Palestine: Netanyahu Needs To Expose PLO Hoax
The first visit to Australia by a sitting Israeli Prime Minister – Benjamin Netanyahu – has been preceded by a statement signed by 65 prominent Australians on the initiative of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network.
That statement declares:
“The Australian Government needs to rethink its one-sided support for the Israeli Government. We are appalled that our Government opposes the recent UN Security Council resolution supporting the application of international law to Israel and Palestine, when most nations, including the United Kingdom, Germany, France and New Zealand, support it. Even the USA did not oppose it. It is time for the suffering of the Palestinian people to stop and for Australia to take a more balanced role in supporting the application of international law and not supporting Mr Netanyahu and his policies.”
Signatories to this statement include:
- senior legal professionals – including former Solicitor General Gavan Griffith QC, and former Federal Court judge Murray Rutledge Wilcox
- former parliamentarians –and diplomats including Jon Stanhope, former ACT Chief Minister, former ALP Minister The Hon Alan Griffin, and Ambassador Bruce Haigh
- senior clergy – including Bishop George Browning, Bishop Pat Power and former Uniting Church President Rev Gregor Henderson AM
- Artists – including actor Miriam Margolyes, writer and commentator Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah, artist Luke Roberts, and filmmaker Christina Wilcox
- Academics – including Dr Susan Carland, Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees AM and Associate Professor Peter Slezak, and many others
Their signatures are a sad testament to their embrace of Security Council Resolution 2334 and to its claim that the Jewish Quarter, the Kotel and the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem and the Machpelah in Hebron are “Occupied Palestinian Territory”.
If they did not understand that is what they were endorsing then they should withdraw their signatures immediately.
Interestingly they also signed up to “supporting the application of international law to Israel and Palestine”
International law indisputably establishes:
- The right of the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Jerusalem, Hebron and Judea and Samaria (West Bank) pursuant to the provisions of the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine
- The preservation of such vested legal rights under article 80 of the United Nations Charter.
The Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) – Israel’s “partner for peace” has:
- declared this established international law to be “deemed null and void” under its Charter
- claimed in its 1964 Charter:
“Article 24. This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area. Its activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields.”
This article remained unamended when UN Security Council Resolution 242 was passed after the Six Day War. Article 24 was removed from the Charter in 1968 but no claim to sovereignty replaced it.
The PLO claim in 2017 to a separate State where sovereignty still remains unclaimed under its own Charter has been one of the greatest scams perpetrated on and swallowed by the international community during the 100 years conflict.
That persons of the quality and calibre of these 65 prominent Australians should have signed this declaration is testament to the stunning inroads that false Arab propaganda has been used to influence public opinion over the last fifty years.
The idea of two states – one Arab, one Jewish – in the area covered by the Mandate for Palestine has been offered to – and rejected by – the Arabs on many occasions since 1922.
Prime Minister Netanyahu should take the opportunity to say a few words on this PLO hoax during his visit to Australia.
David Singer is a Sydney Lawyer and Foundation Member of the International Analysts Network
Sorry about my mistake re Hawke and Rudd signing the Palestinian Advocacy Network statement, David, and thanks for clarifying the issue. In a way, their separate support is worse. Penny Wong was interviewed on ABC television a couple of nights ago and asked, apropos ‘the Elders’ of the Labor Party statement, would the Labor Party come to embrace a policy of recognition of the Palestinian State? While delivering the usual comment on ‘a two state solution’ being preferable, she did go on to imply that if that was too long in coming, it could come to that.
I rang the Canberra Parliamentary Office of my Federal member, drawing their attention to PW’s statement, and saying I was aware of a shift in Labor Party line in regard to Israel/Palestinians, augmented by the likes of Lee Rhiannon. I said they would never receive a vote from me again if they so arrogantly interfered in this way in the affairs of state of Israel, supporting Palestinian statehood without regard to Israel’s security. It would put me in a difficult position, because as a person with socialist democratic leanings, I cannot vote Liberal Coalition. I am only one voice, but it’s important to use it.
It was Goebbels who said, ‘If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.’ How things come around full circle: this is exactly what we see now before our very eyes. So many, it seems, are both intellectually lazy and stupid.
Liat, what the Elders of the ALP have done and what the ALP threatens to do on this issue is detrimental to Australia’s interests.
They delude themselves into believing that only the Jews would be the victims of their misguided, immoral , nonsensical schemes, and that doesn’t bother them at all.
You sound angry, David, but as usual you’re succinct and rational in what you have to say. I certainly feel anger at the temerity and arrogance of these ‘prominent’ Australians who have endorsed this false rhetoric. You’re right, the inroads that Arab propaganda for the Palestinian cause has made is stunning. They have successfully tricked the world. We have to now ask ourselves, is that because the world is willing to be tricked? And the answer to that, I think, is yes.
Netanyahu thus far has been a breath of fresh air, with his forthright, concrete responses to the usual difficult questions, and indeed with his response to the two ex-Australian Prime Ministers who signed this letter. Rudd, in the meantime, has been reported to have responded even more rashly, and inappropriately, attacking Netanyahu in regard to the use of Australian passports in relation to the assassination of a Hamas terrorist! Let us not allow these people to spoil the positive aspects of BN’s visit. Although tomorrow the protesters on the Palestinians’ behalf will be out in force apparently.
Hawke and Rudd did not sign the statement.
They are a different case altogether.
Trying to deal with the views of people rushing into print basing their opinions on false facts is a long and difficult job. Unless they are challenged – their opinions -if stated often enough by them or others – soon become accepted as being true.
There was a guy who made such type of propaganda famous with these famous words:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
His name was G******S.
A pat on the back if you can guess his name.
The PLO a “partner of Peace” is a nasty Hoax. The PLO was created out of terrorism against Jews and has never changed its ugly spots. Remember the Munich Olympic massacre of Israeli athletes . The only ever massacre against Olympic athletes in the whole history of the Olympic games was perpetrated by PLO gangsters . BTW, is it by accident that the PLO successfully managed to execute this massacre on German soil?
David,
I don’t often find myself in disagreement with you, BUT, in the first paragraph of your post today you used the word “prominent”.
Well my friend, they don’t sound too “prominent to me.
‘Former’ this and ‘former’ that and littered with many middle eastern sounding names!
Nah! they aren’t “prominent” at all. They just wish they were.
Add to that the call today from Messrs. Hawke, Carr and Rudd to recognize a “Palestinian” State, whatever they think that might look like, and that completes the non-entity contribution to the otherwise warm welcome received by Prime Minister Netanyahu.
Roy
I don’t think it helps to denigrate the signatories themselves.
Concentrate on the message they have sent and don’t shoot the messanger.
What a gentleman you are David.
I accept the rebuke and unreservedly apologize if any of them is offended by my printed observation.
Roy
It was certainly not my intention to make you feel that I was rebuking you.
I have been the recipient of abuse you could not imagine from anonymous commentators who have no answers to the articles I publish.
I consider that to be evidence they have no answers to contradict or dispute the matters raised in my articles.
In the case of our 65 prominent persons – they need to answer the questions posed in my article about their understanding of what they were signing.
I am sure many of them would be Christians and fail to understand that in signing the statement they were trashing the Old Testament – the basis of their own religion and the Jewish religion.
None of them has sought to justify their signing the statement.
Maybe some readers – including yourself – would like to write to them directly and seek their response and advise readers what they say.
Rightly so – Bibi should speak up …and will.
These (so-called) educated ppl are either:
Totally Ignorant – misguided
historically illiterate
Easily influenced – gullible – narrow- minded
one -eyed – plainly meddlesome
Anti-Israel
Anti – Semitic
It’s beyond me the breadth and depth of their ignorant
And dangerous commitment to their beliefs
Where do we go from here when the so called
Intelligentsia is so malignant ?
Erica
See my reply to Leon Poddebsky.
Indeed if more than one person writes to these prominent Australians questioning them signing the statement they did then it could be the pressure valve to elicit a response they might otherwise have not made.
You are too lenient. Believing they have “naive” intent
Is not helpful. It doesn’t really matter HOW they believe – it matters WHAT !
Don’t let their “humble” ignorance fool you. They are guilty of
Being shamed.
David, are you assuming that all of these prominent Australians ,or indeed any of them, are ignorant of the truth?
Have you considered that their actions are motivated not by ignorance of the facts, but by other motives?
When a former Australian foreign minister can assert that Jerusalem is ” a great Arab city which Israel is Judaising,” and does so without fearing any deserved ridicule or damage to his reputation, we can be sure that it is not ignorance at work, but something else.
When a former Australian prime minister can call descendants of Arab imperialist conquerors, and recent Arab immigrants into Judaea, ” the indigenous population” of Judaea, we know that it is not ignorance that misled him.
Certainly we need to educate those who genuinely do not know the facts, but we also need to be aware of other forces that lead educated, sophisticated people to lie flagrantly.
Do tell us more Leon.
I believe that everyone should be given the benefit of the doubt and the opportunity to explain why they hold the opinions they do when challenged – as I have done here in my article.
These 65 prominent Australians need to tell us why they have accepted the terms of Resolution 2334 declaring that the Jewish Quarter, the Kotel and the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem and the Machpelah in Hebron are located on “Occupied Palestinian Territory”.
Only then can we determine whether their publicly expressed opinion has any merit or is perhaps based on false facts that have influenced their decision.
Rushing to judgement is not encouraged.
If you can find out the email or facebook addresses of these people – send them a copy of this article and ask them to respond either to you or to JWire direct.
After they reply then we can discuss the matter further. If they refuse to reply we may then be entitled to draw conclusions based on their silence.