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

Israel is a shocking Occupier of Gaza

Israel is accused of ‘occupation’. The terms ‘Occupation’, ‘Occupiers’ and ‘Colonisers’ are widely used when addressing the long-standing war between Israel and the Palestinians over disputed territories.

The disputed territories (particulalry the 'West Bank') are the subject of ongoing peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.

We pray for a peaceful resolution to the Arab/Israeli conflict, where both Palestinians and Israelis live, and thrive, in peace

But what about the Gaza Strip. What's going on with that 'occupation'?

Colonisation involves the assimilation of the indigenous population or/and the conversion of the indigenous culture to the culture of the colonizers.

Let’s look for a moment at that concept of occupation and colonization. Let’s take a look at several occupations and colonisations of relatively recent history

The British occupied and colonized the United States. They imposed British law and the English language. And then, most of the local, Indian population, got wiped out by the new immigrants

The Portuguese occupied and colonized Mozambique. They imposed Portuguese law on the indigenous population, made sure that most converted, and made them speak Portuguese too

The French occupied Morocco, imposed French law and the French language on the mostly Arabic, Muslim Population. The same happened in Algeria

The British occupied India. They imposed British law, and made English an official language within the mostly Hindi speaking country

The white, Afrikaans led apartheid regime, imposed Afrikaans on the South African black population. Through subjugation, the National Party enforced bantu education. Bantu education was aimed at controlling the local population’s mind, sources of educational material, and freedom. It was aimed at creating a new history, one where the local population’s languages and cultural identities would be eroded, so that the National Party’s agenda would be furthered, with limited resistance

All nations protect their borders and Israel has indeed protected its borders in an effort to limit attacks from Gaza. Without a doubt, movement for Gazans into Israel has been curtailed. But so has movement of Gazans into Egypt. Neither Israel nor Egypt want to jeopardize their security. The issue of cross-border restriction of movement has more to do with Hamas’ intention than Israel’s ‘apartheid style tactics’.

Egypt has never accused of being an ‘apartheid state’, and ‘occupier’ or a ‘coloniser’ when it too restricts movements of Gazans into Egypt, in an effort to protect its citizens.

Why is Egypt not called an ‘occupier’? Because everybody knows that Egypt is not ‘occupying’ the Gaza strip, it’s merely protecting its borders… and it’s citizens

Egypt does not ‘occupy’ the Gaza strip

Protection of a nation state’s border does not define ‘occupation’ or ‘colonisation’

Restrictions of cross-border movement is legitimate, and practiced across the world. In South Africa, there are border control posts between South Africa and ALL it’s neighbouring countries

Gaza is controlled by Hamas (not Israel). Arabic is the official language (not Hebrew). Islam is the official religion (not Judaism).

School text books (which include calls for the destruction of Israel and the murder of innocents) are used in the public school system. Freedom of the press is curtailed. Journalists are imprisoned. Suspected traitors are executed. Women are not regarded as equals within civil society, and do not share equal rights. Gays and Lesbians are tortured, and some get murdered/executed. Family honour killings are tacitly encouraged. Political prisoners and prisoners of war do not have access to the Red Cross.

Israel is a democratic state. It guarantees freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equality of the sexes, rights for Gays and Lesbians. All holy sites, for all religions, are protected by the state. Religious freedom is enshrined in, and upheld by, the law. Women have the vote. Gays have parades. Jewish schools teach in Hebrew and the curriculum includes Jewish studies. Muslim Arab schools teach in Arabic and the curriculum includes Muslim studies. Yeshivahs flourish for those wanting to engage in intense study of the Torah and other Jewish texts. Madrassahs flourish for those wanting to engage in intense study of the Koran and other Islamic religious texts. Muslims, Christians and Jews practice their faiths openly and freely. Muslims have Mosques (including one on Judaism’s holiest site), and Muslim worship is protected under Israeli law. Christians have churches (including many in Judaism’s holiest city), and Christian worship is protected under Israeli law. There is freedom of association and all people, religions, races and creeds are protected, as equals, by Israeli law. Political prisoners, including those militants that Israel calls ‘terrorists’, have access to legal aid, the Red Cross and humanitarian organisations

If Israel were ‘successful’ occupiers and colonisers, they would impose their laws and way of life on the occupied population. Israel would have assimilated the indigenous Gazan population or Israel would have converted the indigenous Gazan population to Israeli culture.

This is what all ‘successful’ occupiers and colonisers have done.

Hamas would not control Gaza. There would be freedom of the press in Gaza. Jews would have synagogues. Journalists would be respected and free to report (and opine) on what they see (and believe in). There would be freedom of association. Political opposition would be encouraged. Gays and Lesbians would be able to freely express their love without the threat of torture or murder. Young women would not have to fear family honour killings for getting into relationships that their families, or the political leadership, do not approve of. Prisoners would have access to legal aid, the Red Cross and humanitarian organizations.

To those who continue to despise Israel for its ruthless 'occupation' of Gaza...

Fear not....

As an ‘Occupier’ and ‘Coloniser’ of Palestinians in the Gaza strip, Israel has clearly failed

Cosatu's fight against (in)justice is not based on anti-semitism....Is it?

The 86th session of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Tourism Committee conference will be hosted in Isreal, next week.

SA Tourism was invited, but are unable to attend. "Cosatu saluted the SA tourism ministry on Thursday for not attending a tourism conference to be hosted by Israel"

It is no surprise that Cosatu is happy about SA tourism's non-attendance. Cosatu openly supports the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) campaign against Israel, which Cosatu says is an Apartheid state.

Cosatu has been accused by right-wing, conservative Jews (and some others) for being not only anti-Isreal, but anti-semitic too. The Jews argue that while the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians needs to be resolved peacefully and quickly, Cosatu's focus on Israel as an 'apartheid state' is not only unjustified, but smacks of anti-semitism.

Cosatu denies these accusations, claiming that calls to boycott Israel are not anti-Israel per se, nor anti-semitic, but simply part of their continued fight against injustice wherever it may occur

Cosatu is right to support the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) campaign. After all, Cosatu has led the ethical and moral transaformation in South Africa. Cosatu fought against apartheid, and continue to highlight the injustices that pervade the world.

Here are some other BDS campaigns that Cosatu vocally supports:

BDS Saudi Arabia

Cosatu has led multiple marches on the Saudi Arabia embassy in Pretoria. Cosatu continues to fight for the rights of Christians, who are all too often oppressed and repressed. These marches aim to highlight the religious intolerance of the Saudi authorities.

Here's why Cosatu continues to march on the Saudi embassy:

"Saudi Arabia's treatment of religious minorities has also been described by both Saudis and non-Saudis as "apartheid" and "religious apartheid"

Testifying before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on June 4, 2002, in a briefing entitled "Human Rights in Saudi Arabia: The Role of Women", Ali Al-Ahmed, Director of the Saudi Institute, stated: Saudi Arabia is a glaring example of religious apartheid. The religious institutions from government clerics to judges, to religious curricula, and all religious instructions in media are restricted to the Wahhabi understanding of Islam, adhered to by less than 40% of the population. The Saudi government communized Islam, through its monopoly of both religious thoughts and practice. Wahhabi Islam is imposed and enforced on all Saudis regardless of their religious orientations. The Wahhabi sect does not tolerate other religious or ideological beliefs, Muslim or not. Religious symbols by Muslims, Christians, Jewish and other believers are all banned. The Saudi embassy in Washington is a living example of religious apartheid. In its 50 years, there has not been a single non-Sunni Muslim diplomat in the embassy. The branch of Imam Mohamed Bin Saud University in Fairfax, Virginia instructs its students that Shia Islam is a Jewish conspiracy."

BDS Jordan

Cosatu's fight for women's rights is widely known. Cosatu has been particulalry pro-active in highlighting the lack of women's rights in Jordan. The apartheid style discrimnation of women in Jordan has led to Cosatu's calls for the South African government to break all diplomatic and trade ties with that country.

Here is why Cosatu is furthering the cause of women in Jordan:

"While Jordan, compared with many other Middle Eastern countries, scores quite highly in democratic league tables” , human rights, especially women’s rights perform poorly.

Article 340 of the Jordanian Penal Code stipulates: "He who discovers his wife or one of his female relatives committing adultery (with a man) and kills, wounds or injures one or both of them, is exempt from any penalty." Another clause states: "He who discovers his wife or one of his female relatives with another in an adulterous situation, and kills, wounds or injures one or both of them benefits from a reduction in penalty. When an attempt to cancel article 340 did not succeed, MP Mahmoud Al-Kharabshehm, speaking for 31 other MP's, said: "The changes will lead to a degredation of Jordanian society, affect the Jordanian family, and remove the deterring element embedded in article 340."

Furthermore, women do not have the same status as men with respect to nationality. A Jordanian man may marry a foreigner and pass on his nationality to his children; women can not. Women can't even pass on their nationality to their husbands

BDS Bangladesh

In staging demonstrations against the persecution of Buddhists in Bangladesh, Cosatu have managed to raise the profile of this community. Cosatu has opposed what is tantamount to Apartheid style torture and forced removals by the Bangladeshi government

Here's why Cosatu continues to hold demonstrations and rallies in support of Bangladeshi Buddhists:

"The Buddhist communities of Bangladesh are under pressure from the military and police not to practice Buddhism, and Buddhists have suffered abuse, arrest, and even rapes. The government encourages Muslim settlement in Buddhist areas, as part of its campaign to promote Islam. According to Jumma exiles, torture and murder of Buddhists is a frequent occurrence"

BDS Iran

Cosatu has called for the boycott of all good manufactured in Iran. This has been in solidarity of the Gay and Lesbian community of Iran, who continue to be subjected to Apartheid-style state executions and persecution

Here's why Cosatu has called for Iranian products to be pulled from South African shelves:

"On July 19, 2005, when two teenage boys, Mahmoud Asgari, 14, and Ayaz Marhoni, 16, were hanged in a particularly brutal manner in Iran for the crime of homosexual activity. Although Iranian officials insisted that the death sentence was for the rape of a third boy, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, has said otherwise.

But Asgari and Marhoni were not alone. According to the Iranian gay and lesbian rights group Homan, the Iranian government has put to death an estimated 4,000 homosexuals since 1980. According to Scott Long, director of the Human Rights Watch Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights Program, Iranians who are suspected of being gay commonly face torture. Hossein Alizadeh of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission said Iran gays live with “constant fear of execution and persecution and also social stigma associated with homosexuality.”

BDS Israel

Despite Israel's commitment to a peaceful and speedy resolution of its conflict with the Palestinians, Cosatu continues to fight apartheid-style practices by the Israeli apartheid state.

Here's why Cosatu's anti-Israel marches, boycotts and demonstrations against Israel are not anti-semitic in nature, but rather fall in line with Cosatu's other campaigns against injustice around the world:

"Israel's Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty seeks to defend human rights and liberties in Israel. Israel is the only country in the region ranked "Free" by Freedom House based on the level of civil liberties and political rights

In 2010, Israel was also the only country in the Middle East to be ranked "free" by Freedom House's "Freedom of the Press report, ranking the highest in the region."

Women in Israel have been guaranteed gender equality since the establishment of the state in 1948. This has enabled women to actively participate in Israeli life. The Israeli Declaration of Independence states: “The State of Israel (…) will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex.”

Israel has no entrenched constitution, but freedom of religion is anchored in law. While the Basic Laws of Israel that serve in place of a constitution define the country as a "Jewish state," these Basic Laws, coupled with Knesset statutes, decisions of the Supreme Court of Israel, and various elements of the common law current in Israel, also protect free practice of religion in the country. Legal accommodation of the non-Jewish communities follows the pattern and practice of the Ottoman and British administrations with some important modifications. Israeli law officially recognizes five religions, all belonging to the Abrahamic family of religions: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Druzeism and the Bahá'í Faith. Furthermore, the law formally recognizes ten separate sects of Christianity: the Roman, Armenian, Maronite, Syriac, and Chaldean Catholic Churches; the Eastern Orthodox Greek Orthodox Church; the Oriental Orthodox Syriac Orthodox Church; the Armenian Apostolic Church; and the Anglican Evangelical Episcopal Church.

Rights for sexual minorities in Israel are considered to be the most tolerant in the Middle East. A national gay rights law bans some anti-gay discrimination"

So, back to the question:


Does Cosatu’s support of the BDS campaign against Israel smack of anti-semitism?

I'm not sure

I would be in a much better position to answer that question if BDS campaigns against Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bangladesh and Iran actually existed


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

Paradigm Shift Your Life


paradigmshiftyourlife.blogspot.com