ZFNZ critical of NZ’s stance on Israel
The Zionist Federation of New Zealand has issued a statement saying New Zealand believes that Israel should allow Israelis be killed proportionately to satisfy the international community.
Jacinda Ardern
The full statement: “The Zionist Federation of New Zealand condemns the latest anti-Israel resolution by the UN General Assembly on 11 June 2018. It seems preposterous that only one country, Israel, is condemned for defending its people, that only one country, Israel, is expected to sit by and let its border be breached by a hostile nation. It seems only one country, Israel, is expected to sit back and watch its people get murdered.
It is inconceivable to accuse Israel of “excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force” when Hamas and Islamic Jihad themselves have admitted that 85% of those killed where their own operatives, and that their women and children would sacrificed to prevent normalisation of relations with Israel. These are recognised terrorists organisations whose own leaders called upon their members to breach the border fence to murder Israel soldiers and civilians. That at least 85% of those killed were terrorists amid the literal smoke and mirrors and thousands of people on the border shows Israel was far from indiscriminate and very precise with the measures it took.
Those who have condemned Israel have yet to come up with an alternative solution that Israel could have taken, except, like Prime Minister Ardern, that under the name of “proportionality” Israel should have let Israelis be killed to satisfy the international community, some of whom, like New Zealand, are allegedly Israel’s friends.
Israel, like all countries, has the right to defend its borders and protect its people.”
In the meantime, a J-Wire reader from New Zealand writes: “I must apologise to Australians that we did not vote No like you did on June 12 at United Nations. Along with our four Pacific Island neighbors. We have a left wing government who is anti Semitic.”
The representative of New Zealand said his delegation voted in favour of the resolution because it was deeply concerned about the high numbers of civilian deaths in Gaza. However, Hamas must be held accountable for its actions.
Those voting against resolution L23 were Australia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Solomon Islands, Togo and the United States.
The representative of Australia said the resolution failed to refer to Hamas by name or its role in the Gaza protests. It also failed to mention Israel’s legitimate security concerns, while its reference to an international mechanism could raise expectations unrealistically. For those reasons, Australia had voted against the resolution, but it remained committed to a two-State solution.
The General Assembly adopted L23 deploring the use of excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate force by Israeli forces against Palestinian civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and particularly the Gaza Strip.
A UN statement read: “By the text titled “Protection of the Palestinian civilian population” — adopted by a vote of 120 in favour to 8 against with 45 abstentions — the Assembly demanded that Israel refrain from such actions and fully abide by its legal obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention relating to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949.
It also deplored the firing of rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israeli civilian areas — and any actions that could endanger civilian lives — and called for urgent steps to ensure an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, as well as for the exercise of maximum restraint by all parties.”
Rob Berg, the president of the ZFNZ told J-Wire: “It is disappointing that once again New Zealand has sided with non-democratic countries at the UN instead of voting along with its closest allies, Australia and the US in the recent UNGA vote. New Zealand has yet again sided with terrorists without giving any viable alternative to the measures Israel took to defend its population against a violent attempt to breach the Israel-Gaza border”
He said when Jacinda Arderns was interviewed on breakfast TV news after the May 14 deaths on the Gaza border, said the she was concerned about “the devastating, one-sided loss of life”
can you imagine a world without Jews…….
Which borders are we referring to?
Israel has never defined its borders.
Which fence are we referring to?
The fences being approached are 1 kilometer inside Gaza.
What is wrong with staying an obvious fact? 60 Palestinians died and thousands were injured on May 14.
One Israeli Soldier needed a bandaid when he was struck by a pebble.
That sounds awfully disproportionate to me.
And you ask why Israel is held to some higher standard that is not applied to others.
Israel claims to be the only democracy in the Middle East and has the most moral army in the world. Israel asserts its own status as being superior therefore it is fair to challenge that.
How can they claim to be the most motlrsl army in the world when they shoot women, children, medics and press in the back.
As for ZFNZ saying 83% of Casualties were Hamas. That is obvious propaganda. The originators of the Great Return March were not and never have been Hamas members.
Why is it called the Great Return March?
Because 70 % of people in Gaza were or are descended from people who were evicted from their land and their homes in 1948. The old still retain the keys and title deeds of their homes.
Gavin:
Your comments are deceptive and misleading.
This is evident from your following comment:
“As for ZFNZ saying 83% of Casualties were Hamas. That is obvious propaganda.”
On May 16, Hamas Political Bureau member Salah Al-Bardawil said in a Gaza television interview that 50 of the people killed in Gaza on May 14 were from Hamas, while 12 were “regular people”.
The propaganda is coming from your side Gavin.
Wasting further time answering the rest of your comments is not warranted. Hopefully you will have the decency to apologise for and withdraw your shocking error.
I will not withdraw.
Anyone who actually watched that interview will clearly see that the number was plucked out of thin air as he was constantly being berated that Hamas was sending innocent people to their deaths.
Now tell me where is the evidence that 83% of the 13,000 + Casualties were Hamas members.
And tell me 5 slight injuries to IDF soldiers does not represent an incredibly one sided encounter.
It seems to me that one IDF soldier is worth 3,000 innocent Palestinians.
That suggests a belief in racial superiority.
Gavin
You continue to dissemble and deceive when asking:
“Now tell me where is the evidence that 83% of the 13,000 + Casualties were Hamas members.”
This continues in the vein of your earlier false statement:
“As for ZFNZ saying 83% of Casualties were Hamas. That is obvious propaganda.”
The facts are:
1. The ZFNZ statement said:
“It is inconceivable to accuse Israel of “excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force” when Hamas and Islamic Jihad themselves have admitted that 85% of those killed where (sic) their own operatives, and that their women and children would sacrificed to prevent normalisation of relations with Israel.”
Get it? 85% of those “killed” were Hamas operatives – not 83% of the casualties as you falsely state.
2. As to your further misleading claim:
“Anyone who actually watched that interview will clearly see that the number was plucked out of thin air as he was constantly being berated that Hamas was sending innocent people to their deaths.”
Here is a transcript of the interview that exposes the falsity of your claim:
Interviewer: “Many people are saying that the children… I’m telling you what people are saying. It’s not that I believe this. People are saying that children are dying and that Hamas is reaping the fruits.”
Salah Al-Bardawil: “In the last round, there were 62 martyrs.”
Interviewer: “Right.”
Salah Al-Bardawil: “50 of the martyrs were from Hamas, and the other 12 were regular people. So how can anyone claim that Hamas is reaping the fruits, when it paid such a steep price? What did Hamas gain? 50 martyrs…”
Interviewer: “This figure is…”
Salah Al-Bardawil: “I am giving you an official figure. 50 of the martyrs in the recent battle were from Hamas. Before that, at least 50% of the martyrs were from Hamas. So what did Hamas gain from this?”
Really Gavin – I find your refusal to withdraw your comments indefensible, offensive and quite frankly disgusting.
Man up, do the right thing and apologise.
Nothing to apologize for.
Your “transcript” is highly suspect. I have viewed the interview with Atlrabic speaking friends who cslled BS when this transcript was released.
The bottom line of this whole narrative is disproportionate. Regardless of Hamas. Regardless of Islanic Jihad, innocent unarmed civilians including 2 press and 2 paramedics were killed. Others shot in the back.
1 soldier had a bandaid applied when struck with a pebble.
How is that not disproportionate.
Gavin
Your failure to withdraw your offensive and untruthful comments stamps you as a person lacking credibility or integrity.
One could say the same regarding yourself David.
Not once have you addressed the basic argument.
How is 13,000 Casualties to 1 not disproportionate.
Any person of logic would have to admit that.
Or is logic suspended when one supports Israel.
The excuses for excessive use of force are wearing thin. So thin that the Knesset is debating s law making it illegal to film or broadcast the evidence of excessive force.
Gavin
There is no point trying to have any discussion with persons who lack credibility and integrity and who fail to apologise and withdraw when they are caught out making false statements – as has been clearly the case with you.
You had your opportunity to apologise for and withdraw your false statements but failed to do so. Live with the consequences.
David. When I first saw the suspect transcript of the interview with the Hamas official, I believed then, as I do now, that it was a gift to Zionism and supporters of Israel at all costs.
It is not a valid official statement but it allows people like you to get outraged at the NZ Prime Minister for stating the obvious logical conclusion. One that has been reached by many people of Jewish faith around the world.
What happened inside the Gaza “border” was a disproportionate use of force against unarmed civilians.
As for my credibility, I will leave you with this.
Prior to this gift of a suspect transcript, the best intelligence service in the world could only identify less than 20 of the 111 to that point who were Hamas. But in constantly attacking my comments you conveniently omit what you know of the actual state of play prior to that interview.
And as I have pointed out. Whether Hamas,Islamic Jihad or any other group was involved, the targeting of unarmed civilians with live rounds inside their own border was than as it is still now disproportionate.
Gavin
Now you argue – the transcript is “suspect”. Substantiate your allegation.
You then claim – ” that it was a gift to Zionism and supporters of Israel at all costs.” No Gavin it was proof that you were a liar and dissembler anxious to besmirch and denigrate Israel based on false statements made by you.
I repeat – you have no credibility or integrity.
It would appear that I am being denied the opportunity to address my accuser, unable to reply.
1. I watched the suspect interview with Arabic Speaking Friends
2. Any analysis of body language would show the Hamas official to be flustered and grasping at straws ie the claims of numbers are clearly false and lies
3. My Arabic speaking friends stated that the transcript was a quite inaccurate and misleading translation
Not once have you even attempted to answer the question. Is 13,000 casualties to 1 not disproportionate?
If you believe it not to be disproportionate, you obviously believe that one scratched IDF Soldier is worth more than 130 Palestinian lives and 13,000 injuries.
If that is the case, you obviously believe in the superiority of Jewish citizens of Israel, a very slippery slope to engage on.
I wonder whether your continued snipe at tiny points of what I am saying does in fact say more about your own credibility and integrity.
It is beyond my comprehension that a supposedly intelligent person like Jacinda Ardens could make a comment that “she was concerned about the devastating, one-sided loss of life”. In the real world if someone is trying to kill you, you have an obligation to defend yourself. Is there not a saying “kill or be killed”?
G-D help New Zealand and its people.
An example of what intelligent people are capable of doing is the treatment which the elite of Germany (and much of Europe generally) meted out (in 1933-39) to its Jewish population, a population which had been contributing massively to the German national interest since Jewish emancipation.