A black and white photo ...

The Jews have forgotten, but Desmond Tutu remembers

Desmond Tutu, the outspoken critic of Israel and longtime ‘defender’ of human rights continues to highlight the ‘injustices’ and violations of human rights that Israel continues to display


The Archbishop, still remembers to continue his support of the ‘Israel-is-an-Apartheid-state’ claim

He remembers to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanction campaign

Just this week, he remembered to remind the world that:

“They (the Jews) have forgotten their own history. They have forgotten what their own prophets have said about our God,"

Of the ongoing situation in the Middle East, he remembered to tell the world:

"There is a great deal of preventable suffering being caused by people who themselves suffered so deeply

His memory, and his effort in reminding the world of evil, apartheid Israel, is not a short one.

In 2009, he remembered to remind the Jews that they have forgotten about their own suffering. In reference to Israels’ actions, he said: "But who pays the penance? The penance is being paid by the Arabs, by the Palestinians. I once met a German ambassador who said Germany is guilty of two wrongs. One was what they did to the Jews. And now the suffering of the Palestinians."

In 2002, he remembered to inform the world of the atrocities committed by Jews. He said: "My heart aches. I say why are our memories so short. Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation? Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home demolitions, in their own history so soon? Have they turned their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions? Have they forgotten that God cares deeply about the downtrodden?"

In 1989, in a visit to Jerusalem, he remembered to draw comparisons between apartheid South Africa and Israel, when he commented that he is a “black South African, and if I were to change the names, a description of what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank could describe events in South Africa”

In 1988, he remembered to demonise Zionsim, and told the world that Zionism has "very many parallels with racism”

There are approximately 27,000 refugees and asylum seekers in Israel today. These are mostly Africans, Muslim and Christian, from countries such as Eritrea, Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Ivory Coast. Every year, thousands of refugees attempt to cross, via Egypt into Israel. These African, black, Muslim and Christian, refugees, come from Sudan, Eritrea and Ethiopia. These refugees are fleeing genocide and persecution.

They are trying to get to one country that they believe will help them.

They are not trying to get to Egypt or Libya. They are not trying to get to Syria where 3,500 Muslims have been killed by their own government in the past 6 months

Desmond Tutu remembers.  That I am sure of

They are not trying to get to Saudi Arabia, where Christians cannot express their religious beliefs openly, or where women cannot drive cars.

Desmond Tutu clearly remembers this

They are not trying to get to the Palestinian Territories under the Palestinian Authority or Hamas control, where political freedoms and freedom of the press is curtailed, summary executions practiced and where persecution of gays and lesbians is rife

Desmond Tutu, I am sure, remembers to fight those injustices

Thousands of black, African Muslim and Christian, men and women, desperate refugees, looking for a better life, are trying to get to Apartheid Israel

They are trying to get to the evil, Apartheid Israel, country of the insensitive Jews, that Desmond Tutu has, for over 20 years, remembered to remind us about

I am sure that the desperate, black, men and women, Muslim and Christian refugees are upset, because with all of his remembering about Apartheid Israel, Desmond Tutu clearly forgot to send these people the memo


Video: Is Israel and Apartheid State?    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0DJBrO5ux8&feature=player_embedded

Israel’s response is ALWAYS disproportionate

Israel has long been accused of its ‘disproportionate response’, when confronting terror, or attacks on its populace

In Israel’s last war in Lebanon with Hezbollah, Israel was blasted for its disproportionate response when dealing with Hezbollah’s terror/military infrastructure

During Israel’s last incursion into Gaza to stop rocket fire into its territory, Israel was widely accused of using excessive force. The press, international community and ‘humanitarian’ organizations fell in love with the term: "disproportionate use of force"

Last week saw the Hamas release of Gilad Shalit, along Israel’s release of 1,027 Palestinians

Once again I witnessed Israel’s disproportionate response to violence and terror in the prisoner ‘exchange’ that took place

Gilad Shalit was taken captive while sitting on Israeli territory, defending Israeli lives. Many of the Palestinian prisoners were arrested after committing murder, or for plotting attacks on civilians. Attacks that included the bombing of restaurants, clubs and busses and the stabbing of teenagers.

Everyone now knows of Gilad Shalit. But what about Nasser Yataima who killed men, women and children in a bombing attack on a Netanya Hotel. Or Yussuf Dhib Hamed Abu Aadi and Na'el Barghouti who stabbed Israelis to death

Israel’s release of 1,027 prisoners for one Israeli is pretty darn disproportionate. But the figures are not the key driver of Israel’s (once again) disproportionate dealing with the situation

Calling the proceeding a prisoner ‘swap’ is a disservice. It was no ‘swap’. A swap is regarded as an exchange of equal value.

But in this situation, the value is indeed disproportionate.

A defender of human life was exchanged for takers of human life

This is not my twisted, right wing view of the situation. Israel and its enemies have disproportionate/unequal values, disproportionate/unequal ideologies and disproportionate/unequal world views

After a prisoner deal between Hezbollah and Israel, Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah said the following:

"We have discovered how to hit the Jews where they are the most vulnerable. The Jews love life, so that is what we shall take away from them. We are going to win, because they love life and we love death."

Chief Palestinian Authority cleric Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri has stated:

"We tell them, in as much as you love life, the Muslim loves death and martyrdom. There is a great difference between he who loves the hereafter and he who loves this world. The Muslim loves death and [strives for] martyrdom."

I followed the prisoner exchange closely. I watched ‘Western’ channels – BBC, Fox, CNBC, France 24 and I watched ‘Arab/Islamic’ channels, including Al Jazeerah and Iran’s Press TV

It was clear from the all the interviews with Palestinian prisoners, the one with Gilad Shalit, as well as from all the footage, that once again, Israel showed it’s disproportionate response to terror and violence.

• Israel disproportionately fed the Palestinian prisoners – they looked nice and plump, vs Gilad’s gaunt look

• Israel disproportionately gave Palestinian prisoners access to sunlight – they looked good, vs Gilad’s deathly white complexion form the lack of exposure of sunlight

• Israel disproportionately gave the Palestinian prisoners access to humanitarian organizations – They had access to the Red Cross, Red Crescent and United Nations representatives, vs Gilad’s access to NONE OF THESE

• Israel disproportionately gave the Palestinian prisoners access to legal representations – vs Gilads’ access to NOTHING

• Israel disproportionately allowed the Palestinian prisoners to have contact with their families (even if only telephonic at times) – vs. Gilad’s contact with NOBODY

• Israel disproportionately gave the Palestinian prisoners access to education (in Arabic, their mother tongue), with many earning Masters and Doctoral Degrees while in prison – vs. Gilad’s periodic access to a radio and TV (also in Arabic, his captor’s mother tongue)

I’m reminded of Israel’s disproportionate response, following the devastation of the earthquake in Haiti.

At the time, Peggy Shapiro noted:

“Despite its small size, Israel sent a large contingent of highly-trained aid workers to quake-stricken Haiti. Two jumbo jets carrying more than 220 doctors, nurses, civil engineers, and other Israeli army personnel, including a rescue team and field hospital, were among the first rescue teams to arrive in Haiti. In fact, they were the first foreign backup team to set up medical treatment at the partially collapsed main hospital in Port-au-Prince.

The international agencies that condemn Israel for its "disproportionate response" when it is attacked are not mentioning Israel's disproportionate response to human suffering. The U.S. has pledged 100 million and sent supplies and personnel. The U.K. pledged $10 million and sent 64 firemen and 8 volunteers. China, a country with a population of 1,325,639,982 compared to Israel's 7.5 million sent 50 rescuers and seven journalists.

The 25 Arab League nations sent nothing.”

Israel continues to be regarded as a ‘rogue state’ and a ‘violator of human rights’ whose response to fighting terror is always regarded as ‘disproportionate’. This latest ‘prisoner swap’ has once again made it clear to me, that in an effort to achieve peace, Israel will always demonstrate its disproportionate value for human life and human dignity

The rise of the Jewacide Bomber

It has long been asked: Why?

Why are there no Jewish suicide bombers?

Why has Judaism not created extremists, fundamentalists, and (dare I say) lunatics, the kind of which have brought disgrace to Islam and embarrassment to Moslems the world over?

Why is there no Taliban style movement in the Jewish world, where women are degraded and people attacked, in order to maintain a system of religious control?

Why are there no Jewish martyrs?

Is it because followers of the Jewish faith are less extreme? Is it because ‘religious’ Jews place a higher value on human life? A greater significance on human dignity? A greater respect for fellow human beings?

The people who dispatch suicide bombers, and most of the bombers themselves, believe that they are in a war. A war between Islam and the West. A battle between the infidels and those that submit to the will of the Almighty God. A fight between good and evil.

The people who dispatch suicide bombers and the bombers themselves are willing to die for, and kill for, the values that they believe are true, the system they ‘know’ is right, the religion they trust, the people they trust, and the God they serve

These people have passion. They have anger. They have desperation. And they are willing to do something about it

They are willing to martyr themselves, and take a few sacrificial lambs with them in the process

And there are always the majority of Muslim leaders who condemn these actions as ‘non-Islamic’ and the perpetrators as not representing ‘true Islam’

And there are always the minority of extremists who defend the actions, and claim it’s a battle between Islam and the West, Good and Evil

Why are things different for the Jews?

Do religious Jews feel no passion? Do they have no anger, or desperation, or a willingness to protect the faith they believe in. Are religious Jews not willing to defend and fight for what they ‘know’ is right? Do they not have the same passion that would drive them to defend their principles and values at any cost?

Would religious Jews not do anything to protect themselves and their communities from the onslaught of ‘western’ values and the threat it poses to their religious system?

Are religious Jews not keen to become martyrs for their cause, and take a few sacrificial lambs along for the ride?

Well, the concept of martyrdom is not alien to ‘religious’ Jews.

Judaism has cardinal sins which should be avoided at all costs. A person must give up their lives, rather than transgress these sins. And over the millennia, famous Jews have given their lives for far less than the cardinal sins, and in the Jewish world, these people are considered saints and heroes

But there have also been people that not only martyred themselves, they took other with them

Baruch Goldstein was deeply concerned about the threat to Israel’s existence and the deligitmisation of so-called ‘settlers’. He believed he had a religious duty to do something about that threat. And that religious duty demanded action, sacrifice and martyrdom.

On 25 February 1994, Baruch Goldstein martyred himself. It was after all, for the cause. For the defense of Israel. For the protection of Judaism. And it was perpetrated in the name of Almighty God

And in the process of martyring himself, Baruch Goldstein took 29 sacrificial lambs with him

The majority of Jewish leaders condemned the massacre, and called it a misrepresentation of Judaism.

A minority of extremists defended the actions and view Baruch Goldstein as a defender of the faith

Yigal Amir was frustrated with the concessions Prime Minister Rabin was making to the Palestinians. He was concerned about the future of the Jewish Promised Land. He was worried about the safety and security of Jews, and the relinquishing of land, promised to the Jewish people, by God

Yigal Amir martyred himself. He gave up his ‘life’ (of freedom), for the cause. He was willing to be imprisoned for the rest of his life, in the defense of the people of Israel, the land of Israel and God. In fact, he would have been more than happy to give up his life (in this world) for the cause. If secret service agents, or the Prime Ministers body-guards had killed Yigal Amir, Yigal Amir would have still succeeded in his plans to halt the ‘peace process’ and defend the values he believed in

And in the process of martyring himself, he took a sacrificial lamb with him

And again, most of the Jewish world condemned the assassination. A few praised it

These two examples are of two individuals. They could be considered truly ‘fringe’. Is a sample of 2 big enough to generalize, despite the support and admiration that both these individuals received in certain circles?

Are there no communities, or larger grouping of extremist Jews? Entire schools of Taliban style thought? And again, the question is asked: Why?

Why is there no Taliban style movement in the Jewish world?

This week, the BBC ‘exposed’ the extremist, ‘ultra-Orthodox Jews’ who are defending their value system in Beit Shemesh, Israel. They are fighting the threat that is posed to their lifestyle, their beliefs and their practices. For these ultra-orthodox Jews the young school girls from the adjacent neighbourhood are a threat. The school girls’ sleeves and skirts don’t meet the same religious criteria imposed by the ultra-orthodox Jews. The ultra-orthodox Jews feel that their sensitivities are being ignored, and the Jewish value that is placed on modesty is being threatened.

These ultra-orthodox Jews are willing to martyr themselves. They are willing to be beaten by police officers, arrested, and imprisoned, all for the sake of protecting their value system and defending God.

They are even willing to a few sacrificial lambs with them. Not through the murdering of Jewish school girls, but by subjecting them to abuse, taunts, rock throwing. They even throw feces at the school children

These ultra-orthodox Jews have staged similar protests in the past, violently clashing with police and local communities, protesting what they call “the evil regime”. There have many incidents too, of women being beaten, spat at and taunted for sitting on the men’s side of segregated busses. They believe that these Taliban style actions are required in the battle of good and evil. And martyrs and lambs are required too

Some in the ‘religious’ Jewish world condemn such attacks, beatings and public humiliations. Many, do nothing. These ultra-orthodox Talibani Jews belong to a value system that the religious Jewish world relies on for religious rulings, conversions, marriages and even the certification of Kosher products.

Most of the religious world turn a blind eye to the growing number of attacks on women, on secular Jews and even on other religious Jews (as is the case in Beit Shemesh)

The real number of Jewish extremists is low, but that low real number is merely a factor of the size of the Jewish population, which is, sadly, low. There are many in the religious Jewish world (whether ultra orthodox, or ultra-nationalistic or ultra-anything) that are feeling frustrated and threatened.

And these people have shown a willingness to martyr themselves and take a few sacrificial lambs with them.

Just as the majority of Moslem leaders denounce martyrdom operations, these Jewish extremists are widely condemned in the Jewish world. But condemnation does not make an extremist’s frustration and fear disappear. Neither does condemnation make an extremist’s willingness to be a martyr fade away. And condemnations will not stop an extremist from taking some sacrificial lambs along for the ride, as long as the cause is justified

And it always is

The number of incidents perpetrated by ‘Jewish extremists’ will continue to rise. And the methods employed will continue to escalate. Martyrdom operations will move from a willingness to be subjected to teargas and imprisonment to a willingness to die. And the throwing of feces at sacrificial lambs will simply not be sufficient in the war between good and evil

The question of :WHY are there no Jewish Suicide Bombers? is irrrelevant

The question is: WHEN will the first one strike?

Israel's best piece of Public Relations: The Goldstone Report

Since the Six Day War, I don't think the State of Israel has had a better piece of PR than the Goldstone Report.

Let me more precise: The Goldstone Report was a PR disaster. However, The Goldstone Report and it's subsequent 'press' has been the best thing that has happened to Israel since winning the Six Day War

Ofcourse there is debate as to whether Judge Goldstone should have accepted the role in the first place. However, his acceptance of the role was a coup for the State of Israel

Judge Goldstone, an internationally respected jurist, well known defender of human rights, and  a Jew, was best suited to take up the role.

Judge Goldstone's credibility within the international community is (now, possibly: was) extremely high

In taking up the role, Judge Goldstone had to prove to the world that, despite being Jewish, he was able to 'objectively' assess the human rights violations, and the fall-out of the Gaza conflict

If a non-Jew, or a 'real' anti-semite (not the Judge Goldstone type, as portrayed by Jewish Extremists) had accepted the role, the report would have had zero credibility within the Jewish world, and limited credibility within the rest of the world

The fact that Judge Goldstone, a respected jurist, defender of 'human rights' and JEW took up the role, gave the Goldstone report the highest levels of credibility within the non-Israel/non-pro-Israel/non-Zionist world (i.e. 99% of the worlds population - rounded down to the nearest percent)

Judge Goldstone and his colleagues released a report that was accepted by 99% of the world as credible, accurate and objective. Israel and it's supporters viewed the report as biased (and anti-semitic)

Judge Golstone's op-ed in the Washington Post (click on the link to read) revealed the true nature of a man who went into the process, with his eyes open (despite what Israel's 'defenders' initially claimed). Israel was not forthcoming with information (and they never should have been). However, that was seen as a pity by Judge Goldstone, since he knew that impartiality could not be guaranteed.

Regarding Israel's refusal to cooperate in the fact-finding mission,  Judge Goldstone expressed his regret back then, when the report was published, and he expressed his regret last week, when he said: "I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes"

The op-ed noted the following crucial points (actual quotes from Judge Goldstone's op-ed):

• That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets
• Indeed, our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing
• Regrettably, there has been no effort by Hamas in Gaza to investigate the allegations of its war crimes and possible crimes against humanity

Judge Goldstone's most telling, important and powerful statement is the following:

• I had hoped that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of evenhandedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted

When the Goldstone report was released, it was hailed for it's objectivity and it's open criticism of Israel. It's acceptance was widespread in particular because of who headed the fact finding mission: Judge Goldstone

And now, that Judge Goldstone has been honorable and just, and dealt wisely (and bravely) with the new evidence that he has before him, does that make him less credible?

Do the 99% of the world who accepted the Goldstone Report and used it to violently attack Israel now see Judge Goldstone as a sell-out?

Possibly

But that would speak of those peoples' own fallability and flaws in their arguements against Israel. Arguements that are based more on hatred and vitriol. than on facts and objectivity

For those people, Judge Goldstone's (or any report) would not have changed their postions/mindsets anyway

Whether Judge Goldstone should have taken up the position is debatable.

However, the fact that Judge Goldstone did take up the role, could not have worked out any better for Israel. Any other person leading that Gaza mission would never have resulted in such a positive outcome for Israel

It was Judge Goldstone's credibility and objectivity then that still holds true today.

And that has resulted in a wake-up call to Israel's detractors

The freight industry strike got me thinking....Is this country the next Zimbabwe?

The freight industry strike that started yesterday saw truck drivers take the streets, with the (usual) airing of grievances through initimidation, violence and vandalism

The scenes on Joburg's streets probably got the dinner table discussions quite heated, with debates about whether South Africa was headed for doom...with the standard arm chair analysis...

'South Africa is the next Zimbabwe'

The images of violence on Joburg's streets got me thinking about other, similar, images

The events of the past several weeks have presented the world with remarkable images.

Some of those images are inspiring

Many of them, scary

Egypt's (still pending) 'transition' has seen mostly peaceful protests, with footage of tens of thousands of people, united in song, united in prayer, united in celebratory exuberance

There has also been footage of destruction, looting, and murder

Over 300 people have died

The violence in Egypt, while tragic, was, in many circles, anticipated.

Expected

A given

The violence, some say, can easily be explained away

After all, Egypt is an Arab country

An African country

Some argue that Egypt is not a civilised, westernised, country

Backward Egypt is no civilised Europe

Egypt is going to the dogs

The images in Egypt remind me of other, recent, violent clashes. Clashes that took place in other parts of the world

In October 2010, France was gripped by terror.

This terror initiated was initiated by protestors who opposed the increase of the retirement age from 60 to 62

City centres bacame war-zones. There were violent clashes between protestors and police. Many people were injured.

Shops were looted.

Property was destroyed

The rule of law.....non-existent

 

This kind of behaviour was not expected. France is a westernised, developed country, and thriving democracy

The violence and destruction was an anomoly, wasn't it?

Surely this is not the behaviour of civilised Europeans

France is doomed

In November 2010, university students in the UK took to the streets to protests increased tuition fees.

The authorities struggled to control the crowds.

The protests turned violent. Public and private property was vandalised and destroyed.

Police men and women were attacked

Scores were arrested.

   

The images were disturbing

Frightening

And then, in December 2010, Prince Charles and Camilla's car was attacked. 20 demonstrators attacked their vehicle, while chanting 'Off with their heads'

Surely the people in that country must feel ashamed? I doubt they can explain away their behaviour, considering the UK is a civilised, a westernised, and above all, a moral society

How could things have gone so wrong?

Clearly, the UK has no future

The year ended a little quieter in that part of the world. But, still a little disturbing

In late December 2010, thousands of homes in Northen Ireland had no water supply. Around 40,000 people were left 'water-less' after pipes burst during the freezing weather

People had to collect water from distribution centres, with limits on how many litres each citizen could take

That begs the question: How could a developed, western country, not plan sufficiently for aging water pipes? How could the wise Europeans not anticipate the problem, and ensure that the water system was capable of enduring extreme water conditions.

It's apparent, Northen Ireland is on the brink of collapse

The images from Egypt, France, England, Northern Ireland clearly present societies that are in disarray with no clear leadership, or vision.

How could people turn so violent?

How could grievances spur such tragic a violent behaviour?

How could protestors destroy public property and bring countries to a standstill?

How could the police be targeted by these thugs?

How could a prince of a nation be attacked, in public?

I do not know the answer to those questions.

However...

When seeing the scenes of violence, intimidation and vandalism on their streets and on their TV screens, the liberated Egyptian citizens, aggrieved French workers, disenfranchised English youth and thirsty Northern Irish probably didn't say:

''Our country is the next Zimbabwe''

And neither should we

Desmond Tutu is not an Anti-Semite....He's anti-Christian

The following countries have total or partial bans on Hijabs or Burqas:




Tunisia



Morocco



Turkey



France



Belgium



Germany



Kosovo



Spain





In Israel, however, all religions are protected, and all people are free to practice their faiths.



In private… in public…however one chooses



That includes Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Ba’hai, Buddhists….



In October 2010, Desmod Tutu called on the Cape Town Opera to call off its Israel tour



Some right-wing, fanatical Jews have claimed that Desmond Tutu is anti-semitic.



They want to know: Why, oh why, does Desmond Tutu target Israel for its 'human rights' violations... Much more so than China, Sudan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Tunisia, Cuba, Nigeria, Russia, Libya or Indonesia?



This group of Jewish freaks claims that Desmond Tutu specifically (and unjustly) targets Israel in his continued calls to boycott Israel. They say that his pre-occupation with Israel borders on anti-semitism



This claim, by the right-wingers, settlers and other Jewish fanatics, is fallacious



Desmond Tutu is a champion of human rights. He highlights injustices and atrocities that are perpetrated across the globe.



The fact that Israel is associated with Jews is inconsequential



His call to boycott Israel is based on furthering the cause of human rights, and follows his recent call to boycott Saudi Arabia.



Last month, Desmond Tutu attended the “Conference of Anglican Bishops”, held in Saudi Arabia



At this conference, he voiced his dismay at how the Saudi Arabian authorities treat Christians, women, gays and lesbians



After all, in Saudi Arabia, Christians are not able to practice their faiths freely, or in public.



Okay,……



Did you really believe my 'report' that a Conference of Anglican Bishops took place in Saudi Arabia…



Or my 'report' that Desmond Tutu has EVER called for a boycott of Saudi Arabia because of its treatment of Christians?



Wouldn’t it be great if The Most Rev. Dr. Desmond Mpilo Tutu loved Christians more than he despised Israel



---------------------------



paradigmshiftyourlife.blogspot.com