Today’s Jewish News (July 8 2011)

So there’s a story about the picket at Max Brenner in Melbourne.  I don’t know why it’s making a big fuss about this, there have been protests in Sydney against Max Brenner (I haven’t attended any, but have been told of them). It quotes some Jewish guy on page 3 saying he was going to hold a poster “showing Nazi stormtroopers outside Jewish shops, with the slogan, ‘Berlin 1933, Melbourne 2011′”. Evidently this Nazi comparison is not considered offensive – because it’s pro-Israel, and pro-Israel Nazi comparisons are always ok, but anti-Israel Nazi comparisons are always anti-Semitic.

The editorial is in two parts, one about the protest, one about the flotilla. The BDS thing is said to be an attack “on the very existence of the State of Israel”. “As for the imapact on Australian Jewry, the BDS troublemakers must surely understand the resonance of their boycotts, so painfully similar to the Nazi boycott of Jewish shops in Germany and Austria at the onset of the Holocaust.”

Ok, so it’s like the Nazis says the AJN.  But don’t worry, those comparisons are ok because it serves the interests of Bibi Netanyahu.

It goes on to say

While our community’s state and national roof bodies are to be applauded for their strenuous efforts behind the scenes to protect Israel’s interests, the increasing frequency of the BDS protests and the publicity they are receiving means their signiciance can no longer be downplayed…

It would be interesting to know what this entails. I mean, if anyone else wrote this, I’m sure they’d be accused of being anti-Semitic. At the Anti-Defamation Commission website, that’s part of how they define anti-Semitism.

Onto the flotilla (the “infamous Gaza flotilla of May 2010”. Infamous to whom?) It says “there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.”

Medicine, food and even luxury items are readily available, and while there is a range of incomes and wealth, nobody is starving. The inexorable conclusion then can only be that the flotilla and fly-in are purely political provocations.

This is pretty shameful. The op eds are just dull. The President of the ZFA complains that whilst the NIF calls itself Zionist, they don’t mention the word Zionism in its statement of principles. The mere fact that its name has ISRAEL in it evidently is not enough. And Jamie Hyams complains that the Age editorial criticised the Israeli government for threatening reprisals against journalists on board the flotilla. Because the next day Bibi backflipped.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: