As reported by Robin Shepherd:

In a quotable example of how robust action by pro-Israel groups can achieve significant results, a British judge has been formally reprimanded after an investigation by the Office for Judicial Complaints found that he had allowed personal views on the Israel-Palestine conflict to influence the conduct of a landmark trial.

Judge George Bathurst-Norman presided over a trial this summer in which seven anti-Israeli activists were acquitted of vandalising a factory supplying weapons to Israel despite having admitted to causing £180,000 ($275,000) worth of damage. The defendants were acquitted after claiming they had merely sought to prevent the greater offence of Israeli “war crimes” during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009.

Amongst others, the Zionist Federation — probably the most energetic pro-Israel advocacy group in the UK — pointed out at the time that the judge’s conduct violated basic principles of judicial neutrality.

Quoting from a transcript of the judge’s summing up published on the internet by Zionist Federation co-vice-chair Jonathan Hoffman, the Times of London and the BBC reported today that the judge had referred to the “scenes of devastation” during operation Cast Lead as “scenes which one would have rather hoped to have disappeared with the Nazi regimes of the last war…”

It is not clear from either the Times or the BBC what the reprimand entailed. If it was a mere slap on the wrist more action will be required. Nor is there any hint of whether a retrial will now take place. Nothing short of that in the circumstances will do since a precedent was set in that trial that anti-Israeli prejudices may be used as a defence even where the defendants have admitted to a serious crime.

Nonetheless, given the prevailing atmosphere in Britain, the achievements of the Zionist Federation and others who took the trouble to launch complaints about the Judge’s conduct are to be heartily applauded. There’s a lesson here, and it needs to be noted and internalised.

The story has also been reported here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8048382/Judge-reprimanded-for-alleged-anti-Israel-comments.html

and here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-11493124

It takes a non Jewish Spanish politician to tell it as it is. When is the world going to wake up to the fact that it is not Israel that is a threat to the world. While the world focuses on demonising and admonishing Israel, there are othr much more threatening issues on the horizon.   It is rumoured that Iran could have her nuclear capability within weeks.  And who would doubt that this mad regime would be prepared to threaten the world when it has.

Is it yet again be left to Israel to do something about this terrifying threat.   And will she yet again be criticised and pilloried by those who don;t have the guts to do it, as she was when she took out Iraq’s nuclear threat?

This warning from Pilar Rahola is a timely one, but it anyone listening?

Pilar Rahola is a Spanish politician, journalist and activist. She is a passionate defender of the United States and Israel and an indefatigable fighter against anti-Semitism. All these despite being ideologically from the left. Her articles are published in Spain and throughout some of the most important newspapers in Latin America. She is the recipient of major awards by Jewish organizations.�
�
Why don’t we see demonstrations against Islamic dictatorships in London, Paris, Barcelona? Or demonstrations against the Burmese dictatorship? Why aren’t there demonstrations against the enslavement of millions of women who live without any legal protection? Why aren’t there demonstrations against the use of children as human bombs where there is conflict with Islam? Why has there been no leadership in support of the victims of Islamic dictatorship in Sudan? Why is there never any outrage against the acts of terrorism committed against Israel? Why is there no outcry by the European left against Islamic fanaticism? Why don’t they defend Israel’s right to exist? Why confuse support of the Palestinian cause with the defense of Palestinian terrorism? An finally, the million dollar question:Why is the left in Europe and around the world obsessed with the two most solid democracies, the United States and Israel, and not with the worst dictatorships on the planet? The two most solid democracies, who have suffered the bloodiest attacks of terrorism, and the left doesn’t care.
And then, to the concept of freedom. In every pro Palestinian European forum I hear the left yelling with fervor: “We want freedom for the people!” Not true. They are never concerned with freedom for the people of Syria or Yemen or Iran or Sudan, or other such nations. And they are never preoccupied when Hammas destroys freedom for the Palestinians. They are only concerned with using the concept of Palestinian freedom as a weapon against Israeli freedom. The resulting consequence of these ideological pathologies is the manipulation of the press.
The international press does major damage when reporting on the question of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. On this topic they don’t inform, they propagandize. When reporting about Israel the majority of journalists forget the reporter code of ethics. And so, any Israeli act of self-defense becomes a massacre, and any confrontation, genocide. So many stupid things have been written about Israel, that there aren’t any accusations left to level against her. At the same time, this press never discusses Syrian and Iranian interference in propagating violence against Israel; the indoctrination of children and the corruption of the Palestinians. And when reporting about victims, every Palestinian casualty is reported as tragedy and every Israeli victim is camouflaged, hidden or reported about with disdain.
And let me add on the topic of the Spanish left. Many are the examples that illustrate the anti-Americanism and anti-Israeli sentiments that define the Spanish left. For example, one of the leftist parties in Spain has just expelled one of its members for creating a pro-Israel website. I quote from the expulsion document: “Our friends are the people of Iran, Libya and Venezuela, oppressed by imperialism, and not a Nazi state like Israel.”
In another example, the socialist mayor of Campozuelos exchanged Shoah Day, commemorating the victims of the Holocaust, with Palestinian Nabka Day, which mourns the establishment of the State of Israel, thus showing contempt for the six million European Jews murdered in the Holocaust. Or in my native city of Barcelona, the city council decided to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the creation of the State of Israel, by having a week of solidarity with the Palestinian people. Thus, they invited Leila Khaled, a noted terrorist from the 70’s and current leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a terrorist organization so described by the European Union, which promotes the use of bombs against Israel. And so on and so on.
This politically correct way of thinking has even polluted the speeches of president Zapatero. His foreign policy falls within the lunatic left, and on issues of the Middle East he is unequivocally pro Arab. I can assure you that in private, Zapatero places on Israel the blame for the conflict in the Middle East, and the policies of foreign minister Moratinos reflect this. The fact that Zapatero chose to wear a kafiah in the midst of the Lebanon conflict is no coincidence; it’s a symbol.
Spain has suffered the worst terrorist attack in Europe and it is in the crosshairs of every Islamic terrorist organization. As I wrote before, they kill us will cell phones hooked to satellites connected to the Middle Ages. And yet the Spanish left is the most anti Israeli in the world.

And then it says it is anti Israel because of solidarity. This is the madness I want to denounce in this conference.

Conclusion:
I am not Jewish. Ideologically I am left and by profession a journalist. Why am I not as anti Israeli as my colleagues? Because as a non-Jew I have the historical responsibility to fight against  hatred towards the Jews and currently against the hatred for their historic homeland, Israel. To fight against anti-Semitism is not the duty of the Jews, it is the duty of the non-Jews.

As a journalist it is my duty to search for the truth beyond prejudice, lies and manipulations. The truth about Israel is not told. As a person from the left who loves progress, I am obligated to defend liberty, culture, civic education for children, coexistence and the laws that the Tablets of the Covenant made into universal principles. Principles that Islamic fundamentalism systematically destroys. That is to say that as a non-Jew, journalist and leftist, I have a triple moral duty towards Israel, because if Israel is destroyed, liberty, modernity and culture will be destroyed too.

The struggle of Israel, even if the world doesn’t want to accept it, is the struggle of the world.

Brilliant piece by Elliot Chodoff, a political and military analyst specializing in the Middle East conflict and the global war on terror

It should be widely used as it clearly and specifically analyses both the legal and practical aspects of the flotilla

Condemn Israel – Then Investigate

Share

Yesterday at 1:59pm

Condemn Israel – Then Investigate
by Elliot Chodoff

The world has put on its usual show this past week, roundly condemning Israel for intercepting the Gaza-bound flotilla, and then calling for an investigation of Israel’s actions. Normal legal processes, such as investigating prior to condemnation, don’t apply. The verdict is already in: condemn Israel, let’s not be confused by the facts.

(An investigation will find that Israel did not use methods that are acceptable to international bodies like the UN. For example, rather than hailing the ship and boarding it, Israel might have utilized the quietly criticized, but otherwise accepted, N. Korean tactic of a submarine-launched torpedo to sink the ship. This would have spared the world the drama of “peace activists” having to try to smash the skulls of IDF naval commandos with steel rods. Alternatively, Israel could have adopted the Iranian post-election crowd control method, raking the ship’s deck with machine gun fire. It worked for Ahmedinejad; barely a peep was heard from the UN and its assorted organs, and Iranian protest has become a thing of the past.)

A number of points bear noting:

- Israel blockades Gaza
It is a blockade, neither a siege nor proxy occupation. Blockade is a legal form of warfare, and does not constitute collective punishment (according to the Geneva Convention). The blockade was not imposed as a result of the Israeli disengagement, but rather as a response to Palestinian belligerency as expressed in cross-border terrorist attacks, ambushes of military patrols, rocket fire into Israeli towns, and the holding of Cpl. Gilad Shalit. Blockades are legal actions; even the UN allows itself the option to impose them (UN Charter, Article VII, Chapter 42).

Further, the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, compiled in 1994, states (emphasis added):

SECTION II: METHODS OF WARFARE
Blockade
93. A blockade shall be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral States.
94. The declaration shall specify the commencement, duration, location, and extent of the blockade and the period within which vessels of neutral States may leave the blockaded coastline.
95. A blockade must be effective. The question whether a blockade is effective is a question of fact.
96. The force maintaining the blockade may be stationed at a distance determined by military requirements.
97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document.
98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.
99. A blockade must not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States.
100. A blockade must be applied impartially to the vessels of all States.

(http://www.icrc.org/IHL.nsf/52d68d14de6160e0c12563da005fdb1b/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce!OpenDocument)

Which one of these rules did Israel violate? (Hint: None!) It should be noted, that paragraph 98 states that after resisting capture, the vessel may be attacked. The Israeli Navy could legally have fired on the ship after the “activists” on board resisted.

- Blockades may be enforced in international waters
According to The Commander’s Handbook on the Law Of Naval Operations” (US Department of Defense, 1 Jul 2007), a ship is considered to be running the blockade when it leaves port, not when it crosses into blockaded waters. (I am indebted to David Olesker for pointing this out at: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=394803501556)

- Blockade runners are engaging in an act of war and are subject to attack
“Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral states may not be attacked unless they are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture,” says the San Remo Manual.

So much for the law. While even Israel’s friends refer to the operation to stop the flotilla as a “botched raid”, I disagree. While the outcome was certainly far from optimal, “botched” implies something very different. The commandos were sent into what they knew was going to be a difficult and confusing situation, with orders to use minimal force to protect innocent “activists.” They met a violent mob and nandles them rather well.

A few points are worth consideration. First, the mission was to prevent the ships from reaching Gaza. This was successfully accomplished. Second, five of the six ships stopped were boarded without incident.

Next, the commandos were armed appropriately for this mission. They were charged with taking control of the ships and those on board, and did so, using minimum force considering the circumstances. I have yet to read or hear a better alternative plan. Had they gone in with greater force, the results would have been worse.

Emerging information points to the fact that those who resisted on the Mavi Marmara were paid, trained, Islamic mercenaries and not simply not “activists.” This group was divided into squads, apparently had firearms that were thrown overboard when the fighting ended, were well trained, possibly ex-military. Most important, some at least, were on the trip planning to die as martyrs.

As more information comes to light, both legal and factual, it becomes clearer that the real error that Israel committed in the eyes of the world was in attempting to protect its population from the Hamas terrorists in Gaza. The world would much rather see Iran shipping weapons to Hamas in Gaza, as it does to Hizbullah in Lebanon in flagrant violation of UN resolutions and despite the presence of UNIFIL, than have Israel act legally in its own defense.

Thanks to Khaled Abu Toemah, as always, telling it as it is. I just wish we could clone him.
Shhh…Mubarak Is Building a Wall – Khaled Abu Toameh

For years, the Egyptians have been strongly condemning Israel for erecting the security fence in the West Bank. But now Egypt is quietly building its own wall along its border with Gaza and does not want to hear any complaints. The Israeli barrier was built with the chief goal of halting suicide bombings and other terror activities against Israelis. The Egyptian fence, on the other hand, is being constructed to stop Palestinians living in Gaza from entering Egypt. Israel does not want to reopen its borders with Gaza and that is regrettable and painful, but also understandable. But what one cannot understand is the negative attitude of the Egyptians and the rest of the Arab regimes toward the misery of their Palestinian brothers. The Arab rulers want Gaza to remain Israel’s problem alone.
The ironic part is that PA President Mahmoud Abbas is now defending Egypt’s right to build a separation wall. This is the same Abbas who, for years, has been condemning Israel’s “Apartheid Wall” and urging the world to force Israel to tear it down. (Hudson Institute-New York)

Having started down the road of double standards it seems they crop up on a disturbingly regular basis. The latest is the fact that there seems to be no international outcry when Egypt blockades a shipment of humanitatian aid, and refuses to allow access for a large convoy being led by the ace pro Palestinian activist George Galloway.
Nor does anyone seem to raise much objection to the fact that Egypt is currently erecting a steel fence to seal her border with Gaza, both above and below ground.                                                              Apparently the below ground one is intended to stop smuggling things into Gaza through the notorious tunnels     Can we read into this attempt to block the tunnels as a small gesture to improve the somewhat cold relations that exist between Egypt and Israel?

It is interesting to note that while the Viva Palestina convoy is held up in Eqypt, another group of protestors is heading for Gaza on what they call “a march of peace”       What a shame these misguided do-gooders don’t actually try to do something positive for the Palestinian people and try to persuade their leaders that the best option is to make peace with Israel and move forward to improving the quality of life of the people they have forced to live as refugees for the past 61 years.

Below I have included the Arutz Sheva report of the Egyptian blockade.   Again I ask you to spread the word about this Egyptian action and to pose the question as to why no-one bothers to react and only accuses Israel of a blockade, when in fact it is only through Israel that the supply lines are constantly open, contrary to what the pro Palestinian lobby would have the world believe.