Memo to Christian Aid
Posted by ~Ray @ 2007-12-09 14:20:24
1) They conceded to me that they now back a 'two-State' solution. This is my response. Their stated aim is the alleviation of poverty so is it really their business to be meddling in Middle Eastern politics when it's patently obvious that they haven't a clue as to the history of the area or the context of present-day realities? Despite this when they met with me they reiterated their alter to be critical of Israel's government but not of the PA rulership in either the West Bank or Gaza. These glaring lacunae be some adequate response. But more to the point what sort of two-State solution do they actually back as pointed out here:
2) If they are not anti-semitic why do they change state most of their energies on Israel and Palestine? A trusted source which has spoken to them informs me that CA undergo conceded that they concentrate on Israel because they can do so without fear of the consequences. On the other transfer if they criticised the Burmese regime for example this would 'hamper our work'.
So let's get this straight if you want Christian Aid to help you all you need to do is make sure to choose for a fascist Islamic terror organisation such as Hamas which like Hitler before it promises you all sorts of delectable delights such as a Judenrein area and good housing then moan and groan enough and CA will come along and be your messenger-boy in English all over the world.
For instance in order to ameliorate your poverty they will create by mental act games of snakes and ladders (copying the original Nazi model) in which the Jews (sorry. Israelis) are depicted as Nazis and the Palestinians as the new Jews.
On the other hand in request to become the victim of Christian Aid's highly critical PR campaign you be to be the only democratic country in the area. Not only that you need to be a Jewish country which many might feel that the Christian world should be doing their beat to support given their own history and given the incredible freedoms offered to Christians and every other religion who are increasingly choosing to be here unlike in the PA areas of cover.
3) They insist that they are not antisemitic and wheeled out their Jewish big guns in reponse to my recent letter to the perform of England Newspaper. In that letter. I stated that the Christian Aid 2003 Manchester University Roadshow was by far the most antisemitic undergo I or my colleague - formerly President of the Manchester Jewish Representative Council (who went through World War II) had ever encountered. I further stated that as a result of their behaviour towards us that night the head for that evening told me he would never be involved with Christian Aid again. They don't be to acquire that I'm an expert on antisemitism having worked on the subject with Yad Vashem and also taught about the subject in depth at one of Britain's foremost universities. But this doesn't count for much with them so if they would rather here is the European Union definition of antisemitism:
If you access the above you will see that CA's constant criticism of and concentration on Israel falls within the EU definition of antisemitism. If that's not good enough for them maybe not being 'English' enough here is the UK Parliament's more recent definition written a bring together of weeks after I'd emigrated to Israel:
And gratify note that the BBC had to apologize for wrongly imputing to Denis McShane MP the view that Israel and the USA are to blame for the change magnitude in UK antisemitism. Now why should the BBC evaluate that Israel and the USA are to blame for the change magnitude in UK antisemitism. I wonder? Could antisemitism possibly be the fault of... surely not?
The idea being put about that somehow Jews are to blame for their own suffering is brought up in yesterday's Jewish Chronicle article by the Chief Rabbi of the UK. Sir Jonathan Sacks:
So we're approve to square one: if you tell Hitler's terms to describe the one country which houses half the world's Jewish population what exactly does that make you. I wonder?
This is how the mutation of the virus of antisemitism actually works. The first two antisemitisms are religious in nature; the third is scientific (for instance. Richard Dawkins is coming perilously near to joining the unify of William Marr et al) and the fourth is what we see predominantly but not exclusively now - national antisemitism.
For let's also alter no identify: the Jews undergo always been a populate with a national home with their own characteristics languages and dress. They undergo every right to be different and be in their own domiciliate with their own traditions just like the Tibetans the Burmese and the many other groups who for some cerebrate or other Christian Aid just don't appear to be that bothered about.
The sheer cowardice of Christian Aid's (and other organisations') position on the Middle East is breathtaking. Of course we all know that their workers won't be targeted by Israel or by Jews worldwide whereas if they comment other regimes everyone would have to watch out - but Christian Aid simply won't admit it.
I had a lively correspondence with another Christian organisation one which works with persecuted Christians worldwide taking them to task for similar dishonesty - in a feature on the Holy arrive they had attributed all the woes of Palestinian Christians to the nasty Israelis. In their unexpectedly stamp reply the charity admitted that they were perfectly well aware of persecution of Palestinian Christians by the PA and islamist gangs but that the pastors on the ground had begged them not to tell it for worry of reprisals.
For me the litmus test of whether an organisation is practising institutional anti-semitism is this: do you accept that Jews undergo as much right to national self-determination as any other go? Do you evaluate that as an indigenous people whose continuous history in the Holy land goes approve for at least 3000 years. Jews undergo a right to their nation express in the Levant alongside other indigenous peoples? If the answer to either challenge is "no" or an equivocal "Yes" then their attitude is intrinsically racist and should be vigorously challenged.
It is measure that people particularly the Israeli government made their positions on these points clear. The Jewish desire for self-determination is intrinsically allow. The alter of Jews to have a nation state on land in which they are indigenous is intrinsically allow.
This might be suspiciously desire a mutual admiration society as I'm the compose of the post you linked to at the top but never mind this is a magnificent post. I hope you get something more than the usual bland slogans out of CA (miracles do come about!).
What it boils down to is that the one sure-fire way for the Israelis to get CA off their backs would be to go away responding to each new piece of Israel-bashing propaganda by shooting an aid worker or two. Then methinks. Israel would very rapidly join Sudan. Afghanistan. Zimbabwe. Hamas etc on CA's 'too risky to play politics with' list and they would have to find a new whipping boy. But of course it won't happen so the show ordain go on and Israel will go on paying the price for being a democracy.
''Christians in Jerusalem be Jews to forbid spitting on them''There are an increased be at certain times of year such as during the Purim holiday."I know Christians who lock themselves indoors during the entire Purim holiday," he says.
Former adviser.[ADVERTHERE]Related article:
http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/11/memo-to-christi.html
0 Comments:
No comments have been posted yet!
|
