Saturday, August 15, 2015

AUS vs Aunt Poppycock

Another extract from Greg Sheridan's recently published memoir When We Were Young & Foolish: A Memoir of My Misguided Youth with Tony Abbott, Bob Carr, Malcolm Turnbull, Kevin Rudd & Other Reprobates shows just how foolish the Australian's foreign editor was and still is:

"In 1974 the AUS [Australian Union of Students] national conference passed resolutions affirming that: 'AUS does not recognise the existence of the State of Israel' and in other resolutions referred to Israel as 'the Zionist entity'." (p 124)

For the complete 1974 AUS resolution, see my 7/5/14 post Viva Australian Student Activism 1. The only other resolution was that passed in 1975. It did not contain the expression "Zionist entity."

"This signified a particular level of contempt for the state and people of Israel and was meant to be as insulting as possible."  (ibid)

Boo hoo...

Insulting? Or merely accurate?

The fact is that the 'Land of Israel', of which 'Israel', the Zionist entity, is merely the abbreviated version, is a Zionist fiction with about as much substance as King Arthur's Camelot.

Just because Sheridan's exceedingly strange Aunt Poppy filled his young head with poppycock when the nipper was too young to think for himself, and just because he's too damn lazy as an adult to do a bit of homework on the subject and think the matter through, doesn't mean the rest of us have to play along, OK? (On Auntie Poppy's messing with Sheridan's mind, see my 3/8/15 post Greg Sheridan: The Making of a Gentile Zionist.)

Let's get this straight. The simple fact of the matter is that in 1948 Arab Palestine was overrun, ethnically cleansed, and occupied by fanatical, land-grabbing Zionist forces (not long arrived from a fanatical, land-grabbing Europe), who, in an act of unbridled chutzpah, rebadged their ill-gotten gains 'Israel'.

Are we, therefore, seriously expected to forget all about this crime against humanity and adopt the perpetrator's re-branding of occupied Palestine? I think not. Calling it 'the Zionist entity' is merely keeping it real.

"AUS, and the campus left generally, supported the PLO, which was then pioneering airline hijackings and other forms of terrorism against innocent civilians. AUS proclaimed 'Resistance was not terrorism'."  (ibid)

Howling nonsense! Every form of terrorism to assail the Middle East in modern times was pioneered either by pre-1948 Zionist terrorists or by the armed forces of their post-1948 Zionist entity.

For the terrorism of the pre-state mob, see my 27/6/09 post Breathtaking Zionist Hypocrisy. And for the pioneering airline hijackings of the Zionist entity, consider this:

"Israel would introduce plane hijackings to the world as early as December 12, 1954 when it hijacked a Syrian airliner and forced it to land in Israel. The Israeli airforce would often seize flying civilian airliners in international skies and divert them to Israel, subject the passengers to inspection, interrogation, as well as incarceration. Indeed, Israel remains the only party in the Middle East who shot down a civilian airliner, as it did in February 21, 1973, when it downed a Libyan passenger plane, killing 108 passengers on board..." (The Persistence of the Palestinian Question: Essays on Zionism & the Palestinians, Joseph A. Massad, 2006, p 5)

Finally, a bit of clarity on these matters from the Zionist entity's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion:

"If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural; we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but that was two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?" (ibid, p 5)

Why indeed?

AUS was spot-on in the 70s. Its awareness-raising campaign on Palestine, however, was lost on the closed mind of young Greg Sheridan. Incredibly, despite the wealth of information on the subject available today, he's still in thrall to Aunt Poppy's poppycock.

No comments: