Pages

Saturday, 30 June 2012

Will today never end? Or tomorrow, or yesterday depending on where in the world you are and when you read this...

Does today feel longer than normal? If you answer yes then you're quite correct. The International Earth Rotation and Reference System Service from their headquarters in Paris are adding a 'leap second' to the clock at midnight universal time Saturday, June 30, going into July 1. Universal time will be 11:59:59 and then 11:59:60. In London that will be at just before 1am Sunday.

A second can be added or removed as needed every six months, but it typically happens only every 1.5 years.

The adjustment is needed now because the Earth's rottaion is slowing down a very very small amount die to the tidal pull of the moon.

The last such 'leap second' was at the end of December 2008. In fact only 24 extra seconds have been introduced since the process started in 1972.

Not the ideal flight attendant


An American Eagle steward confronts angry passengers on-board the plane. This really is a flight attendant using the pa system to tell passengers that if they "[have] the balls" to get off the plane, they should. Jose Serrano's rant -- including a vaguely ominous "this is probably my last flight" -- on the LaGuardia-to-Raleigh​-Durham route freaked out some people enough that they took their balls and left.

Did he take a poison pill?



A truly strange piece of video from America where Michael Marin was found guilty for burning down his Biltmore area mansion in 2009 to collect insurance money. At 39 seconds does he put something in his mouth and swallow it? If so, what? Mr marin collapses from 7:40. Most peculiar... Fox News have the story

Nigel Farage and Ken Livingstone in total accord, weird!


Nigel Farage and Ken Livingstone in total accord on the EU, weird!

Gordon Brown was warned in 1997 about the probable consequences of his moving bank supervision and regulation from the experts at the Bank of England to the Financial Services Authority

Peter Lilley, shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer [Official Report, 11 November 1997; Vol. 300, c. 731-32.]
“With the removal of banking control to the Financial Services Authority…it is difficult to see how and whether the Bank remains, as it surely must, responsible for ensuring the liquidity of the banking system and preventing systemic collapse.”
“The coverage of the FSA will be huge; its objectives will be many, and potentially in conflict with one another. The range of its activities will be so diverse that no one person in it will understand them all.”
“…that the Government may, almost casually, have bitten off more than they can chew. The process of setting up the FSA may cause regulators to take their eye off the ball, while spivs and crooks have a field day.”
[Official Report, 11 November 1997; Vol. 300, c. 731-32.]
Do you remember Peter Lilley? Peter Lilley was a former Conservative minister whose name was often followed by sniggers on BBC topical news quizes and the like. The BBC used their near monoploy position to destroy Peter Lilley along with the last Conservative government in order to usher in the brave new dawn of New Labour in 1997. The BBC's political coverage, from the moment Tony Blair formed his first government, was dismissive of any criticism especially from former ministers. The whole attitude was one of, you have lost the lection so please have the decency to shut-up and let the victors do as they like.

I wonder if now the BBC will note that in 1997 there were some voices warning that Gordon Brown was not the great genius that he and they claimed that he was and that some people saw that his 'I'm always right' attitude would lead to trouble.

Many thanks to OWS blog for the quote spot.

Friday, 29 June 2012

Bodypaint only fashion show - NSFW - A Rule 5 Friday post



Interesting but I am not sure the styles will catch on on the high street!

Teaching their children to hate Jews (part 2)

My last post concentrated on the way the Palestinians are teaching their children to hate Jews, that Jews should be killed and that Israel should not exist. This blogpost spreads the net a little wider...

Egyptian TV
"Also, we have been ordered to vanquish the Jews and to evacuate them. Allah's judgement must be carried out."

Jordanian TV



Saudi Arabia

"The struggle of this [Muslim] Natioon with the JEws and Christians has endured and it will continue as log as Godd wills"

"As was cited in Ibn Abbas, and was said: The apes are the people of the Sabbath, the Jews; and the swine are the people of the Communion of Jesus, the Christians"

More from Saudi Arabia

These are the textbooks that were and maybe still are being used to teach Muslim children in western countries.

From the UAE

Again the killing of Jews and that Koranic quotation again.

Another piece from Saudi Arabia that asks people in a vox pop, if they would shake hands with are Jew and who are the Jews.

Two thoughts come to mind on watching this video; first what hope is there for peace between Israel and its neighbours when as a result of decades (centuries even) of religious brainwashing so many Muslims have so much hate for Jews, the second thought is what is Borat doing presenting this piece?

The Iranian government's legal and religious justification for the destruction of Israel and the slaughter of its people. The doctrine includes wiping out Israeli assets and Jewish people worldwide.


The Palestinian Authority Mufti of Jerusalem

There's that pesky Hadith extract again.

This brainwashing works, here's some Moroccans living in the Netherlands

"We are against Israel... Because we believe that all the Jews should be exterminated... "

Here's a very young Muslim girl, Fatimah, two years old and she has already been taught 'well'

"Who are struck by Allah's wrath?
The Jews"
Chilling?

Thursday, 28 June 2012

The Palestinian Authority's latest demands prove that they don't want a return to 1967 borders

The claim that all the Palestinian Authority wants is for Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders is a lie.

The latest threats issued by the Palestinian Revolutionary Council (the joint PA/Hamas body) are that if Israel does not surrender all of the lands liberated in the Six Day War of 1967, set up an Arab state with Jerusalem as its capital and make accept as Israeli citizens descendants of the Arabs who fled Israel in 1948, then a third intifada should, and must, be conducted.

I'll address these demands from the last to the first. The demand for the 'right to return' makes a mockery of the demand for a Palestinian state. This is not a call for a two state solution, it is a call for the establishment of a Palestinian state and for the turning of Isrel from a majority Jewish state into a second majority Muslim state. The second demand for Jerusalem to be the capital of the Palestinian state is unacceptable for various reasons which I have touched on before in this blog, Jerusalem is the historical capital of the Jews and should remain so. All of the Muslim claims on Jerusalem are predated by the Jewish claims. Please remember that for the 19 years that the Palestinian state of Jordan controlled Jerusalem, Jews were prevented from visiting the holiest site of Judaism (the Western Wall). Since the recapture by Israel of Jerusalem in the defensive war of 1967, not only have Muslims had control of their holy sites, they even prevent Jewish access to them. This despite the fact that they are built on top of the Jewish Temple. The first demand of the PRC is that Israel surrender all of the lands that it took in 1967 is also not feasible to comply with. If Israel did this it would lose the defensible borders that the Jordan valley affords it.

This last point is well illustrated by the following video
The Palestinians' three demands are really saying 'either give up your defensible borders, your capital and your Jewish majority status or face more violence, terrorist attacks aimed at destroying you'. Do remember that Fatah and Hamas share the same aim of destroying Israel and turning the whole of what is currently Israel, along with 'the West Bank' and Gaza, into a country called Palestine. This is what both the Hamas and Fatah Charters say, what their schools teach, what their maps and flags make clear BUT what most of 'the West' chooses to ignore. Sometimes it is tough to admit that the Palestinian cause that you support is based on a lie and enforced by threats and violence but when that is the case then people loke @aarondellaria and Richard Burden MP should admit it.

Are you proud of being Jewish or scared to admit it?

An interesting blog from the Times of Israel. Take a read and ponder, especially when you baer in mind the sort of thing that I blogged about earlier today.

Teaching their children to hate Jews (part 1)

Here are some videos that show how Palestinian children are taught to hate Jews and that killing Jews is desirable. They also show how successful this brainwashing has been.

We'll start with Hamas TV station, Al-Aqsa TV, and their children's programme 'The Pioneers of Tomorrow' starring Farfur from 2009:


Here's an earlier episode starring Farfur when the audience of young Palestinain children are told that "We want to... We will annhiliate the Jews"


And the episode when Farfur was killed, by a Jew of course.


It's not just on children's TV that Palestinian children are taught to hate Jews, that killing jews is an admirable thing and of course that Israel should be erased from history. It's part of Palestinian life and the results are clear to see...

The most chilling parts of this video are not the claims on all of Israel by political and religious leaders, that's a given, no it was the screaming woman:
"Just give us weapons, the boys and the girls themselves, we will kiill them all [the Jews]. We won't leave a single Jew. We won't leave a single Jew here."


The above are examples of brainwashing and its consequences, it's not pretty and it's not difficult but it is effective. The same concepts and tactics used in Nazi Germany are being used in Palestine and beyond. The end is the same, to kill all Jews. The evidence is clear and the people expressing these views express them clearly, yet the Western media and the useful idiots of the Western left still claim that if only Israel would retreat to its pre 1967 borders all will be well. That last video included a quotation from Faysal al-Husseini, the PA Minister for Jerusalem Affiars that I think needs repetition:
"The Oslo Accords were a Trojan horse; the strategic goal is the liberation of Palestine from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea"
Fairly clear?

Last week I blogged about my attempts to get a blogger @aarondellaria to accept that Hamas wanted to destroy Israel and kill all Jews. He just couldn't accept that that was the case. I wounder if after watching the above he might accept that that is what Hamas want?

Actually I know the answer to that question @aarondellaria seems to be one of those people whose opinions are not affected by facts, he like many on the left of politics, knows the truth and will not be persuaded by 'facts'. I've met these people over & over again and to be honest they make me sick.


Wednesday, 27 June 2012

Not much of an apology from the BBC

The BBC have finally admitted that "We Made a Mistake" over their coverage of the murder of the Fogel family. Honest Reporting have a good report but my point is that the BBC may have apologoised to Louise Mensch, as reported in the Jewish Chronicle.

The place where the Fogel family murders should have been reported as a headline story was the BBC Middle East news page, so that is where the apology should be placed - as a headline story. Does anybody think that this will happen?

Who said the Palestinians were not Palestinians?

"Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis... Who are the Palestinains? .... Egyptians... We are Egyptians. We are Arabs. We are Muslims."
That's the Hamas Interior Minister attacking Egypt for the fuekl shortage in Gaza. That's Egypt not Israel but it's the other admissions that made me smile a little, when angry the truth does tend to come out.

The Queen and Martin McGuinness

The Queen is to meet and shake hands with Martin McGuinness today, what on earth could they chat about? Here are some suggestions for questions the Queen could start with rather than the usual "So what do you do?"

1. "So what did you used to do?"

2. "Why do some people call you Martin 'machinegun' McGuinness?"

3. "Do the names Earl Mountbatten, Baroness Brabourne, Nicholas Knatchbull and Paul Maxwell mean anything to you?"

4. "Did you know of the plot to kill Earl Mountbatten before the murders took place?"

5. "Did you approve of or do nothing to prevent the plot to kill Earl Mountbatten from happening?"

6. "Did you know of or approve the murderous attack on the British Army at Warrenpoint on the same day?"

7. "Tell me Mr McGuinness how many people had the IRA murdered before Bloody Sunday?"

8. "Why were you carrying a Thompson submachine gun in Londonderry on Bloody Sunday?"

9. "What do you have to say to the Saville Inquiry conclusion that you had been 'engaged in paramilitary activity' on that day?"

10.  "What do you have to say in reply to this extract from The Saville Inquiry paragraph R2A-4 of the Reply Closing Submission, 'the submission given by Martin McGuinness is 'simply incorrect' and 'flawed'?"

11. Following the Saviile Inquiry into the evnts of 'Bloody Sunday' do you think there should be an investigation into the Brighton bombing, a plot to kill as many members of the British Government as possible?"

12. "Did you have foreknowledge of or approve the Brighton bombing?"

13. "Did you discuss the Claudy bombings with Father Chesney?"

14. "Why did you claim in 2002 that you had never met Father Chesney, when in 2010 you then admitted that you had? Why should we believe this version of your story when you appear to have lied previously about the same matter?"

15. "Have all of the IRA's weapons been decommissioned? All of them?"

16. "When you were second in command of the IRA in Derry how many murders did you arrange or approve?"

17. "When you were second in command of the IRA in Derry how many people did you personally kill?"

18. "When exactly did you leave the IRA?'

19. "Was anyone killed in the circumstances you describe in this interview?"


20. "Will you now apologise to the relatives of all the people the IRA killed, I am one of those relatives Mr McGuinness?"


There you go, that should be enough topics of conversation to make sure that there are no awkward silences...

Tuesday, 26 June 2012

Who's a racist?


Russell Peters may have a point.

The BBC have published a review?!

Biased BBC report that:
'The BBC has commissioned a report on the BBC’s coverage of the ‘Arab Spring’…its conclusions….
'The BBC’s coverage of the Arab Spring was generally impartial but could have benefited from greater breadth and context, according to the BBC Trust.

It said the BBC should have done more to authenticate user-generated content (UGC), such as mobile phone footage taken by activists or bystanders.

The Trust praised “the considerable courage of journalists and technicians on the ground to bring stories to air”.

Its report described the BBC’s overall coverage as “remarkable”.'

The BBC said it was pleased to see the report’s broad support for its coverage as a whole and the overall recognition of much “outstanding” and “remarkable” journalism.'
That's odd, why have the BBC released a report on their coverage of the Arab Spring, a report that says the BBC's coverage is 'generally impartial' but have not released the Balen report into the BBC's impartiality in reporting on Israel? If the Balen report cannot be released because it is an internal report aimed at checking its own standards of journalism, the report being held for the purposes of journalism, why can this new report be released? Am I too suspicious when I think it may because one clears the BBC and the other does not?

Monday, 25 June 2012

Definition of a racist

'a racist is someone that’s winning an argument with a guardian reader or other lefty – no more, no less'

Not my definition but one that I found on the web today and bearing in mind my last post and the next few I thought it quite apposite.

Ignoring the evidence of their own eyes and ears

I have had a difficult weekend on Twitter, there seem to be number of people who make outrageous claims that are at variance with reality but when they are made aware of the truth they just don't accept it. I will be addressing three people's inability to process evidence this week, @aarondellaria, @natashasuleman and @SarahIJoselh, today I start with @aarondellaria who appears to be ignoring me on Twitter now, unable to deal with the truth it would seem.

I posed a question to @aarondellaria and that question was if he accepted that 'Hamas wanted to destroy Israel and kill all Jews'. He wriggled and wriggled, here's some early attempts to evade answering the question:






Pathetic but I persisted so he had to change tack:

"Hamas can say whatever" - indeed they can but I want this individual to admit that 'Hamas want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews'. So I keep on asking... Here's @aarondellaria's next reply:
So he accepts that Hamas dream about destroying Israel and killing all Jews but as they know that's not realistic we can ignore it.

I wasn't satisfied as I hadn't asked if they could destroy Israel and kill all Jews but if they want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews, so I asked again and this was the response:

So it's just rhetoric and Israel should ignore the rhetoric, although previously @aarondellaria said it was a dream - so just an aspiration not a realistic aim.

I asked again and got this response from @aarondellaria.

There you go, the last refuge of the scoundrel, an accusation (albeit tangentially) that I was a racist. Not bad, he managed several hours before he resorted to that trick.Brighter than some I have had to deal with in the past.


I am not a member of the BNP, nor a supporter, but don't see why that would be relevant to my questioning him about what Hamas wanted that for a certain type of agitator an accusation of racism trumps all and I am sure Aaron Dellaria is used to people backing down before his accusations and his refusal to ever concede. Fortunately I have met his type before and beaten them (in argument) many many times.


Anyway for @aarondellaria here's some evidence of how Hamas view Israel and Jews.


1. Let's start with Hamas's Charter:

'– In the Palestinian state only Jews who lived in Palestine before 1917 will be recognized as citizens [Article 6]:
– Only the Palestinian Arabs possess the right of self-determination, and the entire country belongs to them [Articles 3 and 21].
– Any solution that does not involve total liberation of the country is rejected. This aim cannot be achieved politically; it can only be accomplished militarily [Articles 9 & 21].
– Warfare against Israel is legal, whereas Israel's self-defence is illegal [Article 18].'
That 1968 Charter does not call for Israel to return to 1967 borders it calls for 'the entire country' to return to Palestinian control.

Let's take a look at Article 7 of the Charter:  
"Hamas has been looking forward to implementing Allah's promise, whatever time it might take. The prophet [Muhammad] said: 'The time (of Resurrection) will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: 0 Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him!'" Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985]


2. Let's look at what Hamas Prime Minister, Ismail Haniya, said on his visit to Tunisia in early January 2012. The comments were all recorded and broadcast on Al-Aqsa TV:

"I say to you now, in the capital of south Tunisia: We will never ever recognize Israel."

"The land of Palestine, oh brothers and sisters, is an Islamic, as decreed by the second caliph, Omar ibn Al-Khattab. We shall not relinquish the Islamic waqf on the land of Palestine, and Jerusalem shall not be divided into Western and Eastern Jerusalem. Jerusalem is a single united [city], and Palestine stretches from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and from Naqoura [Rosh Ha-Niqra] to Umm Al-Rashrash [Eilat] in the south."

This is Hamas's leader in the Gaza Strip, Ismail Haniyeh, saying on 14 December that whilst Hamas may work for the "interim objective of liberation of Gaza, the West Bank, or Jerusalem," this in an "interim objective" and "reconciliation" with Fatah will not change Hamas' long-term "strategic" goal of eliminating all of Israel. Ismail Haniyeh also said this:
"The armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the invaders and usurpers [Israel]... We won't relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine."
From the sea to the river, now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, remember that every time someone chants "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" they are calling for the destruction of Israel, the ending of the Jewish state. The river is the Jordan, the sea is the Mediterranean; from the river to the sea is not calling for a two state solution, it is calling for the destruction of Israel.


3. Some video evidence - This video from Hamas's Al-Aqsa TV is a prayer pleading with Allah to "vanquish your [Allah's] enemies" and to "strike" the Jews and their "sympathizers", "the Christians and their supporters", and to not leave "even one".

"Allah, oh our Lord, vanquish Your enemies, enemies of the religion
[Islam] in all places.
Allah, strike the Jews and their sympathizers,
the Christians and their supporters,

Allah, count them and kill them to the last one, and don't leave even one."
Al Aqsa TV (Hamas) Dec. 3, 2010 (1 min)




4.How about another Hamas leader, this time Nizar Rayan, Hamas religious and military leader at the time he said this in on 1 January 2009:
"Regarding the Jews, our business with them is only through bombs and guns... the prophet [Muhammad] promised that we will fight you, with Allah's help, until the tree and stone say: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."


5. How about another Hamas cleric from 2008:
Source: Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas), July 13, 2008
"The Meccan [Quran] chapter entitled 'Jews' or 'Children of Israel' is remarkable... It's about today's Jews, those of our century, and speaks only of extermination and digging graves... This chapter sentences the Jews to extermination before a single Jew existed on earth... Palestine's blessing is linked to destruction of the center of global corruption [Jews of Israel], the snake's head. When the snake's head of [global] corruption is cut off, here in Palestine, and when the octopus' [Jew's] tentacles are cut off around the world, the real blessing will come with the destruction of the Jews, here in Palestine, and it is one of the splendid real blessings in Palestine."


6. This time we'll look at a Hamas newspaper report on the words of a Hamas MP
Source: Al-Rissala (Hamas weekly), Mar. 13, 2008
"You [Jews] will taste the punishment of Scorching Fire." [Quran 3:181]
"This [Quran] verse threatens the Jews with the punishment of Fire... the reason for the punishment of Fire is that it is fitting retribution for what they have done... but the urgent question is, is it possible that they will have the punishment of Fire in this world, before the great punishment [of everlasting Fire in Hell]?...many of the [Islamic] religious leaders believe that the [Jews'] punishment of Fire is in this world... therefore we are certain that the Holocaust is still to come upon the Jews." [Sheikh Yunus Al-Astal, Hamas MP]


7. Let's go back another year and to a Hamas newspaper
Source: Al-Rissala (Hamas weekly), Apr. 23, 2007
"We find occastional condemnation and denunciation of the resistance operations and bombings [suicide attacks], carried out by Hamas and the Palestinian resistance branches... [Eventually] everyone will know that we did this [suicide attacks] only because our Lord commanded so - 'I did it not of my own accord' [Quran] - and so that people will know that the extermination of Jews is good for the inhabitants of the world."


8. Let's lighten the mood with some Hamas children's TV from 2009

The bear puppet host, Nassur, of a Hamas children's TV program used different words for "slaughter" to describe how to rid Israel of Jews.
First the bear explains that all Jews must be "erased from our land." Later in the conversation he adds, "We want to slaughter them, Saraa, so they will be expelled from our land." He repeats, "...We'll have to [do it] by slaughter."

He first uses the Arabic expression for "slaughter," "Nidbah-hom," and later on uses the word "Shaht."

The following is the transcript from the children's program Tomorrow's Pioneers:

Nassur: "There won't be any Jews or Zionists, if Allah wills. They'll be erased."
Saraa: "Chased away."
Nassur: "And just like we will visit the Qaaba [in Mecca]... everyone will visit Jerusalem."
[Seven-year old Palestinian child on phone tells how his father, a member of the Hamas Al-Qassam Brigades, "died as a Shahid (Martyr)."]
Nassur to child on phone: "What do you want to do to the Jews who shot your father?"
Child on phone: "I want to kill them."
Saraa: "We don't want to do anything to them, just expel them from our land."
Nassur: "We want to slaughter (Nidbah-hom) them, so they will be expelled from our land, right?"
Saraa: "Yes. That's right. We will expel them from our land using all means."
Nassur: "And if they don't want [to go] peacefully, by words or talking, we'll have to [do it] by slaughter." (Shaht)
[Al-Aqsa (Hamas) TV, Sept. 22, 2009


9. Here's a short extract from an anti_Israel film that is shown regularly in Universities

The words of that prayer are (my emphasis):
'Allah is the greatest.
He who thanks Allah will be rewarded.
Oh Allah, loosen your power and strength on the Jews. (Amen.)
Please Allah, kill them all...
And don't leave any of them alive
. (Amen.)
Oh Allah, with your great power. Allah!
We are asking you with your infinite power, dear Allah. Allah!
Please dear Allah, take revenge for our martyrs' blood. Allah!
Please Allah, get rid of the Jews.
Bring them down.
They are not as powerful as you.
Please Allah, make the earth shake and destroy the pillars of their civilisation.
Please Allah, cast fear and terror into their hearts.
Oh Allah disperse them so they become lost once again.
Oh Allah, show us a sign.
Oh Allah, surprise them in a way they don't expect.
Oh Allah, cast fear and terror into their hearts.'


10. Enough videos, back to the words of Hamas:
From a sermon delivered by 'Atallah Abu Al-Subh, former Hamas minister of culture, which aired on Al-Aqsa TV, April 8, 2011, translation by MEMRI:
"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him.

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah.

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world.

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

11. Do you recognise these words?
"Palestine is Islamic, and not an Islamic emirate, from the river to the sea, that unites the Palestinians. Jews have no right in it, with the exception of those who lived on the land of Palestine before World War I."
They were said by Hamas official Halil Al-Hayya, as quoted in Al-Hayat newspaper, November 11, 2010
That's right, they are rater similar to the point I started with, Hamas's 1968 Charter.


12. How about another Hams leader? Hamas leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar, Future News TV, June 15, 2010, Source: MEMRI.org
"We have liberated Gaza, but have we recognized Israel? Have we given up our lands occupied in 1948? We demand the liberation of the West Bank, and the establishment of a state in the West Bank and Gaza, with Jerusalem as its capital – but without recognizing [Israel]. This is the key – without recognizing the Israeli enemy on a single inch of land. ...
"Our plan for this stage is to liberate any inch of Palestinian land, and to establish a state on it. Our ultimate plan is [to have] Palestine in its entirety. I say this loud and clear so that nobody will accuse me of employing political tactics. We will not recognize the Israeli enemy."


13. How about some more comments about not living alongside Israel but destroying it?
"[Hamas will] never recognize the legitimacy of the Zionist state that was founded on our land."
That's Khaled Mashaal, Hamas leader, February 3, 2006, Al-Hayyat al-Jedida


14. Another one?
"[Hamas] will not change a single word in its covenant [which is calling for the destruction of Israel]."
That's Mahmoud Zahar, Hamas leader, after casting his vote in the Gaza Strip, January 25, 2006, Ha'aretz


15. Another one?
"We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay (on the land), nor his ownership of any inch of land.... We are interested in restoring our full rights to return all the people of Palestine to the land of Palestine. Our principles are clear: Palestine is a land of Waqf (Islamic trust), which can not be given up."
That's (Mahmoud Zahar, Hamas leader and candidate to the Palestinian legislative council, Palestinian TV, January 17, 2006, Newsday


16. More?
"The vanquishing of the enemy in Gaza does not mean that this stage has ended. We still have Jerusalem and the pure West Bank. We will not rest until we liberate all our land, all our Palestine. We do not distinguish between what was occupied in the 1940s and what was occupied in the 1960s. Our Jihad continues, and we still have a long way to go. We will continue until the very last usurper is driven out of our land."
That's Sheik Nizar Rayan, Hamas "political" leader, at a rally in Gaza, Al-Jazeera TV on September 16, 2005, MEMRI


17. You want more?
"We stand here on our liberated land, near the armistice borders. We remember when Sharon said that Netzarim is like Tel Aviv. Hamas has said, via the lion of Palestine [Rantisi], that Gaza is like Tel Aviv. The promise that has been fulfilled and will be fulfilled in the future, oh Sharon, is the promise of Allah, and the promise of Hamas. Behold, Palestine is being liberated, Allah willing..."

"We have come here in multitudes to proclaim that Hirbiya and Ashkelon will be taken by the mujahideen. We have come here to say that the weapons of the resistance that you see here will remain, Allah willing, so that we can liberate Palestine – all of Palestine – from the Sea to the River, whether they like it or not."
That one was from Mushir al-Masri, Hamas spokesman, at a rally in Gaza, Al-Jazeera TV on September 16, 2005, MEMRI


18. Another Hams leader?
"By God, we will not leave one Jew in Palestine. We will fight them with all the strength we have. This is our land, not the Jews..."

"You will have no security except outside the homeland Palestine.... We have Allah on our side, and we have the sons of the Arab and Islamic nation on our side."
Those two are from Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Hamas leader, June 10, 2003, interview with Al-Jazeera, Jerusalem Post


19. How about Hamas's spiritual leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin, interviewed in the Australian Muslim youth magazine, Nida'ul Islam, June/July 2002
"We reject this US domination and this frantic war. From our side, we concentrate on striking blows to it here in Palestine, with the aim of ironing out the Jewish entity in Palestine, which is the cause of trouble in the world..."


20. Some more video now.

That's Dr. Walid Al-Rashudi, head of the Department of Islamic Studies at Saud University in Saudi Arabia, in a speech broadcast in 2009 on Hamas TV. The religious scholar prays for the extermination of all Jews: "Kill them one by one and don't leave even one."


I could go on and on and on and on, there's so much out there of Hamas's desire to destroy Israel and kill all Jews but even I haven't got all day. I'll give the last word to Lt. Col Ralph Peters in an interview on American television in 2009 "Hamas's mission is to kill Jews, you cannot persaude its leaders to pick a new mission... Hamas exists to destroy Israel... their mission is to kill Israelis, kill Jews"

I am sure that @aarondellaria has a good explanation as to how I have misunderstood Hamas, if so I'd love to hear it.

Israel and Hamas - 'Notice the difference'



Please take note BBC, The Guardian, The Independent, Richard Burden MP, George Galloway MP etc.

Is the Euro doomed, was it always doomed?


Nigel Farage tells the truth whilst Ken Clarke blathers on in favour of the Euro and dismisses the chances of the end of the Euro and then refuse to answer whether he'd like Britain join the Euro but instead make a stupid joke at Nigel Farage's expense. Even more ridiculous is Labour's Gloria de Piero stating with a straight face that "This is not a political project"; the architects of the EU have proudly stated that it was and is a political project, who is she to know better. Paddy Ashdown is another plitician who refuses to face facts or ever admit that he was wrong. I find it detesatable when people who have got so many things wrong become senior statesmen whose words have to be listened to.

Slo-mo hummingbird

I love watching hummingbirds but my attempts at filming them seem always to fail, so I was pleased to find this video.

Postings today

Will be light or non-existent but when I have time:

1. A new comprehensive list of quotations that prove that Hamas does want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews - this will be for the edification and education of @aarondellaria who is still trying to pretend this is not true

2. An epiphany about anti-Israel protesters, again this has links to @aarondellaria


No it won't (update)

Further to this post of yesterday I found some more information amongst the comments at Biased BBC:
'‘”Today there are about 6,000 languages in the world, and half of the world’s population speaks only 10 of them. English is the single most dominant of these 10. British colonialism initiated the spread of English across the globe; it has been spoken nearly everywhere and has become even more prevalent since World War II, with the global reach of American power.”
(Christine Kenneally, The First Word: The Search for the Origins of Language. Viking, 2007)’

‘How many people in the world today speak English?
First-language speakers: 375 million
Second-language speakers: 375 million
Foreign-language speakers: 750 million
(David Graddol, The Future of English? A Guide to Forecasting the Popularity of the English Language in the 21st Century. British Council, 1997)’
As I thought...

Saturday, 23 June 2012

A Coupling translation issue


Israeli Hebrew to English language issues in 'Coupling'. Ah the wonders of shadayim!

Jimmy Carr wonders how far he can go to offend


I must say that I did like the Diana, Princess of Wales gag.

The 'how do you make a gay f*** a woman' joke was in very poor taste and I did laugh and squirm at the same time.

I put this up before the Jimmy Carr tax avoidance revelations, now all Jimmy Carr has to do to offend is say 'tax scheme'.

No it won't

The BBC love to hate anything Western, especially English and long for the day when the West has been eclipsed by the East and Christianity by Islam. I found this comment on the BBC news website that I thought worth examining.

'There has certainly been language shift in Los Angeles, most notably a doubling of the number of Spanish speakers (those who speak the language at home) in the past 30 years from 1.5 million in 1980 to 3.6 million in 2010 (including Spanish Creole).
Internationally, Spanish is also significant and futuregazers have gone as far as predicting that one day Mandarin Chinese could become the default language of business worldwide.

Speaking to the New York Times in 2009, French linguist Claude Hagege, author of On the Death and Life of Languages, said that Hindi and Mandarin could replace English some day.'
The bloody obvious point being missed is that there are more speakers of Mandarin Chinese and Hindi than there are of English BUT (and it's a bloody big but) Hindi is not even spoken by all Indians, nor Mandarin by all Chinese. Indeed the common language of India is English, as it is the second language of so many people. But how many Chinese speak Hindi? How many Indians speak Mandarin? The reason English is the international language is not that it is the first language of the majority of people but that it is the first or second language of more people than any other language and the only chance of a common language.

Friday, 22 June 2012

Is there anything harder than extracting the truth from an opponent of Israel?

If you want to see how hard it can be to get an opponent of Israel to admit the truth, then take a look at my tweet conversation with @aarondellaria today. He called me a liar over this blogpost but couldn't find an example. He challenged me as to when Israel ever gave away land for peace but when I gave him three examples he changed the question to just with Palestinians, so I answered that. But the most interesting point was when I asked @aarondellaria if he accepted that 'Hamas wanted to destroy Israel and kill all Jews'. He wriggled and wriggled, here's some early attempts to evade answering the question:





Pathetic but I persisted so he had to change tack:

"Hamas can say whatever" - indeed they can but I want this individual to admit that 'Hamas want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews'. So I keep on asking... Here's @aarondellaria's next reply:
So he accepts that Hamas dream about destroying Israel and killing all Jews but as they know that's not realistic we can ignore it.

I wasn't satisfied as I hadn't asked if they could destroy Israel and kill all Jews but if they want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews, so I asked again and this was the response:

So it's just rhetoric and Israel should ignore the rhetoric, although previously @aarondellaria said it was a dream - so just an aspiration not a realistic aim.

I asked again and got this response from @aarondellaria.

There you go, the last refuge of the scoundrel, an accusation (albeit tangentially) that I was a racist. Not bad, he managed several hours before he resorted to that trick.Brighter than some I have had to deal with in the past.


I am not a member of the BNP but don't see why that would be relevant to my questioning him about what Hamas wanted that for a certain type of agitator an accusation of racism trumps all and I am sure Aaron Dellaria is used to people backing down before his accusations and his refusal to ever concede. Fortunately I have met his type before and beaten them (in argument) many many times.

@aarondellaria then changed tactic, don't worry he didn't actually answer my question - 'Do Hamas want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews?', no he decided to question my article's research:
So I responded:


Then @aarondellaria gets some help from @joeman42, who was easily dealt with
:
@joeman42 came back with the always ready insult of the intellectually bested, he called me a bigot and accused me of hating 'Muslims and all things Islamic'. Silly chap:


What sort of a person is @joeman42, some sort of peace activist/humanitarian? A believer like @aarondellaria in a two state solution? Nah:

'hates Racism Facism Royalism imperialism & Zionism' and from the map he chooses to display he is not a believer, even a pretend one, in a two state solution. He would seem to want a one state solution, Palestine and no place for Israel. Maybe the proud Irishman @joem42 should read this post from earlier today about another Irish man who found out for himself about the truth of the Israeli/Palestinian situation rather than relying on Pallywood and pro Palestinian propaganda.



For a final (for the moment) insight into @aarondellaria take a look at his Twitter profile:
He claims to be a believer in a two state solution but only sees that 'Settlements and outpost are the major obstacle to peace', so nothing that Hamas or Fatah are doing? Such an even-handed approach, so I asked him about that:
You won't be surprised to learn that 'two states for two people' @aarondellaria has not responded, how could he honestly explain his supposed even-handed position with his identification that 'Settlements and outpost are the major obstacle to peace'.


Finally, and I do mean finally, because even I have a limit to my desire to challenge those who normally go unchallenged, there was this odd exchange:
 An implied threat from @joem42 or was he just wondering if I was an 'occupying' Jew?

Ed Miliband and immigration

We are told that Ed Miliband has admitted that his party "got it wrong" on immigration when in government. Apparently he has said that Gordon Brown and Tony Blair should not have allowed uncontrolled immigration from new EU states in 2004.

Immigration from new EU states was but a small part of what Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the rest of the last Labour government achieve with their deliberate policy of increased immigration.

Thanks to Andrew Neather we know that the 'driving political purpose' of this policy was 'to make the UK truly multicultural' - and one subsidiary motivation was 'to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date'.'

Here's how well Labour had succeeded by 2003



Here's another graph running up until 2009

I well remember the treatment Migration Watch's Chairman, Sir Andrew Green, used to get from the BBC especially during the days when his organisation was portrayed as racist for daring to point out the rise in immgration, so I was interested to read his reaction to this change of Labour policy:
“This is a very significant shift of policy and is music to our ears, confirming what we have been saying for ten years. But it is a bit rich coming from a party which, when in government, threw open the doors of Britain to three and a half million foreign immigrants with total contempt for public opinion. The opposition must now say whether they accept that there must be a sharp reduction in immigration and, if so, how they propose to achieve it.”

Does a falling 'slinky' defy gravity?


The answer is apparently 'no' but it sure looks like it does!

Israel & Palestine - 40 shades of grey


The trailer for the film '40 Shades of Grey' from Irish film maker Nicky Larkin.

Here's Nicky Larkin's op-ed piece from the Irish Independent re the background to his film:
'I used to hate Israel. I used to think the Left was always right. Not any more. Now I loathe Palestinian terrorists. Now I see why Israel has to be hard. Now I see the Left can be Right -- as in right-wing. So why did I change my mind so completely?

Strangely, it began with my anger at Israel's incursion into Gaza in December 2008 which left over 1,200 Palestinians dead, compared to only 13 Israelis. I was so angered by this massacre I posed in the striped scarf of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation for an art show catalogue.

Shortly after posing in that PLO scarf, I applied for funding from the Irish Arts Council to make a film in Israel and Palestine. I wanted to talk to these soldiers, to challenge their actions -- and challenge the Israeli citizens who supported them.

I spent seven weeks in the area, dividing my time evenly between Israel and the West Bank. I started in Israel. The locals were suspicious. We were Irish -- from a country which is one of Israel's chief critics -- and we were filmmakers. We were the enemy.

Then I crossed over into the West Bank. Suddenly, being Irish wasn't a problem. Provo graffiti adorned The Wall. Bethlehem was Las Vegas for Jesus-freaks -- neon crucifixes punctuated by posters of martyrs.

These martyrs followed us throughout the West Bank. They watched from lamp-posts and walls wherever we went. Like Jesus in the old Sacred Heart pictures.

But the more I felt the martyrs watching me, the more confused I became. After all, the Palestinian mantra was one of "non-violent resistance". It was their motto, repeated over and over like responses at a Catholic mass.

Yet when I interviewed Hind Khoury, a former Palestinian government member, she sat forward angrily in her chair as she refused to condemn the actions of the suicide bombers. She was all aggression.

This aggression continued in Hebron, where I witnessed swastikas on a wall. As I set up my camera, an Israeli soldier shouted down from his rooftop position. A few months previously I might have ignored him as my political enemy. But now I stopped to talk. He only talked about Taybeh, the local Palestinian beer.

Back in Tel Aviv in the summer of 2011, I began to listen more closely to the Israeli side. I remember one conversation in Shenkin Street -- Tel Aviv's most fashionable quarter, a street where everybody looks as if they went to art college. I was outside a cafe interviewing a former soldier.

He talked slowly about his time in Gaza. He spoke about 20 Arab teenagers filled with ecstasy tablets and sent running towards the base he'd patrolled. Each strapped with a bomb and carrying a hand-held detonator.

The pills in their bloodstream meant they felt no pain. Only a headshot would take them down.

Conversations like this are normal in Tel Aviv. I began to experience the sense of isolation Israelis feel. An isolation that began in the ghettos of Europe and ended in Auschwitz.

Israel is a refuge -- but a refuge under siege, a refuge where rockets rain death from the skies. And as I made the effort to empathise, to look at the world through their eyes. I began a new intellectual journey. One that would not be welcome back home.

The problem began when I resolved to come back with a film that showed both sides of the coin. Actually there are many more than two. Which is why my film is called Forty Shades of Grey. But only one side was wanted back in Dublin. My peers expected me to come back with an attack on Israel. No grey areas were acceptable.

An Irish artist is supposed to sign boycotts, wear a PLO scarf, and remonstrate loudly about The Occupation. But it's not just artists who are supposed to hate Israel. Being anti-Israel is supposed to be part of our Irish identity, the same way we are supposed to resent the English.

But hating Israel is not part of my personal national identity. Neither is hating the English. I hold an Irish passport, but nowhere upon this document does it say I am a republican, or a Palestinian.

My Irish passport says I was born in 1983 in Offaly. The Northern Troubles were something Anne Doyle talked to my parents about on the nine o'clock News. I just wanted to watch Father Ted.

So I was frustrated to see Provo graffiti on the wall in the West Bank. I felt the same frustration emerge when I noticed the missing 'E' in a "Free Palestin" graffiti on a wall in Cork. I am also frustrated by the anti-Israel activists' attitude to freedom of speech.

Free speech must work both ways. But back in Dublin, whenever I speak up for Israel, the Fiachras and Fionas look at me aghast, as if I'd pissed on their paninis.

This one-way freedom of speech spurs false information. The Boycott Israel brigade is a prime example. They pressurised Irish supermarkets to remove all Israeli produce from their shelves -- a move that directly affected the Palestinian farmers who produce most of their fruit and vegetables under the Israeli brand.

But worst of all, this boycott mentality is affecting artists. In August 2010, the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign got 216 Irish artists to sign a pledge undertaking to boycott the Israeli state. As an artist I have friends on this list -- or at least I had.

I would like to challenge my friends about their support for this boycott. What do these armchair sermonisers know about Israel? Could they name three Israeli cities, or the main Israeli industries?

But I have more important questions for Irish artists. What happened to the notion of the artist as a free thinking individual? Why have Irish artists surrendered to group-think on Israel? Could it be due to something as crude as career-advancement?

Artistic leadership comes from the top. Aosdana, Ireland's State-sponsored affiliation of creative artists, has also signed the boycott. Aosdana is a big player. Its members populate Arts Council funding panels.

Some artists could assume that if their name is on the same boycott sheet as the people assessing their applications, it can hardly hurt their chances. No doubt Aosdana would dispute this assumption. But the perception of a preconceived position on Israel is hard to avoid.

Looking back now over all I have learnt, I wonder if the problem is a lot simpler.

Perhaps our problem is not with Israel, but with our own over-stretched sense of importance -- a sense of moral superiority disproportional to the importance of our little country?

Any artist worth his or her salt should be ready to change their mind on receipt of fresh information. So I would urge every one of those 216 Irish artists who pledged to boycott the Israeli state to spend some time in Israel and Palestine. Maybe when you come home you will bin your scarf. I did. '
Powerful stuff and nicely written. However Nicky had to write a follow-up to that article, based on the reaction to it:
''I BET you're a Protestant." The opening line of an email I read as I horsed down my toast. A fine thing to say to a man from Birr. We've a lovely castle.

The previous week I'd written an article that was published in this paper. It explained how my political ideologies had shifted, following a seven-week stint in Israel and Palestine. I wrote how it wasn't acceptable to have a difference of opinion on the Israel issue in this country. How being pro-Palestinian has become part of our Irish national identity. How the Left can be Right, as in right-wing.

The fall-out has been quite spectacular. I've been called everything from a Protestant to an agent of Mossad. Letters to the editor have been flying in since, like rockets from the Strip. But, unlike the rockets from Gaza, not all the letters have been sent with spleen.

I expected hate mail. And I got it. But I didn't expect the support from a largely silent group of people -- Irish people. It seems there are true liberals out there; people prepared to listen to both sides of the story. Unfortunately they are surrounded by foaming scarf-wearers, clutching their boycott sheets and Bic biros.

It's the foam that gives the fear. Nobody wants to be bitten by a rabid dog. Or a Bic biro. So, as a result, the Irish support I've received has been largely by private correspondence. Strictly for health reasons. I'm contagious.

Private support, but very public abuse. The blogs and boards have been hopping. My favourite so far: "As far as Larkins go, Nicky is clearly more Celia than Jim."

I like it. Funny, but loaded.

But the most interesting forum has been on Facebook. Since becoming an agent for Mossad, I have also turned my hand to international matchmaking. As a result of the article, new Facebook friendships have been popping up all over the place.

Women who wouldn't be allowed to walk in public with

a man outside the internet cafe are now firm friends with chest-thumping provos. Bound together online by a mutual hatred of Israel.

Solid foundations are vital in any new relationship. I'm glad I've brought some love to the world. Unfortunately, none of this love has been extended towards my film. The mud-slingers have been quick to write off a film they haven't yet seen. It seems in our bid to become a socialist state, we're also doing Socialist Realism. But we drank too much Fanta at the party conference. Now we're fully fledged Soviets, sending dissenters to Siberia. Online.

Stalin would be proud. He'd have loved Facebook these past couple of weeks. One of his pre-Facebook mates had some similar ideas on Jews in Germany in the Thirties, as some of the online sentiment shows in reaction to the article.

Is it too far a stretch to conclude that the rise of anti-Semitism on this island is in tandem with the death of a certain Tiger? Are we just bitter that there's a financially thriving state out there? A financially thriving race? And, worst of all, one that doesn't need our approval? Is that what we are really talking about when we dispute Israel's "right to exist"? Or is it just plain old anti-Semitism?

Either way, we'll all have something to say about it. On laptops, while eating toast.'
Supporting Israel, the unacceptable position to take?

Labour numeracy


Labour's Shadow Schools Minister Kevin Brennan makes a ridiculous mistake in the House of Commons - stating that 3 out of 10 is 60% as he tries to ridicule a Conservative's mathematical ability.

This video was on the ITV news website. For some reason the pro-Labour BBC seem to have missed the story completely, I wonder why. Rest assured that if a Conservative spokesman had made a similar error it would have been front page news on the BBC News website and repeated & referenced ad nauseum on the BBC's topical news quizes.

Thursday, 21 June 2012

For @Aarondellaria - Here's a history lesson for you - do please study it all before responding

I have posted similar pieces to this before but think that the point bears repeating...


Let's start with Israel's size and creation on Palestinian land.

Israel's very size at creation was a result of losing land. The first map below shows the land promised to Israel as the Jewish National Home in Palestine as demarcated in the December 1920 Franco-British Boundary Convention. The second map shows the borders of the Jewish National Home in Palestine after the British cut off the eastern 77% of the demarcated borders to form Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan, later Jordan, is the Palestinian homeland, just as Israel is the Jewish homeland.







The truth about Jordan is that it is the Palestinian State. It was set-up in 1929 on part of the land promised by the 1917 Balfour declaration for the 'establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'. Here's another map of the Palestinian Mandate, see how it divides between what is now Israel and what is now Jordan?



So in 1946, Transjordan became an independent state under Hashemite rule. In November 1947, the United Nations proposed to partition the remaining 22 per cent of Palestine. The territory between the Jordan River and the sea was divided into a Jewish and an Arab part. The Jewish representatives accepted the UN partition plan, but the Arab representatives refused. In an attempt to “drive all the Jews into the sea,” they began the 1948 war and lost.

The losing side did not sit back and lick their wounds, they took their revenge on the Jews in East Jerusalem and the rest of Cisjordan — the ancient provinces of Judea and Samaria — now held by Muslim forces. This entire region was ethnically cleansed of all Jews. Even the name of Judea and Samaria were wiped off the map and replaced by the term “West Bank.”

Israel, including Judea and Samaria, has been the land of the Jews since time immemorial. Judea means Land of the Jews. Never has there been an autonomous state in the area that was not Jewish. The Diaspora of the Jews, which began after their defeat by the Romans in AD 70, did not lead to the departure of all the Jews from their ancient homeland. Jews had been living in the Jordan Valley for centuries until the Arab invaders drove them out in 1948, when the provinces of Judea and Samaria were occupied by the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan, which abbreviated its name to Jordan in 1950.

Note that until 1967, when Israel regained the ancient Jewish heartland of Judea and Samaria, no-one, not a single Islamic scholar or Western politician, ever demanded that there be an independent Palestinian state in the so-called West Bank.


But what of the Palestinian people; who are they? I could quote any number of historians and politicians but lest they be tarnished by being called Zionist scum, as I have been for making this point before, let's listen to a senior Palestinian:

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organisation executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

Read that again: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.


For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva ."


Take a look back in time, until the late 1980s, Jordan’s Hashemite rulers did not deny that their country was Palestine. They said so on numerous occasions. In 1965, King Hussein said: “Those organisations which seek to differentiate between Palestinians and Jordanians are traitors.” As late as 1981, Hussein repeated “Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan.”

In March 1971, The Palestine National Council, too, stated that “what links Jordan to Palestine is a national bond […] formed, since time immemorial, by history and culture. The establishment of one political entity in Transjordan and another in Palestine is illegal.”

In 1988, as the first Intifada raged, Jordan officially renounced any claim of sovereignty to the so-called West Bank. In recent years, the Jordanian authorities have stripped thousands of Palestinians of their Jordanian citizenship. They do so for two reasons.

First, because the alien Hashemite rulers fear that the Palestinians might one day take over their own country. And second, because stripping Palestinians of their Jordanian citizenship supports the falsehood that Jordan is not a part of Palestine. And that, consequently, the Palestinians must attack Israel if they want a place of their own.

The other claim that I have made to me is that the Palestinians only want to live in peace alongside Israel and that a return to the pre-1967 borders is all that they want. Leaving aside the fact that the armies of six surrounding Arab nations tried to wipe Israel off of the map in 1948 before Israel won another defensive war in 1967, the enemies of Israel make no secret of what they want and how they intend to achieve it.

Do remember that on the same day Yasser Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."

The removal of East Jerusalem from Israel and a general return to the 1967 borders is not the aim of Hamas, Fatah/PLO/PA or the rest of the Muslim Middle East, it is but a staging post on the way to the eventual destruction of Israel.


The following are comments made by Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya on his visit to Tunisia in early January 2012. The comments were all recorded and broadcast on Al-Aqsa TV:
"I say to you now, in the capital of south Tunisia: We will never ever recognize Israel."

"The land of Palestine, oh brothers and sisters, is an Islamic, as decreed by the second caliph, Omar ibn Al-Khattab. We shall not relinquish the Islamic waqf on the land of Palestine, and Jerusalem shall not be divided into Western and Eastern Jerusalem. Jerusalem is a single united [city], and Palestine stretches from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and from Naqoura [Rosh Ha-Niqra] to Umm Al-Rashrash [Eilat] in the south."


This is Hamas's leader in the Gaza Strip, Ismail Haniyeh, saying on 14 December that whilst Hamas may work for the "interim objective of liberation of Gaza, the West Bank, or Jerusalem," this in an "interim objective" and "reconciliation" with Fatah will not change Hamas' long-term "strategic" goal of eliminating all of Israel. Ismail Haniyeh also said this:
"The armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the invaders and usurpers [Israel]... We won't relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine."
From the sea to the river, now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, remember that every time someone chants "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" they are calling for the destruction of Israel, the ending of the Jewish state. The river is the Jordan, the sea is the Mediterranean; from the river to the sea is not calling for a two state solution, it is calling for the destruction of Israel.

Two days after Ismail Haniyeh's speech, the Palestinian Authority's Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said that Hamas leader abroad Khaled Mashaal had agreed that:
"There will be no military resistance."
"The permanent solution is on the '67 borders."
According to Mahmoud Abbas, Hamas had agreed to a permanent solution based on the 1967 borders. However, Haniyeh said that Hamas agrees to a temporary solution on the 1967 borders as a first stage only.

Who to believe?

Before you say Mahmoud Abbas, remember that for many years, the PLO itself promoted a "stages plan" that would first create a Palestinian state on the 1949 - 1967 armistice lines, and then work from that position to destroy Israel. Indeed senior Fatah official Abbas Zaki recently stated that this remains the goal for Fatah as well, but that "you can't say it to the world. You can say it to yourself."...


The west listens to and believes what Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas say about wanting a two state solution and a return to 1967 borders because that fits in with their world view of an evil Jewish state stealing land from poor Palestinians. The truth is some way from this narrative but the western media, especially the BBC, just don't care; facts will not be allowed to intrude into this narrative.


So the next time you hear a Palestinian spokesman saying they want to live in peace with Israel or a BBC Middle East 'expert' explaining how Hamas and the PLO have changed and really do want peace with Israel, remember that it's all lies. Hamas and Fatah/PLO want to destroy Israel, they claim all of the land that Israel stands on and the return to 1967 borders is but the first step on the path to destroying Israel and killing all Jews.


Another question that springs to mind when people say that the Palestinians want their land back is what was the case between 1948 and 1967. In 1948 Jordan 'occupied' the 'West Bank' whilst Egypt 'occupied' the Gaza Strip. Were there any protests by 'Palestinians' against these foreign occupations? I suppose an alternative question would be why was no Palestinian state formed in the West Bank and Gaza in 1949? Could it be that Zahir Muhsein was telling the truth?

A line that many push is that the Jews are immigrants to a previously Muslim Palestine. Let's examine that claim and start with Jerusalem

Jerusalem was the capital of a Jewish state from around 1000BC until the Jews were expelled one, two or more times. When the State of Israel was created in 1948, it was alongside Jerusalem as a 'corpus separatum under the administration of the UN.' aka an international city. This regime was to remain in force for a period of ten years, whereupon a referendum was to be held in which the residents were to decide the future ownership of their city. This plan was superseded by the 1948 war when the armies of four or more Muslim states tried to wipe Israel off the map and drive all the Jews, who could not be killed, into the sea. The Arab Legion attacked Western Jerusalem and at the end of the 1948 war Israel controlled the newer western part of Jerusalem and Jordan the older east, including the main religious sites.

From 1948 until 1967 the Jordanians expelled Jews from Jerusalem, destroyed many synagogues and some churches and refused access to religious sites to most Jews and many Christians.

By way of contrast since 1967 Israel has not restricted access for Muslims to the Dome of the Rock or the Al-Aqsa Mosque despite them being partly built on top of the site of 'the Temple'; what would be the holiest site in Judaism had it not been destroyed. Indeed the Western ('Wailing') Wall is all that remains of the Second Temple.

Let's look back to the time when Israel was finally formed in the aftermath of the Second World War. This was a time of great population transfers in Eastern Europe, between India & Pakistan and elsewhere; yet only in Israel/Palestine are the displaced still considered refugees. In 1948 over a million Hindus fled Pakistan and a similar number of Muslims left India for Pakistan. Both populations were absorbed by their new countries. In the same region, large population transfers happened when Bangladesh was created. Likewise ethnic Germans were expelled from Central & Eastern Europe and so had to assimilate into Germany. Meanwhile Hungarian refugees from Czechoslovakia and other places found sanctuary in Hungary, Ukrainians who were expelled from Poland found sanctuary in Ukraine, and so on.

Meanwhile In the Middle East 750,000 Jews were expelled form their homes in Arab countries and were absorbed into Israel. Why were the 'Palestinians' not absorbed into Jordan, Syria, Egypt & The Lebanon? The Palestinians talk about the 'right of return' and their right to live in their ancestral homes again. Does the same right exist for the Jews forced to flee Iraq, Egypt, Syria and other Arab countries? The value of the assets these Jews left behind has been valued at today's prices at around $300 billion. A US based organization has decades-old property deeds of Jews from Arab countries on a total area of 100,000 sq.km. - which is five times the size of the State of Israel.

So why did the Arab countries not absorb the Palestinian refugees? In 1959, the Arab League passed Resolution 1457, which stated thus:
'The Arab countries will not grant citizenship to applicants of Palestinian origin in order to prevent their assimilation into the host countries.'
So the Palestinian refugees are not permanent refugees because of Israel's actions but because of a decision taken by the Arab League. Thus the accepted narrative that heaps blame on Israel because it expelled the refugees is actually not true.

Remember that I started this post by explaining that Israel lost around 77% of what was promised to the Jewish people for a homeland and now exists on a sliver of land surrounded by far larger Muslim countries why should Israel be further reduced in size? Do you realise how small Israel is? Why should the Jews not be allowed to keep one small portion of the land they were promised in the Balfour Declaration? If you listen to the BBC and The Guardian you would think Israel occupied (pun intended) an enormous part of the Middle East; here's a map to illustrate the truth; can you spot Israel amongst it's Muslim neighbours?




Let's take another quick look at the claim that the Palestinians only want a return to the pre-1967 borders, a claim that Barack Obama and others seem happy to swallow.

I'll begin with a reminder of the words of the then Fatah leader, Yasser Arafat on the same day that he signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."

A return to 1967 borders for Israel is not the aim of Hamas, Fatah and the rest, it is a staging post on the way to the destruction of Israel.

The surrounding Arab countries attacked the new born state of Israel in 1948 declaring that they would drive all Jews into the sea. They failed and for that any sane person would give thanks but why did they attack were they demanding a return to the pre-1967 borders? In 1967 the same neighbours of Israel mustered forces ready to attack and destroy Israel again, once again they failed and in defeating the aggressors, Israel captured various territory. Why did the Arab countries attack Israel, were they demanding a return to the borders of 1967? Land captured in a defensive war is normally kept not surrendered back to the aggressors but in Israel's case this seems not be the case.

In 1973, on the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, the Muslim countries attacked Israel again and were defeated again, Israel captured more land from Egypt and Syria in another defensive war. Were the Arab countries in 1973 calling for a return to 1967 borders?

So despite the evidence of three wars started by Muslim countries to destroy Israel we are expected to believe that now the Palestinians just want peace so long as Israel returns to its pre-1967 borders. We are meant to ignore the words of Yasser Arafat in the past as quoted above but also of current Hamas leaders like Nizar Rayan, Hamas religious and military leader, who said on 1 Jan 2009
"Regarding the Jews, our business with them is only through bombs and guns... the prophet [Muhammad] promised that we will fight you, with Allah's help, until the tree and stone say: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."
How about Fatah's 1968 Charter:
'– In the Palestinian state only Jews who lived in Palestine before 1917 will be recognized as citizens [Article 6]:
– Only the Palestinian Arabs possess the right of self-determination, and the entire country belongs to them [Articles 3 and 21].
– Any solution that does not involve total liberation of the country is rejected. This aim cannot be achieved politically; it can only be accomplished militarily [Articles 9 & 21].
– Warfare against Israel is legal, whereas Israel's self-defence is illegal [Article 18].'
That 1968 Charter does not call for Israel to return to 1967 borders it calls for 'the entire country' to return to Palestinian control.

Barack Obama should know this history but maybe his upbringing as a child in Indonesia and then as a knowing adult in the church of Jeremiah Wright may have affected him. In case he or you need reminding here are some facts about the state of Israel and Palestine.

If after all this you still believe that Hamas and Fatah just want Israel to return to 1967 borders then here is a question for you: if this is the case then why do Fatah and Hamas incessantly show maps (in schools, on TV, on logos, in government literature) that contain no mention of Israel just Palestine occupying the whole area of Israel and the Palestinian territories? If Fatah and Hamas want a return to 1967 orders then why do they not recognise those borders in their own literature and propaganda?

Here are a few examples



Maybe you'd like instead to read the lyrics of a song played regularly on PA TV that runs:
"Jaffa, Acre, Haifa, and Nazareth are ours.
[I] Muhammad sing about the Galilee and the Golan (Heights).
Jaffa, Acre, Haifa and Nazareth are ours.
[I] Kabha sing about the Galilee and the Golan (Heights).
From Bethlehem to Jenin is Palestinian,
Ramle, Lod and Sakhnin are Palestinian.
Nowhere is more beautiful than Jerusalem;
no matter how much we travel
From Safed to Al-Badhan (near Nablus) is Palestinian;
Tiberias and Ashkelon are Palestinian."
You can see the song being sung here. Not much interest in a return to 1967 borders there is there?

Over and over again Hamas, Fatah and others have stated that they want Israel destroyed, Jews killed and one Palestinian state in its place. Yet still we are expected to believe that a return to 1967 borders is all that is wanted.

Many apologists for Palestinain terrorists claim that Hamas and their ilk have no problem with (or hatred of Jews) just with Israel and Zionists. Let's examine the evidence:

Influential Islamic scholars Muhammad Tantawi, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar in Cairo, the most prestigious centre of Muslim learning, call Jews “enemies of Allah.” Tantawi was generally considered a moderate by the Western media and policy makers. But how did this “moderate” address a delegation of Palestinian Muslims who visited him in 2002?

He urged them to intensify suicide attacks against Israelis, stating that every so-called “martyrdom operation” against “any Israeli, including children, women, and teenagers, is a legitimate act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an Islamic commandment, until the people of Palestine regain their land.”


Here are some excerpts from a Friday sermon in Al-Bireh, the Palestinian West Bank, which aired on Palestinian Authority TV on January 6, 2012.
'Preacher: "Oh servants of Allah, every evil and catastrophe on the land of Palestine – moreover, in the whole world – is caused by the Jews.

"They generate civil strife with their clandestine handiwork, their despicable texts, their bitter hearts, and their abominable intentions.

"Allah said: 'Whenever they kindle the fire of war, Allah extinguishes it, but they strive to do mischief on earth. Allah loves not those who do mischief.' This is the history of the Jews.'

Excerpts from footage of Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya's visit to Tunisia, which aired on Al-Aqsa TV  was posted on the Internet on January 5-10, 2012. This is a transcript:
'Crowd: "The people want the liberation of Palestine.

"The people want the liberation of Palestine."

Crowd member: "Killing the Jews…"

Crowd: "…is a duty."

Crowd member: "Killing the Jews…"

Crowd: "…is a duty."

Crowd member: "Driving out the Jews…"

Crowd: "…is a duty."

Crowd member: "Driving out the Jews…"

Crowd: "…is a duty."

Crowd member: "Crushing the Jews…"

Crowd: "…is a duty."

Crowd member: "Crushing the Jews…"

Crowd: "…is a duty." […] '

So do the preacher and the crowd hate Israel or Jews?


The above are facts, maybe the BBC and the others who spread lies about Israel would do well to study the truth.