Site search Web search

powered by FreeFind

Indexed by the FreeFind Search Engine

Contact us at: red-jos_at_red-jos_net

20 APRIL 2013

This article was received from Mondoweiss on 20 APRIL 2013. It is yet a further illustration of how far zionist thuggery has gone and how the zionist feel that they can rule the world and every country supports their thuggery.

Johannesburg demo against Israeli Independence Day ends in violence

Apr 19, 2013 By Annie Robbins

Protest Israeli Independence Day April 15, 2013

Israeli Independence Day protest Johannesburg April 15, 2013

A protest against Israeli Independence Day at the Gold Reef City Casino in Johannesburg turned violent on Monday night after members of the South African Palestinian solidarity activist community were reportedly assaulted by the Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO). One activist suffered a concussion.


Jewish security organization violently assaults two women protesters; one protester left in concussion

South African activists are pressing charges against the South African Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO), the South African Zionist Federation and the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) for the recent violent assault of two young women Palestine solidarity protesters (including the daughter of a senior member from South Africa's largest trade union federation, COSATU) . One Palestine solidarity protester was left in a state of concussion due to the assault injuries.

Last night supporters of Israel held a music concert to celebrate Israeli Independence Day at Gold Reef City Casino in Johannesburg, which was organized by the South African Zionist Federation (SAZF) and the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD).

The South African Zionist Federation (SAZF) and the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) had insisted on arranging their own security (the "Jewish Community Security Organization") instead of allowing either Gold Reef City Casino or the South African Police Services (SAPS) to perform the role of safety and security for the Israeli event.

Palestinian protesters contested that the Israeli celebration was essentially a "celebration of murder, expulsion and continued Israeli oppression against the indigenous Palestinian people" and arranged a picket outside the venue where over 250 members from COSATU, the SA Students Congress, BDS South Africa and several other civil society organizations were present. In addition, young activists (mostly women students) had also bought tickets, made their way into the venue of the Israeli event and partook in a direct-action Greenpeace-like protest where they released bad smelling "stinky-bombs" and wore T-shirts that read "Israeli Apartheid Stinks" in luminous green writing.

During the direct-action protest inside Gold Reef City, two young women protesters were violently assaulted by the Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO) including having their hands tied with cables, their faces covered and their heads smashed into the parking lot's concrete paving. Other protesters were forcibly thrown down escalators and one protester was locked into a passageway where he was repeatedly and simultaneously kicked in the stomach by more than five Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO) personnel - he later suffered a concussion. Members of the Jewish community attending the event also punched a woman protester in the face several times resulting in a serious swelling injury.

Charges against the Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO), the SA Zionist Federation (SAZF) and the SA Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) include:

- Smashing the heads of two young women protesters into the concrete paving of the Gold Reef City Casino parking lot;
- Illegally restraining the young protesters with cable ties and leaving them with their heads covered in the Gold Reef City parking lot;
- Locking a protester into a passage way, throwing him to the ground and then instructing over five security personnel to kick the protester, which resulted in a state of concussion;
- Throwing two young women protesters down escalators resulting in several body bruises, including a badly injured leg;
- Forcibly hurling several women protesters onto walls;
- Verbally abusing the young protesters, including threatening to "find them" and "kill them";
- In addition, a charge of theft will be laid against the Jewish CSO, the SAJBD and the SAZF for having illegally confiscated cellphones and other possessions from the protesters.

University of Johannesburg academic, Professor Farid Esack, who witnessed the violent assaults on protesters by the Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO), commented: "Its unacceptable that any local community security organization, including that of the the Jewish community (the Jewish Community Security Organization), operates above the law and in this militarized fashion.Given that the Jewish Community Security Organization was recently guilty of racial-profiling and discrimination at Wits University, they together with all Israeli-connected security entities operating in this country, should be banned from any and all future events. They are a threat to our people and I will personally be taking this up with relevant government departments."

The Jewish CSO, a mostly clandestine security body operating in South Africa since 1993, is led by former Israeli Defense Force (IDF) member, Colonel Amir Noy. Noy served for 14 years in the IDF before working as a project manager for the Zimbabwean government. Noy explains the role of the Jewish CSO as that of: “Protecting Jewish life and Jewish way of life [in South Africa]...[its] a bond of brotherhood".

Another high-profile witness to the violent assaults was Chris Mathlako, the International Relations Secretary of the South African Communist Party (a member of the ruling ANC tripartite alliance). Mathlako also slammed the Jewish Community Security Organization (CSO) and added that: "I was shocked at the way in which the Jewish Community Security Organization was behaving like a bunch of thugs, carrying large semi-automatic weapons, beating up young activists and threatening to kill them. The Jewish Community Security Organization is not above the law and should not think that they can get away with this sort of behaviour in our country. This is a serious indictment on the SA Jewish Board of Deputies and the South African Zionist Federation."

Uyanda Mabeche, one of the seriously injured protesters had this to say: "The SA Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD), SA Zionist Federation (SAZF) and their Jewish CSO must be held accountable for what they did to me and my fellow colleagues...its also a sad reflection of how Israel and its supporters deal with protests and criticism. However, I'm very deeply aware that what myself and my colleagues experienced - although very traumatic - is nothing in comparison to what Palestinians go through on a daily basis under the yoke of Israeli apartheid and occupation."

Issued by Muhammed Desai for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions in South Africa (BDS South Africa)

Israeli Independence Day protest Johannesburg April 15, 2013

Israeli Independence Day protest Johannesburg April 15, 2013

Israeli Independence Day protest Johannesburg April 15, 2013

Israeli Independence Day protest Johannesburg April 15, 2013

Israeli Independence Day protest Johannesburg April 15, 2013

16 AUGUST 2013

This article was received from Mondoweiss on 17 AUGUST 2013.

BBC to censor violinist Nigel Kennedy’s statement about Israeli apartheid from TV broadcast Aug 16, 2013
By Tom Suarez
Nigel Kennedy (photo: Chris Christodoulou/BBC)

The BBC has confirmed that it will censor a statement made by violinist Nigel Kennedy from its television broadcast of his performance with the Palestine Strings at a prestigious music festival last week. The BBC made the censorship move because he used the word “apartheid” to describe the world in which his Palestinian colleagues live while performing at the BBC Proms.

Click here for a recording of the actual statement the BBC is excising from its broadcast[1].

The following is a transcript:

“It’s a bit facile to say it, but we all know from the experience of this night of music, that giving equality and getting rid of apartheid gives a beautiful chance for things to happen."

According to The Jewish Chronicle[2], BBC governor Baroness Deech called for an apology from Mr. Kennedy and said that “the remark was offensive and untrue. There is no apartheid in Israel.” Not only is there no apartheid in Israel, she claimed, but nor is there any in Gaza or the West Bank. (She made no mention of East Jerusalem.)

In fact, nearly all aspects of Apartheid, as defined by the UN, apply to Israel in all four of its guises: domestically, its military occupation of the West Bank, its military 'annexation' of East Jerusalem, and its siege of Gaza.

This legal definition includes [3]:

• Any measures including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof;
• Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognised trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;
• Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and liberty of person;
• The infringement of their freedom or dignity, or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
• Arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of the members of a racial group or groups;
• Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups of living conditions calculated to cause its or their physical destruction in whole or in part;
• Inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. The volume of Mr. Kennedy’s voice has been raised slightly for clarity.
2. Marcus Dysch, "BBC to cut Kennedy slur from Proms broadcast", The Jerusalem Chronicle Online, August 16, 2013.
3. Source: UN, International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. Bold emphasis added.


As a Star Observer shareholder, I object in the strongest possible terms to an organisation like the Star Observer being prepared to enter the partisan world of Middle East politics by showing its support for Israel at the expense of Palestine in the ongoing battle for that stretch of territory in Palestine/Israel.

The Star has not been given a mandate by shareholders to enter this sphere of politics and has presumably only done so in order to raise money for the operation of the Star Observer.

The following is an open letter to the Star Observer editor who obviously has no intention of responding to our complaints and we will be forced to take our complaints to the Star Observer Board in order to stop this sort of "advertisement" ever being accepted again!

Mannie De Saxe, Lesbian and Gay Solidarity,
PO Box 1675
Preston South
Vic 3072

In January 2013, the Star Observer carried an advertisement from the Jewish National Fund seeking funds for tree plantings in Israel and - unstated - in the occupied Palestinian territories. We objected to the advertisement then (shown in the letter below) and we object even more strongly to the advertisement - again! - on page 10 of the Star Observer edition 1193 of 20 September 2013. The Star Observer is accepting such an advertisement which is blood money - the blood of Palestinians in the West Bank occupied by Israel since 1967.

Are the readers of the Star Observer Israeli citizens? Are they zionist supporters? Is the Star Observer so desperate for funds that it has to resort to this sort of advertising?

We received no response last time and we believe it is time the Star Observer answered the issues raised.

The zionist community will do anything to show that it is "gay" friendly and the JNF in Australia designed this advertisement for that purpose.

Please ensure that this advertisement does not appear ever again in the Star Observer.

Mannie De Saxe


23 January 2013


The latest edition of the Star Observer dated Friday 18 January 2013 carries a prominent page 2 advertisement from the Jewish National Fund.

As you can see from the picture below the graphic shows two trees with stick people below and the colouring of the trees from left to right is -you guessed it - rainbow colours to show that zionists are gay-friendly!

The impression given by the advert is that the Jewish National Fund (JNF) (remember the Blue Boxes in every Jewish household to collect money to plant trees in Israel?) has saved Israel from the desert and created a "cleaner and greener legacy"

Oh, the hypocrisy!!!

What the advert doesn't tell you is that it the JNF is supporting planting trees in the illegal settlement areas of the west bank, where Israelis steal Palestinian land on a daily basis, apartheid intensifies criminally and the JNF trees are watered with water reserves stolen from the Palestinians for the illegal settlements!

The advert tells you how gay friendly the JNF is, but doesn't tell you that after the elections in Israel on 22 January 2013 the religious right will have more control of the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) and that they are not exactly gay friendly!

And this is now supported by the Star Observer who were no doubt paid a large sum of money for the advert to be placed so prominently in the paper.

Send your protests loud and clear to the editor of the Star Observer and tell the editor that blood money is unacceptable!

I have sent the following letter to the editor of the Star Observer as a protest on behalf of Lesbian and Gay Soldarity:

I wish to complain in the strongest possible terms to the Star Observer accepting an advertisment form a zionist organisation such as the Jewish National Fund which is an organisation using blood money to pay for the advertisment.

On top of this travesty, the advertisement purports to support the gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV (GLTH) communities by showing trees and stick people in rainbow colours. In reality, the rabid right-wing reactionary government of Israel is controlled by religious political parties which are endeavouring to ban all aspects of acceptance of GLTH groups into the life of the Israeli communities.

The Jewish National Fund is one of those groups which plants trees in the illegally occupied Palestinian territories, is instrumental in securing water to water these trees and depriving the Palestinian citizens of their rightful use of their own waters which are diverted for the use of the illegal settlers.

Please ensure that the Star Observer does not ever again accept advertisements from such organisations.

On top of everything else the advertisement appears on page 2 of the issue of 18 January 2013 in one of the most prominent positions available.


This article was published in Mondoweiss on 5 November 2013. If you really want to know what is happening in Israel/Palestine, "Goliath" is a must-read book:

Israel is a ‘corpse’ — Hedges on Blumenthal’s ‘Goliath’

Nov 05, 2013
By Annie Robbins and Phil Weiss
Max Blumenthal

Yesterday Max Blumenthal’s new book on Israel, Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, got the emphatic endorsement of two influential journalists, Chris Hedges and Andrew Sullivan.

First, here’s Hedges at Truthdig, hammer and tongs in an inspiring Old Testament manner: Zionism is a racist ideology, Israel is poisoned by the psychosis of war, and liberal American Jews deny this so as to fetishize the myth and themselves, but Blumenthal reveals the truth, Israel is a corpse.

Israel has been poisoned by the psychosis of permanent war. It has been morally bankrupted by the sanctification of victimhood, which it uses to justify an occupation that rivals the brutality and racism of apartheid South Africa. Its democracy—which was always exclusively for Jews—has been hijacked by extremists who are pushing the country toward fascism. Many of Israel’s most enlightened and educated citizens—1 million of them—have left the country. Its most courageous human rights campaigners, intellectuals and journalists—Israeli and Palestinian—are subject to constant state surveillance, arbitrary arrests and government-run smear campaigns. Its educational system, starting in primary school, has become an indoctrination machine for the military…

And yet, the hard truths about Israel remain largely unspoken. Liberal supporters of Israel decry its excesses. They wring their hands over the tragic necessity of airstrikes on Gaza or Lebanon or the demolition of Palestinian homes. They assure us that they respect human rights and want peace. But they react in inchoate fury when the reality of Israel is held up before them. This reality implodes the myth of the Jewish state…. Liberal Jewish critics inside and outside Israel, however, desperately need the myth, not only to fetishize Israel but also to fetishize themselves. Strike at the myth and you unleash a savage vitriol, which in its fury exposes the self-adulation and latent racism that lie at the core of modern Zionism.

There are very few intellectuals or writers who have the tenacity and courage to confront this reality. This is what makes Max Blumenthal’s “Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel” one of the most fearless and honest books ever written about Israel. Blumenthal burrows deep into the dark heart of Israel. The American journalist binds himself to the beleaguered and shunned activists, radical journalists and human rights campaigners who are the conscience of the nation, as well as Palestinian families in the West Bank struggling in vain to hold back Israel’s ceaseless theft of their land. Blumenthal, in chapter after chapter, methodically rips down the facade. And what he exposes, in the end, is a corpse.

I spent seven years in the Middle East as a correspondent, including months in Gaza and the West Bank. I lived for two years in Jerusalem. Many of the closest friends I made during my two decades overseas are Israeli. Most of them are among the Israeli outcasts that Blumenthal writes about, men and women whose innate decency and courage he honors throughout his book. They are those who, unlike the Israeli leadership and a population inculcated with racial hatred, sincerely want to end occupation, restore the rule of law and banish an ideology that creates moral hierarchies with Arabs hovering at the level of animal as Jews—especially Jews of European descent—are elevated to the status of demigods. It is a measure of Blumenthal’s astuteness as a reporter that he viewed Israel through the eyes of these outcasts, as well as the Palestinians, and stood with them as they were arrested, tear-gassed and fired upon by Israeli soldiers. There is no other honest way to tell the story about Israel. And this is a very honest book.

And here is Andrew Sullivan, much more engaged by the swordplay between Blumenthal and Eric Alterman, and saying that Alterman committed a lazy hatchet job. But Sullivan lands where it matters, on Blumenthal’s excellent encounter with David Grossman, and all that demonstrated about the flaccidity of Zionist ideals:

one reason to pick [Goliath] up is the lazy hatchet job performed on it by one of the more egregiously nasty writers in America, Eric Alterman. Alterman’s critique can be read here, titled “The ‘I Hate Israel’ Handbook”, and here. I urge you to read both…. The reason I urge you to read it all is because it’s essential background for Blumenthal’s response. It’s always a joy to see a smear artist exposed, trick by trick, con by con – and Max is relentless. To wit:

‘Alterman carps about the titles of several chapters in my book, claiming they were “titled to imply an equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany.” He did not bother address the substance of the chapters, which explains the titles.

The chapter titled, “How To Kill Goyim and Influence People” detailed a Jerusalem conference of prominent state-funded Israeli rabbis who had gathered to defend the publication of Torat Ha’Melech, a book published by their rabbinical colleagues that the Israeli paper Maariv described as “230 pages on the laws concerning the killing of non-Jews, a kind of guidebook for anyone who ponders the question of if and when it is permissible to take the life of a non-Jew.” (Among the book’s lowlights: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us…”)’My chapters titled “The Night of Broken Glass” and “The Concentration Camp” detail the officially sanctioned campaign of racist incitement and violence against Israel’s population of non-Jewish African asylum seekers. The former chapter described events leading up to the night of May 23, 2012, when, after an anti-African rally headlined by leading officials from the ruling Likud Party, in which Africans were described from the stage as “a cancer,” hundreds of Jewish Israelis rampaged through African-inhabited areas of South Tel Aviv, attacking their homes and cars and literally smashing the glass of their storefront windows. “I am as afraid to live in the Israel of 2012 as any right-minded German should have been in 1938,” Aliyana Traison, the deputy editor of Haaretz, wrote at the time.’

[Sullivan again] For good measure, Alterman concedes that the book is “mostly technically accurate.” I hate the bullying tactics of those suppressing a discussion of difficult subjects, so am glad to note that Blumenthal himself is not the only one shocked by the shoddiness of Alterman’s smear:

‘Other writers have already carefully deconstructed his tangled mess of factual errors and deceptive claims: Phan Nguyen, Corey Robin, Ali Gharib, Ira Glunts and Charles Manekin.’

I’d particularly recommend Corey Robin’s dissection of Alterman’s account of Blumenthal’s conversation with David Grossman, the legendary liberal Zionist. It’s both a thorough debunking of Alterman but also a disturbing revelation about what has happened to Israel, and why it matters.

18 NOVEMBER 2013

This article is from Mondoweiss by email on 18 NOVEMBER 2013:

‘New Yorkers Against the Cornell-Technion Partnership’ oppose Technion’s role in U.S. militarization and domestic spying

Nov 17, 2013

New Yorkers Against the Cornell-Technion Partnership

The paper below, a revised transcript, was authored by Anna Calcutt and presented by her on behalf of New Yorkers Against the Cornell-Technion Partnership (NYACT) at Judson Memorial Church on October 23, 2013 as part of a panel discussion hosted by NYACT, entitled “Militarization, Domestic Spying, and the Boycott of Israel,” and including additional participants from Adalah-NY: The New York Campaign for the Boycott of Israel; Desis Rising Up and Moving (DRUM); and RootsAction.


In December 2010, New York City Mayor Bloomberg announced a competition to build a 2.1 million square foot applied sciences and engineering graduate school in Manhattan. He offered $100 million in New York taxpayer money and free land.[1] Various universities made bids, including Stanford, which were frontrunners until close to the end; however, Cornell University and the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology won the competition.[2]

Behind close doors, Cornell and Technion had come to an agreement to enter the competition as a partnership.[3] This was decided without consulting staff, faculty, or students at Cornell, which is in violation of Cornell’s own by-laws.[4] It was done with as little information as possible being given out about Technion, the two universities waiting until 10 days before the city’s deadline for proposals before revealing their union publicly. The winning bid was announced in December 2011 and is now known as “Cornell NYC Tech,” or just “Cornell Tech.” Since then, reporting on the campus has scarcely mentioned the involvement of Technion, despite Cornell claiming that it was the inclusion of Technion which enabled them to win the competition.

The proposed campus is to be built on prime real estate on Roosevelt Island in the East River between the Upper East Side of Manhattan and Queens. It will take about 25 years to construct, and entails the demolition of Goldwater Hospital, a long-term care facility on the Island. The proposed site will include space for private companies on campus.

Since December 2012, this shameful collaboration now includes Google, which has donated free office space in its Chelsea building to house Cornell Tech until 2017, when the first new academic building on Roosevelt Island is scheduled for completion.[5]

New Yorkers Against the Cornell-Technion Partnership, or NYACT, formed in February 2012, to oppose the collaboration of Cornell and Technion. We formed in response to the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions, and in particular to the Palestinian call for an academic boycott of Israel.[6,7]

We oppose any collaboration with Israeli academic or cultural institutions on the grounds that we do not support the whitewashing of Israeli apartheid. While most Israeli universities are involved in one way or another in supporting Israeli Apartheid and the Occupation, Technion is an extreme example and is the most notorious and prestigious academic institution that cooperates with the Israeli military. Quoting a New York Times article earlier this year, Yossi Vardi, who has founded or helped build more than 60 companies in Israel and has five degrees from the Technion states: “I can say without exaggeration that Israel could not have been built without the Technion…. There is a Technion graduate behind practically every highway, desalinization plant, new missile technology and start-up company in the country.”[8]

Why do we oppose Technion coming to New York City?
Technion’s links with surveillance operations

The American Technion Society, which is a New York City-based fundraising/public relations outlet for Technion, states in a YouTube video: “The world often turns to Israel for anti-terror and surveillance technology. But where does Israel turn? The Technion.” For example the Technion’s Faculty of Electrical Engineering has developed de-hazing technologies used to improve surveillance images obtained by unmanned airborne drones.[9]

Technion works with a large number of companies in Israel and worldwide. This includes forging collaborations between academic departments and the private sector to develop specific technologies, having students work in partnership with companies on projects, training Technion graduates who go on to comprise the workforce including engineers, vice presidents and CEOs of businesses, and inviting companies to take part in graduate recruitment fairs on campus.[10]

There is already a visiting assistant professor from Technion teaching at Cornell Tech in Google’s offices. His department, Technion’s Computer Science department, lists among its industrial partners and affiliates Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, Elbit Systems, and Google, as well as some less well known companies such as Comverse, Amdocs, and Check Point.[11, 12] Technion also has close links with Verint, and NICE systems. These less well-known companies are worth knowing about.

NICE systems, Comverse, and Check Point are three of Israel’s largest high-tech companies, and they are influenced by technology developed by Unit 8200 – Israel’s version of the NSA which is involved in the surveillance of Palestinian phone and internet traffic.[13, 14, 15]

Check Point and NICE were founded by Unit 8200 alumni, and one of Comverse’s main products is based on the Unit’s technology. Comverse develops and markets telecommunications software used, among other things, to direct airborne drones.[16] And Check Point is an international provider of software and hardware products for IT security. The ironically named NICE systems specializes in telephone voice recording, data security, and surveillance, as well as systems that analyze this recorded data.[17] NICE lists among its leading customers the New York Police Department and the Miami Police Department.[18]

Verint, which acquired Comverse in February of this year, is considered the world leader in “electronic interception,” and Amdocs is the world’s largest billing service for telecommunications. Both companies are based in Israel and are heavily funded by the Israeli government, with connections to the Israeli military and intelligence, and both have major contracts with the US government. Verint and Amdocs form part of the backbone of the US government’s domestic intelligence surveillance technology. Verint was one of the companies (the other being Narus) to which Verizon and AT&T outsourced their mass wiretapping of US citizens as orchestrated by the NSA since 2001. Amdocs has also been accused of wiretapping, for which it was investigated by the FBI.[19, 20, 21]

Since 2006 Verint has worked with the US State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs to carry out a mass telephone surveillance system in Mexico. According to Verint’s Mexico website: “Police forces, national security, intelligence and other government agencies can use these solutions …. as part of a large-scale system designed to generate evidence and intelligence….”[22]

Verint is now headquartered on Long Island, and its President and CEO, a Technion graduate, stated his enthusiastic support for the partnership of Technion with Cornell at a 2012 Israel Day event at the New York Stock Exchange.[23]

Technion’s involvement in military R+D

Technion is also heavily involved in research and development of military equipment. Specialists at Technion developed the remote controlled capabilities of the Caterpillar D-9 tractor, the notorious armored bulldozer which is an essential weapon of Israel’s occupation, enabling the Israeli army to demolish approximately25,000 Palestinian homes since 1967.[24] This bulldozer “performed remarkably during operation Cast Lead” – to quote an IDF Officer and is used by the Israeli military to destroy Palestinian homes, olive groves, and tunnels without any risk to its operators.[25]

The first modern drone was developed in Israel in 1973, and Israel has gone on to become the single largest exporter of drones in the world,[26, 27] as well as using drones to kill over 800 Palestinians between 2006 and 2011 alone. Technion developed a program specifically for the research and development of drone technology, and includes in its achievements a weaponized, bomb-carrying “Stealth drone,” and the 9-inch wingspan surveillance “Dragonfly drone.”[28]

Technion has deep relations with two major military companies in Israel; Rafael Advanced Defense Systems which is one of Israel’s largest government-sponsored weapons manufacturers, and Elbit Systems which is one of Israel’s biggest private weapons research companies.

Rafael is famous for its “advanced hybrid armour protection system,” which is used on the IDFs Merkava Mk 4 main battle tank.[29, 30] Since 2001, Technion has had an MBA program tailored specifically for Rafael managers.[31]

Elbit is one of two main providers of the electronic detection fence, a key component of Israel’s separation Wall in the West Bank, which was ruled illegal by the the International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.[32, 33] Elbit also participated in the design of, and provided surveillance technology for, the US/Mexico border wall.[34, 35, 36]

Numerous agencies have divested from Elbit due to its violation of human rights, including Norway’s Finance Ministry, Denmark’s largest financial institution, and Sweden’s largest pension funds.[37, 38, 39] In contrast, Technion established a center for the development of electro-optics in complete partnership with Elbit.[40]

Furthermore, Technion practices institutional discrimination against Palestinian students by severely restricting their freedom of speech and assembly, and rewarding those Jewish students who, unlike most Palestinians, perform compulsory military service in Israel.[41, 42, 43]

How would Technion impact the New York City campus (and beyond)?

It’s worth noting some of the plans outlined for the New York City campus. According to the Cornell Tech website, instead of traditional departments, programs at the new Cornell Tech campus will be organized around “hubs,” which will allow them to focus on generating technology to serve particular industry sectors. Another unique aspect of the Cornell Tech program is that every student will have an industry mentor. [44]

Technion will formally be involved in the campus through the Jacobs Technion-Cornell Innovation Institute (JTCII) which will be directed by Craig Gotsman, another Technion computer science professor. The institute will be responsible for a third of the academic activity on campus. The hope is to build an ecosystem like that of Haifa (the Israeli city in which Technion is located), where industry and academics feed off each other.

Their plan is to have “[i]nteraction with industry facilitated through industrial liaisons, who will forge and cultivate relationships between academic staff and the technology sector. These relationships will result in joint projects, sponsored research, and technology transfer from the campus to local industry. Industry mentors, entrepreneurs, and members of the venture capital community will be present on campus to help guide and shape students’ industrial projects, some of which may lead to independent spinoffs.”[45]

This makes it clear that the affect of Cornell Tech would be much more wide-ranging than the confines of the proposed campus itself. Furthermore, this is the first time an Israeli institute has been involved in building a campus on US soil. I don’t think we can overstate the significance of Technion’s plans to build in New York City, being as it is a global hub of international business and commerce.

The Acting Consul General of Israel in New York stated “This is of strategic importance in terms of positioning Israel not only in America, but all over the world, as a bastion of creativity and innovation.” Technion’s senior executive vice president has said, “The relationships established will make it easier for Israeli entrepreneurs to gain access to US markets.”[46]

Academic boycott of Israel

Academic boycott of Israeli institutions is morally justified. When people ask about academic freedom, we have to ask not only whose freedom, but also why academic freedom should be elevated above basic human rights. Crucially, the boycott is strategically sound. Israel actively attempts to cover up its crimes by promoting its academic and technological achievements, and Israeli academic institutes, including Technion, rely on foreign investment.

In 2011, the University of Johannesburg in South Africa became the first to implement academic boycott of Israel when it severed its links with Ben Gurion University, ending a 25-year relationship.[47]

In April of this year, the general membership of the Association for Asian American Studies as well as the Teachers Union of Ireland both unanimously voted to support the boycott of Israeli universities, becoming respectively the first scholarly institution in the United States, and the first academic union in Europe, to do so.[48, 49]

In June, the Federation of French-speaking Students in Belgium, representing some 100,000 students from 25 institutions, voted to “freeze relations with Israeli universities.”[50]

Many world-renowned scholars have come out in favor of the boycott, including in June of this year Professor Stephen Hawking, who courageously boycotted Israel’s Presidential Conference, and about which an editorial in the Boston Globe reported, “The movement that Hawking has signed on to aims to place pressure on Israel through peaceful means.”[51, 52]

To see such a statement in a mainstream US broadsheet shows how far things have come. The tide is turning—and these are just a handful of the victories being achieved on campus.

We’re not against education, jobs, science, and progress. We’re against oppression, apartheid, discrimination, and the destruction of lives and homes. New York City desperately needs jobs and education facilities, but surely these don’t have to come at such a high price.

Our campaign / next steps

Our campaign ultimately aims to get New York City and Cornell University to end their collaboration with Technion. We need your help. We need to continue to raise awareness, as most people in New York still don’t know the truth about Technion and the impact its presence would have here. Most people would not support $100 million of their taxes going towards an institute that develops drones and practices discrimination on its home campus. We may not have the financial resources to stand up to New York City, but we have the truth on our side, and in time, with enough support, we will make a difference.

So how can you help? There are many ways. Come and join us at our protests outside Cornell Tech’s temporary offices at Google; we’re there every 2 weeks in Chelsea holding signs, handing out leaflets, and talking with the public. If you’re concerned about this issue, write a letter to your local paper, your student newsletter, church paper, community blog, or any other group you’re involved with.

Write to your elected officials to see what they have to say about it. If you’re involved in activism, let your activist friends know about this. As I hope has been made clear this evening, the issue of Technion coming to New York is of significant interest to anyone concerned about militarization and surveillance as well as Israel/Palestine.

Talk with your local community, your mosque, temple, church. If you would like help with this, get in touch with us or look up the resources on our website, which includes fully referenced reports (we will be adding a transcript of this talk on there soon along with the video recording of this evening’s event).

If you would like to subscribe to our Announcements e-mail list, you can e-mail us at asking to be added. That way we can keep you informed of our protests and other events and news.

You can also follow us on Facebook and Twitter (@NYACTechnion).

We will be outside Google again this semester every other Tuesday from 5:00-7:00 PM until December 10. Please come and join us! You are welcome even if you just want to talk to us and find out more about what we’re doing.

Finally, on behalf of NYACT, I would like to thank everyone who has come this evening, and all of the speakers for making this such an interesting event—and to say what an honour it is to be holding the event at Judson Memorial Church which, as I’m sure many of you know, is more than a venue. The Judson has a long history of working for social justice issues, and we’re glad to have held this discussion here.

1. Anne Ju, “’Game-changing’ tech campus goes to Cornell, Technion,” Cornell Chronicle, 19 Dec 2011: link to
2. Ilya Marritz, “Mayor Bloomberg Answers Stanford U Critics,” WNYC, 8 May 2012:
3. Richard Pérez-Peña, “Alliance Formed Secretly to Win Deal for Campus,” The New York Times, 25 Dec 2011: link to
4. Article XIII, Section 2, of the Cornell bylaws states that: “The functions of the University Faculty shall be to consider questions of educational policy which concern more than one college, school or separate academic unit, or are general in nature”:
5. Patrick McGeehan, “Cornell’s High-Tech Campus Will Have a Temporary Home at Google,” The New York Times, 21 May 2012: link to
6. The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) was launched in Ramallah in 2004 by a group of Palestinian academics and intellectuals. For more information see: link to
7. “An Appeal for Action: End Cornell University Collaboration with Technion,” PACBI website, 4 March 2012: link to
8. Danna Harman, “The Technion: Israel’s Hard Drive,” The New York Times, 12 April 2013: link to
9. The American Technion Society, “Israel’s Source for Anti-Terror and Surveillance Technology: The Technion,” YouTube, uploaded on 3 Dec 2013: link to
10. The Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Admissions/Careers website: link to
11. The Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Computer Science Department Industrial Affiliates website: link to
12. The Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Computer Science Department Industrial Partners website: link to
13. James Bamford, “Shady Companies with Ties to Israel Wiretap the U.S. for the NSA,” WIRED, 3 Apr 2012: link to
14. Jimmy Johnson, “Israeli Firm Helps NSA Spy on Americans and Mexicans,” The Electronic Intifada, 15 Jun 2013: link to
15. Gil Kerbs, “The Unit,” Forbes, 8 Feb 2007: link to
16. Terri Ginsberg, “New York tech university evasive about Israeli partner’s role in arms industry,” The Electronic Intifada, 9 Sept 2013: link to
17. NICE Systems, Wikipedia: link to
18. NICE Systems, Company Overview website: link to
19. Johnson op cit.
20. Christopher Ketcham, “An Israeli Trojan Horse,” Counterpunch, 27 Sep 2008: link to
21. TheMarker, “What was the Israeli Involvement in Collecting U.S. Communications Intel for NSA?” Haaretz, 8 Jun 2013: link to
22. Verint Mexico Solutions Communications Research and Intelligence website: link to
23. The American Technion Society, “Alum Rings in Trading Day,” Technion Alumni eNews, 5 Feb 2013: link to
24. The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions website: link to
25. Yaakov Katz, “‘Black Thunder’ Unmanned Dozers to Play Greater Role in IDF,” The Jerusalem Post, 30 Mar 2009: link to
26. Israeli Air Force website, “The First UAV Squadron”: link to
27. Jefferson Morley, “Israel’s Drone Dominance,” Salon, 15 May 2012:

And figures based on data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) arms transfers database at: link to

28. Kevin Hattori, “Stealth UAV, Lunar Elevator Among Student-Developed Projects,” American Technion Society, 24 Feb 2010: link to
29. Robert Mahoney, “Israeli Army Decision Endangers Journalists in Gaza,” Committee to Protect Journalists, 14 Aug 2008: link to
30. Nidal al-Mughrabi, “Reuters Cameraman Killed in Gaza,”Reuters, 16 Apr 2008: link to
31. Technion Press Release, “Technion MBA Program Delivered In-House to 40 Rafael Managers,” 7 Jan 2001: link to
32. Who Profits – The Israeli Occupation Industry: link to
33. International Court of Justice Press Release, “Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” 9 Jul 2004: link to
34. Yaakov Katz, “Elbit to help US secure Mexican border,” The Jerusalem Post, 25 Sep 2006: link to
35. Jimmy Johnson, “A Palestine-Mexico Border,” North American Congress on Latin America blog, 29 Jun 2012: link to
36. Elbit. website:
37. Elizabeth Adams, “Norway’s Pension Fund Drops Israel’s Elbit,” The Wall Street Journal online, 3 Sep 2009: link to
38. “Danske Bank Divests from Elbit and Africa-Israel,” BDS Movement News, 26 Jan 2010: link to
39. Benjamin Joffe-Walt, “Swedish Pension Giant Divests from Elbit,” The Jerusalem Post, 31 Mar 2010: link to
40. “Out of Sight,” Technion Focus, Nov 2008: link to
41. Anhel Pfeffer, “New ‘bill of rights’ for student reservists,” Haaretz, 24 Dec 2003: link to
42. Uri Dekel (Technion Student Association Chairman, 2009), “Update for Reservists – Suite Of Solutions Following Operation Cast Lead,” Technion Student Union, 21 Jan 2009: link to
43. “Arrest of 8 demonstrators at the entrance of ‘Technion’ Haifa,” Panet, 2 June 2010: link to
44. Cornell University College of Engineering, Cornell Tech Update: link to
45. Cornell NYC Tech website: link to
46. Julie Wiener, “Israeli School’s ‘Strategic’ Move,” The Jewish Week, 20 Dec 2011: link to
47. Stuart Graham, “UJ Cuts Ties with Israeli University,” Independent Online News, 23 Mar 2011: link to
48. Elizabeth Redden, “A First for the Israel Boycott?” Inside Higher Ed, 24 Apr 2013:
49. Adam Horowitz, “Teachers’ Union of Ireland Endorses Academic Boycott of Israel in Unanimous Vote,” Mondoweiss, 5 Apr 2013: link to
50. “The FEF (Belgian French-Speaking Students Federation) Calls for a Freeze of All Academic Partnerships with Israel!” Comité Palestine Louvain, 25 Apr 2013: link to
51. Hilary Rose and Steven Rose, “Stephen Hawking’s Boycott Hits Israel Where it Hurts: Science,” The Guardian, 13 May 2013: link to
52. Editorial, “Stephen Hawking Makes a Peaceful Protest,” The Boston Globe, 11 May 2013: link to


This article is from Australians for BDS by email on 8 NOVEMBER 2013:

Update on Shurat HaDin lawfare attack on Professor Jake Lynch (Australians for BDS – 8 November 2013)

On Tuesday Oct 29th, 2 Israeli based organisations and three individuals made an application to the Australian Federal Court against Professor Jake Lynch. The case is Shurat HaDin – The Israel Law Center & Ors v Jake Lynch, NSD2235/2013.

The applicants are: Shurat HaDin, Green Freedom Limited (Israel Company Number 514 331 479), Andrew Hamilton, David Hans Lange and Jonathan Rose. ??

The following media alert was released as a result of this action and prior to a press conference on Wed Oct 30th led by Professor Stuart Rees and Associate Professor Peter Slezak (Professor Jake Lynch is currently overseas on sabbatical leave).?

Australian academic faces lawfare attack?The right to criticize the policies of another country is at stake Today an Israeli based law centre, Shurat HaDin, filed a case in the Federal Court of Australia, against Professor Jake Lynch from the University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies. They claim that he has supported policies which are racist and discriminatory by his specific endorsement of an academic boycott of Israeli institutions and individuals within them, because of these institutions’ support of the illegal occupation of Palestine and their close connections with the Israeli armament industry.

This lawfare attack against academic freedom and freedom of speech has been condemned by over 2000 Australian and international human rights advocates from some 60 countries, who have all signed a pledge supporting BDS and offering to be co-defendants in any legal action taken against Lynch.

? Shurat HaDin has taken many similar actions internationally against groups who supported the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement. Professor Stuart Rees comments,?“It seems that this firm, Shurat HaDin works in the civil courts as a proxy for the Israeli government and security forces, seeking to shut down any criticism of the state and its ongoing human rights abuses and violations of international law.”

In August, Shurat HaDin lodged a complaint in the Human Rights Commission against Jake Lynch’s refusal to sponsor an Israeli academic from the Hebrew University because of that institution’s links to the Israeli military and the ongoing Occupation of the West Bank and blockade of Gaza.

This overseas firm now wants to silence this highly regarded academic, by taking their complaint to the Federal Court. This challenges the right to take non violent action in support international human rights law and the rights of the dispossessed Palestinians. Australians for BDS condemns racism in all forms, and specifically anti-Semitism.

“Israel’s occupation and ethnic cleansing machinery continue unabated but the moral force that used to drive that process is fast eroding and, as out of touch as the Abbott government and anti-BDS activists in Australia may be, there is an undeniable shift in the balance of moral power. .. International civil society is holding Israel to account in a way no government has ever been able to do”......Randa Abdul Fattah, Palestinian lawyer and writer resident in Sydney

Professor Jake Lynch released the following statement which was read at the press conference on Wed Oct 30th in Sydney:

? “I am confident we will successfully fight off this despicable attack on freedom of expression, which is backed ultimately by the Israeli security state. The Shurat HaDin law centre has links to the Israeli National Security Council, and the Mossad, and has admitted in the past being directed by them as to which targets to pursue. That makes this attempt to subvert political debate in Australia all the more sinister.

In respect of the claims by Shurat HaDin, the boycott policy I wrote for CPACS, after a public meeting held at the University of Sydney, was carefully conceived to avoid discrimination, being confined to a request to the Vice Chancellor to revoke institutional links with two Israeli universities. And when I turned down the request by Professor Dan Avnon, to use my name on his application under one of those same schemes, I was (a) not in a position to prevent his coming to Sydney, since he had only to collect two names as host academics out of 3,000 at the University and (b) using my discretion - in effect, being asked for a favour. The law cannot require me to use my discretion in a particular way or it ceases to be discretion!”

?A number of opinion pieces have been published recently outlining the issues raised by this action and we have posted links to them below. ??Your support and pledge to be a co-defendant in this case represents a strong stand against this unfounded and spurious lawfare attack by Shurat HaDin. It is unlikely that this organisation will desire to co-join any other defendants, but your ongoing support is crucial as Australians for BDS fights this foreign organisations’ attempts to gag free speech and academic freedom in Australia.

Please encourage others to sign onto the pledge and leave their comments on the site. ?? And if you are an academic, please encourage your colleagues to sign on with their title eg. Prof, Dr., as we will be contacting all academics shortly to sign a statement of support for Professor Jake Lynch.

Thank you for your support. We will keep you posted as this case develops.

Antony Loewenstein: To support the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement is not anti-Semitic

Prof Stuart Rees: Op Ed in New Matilda – Two Thousand Defendants for Human Rights

Randa Abdel-Fattah: – Who's afraid of BDS? Israel's assault on academic freedom – Opinion – ABC Religion & Ethics...

Dr Peter Slezak: - Is It Anti-Semitic To Protest Injustice?

Samah Sabawi: – Israel and the erosion of democracy : An Australian Story

This message was sent by Australians for BDS using the system. You received this email because you signed a petition started by Australians for BDS on "Defend free speech and human rights and support the BDS." does not endorse contents of this message.

View the petition | Reply to this message via


10 JANUARY 2014

This article is from Mondoweiss by email:

Arab-American scholars back ASA boycott as legal threats start pouring in

By Alex Kane

The landmark decision by the American Studies Association (ASA) to boycott Israeli academic institutions has lead to legal threats, reports of intimidation aimed at pro-boycott scholars and pushback from those in support of the ASA’s decision. The latest is that a group of prominent Arab-Americans have issued a statement in support of the ASA decision, while an Israeli legal center has said that a lawsuit is in the pipeline.

Earlier this week, Palestinian and Arab-American scholars released a missive in support of the ASA boycott, which is part of the larger boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement targeting Israel. The statement condemned the “hate” that the ASA has been a target of and expressed appreciation at the ASA’s “recognition that BDS is a legitimate, non-violent tool of resistance by peoples enduring settler-colonialism, occupation, and apartheid.” Some scholars who signed the letter have already reported receiving hate mail because of it.

It was signed by dozens of prominent figures, including Rashid Khalidi, George Bisharat, Ali Abunimah, Noura Erakat, Nadia Hijab and more. Here’s more from the statement:

By broadening the possibility for critical discussion and debate about the US, Palestine, and Israel, the ASA’s stand has created a new opening that will help to challenge the attack on academic freedom that Palestinian and Arab-American scholars and our allies encounter in the US.

We strongly uphold the principles of free speech and association guaranteed in US jurisprudence and demand that the legal protections offered by these guarantees be extended to our colleagues in the ASA without delay.

We urge all of our colleagues of whatever ethnicity to support the ASA by:

-Becoming a member of the ASA and/or making a donation to the organization,
-Encouraging your department to join the ASA.
-Writing a letter of support to the ASA.

A petition has also been set up for those who agree with the statement.

(Image: Carlos Latuff)

Meanwhile, Shurat HaDin, an Israeli legal group, has said that they will sue the ASA if they don’t cancel their boycott. Yesterday, the Jerusalem Post reported that Shurat HaDin, a group that has links to the Israeli government and the Mossad, sent a letter to the ASA claiming that the academic boycott violates anti-discrimination laws in the U.S. since it targets Israelis and Jews.

That threat has elicited major pushback from the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and the ASA. Today, the CCR issued a statement decrying the threat:

This threat is the latest in a pattern of legal bullying that has escalated in the U.S. as the movement for Palestinian rights has grown. An academic boycott in fact violates no anti-discrimination laws because it does not target any individual or institution based on their Jewish identity or Israeli citizenship. Rather, it is aimed at institutions with direct relationships to the Israeli government. Shurat HaDin’s attempt to paint this principled action as anti-Semitic and discriminatory against Israelis is not only legally bankrupt, but also trivializes important struggles against anti-Semitism and all other forms of racism.

The ASA also released a statement strongly pushing back against Shurat HaDin’s threat. Here’s ASA President Curtis Marez’s statement in full:

We will not be intimidated by Shurat HaDin and its legal threats.

Unlike in Israel, where criticism of the government’s policies towards the Palestinians is increasingly criminalized, our boycott decision is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. Thankfully, in the United States we still have the right to speak out against Israel’s racial discrimination against Palestinians. As an organization we have the absolute right to oppose the discriminatory practices of Israeli academic institutions and their complicity in Israeli human rights abuses. Everyone knows the First Amendment protects not just speech but conduct. Shurat HaDin’s claims are particularly odious as our interactions with individual Israeli academics are likely to be more frequent rather than less in the years ahead.

12 FEBRUARY 2014

This article is from AlterNet:

Forget the Failed Peace Talks—Boycotting Israel Is The True Path To Justice

By Josh Ruebner

Secretary of State John Kerry's diplomacy in Israel/Palestine has devolved into political theater of the absurd.

Secretary of State John Kerry meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in April 2013. Photo Credit: Matty Ster/U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv

After Secretary of State John Kerry’s tenth trip to Israel and the Palestinian West Bank last month, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon derided his efforts to broker Israeli-Palestinian peace as “obsessive” and “messianic, ” wishing that Kerry would “win his Nobel Prize and leave us alone.”

But the intensity of Kerry’s diplomatic efforts should not be confused with progress toward that elusive goal. Instead, negotiations appear off-track, if not totally derailed. In an interview last month with al-Arabiya, Kerry refused to set a deadline for putting forth a now much-delayed U.S. framework agreement proposal, and his original April timeframe for a treaty seems all but impossible.

Based on recent leaks from the negotiating teams, it’s easy to see why negotiations appear stuck, with the United States reduced to largely repackaging stale and discarded ideas from the Clinton administration. For example, Martin Indyk, U.S. Special Envoy for Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations, told Jewish organizations that under Kerry’s plan, 80 percent of Israelis living in illegal settlements in the West Bank could stay in place with their settlements annexed to Israel, seriously calling into question the territorial contiguity and viability of the envisaged Palestinian state.

In addition to Israel’s annexation of major settlement blocs, a senior Palestinian negotiator, Yasser Abed Rabbo, revealed to al-Hayat other details of the proposed framework agreement inimical to Palestinian sovereignty and international law. These include a long-term Israeli military presence in the West Bank’s Jordan Valley, a Palestinian capital in only a part of East Jerusalem (most likely Abu Dis, cut off from the heart of Jerusalem by Israel’s apartheid wall), denial of Palestinian refugees’ right of return to the homes from which they were exiled by Israel in 1948, and Israel’s control of Palestinian borders and airspace. In sum, any “semblance of Palestinian sovereignty or geographic unity has been completely torn apart” by Kerry’s proposals, according to Abed Rabbo.

Given the highly unlikely nature of Palestinians ever accepting such detrimental terms, the U.S.-led “peace process,” yet again, has devolved into political theater of the absurd rather than serious diplomacy. This point was confirmed by an Israeli source close to the negotiations, who told The Guardian that Kerry’s goal “is to keep this process on life support for a few more months” to prevent Palestinians from seeking to advance their rights at the United Nations this fall. “After that,” the source claimed, “we’ll probably see a controlled collapse of the peace process.”

Why, then, is Kerry investing so much political capital and frenetic energy into what amounts to a dog and pony show? It’s because Kerry understands, better than most Israeli politicians, the window for a two-state resolution to the conflict is shutting. In an “Après moi, le déluge” warning to Israel in Munich this month, Kerry spoke of the “increasing de-legitimization campaign” and boycotts of Israel that are sure to snowball if these talks fail. Rather than heed Kerry’s prediction, Israeli politicians instead chose to shoot the messenger. Cabinet member Naftali Bennett accused Kerry of being a “mouthpiece” for an “anti-Semitic boycott,” while another minister, Yuval Steinitz, reproached him for forcing Israel to “negotiate with a gun to its head.”

The Anti-Defamation League, a stalwart of the Israel lobby, issued as well an open letter to Kerry, arguing that the import of his “comments was to create a reality of its own” and that by merely discussing the growing, Palestinian civil society-led campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel, he was bringing it to fruition. But this ostrich-like attitude neglects the fact that the political class already has not only taken notice of, but has become frightened by, the success of the BDS movement.

In the wake of a successful BDS campaign forcing the actress Scarlett Johansson to resign her post as a global ambassador for the anti-poverty organization Oxfam in favor of retaining her lucrative contract with SodaStream, a corporation profiteering from Israel’s expropriation of Palestinian land, recent State Department daily press briefings have been dominated by discussions of BDS. The press corps has managed to tongue-tie State Department spokespeople, who have unconvincingly tried to explain why the United States sees the boycott of Israeli settlement products as illegitimate, when it claims to view the settlements themselves as being illegitimate.

Meanwhile, at the state and federal levels, lawmakers have attempted to stifle the boycott of Israeli academic institutions complicit in Israel’s oppression of Palestinians. A bill in the New York state assembly penalizing academic institutions supporting such boycotts appeared to be on a fast-track to passage, until organizations such as the New York Civil Liberties Union and the American Association of University Presidents, along with BDS activists, successfully mobilized to halt it, and The New York Times lambasted it.

Members of Congress, such as Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL), who introduced last week H.R.4009, the Orwellian-entitled “Protect Academic Freedom Act,” to deny federal education funding to academic institutions supporting the boycott of Israel, should take heed of the growing power of the BDS movement and potential First Amendment challenges to their threats to repress BDS through legislation.

Now that the political classes supporting the status quo are fearful of BDS, it is clear that the movement has firmly entered the third of Gandhi’s four stages of social change: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Although the BDS movement is still far from securing Palestinians’ long-denied human and national rights, and as Martin Luther King, Jr. noted, “Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability,” the BDS movement is putting forward a credible, alternative strategy to the discredited “peace process.” And, as Kerry recognizes, this movement will gain significant momentum once these talks finally reach their inconclusive end.

Josh Ruebner is the National Advocacy Director of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation and a former Analyst in Middle East Affairs at Congressional Research Service. He is the author of the Shattered Hopes: Obama’s Failure to Broker Israeli-Palestinian Peace

10 APRIL 2014


Bob Carr has been involved in politics for many years.

His political posts have been long and varied and he has been an environment minister in a New South Wales government as well as having been Premier of that state for many years.

After he left NSW politics and Julia Gillard was the Australian Prime Minister, when there was a vacancy as Foreign Minister Gillard invited Carr to take the post which he seems to have done with alacrity.

Of course it all came to a tearful end when Kevin Rudd dumped Gillard and the Australian Labor Party (ALP) lost government to the Coalition in September 2013.

Carr is not renowned as being a left-wing member of the ALP - rather he is right of Genghis Khan in keeping with the 2014 version of the ALP.

In Australia there are approximately 100,000 to 120,000 Jews. This is not a tight-knit community, but by and large the majority are supporters of the apartheid Israeli state.

There are many christian communities in Australia and many of them are christian zionists. It is my belief that those christians around the world who support apartheid Israel do so from an anti-semitic point of view because they would like to help Jews living in their communities to go and settle in apartheid Israel.

Those who were the original supporters of Palestine as a home for the Jews, dating from well before the first world war and the Balfour Declaration, back to the 19th century, and who supported the early zionists looking for Palestine to be the Jewish homeland, were christian politicians in England who were eager to remove Jews from Britain.

What has all this got to do with Bob Carr?

Carr has just published a diary of his years as the foreign minister of Australia, and in the book he relates how the Jewish lobby in Australia exerts an undue amount of influence over government foreign policy in relation to apartheid Israel, particularly such bodies as the Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council.

For once in Carr's life he is correct and has hit a bullseye!

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and there have been hysterical outcries from members of the Abbott government's ministers, particularly the current foreign minister Julie Bishop, and many others including, of course, the Jewish members of the current opposition ALP parliamentary representatives, and also including the so-called christian members of both sides of politics - if they can be defined as such.

But the Jewish communities - or many members of these so-called communities are beside themselves and the cries of anti-semitism are probably soon to be on their way.

This story has a way to run but it has created an interesting diversion from the horror of Australian politics relating to such issues as asylum seekers and other nasty stories which are breaking out on both sides of the so-called political divide.

Watch these spaces - more interesting events are bound to unfold in the coming days and weeks!

The following article is from Mondoweiss on 10 April 2014 and is by Philip Weiss. It is very helpful to know what has been happening in Australia in the media and from those Jews who belong to some of the organisations under discussion.

Aussie media focus on Carr’s assertion that Israel lobby had ‘direct line’ into Prime Minister’s office

Philip Weiss on April 10, 2014
Former Australian PM Julia Gillard

Yesterday I did a short post on the stunning criticism of the Israel lobby’s influence in Australia coming from a former Australian foreign minister, Bob Carr, whose memoir says that Jewish donors so preyed on the mind of a liberal prime minister that she wouldn’t let him utter a word of criticisms against Israeli settlements.

Well, sunshine is the best disinfectant, and this story just gets bigger and bigger. It’s in Haaretz (my postscript); and the Australian media are taking seriously Carr’s assertions that the lobby’s influence is “unhealthy” and that it has too much access to policymakers. The story has been propelled by lobby charges of bigotry against Carr, who trots out the usual; he recommended a Holocaust book as the most important book of the last 100 years in a book he wrote about reading. And by the fact that Carr published text messages between himself and former P.M. Julia Gillard.

First, Carr states his case plainly in an interview on Australian Broadcasting Corp. He says it’s the rightwing lobby, and that it’s banjaxed Australian opposition to the settlement project:

SARAH FERGUSON: Let’s go to the book. The strongest criticism of all in the book is aimed at the Melbourne Jewish lobby. Now, there are lobby groups for every cause under the sun. What’s wrong with the way that group operates?

BOB CARR: Well the important point about a diary of a Foreign minister is that you shine light on areas of government that are otherwise in darkness and the influence of lobby groups is one of those areas. And what I’ve done is to spell out how the extremely conservative instincts of the pro-Israel lobby in Melbourne was exercised through the then-Prime Minister’s office. And I speak as someone who was in agreement with Julia Gillard’s agenda on everything else. But I’ve got to say, on this one, I found it very frustrating that we couldn’t issue, for example, a routine expression of concern about the spread of Israeli settlements on the West Bank. Great blocks of housing for Israeli citizens going up on land that everyone regards as part of a future Palestinian state, if there is to be a two-state solution resolving the standoff between Palestinians and Israelis in the Middle East.

SARAH FERGUSON: You’re saying that the Melbourne Jewish lobby had a direct impact on foreign policy as it was operated from inside Julia Gillard’s cabinet?

BOB CARR: Yeah, I would call it the Israeli lobby – I think that’s important. But certainly they enjoyed extraordinary influence. I had to resist it and my book tells the story of that resistance coming to a climax when there was a dispute on the floor of caucus about my recommendation that we don’t block the Palestinian bid for increased non-state status at the United Nations.

SARAH FERGUSON: They’re still a very small group of people. How do you account for them wielding so much power?

BOB CARR: I think party donations and a program of giving trips to MPs and journalists to Israel. But that’s not to condemn them. I mean, other interest groups do the same thing. But it needs to be highlighted because I think it reached a very unhealthy level. I think the great mistake of the pro-Israel lobby in Melbourne is to express an extreme right-wing Israeli view rather than a more tolerant liberal Israeli view, and in addition to that, to seek to win on everything, to block the Foreign Minister of Australia through their influence with the Prime Minister’s office, from even making the most routine criticism of Israeli settlement policy using the kind of language that a Conservative Foreign secretary from the UK would use in a comparable statement at the same time.


Note that Carr is saying precisely what Walt and Mearsheimer wrote eight years ago and were also accused of bigotry for saying: It’s not Jews, it’s the lobby, which represents a conservative segment of that community; and the lobby has a “stranglehold” on our foreign policy.

Carr knew what he was saying would be explosive. Maybe that’s why he published diary entries verbatim, and text messages that he exchanged with Julia Gillard, showing the penetration of the lobby into decisionmaking about the Middle East.

“The book would not have been truthful with this disagreement between a prime minister and her foreign minister edited out,” Mr Carr told Fairfax Media, explaining his decision to publish Ms Gillard’s private text messages without consent, despite asking other officials for permission to publish correspondence.

“The public should know how foreign policy gets made, especially when it appears the prime minister is being heavily lobbied by one interest group with a stake in Middle East policy.”…

In diary entries Mr Carr reveals just how deep his division with Ms Gillard went. He complains that Ms Gillard would not even let him criticise Israeli West Bank settlements due to her fear it would anger Australia’s pro-Israel lobby – a reference to the Melbourne-based Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council – which Mr Carr says had a direct line into the prime minister’s office.

“So, we can’t even ‘express concern’ without complaint,” Mr Carr writes. “This lobby must fight every inch.” Reproducing private text messages, Mr Carr suggests Ms Gillard’s support of Israel was so immovable that she would not even allow him to change Australia’s vote on what he considered to be a minor UN motion.

“Julia – motion on Lebanon oil spill raises no Palestinian or Israel security issues. In that context I gave my commitment to Lebanon,” Mr Carr writes in a text message.

“No reason has been given to me to change,” Ms Gillard reportedly replies.

“Julia – not so simple,” Mr Carr responds. “I as Foreign Minister gave my word. I was entitled to because it had nothing to do with Palestinian status or security of Israel.”

Ms Gillard shuts him down in a final terse message: “Bob … my jurisdiction on UN resolutions isn’t confined to ones on Palestine and Israel.”

Did you see where Carr said that the Israel lobby has a direct line into the P.M.’s office? Now read some of this interview on ABC of a leading Israel lobbyist, Mark Leibler, national chairman of the Australia-Israel and Jewish Affairs Council. ABC interviewer Tony Jones is obviously disturbed that he had such access to the P.M.

MARK LEIBLER: I think Bob doesn’t miss a trick. I mean, if anything’s calculated to sell books. Just unpick for a moment what he’s saying. He’s talking about the Jewish lobby, he’s talking about a difference of opinion between him and the Prime Minister. Why can’t they have a difference of opinion on a matter related to Israeli policy? No, if there’s a difference of opinion, the Prime Minister has to be controlled or influenced by someone. So the Prime Minister has to be wrong ’cause she’s controlled by the Jewish lobby. …

TONY JONES: Let me ask you a very simple question: did you have direct access to Julia Gillard when she was Prime Minister and were you able to express serious concerns to her directly about policy over Israel?

MARK LEIBLER: We had – I had opportunities to talk to the Prime Minister on -not only about Israel – I had more contact with her about indigenous issues than I did in relation to Israel. She very quickly formed her own view and I didn’t see that there was any need for me to intervene.

TONY JONES: OK, but I guess what you’re saying is on a reasonably regular basis you were able to talk to her about concerns that you had, is that correct?

MARK LEIBLER: If I wanted to raise concerns, I would have been able to raise them with her, as I was able to raise them with Kevin Rudd, with John Howard, with Paul Keating, with Bob Hawke and even with Malcolm Fraser. No different.

TONY JONES: So what you’re saying is you get a fair bit of access to prime ministers and have had for a long time, but …


TONY JONES: … you’re arguing there’s nothing sinister about that?

MARK LEIBLER: Absolutely. By the way, I’m not unique in that respect. I mean, there are many other people who have far greater access to prime ministers, present and past, than I do, but that’s part of a democracy. TONY JONES: No doubt. But your role as a lobbyist is well-known, so well-known that the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, described you recently as a key fundraiser for the lobby and the man who maintained close relations with prime ministers, both in Australia and Israel, over many years. Do you see yourself as a kind of go-between between the Israeli Government and Australian prime ministers?

MARK LEIBLER: Absolutely not. I mean, there are excellent relations between the Prime Minister of Australia, both the current one and the former one, and the Prime Minister of Israel. They don’t need any intermediaries.

TONY JONES: Yeah. I guess no-one here is saying there’s anything to be ashamed of, but the problem only arises when the former Foreign minister claims that the influence of the lobby was very unhealthy…. Well, when you actually get to read the book, what you’ll find out is that he recalls… a private meeting in the boardroom of Arnold Bloch Leibler, which you chaired before that breakfast meeting – in other words, the day before – in which he says you addressed him with a “how-dare-you” tone – this is how he puts it – a “how-dare-you” tone over these issues, particularly the issue of whether there should be enhanced Palestinian representation in the United Nations.

MARK LEIBLER: Well, that is – unfortunately, that doesn’t – that just didn’t happen. I mean, the meeting took place, and I must say, we had our differences of opinion, but the main purpose of the meeting was for me to get across the message to him that we were no right-wing extremists, that our views were identical to all mainstream Jewish organisations, and that as far as the settlements are concerned, there were legitimate differences within the Jewish community and within Israel in relation to settlements being an obstacle to peace. But what – if I can put it in a nutshell, what all of the Jewish community organisations objected to was a single-minded focus on settlements, as if, you know, stopping settlement activity would suddenly lead to peace, overlooking the fact that Hamas was lobbing rockets into Israel at the time, that – I can go through a whole series of things, but – it’s complicated.

TONY JONES: Sure. But let me just take you back to this meeting, ’cause what he focuses here is, as I said before, what he described as your ”how-dare-you” tone, as in, as he puts it, “How dare you consider voting to allow the Palestinians to have greater representation or enhanced representation at the United Nations.” Now, I suppose what he’s saying is that there are two different Mark Leiblers – there’s the one behind the scenes and then there’s the public one at that breakfast meeting with a more conciliatory tone which he obviously appreciated.

MARK LEIBLER: Well, all I can say is that his recollection of that meeting does not accord with my recollection of that meeting. Yes, by the way, it was a heated discussion, but I wasn’t hectoring him and I wasn’t lecturing him, but I was explaining very clearly where we differed and where we agreed and that set the basis and led to the tone of what was, I think, a very successful meeting. He was delighted with it and very pleased with it….

TONY JONES: Sure. Do you think – let’s put it this way: do you think you have considerably more influence over Australian prime ministers than, say, for example, Palestinian representatives?

MARK LEIBLER: I really don’t know. They don’t take me to their meetings.

TONY JONES: (Laughs) No, I don’t imagine they do… Mark Leibler, just finally, to make the final point, it’s a pretty obvious one, really: I suppose what you’re saying to Bob Carr is that you will continue to speak when you can to prime ministers and Foreign ministers and proffer advice from this lobby that he describes.

MARK LEIBLER: Well, I would hope that that’s how things are supposed to function in a democracy. I mean, there are other places where when you express your views or try to lobby, you end up in jail or you end up being shot. This is part of the hallmark of Australia’s wonderful democracy and it’s something that everyone can participate in.

TONY JONES: And just to finish the point, do you think you will get the same access or even more to the Tony Abbott Government that you got with the Julia Gillard Government?

MARK LEIBLER: Well, when we’ve got an issue which is a serious one which needs to be raised, we haven’t had a problem in getting access to either ALP or Liberal prime ministers or Foreign ministers and so it should be. By the way, we’re not the only ones. Basically, any representative of a community organisation, if they’ve got something serious to raise, they’ll get the access that they need.

TONY JONES: Mark Leibler, we’ll have to leave you there. Thank you very much for coming to join us live on the program tonight.

MARK LEIBLER: My pleasure.


Amazing. In the full interview, you will see that Liebler says that many Jews oppose settlements, but what all Jewish organizations “objected to was a single-minded focus on settlements, as if, you know, stopping settlement activity would suddenly lead to peace.” The same line that almost all major Jewish orgs took on Obama in 2009-2011.

But I’m stunned that Carr has been able to blow a bridge that Jimmy Carter, James Baker, Colin Powell, Paul Findley and Walt and Mearsheimer could not blow: the mainstream bar on talking about this stuff.

So, when is this story going to make “60 Minutes”? I guess they’ll think about that tomorrow, to quote Scarlett O’Hara.

P.S. Haaretz has covered the story with these blunt headlines: “Former Australian FM denounces Jewish lobby’s ‘extraordinary influence’. In new book, Bob Carr claims office of former Australian PM Julia Gillard was effectively held hostage by Jewish lobby.”

Haaretz calls out the Greater Israel crowd: “Carr claims the ‘extreme right-wing’ pro-Israel lobby in Melbourne wielded ‘extraordinary influence’ on Gillard” — who is of course a liberal politician.

About Philip Weiss
Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of
View all posts by Philip Weiss ?
Posted in Israel/Palestine
? State Dep’t tries to clean up Kerry’s ‘Poof’
Why LA needs a city-funded Middle Eastern cultural center ?

{ 17 comments... read them below or add one }

1. unverified__5ilf90kd says:
April 10, 2014 at 10:54 am

It is obvious that we have exactly the same chronic problem in the USA only worse. It is clearly at play from Obama all the way down the food chain. The pressure to change the fact that Kerry recently blamed Israel for the breakdown in the peace talks, is the latest example of this money machine in action to suppress, distort and change the truth. These crude and deceitful activities are a threat to democracy all over the world. Let’s pray that the effect of Bob Carr’s exposure of the lobby in Australia will encourage others, including journalists, that there are positive and rewarding reasons to continue this exposure of foreign policy distortions caused by money from the Israeli lobby in many counties especially the USA, UK, France and Australia to name but a few.

2. hophmi says:
April 10, 2014 at 12:54 pm

“But I’m stunned that Carr has been able to blow a bridge that Jimmy Carter, James Baker, Colin Powell, Paul Findley and Walt and Mearsheimer could not blow: the mainstream bar on talking about this stuff.”

Since this bridge never existed in the first place, there was nothing to blow.

3. Sumud says:
April 10, 2014 at 1:56 pm

(Concurrent events for two quoted articles below from late June 2010:

May 31, 2010 – really shocking Israeli raid on humanitarian flotilla to Gaza killing 9 activists and injuring more than 50.

June 24, 2010 – leadership spill and Julia Gillard ousts Kevin Rudd as PM.)

Recall that PM Julia Gillard’s partner Tim Mathieson, formerly a hairdresser, was employed in late 2009 by a leading Australian Israel lobbyist Albert Dadon:

Ms Gillard had disclosed to the register of MPs’ interests that Mr Mathieson started work with Ubertas in November 2009. In June 2009, she and Mr Mathieson had led other Australian politicians, including Liberals Christopher Pyne and Peter Costello, in Jerusalem at the first Australia Israel Leadership Forum.

At a second forum in December 2009, also addressed by Kevin Rudd, she acknowledged Mr Dadon and his wife for their support of the forum.

A former Australian ambassador to Israel, Ross Burns, had accused Ms Gillard in a letter to The Sydney Morning Herald of being silent on the ”excesses” of Israel and questioned why Mr Mathieson had been given the job by Mr Dadon.

”I’ve made up my own views about Israel and made them publicly known well before there was any suggestion that my partner would work in a property group associated with Mr Dadon,” Ms Gillard said.

PM defends partner’s property job

Mathieson resigned from his position with Dadon’s company later in 2010 apparently.

Most of the article from one day prior to above outlining Ross Burn’s concerns about Gillard’s and the governments position on Israel:

Ms Gillard has been part of the Australian delegation to the last two meetings of the Australia Israel Leadership Forum, founded by the Melbourne property developer Albert Dadon.

Mr Dadon employs Ms Gillard’s partner, Tim Mathieson, as a real estate salesman, at Ubertas. Mr Burns said yesterday that Ms Gillard was at the forum’s inaugural meeting in Israel last June, six months after the Israeli army invaded the Gaza Strip, killing more than 1000 Palestinians.

She was also the acting prime minister when the invasion took place, and issued a statement at the time criticising the Palestinian group Hamas for firing rockets into southern Israel. It did not condemn Israel for causing civilian casualties.

The former prime minister, Kevin Rudd, and the Foreign Affairs Minister, Stephen Smith, have since expressed unease at the subsequent blockade of Gaza by Israel.

”It looks a bit funny when you go on this tour to promote bilateral relations, but you don’t seem to have any reservations about the issue that was number one on the horizon,” Mr Burns said.

Another former Australian ambassador to Tel Aviv, Peter Rodgers, who served in the Israeli capital from 1994 to 1997, also criticised the government’s attitude towards Israel.

He said last night that under successive governments, Australia’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had become increasingly unbalanced, and that this was unlikely to change under Ms Gillard’s stewardship.

”There’s been a marked swing away from the old attempt to be even-handed on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, to a much more determined pro-Israeli position, and I think Gillard is part of that,” Mr Rodgers said.

The Herald sought comments from Ms Gillard, Michael Danby, a prominent Jewish federal MP – and a supporter of Ms Gillard in last week’s leadership coup – and Mr Dadon for this article, but received no response.

Former ambassadors question silence on the ‘excesses’ of Israel

o lysias says:
April 10, 2014 at 3:06 pm

Didn’t the Aussie Israel lobby play a big role in deposing Kevin Rudd as PM and replacing him with Gillard? (Not to downplay the also important U.S. influence to the same effect.)

§ Sumud says:
April 10, 2014 at 10:10 pm

I heard rumours to that effect lysias but don’t know of anything substantial.

Earlier in 2010 Rudd’s government was vocally critical of Israel after it was discovered that 4 Australian passports had been stolen and used in the murder of the Hamas guy in Dubai, from memory Rudd changed an Australian I/P related vote at the UN from a NO to ABSTAIN. Also Mossad’s station chief in Australai was expelled. Other than that he was consistently pro-Israel.

After being deposed, he went to a BDS-targetted Max Brenner here in Melbourne with Danby and various other pro-Israel jewish politicians (and the media) to have a hot chocolate and tell the community that BDS was comparable to the nazi boycott of jewish business in pre-war Germany. That struck me as a very odd thing to do …you could interpret it as a mea culpa of sorts, but without inside information it remains speculation.

§ Shingo says:
April 10, 2014 at 10:14 pm

Yes Lysias,

I heard reports that Rudd’s denunciation of Israel’s actions against the Mavi Marmara started the ball rolling.

§ Sumud says:
April 11, 2014 at 12:01 am

Sounds like Rudd was rather more pissed at Israel (then conciliatory) in the first half of 2010 than I realised: What am I, chopped liver? How Rudd dived into schmooze mode

The UN vote that Rudd changed from a NO to ABSTAIN was calling for action against Israel over their bloodbath in Gaza in 2008/9. I wonder if that can of worms will be re-opened if Abbas goes to the ICC?

§ RoHa says:
April 11, 2014 at 7:39 am

The standard story is that opposition to the mining tax was the main influence behind the dumping of Nice Mr. Rudd. However, when we put together Rudd’s actions (expelling a diplomat) over Israel’s misuse of Australian passports, the fact that Danby was one of the traitors running to the US embassy to blab about cabinet discussions, the fact that the US can’t blow its nose without Israeli permission, and the fact that The Very Wonderful Julia “no carbon tax” Gillard was living with an agent for Israel (how direct a line do you want?), some of us feel that our suspicions about Israeli lobby involvement are at least as justifiable as the inordinate length of this sentence.

4. thankgodimatheist says:
April 10, 2014 at 7:45 pm

Pulling the wool over our eyes, Mr Leibler, have you no sense of decency (and I will not talk of shame)?

5. Shingo says:
April 10, 2014 at 7:58 pm

But I’m stunned that Carr has been able to blow a bridge that Jimmy Carter, James Baker, Colin Powell, Paul Findley and Walt and Mearsheimer could not blow: the mainstream bar on talking about this stuff.

While I too am a little surprise Phil, it’s not that big a shock. The social and political culture in Australia isn’t like the US. There has always been a healthy contempt and cynicism for those in power. That makes it much more difficult for the ruling class to frame the debate or act as gatekeepers.

As a consequence, the Israeli lobby has to be far more subtle and keep a far lower profile here than AIPAC’s vulgar displays. In fact, I was not even aware of obvious Zionist organizations until I went to the gym the other day and saw a water bottle someone had left behind with a Zionist organization label on it.

Israel is not sacrosanct here, and I believe that it’s approval is in the negative digits. Bear in mind that Miko Peled was also invited to Canberra to address a conference with politician from both sides and given a very warm welcome.

Also, don’t forget that the ABC recently produced that superb document earth, Stone Cold Justice.

o Krauss says:
April 11, 2014 at 12:02 am

Shorter Shingo: Australia is a great country.

I tend to agree.

§ Shingo says:
April 11, 2014 at 12:16 am

Shorter Shingo: Australia is a great country.

That’s a matter of opinion, but the social attitudes here are less tolerant of elitism and less prone to hero worship. Russel Crowe complained that it was something he disliked about Australia – that it doesn’t revere it’s leaders enough.

6. Mayhem says:
April 10, 2014 at 9:00 pm

This talk of ‘over-influential’ Jews reminds us vividly of what happened in Nazi Germany.

o Sumud says:
April 10, 2014 at 11:48 pm

Unlike Israel – and nazi Germany – all Australians have full equal rights, none are denied the vote and discrimination (racial, religious, other) is prohibited by law

. Unlike Israel – and nazi Germany – we do not invade foreign countries transferring our citizens into overseas settlements, plunder the occupied territories and commit multiple instances of war crimes and crimes against humanity against the occupied population.

Take a look in the mirror Mayhem, try to be honest.

That you would equate discussion of a visible lobby group for a foreign country with naziism and the holocaust reflects your unhinged mental state, but not a lot more.

§ red-jos says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
April 11, 2014 at 9:12 am

Like Israel – and Nazi Germany – not all Australians have equal rights, and the plight of the indigenous communities is a national and international disgrace.

Australia, together with the USA, UK and other imperial powers invades foreign countries transferring our citizens into overseas settlements, plundering occupied territories – think Bouganville and other places around the Pacific region, and commit endless instances of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The Israel lobby in Australia run by Jews, many of whose families were Holocaust survivors, are Australian citizens working for a foreign country’s interests – Israel’s – so, are they Australians or Israelis, and if their sympathies are with apartheid Israel why don’t they go and live there?

Mannie De Saxe
7. Ellen says:
April 11, 2014 at 12:28 am

Both Julia Gillard and (take a deep breath) Ayann Hirsi Ali will be speaking at Maryville University in St. Louis under the St. Louis Speakers Series.

It does not take too much imagination to understand the real purpose of this speakers series. (Just look at the line up of their speakers.)

Both these ladies should speak. Hopefully there will be opportunity for public dialogue.

link to
8. straightline says:
April 11, 2014 at 12:53 am

This from the aftermath of the firing of Rudd and installation of Gillard:

link to

Note the quote from that other Jerusalem Prize winner Greg Sheridan – Foreign Editor of the Australian. And this: ‘She wants to be Australia’s first female prime minister and she knows that means currying favour with the Jews’.”

(Australia renews its love affair with Israel, Dan Goldberg,, 10/12/09)

Jews amount to 0.3% of the Australian population. Muslims on the other hand comprise 2.2% of the population and their number is increasing.

9. Pixel says:
April 11, 2014 at 8:02 am

American Jewish Committee builds Israel lobby in Europe

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 1

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 2

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 3

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 4

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 5

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 6

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 7

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 8

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 9a

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 9b

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 10

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 11

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 12

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 13

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 14

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 15

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 16

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 17

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 18

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 19

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 20

Jewish and Israel/Palestine Issues Part 22



Mannie's blogs may be accessed by clicking on to the following links:

MannieBlog (from 1 August 2003 to 31 December 2005)

Activist Kicks Backs - Blognow archive re-housed - 2005-2009

RED JOS BLOGSPOT (from January 2009 onwards)

This page was created on 22 APRIL 2013 and updated on 26 OCTOBER 2016