10 January 2008
Kiwi Friends of Israel
Blog media releaseGroup concerned by Auckland protestA recently formed pro-Israel advocacy group, Kiwi Friends of Israel, says an Auckland protest against the situation in Gaza was hijacked by extremists.The protest's leaders led chants of "Support the Intifada!" and "Allahu Akhbar!", as well as some protesters brandishing signs with the Star of David alongside a Nazi Swastika. One protestor was also seen wearing a t-shirt with the slogan "9/11 was an inside job". Another sign described the biblical claim that Jews were the "chosen people" as "bullshit"
"This sort of hate speech does nothing to promote peace between Israel and the Palestinians. It's the sort of extremism that undermines rational debate," says Kiwi Friends of Israel.
The word intifada means rebellion or uprising in English, and refers to the Second or al-Aqsa Intifada, referring to the wave of Palestinian terrorism since 2000.
Allahu Akhbar is an Arabic phrase meaning "God is Great" and has commonly been associated with Islamic extremism and terror. It features on the flag of the Islamic Republic of Iran and was chanted during the execution of American citizens Nick Berg and Daniel Perle.
"The organisers of the protest should front up and say whether or not they support this behaviour, and if they don't they should apologise and condemn it," says the group.
Ends
What an idiot (the man in the photograph). The linking of the Holocaust to the war going on right now between Israel and Hamas has absolutely nothing to do with mass extermination and Nazi ideology.
I blame the education system.
Well, no, it's more than just lack of education. It's a twisting of reality that makes people think that it is acceptable to link Nazism and Israel together.
There's more than just the physical battle at work here - this attack is spiritual, and most people are completely unaware and vulnerable.
UPDATE: It's very easy for anti-Israeli sentiments to escalate into violence against Jewish people. In Europe, there have already been a number of incidents. Let's hope and pray that anything like what is occurring overseas does not happen here.
Related link: Jews in Europe targeted as anger grows ~ MSNBC
I would be interested to know the make-up of this new KFOI. Do they have a website?
ReplyDeleteAre they a grouping of senior and well-respected people from the Jewish community or are they just a bunch of pro-Zionist radicals that like to spout their tripe on blogosphere?
Also I thought "Perle" was actually spelt "Pearl" so if that is the case then getting the basics wrong in a press release indicates they are more likely to be from the latter group than the former. Just an observation.
Sean, thanks for pointing out the mistake. The release was sent out in a hurry - it is embarassing, but mistakes happen, especially in volunteer organisations.
ReplyDeleteKFOI is getting a website set up soon. We had planned to hold off on publicly launching until we had it nailed down, but decided to start commenting on issues now because of the situation in Israel. We simply couldn't sit by as anti-Israel groups and some media commentators smeared Israel.
With regards to your claim that we are a group that just likes to "spout their tripe on blogosphere", KFOI has already achieved considerable media attention on radio and in print. It was KFOI who raised the issue of Fr Gerard Burns' desecration of the Yitzhak Rabin Peace Memorial. That issue has since gained international media attention, and the Herald editorialised in support of our stance, stating that our group was right to seek an apology. The idea that we are somehow less credible because we have sought to engage blogs is ridiculous.
I suspect you are just trying to distract from the outrageous behaviour identified in the post. Rather than focus on Kiwi Friends of Israel, why don't you focus on the issues at hand?
"..or are they just a bunch of pro-Zionist radicals that like to spout their tripe on blogosphere?"
ReplyDeleteThe press release doesn't sound at all like "pro-Zionist radicals" however I read it. Rather, it sounds like a group of people who are very frustrated at the MSM's one-sided coverage and lies by omission.
"Intifada" does indeed mean rebellion or uprising in English. It certainly does not mean "wave of Palestinian terrorism." If these guys want to complain about hate speech, they should try not indulging in it themselves.
ReplyDeleteAnd "Allahu akbar" does indeed mean "God is great." Jews and Christians have a problem with that how, exactly?
hmm...so the terrorists describe terrorism as an "intifada" therefore it cannot be terrorism.
ReplyDeleteInteresting idea, that. Next time the thugs lop a head off, let's hope they describe it as a chocolate eclair--we can all rest easy then.
You really are getting desperate PM.
PM, I'd ask you to read the release again. Intifada does indeed mean rebellion or uprising, the release posits that by support the intifada the protestors are professing support for the current intifada against Israel, the second or al-Aqsa intifada, which has resulted in a wave of Palestinian terrorism. Would you care to dispute that the Second Intifada has seen an upsurge in Palestinian terrorism?
ReplyDeleteYour point on the chant of Allahu Akbar makes little sense. Yes it does mean God is great, but this wasn't a prayer meeting. And it certainly had more than a religious dimension when it was being shouted by white atheists at the protest.
The chant has a powerful political dimension, since islam is as much an ideology as a religion.
ReplyDeleteIt has damn-all in common with a Jew or a Christian declaring "God is great".
kiwisforisrael - thanks for your repsonse. I should clarify that I was merely asking the question, not specifically stating that the group was one that "spout their tripe on blogosphere" (KG - please take note also). At this point I still don´t know enough about the group and who they are so I will reserve my decision. However the reason I used the second grouping as a possible definition is that I see a lot of extreme posts and comments in support of Israel (and no doubt there are extreme posts against Israel as well but I rarely visit left-wing blogs) and it is quite plausible that the new group is just a ragtag bunch of opinionated blog commentators. I could be completely wrong of course, but so far the group hasn´t been very transparent. You might want to be aware of this because as a new group that has quickly achieved some media attention you may soon be under some scrutiny from the left wing blogs. I am sure when the website is up we will know more.
ReplyDeleteYou mention I should focus on the issue at hand. I agree. I have said in an earlier post that I believe Fr Burns´ actions to be regretable, even though at the same time I felt the shock reaction was a bit over the top.
On the wider issue I notice that those pro-Israel seem to assume that those anti-Israel are pro-Hamas. From what I can see the no-one in the mainstream Western world has any sympathy for Hamas. There are your John Minto extremists out there, but by and large no-one advocates for Hamas´ actions. In fact I would go as far as to say the vast majority in the mainstream West would also like to see the end of Hamas and the return of Fatah to power.
Most anti-Israel in the current Gaza war abhor the civilian deaths. Some commentators like to analogize Israel´s victimisation by saying "how would you like 10-20 rockets a day landing randomly in Auckland". Not nice. But similarly then how would one like the sort of bombing campaign Israel are currently performing on the innocent civilians of Auckland just because there are the aggressors living among them? Israel says its attacks are targeted but that´s clearly not good enough. The numbers show it.
Ultimatley both sides are wrong, as so often is the case in armed aggression. Hamas, well the sooner they are out of power the better. Violence is never the answer, and again we will see that, as Hamas will not be eliminated this time, and their self-defeating rocket attacks will not stop. It´s back to the negotiation table I´m afraid. It´s slow and painful, but its the only way.
Both sides need a smack round the ears for their contsint fighting but this time Israel has it right. What would you do if some one kept biffing rockets into your backyard and trying to blow you up with bombs? You would strike back, wouldnt you? Israel started out just as Hamas is doing right now but times have changed and we have moved on. The Palestainians are copping it because of what Hamas is doing I see that support for Hamas will drop, the people will get sick of what is happening to them. Then and only then will both sides see eye to eye. Israel is only defending its people and I support Israel for doing what it needs to do.
ReplyDeleteKiwisforIsrael: I don't doubt there were some terrorist acts carried out during the second intifada. Now, would you dispute that the second intifada was actually an uprising or rebellion by Palestinians against the occupation and settlement of their territory?
ReplyDeleteI'm just trying to get a grip on how much "hate speech" is actually going on here:
Israelis = Nazis? Check. Gratuitous hate speech.
"God's chosen people" is bullshit? Bzzt! Wrong! Every single atheist or agnostic on the planet would call that bullshit.
God is great? Honestly, you've got to be kidding.
Support the intifada? Possibly. If it's a call to support crimes, yes it would be hate speech. If it's a call to support non-criminal Palestinian rebellion, no it's not.
Conflating Palestinian rebellion with terrorism? Very likely to be hate speech.
NB: personally I think "hate speech" is a bullshit concept - everybody hates somebody and has every right to hold an opinion and express it. But seeing as you guys are using the term, I'm going along with it for the sake of argument.
"We simply couldn't sit by as anti-Israel groups and some media commentators smeared Israel."
ReplyDeleteWhy not, Israel is literally smearing Palestinians all over the place.
"What would you do if some one kept biffing rockets into your backyard and trying to blow you up with bombs?"
If you want it in perspective, it's like someone firing a roman candle at your window, so you go and demolish his and his house and his families houses.
Is this the same Paul (also from Christchurch) posting as Canterbury Atheist? If so, please use the one blog handle when posting here.
ReplyDeletePaul - here's what a "Roman Candle" from Hamas does:
ReplyDeleteMother of four killed on way back from gym as Gaza terrorists fire long-range rockets at city of Ashdod; victim's sister wounded in strike.
That was in the city of Ashdod, 28 miles from the border.
Your analogy of the next door neighbour doing ineffectual things does not work well.
Two rockets landed in Ashkelon Monday evening, one of them inside the yard of an elementary school located close to several kindergartens. Some of the buildings sustained heavy damage and residents reported of power outages as a result of the explosion.
Some 80 rockets have been fired at israel throughout Monday....
Oops, kilometers, not miles and around 20-28km from Gaza rocket fire.
ReplyDelete"Is this the same Paul (also from Christchurch) posting as Canterbury Atheist? If so, please use the one blog handle when posting here."
ReplyDeleteNo, should probably leave it up to blog admin to check IP's though. Or maybe you wanted people to jump to conclusions?
"Mother of four killed on way back from gym as Gaza terrorists fire long-range rockets at city of Ashdod; victim's sister wounded in strike."
As opposed to occupying, oppressing, starving, destroying infrastructure, and killing hundreds of women and children? All because they don't want to give back the land they stole, or even allow these people humanitarian aid?
Israel is using criminal and terrorist tactics to break the will of the Palestinians so that they don't keep asking for their land back and so they don't elect another non-puppet government.
ZenTiger - the rocket attacks from Hamas are a terrible and unacceptable practice. But does it justify the current Israeli response? (take away loses to Hamas and consider the death and destruction to cvilians only if you will). Are we going to be a step closer to peace now, or a step further away?
ReplyDelete"(take away loses to Hamas and consider the death and destruction to cvilians only if you will)"
ReplyDeleteIt's naive to suggest that civilian losses can be considered in isolation when one side of this conflict deliberately targets civilians and deliberately uses civilians as human shields.
And I notice there's always a "but" after any faint condemnation of terrorism with some people...
No, we're not "a step closer to peace" now--because Hamas has specifically rejected peace, along with the continued existence of Israel.
When will some people get it through their thick skulls that no matter how many concessions Israel makes, islamists WILL NOT accept the existence of Israel?
KG: What concessions exactly have Israel made?
ReplyDelete"how many times do muslims preachers and leaders have to state that their objective is the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews"
Hows that objective going? 854 of their own dead to 13 Israelis doesn't exactly sound like success.
What concessions should they make, after handing back land won after they were attacked, only to see it used to stage further attacks?
ReplyDelete"Hows that objective going? 854 of their own dead to 13 Israelis doesn't exactly sound like success."
Is that deliberate stupidity? To use only the (alleged) figures from the Gaza operation, when I was obviously talking about the islamist's worldwide agenda?
Not so much stupidity, I suspect as simple dishonesty....
Nice to see Paul show his true colours.. :-)
ReplyDeletePaul - IP addresses are easily changed, masked or reallocated. It is easier simply to ask politely.
ReplyDeletePaul - you likened the rocket attacks to a harmless Roman Candle. My reply that a harmless Roman Candle traveled 20 clicks to kill one person and wound another absolutely, categorically invalidates your point.
Your reply was simply irrelevant to that point. But you probably realise that. I answer the substance of your reply in my next point.
Sean - You said: ZenTiger - the rocket attacks from Hamas are a terrible and unacceptable practice. But does it justify the current Israeli response? (take away loses to Hamas and consider the death and destruction to civilians only if you will). Are we going to be a step closer to peace now, or a step further away?
Personally, I am not able to make a conclusion about the term "justify" with regard to the current Israeli action.
I can agree that I don't think the current approach is warranted (if you see the distinction), and I agree that it is unlikely to move closer towards a lasting peace.
In short, I am deeply sympathetic to the Israeli cause, but do not agree with the current action. I think other actions could have been taken, declared, warned etc before going this far. Maybe they were, and it just wasn't reported?
I have seen reports where the Israeli are blamed for making the first *serious* breach of the truce, only to find that mortar attacks started after the first day of the truce, a significant attack only 5 days after the start of the truce 6 months ago, with ongoing missiles. What they meant by *serious* was that it was only pure luck Israeli's were not killed by ongoing rocket fire.
This comment by Patrick Starr on KiwiBlog:
ReplyDeleteOn the 3rd December 2008, a senior Hamas leader, Osama Hamdan addressed a rally in Beirut in which he compared the Hezbollah ‘victory in Lebanon in 2006’ with the upcoming Gaza conflict.
Doesn’t that strike you as a teeny bit coincidental?
Very interesting comment. Can't find a source link for it at the moment though. Anyone?
Zen - By and large I share the sentiments of your 8:31 post. Though I take a more sympathetic ear to the moderate Palestinian cause, clearly the actions and intentions of Hamas are reprehensible (just not in this way). This tit for tat about who started what and whose fault it is is not getting anywhere though. We know the history of the place, so it is an unwinnable argument, whoever´s side one takes.
ReplyDeleteHave a read of this article The hundred years´war when you have some time. It´s from The Economist, one of the few media outlets I find to be the least corrupted by bias one way or the other.
If Hamas laid down its weapons there would be peace in Gaza.
ReplyDeleteIf Israel laid down its weapons there would be genocide.
How many times can you poke a Wolf with a stick before it bites you?
Shalom
Kev
If Israel laid down its weapons there would be genocide.
ReplyDeleteWith the laying down of weapons being the only action, this might well be true, heavykev.
If Hamas laid down there weapons, there might be peace, but the Palestinians would go on being a citizenless people group with no place to call home.
I decry Hamas' charter and think they're idiots for their foundational aim to drive Israel into the sea... they're angry people... but that angry group was not created in a vacuum.
Their rhetoric needs to be condemned, but they have demonstrated that they can move towards peace.
The Arab peace initiative was/is a positive move. All Arab states agreed to it and so did Hamas and Fatah. If surrounding Arab nations agreed to something, Hamas would be isolated if they did not go along with it - I would also say they would be largely isolated from their own people. The only group that has made no serious moves to enact the agreement is Israel. Thankfully the initiative is gaining some momentum again. As a supporter of that initiative and what it entails, my hope is that it succeeds sooner than later.
With the majority of Palestinians wanting to live peacefully beside Israel in their own sovereign state, if something like the Arab Initiative can be agreed upon, Hamas' extremism would quickly be sidelined... but with the current events, their cause is simply being strengthened as more people feel disenfranchised by what is happening.
All sides would be wise to sit at the table with that initiative in front of them and nut it out. If the agreement is instigated by the Arab states, it's more likely to get a good follow through by the groups that threaten Israel.
excuse typos and poor writing in that last comment :)
ReplyDeleteI was on the demonstration in question and, having written a number of times about contemporary anti-semitism, I was pleased to note that organisers made strenuous efforts to emphasise that it was the Israeli government, not Jewish people, who were the target of the protest.
ReplyDeleteWhen John Minto talked of the Jewish members of the protest, and noted that ten thousand Israelis, many of them Jewish, had recently marched through Jerusalem against the attacks on Gaza, he was loudly applauded. Another speaker, an Islamic scholar from Turkey, made the same point, and also attracted applause. The notion that the chant 'Allah Akbar' is ipso facto an endorsement of terrorism is nonsense - the slogan is usually simply an affirmation of faith and solidarity with fellow believers.
I did not notice swastikas being juxtaposed with the Star of David on a banner, but I did notice the fool with the 9/11 Truther slogan on his T shirt. It needs to be emphasised that large protests will always attract the odd crank. It's quite unfair, though, to generalise the odd crank into the official message of the protest.
I'd rather focus on the many distinguished New Zealanders who attended the event - CK Stead, who is often considered our most distinguished living writer, for instance. I haven't hitherto considered Stead a jihadi, nor even much of a lefty!
I would be interested to see NZ Frinds of Israel make some substantive points about thre crisis in the Middle East, rather than produce this sort of misrepresentation. Do they, for instance, support the dismantling of the illegal Isaraeli settlemetns in the West Bank and the end of the occupation of land taken in 1967, or do they share the view of the frontrunner in the curent Israeli election campaign, who wants the occupation to continue permanently, and rules out any notion of a Palestinian state?