The Honey-Trap of (Im)Moral Equivalence

People love to lay the blame for the stalemate at 50:50. But the facts do not support this. Israeli schoolbooks do not teach children to hate and destroy Palestinians, as the Palestinian schoolbooks do of Israelis Even the most extreme Israeli politician does not threaten to wipe out the Palestinian people, as even mainstream Palestinian politicians do of Israelis.

Douglas Murray..
Gatestone Institute..
24 April '13..

Today, in an age that often seems of pragmatism and managerial-ism in politics, if there is a way not just to honor the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's memory but to continue her legacy it should be to encourage and praise those rare individuals who are willing to buck such trends. In Canada recently, I have had an opportunity to reflect on the perhaps surprising fact (also surprising to many Canadians) that in recent years Canada has shown itself to be a home to convictions which ennoble the present and can stand proud before history. The Harper government's moral clarity on a number of issues –in particular religious freedom and Israel – demonstrate a stand that can be rightly admired and celebrated by free peoples around the world.

Over the last decade the issue of religious freedom has come out of the rear-view mirror to a position of utmost importance, especially among minority communities. But nowhere does it matter more than in the Middle East. As Canada's Foreign Minister, John Bair, must have been reminded on his recent trip to the region, whether you compare what is happening across that region to events in Europe in 1848 or 1991, such historical comparisons are of limited use. What is happening there now, the upsurge of Islam, is a once-in-a-lifetime event. And although none of our countries may any longer have the capability or will to have a permanent military presence in the region, the significance of what soft diplomacy we can muster, and what moral stands we insist on, may yet prove far more important.

If the democracies can do one thing to help guide the Middle East in a more liberal direction, it is by simply showing our friends and potential friends in those countries why the freedoms we enjoy could profitably be enjoyed there as well. If we are seen to be saying, to quote Groucho Marx, "These are our principles and if you don't like them we have other principles," we risk enshrining the worst message of the Islamists: that we democrats are bad friends with insubstantial values. This period in history is too important to be left solely to those allegedly sophisticated' British foreign-office types who revel in making no moral judgements at all.

The other area in which Canada has also shown the significance of values is in the matter of Israel. The Harper government has shown that it is possible to remain unbending when it comes to civilizational values.

While Denouncing It Elsewhere - Rewarding Terror Against Israel

Evelyn Gordon..
Commentary/Contentions..
17 April '13..

As Boston was mourning its victims of terror yesterday, a Parisian suburb was planning a gala fete for terrorists. Among those slated to be honored at tonight’s ceremony in St. Denis are Allam Kaabi, convicted of assassinating Israeli tourism minister Rehavam Ze’evi in 2001, and Salah Hamouri, convicted of plotting to assassinate Israel’s former Sephardi chief rabbi, Ovadia Yosef. Both are members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine who were released in 2011 as part of the exchange for kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit.

Though sponsored by a private organization, the ceremony is to be held in a building owned by the municipality, thus lending the town’s imprimatur to it. And, adding insult to injury, it’s slated to be graced by a representative of Amnesty International: Evidently, this self-styled human rights organization has no problem with targeted killings of Israeli civilians, though it objects vociferously to targeted killings of terrorists.

I can’t conceive of any Western city lending its aegis to a ceremony honoring, say, al-Qaeda terrorists–at least, not without sparking a major outcry from its countrymen. But as this ceremony once again demonstrates, even people who find terrorism against anyone else beyond the pale are often willing to make an exception when the victims are Israelis. And that holds true far beyond France.

Iran's Jews 'did not face persecution': Thatcher

Bataween
Point of No Return
31 January '10

Margaret Thatcher, elected British Prime Minister in 1979, the year of the Islamic revolution in Iran, has a reputation as one of the most pro-Jewish of politicians; Jimmy Carter has acquired a reputation as one of the least pro-Israel of US presidents. Newly-released documents show the roles are reversed: the 'Iron Lady' rebuffed Carter's appeals to her to protect the Jews of Iran, denying that they were being persecuted. Yet over the next decade, more than two dozen Jews were executed, several jailed for spying, and four-fifths of the community have since fled the country. (With thanks: Frank)

In May of 1979, according to the files, which go online on Saturday on the Thatcher Foundation Web site, Carter appealed Thatcher for "urgent private representations" to Iranian authorities to assure the safety of Iranian Jews.

Thatcher refused, saying the British Embassy did not believe Jews faced organized persecution, and that intervention "could indeed make their position less secure."

The papers also showed that the former British premier had also refused a more demonstrative response to the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979, saying it would do more harm than good.

(Read full article)
.