Letters, April 15, 2011
Does Goldstone retraction count for nothing?
AUSTRALIANS for Palestine and affiliated groups applauded the Goldstone Report, and called for an investigation of Operation Cast Lead.
In a recent article in The Washington Post, Justice Richard Goldstone concluded that “civilians were not intentionally targeted” by Israel, yet pro-Palestinian groups have yet to rein in their hate campaign against Israel. And some Greens senators still run to support these fringe groups.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
Philip Rothschild
Caulfield North, Vic
Goldstone’s admission has come far too late
ONE of the immediate effects of the Goldstone Report has been to provide invaluable support, massive moral/immoral encouragement to a sworn mortal enemy of Israel, Hamas, to increase their aggressiveness across the Gaza-Israel divide.
Through the validation by the United Nations of a thoroughly farcical assessment of a conflict comprehensively and universally known for the one-sided, Palestinian terrorist policies and strategies of engagement with Israel, the UN, a world forum of “balance and justice”, has kept alive Hamas’s green lights of applying its ideology of wanton destruction of the Jewish State. Within the current political dynamics in the Arab world, we are witnessing a massive increase in acts of aggression from Gaza.
The obvious Palestinian strategies consider with prevalence the practical elimination of Egypt as a dependable ally of Israel. In fact it is becoming a reliable source of armoury support to Gaza.
At the same time, in view of the fluid political structure and the implicit intense attempts by the United States to engage with the new developments in Egypt in a continuum of friendly relationships, Hamas is hedging its rationale on a less than supportive attitude of the US Administration towards Israel in the event of another open conflict in Gaza.
At the core of this rationale is the high expectation that, in the current “revolutionary” spirit, should a new open conflict flare up, massive popular support for Hamas will sweep the streets of Cairo.
This, and similar strategies must be seen as part of the obvious interactions between factors of direct (i.e. the explicit Hamas policies) and indirect (i.e. the Goldstone Report) determinants of crucial events.
This is why the belated partial teshuvah (repentance) offered by Richard Goldstone comes far too late to have any reverse impact on the evil effects it has provided.
In the same context, the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions campaign is intended to intimidate Israel and its supporters into a psychosis of collective guilt and, respectively, garner general support for any “entity” engaged in confronting Israel.
Otto Waldmann
Bondi Junction, NSW
NIF’s Chazan should not be given warm welcome
NOW that Richard Goldstone’s credibility has been shot to pieces, and considering the damage he has caused Israel’s reputation, will Australian Progressive Jews still be supporting and promoting one of Goldstone’s most valuable backers, the New Israel Fund (NIF), headed by left wing activist Naomi Chazan?
Chazan’s last visit to Australia promoted by Jewish groups, such as UIA Progressive Trust, the Union for Progressive Judaism (UPJ) and Temple Beth Israel, was cancelled amid revelations that Chazan’s NIF was a major supporter of the anti-Israel Goldstone Report, as well as extremist Arab groups that called for the destruction of Israel.
Regrettably, the UPJ website stated they only withdrew Chazan’s invitation as a UIA guest speaker, not because they didn’t support her views, but because it may have taken focus off the fundraising activities by UIA.
It is rumoured that Chazan is once again attempting to come to Australia. I hope the Progressive Jewish movement will not be divisive, and be sensitive to the majority of Australian Jews who do not support the stream of Israel bashers who just add more fuel and hatred towards Israel in Australia.
Michael Burd
Toorak, Vic
Greens policy on Israel is hypocritical
SUPPORT for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel is a measure of the Greens’ hypocrisy.
Why would a party whose raison d’etre is supposedly the environment even want to boycott the environment-saving technologies of the world leader in water conservation, reclamation and desalination, solar energy, biodiversity and sustainable development in general?
Judith Rona
Bondi, NSW
Israel should be idolised by environmentalists
DO Greens Senators Scott Ludlam and Sarah Hansen-Young know that Israel exports revolutionary irrigation technologies and water management practices to Australia. If they do, why would they promote severing ties with the Jewish State?
After all, aren’t the Greens meant to be environmentalists? Hence, this anti-Israel position adopted by these Senators is in complete contradiction with an official Greens policy – to promote a sustainable approach to water management.
Daniel Jacobs
St Kilda East, Vic
Whose story should we be promoting?
IT is quite important to note that Dr Ayman Agbaria’s interview with The AJN (08/04) is fraught with many uncontested and untrue statements.
For instance, the Israeli Arab community has 14 members in a Knesset of 120. Hence, they are not “unrepresented … in Israeli politics”, as Agbaria claims.
The most disconcerting thing about this affair is that it was the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation that brought him to Australia. One would think that they should put their money to better use.
Arthur Goren
Hoppers Crossing, Vic
comments