July 09, 2003


In Australia, as in the US, the Jewish population is moving to the Right:

Labor’s traditionally strong relationship with the Jewish community has fractured over Israel, and Simon Crean has become a target for Jewish anger.

Leading Jewish voices are suggesting Jews will shift their support from Labor to the Liberals at the next election, and donations to Labor are at risk.

Senior ALP sources are aware of the deep Jewish discontent with Labor and concede fundraising from the Jewish community may not be as "dependable" as it once was.

That’s because Labor, now loaded with official Pals of Palestine, is not as “dependable” as it once was.

(Via sharp-eyed Andrew Lloyd.)

Posted by Tim Blair at July 9, 2003 01:40 AM

Thanks for the link, Tim, but it's seemingly busted.

Posted by: Andrew at July 9, 2003 at 03:17 AM

Thanks for the link, Tim, but it's seemingly busted.

Posted by: Andrew at July 9, 2003 at 03:18 AM

One wonder how much the jewish vote is worth, as a great deal of the jewish community lives in Wentworth, one of the Liberals' safest seats.

Posted by: Toryhere at July 9, 2003 at 08:33 AM

Hmmm, the Jews have developed a knack for commerce-something to do with commerce being unclean for medieval agrarian Europe ( and some things never change - they're rusting rustics underneath it all).So ,why would Jews vote for communards, rather than finding and supporting pollies all for open commerce and minimal government.
Perhaps Crean has done an inadvertant service in clarifying some points: communistos are nasty types who like to impoverish everyone but themselves.

Must say, though, making Latham shadow treasurer, Slimey Simey has handed Howard and Costello another Xmas gift, to add to the many they've already presented.And , provided a good laugh to boot.
I hereby nickname Latham Bootikins. He sank the boot into Hollingworth, he's sunk it into others, and now he'd like to sink it right into government finances.Someday, one wouldn't be surprised, the voter will land a hobnailed boot on his big fat useless wuffy backside and land it out onto the cold hard cruel street.

Posted by: d at July 9, 2003 at 09:49 AM

OT: On the day that there's an editorial criticising David Irving, they have a column by paleoconservative (many of whom are Western European Aryans who deny the holocaust) Pat Buchanan about the lack of WMDs, suggesting it may have been the J-e-w-s.

Posted by: Andjam at July 9, 2003 at 10:57 AM

I can't remember the newspaper involved right now, BTW.

Posted by: Andjam at July 9, 2003 at 10:58 AM

Buchanan is another screwball.

Posted by: d at July 9, 2003 at 02:07 PM

You are far too kind to Pitchfork Pat calling him merely a screwball.

Posted by: Michael Lonie at July 9, 2003 at 03:56 PM

Yeah, Pat Buchanan is a real nutcase. I firmly believe that the right approach is to label him crazy, for we can find no real refutation for his objections to Israeli double-dealings with the west over China and Russia, gaining access (legally or illegally) to top-secret or better US info, then passing it on to whomsoever it pleases them. How could Buchanan POSSIBLY object to that practice taking place while the USA still subsidizes Israel to the tune of billions of $'s every year?

Oh, and the way Israel approaches (directly or indirectly) US congresspeople and senators, providing them with free trips year-round to Israel for a festive, profitable romp.

Or the way Israel has repeatedly held back information on impending terrorist attacks directed at the west, for fear of burning one of their inside men.

Or the way the Mossad and Shin bet repeatedly get caught stealing US secrets, or are simply given them by Jewish-American employees of sensitive US agencies who just can't seem to figure out EXACTLY which nation's interests they should serve.

Or the way democratic (but not them alone) ex-presidents that dodged the draft heroically proclaim at Zionist functions that while they would not take up arms for their own nation, they would do so proudly for Israel.

Much like our Jewish-Australian friends eh? SURELY they ARE Australian, like the rest of us? SURELY they will choose a politician to lead this nation based upon the policies that will affect Australia, and not just for the foreign policy adopted in regards to one small mid-eastern theocracy that can't build bridges very well?

Posted by: Mike M at July 9, 2003 at 04:10 PM

It wa difficult but decided to tone this one by calling him screwball.
As for sensitive info Mike M. , it was Clinton and his sidekicks who handed all of it over to the chinese .So, is Buchanan going to kick Clinton and Hilary's fat behinds all over the kiddy winkies playground on what can only be called treason by the gruesome twosome. And Hilary wants a go herself in helping communist regimes.. . Castro too , no doubt , given she sidles up to the ugly mug and plants kisses all over his cushioned buttocks.

And as for the rest Mike M., it's also bad fiction writing.You're not in traing for the SMH or AB(aghdad)C(ommunistos), or both, by any chance?

Posted by: d at July 9, 2003 at 04:27 PM

I take you are all pretty comfortable about occupation of the West bank and Gaza, and that the Palestinians have no right to a viable state.

Posted by: craig at July 9, 2003 at 11:05 PM

Why yes we are! We love the idea of big, bad Jews torturing the fragile, huge-eyed, cuddly-wuddly Palestinians, who have Done Nothing Wrong and are completely innocent. Is it their fault that they have a tendency to explode in public?


Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 10, 2003 at 02:22 AM

I'm shoulder to shoulder with Andrea Craig. `Palestinian people' -codswallop.Arabs who moved out on the expectation the coalition of towelheads, with Cuban communisto army mixed in with the Syrian army , would do to the Jewish people what Hitler and co failed to accomplish.And PLO & PLF were set up to further those murderous aims. Palestinian state, indeed, garbage, undiluted .

Posted by: d at July 10, 2003 at 11:37 AM

Assclown hey!

It's good to hear yet another stirring argument in support of Israel.

You should get your pea brain in action and actually inform yourself of the situation.

As for you d, I'm surprised that a person who obviously thinks he is informed would not realise what a gross injustice denying a whole people the right to self-determination is.

We are not talking about the whole of Israel here but a mere 22% of the original region known as Palestine. This 22% constituting the West bank and Gaza is actually not even part of Israel.

Check out resolution 242 if you don't think that the occupation is illegal.

I too used to think that Israel was a victim and the big bad Palestinians were just a bunch of terrorists.

I read a newspaper article about six or seven years ago about the refugee situation in Lebanon. This prompted me to inform myself further.

What did I find? I found out I was full of shit.

By the way there is a name for those that moved out of Israel, they're called refugees. I mean for crying out loud there are over a million refugees in the West bank and Gaza alone.

Is any of this registering? Probably not.

Posted by: craig at July 11, 2003 at 12:45 AM

> Check out resolution 242 if you don't think that the occupation is illegal.

Does anyone actually believe that general assembly resolutions have force of law?

They're actually little more than prison petitions.

Posted by: Andy Freeman at July 11, 2003 at 01:35 AM

Craig - you're still full of it.

I haven't got time to fisk all your points so I'll take the one easiest.

"We are not talking about the whole of Israel here but a mere 22% of the original region known as Palestine. "

The original region known as Palestine lay on both sides of the Jordan River. In 1921 the British arbitrarily separated almost 80% of that part situated on the east bank, named it Trans-Jordan and installed the Saudi Hashemite family as rulers over the indigenous Palestinian populace. The Palestinians thus received their first state then and now want the remainder, at Israel's expense, as their second.

So next time you see this canard of "only 22%" ask them about the 80% they already have in Jordan.

Israel within the '67 border is only 17% of the original region known as Palestine.

Posted by: anapikoros at July 11, 2003 at 01:42 AM

Jordan was put under the British mandate for Palestine in 1922. The area to the east of the Jordan, was given autonomy. In 1946 the Britichc granted Transjordan independence.

In 1948 when the British pulled out Palestine consisted of the area to the west of the Jordan. This area included territory beyond the region of Palestine.

Jordan invaded the West Bank in 1948. This land was among the territories captured by the Israeli's in 1967.

The Palestinians have been occupying the West Bank and Gaza for thousands of years.

Their occupation pre-dates the Arabs by a few thousand years so I don't know why they should be forced to up stumps and move, just because they are not Jews.

I was wrong on one point though the area concerned is 23% not 22%.

Posted by: craig at July 11, 2003 at 04:44 AM

Craig, you last is unadulterated swine crap. In the first instance, there never has been a `palestinian people', not even a few thousand years ago.The `palestinians ' are Arabs - you know, the guys who used to live in tents and bugger camels.
As for self determination,great, just great. Hey, that lot of Arabs are in a hole dug by Arabs and cemented over by Arabs including the `self-determining' `Palestinian Authority' led by that bucket-head murdering savage with the potato sized nose and porcine eyes, Arafat, and his pet godzillas in PLO PlF.

Moreover, why did Jordan invade, Craig ?

We could really go town on your errors.After all, it's the sort of twaddle the U.N. spends other people's money on.I will , however, refer you to Professor Zeitlin's papers, including what was dealt with at the U.N.

Israel has had a pretty hard fight, and it aint over yet, their are still plenty of Euro-spocialisto creeps, in the U.N. who still hope to finish of Israel.
This thing about `Palestinians' is a straw man, all wind, no guts to it. Yes, craig, fuck the non-existent palestinians. Their are Arab countries, they can go their, if they prefer life under fatah Allah rather than civilised Israel.

Posted by: d at July 11, 2003 at 12:27 PM

The Palestinians are still predominantly the same people that have lived in the area for millennia.
The Arab invasions occurred in the seventh century.

That a minority invader could breed out the indigenous population is fanciful indeed. , or are these dastardly Arabs super breeders.

I haven't read Zeitlin's papers but I will.

I hope it doesn't refer to the absurd interpretation that Resolution 242 did not refer to all the conquered territory.

Israel militarily dominates the Middle East. They have won their war, but continued occupation of the West bank and Gaza will not assure them peace.

Posted by: craig at July 12, 2003 at 03:39 AM