Melanie Phillips: The destruction of Israel the signature cause of the British Labour party
The leader of Britain’s Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, has told his party’s annual conference that if he becomes Prime Minister he will immediately recognise a Palestinian state. Immediately. Why? What kind of priority is this for a British Prime Minister?UK: Labour loves Palestinians more than British citizens
Labour delegates also voted to condemn Israel’s use of force against violent riots on the Gaza border, urge more UK funding for UNWRA, the UN agency for Palestinians, and back a freeze on British arms sales to Israel. And in a veritable sea of hatred of the Jewish state, they waved Palestinian flags provided for them by the conference organisers as they debated “Palestine”, which delegates had voted was a priority issue ahead of the NHS, Brexit, social care and welfare.
How come that’s such a priority?
At a fringe meeting Len McCluskey, the Unite trade union leader who previously dismissed the party’s antisemitism scandal as “mood music”, spat his venom against Israel.
Unite represents mainly low-paid British workers in the service sector. Unite is obsessed by hatred of Israel. Why? What possible reason can there be for this? What impact does Israel have on the lives of such workers? None.
All this has made one thing crystal clear. Palestinianism is now the signature cause of the Labour party. Members don’t wave the flag of the potential state of Kurdistan, or Tibet, or identify any other foreign cause to be more important than British domestic issues.
So why has Palestinianism become the cause of causes? The answer is that the obsession is not with the fate of the “Palestinians”, whose lives in fact have been made wretched by their own leaders and the Arab world in general. The obsession is with the Jews.
IsraellyCool: What Do Palestinian Propagandists Actually Mean by “Peace”?
I saw this video on Twitter: a palestinian schoolgirlis talking about what they teach them in schools and what they mean by “peace” – and they don’t seem to mean that they want peace with others based on mutual understanding and co-operation. The girl is describing themselves taking everything and having “peace” between themselves, not with others.
A Palestinian girl's vision of peace. This is 13 year old Iman Zaher, from the village of Luban a-Sharqiya. pic.twitter.com/vV9zNSiUoI
— Imshin 💙 (@imshin) September 25, 2018
This kind of explains why those paraded as “peace activists” (like ‘Shirley Temper‘) don’t seem “peaceful” at all.
If that’s their definition of “peace”, this mindset sounds a lot like that of Islamists from the time of the Arab conquests in the Middle Ages (after they expelled non-Muslims from Arabia and later started expanding outside of Arabia and they even went to Spain). They declared areas that they didn’t rule “Dar Al-Harb” (translation: House of War), and started waging war on those around them and after violently subjugating, enslaving and expelling others, declared areas they conquered “Dar Al-Salam” (translation: House of Peace), even though they weren’t “peaceful” at all.
They seem to just redefine words to have some other meaning. For instance, they have tried to redefine the word “refugee” to have some other meaning that only applies to them and that no other country uses. Or how some propagandists try to redefine the word “coexistence” when referring to Spain under Islamic rule, even though historians criticize calling that “coexistence.”