The Left, Hamas and the Politics of Hypocrisy

Over the past week, rallies in Australia to support the recent Hamas attacks have sprung up across the country. For decades, the Left has inexplicably aligned itself with the pro-Palestine cause, and following recent events — including the kidnapping of children and the murder of over 1,500 Israelis — rather than condemn the violence, the Left has chosen to double down.

From grassroots activists to federal politicians, among them Australian senators Lidia Thorpe and Mehreen Faruqi, the Left has aligned itself with a nationalist movement run by terrorists. Prominent left-wing American academic, Judith Butler, expressed this relationship by stating, “Understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important.”

There is a glaring paradox in support for a Palestinian national movement that increasingly shuns the left-wing ideals of human rights, gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and social freedoms. This association between leftist politics and Hamas reveals an alarming lack of moral consistency. In its deeds and charter Hamas presents a stark contrast to these fundamental humanistic ideals. It has always been anti-gay, anti-women and anti-freedom. The criminal code in Gaza carries 10 years in prison for homosexual activity. Forced marriage is common and “honour” killings rampant, as well as the “corrective” rape of lesbians. Women face restrictions on freedom that are unthinkable in any modern democracy. Palestine has no domestic violence legislation, and women are routinely killed by family members. Marital rape is legal while adultery and abortion are both criminalised in the West Bank and Gaza.

Palestine has been brazenly anti-semitic and intolerant of Israel since its inception. When the UN first established the Israeli-Palestinian plan following the departure of the British in 1948, the entire Arab world rejected it. Arab governments and their leaders announced that they intended to wipe the Jewish state off the map, and they declared war the very day after Britain left.

The goals of Hamas leaders and their supporters have grown extraordinarily complex, and though it is hard to know what it is they hope to achieve, what their leaders say is extremely concerning.

Hamas leader, Mahmoud Al-Zahar:

“The entire 510 million square kilometres of Planet Earth will come under [a system] where there is no injustice, no oppression, no Zionism, no treacherous Christianity…”

The current supreme leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, posted a video of Israelis fleeing Hamas terrorists with the caption:

“God willing, the cancer of the usurper Zionist regime will be eradicated at the hands of the Palestinian people and the Resistance forces throughout the region.”

So, how is it that left-wing activist groups and politicians can, in good conscience, endorse an organisation that promotes a world where there will be no Jews or Christian “traitors”, where gays will be imprisoned (if they’re lucky), where marital rape goes unpunished?

The glaring double standard in the approach to these issues from those on the Left is perplexing. This inconsistency raises questions about the credibility of the principles they profess and the sincerity of their commitments.

In contrast, the Jewish state was established by a group of liberal, mostly secular, idealistic people who had nowhere else to go after World War II. The country was founded in the vision of a democratic state without discrimination on the basis of religion, gender or sex. It guarantees freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture. It is home to the most developed LGBT rights in the Middle East, prohibits gender-based discrimination, and despite what many say, the country is tolerant towards its Arab citizens (the religious Arab Muslim party, Ra’am, was part of the coalition that governed Israel following the 2021 election).

Yet, the NSW Greens last week attempted to amend a government bill to express support for Israel to instead condemn the democratic nation. They then affirmed their support for the Palestine Action Group after a rally in which protesters chanted “Gas the Jews”. The same party that promotes drag queen storytime supports a country that decapitates its queer citizens.

The Left’s persistent demands for an independent Palestinian state ignore the realities of what that might look like. The present future for Palestine looks more like that of Syria or Iran, countries that no left-wing supporter would live in. These polities are no friend of the Left nor an ally to the liberal, democratic project of liberty, equality, justice and human rights.

The longstanding disparity between the desires of the Palestinian people and what is offered by their government casts a dark shadow over their quest for statehood. Support for Hamas may well have significant repercussions for the Left, both in terms of public perception and electoral consequences. Their alignment with an organisation with such regressive beliefs will alienate centre-left and centrist supporters who believe in their commitment to progressivism.

In light of the stark contradictions between left-wing domestic values and their alignment with Hamas, a call for re-evaluation is in order. It is essential for parties to maintain coherence in their political positions and international affiliations. The left must align their international associations with their domestic principles to maintain credibility and consistency in their pursuit of progressive values. It is incumbent upon progressive parties, like The Greens, to ensure that their international affiliations reflect their domestic values, before they compromise the principles they claim to uphold.

A reconsideration of the leftist viewpoint not only provides greater ideological consistency but also leads to a rekindling of opportunities for constructive negotiations. Leftist parties around the world might play a pivotal role in steering the conflict away from a bleak, perilous, and seemingly intractable course — if only they would dig their heads out of the sand.


115 thoughts on “The Left, Hamas and the Politics of Hypocrisy

  • MrZee says:

    As Jordan Peterson says, look at what people do rather than what they say. The Left clearly want the iron fist certainty of totalitarianism rather than the principles they say they espouse.

    • whitelaughter says:

      If an alcoholic praised the ‘dry’ Islamic world, and condemned the West, we’d know that they secretly wanted to be cured of their addiction to alcohol.
      So why shouldn’t we think the same when queers praise Islam?

  • Daffy says:

    “The glaring double standard in the approach to these issues from those on the Left is perplexing. This inconsistency raises questions about the credibility of the principles they profess and the sincerity of their commitments.”
    The left is split: there’s the ‘soft’ left: one’s neighbour, colleague, teacher, pupil is probably a soft-left nice person. OTOH, there’s the serious left. For them the issue is never the issue, my enemies enemy is my friend while it is convenient. The issue is always a power maneuver. That’s why the soft left lamely follow the serious left in supporting evil, because its convenient to the serious left’s mission to obtain power at the expense of the openness of a liberal democracy.

    • Katzenjammer says:

      I think it’s as superficial as ‘laud the exotic and shun the ordinary’, a variation on noble savage views that appeal to self-indulgent progressives.

      Quote – “Today, the world is still full of wilfully blind callous perpetrators and complicit witnesses who see no Evil and hide behind a veneer of intellectual abstraction.”

      Typical example of that intellectul abstraction –

      Judith Butler, expressed this relationship by stating,
      “Understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important.”

  • Steve Moore says:

    When Hamas chants “Gas the Jews” the Greens add “That’s abhorrent! Gas is evil”

    • Ceres says:

      Hamas supporters also chant “From the river to the sea”. Akin, it appears, to “the Final Solution” uttered in the 1940’s. Evil.

    • rosross says:

      And do you also condemn the signs which have gone up in Tel Aviv saying: Exterminate Gaza? Kill them all? (Which means all Palestinian non-Jews) Surely if we do not condemn all incitement to hatred we are betraying the principled foundation of the Western world and therefore sowing the seeds of its destruction?

      • pmprociv says:

        rosross, what you say here is factually correct, for there are extremists and idiots in all populations. But in the present context we should consider scale, and location. It’s perfectly understandable, under present circumstances, for some Israelis to vent their anger and resentment at Palestinians — but don’t forget the huge numbers also coming out in support of them, and protesting against the Israeli governments aggressive actions. Free speech there is patently obvious, unlike among their neighbouring countries.
        How many in the Arab world are protesting about its attitude and behaviour towards Israel? Would they survive long if they did? On a broader scale, even here in Oz, how many are out on the streets, demanding elimination of the Palestinians? Have any of the “progressives” expressed any sympathy or empathy for Israel’s current situation? It’s more like “blame the victim”.

        The article is about the hypocrisy of Australia’s so-called “left”, whose Greens are an insult to their name, with a leader who, in my view verges on being an idiot — and not even a very useful one.

        • rosross says:


          I am well aware some Israelis, not many, but some want justice for Palestine. I have known some personally and know they have lived in fear for their lives for speaking out.

          I admire Haaretz for striving to provide facts and balance. I wish there was more of it in the Australian media.

          The Israelis are not an occupied and colonised people so they can have high levels of free speech. It is not however for everyone. As you may know those criticising Israel at this point are being arrested and detained. Any non-Jewish Israelis I will bet you will have their citizenship revoked.

          As to Free speech in surround countries you are doing what Israel does all the time, comparing itself to non-democratic tyrannies. How does that work?

          Israel claims to be a Western democracy? How does it stand up when compared to other Western democracies? It does not.

          It is the worst kind of hypocrisy to compare yourself to the worst. Makes even Hitler look good.

          As to those criticising Israel in Australia, with virtually all media, including conservative media, running non-stop material demonising the Palestinians and eulogizing the Israelis I think Israel has a great deal of support.

          Yes some are protesting for Palestine but where are the stories from the Palestinian side? Will we see one in Quadrant? I doubt it. The Spectator? Nope.

          The press is so biased on this issue that it is a disgrace even given the generally parlous nature of modern media.

          Israel is not the victim unless you can show me how a State which occupies and colonises another country and has the fourth largest military in the world is a victim. Actually Israel is a victim, but of atheist, militaristic and colonialist Zionism. As is Judaism.

          Everyone who supports Israel’s genocidal bombing of Gaza is supporting its plan to exterminate as many Palestinians as it can. That is simple logic.

          I agree with you on the Greens but I also know no-one ever gets it all wrong.
          They may be greatly deluded on many counts but their fight for justice for the Palestinians is on the side of right.

          It is too easy to divide the world into Left and Right when it is not that simple. As you may see I would be placed in either camp on different issues. That is because I apply principles, the same principles to every issue and that means sometimes the Left is fighting for justice and sometimes the Right is fighting for justice.

  • Stephen Due says:

    Perhaps the apparent contradiction of the Left in Australia supporting Middle Eastern Islamic terrorists – aka freedom fighters who behead gays on their days off – lies in this: that both want to destroy Western civilisation. The Left and the Islamists are of course united in that purpose in countries like Britain, which has unwisely allowed Islamists to immigrate in large numbers.
    I don’t think the Leftist intellectuals in this country will be moved by the argument that they are bringing their movement into disrepute by supporting terrorism. The Left are, after all, terrorists themselves in their own way. It’s just that they use different weapons. One uses the bullet and the bomb, the other uses propaganda the lie. But both will stand triumphant on the ruins of the West. Their only problem will be having nothing of value to put in its place.

  • lbloveday says:

    “…adultery and abortion are both criminalised in the West Bank and Gaza”
    Yes, but the penalty for adultery is harsher for women (6mths to 2yrs prison) than for men (1mth to 1yrs), and a complaint for the crime of adultery can only be filed by male relatives.

    • pmprociv says:

      Not so long ago (at least to early 1980s), in Saudi Arabia, the penalty for adultery, for women, was death by stoning (inflicted by pouring a truckload of rocks over the accused). Their male partners were often excused as innocent victims.

      • lbloveday says:

        I’ve read from various sources that women who are (allegedly) raped are often reluctant to report it for fear of being accused of adultery, and that the same applies in Gaza.
        That said, I’ve also read that 8 convicted rapists were executed in Saudia Arabia in 2019 alone – more than were executed in the entire “West”.
        Even the USA no longer executes any one for rape, despite President (then candidate Senator) Obama disagreeing with the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling:
        “Had the Supreme Court said, ‘We want to constrain the abilities of states to do this to make sure that it’s done in a careful and appropriate way,’ that would have been one thing. But it basically had a blanket prohibition and I disagree with that decision.”

    • rosross says:

      You find similar things in Hindu India for women who are raped. They go to jail and are punished and the men go free. Less developed cultures tend to be misogynistic and particularly when religion is fundamentalist in nature.

      Misogyny remains powerful in all fundamentalist religions and that includes Christianity and Judaism.

  • wdr says:

    The Left has replaced Class War with Race War.

  • Paul.Harrison says:

    Oscar, I thought as I worked through your words that I may have found stronger language from you regarding the Left. In my humble opinion, and blessed with some 60 years of insight, I not only think, but I also know perfectly well, that the Left never did, do not now and never will, have the best interests of the West, including Australia and her institutions of democracy, at hand. If one were to delve into the shadowy, cobwebbed, dusty and dark corners of their creed, we may find the leader/s lurking there, as spiders do with their poisonous fangs, waiting to pounce. These are the evil men and women who push the gullible towards their intended target/s. I first saw that evil when I observed Comrade Cairns in Hanoi in late 1973 bearing gifts to strengthen the Communist war against South Vietnam and the US troops. Nothing, absolutely nothing, has changed over the intervening years. The only surprise for me is that it has taken them 50 years to win the battle of subversion. Yes, wake up, we have lost the battle. The domino effect is alive and well. You say, and I quote,

    “It is incumbent upon progressive parties, like The Greens, to ensure that their international
    affiliations reflect their domestic values, before they compromise the principles they claim to

    Domestic values, principles, etc….come on, they are completely and absolutely sworn to uphold a totalitarian version of international affiliations, versions of which are completely abhorrent to a Western citizen, most of whom are living with their head, not in the sand, but in a bucket of cement rapidly hardening. As an example, the Greens do not possess a value system, or a principled system, of any type which the average punter would recognise, and so the people slavishly vote and vote again for the Communist led Greens on the strength of their environmental concerns, which they hide behind.

    No, I object to the softly, softly approach. We will never see an age where the Left, and, once more, I quote,

    “might play a pivotal role in steering the conflict away from a bleak, perilous,
    and seemingly intractable course — if only they would dig their heads out
    of the sand.”

    Their course is set, they have their eyes on the main prize/s, and they will not stop until the evil Voice of the Party, our very own ABC, announces that the battle has finally been won against we, the agents of freedom and reason, beaten by indifference and stupidity, and by deliberate design.

    No, I am disappointed that your piece concluded, not with a bang, but with a whimper.

    Kindest………Paul Harrison, Flight Lieutenant, Royal Australian Air Force, Ret.

  • Just a Bloke says:

    40% of the population and the ALP voted Yes. Why wouldn’t they support Hamas? Aboriginal culture doesn’t fit too well with woke ideology either.

  • Sindri says:

    The hard left generally support people and movements that that are stupefyingly brutal and murderous – Stalín, Mao, Pol Pot – because, fundamentally, they hate what is good.

  • ianl says:

    >”The glaring double standard in the approach to these issues from those on the Left is perplexing”< [quote from the article]

    Not perplexing, just powerlust – as most comments above correctly point out. Any "ally" will do in this glorious struggle, although how the Left expects eventually to square the circle is perplexing.

    • rosross says:

      The maps on the video can be found on a Jewish American site, called, If Only Americans Knew, and they make a solid case that of course Palestine was stolen from 1947 until all of it is now occupied and colonisation continues. You can also find the advertisements put around by the Zionists from the 1890’s calling for colonists for Palestine so pretty clearly they had a plan to take the country. Maybe spread your research deeper and wider.


        Evidently rosross, the truth is too hard for you to accept. You are like a cracked record of the fount of all knowledge pertaining to all things Pallywood.

        • rosross says:

          And the use of the nasty term Pallywood makes your biased position very clear. To dehumanise and mock others is the first step in losing your own humanity and your capacity for conscience and compassion.

  • Phillip says:

    Where did the word ‘Palestine’ come from? Is it meant to represent an area of land originally inhabited by Jews, Christians and then only until about year 800AD, Muslims?
    Unfortunately due to some ignorant word association played by the imperial British Governors pre WW I we now have a small percentage sect of Islamic people within the whole of Israel claiming to be the sole native title owners. ….
    Well that’s funny, I have the same little mix up of confused title elites in Australia…and once upon a time the British were there too …!

    • Phillip says:

      To be clear, the slur upon the British is a little unfair.
      My argument is that the notion of ‘This is Palestinian Land’ is a huge leftist islamic lie.
      Enough historical evidence exists to prove that Israel is an amalgamation of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah post the Assyrian Empire boundaries. The Hamas and the PLO have been pushing a false history for decades. Unfortunately the only tool that these people use for communication is horrific violence.
      It is interesting to note that the limits of Gaza are similar to an earlier Philistia, inhabited by a set of people who in his youth, King David had to put down. He didn’t succeed in erasing the Philistine like moronic character that is still pushed by the Hamas barbarian.
      The video posted by StJohnofGrafton is spot on.

    • rosross says:

      Can we really deny history? Egyptologists have translated the words Palestine and Palestinians from hieroglyphs which are 5,000 years old. Apparently they invaded Egypt more than once. They also mentioned, carved in stone, 3000 years ago when a tribe called Judea, from what is now Iraq, moved in and set up camp in Palestine.

      While also called the Holy Land by Christians, there is no doubt Palestine has existed for thousands of years.

      Battles fought in both the First and Second World Wars refer to Palestine.

      Oranges exported around the world in the 19th century came from Jaffa, Palestine.

      In 1930 Golda Meir addressed a postcard to a friend in Tel Aviv, Palestine.

      History records the British Mandate for Palestine (1918-1948).

      In 1947 it was Palestine, clearly identified in the UN mandate which was partitioned.

      It is one thing to ignore historical facts but foolish in the extreme to deny them.

      We know Palestine existed and we know Palestinians, the people of Palestine, again occupied, also exist. How does it serve any sensible or reasonable purpose to pretend otherwise?

      • pmprociv says:

        Yep, it simply goes to confirm the stupidity of trying to resolve today’s problems, or at least attribute blame, by dredging back into history — where does one stop? There should be some statute of limitations.

        Of course, everyone living there in the old days was Palestinian, with its districts (provinces?), until Judaism was invented. Then every early Christian was a Jew, including old Jesus Himself (confirming the stupidity of the claim that it was “the Jews who murdered Him”), until that sect decided to separate out as a distinct faith, rather than being merely another apocalyptic sect. (Which begs the question: was Jesus a Christian? I think not . . .)

        • rosross says:

          Totally agree. Our job is to right the wrongs of today. The history of religions is interesting but only to followers and all history is relevant to historians professional or amateur. However, today is what matters.

          I am not convinced a literal Jesus even existed. There is no evidence for it. But the teachings are of value and also found in ancient Egyptian translations from the Great Goddess Isis.

        • Just a Bloke says:

          Pretty safe bet that Jesus Christ wasn’t a christian unless he followed himself.

          • rosross says:

            True, but the religion was founded in his name. Not that there is evidence he ever truly existed. No mention of him by the Romans, consummate scribes, the Herodians, consummate manipulators, or any contemporary historian.

            Josephus who was born 30 years after Jesus supposedly died did write about him but half a century then for the fantasy to be created. Certainly he was not writing from experience and given the fact people lived shorter lives, a generation and more away from it.

            • cbattle1 says:

              The reference to Jesus in Josephus’s history, is best understood as a later interpolation by some Christian scribe in the long process of copying books by hand through the generations. It may have first appeared as a note in the margin at the relevant time line in the text, and later shoehorned in. As such, the reference to Jesus has no context within Josephus’s historical narrative. Strangely, the Jesus reference is quite brief, but the preceding text of some page and a half (its been a while since I read it) has as the subject matter a story about a woman in the city of Rome (a Jew?) who was a devotee of the Egyptian god Anibus, and was convinced by the priest at the temple that if she slept in the temple alone overnight, Anibus would visit her. She did, and in the dark apparently Anibus arrived and had sex with her. Of course, it later turned out that “Anibus” was in fact the priest! Of what relevance that story is, is hard to say, but the small passage about Jesus immediately follows. Historians of the ancient world often let their imaginations run away with them. Josephus writes that he had it on good authority from travellers that the pillar of salt that was formerly Lot’s wife, was still in existence, as was Noah’s Ark!

              • rosross says:

                Yes, had to laugh at the pillar of salt story. And of course anything referencing Jesus has been well attended to by the Christians over thousands of years. Lots of doctoring, censoring, rewriting, inventing – an ancient form of Bruce Pascoeism at times.

          • Gordon Cheyne says:

            Jesus following himself? Perhaps he was beside himself with holiness.

      • cbattle1 says:

        People will always, more or less, interpret history in a selective and creative way, depending on their agendas, biases, prejudices etc. We can perhaps agree that most of what today is called the “Holy Land” was known in early antiquity as the land of Canaan, with Philistines along the coastal areas. Whether or not Jews/Hebrews originally came down from Mesopotamia, can never be proved. Most likely they evolved in situ as Canaanites, and 100 years of Archaeology show that houses identified as Israelite also contain Canaanite household idols, and the Hebrew language and alphabet indicate a Canaanite origin.
        Extrabiblical knowledge paints a picture of a plurality of people living in this area, and it is not clear cut who in antiquity was a Jew, Israelite, Judean or Samaritan, etc. Take for example when Jezebel from Tyre was Queen to Ahab, King of Israel; the worship of Baal and Asherah gained much popularity, and during the Post-Alexander times, Greek culture was embraced, as was later the case when the pragmatic Herod the “Great” ruled in alliance with Rome (well, maybe puppet ruler). One can imagine that Greek and Roman customs were keenly adopted by the population; baths, gymnasiums, sports, theatre and chariot racing being a lot more fun and entertaining than what the Sanhedrin was offering!
        That someone from Eastern Europe in the 19th and 20th century could state that what was then known as Palestine was in fact their original and eternal homeland, is drawing a very long bow!

        • rosross says:

          Have you read the material from Egyptologists who have transcribed the words Palestine and Palestinians from hieroglyphs dating back 5,000 years? they also made mention in stone when a tribe called Judea arrived in Palestine and set up camp.

          The history is fascinating but, as you say, utterly irrelevant in the modern age. I mean should we restore the ancient kingdoms of Mercia, Assyria, Sumeria? I don’t think so. Apart from which religions do not get rights to land. If they did then surely it would be to the lands where their religion was invented, i.e. Iraq for Jews and Palestine for Christians.

          • cbattle1 says:

            I’d be very interested to read the work of Egyptologists regarding 5,000 year old references to Palestine and 3,000 year old references to a tribe of Judah, but I wouldn’t know where to look. There are some references to the Hyksos, but nobody seems to know who they were and what happened to them. I thought “Palestine” was derived from “Philistine”. Certainly, the Romans called their province “Palistinia”, or something like that.

            • rosross says:

              Start with The Story of Egypt: The Civilization That Shaped the World
              Book by Joann Fletcher. She is a British archaeologist and Egyptologist. As you can imagine transcribing the hieroglyphs, possible post Rosetta Stone, takes a lot of time.

              The Philistine connection or theory is relatively new and part of a longstanding campaign to deny the reality of Palestine.

              One theory is that Palestine comes from the ancient Canaanite/Palestinian God, Pales, which would make sense. But archaeology is a slow process.

              Interestingly, as yet anyway, there is no evidence Jews were ever in Egypt. Some theories link the Hebrews to Habiru but that still does not designate them as slaves. One presumes in ancient societies slaves were pretty common. Indeed everyone had them including the Hebrews.

  • lbloveday says:

    Peter Jennings is a former deputy secretary of the Defence Department, former chief executive of Australian Strategic Policy Institute and a director of Strategic Analysis Australia. Here is his informed comment on Gaza:

  • cbattle1 says:

    I think it was a Bolshevik slogan that “the end justifies the means”, and it appears the far Left still hold that as a key article of faith. The theory goes that when nationalism, capitalism and property are finally overthrown, then “the people” will self-organise a new world of equality, liberty, fraternity, etc., etc. So, radical Islamism is but a stage in the progressive social evolution, and as such it too will fade away as that evolution progresses. Therefore, when viewed through the far-seeing progressive lens of the Left, what appears as “hypocrisy” is in fact nothing of the sort!
    There are some fundamental points made by Oscar Godsell, that need to be questioned, and they are contained in his potted history of Palestine:
    “Palestine has been brazenly anti-semitic and intolerant of Israel since its inception. When the UN first established the Israeli-Palestinian plan following the departure of the British in 1948, the entire Arab world rejected it. Arab governments and their leaders announced that they intended to wipe the Jewish state off the map, and they declared war the very day after Britain left.”
    Firstly, there is the labelling of Palestinians as being “anti-semitic”; given the fact that close to 100% of Palestinians are in fact semites, that would make them “self-loathing”! With the Ashkenazi or European Jews who founded the state of Israel, it is a moot point whether they are a semitic people at all! The other point is the assumption that it was somehow wrong for the Palestinians to object to Jewish immigration or to the partition of Palestine. Small numbers of Jews had long lived in Palestine under Ottoman rule; they just got on with their lives like their Muslim and Christian neighbours. It is perfectly natural for a people to defend their land and their identity, and the Palestinians acted in the same way we would in similar circumstances.

    • rosross says:

      Yes, it is hard to come to terms with the concept that intelligent people can resort to fantasies about Palestine’s history and the reality of the creation of the Israeli State.

      Even if it could be demonstrated, as some claim, that Palestine never existed, how does that justify the treatment of the native people of the land invaded to create Israel and occupied and colonised ever since?

      There is no other violently colonised and occupied people in history as far as I know, who did not fight back and resist. Why are the Palestinians held to a different standard?

      And beyond hatred of the Left, which does grow tediously childish at times, as does the hatred of the Right, surely sensible individuals can make a distinction between a defence of justice and the right under international law for the Palestinians to fight for justice and freedom, and violence committed by the Palestinian Resistance in that fight.

      It is the double standards which are so shockingly apparent.

      • pmprociv says:

        rosross, how does that statement fit with your interpretation of Putin’s war on Ukraine? Do you think the Ukrainians have a right to exist as a separate nation?

        • rosross says:

          No nation has a right to exist. However, in terms of the Ukraine situation, it is very different. They are suffering because their Government participated in US/Nato aggression and had been attacking and abusing ethnic Russians.

          The Russians did work to avoid invasion and the Ukrainians, if they had been allowed to be sensible would have retained their State as it was. That would have been the best outcome.

          A neutral Ukraine would not have been attacked. I think the Ukrainians should have Statehood and it should be respected, and that will apply to what is left of their State when the war ends because the areas held by Russia are populated by ethnic Russians and if they want to rejoin Russia, as Crimeans did, they should be allowed to do so.

          They are really very different scenarios. Ukraine is a proxy war waged by US/Nato and Palestine is a colonial war waged by Israel which occupies all of Palestine.

        • rosross says:


          My question to you is do you think the ethnic Russian areas in Ukraine have a right to choose to return to Russia?

          • pmprociv says:

            rosross, this business about Russian (R) and Ukrainian (U) ethnicity and languages is a furphy, pushed by Putin after starting his crazy war (among his many other, contradictory rationales, one of which was to exorcise Satan). Prior to his invasion, R and U people moved about freely in and between each others’ countries, with intermarriage not even being commented upon (my own mother was U, father R — and looking back, they spoke R at home, which was my first language; I had no idea there was a separate U one until recent times — the differences between the two are trivial, although you can be sure they’ll now be amplified). As you know, both countries have a common history, going back all the way to Kievan Rus, set up by Vikings. Even in Ukraine itself, R was the predominant language throughout most of the country, the lingua franca in Kiev itself. Zelensky’s TV shows were very popular in Russia, seeing he spoke its language — and, since becoming leader, admits to having had tutorials in speaking Ukrainian! Which makes him a Jewish, Nazi, Russian speaker! Could he possibly be an ethnic Russian? I still don’t know what “ethnic” means . . .

            The situation there now is such a mess (with the present fog of war being further blanketed by events in the Middle East), with so much animosity and hatred being generated, talk of “rights ” of anyone to move anywhere becomes pointless — while Putin’s plebiscites, about what local populations wish for, as you well know, are meaningless, purely of propaganda value to justify whatever he chooses to do (just like his elections back home). The two countries, I fear and regret, will be cleaved apart forever, certainly beyond our lifetimes. At least they’ll have a “two-state solution”, one hopes.

            • rosross says:


              Since we have statements from political analysts going back a decade stating that Ukraine was attacking ethnic Russians and we also know in recent times they were set to ban Russian as a language, how is it a furphy or invented by Putin?

              It is fact and even you can ascertain that. Yes, there was intermarriage of course because for centuries Ukraine, The Ukraine means The Borderlands, and Russia were one country.

              Yes, I do understand the complex nature of the history of Ukraine and Russia. But it is also clear that fascist elements are strong in Ukraine and have been leading the attacks on Russian speakers. It is not a furphy that the Ukrainians were bombing areas with ethnic Russians.

              I agree totally it is a mess and so much animosity and hatred but that is what happens when people are set against each other for nefarious interests. The Ukrainians are pawns in a bigger game to weaken Russia. Just as the Palestinians are a pawn in a bigger game for Israeli domination of the Middle East. Both will fail but at terrible cost to all involved.

              I have friends with the same parentage, Ukraine and Russian and have seen their torment.

              All of which is why I think it is so important to seek to understand both sides and to avoid demonisation whether of Russians or Palestinians. The latter are of course a truly brutalised and occupied people while the Russians have greater power than Ukraine.

              But all of it requires a clear head and solid facts with avoidance of spittle-flecked hatred, demonsation and hyperbolic propaganda.

              It is a shared humanity that we all have and that is the great tragedy for Israel that in denying the humanity of Palestinians it denies and loses its own.

      • Doubting Thomas says:

        ros, the logical extension of your argument is that all “First Nations” people have the unfettered right to resist, by any means possible, the allegedly unjustified occupying settlers, and those settlers have no right to defend themselves. Thus, an extremist group of Australian Aboriginal people must be excused should they unilaterally decide to kill every “white” Australian in sight. No retaliatory action by the “occupying” people would be morally acceptable by those standards.
        The sad and irrevocable fact is that Israel, like those nations occupying all territories colonised in history – ancient and modern – is a fait accompli, and is an egg that cannot be unscrambled.

        • rosross says:

          How did you make that leap?

          You said: the logical extension of your argument is that all “First Nations” people have the unfettered right to resist, by any means possible, the allegedly unjustified occupying settlers, and those settlers have no right to defend themselves.

          No, the logical extension and basis of my argument is that if the British and later Australian Governments had treated aborigines as Israel has treated the native Palestinians then we should not be surprised if they resorted to violent resistance.

          If they were still crushed under occupation and colonial rule they would have a right to resist. We could quibble about levels of violence used but not their right to fight to be free.

          There is just no comparison. The British made aborigines citizens very quickly, with rights in law. Israel occupies Palestine, ruling over people who have no right to anything let alone vote and who are denied civil and human rights.

          That did not happen to aborigines.

          As Australians with full rights in law, compensation, reparation and even sorry said, any extremist group of Australians with aboriginal ancestry would not be justified in resistance.

          You said:The sad and irrevocable fact is that Israel, like those nations occupying all territories colonised in history – ancient and modern – is a fait accompli, and is an egg that cannot be unscrambled.

          It is not about unscrambling the egg. It is about making a meal of the reality of colonisation on which some, the powerless native people, do not choke.

          What other nation founded through colonisation and calling itself a Western democracy treats the native people of the land they have taken as Israel treats the Palestinians and has treated them for 75 years? I can think of none.

          If you can cite any then please do.

          • pmprociv says:

            Sorry to intrude again, rosross, but your comment: “if the British and later Australian Governments had treated aborigines as Israel has treated the native Palestinians then we should not be surprised if they resorted to violent resistance”, would be disputed by some, if not most, of our Aboriginal militants, who accuse the British of genocide, among other horrendous crimes. And there’s no denying they stole all the land (most of which has recently been handed back, with more to come). So you’d accept, as justified, any violent actions from that quarter? Seeing much of today’s youth crime, even domestic violence, is being attributed to “colonialism” and “racism”, perhaps we should turn a blind eye to that?

            Also, my understanding is that there is an Arab political party in Israel, which has members in the Knesset, indicating political rights, including voting, for Palestinians (does that make them “citizens?).

            • rosross says:


              You said: So you’d accept, as justified, any violent actions from that quarter?

              No, but I would not be surprised if we had committed atrocities against three generations and denied them human and civil rights if given no hope they resorted to violence.

              I was not surprised the French Resistance resorted to violence or the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto. There is a limit to how much you can brutalise people.

              The Palestinian authority is a stooge run by Israel. Everyone knows that. When an election was held and Hamas won, the US and Israel overturned it. Sorry, what is free about that?

              As the occupier Israel has all power and total responsibility.

  • rosross says:

    It will be great to see Quadrant exploring both sides of this tragic conflict. Otherwise this just becomes an echo chamber of propaganda.

    The loss of independent press, brave and sturdy enough to strive for balance, is a threat to all of us. Any reading of history makes that clear.

    • pmprociv says:

      For starters, I thought this was a pretty convincing, authoritative argument (although might be pay-walled):


      • rosross says:

        It is paywalled. The start was interesting but in that, ‘condemn in others that which you deny in yourself’ way, he is demonising the Palestinian Resistance for things Israel has always done and has now done to horrific new levels – targeting men, women, children, the old, the sick, the trapped, the helpless.

        But we do seem to live in a time when the approach is that of, never let facts get in the way of propaganda. One thing is certain, humans have changed very little and insanity and barbarism wreak havoc in our world on all counts.

        The much touted Western values are drenched in blood by the actions of the West. Like Israel we have betrayed ourselves. Perhaps there is something in this prophecy thing. The crazy Christians must be salivating in delight at the prospect of Armageddon.

    • cbattle1 says:

      I would like to write an article regarding the most recent argy-bargy among the Eastern European Slavs, from the perspective of the struggle in Russia between the culture of the West, with its open borders, multiculturalism, multiracialism, secularism, LBGT+ and diversity celebration, etc., and the conservative politics of Vladimir Putin that supports and celebrates Russo-Slavic culture, the Orthodox Church, family values, traditional marriage and gender recognition, etc. Curiously, one would think that conservative minded people in the West would identifying with those values espoused by Putin, but, they are steadfast in alliance with the Left in demonising Russia! Is it not delusional to think that Western style representative democracy will have a future for the conservative or politics leaning to the Right?

      • rosross says:

        I hope you do write such an article. It sounds fascinating.

        Yes, I also find it ironic that Russian and Putin’s conservative values should be applauded by conservatives in the West. They are by some, but most just bleat Americana and beat the drums of war.

        I find much that Putin has said is very sensible, particularly compared to our insane world where black is white and white is purple and all the ridiculous connotations which are now shoved down our throats.

  • pgang says:

    This article was interesting but a little odd in that it assumes the left believes in its ever changing ‘values’. Those values are simply a means to an end in the cause of socialism.

  • Phillip says:

    Can I make just one last reply before Mr Franklyn has to jump in….
    The Oscar Godsell essay is sensible and well argued. I just wanted to make the differentiation between the land area we know as Israel being erroneously called Palestine; and the small sect of Sunni Islamic people within Israel who somehow for political identity call themselves Palestinian.
    The conflict within Israel is about land rights and ownership.
    The land of Israel still has strong naming connections and ancestral history to the 12 Tribes of Israel and the ancestors of the Israelites; Abraham-Isaac-Jacob. All honoured within the religions of Judaeism, Christianity and Islam. The Islam religion only beginning some 500 odd years after the time of Christ.
    The Sunni Islamic tribe within Israel is a legacy remnant of the Ottomon Empire in that locality approx 1550-1910, about a 400 year time span.
    And I think we agree on the time period for the existence of Jews and Christians in the same locality, about 3000 – 2000 years.
    So if land claims are based on time, then favour falls with Judeo-Christian occupation.
    Or if land claims are based on work effort and infrastructure built, then favour goes to Judeo-Christian occupation.
    And if land claims are based on majority population then the Sunni Muslim is last in line.
    Hence My argument is that the notion of the land of Israel being ‘This is Palestinian Land only for Sunni Muslim’ is a huge leftist islamic lie. To call the land an Israeli occupation of force or of apartheid is categorically wrong. The citizens of Israel have shown to abide peaceful inhabitants of all faiths as long as they comply with the commonsense rules of peaceful existence.
    The leaders of “Palestinian’ terrorist groups have never given a forethought to peace and prosperity.
    Horrific Violence is their mantra and manner.
    Hence a few Israeli citizens are a bit upset about that and they are now just letting the locals in Gaza quietly know about it.
    Otherwise, thankyou Oscar for a good essay.

    • Katzenjammer says:

      “The conflict within Israel is about land rights and ownership.”
      The conflict has never been about land. It’s about the the position of dimmi Jews in Islamic theology. It’s a cosmic travesty in Islamic theology for Jews to hold sovereignty over Islamic territory and over Muslims. Failure to correct this in 1948, 1967 and 1973 are demonstartions to them that evil forces are ruling the world. All those ignorant progressive leftist, most are atheists, don’t realise they’re supporting a far more fundamentalist religious cult than anything in their own Christian cultural background they think they’ve left behind.

    • rosross says:

      Your position runs counter to historical facts, including those fully admitted by many Israeli historians.

      The land we know as Israel can be easily identified by studying the partition plans of 1947. That is demonstrable historical fact. How can you say any of it is erroneously called Palestine when the Partition Plan was for the country called Palestine and logic and reality decrees, it was Palestine which was divided to allow the creation and invention of a State of Israel in 1947.

      It was in Palestine that Zionist armies wiped from the face of the earth (but not British mandate maps) 530 Palestinian towns and villages. Surely you know that? How can a place not exist when it has been written about for thousands of years?

      Why would Golda Meir address a postcard to a friend in Tel Aviv, Palestine in 1930?

      And what relevance do those followers of Sunni Islam have to this issue? When you say within Israel I presume you mean as Israeli citizens? Those Palestinians grudgingly accepted were followers of various forms of Islam and Christianity.

      I take it you are also aware that Israel has never declared its borders? It does currently occupy all of Palestine but the only borders ever defined for it, remain the UN Mandate.

      The conflict is about rights, land and ownership. That is what colonial wars are always about. But mostly it is about justice. It is about dispossession and disenfranchisement of the native people of the land of Palestine, who, not surprisingly are called Palestinians.

      The religious aspects from ancient times which you cite have no relevance in the modern age, except of course to followers of religion who espouse them.

      As to Israel demonstrating themselves to be peaceful, I would humbly suggest you read Israeli human rights groups where you will find it has been exactly the opposite for more than 75 years.

      The conflation of religious belief with historical and current realities offers no chance of resolution. This colonial war needs to be seen purely for what it is and the facts must speak not religious teachings, real or imagined.

  • rosross says:

    The premise that Israel is the victim in all this requires absolute denial of the violence of its foundation in Palestine and the 75 years of violent occupation and continued colonisation ever since. Yes, that country did and does exist, the Nakba for the Palestinians and yes that people did and do exist.

    Even Israeli historians have not denied those realities but they seem to be now consistently denied to paint Israel as an absolute victim which has done nothing to provoke resistance from the Palestinians. All that ‘love and care.’ from the Israelis and this is what the Palestinians do, seems to be the view.

    Whatever one believes about religion or history as contributing to this conflict, it is very dangerous indeed to not assess it in light of all factors. Dangerous because what we betray for others we betray for ourselves. Even more dangerous is to deny the humanity of one side, who would, by the normal application of principles, be deemed to be the oppressed victim.

    I would be curious to know just what principles of justice and civilization, make it acceptable to turn the occupier, with its massive army, into the victim and the occupied, with no army into the aggressor.

  • lbloveday says:

    What Gilad Erdan showed the UN:

    • rosross says:

      Is it possible to believe anything Israel says about the Palestinian Resistance or indeed, vice versa? Wise to remain sceptical particularly when the prose turns purple and the tone is hyperbolic. Demonising the other side is commonplace in war and Israel has most media on its side. We are hardly being presented with balanced and informed reporting from both sides.


    The true roots of Islamic Jew-hatred.”
    An informative article by David Horowitz, October 27, 2023, on the history of hatred of the Jewish peoples.
    Worth a read for those who aren’t afraid of the truth.

  • cbattle1 says:

    Partitions forced on people by foreign powers have not proved to have provided good outcomes; to mind comes the British partition of “India” (A national entity created by the British), into Pakistan, East and West, and India in the middle, which resulted in horrific massacres and fleeing refugees. The partition solution list goes on: Korea, Vietnam, Ireland etc. And now, some are promoting the two-state solution by the partition of China into two sovereign states, that of Mainland China and Taiwan respectively.
    It needs to be acknowledged that no “Hamas” or any other radical Islamic militant group existed in Palestine prior to the roll-out of the Balfour Declaration pledge to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine. As Jewish migration increased into British Mandate Palestine, as per the Balfour Declaration, tensions between the Palestinians and the uninvited Jews grew steadily, and when the British tried to limit Jewish immigration, they themselves became targets of militant Jewish terror, the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem is probably the most dramatic of the acts. But a full-scale guerrilla campaign was waged against the British, bombing of trains, etc, as well as attacks on Palestinian villages. Under those circumstances, the likelihood of the partition of 1947 being a successful solution was “0”!

    • rosross says:

      True. The Partition of India was also a disaster. We forget our history at our peril.

    • rosross says:


      My question would be, is there a historical precedent where an occupier claimed to be acting in self-defence when it was crushing resistance from those it occupied?

      Surely, the act of occupation, in itself, forfeits the right to claim self-defense let alone any proportionality?

    • pmprociv says:

      cbattle1, partitions of people became inevitable once our ancestors took up agriculture and stopped moving around. Centres of power, with social hierarchies, were the outcome, leading to city-states, with warrior classes and priesthoods exploiting religions to focus that power. As populations grew, with economies developing, nation states were the next step — requiring borders to be drawn up, in an attempt to avoid endless, internecine warfare. But borders will always be unsatisfactory and controversial, seeing that racial/language/ethnic/religious groupings don’t line up comfortably with natural features (except for one fortunate continent-state, with a precious constitution that shouldn’t be meddled with frivolously).

      It’s easy for the Arab nations, and India-Pakistan, to whinge about imperialist, colonialist powers setting up their borders, causing all their problems, but how long have these countries now been independent? If they’re unhappy with their borders. what’s preventing them from changing them?

      • rosross says:

        Yes I agree the former colonies are full of complaints and not enough appreciation for what their former colonial rulers built for them.

        And stuff happens. The tragedy in Israel and Palestine is that the Israelis considered the Palestinians to be inferior as humans, a common attitude in Europe toward Arabs in past times. Like South Africa, that divide was always going to end badly.

        I feel sorry for all involved, but particularly for the Israelis because occupation and violent colonisation debases those who do it and strengthens those who suffer it.

      • cbattle1 says:

        Yugoslavia was a cobbled together state created post WW1, and post WW2 it was re-created as a Communist/Socialist state under Tito. Post Tito, the proverbial hit the fan and Yugoslavia is no more. So, that appears to be an example of people creating their own partitioning, with help from NATO.

        • rosross says:

          It is also an example of the ability of a powerful dictator to hold together disparate groups. With his death it all fell apart.

          And when the Americans killed Saddam Hussein and destroyed Iraq, that too led to a falling apart with disastrous consequences. Same for Libya and Gaddafi.

          I am not condoning tyranny, although they were useful tyrants for the US for a long time, same in Syria, but that breaking something up does not necessarily leave you with an omelet. Just a mess.

          The huge influx of refugees pouring into Europe and the UK can be traced to this sort of destruction. However, it has long been the way of the world, chosen and imposed, that humans move and change the world around them.

          And this is also why the decay of the West is so dangerous. Terror reigns at the edges of change.

  • lbloveday says:

    From The Australian:
    Mobs break into the Makhachkala airport, in Russia’s north Caucasus, looking to lynch Jews after rumors spread about the arrival of Jewish refugees from Israel.

    • Katzenjammer says:

      There’s a great misunderstand about the pro-Palestine rallys. They’re not in response to anything Israel has done, is doing, or is likely to do. The success of Hamas despicable slaughters is viewed as a rallying call for haters of Jews and Israel everywhere to follow their example.

  • lbloveday says:

    Rabbi Benjamin Elton in The Australian:
    There are Jewish victims of Hamas and there are Palestinian victims of Hamas, AND OUR COMPASSION HAS TO EXTEND TO THEM ALL.

    • David Isaac says:

      Hamas was assisted into being by Israel and has given her the gift of an opposition Israel’s own citizens and the world can hate, as opposed to the comparatively peaceable Fatah, which had the dangerous habit of negotiation and compromise. An enemy which is vociferous in its refusal to accept your existence makes a strong case to public opinion for its own annihilation. Soon enough the whole of mandatory Palestine will be incorporated into the Israeli state.

      • rosross says:

        If all of Palestine is annexed by Israel it will mean all Palestinians will become Israeli citizens of course. I am sure you do not foresee an apartheid state which would really just be continued occupation.

        In fact in recent times the Palestinians have begun to see the one state solution as the only answer. Israel’s issue will be with a majority of non-Jews, and as a democracy, equal rights. it can no longer be a theocratic Jewish State.

        That will be in the interests of Israelis and Palestinians. And there will also be right of return in such a democracy.

      • rosross says:

        @David Isaac,

        Did you really mean to suggest that an occupied people who continue to resist deserve to be wiped out? Surely not?

        Israel claims to be a Western democracy. Does our Western system support the extermination of an entire people because they resist occupation?

        And could it even be attempted without alienating the world, toadying Governments aside, and creating a bigger war which threatens everyone?

  • lbloveday says:

    Chris Mitchell on Gaza hospital “bombing”:
    Some of the world’s biggest media outlets swallowed false Hamas claims that Israel had bombed a hospital in northern Gaza, even though Israel had almost immediately said it had no record of any attacks by it at that time.
    These mistakes underline a problem in journalism. Too many reporters quick to swallow Hamas lies now see their role as upholding moral virtue rather than reporting facts. Trouble is, they are too ill-informed to know where virtue lies.

    • rosross says:

      If you look into it more closely. There are videos of the missile approaching the hospital and coming from the direction of Israel. If the Palestinians had fired such a missile it would be heading out to see given its trajectory.

      Military analysts also said the Palestinians do not have weapons which could do the damage this one did. But the Israelis do.

      That is why even mainstream media, following reports on the incident from weapons and military experts, are concluding the hospital was bombed by Israel.

      • rosross says:

        Freudian slip – heading out to sea.

      • Doubting Thomas says:

        ros, there is no doubt whatsoever that the Israelis did not fire the missile that Hamas and its running dogs claimed hit the hospital and killed hundreds of people. The missile was a misfired Hamas missile that hit the hospital carpark.
        This argument is going nowhere.

        • rosross says:

          @Doubting Thomas,

          From what I have read from military analysts the Palestinians do not have the weapons to do that kind of damage and Israel does.

          There is also footage, from Al Jazeera and other media sites showing the trajectory of the missile and it hitting the hospital. That indicates it clearly came from the Israelis. There is also growing evidence it was a powerful new weapon. That would not be in the hands of the Palestinians.

          In an age when anything can be fabricated and often is, including images and videos, it is wise to take a cautious view. Israel does not tell the truth on this issue and since the Palestinians don’t have a voice in essence, finding the truth is almost impossible.

          At this point it is impossible for you or I to categorically state what happened. But, we do also know Israel has a long and proven history of targeting hospitals and I believe, as of this week, has demanded another hospital be evacuated, leading no doubt to the death of many inside if there were anywhere to go, which there is not. So, clearly Israel bombs hospitals. Giving people a warning hardly negates tht behaviour.

          • Doubting Thomas says:

            Ros, Al Jazeera has even less credibility than the ABC. All credible media accept that Israel did not fire the missile that did not hit the hospital and did not kill hundreds as claimed by HAMAS.
            All credible media, and all decent people, accept that the October 7 attack on innocent Israeli and visiting civilians from overseas was a disgraceful series of war crimes for which there was, and remains, not the faintest excuse or defence based on any historical interpretation.
            That you continue to argue as if the Israelis had it coming is equally shameful.

            • rosross says:

              What do you mean by credible media? Those who subscribe to the Israeli propaganda book would agree, but those who do not challenge the story because of the power of the missile and because of the trajectory shown on image. Not just Al Jazeera had that footage. You might want to look more closely at the evidence.

              Your ‘áll credible media’ sounds like ‘the science says’and we know what rubbish that was with Covid.

              Most Media said a Yes vote would win. They were wrong bigtime.

              I have never said Israel had it coming and I never would. I said, after a genocidal foundation, never redressed and 75 years of occupation and continued colonisation using massive military force and committing human rights atrocities and war crimes, it was not surprising the Palestinians fought back as they did.

              If you seriously think people can murder, imprison, torture, abuse others for three generations and win hearts and minds which makes violence and resistance impossible then you are naive.

              • Doubting Thomas says:

                Enough, ros. Nothing the Israelis have ever done to the Palestinians justifies or excuses 7October. Nothing! And nothing justifies your constant shameful failure to condemn it.

                That’s my last word on the subject.

                • rosross says:

                  @Doubting Thomas,

                  And my last word is that anyone who says Israel has done nothing to provoke Resistance and violence knows nothing about the history of Palestine and the creation of Israel. Israel has done everything, including creating Hamas in the first place, to create resistance and violence because that means it can play victim and continue to work on its plan to rid Palestine of its native people and to take all of the land. It won’t work, but that has always been the plan.

                  Plenty of Israeli historians have said exactly that and the records from the Zionists make it clear.

                  I do understand that some people are simply incapable of seeing both sides in this conflict and the powerful agendas at work to make sure many do not. But, I have a quaint faith in the decency and common sense of most human beings and even a spiritual belief that eventually justice will be done.

                  You may think it odd, but from what I can see, this is destroying Israelis far more than Palestinians. A debased culture is hard to repair. You cannot commit constant atrocities against helpless people over 75 years and not die a little inside every time. I hope they can when justice is done for Palestine and the two can unite as one. It is ironic, but not surprising how very Arab is Israeli culture. But then there is a maxim that the coloniser will absorb much of the culture from the colonised.

                  People do not have to agree, they just have to respect differences of opinion and value facts. Thanks for your time.

            • rosross says:

              Quote: But then the Israeli case began to fall apart. BBC reported they could find no cemetery anywhere near the location from which the IDF claimed the errant rocket had been fired.

              And The New York Times reported that its own more thorough study of the relevant videos did not support the U.S.-Israeli case. Instead it showed that the Palestinian rocket that misfired was “most likely not what caused the explosion at the hospital,” because it had “actually detonated in the sky roughly two miles away.”

  • Sindri says:

    So much rubbish, obsessively repeated, on display here. If Hamas would just recognise Israel’s right to exist instead of insisting that the only solution is the destruction of Israel by force, and instead of indulging its primitive loathing of jews which it considers scripturally based, it could have peace tomorrow. Gaza could be a vibrant, economically successful self-governing enclave if it didn’t have brutal theocrats in charge, who came to power by a popular vote in 2006 and haven’t allowed another one since.

    • rosross says:

      The Palestinians and Hamas have recognised Israel exists. Does any State have a right to exist? Not sure about that. What they cannot do is recognise it has a right to exist as a Jewish State because that disenfranchises most Palestinians as Muslims and Christians.

      And I would be fascinated to see sources of any occupied and colonised people in history who first had to state their oppressors had a right to exist on their land. I doubt anyone has ever said that so demanding it of Palestine is just manipulative theatre.

      Although perhaps a sensible position is for the Palestinians to agree Israelis have a right to exist and Israelis to state Palestinians have a right to exist. Would you support that? I am fine with it.

  • Sindri says:

    So am I RR, if you mean that each side should agree in effect to a two-state solution, but that is precisely what Hamas has never agreed to. I don’t exactly know what you mean when you say Hamas has recognised that “Israel exists”. Why would anyone, Hamas included, pretend that Israel doesn’t exist? Hamas has emphatically not recognised Israel’s *right* to exist. On the contrary, its core principle is that Israel must cease to exist, and that the only means of achieving that is by violence. That is why, since Israel exited Gaza in 2005, the primitive theocrats of Hamas, instead of concentrating on building something like a civil society (the tourism potential of Gaza, for a start, is vast) have done nothing but commit attacks of terrorism on Israel, of which the latest truly disgusting piece of barbarism is an example.
    On another matter, I noted your statement in an earlier post that “no state has a right to exist”. There is a problem here I think with exactly what you mean by that. By “state”, do you mean nation-state or government? If the latter, I would agree with you. To pick a random example, North Korea as a “state” could be argued to have “no right to exist”, in the sense that the tiny clique who rule it do so with conspicuous cruelty and barbarity, and without anything like the consent of the governed. Nevertheless, it is currently a distinct polity and if its people decided by a free vote that it should continue as a state within its present borders, it would not be posible to say that it has “no right to exist”. Australia has been a self-governing federation since 1901. It endures, no doubt with lots of warts and imperfections like every other state in the world, because its citizens wish it to do so. It would be absurd to say that Australia has no right to exist.
    It’s a question ultimately of fact and degree, and your statement is (in my opinion) too dogmatic.
    And no, I don’t agree with your inevitable rejoinder that Israel, on my test, has no right to exist, and I’m not being uncivil when I say in advance that I have read what you have said on the subject and there’s no point or profit in my arguing about it with you.

    • rosross says:


      No need to argue. Exchanging views is what such threads are about. And I do not believe I have said Israel has no right to exist. I have said the only borders Israel could defend in a court of law is the UN Mandate.

      Does any State have a right to exist? And what does that mean?
      But yes, if any State can say they have a right to exist then so can Israel, created 75 years ago.

      But if Israel has a right to exist then why not Palestine?

      Closer reading of the offers from Israel reveal that the Palestinians have never been offered a fully independent State, just bantustans still under the control of the Israeli military.

      Does any State have a right to maintain brutal military occupation and continued colonisation of a land which dispossesses and subjugates the native people?

      I don’t think any State does. Others disagree selectively.

      When the Israelis removed the illegal settlers in Gaza they took them to other parts of Occupied Palestine and turned Gaza into a prison. Quite how you think the Palestinians could have done much when they had no freedom is the question.

      I really suggest you read Israeli human rights groups on the situation in Gaza and the rest of Occupied Palestine.

      I respect and appreciate you taking the time to reply. Happy to agree to disagree.

  • lbloveday says:

    I see 6 past PMs, Keating being an obvious MIA, have written a joint letter re the “Hamas terrorists” (their words).
    But who is the 6th signature, “The Hon. Scott Morisson MP”? Australia has never had a PM named “Morisson”.
    Pedantic? This is not some quick comment on Quadrant or The Australian, but purportedly an important statement by Australia’s immediate past 6 PMs.

    Inter many alia:

  • MargieCJ says:

    To even begin to understand the perilous and menacing situation that the Israelis are in, living in the tiny democratic country of Israel, and surrounded by numerous large Islamic countries, none of which are democratic (and constantly being badgered by the Left about the importance of “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, Justice, Wokeness”), then start by reading and listening to the following:-

    “The Story of Mohammed Islam unveiled” by Harry Richardson published 10th October 2013

    Bill Warner, PhD: Jihad vs Crusades

    Acts of Islamic Terrorism from September 11th 2001 right up to the present.

    • rosross says:

      Whatever peril Israel faces none of it justifies how it has treated the Palestinians for 75 years and what it is doing now.

      When we deny the humanity of anyone we give licence to truly great horrors which threaten us all. Never again must be for everyone and now it is Muslim and Christian Palestinians which need us to stand up and say Never Again.

      Either we are all human or we are not. That is the point this YOUTube video makes.

      An Emotional Piece for the Victims of Gaza on Dutch Television – Ramsey Nasr

  • MargieCJ says:

    To even begin to understand the perilous and menacing situation that the Israelis are in, living in the tiny democratic country of Israel, and surrounded by numerous large Islamic countries, none of which are democratic (and constantly being badgered by the Left about the importance of “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, Justice, Wokeness”), then start by reading and listening to the following:-
    1.”The Story of Mohammed Islam unveiled” by Harry Richardson published 10th October 2013
    2. Bill Warner, PhD: Jihad vs Crusades
    3. Acts of Islamic Terrorism from September 11th 2001 right up to the present.

  • rosross says:

    It is clear that many who support Israel’ do not understand the risk it poses to our humanity. When we deny the humanity of any group we deny it for all. So does the West and our civilized world spiral into even greater horrors.

    This from Dutch television says it well. To deny the humanity and rights of the Palestinians is to deny our own.


  • pgang says:

    The four circles of evil, as Rowan Dean covered on Outsiders on Sunday, very clearly on display here as circle 3, with some hints of circle 2. Not sure what happened to Roger Franklin’s one comment limit. Maybe it only applies to outsiders. Every time somebody offers their opinion it is pounced on by the wind-up Freddy Krueger doll, stabbing it to death repeatedly. It annuls any opportunity for a grown-up exchange of ideas.

    • lbloveday says:

      Quote: “Every time somebody offers their opinion it is pounced on by the wind-up Freddy Krueger doll, stabbing it to death repeatedly”.
      I don’t read the doll’s comments per se, haven’t for yonks, but as I scroll I obviously see the quantity of replies, as distinct from initial comments by the doll, and some words are “read” and indelibly stick in my mind. Amongst those are the doll replying to Katzenjammer
      “In the main I reply if someone replies to me.
      A reply to a reply would usually be at a second or greater indentation.
      It’s so long that I can’t remember when, if, I last replied to the doll in this forum, yet as I scroll I see regular replies to my posts (at least 3 in this article alone)..

  • MargieCJ says:

    I will try to answer you rosross.
    You say, ” When we deny the humanity of any group we deny it for all. So does the West and our civilized world spiral into even greater horrors.”

    If by “we”, you mean Australians, then let me remind you that Australia is a vibrant, multicultural country. Australians identify with more than 270 ancestries. Since 1945, almost seven million people have migrated to Australia. So to answer the second part of your sentence, the answer is NO, the West and our civilized world is not spiralling into even greater horrors.

    However, if by “we” you mean Islamists, then the answer is YES, when Islamists deny the humanity of any group, they deny it for all. So, if the Islamists are allowed to “kill the Jews, gas the Jews, death to America” then the West and our civilized world might very well spiral into even greater horrors.”

    The following is quoted from ‘The Story of Mohammed – Islam unveiled’ by Harry Richardson, published 10.10.2013 – p27
    1. Jihad is sanctioned by Allah. There is no higher authority,
    2. Jihad can be any action which advances islam or weakens the Kaffirs/Infidels whether by a group or an individual.
    3. ALWAYS play the victim. Although Mohammed had attacked innocent people without provocation, he blamed them. He said that they had ‘stopped others from becoming muslims’ and had worshipped idols. The attack was their fault and the muslims were the victims, not the Kaffirs/Infidels.”

    • rosross says:

      And I will do you the courtesy of replying to your statements.

      You said: If by “we”, you mean Australians, then let me remind you that Australia is a vibrant, multicultural country.

      I meant WE as humans. I meant WE as the human ability to have a conscience, integrity and principles.

      You said: the answer is NO, the West and our civilized world is not spiralling into even greater horrors.

      Given the decay in Western societies and the betrayal of principles as well as support for genocide in Palestine, and US/Nato proxy wars in Ukraine, there is a good chance we are spiralling into greater horrors.

      You said: So, if the Islamists are allowed to “kill the Jews, gas the Jews, death to America” then the West and our civilized world might very well spiral into even greater horrors.”

      I do not condone such violent language but I can understand why so many hate Americans. And if you condemn cries to ‘kill the Jews, gas the Jews,’are you saying you equally condemn fanatical Jews and Christians calling Death to the Arabs, exterminate them all, kill the Muslims? Or are you applying double standards?

      Will you categorically condemn Israelis for signs up in Tel Aviv, exterminate them all? You do know non-Jewish Israeli citizens are being summarily arrested at this point and that Jewish settlers have been told to shoot the Palestinians? Do you approve of that?

      As to the Rules of Allah, I put as much importance in them as I do the delusional and fanatical rules of Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism or any religion.

      You can find in all religions in backward, ancient teachings such things. The Muslims were not unique in their primitive nature when the religion was invented, which by the say was 600 years later than Christianity.

      Shall we go back to Christians in 1443 and see what they were saying and doing? That is when the witchhunts began and it lasted for 300 years. Some villages were almost devoid of women because they had all been burned.

      It is wiser to deal with realities today instead of religious extremes and historical events.

    • rosross says:

      You do know Israel has tested weapons on the Gaza prison many times and is doing so again. That information is readily available. The Pulitzer Centre has written it up.

      I have no problem condemning excesses by the Palestinian Resistance. Do you do the same for Israeli excesses?

      Quote: While hundreds of wounded children in Gaza have been treated for what a surgeon described as “fourth degree burns” caused by novel weapons,

  • MargieCJ says:

    rosross clearly demonstrates the very real need for all free people to understand that Islamists are brainwashed into the deadly doctrine of Muhammad from birth and that they live in constant fear of not conforming to their doctrine throughout their lives. There is no other religion which tells its followers to kill the infidels/kaffirs. It is also a fact that Islamists constantly use Taqiyya which is the permission to lie to justify Islam. Islamists also use Taqiyya to gain the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability so as to defeat them.

    Never forget the following:-
    “The Story of Mohammed – Islam unveiled” by Harry Richardson, published 10.10.2013 – p62
    “This is how Jihad works, slowly, step by step, leaders, opinion makers, academics, journalists, organizations and eventually the general population, are cowed into submission and forced to accept responsibility for deliberate islamic attacks against them.
    Never ever, does Islam take responsibility….”

    • lbloveday says:

      Quote: “Islamists are brainwashed into the deadly doctrine of Muhammad from birth”
      Generally attributed to Aristotle, sometimes to the Jesuits:
      Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.
      And little can be done to change such a man.

    • rosross says:

      I am not the one who is brainwashed. I am one of a few who can actually gain understanding of all factors at work and apply common sense, facts and logic to the situation.

      Your post is like so many others. You want to pretend this genocide in Occupied Palestine is some global fight to save the world from Islam. It isn’t. But that is what Israel wants people to believe and clearly some do.

      A clear and mature mind can separate whatever threats Islam might present, remembering most are moderates, and this war Israel wages against the people of Palestine whom it holds under occupation and continues to colonise.

      Remember the Referendum. The spinners and propagandists were hard at work with a lot of money to present their cause and they failed. The same is happening with Israel because there are clear and present principles being betrayed and anyone of conscience and reason who is not consumed by an obsessive hatred of Islam and Muslims, drowning in irrational fears which prevent critical thinking, can see that.

      I respect your right to your position even though it is based in ignorance and prejudice.

  • rosross says:


    Last reply to you because there is no point. But think again about what you just did. You sought to justify Israel testing weapons on imprisoned men, women and children by launching into a diatribe about Islam. That is exactly how tyranny becomes entrenched and how atrocities become a norm. History teaches that clearly.

    We both know you would never demonise all Christians, Jews or Hindus for the actions of their fanatics and radicals. Just Muslims.

    I think what has horrified me more than anything are the number of intelligent and decent people who are so irrationally consumed by a fear and hatred of Islam that they will not only condone, but promote genocide. I suggest you read up on Pol Pot, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Stalin’s purges and 1930’s Germany if you want to see where such visceral prejudice leads.

  • rosross says:

    As a Jew who grew up just after the Holocaust, with relatives who fled pogroms and a grandfather named Israel, I take “never again” seriously. And that means never again for anyone.

    Never again is now.

    We must put an immediate stop to this genocide.

  • lbloveday says:

    Abdul Nacer Benbrika, who migrated to Australia from Algeria in 1989, was stripped of his citizenship in 2020 after completing his 15-year sentence after being found guilty by a jury of being a member of, and directing the activities of, a terrorist organisation.
    Today (1/11), the High Court ruled in his favour in a 6-1 decision, finding s 36D of the Australian Citizenship Act is invalid and therefore Benbrika is an Australian citizen.

    • rosross says:

      And that is relevant how? The law is often an ass but I think we step into deep waters when we start ripping citizenship off people. You either are or you are not.

  • MargieCJ says:

    rosross, you say, “Last reply to you because there is no point.” At last we can agree, (but I won’t hold my breath!) This, also, will be my last reply to you because there is no point.

    The solution to Islamic terrorism and savagery is to target the root cause. Islam is neither a religion nor a race. Islamists follow the doctrine of Islam which is found in the Koran, the Sira (the biography of Mohammed) and the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed). It is a 1400 year-old barbaric, sadistic, jihadi, male death cult that follows an ideology of hatred, murder, brutality, misogyny and domination over all females. Its aim is to enforce world-wide sharia Islamic law; death to all kaffirs/infidels; and global formation of a violent, jihadi, Islamic caliphate. Islam is at war with the Democratic free countries of the West and is using fear and submission as part of their weaponry.
    Finally, there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. Islam is Mohamed, Islam has never changed, Islam will never change. To change Islam, you would have to take Mohammed out of it and then it wouldn’t be Islam any more.
    Time to stop appeasing the Islamists, and tell the truth about Islam.

    • lbloveday says:

      “…there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim”.
      Turkish PM, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan agrees emphatically:
      “The term ‘moderate Islam’ is ugly and offensive. There is no moderate Islam. Islam is Islam”.
      Also from Erdoğan:
      “They (Israelis) have no conscience, no honour, no pride. They curse Hitler day and night, but they have surpassed Hitler in barbarism,”.
      PS, that was way back in 2014; THREE days ago it was “Hamas is not a terrorist organisation but a liberation group”, and “Tel Aviv won’t last THREE days without their (Western Powers) support”.

    • rosross says:

      I will ask you a question, if you judge all Muslims by the actions of their radical fundamentalists do you do the same with all other religions? I doubt it. The double standards are the problem. But if you do then accept my apology for assuming you do not.

      I have known many moderate Muslims in the US, UK, Canada, India, Africa, Australia, and I have come across some fundamentalist Jews and Christians. The reality is all fundamentalists are pretty much on the same page but that is what orthodox religion creates. I wonder if we would have seen more violence from Christians and Jews if they had been targeted as so many Muslim countries have?

      I have no time for any religion but have studied many including Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Catholicism, Anglicanism and Gnostic Christianity as well as Jewish Kabbala.

    • rosross says:

      I will add that intolerance is not particular to any religion. I lived in Antwerp for some years and at one point was caring for a friend’s four-year-old for a few days. I took him to the playground in the park across the road.

      We lived in a suburb with a large Hasidic community and the women often gathered in this park. I did not normally bother with it but had a four year old to keep occupied.

      There were about a dozen women there with children and they all turned on us and abused us, harassing us to leave. It was a public park. I gave the little boy a brief swing and said they had no right to try to force us out, but, because he became upset, I left.

      Do I blame all Hasidic Jews or even all Jews for that? No. Those women spent their hairless, wig-wearing lives in a patriarchal, misogynistic culture, cut off from the broader community and did not know any better. I was angry at first, mostly for the child and then just felt sorry for them.

      But, such intolerance when maintained across generations will go deeper and deeper. No fundamentalist religion is healthy and that is a simple, psychological reality.

Leave a Reply