a red flag by a majority of Jews. Because it’s understood to be a tool in destroying the State of Israel serving as the one place where Jews get to have self-determination, and to deny Jews this universal right is discriminatory in nature, and therefore considered by many to be antisemitic. This is one of the reasons why so many, including actual governments, have declared the BDS movement (which calls for the boycott of Israelis and Jews) antisemitic, because one of its three stated goals is a return of Palestinian refugees to all of Israel. Note here that the one of the founders of BDS is Omar Barghouti, a Palestinian man living in Israel thanks to his marriage to an Israeli Arab. He states he wants a right of return of Palestinian refugees, while ignoring the right of Jews to return to Israel. He knows exactly what this means for Jews.

More than that, most conflicts around the world aren’t resolved through a mutual and unlimited right of return. When two countries were in a conflict and many people were displaced on both sides, conflicts were usually resolved through eventually agreeing that there was a population exchange, and whatever harm befell one country and its population, it was more or less balanced off by whatever harm befell the other country and its population. A population exchange is a bad thing, since it points to many people being displaced, but once it has occurred, recognizing it can allow both sides to move on. The Israeli-Arab conflict could have been resolved like that long ago. About 800,000 Arabs were displaced in Israel during its War of Independence (most of them because they fled the war that their own side started), about 850,000 Jews from Arab countries were expelled from those countries following Israel’s victory in that war, and most of the Jews displaced from Arab countries ended up in Israel. Agreeing that this was an exchange of populations, that Israel would take care of the displaced Jews, and the Arab countries would take care of the displaced Arabs (presumably by creating a new Arab state on the parts of the Land of Israel that Egypt and Jordan had occupied during Israel’s War of Independence) could have been a resolution for this conflict over 70 years ago. In fact, Israel agreed to this when it told the UNWRA in 1952 it assumes all responsibility for the Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries. Here’s a mention of Israel taking that responsibility in an excerpt from an essay looking into how UNWRA today discriminates in favor of the Palestinian refugees in comparison with how all other refugees worldwide are treated by UNHCR (for example, mentioning that refugees treated by UNHCR have no right of return):

If this conflict wasn’t resolved through accepting the mutual population exchange, if the Arab countries didn’t create a Palestinian state on the lands occupied by Jordan and Egypt, if the Palestinians today continue to insist on the right of return even as they gain citizenship in other countries, and they insist on a right of return specifically to the territories that now make up the State of Israel, it’s because they’re not interested in a resolution. They know that applying the Palestinian right of return to all of the land will effectively wipe out Israel as the one Jewish state, and that’s what those who are advocating for it are really interested in.

Here’s a statement by a UN official from 1952, convinced that the Arab states are purposely using the Arab refugees as a political weapon against Israel:

Here’s what a leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization said in a 1977 interview he had with a Dutch newspaper:

“There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are part of one people, the Arab nation. Look, I have family members with Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are one people.

Only for political reasons we do carefully maintain our Palestinian identity. Indeed, it is of national importance for the Arabs to insist on the existence of a Palestinian people to oppose Zionism.

Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is only there for tactical reasons.” - Zuheir Mohsen, PLO, March 31, 1977

Eclipse From The ISS

Bester Rapper Deutschlands.♥️

Der beim türkischen Erstligisten Antalyaspor spielende israelische Fußballer Sagiv Yehezkel (28) ist am Sonntag festgenommen worden, weil er nach einem Torerfolg mit einer Aufschrift auf einer Bandage seine Solidarität mit den von der Terrororganisation Hamas festgehaltenen Geiseln bekundet hatte. Die Staatsanwaltschaft in Antalya habe eine Untersuchung wegen "Aufstachelung zu Hass und Feindseligkeit" gegen Yehezkel eingeleitet, sagte der türkische Justizminister Yilmaz Tunc.

Tunc sprach nach Angaben der Nachrichtenagentur Reuters von einer "hässlichen Geste in Unterstützung des israelischen Massakers in Gaza". Tatsächlich hatte Yehezkel eine weiße Bandage auf dem Handgelenk ins die Kameras gehalten, auf die er handschriftlich "100 Tage, 7.10." geschrieben hatte, ergänzt um einen Davidstern. Er meinte damit offenkundig die Terrorattacke der Hamas am 7. Oktober, seit der 100 Tage vergangen sind. Über 100 Personen, die damals verschleppt worden sind, befinden sich immer noch in der Gewalt der palästinensischen Terroristen. Weltweit wurde der Geiseln mit Demonstrationen und Solidaritätsaktionen gedacht, auch in Wien.

Der israelische Nationalspieler wurde auch von seinem Klub gefeuert. Wie Antalyaspor auf seiner Internetseite mitteilte, wurde der Fußballspieler mittels einer Entscheidung des Klubvorstandes gekündigt, weil er mit seiner Äußerung "gegen die nationalen Werte unseres Landes gehandelt hat". Auf Yehezkels Tor verzichtete der Klub freilich nicht. Der Israeli hatte in der 68. Minute den Ausgleich zum 1:1 im Heimspiel gegen Tranzonspor erzielt und rettete seiner bisherigen Mannschaft einen Punkt.

Das Vorgehen gegen Yehezkel löste große Empörung in Israel aus. "Schämt euch, türkische Regierung", schrieb Ex-Premier Naftali Bennett auf Twitter. Er wies darauf hin, dass nach der "einfachen Geste" Yehezkels in der Türkei "die Hölle los" sei. Der Spieler sei nämlich zunächst vom türkischen Fußballverband verurteilt, dann von seinem Team suspendiert und gefeuert worden. Schließlich habe die türkische Polizei ihn noch festgenommen und verhört. Der Fußballer, der zuvor unter anderem bei Hapoel und Maccabi Tel Aviv gespielt hatte, war erst im Vorjahr in die türkische SüperLig gewechselt.

Israeli soccer player, Sagiv Yekhezkel, who plays for Antalyaspor, a Turkish team, dedicated a goal to the Israeli hostages today. 

On his wrist he wrote “100 days ✡️ 7.10” 

Following the show of support:

1. He was condemned by the National Football Association.

2. His team first announced that he was suspended and then said he would be fired.

3. Turkish police arrested him and interrogated him. He is accused of “supporting the  Israeli massacres in Gaza and inciting the public,” per Turkish media.

US President Biden Leads International Tributes to Holocaust Victims and Survivors on Yom Hashoah

U.S. President Joe Biden signs the American Rescue Plan, a package of economic relief measures to respond to the impact …

US President Joe Biden led international leaders in paying tribute to the victims of the Nazi Holocaust with a long and personal message for Yom Hashoah, the annual day of commemoration which began Wednesday night.

“The history of the Holocaust is forever seared into the history of humankind, and it is the shared responsibility of all people to ensure that the horrors of the Shoah can never be erased from our collective memory,” Biden wrote in an April 4 proclamation.

To prevent “a tragedy like the Holocaust from happening again,” Biden continued, “we must share the truth of this dark period with each new generation. All of us must understand the depravity that is possible when governments back policies fueled by hatred, when we dehumanize groups of people, and when ordinary people decide that it is easier to look away or go along than to speak out.”

Meanwhile, he’s going to resume sending American taxpayer dollars to the Palestinian Authority so that their “Pay to Slay” coffers are full, and restart funding to UNRWA so that they help teach Palestinian children to hate Jews.