Thursday, July 23, 2015

I see ISIS flags fly in Jerusalem (where Jerusalem light rail stops)

Inside the Pisgat Ze'ev shopping mall (from an earlier visit): Arabs eating in kosher Jewish restaurant
The Arab village Shuafat seen today from a friend's apartment in Pisgat Ze'ev. The security wall separating the areas can be clearly seen. The building in the middle was flying the ISIS flag.
Original post was October 2014, but has been updated 23 July 2015 following a BBC Panorama programme about the Jerusalem Light Rail. See update at end.

Pisgat Ze'ev is an area just 3 miles north of the centre of Jerusalem that in so many ways characterises the Israeli-Arab conflict and the widespread misunderstanding of it in the rest of the world. Pisgat Ze'ev was an area that played an important role in servicing the second Jewish Temple but was a deserted wasteland under the illegal Jordanian occupation between 1948 and 1967  (interestingly in 1930 much of the land had been bought by Jews).  However, Pisgat Ze'ev is now an important suburb of Jerusalem (and is almost a city in its own right), with over 50,000 residents (an increasing number of whom are Arabs). The new Jerusalem light railway starts from Pisgat Ze'ev. Despite all of this international anti-Semites 'experts' who have never been to Israel laughably classify Pisgat Ze'ev as "an Israeli settlement in occupied East Jerusalem".

Despite what the international anti-Semites 'experts' say, any eventual 'final borders' of Israel will include Pisgat Ze'ev as evidenced by the fact that the infamous security wall snakes around Pisgat Ze'ev separating it from the sprawling Muslim Arab village of Shuafat. Unlike "Jewish" Pisgat Ze'ev - where any additional housing plans draw the wrath of the international community - Shuafat continues to grow without the need for any planning permission; and unlike Pisgat Ze'ev  where Jews and Arabs have equal rights, no Jewish civilian can even safely step foot in Shuafat, despite it technically being under Israeli control.  Bizarrely, although Shuafat looks a lot like Pisgat Ze'ev in many respects (except the houses are actually larger and often more luxurious in Shuafat) it is officially classified as a 'Palestinian refugee camp' by the United Nations.

Even though many residents of Shuafat are employed in Jewish businesses in Jerusalem, during the 2000-2004 Intifada residents of Shuafat celebrated each suicide attack against Israeli civilians with wild celebrations and fireworks (something I can personally testify to seeing). The same happened this summer when residents celebrated Hamas rocket attacks against Israel even though some were targeted at Jerusalem. Occasionally residents of Shuafat enjoy shooting at residents of Pisgat Ze'ev. Despite all of this the Jerusalem municipality in its wisdom decided to route the Jerusalem light railway with a stop in Shuafat to show that it wanted to serve all residents of Jerusalem. Although many residents of Shuafat use the train, this act of faith has been 'rewarded' with constant attacks on the train at Shuafat resulting not just in frequent loss of service (and millions of shekels wasted on repairs) but in Jews being too afraid to travel in it. Also, during the summer gangs of young thugs from Shuafat came up to Pisgat Ze'ev armed with knives. Little of this anti-Semitic Arab violence and intimidation is reported in the Israeli media, let alone the international media.

After sunset security patrol comes to monitor what is happening in Shuafat from outside my friend's apartment
All of that provides the background to what I witnessed today. Sitting in a friend's apartment in Pisgat Ze'ev overlooking Shuafat we could see an ISIS flag flying on one of the buildings. Nobody was particularly surprised by this. Nor was anybody surprised when after sunset a border security jeep stopped outside the house with three IDF soldiers (two Jews and a Druse) who had come with night vision binoculars to monitor what was going on in Shuafat. After providing them with coffee and cake they told us they were aware of ISIS flags in the village (I understand they had already been in to have them taken down). I also learned that it was soldiers from this unit who had found - hiding in Shuafat - the commander of the Hamas brigade who had ordered the kidnapping and murder of the three Israeli teenagers in June.

This was just an ordinary day in Pisgat Ze'ev.

In contrast, later the same evening in Tel Aviv's Rabin Square I was able to share in the joyous Simchat Torah celebrations (I hope to post more about that)
Simchat Torah celebrations in Tel Aviv this evening


Update: opposite the ISIS flag
Update: the current Intifada in Jerusalem

UPDATE 23 July 2015 Following the Panorama Programme on 20 July I posted the following self-explanatory complaint to the BBC:

This entire programme was a disgracefully biased and antisemitic piece of propaganda presented by an 'as a Jew' moron who failed to do the most basic research (see e.g. here). Not only was the programme promoting the idea that Jews living in the suburbs of Jerusalem had no right to travel into the centre of the city (a bit like arguing that HS2 would lead to Londoners colonising the North) but it also ignored the fact that the light rail actually services all the Arab villages along its route (which is actually only 6 miles total).

One of the stops is Shuafat, an Arab village which has provided more terrorists and suicide bombers than any other. The Jerusalem municipality, in its wisdom, decided to route the railway to stop in Shuafat to show that it wanted to serve all residents of Jerusalem. Although many residents of Shuafat use the train, this act of faith has been 'rewarded' with constant attacks on the train there resulting not just in frequent loss of service (and millions wasted on repairs) but in Jews being too afraid to travel in it. Many Jews who live in Pisgat Zeev (the next stop out) are no longer able to use the train because of the constant threat of violence against them and so have to travel to the city by other means. So, contrary to what the programme said it is actually Jews - and only Jews - who are stopped from using the train.
And here is the typically pathetic BBC response:
Thank you for contacting us about ‘The Train that Divided Jerusalem’, we have received a wide range of feedback about this programme. In order to use our TV licence fee resources efficiently, this response aims to answer the key concerns, but we apologise in advance if it doesn’t address your specific points in the manner you would prefer.

We raised your concerns with the programme makers, who responded as follows:

“Adam Wishart is an experienced filmmaker who was commissioned to make a programme about Jerusalem for Panorama, with the new light railway and its passengers at its heart.

The programme took care to explain Adam’s background; that he is a British Jew, his grandparents had campaigned for the state of Israel and that as a teenager he’d travelled to Jerusalem to take part in a Zionist education camp.

The film was largely observational in style with Adam spending time with two main contributors, Rivka Shimon and Baha Nabata. Throughout it he spent time with them at events, on the train and at their homes to try to get a deeper understanding of their opposing points of view and why they held the opinions and beliefs they did.

During the course of a thirty minute film it would have been impossible to cover every historical detail but the programme was careful to represent the views of both Israelis and Palestinians living in Jerusalem. Adam spoke to people from both communities and reported the impact of violence on both sides.

The programme took particular care when referring to holy sites; Temple Mount as the Holiest site in Judaism and the Al Aqsa mosque and Dome of the Rock as being one of the holiest sites in Islam.

Several translators worked on the programme to ensure that the Arabic and Hebrew sections were accurately and fairly translated and interpreted.

We believe the film was balanced and fair and provided its BBC One audience with an illuminating view of the ancient city of Jerusalem.”

We hope this goes some way in addressing your concerns, thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards
BBC Complaints
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

Monday, July 20, 2015

BBC responds to my complaint about its statement that nobody in Iran has threatened Israel for a very long time


I (along with a number of people including Denis MacEoin - see below) complained to the BBC following a typically outrageous interview on Radio 4 with an Israeli representative.

My complaint:
During the Newshour interview with Danny Danon (July 14) the interviewer Razia Iqbal said nobody in Iran has threatened Israel for a very long time. In fact the threats to annihilate Israel have never stopped and during the last week the supreme leader Ayatollah Khamanei and the President Rouhani both repeated their threats and intent. See: http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/07/07/as-iran-nuclear-talks-extended-iranian-leader-repeats-threat-to-destroy-israel/# and http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6160/iran-quds-day-death-america-israel (an event ignored by BBC: http://bbcwatch.org/2015/07/12/bbc-news-ignores-al-quds-day-in-english/)
BBC response:
Dear Mr Davidson

Thank you for your email in which you complained about the interview with the Israeli Minister for Science, Technology and Space Danny Danon the BBC World Service broadcast in Newshour on 14/07/2015 in the wider context of the agreement reached about Iran’s nuclear programme.

We have received a wide range of feedback about this interview referring to the segment of it in which our presenter, Razia Iqbal, broached the subject of how and why the Israeli government perceives Iran as a threat.

In order to use our Licence Fee resources efficiently, this response aims to answer the key concerns raised regarding the interview, but we apologise in advance if it doesn’t address your specific points in the manner you would prefer…

The question about whether Israel faces a threat from Iran was a legitimate one for the interview with Danny Danon. However, after our editors spoke with Razia about the interview, it was agreed that her question could have been framed more clearly. The context of live radio, a developing story and a presenter responding to an interviewee’s points, should also be taken into account.

Mr Danon was allowed to give his views at length and in detail. He stated that Israel had the capability and right to defend itself - what Razia was trying to elicit in response from Mr Danon was what Israel considered to be the current threat from the state of Iran. In so doing, she was seeking to compare the very public and aggressive statements about Israel made by the previous president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, with the language used by the current president, Hassan Rouhani. Mr Danon was allowed to give a lengthy, uninterrupted response. Questioning that response does not constitute bias, it is about seeking accountability for a viewpoint. The issue of whether Iran poses an existential threat is not without controversy within Israel. The current head of Mossad has said that a nuclear Iran would not necessarily pose such a threat; two of his predecessors have been critical Mr Netanyahu’s stance on the issue.

In that context, it was absolutely correct and legitimate for Razia to ask the question.

We hope the above allays the concerns you have raised and thank you once again for listening to our programmes and taking the time to write.

Best regards,
Dejan Calovski
Audience Relations
BBC World Service
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/
My follow-up response to Dejan Calovski
Dear Mr Calovski,

Your response did not address the core point, which was that Razia Iqbal stated the blatant lie that Iran's leaders had not threatened Israel since the time of Ahemdinejad. This is not a matter of interpretation. The recent statements by Khomaini and Rouhani are a matter of record, for which you have the links.

Also, what I find both disingenuous and quite disgraceful about your response is the fact that you are using alleged statements by some of Netanyahu's political opponents as a defence for the BBCs lie. This is analogous to telling David Cameron that ISIS has never committed any atrocities and then supporting this assertion by claiming that George Galloway and Ken Livingstone disagree with Cameron on his stance about ISIS. Whatever politicised individuals associated with Mossad may or may not have said about their perceived views of Iran's military capabilities, none of them would ever deny that Iran's leaders continue to make existential threats against Israel and that those leaders would attempt to destroy Israel if they could. So why is the BBC attempting to cover up this fact?

Yours

Edgar Davidson

Denis MacEoin (who is a genuine authority) had made the following complaint:
On Newshour on July 14, I listened to a brief interview with Danny Danon, Israel's Minister of Science, Technology and Space. Speaking of the new deal to allow Iran to develop nuclear power (which will lead to the building of nuclear weapons), the interviewer made one of the most fatuous and inaccurate statements I have ever heard. Perhaps I should note first that I am an academic in Persian/Iranian Studies with a long personal knowledge of the country, its religion, its language and its politics. I currently research and write about Iranian affairs. When Danon said Israel would have to stand on its own against the Iranian threat, here is what she said: 'But you’re not under threat by Iran. Nobody in Iran has threatened you for a very long time. You’re harking back to a time when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened Israel directly.' I have collaborated on a book detailing Iranian threats to Israel. I have lost track of the number of times, even during the current year when Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamene'i, members of the religious ruling elite, members of parliament, former presidents Ahdmadinezhad and Rafsanjani, have threatened Israel directly, saying Iran will obliterate the Jewish state by force. Threats made by senior officials have been made only a few days ago, around the time this interview was broadcast. Israel is the most threatened country in the world. A nuclear Iran increases the threat. I demand a correction and an apology from the interviewer.
Denis got exactly the same response and has noted:
But the interview lasted about one minute, so these comments ‘Mr Danon was allowed to give his views at length and in detail’ and ‘Mr Danon was allowed to give a lengthy, uninterrupted response’ are just rubbish. And the ‘answer’ doesn’t actually look at the content of my complaint at all. Anyone else who has had this response should also get back to them.

Bournemouth Action for Israel: "They really hate us"


The Facebook page of the group Bournemouth Action for Israel has the sobering account below of what happened to them when they booked a stand at the Tolpuddle Festival last weekend. It provides a very clear picture of what Israel supporters are up against in the UK and the closed minds of the leftists, with whom any attempt at reasoned argument is pointless. I am increasingly convinced that pushing the "pro-Israel, pro-Palestine, pro-peace" message does not work and nor does the "Israel is really a decent place" narrative. Both messages are timid and somewhat defeatist, with the former creating the impression that Israel supporters accept that 'we must do something to help the Palestinians' and the latter only serving to confirm the (wrong) impression that Israelis are privileged compared to Palestinians.   The only relevant message that pro-Israel activists in the UK should be pushing is that the anti-Israel pro-Palestinian activists are anti-semites pushing a bunch of complete lies. 

WE'VE HAD ONE HELL OF A WEEKEND! WE BECAME 21st CENTURY MARTYRS, AT TOLPUDDLE MARTYRS FESTIVAL.

 Bournemouth Action For Israel, is a grass-roots Israel Advocacy organisation, run by a group of Jews and Christian supporters of Israel. We decided to combat the rhetoric of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and to have a stand at the Tolpuddle Festival, promoting Israel’s side of the narrative, this weekend.

By booking to be at the Tolpuddle Festival, we knew we were entering the Lions Den. This festival is organised by the Trade Unions Congress, a left-wing, mostly anti-Israel organisation, whose members have swallowed the rhetoric of the well-organised and well-funded Palestinian Solidarity Campaign for many years, while Israel ignored what was and is happening, in the diaspora.

The Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, which has had the trade unionists all to themselves for the past few years, quickly discovered our presence and that was the start of the less-than-welcome reception.

In succession, the volunteers were accused of representing a fascist, racist, oppressive, apartheid, baby killing, subjugating, land-stealing state and that we had no right to be at the festival. In forthright manner, we were informed that serious complaints would be lodged to the organisers with a view to having us ejected. A flash mob suddenly converged on us from the direction of the PSC stall, shouting abuse, throwing our leaflets to the floor and trying to destroy our stand.

Needless to say, when each organisation was invited to explain what it was there for, our leader was greeted by well orchestrated boos and jeers. Having fully anticipated just such a reaction, he calmly asked them if they would like another minute or so to vent their anger. When things quietened down, he was able to inform the hall that our organisation represents a Pro-Israel, Pro-Palestinian, Pro-peace viewpoint and if we could not have civilised dialogue here in England, what chance was there for it to happen in the Middle East.

After these initial rabid outbursts, the volunteers were encouraged to hear from other stallholders and officials that we had every right to be there and although they did not agree with what Israel was doing, we should be free to put over our point of view.

Today, we arrived very early to ensure we would be there before the PSC and as we were in the process of setting up our stand, we received a visit from the organisers. They explained to us that this was going to be the busiest day of the event and that they were short staffed on security. In view of the many virulent complaints they had received about us, and although we had every right to be there, we should leave in the interest of our own and their staff's safety.

Not wishing to place the staff nor indeed ourselves in physical danger, we had no real option but to make a tactical withdrawal. Basically, we were bullied into going.

The problem with the radical left is much worse than we anticipated. THEY REALLY REALLY HATE US.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

The Iran deal: the comparison with 1938 is wrong and here is why


The 1938 deal at least attempted to address the core problem: To stop the militaristic intentions of a murderous antisemitic dictatorship (Germany).   The 2015 deal legitimizes and funds the militaristic intentions of a murderous antisemitic dictatorship (Iran).


Aspect of treaty agreement
1938 treaty signed by Germany
2015 treaty signed by Iran
Money just for signing deal
Germany gets nothing
Iran gets $50 billion
Money if they stick to the deal
Germany gets nothing
Iran get hundreds of billions each year from sanctions relief and new contracts
Penalties if they do not stick to deal
War declared against Germany
None (the Russians and Chinese have already made it clear that the sanctions ‘snap back’ will not be implemented) and all military options have been taken off the table
Military
Some limits imposed on Germany’s army/navy movements
No limits to Iran’s army/navy movements
Weapons conventional
Minor limits imposed on Germany
All previous limits imposed on Iran dropped. They will be given the money to buy the world’s most sophisticated weapon systems.
Weapons nuclear
None
Iran gets to build nuclear bombs with the full approval of the international community
Territory
Stringent limits Imposed on Germany’s territorial ambitions
No limits imposed on Iran’s territorial ambitions (so immediate expansion of interest in Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank)
Support for terrorism
Not accepted
Iran can continue its support for terrorist movements all over the world
Jews
Germany promised not to harm them, although Hitler made it very clear he wanted all Jews out of Germany
Iran promises death to Israel


 See also:

See also:
Daniel Greenfield's excellent analysis of the deal
The Iran deal in full exclusive
Iran and sanctions - the dummies guide
The war against the Jews
 





Sunday, June 28, 2015

Smoothie drinks not so innocently funding anti-Israel hatred


I have sent the following self-explanatory letter to the Innocent Foundation:
Dear Sir/Madam

Concern about one of the charities (War on Want) supported by the Innocent Foundation

I regularly buy and enjoy your excellent fruit smoothies. I had never realised, until I studied a carton this evening, that 10% of your profits are given to charity. This can be a noble aim, and I checked the website www.innocentfoundation.org to see which charities benefited.

I was horrified to discover that one of the 'charities' was War on Want. This so-called 'charity' is in fact an extremist left-wing political organisation which is almost exclusively dedicated to the delegitimization and ultimate destruction of the State of Israel. In pursuit of this goal War on Want relies on lies, propaganda, bullying and antisemitism. In addition, one of War on Want's Council of Management members is Atif Choudhury who is a founder of the openly terrorist supporting organisation the International Solidarity Movement - an organisation which played a role in the suicide bombing of Mike's Place bar in Tel Aviv in 2003, by helping the two British-born Islamic terrorists Asif Muhammad Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif enter Israel. Two musicians and a waitress were among the dead in that attack. Further details of War on Want's activities can be found here:

http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/war-on-want-charity-that-is-just-anti.html
http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/comic-relief-funds-people-who.html

I would very much appreciate answers to the following:
  1. Is the Innocent Foundation aware of the above facts about War on Want?
  2. Why did the Innocent Foundation give money to War on Want?
  3. Does the Innocent Foundation intend to give any further money to War on Want?
Obviously, until I receive confirmation that the answer to the last question at least is a definitive NO I will not be buying your products and will be advising other like-minded people not to do so.

Yours

Edgar Davidson

I have no doubt that the Innocent Foundation will say (just as Comic Relief did) that the War on Want projects they have funded are unconnected with Israel. But how can they possibly know that War on Want did not use that money to subsidise its political campaign to deligitimize the Jewish State?. Its campaign against Israel has been almost the ONLY activity War on Want has undertaken in the last 5 years (as proven by the material I have previously provided). Every one of their employees spends almost 100% of their time on the campaign against Israel and it is therefore impossible that  money from organisations like Innocent does not contribute to this.

It is also interesting to note that War on Want seems to get all of its funding not from members of the public who really want to fund it, but rather from other organisations (like the British Government, the EU, Comic Relief and Innocent) whose 'leaders' believe it is a cause that should be supported. Yet these 'leaders' are simply using money from consumers and tax payers who would never dream of donating to a bunch of freaks and bigots like War on Want. It's all very well to say that Innocent is being noble in donating 10% of its profits to such 'charities'; but that 10% all comes directly from consumers who buy their products and who have no say in how that profit is spent. If they were asked they may very well prefer that the price was lowered by 10%. Seems like Innocent is not much different from Lush.

Saturday, June 27, 2015

On the hypocrisy of the Golders Green demo threat


It seems like the only thing of concern to British Jews at the moment is next week's planned demonstration by a handful of neo-Nazis in Golders Green to "end the Zionist occupation of Britain". Never before has the community been so united.

While the people behind the demo are clearly despicable attention-seeking antisemites deliberately trying to provoke trouble, I am somewhat bemused as to why this tiny piece of antisemitic theatre has so grabbed the attention of the Jewish community. On almost every day of the week on the streets of the UK there are much better planned and coordinated displays of antisemitism that use exactly the same pretext as the one planned in Golders Green (i.e. 'ending the Zionist occupation'). Just look at the future events on websites of organisations like the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the Socialist Workers Party, the UK Boycott Israel Campaign, and the dozens of other trade unions and students associations. These events range from weekly (and even daily) protests against shops and businesses with any connection to Israel and those selling Israeli products through to protests to stop any Israeli performer from appearing or any person at all speaking in public in support of Israel. Often they are quite elaborate, lavishly funded pieces of real street theatre with the sole intention of convincing normal Brits that Israeli Jews are the most demonic and evil people in the world. Every one of these events has more antisemitic participants than the number likely to turn up in Golders Green. And, of course, these events pale into insignificance when compared to the daily mass (often violent) rallies of antisemitic hatred that fill the streets of London whenever Israel dares to defend itself from terrorist attacks.

What is common about all those antisemitic demonstrations (apart from the fact that they, like the Golders Green demo, are dressed up in the language of anti-Zionism) is that (unlike for the Golders Green demo) there has NEVER been any significant coordinated counter-demonstrations by the "official Jewish community" (such as the Board of Deputies, CST or the Jewish Leadership Council). Instead, in the small number of cases where there are counter-demonstrations they are organised and attended by the same small groups of heroes from independent organisations like the Sussex Friends of Israel.

What it comes down to is that Britain's 'official Jews' feel comfortable demonstrating against anti-semitism when the proponents are white racists, but will not get involved when the proponents - -in far greater numbers - are Muslims and socialists. By making the Golders Green counter-demo such a 'big event' we also now have the bizarre situation whereby among the fellow counter-demonstrators will be some of the very people and groups most prominent in the anti-Israel demonization (such as the dubiously named United Against Fascism and Hope not Hate, as well as some Muslim Brotherhood fronts and even members of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign). It has even been rumoured that George Galloway will attend the counter-demo (although, interestingly, he has been formerly invited to speak by the demonstration organiser Joshua Bonehill in his capacity as a 'fellow anti-Zionist').  In fact, the event even gives these people the publicity to claim that they are 'not antisemitic, only anti-Zionist'.What is also troubling is that the 'official Jewish community' has used up a lot of its political currency lobbying against the demo when there are far more robust legal grounds for lobbying against the multiple 'boycott Israeli goods' demos (something the 'official Jews' have never done - in part because some of them support the boycott of Israel).

So while I am not demeaning those who are organising counter-protests at Golders Green, perhaps we can hope that the thousands of Jews who have said they are going to Golders Green will also make the effort to counter-demonstrate at the many anti-Israel events (of which there are several planned in London even before next week).

See also: anti-semitism v ant-Zionism

Update 28 June: I posted the following question on the CST facebook page in response to one of their many postings about the Golders Green event:
Can somebody at CST explain why the Golders Green demo is seen as so much more of a threat than, say, the multiple (and much better planned and attended) antisemitic events that take place daily under the guise of 'anti-Zionism'
This lead to the following dialogue:

CST:
Probably because it involves neo-Nazis in Golders Green using explicitly anti-Jewish language.
Me:
Dear CST: By far and away the most serious threat to the Jewish Community in the UK comes from Islamists who are also explicit in their antisemitism. Yet CST's response to that is to 'engage with the Muslim community' which has involved teaming up with Muslim Brotherhood front organisations. The only difference between the MB and ISIS is that the former claim to want a non-violent shift to an Islamic state. Using CST's logic the way to respond to the Golders Green event would be to reach out to all 'non-violent' neo-Nazis - which curiously is what Bonehill claims to be. Also when it comes to the 'boycott Israel' events these often result in violence against Jewish owned businesses and have the very explicit aim of destroying the Jewish State by isolating it economically. Why is that not a concern for British Jews?
CST:
We agree that the most acute threat comes from jihadists and tackling that threat is our top priority. We do this in lots of different ways, including counter-terrorist security for the community, pressing for appropriate policies from police and government, and working with Muslim allies who are trying to reduce extremism and antisemitism within their own communities. We do not work with Muslim Brotherhood front groups and if you read the CST blog you will see we have written extensively about the problems posed by the MB and their supporters.
Me
I'd be very interested to know exactly which 'Muslim allies' you work with. The Muslim Council of Britain most certainly is a Muslim Bortherhood front organisation and since the BoD certainly works with them, I obviously assumed CST did. I know for sure you have worked with the disgraceful frauds "Tell Mama" - even after they were exposed by the Daily Telegraph. I also understand you worked with Baroness Warsi long after both her family's Muslim Brotherhood links and her anti-Israel obsession were exposed. I'd also be interested to know how working with the 'Muslim allies' has reduced the threat against the Jewish community. It also seems to me that, by stressing the concern about "anti-Jewish language", the CST is explicitly allowing itself to ignore the 'death to Israel' rhetoric of the leftists (and many Muslims).
CST
We aren't going to start listing here all our interactions with Muslim allies. Many of them are confidential for obvious reasons. But several of your assumptions are incorrect. More generally, we do not accept your inference that we are soft on Islamist extremism. We have spent 25 years trying to raise awareness of this problem and we continue to do so.
Me
Don't get me wrong - I have tremendous respect for the work CST does in keeping the Jewish community safe. If CST really has never worked with the MCB, Tell Mama, or Warsi then I'd like to know that, but it is a matter of record that the BoD has worked VERY CLOSELY with every one of those, and the new Chair of the BoD Mr Arkush has gone on record as saying he plans to extend the dialogue with Muslim groups. My concern is that groups and individuals which appear to be moderate (such as Tell mama and Warsi) turn out to be very much part of the problem. And there is also the unanswered question about why CST has never really been interested in confronting the 'boycott Israel' events. 


UK Government and media partly responsible for British deaths in Tunisia


After the massacre of tourists at the Bardo museum in Tunisia in March the Tunisian government launched their "I will come to Tunisia this summer" campaign to promote tourism to the country.
ISIS made their own intentions clear in multiple messages like those above, and their response yesterday proved their intent. Sadly, of the 38 people killed a disproportionate number were British tourists.

Those tourists would certainly not have seen the warnings posted by ISIS because the British government and media continues to cover up for, and deny, the threat of Islamic terrorism and the mainstream Islamic ideology that underpins it everywhere. That same politically correct refusal to acknowledge reality and warn people accordingly meant, for example, that the tourists would almost have certainly been oblivious to the following relevant facts when they chose their holiday destination:
  • They were going to an Islamic country during Ramadan - the time of year when Muslim terrorists believe they have a special duty to launch attacks on 'infidels'. ISIS had even specifically threatened to attack tourists in Tunisia during Ramadan.
  • In addition to the attack in March there was a suicide bombing in October 2013 at the very same resort (Sousse) that was attacked yesterday. Moreover, in recent years Islamists in Tunisia have carried out multiple terrorist attacks against both foreigners and 'secular' Tunisians. These attacks (such as the one on a synagogue as recently as 2014) are simply ignored by the British media.
  • Tunisia has by far the largest foreign contingent of ISIS fighters in Syria and Iraq (estimated at 20,000) and because of the large numbers going the Tunisian government recently stopped a further 5,000 leaving meaning that at least 5,000 known ISIS member were in the country.
  • After the 'Arab spring' (which actually started in Tunisia) in their first 'democratic' elections the Tunisians voted for a hard-line Islamist government. That means over half of the Tunisian population supports the political objectives of ISIS. Although the government fell in 2014 (replaced by a more moderate regime) Tunisia remains deeply divided between the more secular residents of the major cities and Islamic fundamentalists who dominate everywhere else (incidentally secularists and fundamentalists are all totally united in their hatred of Jews and Israel - another fact the British government and media will not acknowledge).
I am certainly not suggesting people should be frightened away from visiting places because of the threats of terrorism. But it is interesting that, while millions of Brits holiday in Islamic Mediterranean countries - where they are regarded as disgusting infidels by the bulk of the population and where there is a real and imminent terrorist threat to them -  only a handful of (non-Jewish) Brits ever visit Israel.  This is mainly because of the perception - again promoted by the government and media - that it is Israel which is the place to be avoided for reasons including the terrorist threat. Yet, while Muslim terrorists certainly continue to target native Israelis, attacks targeting foreign tourists have been almost non-existent because of effective Israeli security. Contrast this with 'security' in the Muslim countries where, in most cases, the 'security' people have been working with the terrorists when attacks happened.

While the government and media continue to peddle the 'Islam is a religion of Peace' lie and the 'Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with Islam' lie, uninformed Brits will continue to be murdered for believing it. And that includes Brits in the UK, like Palmira Silva who was beheaded in London in 2014 by Nicholas Salvador whose conversion to Islam and obsession with ISIS prior to the attack was not only ignored at the time by friends and police, but was 'written out' of almost every media report of his trial last week (even this one ignores his conversion to Islam). And by refusing to accept the role of Islam in motivating such terrorist acts, they can always be passed off as 'acts of insanity' - which is exactly why Salvador was found not guilty of murder. And so the cover-up continues...

Postscript: Tunisia has announced it will close 80 mosques in response to yesterday's attack. So their government understands the reality of Islamic ideology a lot better than the British government who would never dare close a mosque, no matter how many terrorists are incited to violence from its preachers. Indeed, Cameron again asserted that yesterdays' multiple Islamic attacks had 'absolutely nothing to do with Islam'.

UPDATE: Imagine if the Tunisian attack had been by a Palestinian on Tel Aviv beach ....

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Britain is funding the continued murder of Israelis


In a terrorist attack claimed by Hamas today near the Israeli town of Dolev,  Israeli Danny Goren (aged 25) was killed and his friend wounded after being shot at point blank range by a Palestinian who they had got out of their car for to help find water. If and when the terrorist is arrested, like all 'resistance fighters' who have killed at least one Jew, he will be guaranteed a minimum salary of $40,000 for the rest of his life paid for by 'the Palestinian Authority' which is about 10 times the average wage of a Palestinian worker (if he was imprisoned without killing a Jew he would only get $2,000 per month). But, of course, the Palestinian Authority's money comes exclusively from European and US taxpayers. It turns out that the scale of Britain's contribution to this terrorist infrastructure funding (which I have written many times before about) is far in excess of what I have previously reported.

IsraellyCool reports that Britain's funding to 'the Palestinian Authority' was £265 million in the last 3 years alone (my understanding had been that it was in the order of £40 million per year). Moreover, this does not include Britain's funding of NGO's inside Israel (such as Btselem and Breaking the Silence), which are exclusively anti-Zionist and which are dedicated to deligitimizing Israel. Nor does it include Britain's contribution to the 600 million euros annually provided by the EU to 'the Palestinian Authority'.

The average Brit is totally unaware of just how big a chunk of Britain's foreign aid goes to fund this corrupt terrorist regime. And British Jews, who should know better, continue to believe that PM David Cameron is a 'great friend of Israel'. Even after two of his first major foreign policy decisions in his new term were to 1) instruct his UN Ambassador to vote in favour of a motion that Israel was the worst violator of health rights in the world; and 2) lead the antisemitic EU labelling of Jewish-made goods from Judea, Samaria and the Golan.

See also: