Double speak needs to be challenged
George Orwell hit the nail on the head when he stated: “The further society drifts from truth the more it will hate those that speak it”…writes Michael Kuttner.
Michael Kuttner
We are these days facing an epidemic of Orwellian double speak with individuals and groups issuing endless streams of advice, claims, condemnations and assertions about Israel. Apart from those who can be classified as congenital haters we are left with others who proclaim their “friendship” and “support” at every opportunity but when one digs a bit beneath their veneer of apparent solidarity one can discover that things are not as loudly claimed.
Whether it is a refusal to rock the politically correct boat or being seduced by repetitive double speak the fact remains that left unchallenged false narratives soon become the accepted truth. Therein lies the root of many of our current problems in trying to defend Israel from continual falsehoods.
It is not a new phenomenon but something which persists and with the powerful tools of the internet and social media it has become even more potent.
Recent events should help to illustrate the situation. Let me be quite explicit. In no way do I seek to deny those spreading false stories the right to do so. However if these groups and individuals want freedom of speech guarantees then they also have to be prepared to be “outed” and face the glare of exposure.
A recent news item reported on the New Israel Fund (NIF) hosting two book launches in Sydney and Melbourne. Prominently featured was their claim that “we can support Israel and work to end the occupation.” Now, if they want to peddle this to Australian audiences that is their right but it is also important that those whose knowledge of the situation is limited to the ABC and Fairfax newspapers are given the opportunity to learn about the other side. For anyone who has swallowed the revisionist version of history or for those already brainwashed by progressive leftist fairy tales I guess no amount of facts will alter their views. This does not negate the necessity to at least rebut and expose erroneous assertions so that those whose minds are still receptive to the truth can make honest conclusions.
NIF Australia obviously has never heard of San Remo or the decision by the international community to allocate all the territory from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River to a proposed re-established Jewish State and settlement thereof. They also apparently have never realised that subsequent appeasement suggestions to create yet another Arab State (in addition to Transjordan) were summarily rejected by all Arab representatives. This rejection in effect nullified the offer. Subsequent illegal occupation of Judea, Samaria and half of Jerusalem by Jordan also seems to have escaped NIF’s attention. When this territory was liberated in 1967 as a result of an intended war of annihilation planned by Arab States the original internationally legal agreement for Jewish settlement reactivated. The still-born scheme to internationalize Jerusalem, a long-held dream of the Vatican, was never a serious option.
The mythical “Palestinians” now claiming ancestry to the Canaanites only materialised with Arafat and his gang of merry terrorists. All those who naively believe that, by ending the misnamed occupation, peace will break out and that they are supporting Israel need to take a serious reality check. Who do they think is waiting in the wings? It is Hamas, which is part of the double speaking PA. Their programme like Mein Kampf clearly articulates their true intentions.
Palestine (including all of Israel) is a place dedicated to Muslims no part of which can be relinquished. Every Muslim (including women and slaves) must embark on holy jihad in order to return the land to its rightful owners, i.e. Muslims. Jewish settlement in ALL parts of Israel is considered an illegitimate invasion and the very existence of Israel is a provocation of Muslims.
Taking this into account it becomes obvious that the NIF promoted and funded campaigns to “end the occupation” will have only one result – the destruction of the Jewish State in its entirety. For NIF to claim this is “supporting” Israel is a classic example of double speak on a grand scale. Yet this is what they are peddling to Jews and non Jews alike.
You can usually judge the character and real intentions of individuals by the company they keep. In the case of NIF the list of associated groups they consort with and actively fund speaks volumes about an agenda different to that publicly proclaimed. Despite protestations to the contrary NIF’s support of organizations dedicated to “shmutzing” Israel in the international community is clear. Moreover the European Union is complicit in providing millions of Euros to the same groups. It is well known that EU funds continue pour in to the coffers of those working to undermine and boycott Israel.
Don’t take my word for it.
NGO Monitor, an internationally respected and serious watchdog has produced a report which undeniably proves that NIF funded groups are eagerly beavering away in support of this activity. Take a look at this link and you will see it all revealed.
https://www.ngo-monitor.org/funder/new_israel_fund/
In summary it can confidently be asserted that instead of a “new” Israel the end result would be NO Israel.
Nikki Haley the American Ambassador to the UN is a breath of fresh air and certainly not guilty of “double speak.” Her description of the UN Human Rights Council as a “cesspool” of political bias against Israel is spot on. The frenzied responses to the US withdrawal from this corrupt body are classic examples of politically correct knee jerk denial of reality.
Australia’s Julie Bishop oozes enthusiastic delight at the prospect of jumping into this cesspool and participating in the work of the UNHRC. Her remarks that “Australia will work with other UN members & civil society to protect & promote human rights worldwide” are so far from reality that one has to wonder what it is that has been put in her cup of tea.
The United Kingdom’s Boris Johnson who heads a Foreign Office reluctant to believe that the Mandate days are over, is also distraught at the US ditching a UN council riddled with corrupt and hypocritical members. He pledges to continue the UK’s support for “the best tool the international community has to address impunity in an imperfect world.” Now that’s real double speak in action.
Finally, Helen Clarke, a former Labour PM of New Zealand and ex. UN employee, expressed a fear that Trump’s next move may be withdrawal from the UN itself. Reduction in funding may well hasten this potential final step.
We are certainly living in interesting times where hypocrisy and double standards are being challenged and double speak is exposed.
It’s been a long time coming.
Michael Kuttner is a Jewish New Zealander who for many years was actively involved with various communal organisations connected to Judaism and Israel. He now lives in Israel and is J-Wire’s correspondent in the region.
Michael:
You are 100% spot on when it comes to the New Israel Fund (NIF) continuously using the phrase “End the occupation”.
“End the occupation” is actually a phrase coined by the PLO that has been well and truly swallowed hook, line and sinker by NIF.
This phrase ignores the following facts:
1. The Jews living in East Jerusalem were all driven out of their homes and businesses by six invading Arab armies in 1948 and not allowed to return there until 1967.
2. Established Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza all suffered the same fate in 1948 as their fellow Jews in East Jerusalem.
If NIF wants to be intellectually honest with itself then it should use the term “end the re-occupation” that occurred after Israel’s defeat of Jordan and Egypt in the 1967 Six Day War and the re-occupation by the Jews of their properties in East Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza from which they had been forcibly expelled by six invading Arab armies in 1948.
Maybe NIF is ignorant of these facts. If so – they need to review their slavish use of Arab terminology that is deceptive, misleading and downright untruthful.
There is always a need in Human Rights Democracies to be able to criticise abuses of power and energetic and competent structures are obligated to exist .
But when the NIF declares that territories in dispute are occupied that fails a test of integrity for a Jewish organisation claiming devotion to Israeli Security .
A Judea with millions of Islami that believe the Jewish people are invading the Holy Land and have to be massacred and expelled and that Jewish Security demolished cannot be allowed it is a Niave Very Dangerous Psychosis .