Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Middle East Israel media bias dishonest reporting

Letters

Letters written by KBRM members to newspapers or Radio/TV stations

Submitted to the Sunday-Star Times on March 7, 2010

Your correspondent, J. Wakim (7 March) is so obsessed with bashing Israel that he loses sight of the real facts. The scourge of international terrorism calls for concerted action on the part of democratic countries to eliminate this threat from overwhelming the freedoms and human rights New Zealanders and Israelis hold to be fundamental to our way of life. This will not be achieved by passing useless resolutions which condemn those countries prepared to take action to safeguard their citizens. One wonders why Mr. Wakim does not realise that terrorist instigators cannot be truthfully classified as political leaders and why he singles out only Israel when the USA and other countries are also engaged in eliminating terrorists. Unfortunately his hatred of the Middle East's only democracy merely demonstrates the sort of bigotry so prevalent in certain circles. It is a pity that the media in many cases aids and abets this campaign of disinformation.

Submitted to the Sunday-Star Times on March 7, 2010

How can J Wakim (Mar 7) castigate Israel for its presumed role in killing a Hamas leader, and not mention the Israelis killed by Hamas in its relentless war on the Jewish state? Every state has the right to defend itself and strike back at its enemies. To call this man a political opponent is like calling Hitler a ‘political opponent’ during WWII. When Mr Wakim calls for a boycott on American goods because of the targeted killing of al Qaeda leaders, perhaps we could take him more seriously.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on March 3, 2010

Matt McCarten's anti-Israel rant is riddled with errors.
Mahbouh was not ‘tricked’ into going to Dubai. He booked the trip himself, thereby breaching Hamas' own security rules.
Israel does not have ‘the fourth largest military in the world’. It is not in the top 15 military spenders, and has the 35th-largest regular forces.
Israel was not built on ‘theft of land’, but was established by the United Nations on the basis of international treaties.
Gazans are not being ‘bled into submission’ nor does ‘nothing go in and nothing out’. Significant humanitarian aid enters Gaza, as does fuel. Gazans can and do leave Gaza for humanitarian reasons.
Palestinians ‘fight back’ not with ‘home-made bombs’ but with increasingly-sophisticated missiles, which Mahbouh was reportedly travelling to buy.
Palestinian civilians have never been ‘massacred and their homes levelled’. Widely-circulated massacre stories are at best dubious, at worst proven hoaxes.
Hamas was not created by Israel, but broke away from the PLO to pursue a radical Islamic agenda. Its Charter commits it to the destruction of Israel.
The author's rage has apparently blinded him to well-known facts. This is advocacy-journalism gone mad.

Submitted to the Herald On Sunday on March 1, 2010:

Could Matt Mcarten please tell your readers how he got his ‘Alice in Wonderland spectacles?’ For some years he's been unable to stop wearing them but the poor fellow needs reminding that there is a real world out there in the Middle East — one that bears little resemblance to the distortions and untruths he perceives. If he got rid of the glasses and opened his eyes he'd find that the delusions he suffers from and his obsessive need to distort Middle East reality will fade away.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on March 1, 2010

Matt McCarten's anti-Israel rant is riddled with errors. A few of them:

Mahbouh was not ‘tricked’ into going to Dubai. He booked the trip himself, thereby breaching Hamas' own security rules.
Israel does not have ‘the fourth largest military in the world’. It is not in the top 15 military spenders, and has the 36th largest regular army.
Israel was not built on ‘theft of land’, but was established by the United Nations on the basis of international treaties.
Gazans are not being ‘bled into submission’ nor does ‘nothing go in and nothing out’. Significant humanitarian aid enters Gaza, as does fuel. Gazans can and do leave Gaza for humanitarian reasons.
Palestinians ‘fight back’ not with ‘home-made bombs’ but with increasingly-sophisticated missiles, which Mahbouh was reportedly travelling to buy.
Palestinian civilians have never been ‘massacred and their homes levelled’. Widely-circulated massacre stories are at best dubious, at worst proven hoaxes.
Israel did not create Hamas. Hamas broke away from the PLO to pursue a radical Islamic agenda. Hamas' Charter commits it to the destruction of Israel.

The author's rage has apparently blinded him to well-known facts. This is not responsible journalism.

Submitted to the Herald On Sunday on March 1, 2010:

In the space of a short opinion piece (28 Feb), Matt McCarten managed to distort history, demonise a democratic country and condemn those fighting terrorism — no mean feat ! Without the slightest shred of evidence he accused Israel of eliminating a terror leader. This knee jerk reaction is typical of those who believe in Israeli conspiracies. Furthermore his moral bankruptcy in elevating someone responsible for murder & terror to hero victim status whilst attacking those responsible for making the world a bit safer makes sorry reading. The Jewish People's sovereignty in Israel & Judea (renamed Palestine by the Romans) predates by a long way Islam & Arabs and his distortion of this fact merely demonstrates his own skewed agenda. In the war against terror & its accomplices there can be only one winner. As the only democratic country in the Middle East facing threats to its very existence, Israel has no need to apologise for its actions.

Submitted to the Southland Times and The Press on March 1, 2010:

What an amazing story (26/2/10)! The son of a Hamas founder couldn't live with Hamas's culture of hate and went over to the Israeli side. What a different picture from the usual blame-Israel accounts, and told by one who knows. When Mosab Hassan Youssef says, ‘Hamas cannot make peace with the Israelis; that is against what their God tells them’, he shows the foolishness of thinking that Israel 's house-building is the impediment to peace.

Coincidentally, a story appeared the next day that reinforced this message. A Frenchman who was held hostage by Muslim militants in Mali reported, ‘they want to Islamise the whole world in their own way.’

Because of this mission, Israel is forced to fight for its life and for the lives of its citizens. Peace can come to the Middle East only when Hamas and other terrorist organisations either give up their goal of destroying Israel or are quashed.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on March 1, 2010:

Why did you not print one of the most important stories to come out of the Middle East (26/2/10)? The son of a Hamas founder left Hamas in order to help Israel as a spy and prevent dozens of Islamist suicide bombers from finding their targets! When Mosab Hassan Youssef says ‘Hamas cannot make peace with the Israelis; that is against what their God tells them’, he reveals the real cause of the conflict, not the foolish notion that Israel's house building is preventing peace. (This is as silly as thinking in 1938 that peace would come if Germany was given the Sudetenland.) Peace will come when Hamas and similar terrorist organisations either give up their goal of destroying Israel or are quashed, and not before.

Submitted to the Herald On Sunday on March 1, 2010:

Matt McCarten (28 Feb 2010) hasn't the foggiest idea what Hamas is about. Of course they wouldn't steal passports and try to assassinate Israeli leaders; that's much too sophisticated. They simply launch rockets and send suicide bombers to kill as many men, women and children as they can. With his lies about Israel, Mr McCarten has interchanged aggressor and victim. Readers who are confused about who is to blame should read the story (reported in other papers) about the son of a Hamas founder, Mosab Hassan Youssef, who went over to the Israeli side because he couldn't live with Hamas's mission of destruction. This amazing man acted as a spy, preventing dozens of suicide bombers from reaching their targets. When he says, ‘Hamas cannot make peace with the Israelis; that is against what their God tells them’, he knows what he's talking about. Peace can come to the Middle East only when Hamas and similar terrorist organisations either give up their goal of destroying Israel or are quashed.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on February 25, 2010

John O'Neill has it wrong. No-one - Dubai, Britain or the EU — has claimed that any passport details were stolen by, or in, Israel. Reports show that passports aren't taken away from travellers at Israel's international airport — they're just checked, like everywhere else - and the alleged copying is a beat-up by sections of the media. As for the supposed ‘lenders’ of passports, the smart word is that the comments made to Fran O'Sullivan were strictly tongue-in-cheek. Don't believe all you read, John

Submitted to The NZ Herald on February 22, 2010

By screaming ‘murder’ in the headline (19 Feb, p. A13) and showing a portrait placed over a gathering of ‘Palestinian supporters’, the Herald has glorified a terrorist and led readers to think that Israel (if it was responsible) did something heinous. In the almost full-page about the killing, the victim is described only as ‘a Hamas commander and arms smuggler’ and Hamas is described only as Israel's ‘opponent’.

The fact is that these Hamas terrorists (as the world knows them) are at war with Israel and are sworn to its destruction. The Hamas leader who was killed had himself killed two Israeli soldiers who were kidnapped while standing guard. Israel has as much right to go after him as the Americans do to go after al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan or Iraq - even more, because the Hamas threat to Israel is more ongoing and immediate.
But while the US actions are condoned or praised, Israel gets hit with a charge of ‘murder’. Please stop your Israel-bashing.

Submitted to The Southland Times on February 22, 2010

Sir
It is disappointing to see so many errors of fact in Martin Mcgregor's letter Feb 17 concerning the League of nations and Israel.
It is correct to say that the League appointed Britain as Mandatory to carry out the Leagues intentions in Palestine.

Article 2 shows the Leagues intention, the mandate document states ‘The Mandatory (Britain) shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National home.’

Article 4 says ‘an appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the British.’ The second paragraph of Article names that organisation as the ‘Zionist Organisation.’

Article 6 instructs the British to ‘facilitate Jewish immigration’ and the settlement of land by the Jews.

Articule 22 provides that ‘English, Hebrew and Arabic will be official languages ’ and that ‘statements or inscriptions on stamps will be in Hebrew and Arabic’.

The other articles cover many issues including the protection of the non Jewish population, defines antiquities and protects religious freedom.

On Feb 18 1947 the british handed back the mandate to the United nations to sort out. This resulted in partition in 1948.

The UN does not recognise States, other countries do by recognition. New Zealand gave de facto recognition to Israel on February 29 which was 3 days after the first Israeli general election. De jure (in Law) recognition was given in december 1949.

Egypt never annexed the Gaza strip. Its citizens travelled on UN documents, more recently Palestinian authority documents.

Population as a subject does not appear in the document at all.

Submitted to The Southland Times on February 19, 2010

Sir
Your correspondents Martin McGregor and Maryana Rooney both present distorted views of Israel and Palestine.

Far from Jews driving the Arabs out of Palestine, the United Nations partition plan was accepted by Israel. It was rejected by the Arab states, which then invaded Israel. The flight of Palestine's Arabs was encouraged by their own leaders, who spread tales that men would be massacred and women raped. There is no evidence that these fears were justified.

The state of Israel was not unilaterally-declared, nor presented as a fait accompli. It had been adumbrated as far back as the San Remo Treaty of 1920, and its creation was supported by the League of Nations, and later by the UN.

Ms Rooney's assertion that most Palestinian children don't reach adulthood, or die in the conflict, is highly implausible. Even the severe fighting in 2009, civilian casualties were about 1,000. Even one civilian death in conflict is regrettable, but what of the many Israeli victims of Palestinian suicide bombers? She is right that (nearly) all we hear, read and see in the media is persecution of the Palestinians. This is a false picture painted by sections of the media; those courageous enough to report the whole story usually don't get reported in New Zealand.

I regret that Ms Rooney feels that Jews and Christians persecute Muslims. A large Muslim population, and a smaller Christian one, live peacefully in Israel, with full civil rights. Could the equivalent be said of the Palestinian Territories? Her invocation of colonialism and imperialism is straight out of the Charter of the Palestine Liberation Organisation - ruler of the Palestinian Territories. The same Charter demands the destruction of Israel, a fact which is rarely publicised in Western media, but is essential to an understanding of the conflict.

Printed

Submitted to The Southland Times on February 19, 2010

Wittingly or unwittingly, Martin McGregor in his letter (17 February), has misrepresented the situation surrounding the Jewish connection to Israel and its establishment. Hopefully the following historical facts will help readers to understand the situation.

Jews maintained a connection even after they were exiled from Roman Palestine, the remains of their ancient home. Prior to the Crusades the Jewish community numbered as many as 300,000. The Arabs of Palestine identified themselves as Arabs, Syrians etc. and there was no nation or nationalist entity other than the Jews who claimed it as their homeland.

The decision to establish the British Mandate by the League of Nations, contained the following declaration: ‘the Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative & economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home. Recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country (i.e. Palestine).’

Mr. McGregor has also conveniently forgotten that the Arabs rejected the partition plan of 1947 which would have given them an Arab Palestinian State and elected instead to try and wipe out the newborn Jewish State of Israel. They failed and as a result of their continuing refusal to recognise Jewish historical rights, their people are still suffering. Meantime Israel absorbed hundreds of thousands of destitute Jewish refugees from Arab countries — a fact ignored by critics of the Jewish State.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on February 9, 2010

Yet more biased journalism from the UK Independent, this time on the Gaza zoo. Gaza is not under ‘siege’, which implies efforts to capture it. On the contrary, Israel left Gaza to Hamas rule in 2005 — and Hamas responded by intensifying its rocket attacks on civilians in Israel (the Sderot school has had to build a rocket-proof playground). Claims of the ‘desperation’ of Gazans don't square with reliable reports of returning prosperity there. And if Gazan children ‘haven't been allowed to travel to Israel’, how many Kiwi kids have never been abroad? Anyway, why would Gazans wish to travel to a country they want to wipe off the map?

Your correspondent reports that there are four zoos in Gaza, one of which is in financial difficulties. If true, this small enclave is emphatically ‘over-zoo'd’ by world standards. And the zookeeping standards described would fit most zoos in developing countries.

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on February 3, 2010

Mike Walker (Jan 31) errs in saying Israel didn't cooperate with the UN commission because it didn't like its findings. The reason was that Israel didn't trust the commission to do a fair job. As it turned out, that fear was justified.

Mr Walker repeats charges about schools and ambulances being attacked without mentioning that Hamas used schools and ambulances for military purposes.

In fact (and it is a fact), Israel made great efforts to minimise civilian casualties, while fighting an enemy that operates from civilian areas. Nevertheless, in war every soldier is not a saint, every bomb does not hit its target, intelligence is not always correct, and mistakes are made. In WWII, for example, over 4 million (!) innocent civilians were killed by Allied forces, and that was a war where the enemy didn't hide among civilians.

Bad things inevitably happen in war. Gaza should have thought of that before it declared war on Israel and launched its rocket attacks. If you throw stones at a lion, you should expect to be bitten.

Incidentally, the ‘liberation of Palestine’ goal of Mr Walker's group is another way of saying ‘destruction of Israel’. So much for wanting peace.

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on February 3, 2010

Dear Editor,
Your paper appears to show an anti-Israel bias, after following the publications tendency to allow more space to articles and letters that critisize Israel (many with factual errors), it seems unfair that KBRM has had to pay for the facts to put in print. Mike Walker (Jan 31) must only have access to the mistruths frequently given in a disproportionate amount of newspaper coverage. I would challenge the SST to promote truth over popular fiction.
KBRM Member

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on February 2, 2010

Mike Walker, Jan 31 2010, should be aware that Israel refused to co-operate with the UN and Mr Goldstones Inquiry team because most of its members had made public statements condemning Israel's actions in Gaza 2009 before being appointed to the Commission of Inquiry.

As Solidarity Campaign Co-ordinator for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in New Zealand Mr Walker has blood on his hands.
On June 13 1974 3 women were killed in an attack at kibbutz Shamir. One of the three was Miss Judith Sinton of Auckland who was on holiday in Israel.

On November 27, 1974 Mr Graham Clark of Blenheim along with Mr and Mrs Mawdley, a couple immigrating to New Zealand and Miss Bunty Condon of Sanderingham were on a British Airways VC10 flight which was hijacked to Tunis. In the end all were released.

A third incident involving the PFLP was the hijacking of the Air France Airbus aircraft to Entebbe Uganda on June 28 1976 where 5 New Zealanders on board including Mr Colin and Mrs Nola Hardie He, Manager of the Christchurch Star newspaper were released by hijackers after being separated from the Jewish passengers with the rest of the Gentiles.

This is but three incidents involving the PFLP, just another terror group like Hamas who don't want Israel to exist.

Israel's point of view is available on its ministry of foreign affairs website or by contacting the Embassy of Israel in Canberra Australia.

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on February 2, 2010

Sir,
There is a Yiddish word ‘Chutzpa’, defined as someone who murders his parents and then pleads for the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.
Mike Walker's letter published on January 31 seems to be an equally valid definition of the term when he criticizes Israel for attacking ambulances in Gaza (an unsubstantiated charge), but fails to mention that Hamas regularly uses ambulances to transport arms and militants in violation of the Geneva Conventions and the neutrality of the Red Cross Symbol (for video evidence, search for "Hamas Ambulance" on YouTube).

To add insult to injury, Mr. Walker represents himself as a coordinator for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine one of the most hard-line factions in the PLO which has rejected any type of negotiated settlement with Israel and has been responsible for dozens of terror attacks which specifically targeted civilians.

Printed on February 7, 2010

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on February 2, 2010

The campaign co-coordinator for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in his letter (31 Jan) complains about the recent advertisement which appeared in your newspaper concerning the situation in Gaza. Mike Walker conveniently omits to mention that Hamas, the terror group controlling Gaza, used hospitals as command centres for their attacks against Israeli civilians, stored ammunition in schools and Mosques and fired rockets from these places as well as private homes. In other words Gazan civilians were used as human shields by the terrorists. Is it any wonder therefore that these places suffered collateral damage?
Readers should also be made aware that the organisation which Mr. Walker proudly represents has been responsible for horrific acts of terror against innocent civilians and has as its aim the elimination of the Jewish State. Need one say more?

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on February 2, 2010

Mike Walker recycles allegations of Israeli war crimes in Gaza, based on the unsupported statements of Hamas leaders who see themselves as locked in a fight to the death with Israel. In a rare case where analysis is possible, Palestinian figures show that the large majority of ‘civilians’ of fighting age killed were male, casting doubt as to whether they were civilians at all. Most identifiable alleged violations of the rules of war by israeli soldiers have proved to be baseless, and the rest due to human error. Every life lost is a tragedy, but independent observers testify that Israel's armed forces go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties.
As for damage to public services, Mr Walker neglects to say that Hamas fighters based themselves in public buildings, and used civilians as human shields - both admitted by Hamas leaders - thereby inviting damage and casualties. This shows reckless disregard for the effects on the people of Gaza, from those whom Mr Walker wants to rule Israel and the West Bank as well.
The Goldstone report criticised both Israel and Hamas, and the UN subsequently required both parties to investigate. Israel is about to release its response to Goldstone. Where is that of Hamas?

Submitted to The Press on February 1, 2010

To answer ___________ request for information (Jan 30), KBRM has grown in three years to 75 members. Member names are not released because of the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic element in New Zealand (see Bigotry Box at Feedback, kbrm.org.nz). One card I received was so threatening that the Postal Service attached a note suggesting I contact the police.
We have a 17-member Action Group that formulates our articles, appeals, and advertisements. We do business by email because of the geographical separation. We have no connection with any Zionist lobby. All funds for advertisements come from Kiwi pockets.
KBRM commiserates about Mr McRobie's rejected article. We also have had articles rejected, forcing us to advertise if we want to get our ‘missing truths’ across.
Despite his continued belief, I did not say, ‘all that needs to be done to end conflict in the Middle East is for Palestinians to accept the existence of Israel’. That was the headline. What I said was, ‘If Gaza wants to end the Israeli 'oppression' (i.e., the blockade), all it has to do is accept the existence of Israel.’ This is a true statement, and I'm happy to repeat it.
I apologise for the abusive letter Mr McRobie received, and will rebuke the sender if he will forward it to me. As for our advertisement, I assume he has read it by now and invite him to notify me of any errors if he finds any. They will be corrected.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on January 30, 2010

‘Accurate or not’, says the article, ‘a monstrous picture has emerged... of how the... wife of the hardline Prime Minister (of Israel) handles her domestic staff’. The question of accuracy — and the story was denied by the PM and his family — didn't stop the Herald from displaying it prominently with a large colour photo (p. A18, Jan 28).
I say, ‘Accurate or not, a monstrous picture has emerged in the NZ press of Israel.’ In this article, for example, aside from featuring a questionable and ridiculously minor charge, the words ‘bully’ and ‘hardline’ were applied to a PM who publicly accepts a two-state solution, and who placed a freeze on settlement building as a concession to Palestinians, while Palestinians made no concessions.
‘Accurate or not,’ there is a story about an Israeli tourist who saved a child from a vicious dog. A reporter who saw the attack said he would write a news report. ‘I can see the headline,’ he said, ‘Heroic Tourist Saves Child From Vicious Beast. Where are you from?’ When the tourist answered Israel, the reporter said, ‘Oh, then the headline will say Vicious Israeli Kills Family Pet.’

Submitted to The Press on January 26, 2010

Abdullah Drury (Jan 167#41; accused me of being simplistic and overlooking facts in regard to ‘the need for Palestinians to just accept Israel.’
The trouble is, I didn't say that — that was the headline inserted over my letter. What I said was, ‘If Gaza wants to end the Israeli 'oppression', all it has to do is accept the existence of Israel’. This is a true statement. If Gaza gave up its attacks and its aim of destroying Israel, there would be no need for Israel's partial blockade (the only act of supposed ‘oppression’).
As for overlooking facts, Mr Drury''s statement that the Palestinians, ‘even Hamas’, have accepted the existence of Israel is not a fact, as the residents of Sderot can well testify. Besides these continuing attacks, there is the Hamas charter and recent statements by Hamas officials reaffirming their goal of destroying Israel.
Nor is it true that common Palestinian folk are imprisoned in their homes. The check points and security barriers in the West Bank are there to stop suicide bombers and other attacks. They cause inconvenience to travellers, but they do not imprison anyone in their home.
Alan McRobie (Jan 20), besides making the same accusation based on the false headline, belittled KBRM as a ‘small group that styles itself as Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Middle East’. Actually, we're pretty big, and our name was carefully chosen by vote.
His implication that we're part of an Israeli lobby is also untrue. We have no connection with Israel or any other group. Nor does our funding come, even in part, from anywhere other than our own pockets, plus contributions from other Kiwis who want to see the truth in their newspapers.
KBRM does not believe ‘Israel, right or wrong’; we believe that Israel has the right to have the truth told about it.
The fact is, neither writer found errors in our advertisement. It is unfortunate that some people choose to see truths favourable to Israel as ‘Zionist propaganda.’

Printed on January 27

January 28, 2010
Letter sent to Radio NZ National (edited)
As I listened to ‘The Panel’ with Rosemary McLeod and Finlay MacDonald yesterday afternoon, for a fleeting moment I thought I was going to hear radio history being made. The topic was the Haitian earthquake and its horrendous aftermath and a comment was made about the need to praise the work of one particular nation that was offering aid and relief in Haiti, particularly as this nation was one that the we all ‘love’ to criticise. This nation was apparently in Haiti right from the outset, offering search and rescue and medical assistance, in fact this nation was always one of the first to offer practical assistance in time of disaster and tragedy.

With such an introduction I thought, ‘finally, some one on Radio NZ has had the decency to give credit where credit is due and pay tribute to the work of the Israeli Defence Force personnel, Israeli relief organisations like ISRA-Aid and the Israeli orthodox-Jewish search and rescue team, ZAKA, all of whom have contributed enormously to the relief efforts in Haiti.’

But no, you were referring to the United States of America. While America should be commended for its efforts in Haiti, when you consider the population of America and its geographical proximity to Haiti, it should come as no surprise that the Americans were among the first to offer and provide assistance to the Haitians. But the Jewish state (the nation the international media and the UN fall over themselves to criticise) with its tiny population and geographical distance from Haiti, provided the only field hospital equipped to undertake surgery in the days immediately following the Haitian earthquake. The Israelis quietly got on with the job of rescuing survivors, providing relief, delivering babies and performing life-saving surgery while American President Obama was still promising to ‘not abandon’ the Haitians. It was also the Israelis who got a communications network set up so international reporters could send their stories from Haiti to the world.

Yesterday I thought, erroneously, that the NZ media might be able to demonstrate the old fashioned New Zealand value of ‘giving credit where credit was due’, and put in one good word for a small, beleaguered nation that offers help to any who will receive it. I was disappointed.

Submitted to The Southland Times on January 18, 2010

K L Marks (Jan 23) is right to be outraged at the loss of life of innocent life in the Middle East. But outrage isn't enough. Civilians are killed in every war. The question is how to stop the war, and for that it is necessary to understand the root cause.
A clue may be found from the fact that all of Israel's military and security actions, whether well-advised or not, are made in self-defence, whereas the Palestinian attacks are made with the goal of killing Jews and driving Israel into the sea.
This war cannot possibly end until the Palestinians either accept, or are made to accept, the existence of Israel.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on January 18, 2010

While international political leaders make big promises of aid for the distressed population of Haiti, 220 Israeli Defence Force personnel are quietly getting on with the job of providing specialist search and rescue and medical help to survivors.

The IDF has established a field hospital in Haiti, which can treat approximately 500 people per day. Other Israeli relief operations currently in Haiti include a six-man search and rescue team, a 15 member medical team and a plane load of food and medical supplies sent by IsraAID.

While it is becoming common practice for some in this country to vilify Israel and its Defence Force, if New Zealand was ever hit by such a catastrophic disaster as has devastated Haiti, I hope Israel and the IDF would be willing to help us, as they have quietly helped victims of disasters across the world for the past sixty years.

Submitted to The Press, Otago Daily Times, Dominion Post, Manawatu Standard & Southland Timeson January 18, 2010

The International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem reported last Thursday that Israel was one of the first countries to send practical help to Haiti.
Over 120 specially trained medical and relief personnel were on the ground rescuing and treating the wounded while most other countries were still getting organized. A field hospital has been set-up which includes an intensive care unit, two operating theatres, a pharmacy and X-ray unit.

Other Israeli emergency and rescue teams, despatched by humanitarian group IsraAID, have arrived with food and medical supplies and include ZAKA volunteers and a 12-man search-and-rescue team equipped with sonar locaters and sniffer dogs trained to search for people buried under the rubble.

Those who vilify Israel and hurl baseless, hate-filled accusations against the Jewish State should ask themselves how this tiny, embattled country is so often among the leaders in search and recue emergencies, whilst its richer and better endowed neighbouring States are nowhere to be seen.
This kind of positive news about Israel rarely gets reported. Fair minded Kiwis need to know.

Printed (on line) in the Waikato Times on January 25

Submitted to The Press on January 18, 2010

I am defending my challenge to your headline ‘Protest Against Israeli Player Anti-Semitic’
How could anyone infer that from what I wrote? I did not claim that Mr Minto or his protest was anti-semitic. I have never met him or any of his mates. What I did say was that ‘Minto and his friends prefer to go after Israel because they believe all the distortions, libels and lies that are being spread by PA propaganda’. This was my inference based on Minto's beliefs summarised in his 12 January ‘What-do-we-want’ blog.

After clarifying my thoughts I realise that it is not unreasonable to suspect that The Press Letters Column has an anti-Israel bias .
. The initials PA (Palestinian Authority) were deleted from my letter.
The thrust of my letter was to shine a little more light behind the headlines and give Kiwis a glimpse of what the Middle East is really all about.
My last two paragraphs were intended as an ‘epilogue’ to widen the focus to include the secular West and to point out to your readers that it is not Jewish suicide bombers that threaten them...
These paragraphs were deleted.
I leave your readers to make your own inferences.

Printed on January 20

Submitted to The Press on January 18, 2010

Abdullah Drury (Jan 16) is correct that ‘just accept Israel’, in general, is too simplistic a solution. My statement referred to Gaza, where the only ‘oppression’ is Israel's blockade. And yes, this blockade would end if Gaza, which bombards Israel with rockets almost every day, would only accept Israel's existence.

As for Israeli Arabs, Israel's laws apply equally to all citizens (except that Arabs are exempt from compulsory military service.) Israeli Arabs would rather be part of Israel than a Palestinian state — so much for ‘persecution’/

Mr Drury says Palestinians don't want a Jew-free land. Can he tell me how many Jews there are in Gaza and the West Bank, outside of protected settlements? However he hit the nail on the head when he said they want a Zionist-free land. Yes, their goal is to destroy the Zionist state of Israel, and that's the fundamental problem.

Finally, it is not true that Palestinians are ‘persecuted, harassed and imprisoned in their own homes.’ This is a weird way of describing check points and security barriers, whose only purpose is to stop terrorism.

Every nation is entitled to self-defence, or does that not apply to the one Jewish nation in the world?

Printed in The Listener on January 18, 2010

Marilyn Waring's contribution to the ‘20 Ideas for a better world’ (December 26) deserves comment. The 61-year-old Shatila refugee camp member quoted should complain to the UN about the state of the camp, which it built and runs. As to the rest of his comments, he has only his fellow Arabs to blame, as they failed to accept partition in 1948. failed to set up an Arab state in the west Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza, and who turned down every attempt to make a Peace Deal since 1967. By presenting this man's views as hers, Waring appears not to believe that the Jewish State has any right to exist.
I challenge her to clarify her position.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on January 18, 2010

Submitted to The Press & Timaru Herald on January 18, 2010

Western countries are responding to Haiti's plight in the wake of the terrible earthquake, but for a small nation constantly having to defend itself against militant groups and critics, Israel shines. It provided practical help when the tsunami stuck Indonesia and is already assisting in Haiti.
The International Christian Embassy (ICEAJ) in Jerusalem, has reported that Israel is sending 40 doctors and 24 nurses to set up a relief hospital ‘capable of treating 500 patients, which will include an intensive care unit, two operating rooms, a pharmacy and an x-ray lab'’. Over 200 people will be involved.
Another report is of a non governmental Israeli rescue organisation ZAKA, most of whom are Orthodox Jews and have already rescued 8 students alive from a collapsed university.

Printed on January 19

Submitted to Dominion Post on January 17, 2010

As the full horror of the Haiti earthquake is revealed it is heartening to see most of the international community rallying around to provide aid and succour. One of the first countries to send practical help was Israel, which had a field hospital staffed by over 120 experts on the ground and treating the wounded while most other countries were still getting organised. In addition to the field hospital, Israel also sent a team with trained sniffer dogs to search for people buried under the rubble. Those who vilify and hurl baseless accusations against the Jewish State should ponder for a moment how it is that this small country can be one of the leaders in search and rescue, whilst its richer and better endowed Arab neighbouring States are nowhere to be seen.

Printed on January 27

Submitted to The Press — paragraph in red deleted by editor

Like all who are benighted by weak arguments, Denis O'Connor (12th January) has to open his letter with insults. His ‘renowned’ Goldstone Report is certainly that: renowned for the piece of politicised bias that it is. It may have been taken seriously had the UN also condemned Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, but during eight years of unremitting salvoes aimed at Jewish civilians, it said nothing.

Mr O'Connor thinks Hamas terrorists are ‘freedom fighters’. Freedom from what? Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gazan territory in 2005, yet the rocket attacks continued (and still do). Furthermore, security fences are reversible, deaths from suicide bombings are not.

As for the apartheid accusations, they are nothing more than vacuous sloganising masquerading as fact and, as someone who spent three years living in South Africa in the 1970s, I can easily refute them. One of the first things that strikes you when you go to Israel is the religious, cultural and racial inclusiveness of the country.

I was in Jerusalem during Ramadan and saw thousands of Palestinians streaming to the Al-Aqsa Mosqe for Friday prayers. Before 1967, Jews were banned from their holy sites and their synagogues were desecrated.

Finally, a question for Mr O'Connor. If Hamas' agenda is ‘freedom’ or a Palestinian state, why does its Charter openly call for the murder of Jews everywhere, not just in Israel?

published on January 16, 2010

Submitted to The Press on January 11, 2010

Congratulations on an excellent editorial (January 8). Not only is John Minto's tennis protest inappropriate, it is misdirected. As you say, there is blame on both sides. You might have added that while Israel has accepted 1.5 million Palestinians as full citizens, Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank want their territories Jew-free. So much for Minto's apartheid charge/
However, your editorial was undermined by Evans' atrocious cartoon that showed a Palestinian mother holding a dead child. The Gaza war was waged to protect Israeli children from being killed by rockets launched from Gaza by terrorists who hide among civilians. To show sympathy for Gazans killed in this war, rather than for the dead Israeli children killed by Gazan rockets, is to turn morality upside-down. If Gaza wants to end the Israeli ‘oppression’, all it has to do is accept the existence of Israel.

Submitted to the Dominion Post on January 11, 2010

Saying something, even very loudly does't make it true.
A case in poInt: Mr Minto's assertion that Israel practices apartheid; it simply does not.
What is true is that 1.5 million Arabs live and enjoy full citizenship in Israel.
On the other hand no Jews live in Gaza!!!

Submitted to the Southland Times on January 11, 2010

Pauline McIntosh appears to model her arguments on the foolishness and distortions of John Minto.

In the same way that Minto pretended his loud hailer wasn't disturbing the Auckland tennis players and spectators, McIntosh blares her distortions through the Southland Times letters column, pretending that Israel is like the former South Africa.

She is unaware of (or hides) the fact that 1.5 million Arabs are Israeli citizens, equal under the law to Jewish Israelis.

She also blames everything on Israel as if the Arab invasion of 1948; the Arab aggression of succeeding years (never heard of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Ms McIntosh?); PLO terrorism (never heard of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre?); and thousands of rockets fired into Israel from Gaza )when Israel had totally withdrawn in 2005) had never happened.

She should take her lesson of (love thy neighbour as thyself) (Leviticus 19:18) to the Arabs; or apply it to herself, before falsely condemning Jewish Israelis.

Submitted to the Southland Times on January 10, 2010

Pauline McIntosh's attack on Israel contains so many errors that it's hard to know where to start:
— Palestinians don't live in ‘intolerable slave-like conditions’. The West Bank is enjoying unprecedented properity, and Gaza is not far behind. West Bank businessmen don't want independence yet, because they don't trust the Palestinian Authority to preserve peaceful conditions
— if any Palestinians in Gaza are ‘scrounging in rubbish tins’ and ‘sheltering in Israeli-bombed rubble’, they chiefly blame their own rulers for failing to improve their living conditions, while prosecuting an offensive againt israel which most Gazans don't want
— Israel doesn't enjoy ‘unbridled power and insatiable greed and privilege’. The 1.4 million Arabs living within the undisputed borders of Israel have full citizenship and civil rights. In independent opinion polls, over 75% of them don't want to live anywhere else, and few wish to be citizens of a Palestinian state. Meanwhile, in Gaza Hamas is independent in all but name, and in the West Bank the Palestinian Authority has wide authority. Far from displaying greed, Israel supports Palestinian economic efforts with technical and financial assistance, as well as humanitarian aid.

Ms McIntosh invokes the Christian doctrine of love for one's neighbour. Is she aware that Christian organisations flourish unmolested in Israel, but in Palestine, Christians are routinely harassed and maltreated as ‘unbelievers’? Or that Israel has offered peace terms on a number of occasions, but significant factions of the Palestinian leadership demand Israel's complete destruction? — a prospect to which Ms MacIntosh looks forward with approval.

Printed

Submitted to the Southland Times on January 10, 2010

Pauline McIntosh's letter contained so many false accusations against Israel that are not supported by the actual facts that one wonders what her real agenda might be. She has however provided the answer by wishing that Israel should disappear as a Jewish State. As a proponent of the age old campaign of Jew cleansing and scapegoating, readers can now draw their own conclusions as to her real intentions.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on January 9, 2010

Janfrie Wakim (6 Jan) claims that Palestinians have no chance of being involved in sport. The reality is that they are free to, and do, play sport at all levels up to the international. Their leaders will not let them play Israelis, and Islamic dress codes make it unlikely that we shall see a female Palestinian tennis player in Auckland any time soon. Left to themselves, Israeli and Palestinian youth happily play soccer together. But FIFA forces Israeli soccer teams to play in its European group, because Arab states object to their teams sharing a field with Jews in regional tournaments. What price apartheid?

Submitted to the NZ Herald on January 9, 2010

BBC World Service reported on a video showing the Sri Lankan army murdering hundreds of naked young Tamil males with a bullet in the back of the head. (In the camps on the Jaffna Peninsular).

Untold thousands of Africans in southern Sudan and Darfur, Christians and animists, have been killed by Muslim Arabs from the north of Sudan What about Tibet, Myanmar, Chechnya, DR Congo, Chad, Rwanda? Has anyone heard of John Minto publicly protesting about any of these on-going atrocities?

Minto and his friends prefer to go after Israel because they believe all the distortions, libels and lies that are being spread by PA propaganda and enthusiastically embraced by the western left wing media and academics where virulent antisemitism is back in fashion.

How many Jewish suicide bombers have you read about? Not one. Why? Because Jews, like us, do not believe the claims of Islam about Paradise. Western values and culture are very close to that of the Jewish world. Holy wars are all about, hatred, destruction and death but evil can be halted when even a few honest men refuse to shut up!

The threats of Ah-ma-dinner-Jad to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ are not hollow.

Printed on January 13, 2010

Submitted to Otago Daily Times, Southland Times, The Dominion Post & NZ Herald on January 8, 2010

I genuinely wonder how Mr Minto could label Israel a racist state practicing apartheid. Such an allegation is downright silly.
Perhaps we get an understanding of how Mr Minto's mind functions when, after being warned three times outside the ABS tennis centre that he would be arrested for creating a public disturbance; he seemed surprised when it happened.
If Mr Minto were really concerned about individual freedoms, rather than target tennis pro, Shahar Peer, at the ABS tennis centre he could have used his time and mega phone more wisely by visiting a number of Middle East embassies. The abuse of freedom that occur in these countries would indeed be worthy of protest, as opposed to the waste of time and resources that Mr Minto put our country to, over his unfounded allegations against Israel; the only sovereign democratic state in the entire region.

Printed in Otago Daily Times, Southland Times and The Press

Submitted to The Press on January 8, 2010

What a perceptive cartoon in this morning's Press! It was so refreshing to see a cartoonist portraying an Israeli mother holding a wounded child to represent the many Israelis who have died and been wounded by terrorist activity originating from the West Bank and Gaza - whilst at the same time he emphasizes the separation of sports and politics. Some readers may chose to see the mother and child as Palestinian, but they need reminding that deaths by Muslim on Muslim and the policies of their leaders are by far the major cause of Palestinian misery.

Submitted to The Press on January 8, 2010

Congratulations on a well rounded, insightful editorial highlighting the intricasies of the controversy surrounding protests of Shahar Peers' playing at the ASB Classic. It is however, a distinct shame that your newspaper chose to print such an emotionally manipulative cartoon which gave an overly simplistic picture of the tension that exists between Israel and its neighbours. No doubt John Minto will love it. I will assume only that all other available cartoonists of worth are on holiday at the moment.

Printed on January 11,2010

Submitted to The Press, The Otago Daily Times and The Southland Times on January 7, 2010

I see that chief loonie John Minto has gotten eight other loonies to protest against an Israeli tennis player. I call them loonies because only a lunatic (one out of touch with reality) could so invert the facts, which are:
Israel accepted 1.5 million Palestinians as full citizens; the Palestinians want their territory to be Jew-free. Israel withdrew from Gaza; Gaza responded with 7000 rocket attacks. Israel turned over administration of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority; in return the West Bank is a hotbed of terrorist activity. Israel's actions in the West Bank (check points, barriers, etc.) are only to stop terrorist attacks; if a terrorist is killed, the PA embraces them as ‘martyrs’. Israel wants to live in peace with its neighbours; its neighbours want to annihilate Israel.

Yet Minto accuses Israel of oppression and apartheid. I hope most Kiwis will understand how ridiculous this is.

Printed in The Otago Daily Times and The Southland Times on January 9

Submitted to the Timaru Herald on January 7, 2010

John Minto and his friends are protesting against an Israeli tennis player taking part in an Auckland tournament. The irony is that neither Minto nor his fellow protesters have been demonstrating against the grossest violations of human rights taking place in Iran, Syria, Gaza and other such places.
Instead their misplaced ire is directed at the Middle East's only true democracy which faces genocidal threats from Iran and terror attacks from Arab Palestinians.
As to the alleged treatment meted out to Palestinians by Israel (your editorial) I presume you and Minto have overlooked the fact that Israel has provided life saving medical care in Israeli hospitals to Palestinians, despite having thousands of rockets fired at its civilian population by terrorist groups based in territory under the control of Hamas & Fatah.
Incidentally 1.5 million Arabs living in Israel as citizens have overwhelmingly rejected the idea of becoming citizens of the Palestinian Authority. There must be a message in that fact.

Printed on January 8, 2010

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on January 7, 2010

John Minto and his friends are protesting against an Israeli tennis player taking part in an Auckland tournament. The irony is that neither Minto nor his fellow protesters have been demonstrating against the grossest violations of human rights taking place in Iran, Syria, Gaza and other such places. Instead their misplaced ire is directed at the Middle East's only true democracy which faces genocidal threats from Iran and terror attacks from Arab Palestinians. As to the alleged treatment meted out to Palestinians by Israel (your editorial) I presume you and Minto have overlooked the fact that Israel has provided life saving medical care in Israeli hospitals to Palestinians, despite having thousands of rockets fired at its civilian population by terrorist groups based in territory under the control of Hamas & Fatah. Incidentally 1.5 million Arabs living in Israel as citizens have overwhelmingly rejected the idea of becoming citizens of the Palestinian Authority. There must be a message in that fact.

Printed but with but with the references to ‘loonies’ eliminated.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on January 6, 2010

In attacking Israeli sportswoman Shahar Peer, John Minto makes the mistake of seeing everything in terms of political symbols. Ms Peer was invited here to play tennis, not to represent the Israeli Government. Pillorying her for her nationality is a racist act and contrary to the New Zealand spirit of fair play. Perhaps Mr Minto could explain how his small-minded attack advances the cause of either global peace or justice, as his organisation claims to do.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on January 4, 2010

Your editorial, ‘Silence wisest response to Iran protests’ (4 January) is a sad reminder of the editorial opinion of the London Times during the 1930s.
Then, The Times supported appeasement of Hitler's Nazi regime, despite clear evidence of the human rights abuses which led inexorably to World War 2, the Holocaust of Jews, and the deaths of millions of other innocent people.
The arguments used were the same as the Herald's — political expediency.
The world, using similar arguments, has held back from speaking out strongly against other human rights abuses which have led to genocides — such as in Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda and Darfur.
The United Nations Human Rights Council (formerly Commission) has cynically avoided doing anything in all of these cases.
The Herald should recall nobler Fourth Estate traditions and speak out for those suffering human rights abuses and persecution by their own government, instead of following the immoral attitudes of the 1930s London Times and the UN.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on January 4, 2010

I read your editorial of 4 Jan. entitled ‘silence wisest response to Iran protest’ with great interest and incredulity. Silence in the face of human rights denial and persecution of citizens because of political and religious differences can never be condoned. That is what happened in the 1930's while the Jews of Germany and other countries were treated in a similar fashion. The media was also advising silence then so as not to upset the evil policies of a regime intent on eliminating citizens deemed dangerous. We all know where that ended. Today silence is cautioned whilst a dangerous regime gallops full speed towards developing nuclear weapons with the declared aim of wiping a fellow member of the UN off the face of the earth. Haven't we learnt anything from recent history?

Submitted to Southland Times on January 3, 2010

Answering Wynton Cooper's false charges (Dec. 31) is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.

The Arab rejection of the UN partition in 1948 had nothing to do with boundaries. The Arabs refused to accept any Zionist state and waged war to drive it into the sea. This is still the goal of Arab terrorist groups today (not to mention Iran).

Palestinians who left their homes in 1948 mostly did so voluntarily, fleeing from a war that they had started. Two-thirds left without seeing an Israeli soldier. 1.4 million Palestinians who didn't leave (including descendants) live happily in Israel, while those who left have new lives in Arab territories. They are not ‘fighting for their lives’. It is only Israel that is fighting for its life.

While Col. Richard Kemp and Sir Harold Evans were not ‘in Gaza at the time of the Israeli invasion’, they clearly have a lot more knowledge of it than does Mr Cooper. To accuse them of merely parroting ‘the Israeli version’ is to insult two men of high character.

As to bias, I leave it to readers to determine who is biased - those who present lies about Israel, or those who rebut those lies.

Answering protests against the Gaza blockade (Jan. 2, p. B2) is also easy. The UN charter says a blockade is one of the first actions to be taken against an aggressor nation. If Gaza would abandon its continuing rocket attacks on Israel, the blockade would end.

Submitted to The Press on January 3, 2010

When the Middle East conflict is discussed, the tendency in the media, and of many Kiwis, is to blame Israel. However there is one, and only one root cause, and that is the unwillingness — indeed, the active, violent resistance — of many Palestinians to accept the existence of a Jewish state. If this resistance were to end, if the Palestinians would allow Israel and Israelis to live in peace, all other disagreements could be solved. And until that happens, there can be no peace.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on January 1, 2010

Sir,
It is unfortunate that the self-described Pro-Palestinian organization IWPS took Auckland student ‘Majdoleen’ on a propaganda tour that focuses on extending the conflict rather than working towards a peaceful solution.
They made a point of taking her to a Mosque that was damaged by arsonists, but for some reason she didn't stay until the following day when Israel's Chief Rabbi and other prominent rabbis and politicians came to personally express their outrage and disgust over the horrific act of vandalism and to donate new books and money to replace or repair the damage.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis and Palestinians want to live in peace together. Yes there are extremists on both sides, including the IWPS which defines itself as ‘non-violent’ but regularly takes part in demonstrations where stones and firebombs are fired at security forces.
If ‘Majdoleen’ really wants to work towards Peace in Israel/Palestine, maybe she should volunteer for an organization that encourages dialogue, instead of one that focuses on extending the conflict.

Printed January 5, 2010 — The editor printed IWPS in full (International Women's Peace Service), left out the sentence in red and made other small changes.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on December 31, 2009

Professor Waring's contribution to ‘20 Ideas for a better world’ deserves comment. The 61-year-old shatila refugee camp member who was interviewed should complain about the state of the camp to the United Nations, who built it and run it. As to the rest of his comments, he has only his fellow Arabs to blame, who failed to accept partition in 1948. failed to set up a Palestinian state in the west Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza, and who turned down every attempt to make a Peace Deal since 1967.
Professor Waring, by presenting this man's views as hers, appears not to believe that the Jewish State has any right to exist. I challenge her to clarify her position on this point.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on December 31, 2009

The article ‘Student on a mission in West Bank’ is a shoddy piece of pseudo-journalism which somehow got past your quality control. This ‘interview’ with a NZ-based Palestinian activist consists solely of letting her air her opinions — alternately prejudiced and banal — with no attempt to analyse or even to get the facts right. Israeli settlements in the West Bank aren't ‘illegal under international law’ — under one legal interpretation, they are even encouraged! This question has been discussed so much in the media of late that any competent journalist should know the basics, even if the subject of the interview didn't.

But the most alarming error is the report of a mosque ‘set ablaze’ at ‘Yousof’. There is a village called Yousof in the West Bank, but no report of any trouble there since ‘scuffles’ involving the Israeli Army in 2001. It's incoceivable that in the current media climate, any recent arson of a West Bank mosque has gone unreported. So it's more likely that the story is a badly-garbled version of the recent attack on a mosque in Yasuf — an exceptional event which was reported worldwide, and one which was rightly condemned by Israeli leaders, both secular and religious. If so, it's a pity that ‘Majdoleen’ didn't stay around to witness the visit of the Chief Rabbi to the mosque, or to see the replacement copies of the al-Koran donated by israel. But in any case, for someone based in the Middle East, your correspondent seems extremely ill-informed.

It's disappointing to see material like this appearing in your pages, especially since your recent coverage of Middle Eastern affairs has generally been fair and professional.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on December 30, 2009

The article ‘Gaza conflict provokes new generation to pick up guns’ suffers from a glaring mismatch between headline and text. Just one young Palestinian is quoted as having joined an armed resistance group which ‘sometimes’ co-operates with Hamas. But the bulk of the article shows the inhabitants of Gaza increasingly disillusioned with Hamas' hard line. Were two articles run together under a single headline? — if so, they could have been kept separate, and readers could decide whether the present Hamas regime was likely to inspire Gazans to "take up arms" in its cause.

It's a pity you didn't pick up on the recent Wall Street Journal article on life in the Palestinian Territories. The author, a respected Middle East correspondent, paints a compelling picture of cities ‘bursting with energy, life and prosperity’, in large part founded on horicultural enterprises set up with Israeli technical assistance. The Palestinian economy grew by 7% in 2009, when many countries were in recession. Gains in Gaza have been less than in the West Bank, but are still significant, and any blame for Gaza's failure to deveop economically should be placed squarely on the leaders of Hamas - as ordinary Gazans are now starting to do.

Submitted to The Press on December 28, 2009

In keeping with the usual ‘blame Israel’ reporting, The Press recently devoted 1415 sq cm to articles critical of Israel for house constructions and demolitions, complete with colour photographs. Then when an Israeli rabbi was killed in a terrorist attack, you allowed 25 sq cm to a cursory report (Dec. 26) with headline ‘West Bank death’. The casual reader wouldn't even know it was an Israeli who was killed. Here is a more complete account (see Jerusalem Post, Dec. 25):

A father of seven was killed in a drive-by shooting attack Thursday. The victim was identified as Rabbi Meir Chai, a 45-year-old resident whose children range in age from two months to 18 years. Chai was the fourth person killed by terrorists in the West Bank this year, including a 13-year-old boy stabbed to death near his home. The Imad Mughniyeh Group, affiliated with Fatah's Aksa Martyrs Brigade, claimed responsibility.

I thank the letters editor for allowing me to present this additional information to readers.

Submitted to the Southland Times on December 24, 2009

May I correct two misunderstandings in Wynton Cooper's letter (December 23)?

First, it is not my job, nor that of KBRM, to file balanced reports on the Middle East; that is what we expect from the media. We are aware that there are two sides to the story, and when the media present only or primarily one side, we supply the missing truth. Nor do we quote ‘the official Israeli line’ — if there is one. Our last advertisement contained extensive quotes from a British expert on anti-terrorism warfare and a distinguished British editor, both of whom commended Israel for its conduct in the Gaza war.

Second, while loss of life is always regrettable, the necessity or morality of a war cannot be judged on that basis. Over 12 million people were killed by the Allies in WWII, including over 4 million civilians. When you're fighting for your life, for the right to be free, you do what you have to do.

As Amos Oz, an Israeli author who has often been critical of Israel, wrote (in reference to the 1948 war), ‘War was a terrible thing, of course, and full of suffering... but who asked the Arabs to start it? After all, we had accepted the partition compromise that was agreed by the United Nations, and it was the Arabs who had rejected any compromise and tried to butcher us all.’

Submitted to The Listener on December 23, 2009

Prof. Flynn's solution for the Middle East (Dec. 26) is the best idea I have heard in years. The international community will never step in to settle the conflict, any more than it did in 1948 when it's new baby, Israel, was attacked by five Arab armies. Nor is negotiation the answer, given the fundamental disagreement about Israel's right to exist.

Instead, Flynn calls on Israel to act unilaterally and declare a Palestinian state in the West Bank. The boundaries would be close to the 1967 cease-fire line, but with some land swapping permitted (my interpolation). Jewish settlements would not be removed (after all, 1.4 million Palestinians live in Israel), but there would be no new construction.

A key part of his proposal is that ‘Israel would reserve the right to act against anyone who attacks Israel or its citizens on the West Bank.’ This is critical because history has shown that Israel cannot rely on a Palestinian government to stop terrorist attacks. (When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, it was rewarded by 7000 rocket attacks that continue to this day.)

Of course the Palestinians would not accept the plan. For one thing, it doesn't include the "right of return", something which Israel cannot grant if it wants to remain a Jewish state. But it would be, as Flynn says, ‘the best chance for violence to recede in the long term.’

The funny thing is, it's not that much different from the present situation. Palestinians in the West Bank have their own government (not a puppet one), and Israel just announced a 10-month freeze on construction. It would seem just one small step to declare it a permanent arrangement.

Since KBRM's mission is fighting unbalanced reporting, not proposing solutions, this is only my opinion, not that of KBRM.

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on December 20, 2009

On December 13, you printed a story headlined ‘Mosque attack escalates conflict over settlements’. You accompanied it with unrelated images of two heavily-armed Israeli soldiers and an angry or fearful Arab woman, with the caption ‘Demolition of Palestinian homes in Jerusalem is another source of tension’. Whatever the merits of house demolition in East Jerusalem — and the full story of Palestinian rent strikes, and protracted efforts on the Israeli side to try to settle matters without the drastic step of demolition is hardly ever mentioned — it has nothing whatever to do with the printed article, which did not mention demolitions at all. Nor is there any evidence that the images have any connection with the caption — they appear to have been chosen merely to suggest Israeli brutality and Palestinian suffering, and lack any news value. This is irresponsible journalism and you should know better.

Submitted to the Southland Times on December 17, 2009

Let's see if I understand this. Hamas is a terrorist group founded with the aim of destroying Israel. It rules Gaza and has conducted many attacks on Israel, including 7000 rocket firings. In 2006 it kidnapped an Israeli soldier who was standing guard inside Israel's border and has been holding him incommunicado, in violation of international conventions. In return for the safe return of the soldier, Israel offered to release hundreds of prisoners being held for committing or abetting acts of violence against Israel. Hamas doesn't feel this is good enough, so they blame ‘Israeli intransigence’ for a breakdown in negotiations.

This carries chutzpah (nerve) to a new level! It is worse than the man who killed his parents and pleaded for mercy because he's an orphan.

Yet the Southland Times, probably through no fault of its own, published this report with a headline ‘Israel blamed for breakdown’ (December 17, p. 17). And the misinformed public once again gets the message ‘blame Israel.’ Readers may want to visit www.kbrm.org.nz to see other examples of biased reporting.

A letter was also sent to The Press, where the same news item appeared. The first two paragraphs were essentially the same, but the third paragraph was:

Of course The Press was just printing a news item from Fairfax, but once again the public gets the same one-sided ‘blame Israel’ message. Another example occurred on 18 December (‘Settlers rebuild’). For worse examples, visit www.kbrm.org.nz.

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on December14, 2009

The article about the burning of books at a mosque (December 13, p. A17) exemplifies the way NZ media present only one side of the Middle East conflict. In this case, non-violent attacks by ‘Jewish extremists’ and the demolition of homes built illegally were reported as ‘sources of tension’. Of course right-thinking people, including most Israelis, felt revulsion over the mosque attack, but...

Where are the articles about how Jewish extremists who commit acts of violence are brought to justice, while Palestinian terrorists who kill Jews are hailed as heroes or martyrs?
Where is the story about the young Jewish woman stabbed by a terrorist while standing at a bus stop last Saturday?
Where are the stories about the almost-daily attacks on Israelis from Gaza and the West Bank?
Where is an article about the inconsistency between the Palestinian desire to keep the West Bank and Gaza Jew-free while 1.4 million Palestinians live in Israel with equal rights?
Where is the story about the real source of tension: the refusal by Palestinian groups to recognise the right of Israel to exist?
With this kind of one-sided reporting, it is no wonder that many New Zealanders have anti-Israel feelings.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on December11, 2009

Your article ‘Al Qaeda death cloud hangs over Baghdad’ returns to an ignoble theme which hasn't disfigured your pages for some time. The source of this article, which adds nothing to the news already carried of the recent suicide attack in Baghdad, seeks to paint a picture of an ungovernable state under terrorist control and on the brink of collapse. This picture is at odds with other reporting from Iraq which shows a state making a healthy recovery from the genocidal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, a foreign-led coup and a civil war with religious overtones.

The same source carries a stream of articles of equally-doubtful news value, some of which you have published, including the egregious and racist assertion that Iraqis, or any Arabs, are not capable of exercising or living under democratic government. Material from such a tainted source has no place in a serious newspaper.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on December 7, 2009

While I'm pleased to see that you've recently cut back your attacks on Israel, conflating together two stories on separate subjects under an anti-Israel headline (4 December) is an unprofessional trick. This is especially misleading because the second article (on Israeli action to restrain its more militant citizens from defying the freeze on settlement-building) provides a partial corrective to the image of Israel ‘oppressing’ the Arabs of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, conveyed by the headline and the first part of the article. If you were short of space, you could have omitted the file picture (only tenuously connected to the story) of a skullcap-wearing Jew evicting an Arab family. Would you print a similar picture of a white bailiff evicting a Pasifika family from their Otara home for non-payment of rent? I very much doubt it.

Those with the time and willingness to consult the original sources can see how the stories were manipulated, but the average reader can't do this. On 19 November you were pleased to cover at length an Israeli plan to build more houses in Gilo (which is not even in the West Bank) as an example of Israel's intransigence on ‘settlements’. It's regrettable that a a story demonstating Israel's conciliatory approach is hidden under a headline, article and picture saying the opposite.

Submitted to The Listener on November 30, 2009

Michael Cranna (Letters, Dec. 5) is spot on about the ‘we've got blood, we've got body parts’ school of TV journalism. This is exactly what happened when TVNZ sent a news team to Israel to get a story about Kiwi immigrants, but instead were led to a ‘blood and body parts’ show about Palestinian evictions and home demolitions (Sunday programme, Channel 1, Nov. 1). Without checking with Israeli authorities, TVNZ turned an eviction over non-payment of rent into Israeli ‘oppression’ (ignoring the thousands of Palestinians who paid their rent and were not evicted) and turned a house demolition because of illegal construction into more Israeli ‘oppression’ (ignoring the fact that rules apply to Jews and Arabs alike and demolitions have occured in equal numbers in Jewish and Palestinian neighbourhoods). Viewers of this programme might want to read KBRM's formal complaints (Nov. 1 and Nov. 24 posts at kbrm.org.nz).

Submitted to the NZ Herald on November 30, 2009

If Marwan Barghouti, serving five life sentences for multiple murder, represents the Palestinian idea of a ‘regular guy’, what hope is there for peace in the Middle East? He may think he's a resistance hero, but in any civilised society he would be seen to be the terrorist that he is.

Submitted to the Southland Times on November 26, 2009

In response to Wynton Cooper's letter (Nov. 25), I am not ‘Israel's spokesman’ and I resent the accusation. My only concern, and that of Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Middle East, is truth. Our job is to combat falsehoods such as those in Mr Cooper's letter.

The Palestinian woman he refers to is probably Jana Hanoun (featured on TVNZ's Sunday programme) who was evicted with her family because of non-payment of rent. The suggestion that her ‘true crime was to be a Palestinian living in an area desired by Israelis’ is contradicted by the thousands of other Palestinians who pay their rent and who were not evicted.

If he was referring to the other family featured in the programme, their house was demolished because it did not have a permit (resource consent), not because they ‘were Palestinians’. This happens also in New Zealand (e.g., headline in the Wanaka Sun, ‘Family faces demolition’). Jewish buildings are also destroyed if they are built illegally. Statistics for the Jerusalem Municipality show that as of June, 20 demolitions orders had been issued in (Jewish) West Jerusalem and 21 orders in (Palestinian) East Jerusalem.

The ‘900 new Jewish homes’ mentioned by Mr Cooper are not ‘in the same area’. They are in the Jewish neighbourhood of Gilo and they will not deprive any Palestinians of their homes.

Finally, Mr. Cooper should have mentioned that the West Bank and East Jerusalem were seized by Jordan between 1948-1967 and its Jewish residents were murdered or expelled. After Jordan attacked Israel in 1967 the territory was taken over by Israel, which protected the rights of Arab residents and greatly improved their living standard.

The real question is why people like Mr Cooper insist on turning a few instances of building disputes into condemnations of Israel, while ignoring the continuing Palestinian intent and actions to destroy Israel.

Submitted to The Press on November 23, 2009

Felicien Forgues' (Nov. 19) grasps at straws to support his opinion that Palestinian life worsened when Israel took over in 1967. Following this takeover, the life expectancy rose from 45 years to 72 today, the infant mortality rate dropped from 17% to 2.4%, and the literacy rate rose from 54% to 92%. If that's not improvement, I don't know what is.
Yes, there are walls, checkpoints and border controls, but they were erected only after repeated suicide bombings and other attacks by Palestinian terrorists. They would come down if these attacks were to cease. Such measures are not unusual. They are a nuisance, but travellers put up with check points at airports every day, for similar reasons.
Yes, there have been'house destructions, mostly for legal and security reasons, but not ‘to suit settlers' housing and roads’. Any resulting inconvenience is small when compared with the huge benefits enjoyed by the entire populace.

Submitted to theSouthland Times on November 22, 2009

Israel's house building in East Jerusalem has received much criticism, with Arab leaders saying it destroys any chance for peace. This is a phony charge. If Israel were to place a total freeze on construction, we would soon see that the houses are not the obstacle to peace. They cause no harm to anyone, especially compared with the Palestinian rocket and bombing attacks. Anyway, the time for houses to come down is after borders have been agreed on, not before.
The real obstacle to peace is the Palestinian refusal to accept Israel's right to exist which, unfortunately, will not go away, freeze or no freeze.
There also is the matter of Jerusalem, which Israel will never give up, freeze or no freeze. It has good reason for this, considering the way Jews were killed or expelled and Jewish sites desecrated when Jordan captured Jerusalem in 1948. When Israel won it back in the 1967 war after being attacked by Jordan, it scrupulously protected Muslim sites and the right of Muslims to live and pray.
The houses in themselves are not an obstacle to peace.

Published unabridged on Nov. 25

Submitted to The Press on November 20, 2009

Felicien Forgues (November 19th) tries to sever cause from effect. The fence, checkpoints and buffer zones are all necessary aspects of Israel's right to protect her citizens from the savagery of terrorism. After 1967 when Israel took responsibility for health and medical services in the Territories, Palestinian infant mortality dropped from 150 per 1000 live births to 25 and 90% of all children were immunised.
What other nation would truck in thousands of supplies every day to an enemy sworn to its destruction?

Printed November 23

Submitted to The Press on November 16, 2009

If Felicien Forgues wants Orwellian propaganda, he need look no further than the Goldstone Report (14th November). Not only does it equate a democratic nation with a terrorist organisation, but all four of its members publicly expressed anti-Israeli views before commencing their Mission. So much for impartiality.
Forgues speculates on what Palestinian life was like before 1948. It didn't exist since the term ‘Palestinians’ only came into use after 1967. Before that there were Arabs, mainly of Syrian and Lebanese origin, living in a provincial backwater of the Ottoman Empire and latterly, in the British Mandate. They carried out terrorist attacks and massacres on Jewish inhabitants during the 20s, 30s and 40s and never sought their own state while under Jordanian or Egyptian occupation for 19 years.
Perhaps Mr Forgues should ask himself what life has been like for Israelis since 1948. They have endured 60 years of repeated attacks and invasions, all unprovoked and by up to seven Arab armies at one time seeking to annihilate their tiny state, the size of New Jersey. In the 1948 war they suffered 6,000 casualties, one percent of their population.
The arithmetic of death has since been mastered by the Palestinians who willingly sacrifice their citizens to dupe people like Mr Forgues. To quote Hamas leader, Fathi Hammad, ‘We desire death while you (Jews) desire life.’

Submitted to The Press on November 16, 2009

In a letter printed in Saturday's Press, letter writer Felicien Forgues recommended that we ‘compare the life of Palestinians now with how they lived before 1967, or 1948.’ I agree that this is an excellent suggestion, and is a good indication of how the Palestinian population has fared under Israeli rule.
Here are a few basic statistics for the Palestinian population in 1967, at the end of almost 20 years of Egyptian and Jordanian rule:
Life expectancy at birth: 44 (males), 46 (females)
Infant mortality rate: 170 (per 1000)
Adult literacy rate: 72.2% (males), 34.9% (females).
According to the Palestinian Bureau of Statistics, these are the figures for 2004, after 37 years of Israeli rule:
Life expectancy at birth: 71.4 (males), 72.9 (females)
Infant mortality rate: 24.2 (per 1000)
Adult literacy rate: 96.5% (males), 88.0% (females).
Sounds like the Palestinians have done pretty well under Israeli rule.

Submitted to The Press on November 16, 2009

Excuse me, Mr Forgues (Nov. 14), but the following facts are beyond question:
(a) Israel has no intention of destroying a neighbouring country, and never has. In 2005 it removed its soldiers and citizens from Gaza, hoping to ‘live and let live’.
(b) Hamas has repeatedly declared its intention of destroying Israel and carried out 7000 rocket attacks after Israel withdrew.
(c) Israel attacked Gaza in December after trying to persuade Hamas to stop its attacks. It withdrew after destroying some (but not all) of Hamas' military capability. (d) The life of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank did not deteriorate in 1967 when Israel took over administration from Jordan and Egypt (which had seized them in 1948). It actually improved.
To deny these facts and attack an advertisement that consisted of quotes by recognised authorities as ‘Orwellian propaganda’ is only to show one's ignorance.

Submitted to The Press on November 15, 2009

Felicien Forgues' letter (14 Nov) demonstrates clear Orwellian double speak. Israel has never destroyed any neighbouring country. Gaza is a terrorist entity controlled by a terrorist organisation, not a country, and its continuing efforts to ferment terror against Israel's population is hardly a sign of total destruction. The claim that Arab Palestinians were better off prior to 1967 and 1948 is another example of myths masquerading as truth. The standard of living and life expectancy of Arab Palestinians is now considerably better than it was prior to 1967. I guess we should blame the dastardly Israelis for this shocking statistic.

Submitted to The Press on November 15, 2009

The key to Felicien Forgues' letter of 14/11 is the phrase ‘the Palestinians have little means of killing Israeli civilians’. The true objective of Hamas in Gaza is not peace but to kill Israeli civilians.
The minute stage of Israel is filled with puppets controlled by shadowy masters in Iran and Arabia who operate in a theatre of war that stretches from Turkey to Pakistan. Islam surrounds Israel from every direction except the sea and it suits it to keep this conflict going because it provides a reliable fulcrum on which militant Islam is gradually levering western civilization apart.
It is truly Orwellian! Orwell claimed that ‘all war-propaganda, all the screaming, lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting’.
Colonel Richard Kemp pointed out that Hamas and Hizbollah are expert at driving the media agenda and are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

Submitted to The Press on November 14, 2009

Mr Forgues might do well to wonder where the billions of US dollars in aid from mostly Western countries (including Israel), that have poured into ostensibly improving the life of Palestinians, have gone. He would find the answers the off-shore bank accounts held by Palestinian officials and into the weapons which are stacked high in tunnels in Gaza and elsewhere. The Palestinians' leaders have litle interest in the health, education and economic development of their people but continue, as they have done since the creation of the State of Israel, to devote themselves to a single mission: that of the destruction of Israel. Until that sick culture of hatred instilled by Islamic Jihadists has somehow been overcome, the lot of the Palestinian people will not change.

Letter to TVNZ on November 13, 2009

Subject: Congratulations to the SUNDAY TEAM on its recent success at the ‘Global TV Journalist Awards’ held in Gaza last week

And... the winner this year in our very biased/half truth/no truth category goes to ..... THE SUNDAY TEAM from NZ for their programme ‘Across the Divide’.

Judges' Comments:

Congratulations to the team from down under on an excellent effort in this sought after category.

the SUNDAY TEAM showed even more bias than the BBC, something the judges thought nearly impossible. The ability to screen for over twenty minutes just one side of a story, avoiding the facts that could have brought balance and objectivity to the programme, is heartily commended. The judging committee acknowledges that this takes some doing.

The judges further commented:
A brilliant display of ‘don't confuse us with the facts’, ‘we've made up our mind journalism’ and ‘we want to ensure that viewers also come to the same twisted conclusion.’

The Judges concluded by saying they are looking forward to seeing SUNDAY's next programme entitled ‘A Triumph of Democracy’ (the story of the building of the new synagogue in downtown Gaza.)

Accepting the award for the SUNDAY TEAM, its spokesman Jonathan Quartertruth praised the efforts of all involved in the making of the programme.

TO THE SUNDAY TEAM

Seriously, fair go guys!

I had always enjoyed your programme BUT in this case you should have done so much better. You let the NZ side down. Your presentation was so biased it was hardly believable.

You asked at the end of your programme for viewers' opinions so you have mine.

I conclude by wishing you all the best and the season's greetings.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on November 12, 2009

Derek Rouse should expand his reading of history beyond Ilan Pappe’. Try reading some of the writings of Professor Sir Martin Gilbert of Mertin College, Oxford University. His writings include the Atlas of the Arab - Israeli conflict, The 8 volume Biography of Sir Winston Churchill, histories of the 2 world wars and The Atlas of Russian History — also the Childrens Illustrated Bible Atlas.
The Reason for the 1948 war was the Israeli declaration of Independence, May 15. The countries of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon declared war and invaded the mandate Territory to aid the Palestinians by defeating the Jews. They failed. The Jordan Arab Legion commanded by General Sir John Glubb gained control of the West bank and East Jerusalem, while Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip.

That's why there was no Arab state created in Palestine. The refugees created after the invasion are the responsibility of the invading Arab states.

Submitted to the Southland Times on November 12, 2009

Mr. Cooper in his letter (Southland Times 10 Nov) obviously believes that Israel has no right to intercept a vessel carrying tons of weapons for terrorist groups whose aim is the destruction of the Jewish State. What would his reaction be if a terrorist organisation in Otago acquired enough weapons to murder the civilian population of Southland? I presume he would also condemn any attempt by NZ authorities to disrupt the flow of weapons in that situation. Perhaps his double standard applies to those whose hatred of Israel blinds them to the real truth of the situation.

Printed November 13 with the heading ‘Double standard’.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on November 12, 2009

It's amazing how my article on Christian support for Israel can be converted by Derek Rouse in his letter (ODT 10 Nov) into a litany of false accusations against the Jewish State. I suggest that Mr. Rouse make the effort to read 2 books (‘1948’ & ‘One State, Two States’) recently published by historian Benny Morris, in which the author admits his previous mistaken version of the same lies and now explains exactly what the real facts are about refugees, expulsions and nakba. This will reveal that contrary to the fables about Jewish massacres & ethnic cleansing, any disasters incurred by the Arabs during Israel's re-establishment, were totally self inflicted and as a result of their own clearly stated desire to finish the job that the Nazis had failed to accomplish.

Submitted to the Southland Times on November 11, 2009

Wynton Cooper (10.11.09) seems to be unaware that Iran, Hizbollah and Hamas have all proclaimed their intention to wipe Israel off the face of the map. When Israel stopped a shipment of arms to Hizbollah, this was not a ‘double standard’, it was common sense in the interest of self-preservation. Would Mr Cooper have yelled ‘double standard’ in WWII as the Allies tried to prevent Germany from acquiring or producing weapons?u to have the courage to report the facts. To do anything less is to be complicit in a lie and in this case slander.

Printed November 13 with the heading ‘Self-preservation’.

Letter to TVNZ on November 11, 2009

Regarding the ‘Across the Divide’ program which screened on 01.11.09, I would like to express my dismay at the lack of investigative journalism done by your reporting team into the facts of the evictions in East Jerusalem.
The housing complex in question is located in the Sheik Jarra neighborhood of eastern Jerusalem. The home was originally Jewish, but its Jewish occupants were chased out during countrywide anti-Jewish Arab riots in 1929. Arabs then squatted on the property.
Authentic documentation proves the complex is owned by Jews and that Arabs have been squatting on it illegally for almost a century.
Israel's court system, not exactly a friend of Jewish ‘settlers’ twice now ruled the property undoubtedly belongs to Jews.
The slanderous charges made by the representative of the Hanoun family (more than once!), that Israel practices ‘ethnic cleansing’ were never investigated or challenged. This libel can easily be refuted by checking the current population statistics for Jerusalem which clearly show that there are far more Arabs living in east Jerusalem in 2009 compared with 1967.
No checks were done of building permit applications or the details of the long running court disputes with tenants who were evicted because of unpaid rent. The program was not an impartial commentary on the situation in east Jerusalem, but an emotional pro-Palestinian piece that gave an inaccurate portrayal of the events in question. The emphasis made in the program that the family were evicted at gunpoint and then the showing an armed guard in Efrat overseeing work done by Palestinians was sensational and ignores the daily reality for all Israelis - that armed guards are everywhere in Israeli cities, mixed communities, check points and airports. Unfortunately it is a fact that to be a Jewish person in your own country is to be a target for assassination by your Arab neighbours. It would be more unusual to show someone doing their grocery shopping without an armed guard at the Supermarket entrance!If you take journalism seriously and earnestly desire to give a fair representation of the truth, I would encourage you to have the courage to report the facts. To do anything less is to be complicit in a lie and in this case slander.

Submitted to the Southland Times on November 11, 2009

I have a pathetic feeling that Wynton Cooper's comments of ‘Double Standard’ (10.11.09) only reflected the biased media coverage of Israeli-Arab issue and the lack of discernment, which resulted in ungrounded imprudent judgment, of some citizens. Indeed, if one had ever done some humble research on the literature of this middle-east problem, which we can agree is more reliable and authentic than the present overflooded fast-food news, he wouldn't have been so audacious to jump to the conclusion without any backing facts.

Mr. Cooper's comments totally ignored many facts, one of which being that Lebanon, Hizbollah or Hamas (his original word) are trying all their efforts to eliminate Isreal, a peace-longing nation legitimated by UN and ordained even before human history. This is more than what we call ‘invasion’. Let alone Hamas is a well-known organization which promoted violence and vowed to wipe Israel off the map by whatever means. I will leave the other facts to his history teacher.

Adopting Mr. Cooper's metaphoric way, when the terrorists are plotting something against the legal rights of the public, it is fully justified and necessary for the authority to take actions preventing it. It should also be the public's responsibility to support such a movement. Unfortunately we've seen too much abuse of the so-called ‘human-rights’ trampling the basic principle of compliancy, righteousness and justice. And I do wonder who is adopting the ‘Double Standard’ after going through Mr. Cooper's comments...

Submitted to the NZ Herald on November 6, 2009

Thursday's Herald demonstrates graphically the difference between professional journalism and opinion masquerading as news. The article ‘Hamas tests rockets that can reach Tel Aviv, Israel claims’ quotes both Israeli and Palestinian authorities, and provides ample background and context. Contrast this with ‘The fight for homes in East Jerusalem’, emotive, lacking facts and with no attempt to explain — just a portrayal of Israelis as mindless bullies who enjoy smashing up other people's homes. The truth: Arabs living in Jerusalem properties forcibly taken from Jews in 1948, although technically squatters, are generally protected by Israeli law, provided they pay a fair rent. The evictions are of those who won't pay. This is now now well-documented, and the writer's failure to mention it is either very sloppy journalism or deliberate bias.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on November 5, 2009

You seem unaware that HRW's credibility is virtually nil. Following revelations of one executive's obsession with Nazi memorabilia, and another's praise for the killers of israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics, comes a trenchant critique of anti-Israel bias in its reporting, from its founder and Chairman Emeritus Robert Bernstein. Printed at length in the New York Times, it has apparently sunk without trace in your pages, perhaps in favour of non-stories like Israeli ‘kosher lifts’ Your readers deserve better than this.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on November 4, 2009

Benefits of interfaith
Readers of Michael Kuttner's article about the Feast of the Tabernacles in Jerusalem (ODT 3 November) may not know that for many years groups of Kiwi members of the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem (ICEJ) have traveled to Israel to take part in the observance.
This gives much pleasure to members of the New Zealand Jewish community who often feel beleaguered by the largely negative comment on Israel that pervades our media — bringing us news and images of confrontation and violence and ignoring the uplifting or constructive things that happen as much in Israel as in any other country.

Christians and Jews sharing the spirituality of the Holy City of Jerusalem is a form of the interfaith activity which, whether in Israel or here in New Zealand, is an excellent way of developing constructive networks within communities.

Dunedin's Abrahamic Group is a shining example of this to the rest of the country.

MTV Networks Entertainment Group, Comedy Central, and Stewart's Daily Show on Oct. 27, 2009

Congratulations to MTV Networks Entertainment Group, Comedy Central, and The Daily Show for raising the flag of the Palestinian cause high. The power that you wield raising consciousness around the world is awesome.

I'm sure that your family, parents and grandparents included, as well as John Stewart's family and the families of David Javerbaum, Kahane Corn, and Josh Lieb are all kvelling [Jewish word for ‘getting pleasure’] over your political position.

History, as you well know, does repeat itself — especially where the Jews are concerned. Your influence will certainly contribute to our march toward the inevitable. I hope you realize that no matter what your political position is today, when the time comes, the Herzogs and the Stewarts and the Liebs, etc. will be counted as they board the 21st century equivalent of the trains to Auschwitz.

You should all be proud of yourselves for doing your part while at the same time disseminating so little accurate information.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on October 29, 2009

Your article ‘Israelis deny Palestinians water’ is a model of unbalanced journalism.
Israel's water authority has issued a point-by-point refutation of the claims made by Amnesty (which clearly didn't bother to seek Israeli views before publishing its report) and identifies numerous abuses of water and sewerage rights on the Palestinian side. This was dismissed in a few lines of a lengthy article.
The fact that your source — the UK Independent — chose to publish only one side of the story doesn't free the Herald from responsibility for carrying out normal journalistic checks. Even a cursory search of published sources would have revealed the whole truth.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on October 29, 2009

The article about 'kosher elevators' (Oct 25) is a NON-news event. The vast majority of Orthodox Jews in Israel — of whom I am one, having emigrated from Auckland in 1991 — have dismissed it as nonsense. The fact that you feel compelled to reprint it speaks volumes about your agenda. You generally refuse to publish positive news about Israel (medical discoveries. etc.), but have no difficulty in printing this rubbish. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to see that the process of ridicule, deligitimisation and accusations (the ‘water’ article on the same day being an example) is a drip-feed process to influence the public to see Israel and Jews as not a normal State/people. This is the same tactic used by the Nazis in the 1930's with great success. That the media and other groups have climbed on this bandwagon is a sobering reminder that history does repeat itself.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on October 28, 2009

Why was the article ‘Rabbis' ban elevated to include even kosher lifts’ included as news (Oct 28)? Granted it may be an offbeat ‘human interest’ story, but it gives a completely false picture of what mainstream Israel is like. Every culture has its fringe groups, but even most Orthodox Jews find this story a bit outlandish.
My concern is that stories like this become part of a media tendency to portray Israel and Israelis as eccentric, aggressive, strange, ‘others’, rather than portraying them as ordinary people who happen to be living in an extraordinarily difficult situation, and have been for 61 years.
When read alongside the other Middle East story in the Herald that day, ‘Israelis Deny Palestinians Water’, and alongside other articles about Israel in recent months (Gaza, Goldstone report, etc.) it adds up to a picture of a state that is decidedly ‘out of step’ with the rest of the world, something that may be true of many Muslim countries, but is certainly not true of Israel. This troubles me and causes me to ask, ‘why?‘

Submitted to the NZ Herald on October 28, 2009

Yet again the New Zealand Herald clutters up its pages with another unbalanced, anti-Israel piece by Donald Macintyre. Macintyre's article is based entirely upon accusations made in a report by Amnesty International, an NGO that is well known for its anti-Israel bias.

Why is Amnesty International spending its donations on investigating water use in Israel rather than working to free political prisoners like Israeli Gilad Shalit who has been held prisoner by Hamas for years, without a single humanitarian visit?

It could also be asked, considering all the international aid monies being channelled to Palestinian organisations, why Israel is expected to provide infrastructure and supply water to people living in disputed territories, who consistently call for the destruction of the Jewish state and the murder of the Jewish people?

Buried in Macintyre's article is the fact that Syria, Lebanon and Jordan all draw water from the over-exploited Jordan River, yet only Israel is accused of ‘denying water’ to Palestinian Arabs in the NZ Herald headline.

Macintyre's article, built on disputed and unsubstantiated ‘accusations’, ‘claims’ and ‘suggestions’ is not news; it is propaganda, and should be treated as such.

Submitted to the Waikato Times on October 20, 2009

Hamas‘ Fawzi Barhoum has asserted that the U.N. Human Rights Council's 25 to 6 vote (with 16 abstentions) in favour of endorsing the ‘Goldstone Report’ on Gaza was ‘... the outcome of the determination of Arab and Islamic countries, and other countries around the world to ensure the prosecution of Zionist war criminals at the International Court’. However, this endorsement disregards important considerations, such as truth and justice.

Palestinian Authority Justice Minister Ali Al-Khashan has admitted that there is no hard evidence of any Israeli war crimes in Gaza.
Col. Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, testified before the UNHRC that ‘... the Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.... ’.
Even Richard Goldstone has expressed disappointment that, following the endorsement of his report, Israel alone stands condemned by the U.N.

Hamas seeks the annihilation of the Jewish state and the creation of a ‘Judenrein’ Middle East. They have used the UN ‘Goldstone Report’ to promote Hamas' version of anti-Semitism on the world stage.

Incredibly, twenty-five members of the UNHRC seem to share Hamas‘ genocidal vision.

Submitted to the NZ Herald On Sunday on October 20, 2009

I ask Mr John Putt, Letters October 18 these questions. If the Palestinians were serious about having a state of their own, why did they not form it between 1948 and June 1967, when the West Bank and East Jeruslem was under Jordanian contol and Gaza was under joint UN and Egyptian control?
Why after Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, did Hamas start to and continue to attack Israel with rockets attacking towns and other civilian sites if they wanted a state of their own? The answer is the Palestinians don't want the state of Isarel to exist at all. Read the Hamas constitution documents and what is said by West Bankers, Mr Putt! Its all there for you. DO you believe that Israel should be there Mr Putt?

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on October 19, 2009

Why not just print the facts?
Mike Palin (19.10.09) quarrels about who said or did not say the world hasn't warmed for nearly a decade. Here is the actual data from NASA [[click here to see Monthly Mean Global Surface Temperature from 1996 to 2008].

Why not print it and let readers see for themselves?
Tremain (19.10.09) refers to the squabbling Arabs and Israelis as an insoluble problem. That may be his opinion, but why not print the truth: that the ‘squabble’ consists of efforts by Arabs (in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon) to destroy Israel and Israel's desire to defend itself? Would Tremain have referred to the ‘squabbling’ Germans and Allies during WWII?

Submitted to The Press on October 10, 2009

It is disconcerting that Palestinian zoos show children donkeys disguised by paint to look like zebras. (Oct. 10) Donkeys lives are cheap in Palestine and they are fed to other zoo animals when not wanted and often beaten, abused and abandoned by their owners. Perhaps this is a result of fundamentalist Muslims justifying cruelty by a medieval religion which teaches that the devil got in Noah's ark on the tail of a donkey (Tabari I:360 ‘... When Noah brought the donkey in, Lucifer attached himself to its tail, ...’). A UK registered charity for donkeys (www.safehaven4donkeys.org) from both Palestine and Israel is located in Israel, the much maligned, multicultural, democratic, single Jewish State. Faking zebras is just a tiny reflection of the treachery practiced by Hamas and Iran to deceive and destroy Western values.

Submitted to the New Zealand Herald on October 9, 2009

Those who criticise Israel for restricting access to the Al-Aqsa mosque, after Palestinians threw stones at tourists, should remember that during the 19 years that Jerusalem was controlled by Arabs, Jews were not permitted to be there and Jewish holy sites were desecrated. Yet no outcry was raised by the international community.

Submitted to The Press on October 6, 2009

The streets of Jerusalem, Israel's eternal Capital, are currently thronged with thousands of Christians from every corner of the globe celebrating and marching in solidarity with Jews during the annual Feast of Tabernacles.
It is a heartwarming sight for me as a Jewish Kiwi living in Israel to witness this outpouring of love and support for the Jewish State.
What a stark contrast to the hate filled Palestinian Arab mobs who pelted Jewish worshippers with rocks at the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site, during this religious festival week.
In the current climate of double standards no doubt Israel will be condemned for protecting its citizens rather than supported for protecting freedom of worship for all.

Rejected the same day and then sent to; Dominion Post, Otago Daily Times, NZ Herald, Northern Advocate, Timaru Herald (Printed) & Waikato Times

Submitted to Otago Dialy Times on October 5, 2009

On Oct 2, Gaza launched a mortar and rocket attack on Israel, aimed at civilian areas. In response, Israel precision-bombed a weapons workshop and two weapons-smuggling tunnels in Gaza. No one was hurt in either action. The next day Israel complained to the UN about the escalation in attacks (as if the UN cared!). Yet the headline in the ODT (5.10.09) read ‘Israel attacks Gaza’. Readers who only read headlines (and there are many) are left with the impression that Israel is ‘once again’ beating up Gazans without reason — the exact opposite of what happened. No wonder there is so much anti-Israel feeling in New Zealand.

Rejected

Submitted to The Press on October 4, 2009

I am sure that Stephen Meikle knows better and if he does not perhaps he should do some more research.
It is not necessary to be a Bible believer. There is ample evidence from other sources to prove that the Jews were sovereign in their own land well before the advent of Islam and Christianity & despite expulsions and pogroms they maintained a continual physical presence in Israel. Legal recognition of the Jewish People's right to their ancient homeland was given by the international community after the First World War and later by the United Nations. That is more than can be said for the British Colonial authorities when they claimed NZ for the Crown. All Israeli citizens regardless of their ethnic or religious origins have full protection of civil rights, which is more than exists in most Arab regimes.

Submitted to The Press

Stephen Meikle's criticism of Israel is misplaced. His assertion that the Jewish people's claim to Israel is based solely on the Bible demonstrates an ignorance of the continuous Jewish presence in the Holy Land, spanning three millennia, despite the efforts of successive historical empires to dispossess them of their sovereign territory. Even following the Roman expulsion, thriving Jewish communities continued to exist in their ancient homeland, renamed ‘Palestine’.
In more recent times, Arabs destroyed many ancient Jewish communities, such as those in Hebron and East Jerusalem. Despite this, Arab Israelis have full rights as Israeli citizens, making 20 % of the population and demonstrating the kindness to ‘aliens within the land’ commanded in the Bible.
The Jewish people have a Biblical, an historical, and even a 1947 United Nations mandate to possess the land of Israel. Not even Mr Meikle can claim such a strong mandate to dwell in his homeland.

Submitted to The Press

Stephen Meikle (Sept 29) may claim not to be anti-Semitic, but he certainly spread a lot of falsehoods about Jews. His statement that Israel's claim to the land comes ‘only from the Bible’ ignores the documented, continuous presence of Jews well past Biblical times. It also ignores the international authorisation for Israel's creation. (Incidentally, New Zealand has neither of these justifications for its existence). The Palestinians who left in 1948 fled from a war started by the Arabs, while the Jews in Arab-controlled areas were driven out or killed. The 1.4 million Arabs (today) who didn't leave are indeed treated fairly and with ‘kindness’ — a lot better than NZ's ‘aliens’ were treated during the world wars. Finally, to say the German ‘crime against humanity’ was simply to drive Jews out of their homes is beyond ludicrous.
It's a shame that the letters column, which should be a forum for informed debate, is being used as a vehicle to spread insidious lies about the one Jewish nation.

Submitted to The Press

Stephen Meikle's factually bereft and overblown attack on Israel (29 Sept) is astonishing. If he wants to talk ‘irony’ he should be mindful that the ‘Hebrew God’ he uses to chastise Israel is the very same invoked for centuries by Christians to justify their persecution, ghettoization and massacres of the Jewish people.
His attempts to delegitimize and demonise Israel, while toying with the semantics of genocide, reveal a distressingly naive evaluation of current Middle Eastern realities as well as a dearth of historical perspective.
Jews returned to Palestine, where a de facto Jewish homeland had continuously existed, following the vicious Russian and Eastern European pogroms of the 1880s and early 1900s and subsequently the Holocaust. It was a sanctuary, not a Biblical fantasy. Their right to live in Palestine was enshrined in International Law, first by the League of Nations and then by the UNO. Other massacres, e.g of the Armenians, convinced post WW1 leaders like Woodrow Wilson that all peoples must have a homeland. The Holocaust, which Palestinian Arabs condoned, supported this conviction.
The Palestinians who lost their homes did so within a context of war initiated by them and their Arab neighbours. At the same time almost a million Jews were expelled from their homes in neighbouring Arab states and Israel absorbed them all. None ever received compensation for the loss of their homes and livelihoods.
At least the Palestinians need have no moral qualms. Their holy book exhorts them to ‘kill Jews wherever they find them’.

Submitted to The Press on September 26, 2009

The article ‘More troops or war is lost’ (22.9.09) illustrates New Zealand's moral (not to mention military) support of the US war on terrorists — despite the 12,000-31,000 civilian casualties (estimate from Wikipedia). This war was launched by the US in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attack that took 3,000 US lives. I think most of us are proud of this support..
Israel is fighting a similar war on terrorism that began in 1948. On a per capita basis, Israel has suffered the equivalent of many 9/11's, and its existence is more seriously threatened than is America's. Yet the NZ press is mostly filled with articles that criticise and blame Israel, taking umbrage at every civilian casualty.
Why is not NZ equally supportive, at least morally (if not with troops), of Israel's battle against terrorism?

Submitted to The Press on September 26, 2009

Marc Fibbens (23.09.09) doesn't seem to understand that the true lesson of the Holocaust was that Jews cannot depend on the international community to defend them. And so Israel has had to fight for its life for over 60 years.
There can be no equating the morality of those who want to destroy a neighbouring nation and deliberately attack its citizens with those who defend their nation while trying, not always successfully, to avoid civilian casualties.

Printed in The Press on September 25, 2009 (Published In a few words)

Marc Fibbens seizes upon the Lincoln students' insensitivity to imply that the Israelis are the new Nazis (Sept 23). Not only does this ploy of Holocaust reversal ignore the evidence of history, it founders on the reality that the only group in the Middle East calling for genocide is Hamas.

Submitted to The Press on September 25, 2009

This letter was submitted to The Press in response to a false accusation contained in a previous letter to the editor. However the Editor decided that because one letter had already been received no further letters would be published. Despite asking him to reconsider, his original decision stands. This effectively means that anyone could write denying the Holocaust and he would only print one letter in rebuttal, his excuse being that the subject had been ‘adequately dealth with’. Is this fair and balanced reporting? Has The Press never ever published several letters on the same subject? Do they not have an obligation to enable at least some of their readers to express their opinions on any given subject?

Marc Fibbens (The Press 23 Sept) unfortunately misses the point completely. The only injustice being perpetrated on the Palestinians is by their own leaders whose obsessive desire to cleanse Israel of Jews has caused untold misery. If the Palestinian Arabs would have accepted the state offered to them in 1947 they could by now have a flourishing country. Instead they have spent 61 years engaged in terror and mayhem which has gained them nothing. The Israelis meantime turned the arid dessert into flourishing fields and built & defended a modern democratic society, something our neighbours will never achieve because they are too busy trying to kill Jews and educating future generations to hate rather than co-exist.

Submitted to the Dominion Post on September 20, 2009

What exactly have the Jews done to deserve the treatment now handed out to them? Two thousand years of repeated persecution in the Muslim and Christian worlds, but apparently they only have themselves to blame. Finally, they are given permission to build a nation in which to protect themselves, but before they can do so, six million are wiped out in the most hideous crime in history. Then, when the United Nations voted for a state of Israel, five Arab armies, calling their war jihad and their motives pure, tried to wipe them out again; that, of course, was the fault of the Jews and is called the Nakba, a (self-made) disaster for the Arabs of the region. In 2005, Israel leaves the Gaza strip; in return there are cries of a phantom ‘occupation’ and thousands of rockets land, mainly in Sderot.
After years of this, the Israelis decide on some pro-active self-defence and launch an attack on Gaza that leaves many dead. Mostly, they kill Hamas fighters. Now, according to this week's UN report, the Israelis (read, the Jews) are to blame for that as well. They are the aggressors, their vigorous efforts to warn citizens, Hamas's equally vigorous efforts to use their civilians as human shields are all ignored. The real truth, that the Palestinians prefer to see their children die than to make peace and that the world still thinks the Jews are to blame for everything and that we're wallowing in our own self-righteous support for terrorists while we rebuild the structures of anti-Semitism some of us thought we'd left behind, all that is left unsaid.
One wonders why the DomPost (Editorial 17.09.09) spent 500 words lambasting Israel, with only a slap on the hand (28 words) for the Gazan attacks on Israel that were the reason for Israel's defensive action. One wonders if the DomPost was equally concerned about civilian damage to Germany during WWII and ‘stunting’ and thinness among German children, while the free world was fighting for its very existence, as is Israel today.
Today, as the world moves on to whatever destiny it may have, a small country of no little genius and humanity goes to the wall. A truly independent report is called for, but don't hold your breath.

Submitted to the Sunday Star-Times on September 20, 2009

What exactly have the Jews done to deserve the treatment now handed out to them? Two thousand years of repeated persecution in the Muslim and Christian worlds, but apparently they only have themselves to blame. Finally, they are given permission to build a nation in which to protect themselves, but before they can do so, six million are wiped out in the most hideous crime in history. Then, when the United Nations voted for a state of Israel, five Arab armies, calling their war jihad and their motives pure, tried to wipe them out again; that, of course, was the fault of the Jews and is called the Nakba, a (self-made) disaster for the Arabs of the region. In 2005, Israel leaves the Gaza strip; in return there are cries of a phantom ‘occupation’ and thousands of rockets land, mainly in Sderot.
After years of this, the Israelis decide on some pro-active self-defence and launch an attack on Gaza that leaves many dead. Mostly, they kill Hamas fighters. Now, according to this week's UN report, the Israelis (read, the Jews) are to blame for that as well. They are the aggressors, their vigorous efforts to warn citizens, Hamas's equally vigorous efforts to use their civilians as human shields are all ignored. Even Israel's ongoing blockade of Gaza, imposed after Hamas (a group dedicated to Israel's destruction) took over, is criticized for ‘hindering reconstruction’ (SST, 20.8.09), despite the Gazan rockets that still rain on Israel.
The real truth, that the Palestinians prefer to see their children die than to make peace and that the world still thinks the Jews are to blame for everything and that we're wallowing in our own self-righteous support for terrorists while we rebuild the structures of anti-Semitism some of us thought we'd left behind — all that is left unsaid. The world moves on to whatever destiny it thinks it may still have, and a small country of no little genius and humanity goes to the wall.

Submitted to the Southland Times on September 20, 2009 (not related to the Goldstone report):

In the Southland Times (17 Sep) we read that Israel said the Gaza attack was launched to stop Hamas rocket attacks. Why the qualifier 145;Israel said’? What other reason could there have been? Does anyone think Israel sent its soldiers to risk their lives to kill Palestinians for the joy of it? If New Zealand had been subjected to rocket attacks over a period of years, would it have done less?
As to differing reports of civilian casualties, in a war where the enemy doesn't wear uniforms and where mosques are used to launch rockets, it can be hard for both soldiers and after-the-fact analysers to determine who was a civilian and who wasn't. I have examined both Israel's and Palestinian reports of casualties and found compelling evidence to substantiate Israel's.

Submitted to the Dominion Post on September 18, 2009

The editorial ‘Israel's war on humanity’ (17 September) accuses the Jewish people, having suffered centuries-long persecution from both Christendom and Islam, of indifference to the suffering of Palestinian Arabs since the Jews returned to their ancestral homeland and declared their own state, Israel, in 1948.

Firstly, as the editorial itself says, there are other far larger-scale humanitarian crises — Zimbabwe, Sudan, Sri Lanka - than the Israel-Arab conflict.

Secondly, they are not indifferent, as shown by the many Israeli and Jewish voices against continued occupation of the West Bank (Israel withdrew completely from Gaza in 2005), and the many Israeli and Jewish groups working constructively with Palestinians for mutual benefit.

Thirdly, the history of the last 100 years shows that the Palestinians are themselves greatly responsible for their own present unhappy situation, having repeatedly rejected compromise and peaceful settlement over that time; as shown by the actions of Grand Mufti Sheikh Mohammed Amin Al-Husseini and Yasser Arafat.

Fourthly, many Jews and objective observers see the present geopolitical situation, including the many anti-Israel actions of the United Nations, as a continuation of the ancient persecution of the Jewish people in attempting to delegitimise and obliterate Israel as the Jewish homeland.

Submitted to the New Zealand Herald on September 17, 2009

Israel's war on humanity (Dom. Post Editorial 17. Sept) is totally misnamed. Israel is waging war against terror organisations who deliberately use women & children as hostages in the confident expectation that the resulting casualties will bring down the wrath of the UN on the Jewish State.
Once again a UN appointed body produces a highly biased report on Israel's alleged ‘war crimes’. Can any reader really believe that a report which glosses over years of terror rocket attacks against Israeli civilians by Hamas & equates a democratic country's effort to defend its citizens with an organisation dedicated to Israel's elimination, is fair and balanced? Does it not seem strange that the UN & its Human Rights Commission, dominated as they are by dictatorships & despotic regimes,where human & civil rights are trampled underfoot, should be so fixated on the Middle East's only democracy, that they ignore the most blatant crimes against humanity perpetrated by those demonising Israel? That is where your editorial wrath should be directed.

Submitted to the New Zealand Herald on September 17, 2009

Once again a UN appointed body produces a highly biased report on Israel's alleged ‘war crimes’ (NZ Herald 17 Sept). Can any reader really believe that a report which glosses over years of terror rocket attacks against Israeli civilians by Hamas & equates a democratic country's effort to defend its citizens with an organisation dedicated to Israel's elimination, is fair and balanced? Does it not seem strange that the UN & its Human Rights Commission, dominated as they are by dictatorships & despotic regimes,where human & civil rights are trampled underfoot, should be so fixated on the Middle East's only democracy, that they ignore the most blatant crimes against humanity perpetrated by those demonising Israel?

Submitted to the Sunday Star-Times on September 13, 2009

REf. the 2 items which appeared in your world section (13 Sept), I wonder which is really the greater obstacle to peace between Israel and her Palestinian Arab neighbours. Prior to 1967 there were no settlements and still there was no peace because the Arab States refused to recognise the right of Jews to live anywhere in Israel and engaged in terror against Israeli civilians. Today nothing much has changed. Rockets being fired by Arab terror groups against Israeli civilians constitute a far greater obstacle to peace than the building of 500 homes. How can someone honestly claim that houses are a greater threat than rockets?

Submitted to the Sunday Star-Times on September 13, 2009

An interesting juxtaposition of items appeared in the World Section (13 Sept). While the Guardian cited 500 homes being built by Israel as an obstacle to peace negotiations, a small item below read ‘Rockets strike Israel’. Anyone with common sense can see that houses built in Jewish neighbourhoods are far less a threat to peace than rocket and other attacks (many of which are foiled). The true obstacle to peace is the Palestinian goal of ultimately destroying Israel as a Jewish state.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on September 12, 2009 (not published as yet)

Uri Davis and Neve Gordon (World Affairs, 31/8) live in a country besieged by Islamic Jihadists whose sole purpose in life is to see Israel destroyed and her Jewish citizens driven out or annihilated. Yet Uri Davis and Neve Gordon and their families live in safety because their country has a strong security and defence system which is maintained with the sole purpose of keeping her citizens safe from harm from a people who are mired in a culture of hate and violence. These same people have had hundreds of millions of dollars in aid yet their leaders have chosen to squander it on weapons or to squirrel it away in private accounts, condemning them to a life of poverty and oppression by the Jihadists.
Uri and Neve also live in a democratic country where they enjoy total freedom of expression. I can't think of any single other country in the Middle East where such criticism of their country would be tolerated; indeed, these two people would very likely disappear, never to be seen again.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on September 11, 2009 (not published as yet)

After publishing a two-page attack on Israel (World Focus, 31.8.09) as an ‘apartheid state’ (it is less apartheid than New Zealand), you found it necessary to abridge a single letter of rebuttal to only 85 words (‘Israeli conflict’, 11.9.09). Is that your idea of balance?

Submitted to the NZ Herald on September 8, 2009

US President Obama's attempt to halt Jewish settlements in Palestine focuses on a sideshow and neglects the main issue. This is the Palestinian Arabs' demand — repeated to anyone who cares to listen — that the whole land of Israel should become an Islamic state, from which Jews will be ethnically-cleansed. It is inconceivable that the international community will allow such an outcome. Until this fundamental issue is addressed, negotiations over side-issues are a waste of time.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on September 8, 2009 (published on 9 September with the paragraph in red deleted)

I was dismayed to ready your heavily biased ‘World Focus’ feature page about Israel (31/08/09). Rather than publishing two articles that balanced one another, allowing readers to gain an understanding of both sides of Arab-Israeli conflict, your paper presented only one side of the debate.

Both Neve Gordon and Uri Davis are controversial figures in Israel and neither reflects the opinions of the majority of Israelis or the Israeli government. However, their views do support the anti-Zionist position of Fatah, Hamas and their international allies. Anti-Zionism, which vilifies the Jewish state, is a modern re-branding of traditional anti-Semitism. History is replete with the disastrous consequences of tolerating anti-Semitism, in any form.

The Otago Daily Times cannot pretend to be an objective or reliable source of news and information about the Middle East while it provides a soapbox for anti-Zionist apologists, rather than a forum for even handed debate and analysis.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on September 8, 2009 (not published)

I wish to protest your quite unbalanced World Focus section in last Monday's newspaper. Although you gave comprehensive coverage to the myth that Israel is an "Apartheid state," there was no counter-argument from a mainstream Israeli source. In the interests of fairness and free speech the ODT should give an equal amount of coverage to the Israeli point of view.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on September 1, 2009 (not published)

Those accusing Israel of being an Apartheid State (ODT 31 Aug) are either totally ignorant of the real situation or deliberately distorting the facts to suit their own extreme political agenda.
As a kiwi born resident of Israel for the last 18 years, I can attest that the allegation of ‘apartheid’ is patently false. Having worked in one of the Capital's leading hospitals, I witnessed patients & staff from every sector of Israeli society being treated and providing treatment without the slightest hint of discrimination based on grounds of ethnicity, religion or skin colour. Arabs & Jews share wards and clinics on an equal basis, as is normal in any democratic society. Driving to work I share the roads with citizens of every background and on public transport I can vouch that nobody is denied access. Israel's Parliament contains members who are Moslems & Arabs and they are free to express their antipathy towards the Jewish State. That is the criteria of a democracy. Likewise freedom of worship which is a fundamental right in Israel.
I, as a Jewish Israeli, however, would be lynched if I dared to venture into Palestinian Arab territory. The civil rights enjoyed by all Israeli citizens certainly do not exist in Arab countries of the Middle East. So who are the real Apartheid States then?

As I was loading the letter above to the web site an alert to a news item on the nzherald.co.nz site arrived that substantiated this letter: ‘Hundreds of Africans seeking asylum and jobs try to reach Israel every year,...’ ‘Migrants shot in Egypt’... Read More Web Manager

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on September 1, 2009 (not published)

Uri Davis is using the apartheid link to discredit Israel and hopefully gain support for a global uprising which was so successful in bringing about South Africa's downfall. The apartheid policy as operated by South Africa has no relevance to Israel and to keep calling for world sanctions against the Jewish state, because of this lie, is a sinister attempt to hide what is really going on in the Middle East. Israel stands alone against Islamic oppression, terrorism and expansionism. Uri Davis, himself a Jew who has defected to Islam for his own reasons, knows full well the history of the Jewish state and the aggression Israel has suffered and continues to suffer at the hands of militancy which is allowed to flourish in Palestine. Davis is himself an active member of Fatah having been elected to the Revolutionary Council so we can hardly expect an unbiased view of the Israeli-Palestinian problem from him.

Submitted to The Press on August 8, 2009

Andrew Nichols (Aug. 7) claims that Moreu's cartoon of Aug. 6 was ‘baseless caricaturing’. While caricaturing is usually a cartoonists stock-in-trade, Moreu's cartoon was spot on in its depiction of Pres. Ahmadinejad of Iran holding a sign saying ‘Death to Israel!’.

At a 2005 conference titled ‘The World Without Zionism’, Ahmadinejad said ‘...I need to thank you for choosing this valuable title for the conference... They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan.... Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime [referring to Israel] must be wiped off the map [removed from the pages of history may be a better translation] and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine... The issue of Palestine is not over at all. It will be over the day a Palestinian government, which belongs to the Palestinian people, comes to power.’

If this is not saying ‘Death to Israel!’, I don't know how much clearer he could be. New Zealanders should not close their eyes to this evil.

P.S. The reference for the quote is Here

Submitted to The Press on August 5, 2009

Kudos to your cartoonist Mike Moreu (5 August) for succinctly encapsulating the dire danger we all face if Iran is permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. As a kiwi now living in Israel it is comforting to know that this is also recognised as far away as New Zealand.

(published without alteration on August 7)

Submitted to The NZ Herald on on July 25, 2009

Dear Sir
The Associated Press report (Herald, 24 July) about building in Jerusalem was sensationalized and deeply hypocritical.

It stated, correctly, that Jordan ruled a Jerusalem physically divided (by a wall) from 1948 to 1967, and denied Jews access to their holy sites. But the report omitted to say that the Arabs expelled all Jews, destroyed 54 synagogues in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, and used Jewish gravestones for paving.

Israel does indeed, as stated, protect the holy sites of Judaism, Christendom and Islam, in Jerusalem and elsewhere in the country — unlike the Arab record of destruction in Jerusalem noted above, and the desecration of Joseph's Tomb in Nablus in 2000.

The report also repeated the nonsensical Palestinian claim that Israel is attempting to ‘Judaise Jerusalem’ — as if the Israelis have no right to build in the city of King David which has been the spiritual centre of Judaism for 3000 years.

Jews have as much right to turn an abandoned East Jerusalem hotel into apartments, as Arabs have the right to buy apartments in West Jerusalem — which many have done.

Submitted to The NZ Herald On Monday on July 20, 2009

The NZ Herald failed to verify whether or not the ‘Breaking the Silence’ report, on which ‘Israeli soldiers give accounts of Gaza war’ (July 16, 2009) was based, was factual, reliable or credible.

An IDF response to the ‘Breaking the Silence report noted numerous fundamental flaws with the document. The report is based primarily on anonymous testimonies. Unless the IDF can identify and question those who gave their testimonies, the accusations cannot be investigated, verified or refuted.

It is impossible to know when and where the incidents allegedly occurred as there is no mention of date, time or specific locations in the testimonies.

The report makes no mention of the way in which the testimonies were gathered — it is unclear whether they were gathered directly via personal interview or indirectly via mail or e-mail. There is also no mention of how the credibility of the testimonies was checked. There is no way of knowing whether a testimony was given by a soldier or someone claiming to be a soldier.

For more information see: ‘Reaction to Breaking the Silence Report’

Newspaper reports should be factual and thoroughly investigated. The NZ Herald failed the test of good journalism by recounting a story built on rumour and hearsay.

Submitted to The NZ Herald On Friday on July 17, 2009

It is a pity that the NZ Herald keeps reprinting knee jerk anti Israel unproven accusations without first ascertaining the veracity of their facts (or lack of them). Readers should be aware of the following important points:
No identities were used for those giving testimonies as is usual practice in the media.
No mention of rank or position or unit (regular or reserves).
There is no way to verify whether the testimony was given by a soldier or someone purporting to be a soldier.
No mention of time period or specific location of the alleged incidents.
In other words the whole story is hearsay eagerly disseminated by those whose sole aim is the besmirching of Israel in its attempts to protect citizens from terror initiated by those who seek its elimination as a Jewish State.

Submitted to The NZ Herald On Thursday on July 16, 2009

The article ‘Israeli soldiers give accounts of Gaza war’ is strong on innuendo but short on facts. The lack of any detail in the allegations makes them almost impossible to evaluate. However, in one case where enough detail was given for it to be checked, it has been found that the soldier making the allegation wasn't even in combat at the time. Other allegations are attributed to unnamed third parties, i.e. they are hearsay. Others again seem to have been recycled from a similarly unsubstantiated report published several months ago.

Col. Richard Kemp, a British Army office who knows the Israeli Army and has studied the current conflict, is on record (on BBC TV) as saying ‘I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the Israeli Defence Force is doing today in Gaza.’ Why is this view not given similar prominence to those expressed in the article?

Although the Israeli Army has publicly called for soldiers who have witnessed alleged atrocities to come forward, none of the anonymous accusers reported in the article appears to have done so. This must cast doubt on the allegations in the mind of a reasonable person.

Link to Col. Richard Kemp speaking on BBC and quoted in above letter

Submitted to The Herald On Sunday on July 8, 2009

Matt McCarten portrays the Israeli Defence Forces as cold blooded killers. This is not how they are regarded by other professional soldiers who know just how difficult it is to conduct a counterterrorist war like Gaza and to behave in a moral way, minimizing civilian casualties. They recognize that nobody tries harder to achieve this than the IDF (which operates under a Strict Code of Conduct).
Colonel Richard Kemp ex Afghanistan pointed out in a BBC interview 18 January that Hamas deliberately position its fighters and rocket launchers behind the human shield of civilians and also force men women and children to stay put in places that they know are about to be attacked (deliberately trying to lure the IDF into killing innocent citizens).
Hamas, like Hizbollah, are expert at driving the media agenda and always have people ready to condemn the IDF for war crimes and are adept at staging and distorting incidents. Their people have to go along with these charades in front of the world's media, often on pain of death.
The international media and human rights groups invariably presume that the IDF are in the wrong and that they are abusing human rights. Check BBC YouTube.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on July 8, 2009

The murder of Muslim Marwa al-Sherbini in Germany was a terrible crime. However, Egyptian media claims that this murder is an example of how ‘hate crimes’ against Muslims are overlooked in the west is erroneous, as is the suggestion that ‘if the victim had been a Jew, there would have been an uproar’.

Media around the world consistently ignore the discrimination and persecution many Christians suffer from Muslims in Islamic nations. There has been minimal coverage in the western media of the plight of Gilad Shalit, an Israeli Jew kidnapped and held captive by Islamic ‘extremists’ since June 2006. The western media glossed over the 2008 torture and murder of Jews at Mumbai's Chabad House, who were deliberately sought out by Islamic ‘extremists’.

Islam is a religion, not a nationality or racial group. The West mutely accepts Islamic religious and racial discrimination that prohibits all non-Muslims from entering Mecca and Medina and all Jews from entering many Muslim nations. Muslims in the West should accept that they are not the only religious group that experiences discrimination, and be grateful that they receive more tolerance and protection in the secular West than any religious minority does in any Islamic nation.

Submitted to Herald On Sunday on July 7, 2009

When Matt McCarten quoted selectively from Amnesty International's report on the recent conflict in Gaza, he failed to mention Amnesty International's finding that ‘Hamas has continued to justify the rocket attacks launched daily by its fighters and by other Palestinian armed groups into towns and villages in southern Israel during the 22-day conflict. ... These [Palestinian] attacks ... violated international humanitarian law and cannot be justified under any circumstance.’

In the eight years preceding the Gaza conflict, Hamas and Islamic Jihad launched 5107 mortar attacks and 4322 rocket attacks against Israeli civilians, forcing Israel into a military conflict it did not want, in order to protect its citizens.

Although he is swift to denounce Israel for defending itself, Mr McCarten has not published a single harsh word condemning these Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians.

The Israeli people and their government deeply regret the loss of innocent civilian lives in Gaza, yet Hamas and their international allies celebrate the death of every ‘Zionist Jew’ they kill.

Mr McCarten would be more credible as a commentator if he demonstrated that he understood both sides of this conflict.

Submitted to The NZ Herald on May 28, 2009 - Printed but edited.

Sir,
Gwynne Dyer's article of May 27 compares the reaction of Israel and South Korea to the nuclear threat from Iran and North Korea. Mr. Dyer points out that ‘Both Israel and South Korea have a security guarantee from the United States’, yet wonders why Israelis are ‘more hysterical’ than South Koreans.
Maybe recent history would show why these countries respond to threats of annihilation in different ways.
In 1950, when North Korea attacked South Korea, the UN sprang into action. Within hours they had passed a unanimous resolution condemning North Korea for the aggression and within a few weeks US and other UN-backed soldiers (including many New Zealand soldiers) were risking their lives to defend South Korea.
By contrast in both 1956 and 1967 when Egypt threatened Israel, the UN sprang into action by withdrawing all soldiers and leaving Israel to defend itself.
This apathy towards aggression against Israel is sadly not just history. In spite of Mr. Dyer's claim that ‘Israel and Iran, have never fought a war’, Iranian purchased rockets are fired against Israeli cities almost every day from Iranian-backed militias in the Gaza Strip, yet I don't recall any articles from Mr. Dyer condemning those attacks and assuring Israel that UN soldiers are lining up to protect Israel against this aggression.
Sincerely,

Submitted to The Nelson Mail on May 24, 2009 - Printed Saturday May 30.

Dear Editor
Well done your cartoonist for his spitting images of Obama and Netanyahu.
In the BBC HardTalk programme in 2006, Netanyahu was faced with a querulous interviewer who ignored his answers. In spite of persistent provocation Netanyahu maintained a calm and dignified manner and answered the questions directly and with good humour. He pointed out that Israel's response to Hezbollah's 2,000 rocket barrage was justified in the same way as the RAF's response Germany's Rachenwaffen, to locate the launch sites and target them, but far more difficult when faced with an enemy that operates out of civilian areas with mobile launchers. I know what it is like to undergo indiscriminate air attack. As a child in London I survived bombs, doodlebugs and silent V2 rockets.
Mr Moreu portrays Netanyahu as a cynical liar. My impression was that of a confident, articulate leader who doesn't shrink from labelling Islamic extremists as the real threat and who regard Israel as an outpost of the ‘Decadent West’.
I warmed to Bibi Netanyahu. I feel I could trust him to follow an honourable path in the coming peace talks with Obama. Arabs respect strength. This man has it in spadefulls.

Submitted to The Press on May 24, 2009

Mike Moreu's cartoon (21 May) about the meeting between Barak Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu is a distortion of the truth.
‘Ethnically cleansing’ the West Bank of Palestinian Arabs is not Israeli government policy and Prime Minister Netanyahu has not given any statement promoting such an idea. For Mr Moreu to suggest that this is Mr Netanyahu's or the Israeli government's position is libellous.
When Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967, they ‘ethnically cleansed’ the area of Jewish communities, many of which had existed for centuries. Jordan denied Jews access to their holy sites, including the Western Wall of the Temple in Jerusalem. Despite this, when Israel regained control of East Jerusalem in 1967 they allowed Arabs to maintain their control of the Jewish Temple Mount.
It is Israel's Arab neighbours, not the Jewish state, who have a long history of ‘ethnically cleansing’. It is the leaders of these same Arab states, not Benjamin Netanyahu, who have publicly declared their intention to repeat that history.

Submitted to The Nelson Mail on May 24, 2009.

Mike Moreu's cartoon (21 May) about the meeting between Barak Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu is a blatant distortion of the truth and an inversion of history.
‘Ethnically cleansing’ the West Bank of Palestinian Arabs has never been Israeli government policy and Mr Netanyahu has never made any statement as Israeli Prime Minister promoting such an idea. For Mr Moreu to suggest that this is Mr Netanyahu's or the Israeli government's position is libellous.
When Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967, they ‘ethnically cleansed’ the area of Jewish communities, many of which had existed for centuries. Arab forces killed or expelled Jewish residents, desecrated synagogues and cemeteries, and destroyed Jewish homes and businesses. Jordan denied Jews access to their holy sites, including the Western Wall of the Temple in Jerusalem. Despite this, when Israel regained control of East Jerusalem in 1967 they allowed Arabs to maintain their control of the Jewish Temple Mount.
It is Israel's Arab neighbours, not the Jewish state, who have a long history of ‘ethnic cleansing’. It is the leaders of these same Arab states and authorities, not Benjamin Netanyahu, who have publicly declared their intention to repeat that history.

Submitted to The Dominion Post on May 23, 2009.

Dear Editor
Tom Scott is entitled to hold an opinion about the relationship between American foreign policy and Israel. However, his recent cartoon (21 May), portraying the Jewish state as an aggressive dog wearing a kippah, or yarmulke, is deeply offensive.
The kippah is an article of clothing, with both religious and cultural significance, that is worn by Jewish men. By placing an emblem of Jewish faith and culture on a mad dog, Tom Scott is not being satirical, he is being insulting.
Israel's regional enemies make no secret of the fact that they want to destroy Israel and eradicate Jews from the Middle East. Sections of the Arab and Palestinian media frequently depict Israel and Jews in the most inflammatory and offensive ways imaginable.
Responsible cartoonists and commentators are able to express opinion without resorting to racial and religious slurs.
Tom Scott should realise that although racist and denigrative cartoons are popular in some sections of the Arab world, they have no place in New Zealand.

Submitted to The Dominion Post on May 23, 2009.

In his cartoon (May 21), Tom Scott missed the point of the meeting between US President Obama and Israeli PM Netanyahu by projecting his own antipathy toward Israel onto President Obama. Israel and the US share a common goal: to find a peaceful solution while preserving Israel's existence as a Jewish state — a goal that New Zealanders should also share. They may differ on the details, but neither is biting the other's tail.
If Mr Scott was referring to Jewish settlements, he should remember that houses don't kill people; terrorist attacks kill people. Houses can be torn down. In fact Israel just demolished an illegal outpost in the West Bank on Thursday, stating ‘evacuating unauthorized settlements, particularly on private Palestinian land, is the obligation of Israeli society to itself’. There is no disagreement on that.
If there is a mad dog in the peace process, it is the Palestinians who can't stop ‘biting’. On Friday another terrorist attack from Gaza was prevented — unreported, of course, in the NZ press.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on May 23, 2009 ( Letter printed )

I agree with M. Dando (May 23). The nerve of Israel, thinking it has the right to exist in a homeland that goes back two millennia and more! How dare it insist on defending itself against constant attacks for 61 years? Let's get rid of it.
Let's also get rid of New Zealand, which took over its land by force, the United States, which drove Native Americans into reservations, and other countries in the world that were established by conquest, without any historical justification.
Wait, I've got a better idea. Maybe the Jewish people have the right to a homeland — their only one — like everyone else. Maybe the problem lies not with Israel, but with those Arabs (notably, not the 1.4 million Arabs who live peaceably within Israel) who want to eradicate it.

Submitted to The Press, Nelson Mail on May 23, 2009

Mike Moreu's cartoon (21 May) is a gross misrepresentation of actual reality. He implies that Israel wishes to engage in ethnic cleansing. This is an untruth which is on a par with the numerous other false accusations leveled against Israel and Jews over the years. Perhaps he should study the charters of Hamas and the PLO, which call for the destruction of Israel as a Jewish State and then he will realise just who the real ethnic cleansers are.

Submitted to The Dominion Post on May 23, 2009. Printed in ‘To the Point’ May 27

Obviously Tom Scott thinks that portraying the Jewish State as a mad dog, complete with a religious head covering (Thursday 25/5) is funny. I wonder if he will be doing a similar cartoon showing hate filled Islamic terrorists in the guise of an animal wearing a traditional Arab head covering. Hardly likely of course given previous violent reactions by Moslem States to such representations. Jews are fair game however it seems.

Submitted to The Press on May 22, 2009, and rejected in less than four hours.

As usual, Mike Moreu (cartoon, May 21) doesn't understand the Middle East conflict; in fact, he has it upside-down. It is not Israel that wants a land free of Palestinians — there are 1.4 million Palestinians living peacefully within Israel. It is the Palestinians who want a land free of Jews and who have conniptions every time a house is built in a Jewish village (which they also don't want). Regardless of whether this house-building is a good or bad idea, houses don't kill people; rocket attacks kill people. Houses can be torn down, but people cannot be brought back to life. The Middle East conflict will end only when the Palestinian terrorist groups give up their attacks and their goal of destroying Israel.

Submitted to The Press on May 21, 2009

I congratulate your cartoonist Mike Moreau on his excellent likenesses of Obama and Netanyahu - identified with a Star of David to remove any doubts — and the latter's ‘creative answer’ to his own assistant's questioning about what Obama had said. Can you trust any of these Jews? Notice how the lackey had managed to steal Obama's tie? Appreciate the subtlety Mike. Thieves as well as liars eh?
I played back the BBC HardTalk interview of Natanyahu (aka Bibi) in August 2006 during the Israeli incursion into Lebanon.
What struck me about Bibi was that, in spite of the querulous interviewer, he was calm and dignified, answered the questions directly and with humour, put up graciously with the constant interruptions and pointed out that Israel's response to Hezbollah's 2,000 rocket barrage was entirely justified. He reminded the interviewer that the RAF response to Hitler's vengeance weapons was to locate the launch sites and target them — pretty difficult when Hezbollah and Hamas operate out of civilian areas with mobile launchers. But that is not a reason to do nothing and putting up with years of rockets intended to kill indiscriminately.
I know what it is like to be attacked randomly from the air. As a child in London I survived bombs, doodlebugs and silent V2 rockets. Two of my school friends did not.

Mr Moreau wants you to think that Netanyahu is a cynical liar. My impression is that of a strong, articulate leader who states his intentions straightforwardly and doesn't shrink from labelling Islamic extremists as the enemies of Israel — which is regarded as an outpost of the ‘Decadent West’. Bin Laden demands that The West converts to Islam and Ahmadinejad calls for the State of Israel to be ‘wiped off the map’.
It would appear that many western journalists (and cartoonists) enthusiastically agree, judging by their consistent demonising of Israel — branding it (of ALL things ! ) a ‘Nazi’ and ‘apartheid’ state and reserving their special odium for all its attempts at defending its inhabitants or at making peace with its dog-in-the-manger Arab neighbours.
I warmed to Bibi Netanyahu. I feel I could trust him to follow an honourable path in the coming peace talks with Obama. Arabs respect strength. This man has it in spadefulls.

Printed May 4, 2009. Waikato Times

Return of Hitler (Heading by Waikato Times editors)

I agree with Glywn McInnes (Waikato Times letters, April 27) about the threat Mahmoud Ahmadinejad poses to world peace.
Iran's President abused his position as keynote speaker at the Geneva ‘anti-racism’ conference to vent his hatred for Israel and the Jewish people.
Although representatives of the European Union states walked out during his tirade, it was sobering to see how many delegates from other nations remained to hear and applaud his racist invective.
The United Nations' Secretary-General's censure of Ahmadinejad was as mild as Neville Chamberlain's criticism was of Adolf Hitler.
After reviewing Ahmadinejad's performance in Geneva, Reuven Rivlin, the Israeli Knesset's Speaker, gave a solemn warning:
‘Yesterday, ...the world witnessed the return of Adolf Hitler ... If there is one lesson to be learned from the destruction and devastation the first Hitler brought to the world, it is to be found in the realisation that anyone who remains silent, anyone who ignores evil, he too in the final analysis pays the price. I therefore call upon you, my colleagues around the world, not to remain silent, not to turn away and above all not to think for one moment that Ahmadinejad is not a threat to you too.’

Submitted to The Press on April 28, 2009

Anybody who actually believes the Iranian President, of all people, is correct in calling Israel racist (Stephen Meikle, 28 April), has obviously never been there to see reality. As a kiwi now living in Israel I can say that despite the difficult circumstances Israelis face, there is far less racism here than that experienced by minorities in New Zealand. The irony is that if Jesus the Jew was living in Israel today, he would also be branded as a racist by those same people. who now defame the Jewish State.

Printed on April 30, 2009, but the last sentence was missing.

Submitted to The Press on April 27, 2009

___ may condemn anti-Semitism, but his words are the very embodiment of it. He calls facts favourable to Israel (as presented in KBRM ads) ‘propaganda’ from the Israeli lobby. Facts are facts, it is lies that are propaganda. Or perhaps he feels that only criticism of Israel should be allowed. By the way, KBRM is not part of any ‘Zionist lobby’; we are simply a group of people who believe that the truth about Israel needs to be told. Some of our most ardent and active members are Christian.
___ says that ‘any justified criticism of recent Israeli war crime... is branded as anti-Semitic’. KBRM has never made such a claim.
The next charge really goes beyond the pale. ___ thinks that Israel should not attack Iran — a country sworn to Israel's destruction that is on the verge of having a nuclear bomb — because it would cause ‘soaring oil and food prices’ in New Zealand. In other words, let the Jews die, as long as we have our food and oil. But no, this is not anti-Semitic.
___ calls the occupation of the West Bank ‘one of the longest, most cruel, brutal oppressions the world has known’. In fact, the West Bank is largely self-governing and the only ‘oppressions’ are the security barrier and checkpoints, both of which would be gone if there were no suicide bombings and other attacks. Every day millions of travelers pass through airport checkpoints without complaint, but when Israel (whose terrorist threat is infinitely greater) installs them, ___ calls it ‘oppression’
The charge that ‘journalists are banned by the Israelis from the West bank’ is a real whopper.* Perhaps ___ doesn't read the newspapers.
After all that, ___ says that condemning Israel war crimes and violations of international law and human rights are different from anti-Semitism. To me, blaming the only Jewish nation for ‘war crimes’ and violations of human rights, while ignoring evidence to the contrary and also ignoring deliberate war crimes and human rights violations by its enemies, is about as anti-Semitic as you can get. But isn't it nice that the writer ‘wholeheartedly condemns’ anti-Semitism?

read full report

Submitted to several newspapers on April 26, 2009

During WWII, 1 1/2 million German civilians were killed, not counting Dresden. In the Vietnam War, 5 million civilians were killed, not counting My Lai. Yet there was little hue and cry about war crimes. After suffering 7000 rocket attacks from an enemy determined to destroy it, Israel attacked Gaza. Despite the army's best efforts to minimise civilian casualties, several hundred civilians were killed (depending on which report you believe) — an amazing record when the enemy doesn't wear uniforms and operates from civilian areas. Yet Israel, the only Jewish nation in the world, is vilified in the headlines for ‘war crimes’, while the real and flagrant war crimes of its enemy are ignored. Why the double standard?

Published in the ODT on April 28, 2009

Submitted to The Press on April 25, 2009

What a shocking personal attack on me and Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Mideast (_________ , April 25) — full of inaccuracies and insinuations. To set the record straight: I am not a ‘self-styled’ chairman; I was elected.
Our advertisements were written and paid by members of KBRM.
KBRM does not claim there is prejudice on the part of most editors; we believe most editors are fair-minded.
Most material in our advertisements does not come from ‘Israeli sources’. The material is selective because it is facts not usually seen in newspapers. If _________ finds any errors (and he didn't cite any), he should drop us an email (Feedback, kbrm.org.nz) and they will be corrected.
KBRM has no constitution, but we have over 50 members from Whangarei to Invercargill and a 14 member Board who communicate by email.
Member names are not made public is because of the venom and hatred of the anti-Israel crowd, exemplified by _________ letter. (far worse examples may be seen on our website).

Printed on April 28, 2009

read full report

Submitted to The Dominion Post on April 24, 2009

Dear Editor,
I had a strong sense of deja vu when I saw Iran's President Ahmadinejad depicted as a clown in Tom Scott's recent cartoon (23 April). Before the full horror of Nazism was understood by the wider world, people were inclined to portray Adolf Hitler as a bit of a clown and dismiss him as a bombastic buffoon.

Israeli Knesset speaker, Reuven Rivlin described his sense of deja vu upon witnessing President Ahmadinejad in Geneva, and issued a sombre warning we should all heed:

‘Yesterday, ... the world witnessed the return of Adolf Hitler. ... If there is one lesson to be learned from the destruction and devastation the first Hitler brought to the world, it is to be found in the realization that anyone who remains silent, anyone who ignores evil, ... he too in the final analyses pays the price. I therefore call upon you, my colleagues around the world, not to remain silent, not to turn away and above all not to think for one moment that Ahmadinejad is not a threat to you too.’ Yours faithfully,

Submitted to The Southland Times on April 22, 2009

Congratulations to the NZ government for making a correct and courageous decision to boycott the Durban 2 conference. The best way to show ones disdain for racism is to refuse to associate with racists. It didn't take more than the opening speech at the conference to vindicate New Zealand's decision. In this speech, Pres. Ahmadinejad of Iran called for the destruction of the only Jewish state in the world — a tiny blip among 44 Muslim states. You can't get more racist than that.

Submitted to The Press on April 22, 2009

I'm afraid that your cartoonist Moreu got it backwards (April 21). By refusing to attend the racist conference in Geneva (along with nine other countries), New Zealand is indeed ‘walking the walk’ of abhoring racism and fighting discrimination. For one thing, the conference itself is nothing but talk, but more importantly, the talk is racist talk, as was evidenced by the opening day hate speech by the Iranian President Ahmadinejad, which caused 25 European leaders to walk out. If calling for the destruction of the only Jewish state in the world is not racist, I don't know what is. The best way to ‘walk the walk’ is to walk out of such racist activities.

Printed April 24, 2009

Submitted to the Sunday Star Times on April 19, 2009

In a week that featured more Palestinian attacks on Israeli homes and stories debunking the false claims of Gaza casualties, what does the SST choose to print (19.4.09)? A complaint that ‘Israel's treatment of Palestinians is worse than what blacks suffered during the apartheid era in South Africa’. What hogwash!
First, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are governed by Hamas and the PA, not by Israel. Second, the Israeli ‘treatments’ being complained of are the security barrier and checkpoints, both of which were installed to prevent attacks on Israelis. Every day millions of travellers go uncomplainingly through airport checkpoints, where the security risk is minuscule compared to Israel's.
If the Palestinians would give up their nonsensical desire to destroy Israel and allow it to live in peace, these security measures would be removed. But it seems the Palestinians would rather blame Israel than accept responsibility for their actions.

Submitted to the Press on April 14, 2009

Ashley Robinson (April 13) claims that Israel's investigations of alleged war crimes are a sham. In fact, the Israeli Defence Force takes morality seriously (Google ‘purity of arms’). In one of the cases investigated it was found that the soldier who supposedly shot a mother and two children had fired only a warning shot; the rumour developed because other soldiers overheard his officer questioning him and misunderstood. In the other case, it was found that the ‘elderly woman’ was a suspected suicide bomber who was approaching an Israeli installation and didn't stop. This is not to say that every soldier was a saint, but the civilian casualty rate (25%) in Gaza was amazingly low, given an enemy that doesn't wear uniforms and hides among civilians. I suggest that Dr Robinson might better concern himself with the immorality of Palestinians who send axe-wielding murderers into play areas to kill children (Google ‘axe-wielding Palestinian’).

Printed April 16, 2009

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on April 12, 2009

In the absence of a considered argument, Peter Basquin (11.4.09) instead gratuitously insults Israelis by suggesting they have become ‘Holocaust deniers’. Let's examine the facts behind this charge: In a discussion about the Gaza operation, some Israeli soldiers said they had heard of possible misdeeds by fellow soldiers. In the spirit of ensuring proper conduct, an officer passed this information to higher authorities. This officer (Danny Zamir) later explained that he had no doubt the army had generally acted in accord with regulations, but it was too late. Even though the charges proved to be false, the story had already been latched onto by international media eager to report evidence of Israeli ‘war crimes’. Sadly, but typically, little attention was paid to correcting the story. Mistakes were undoubtedly made in Gaza, as in every war. But, if anything, this episode shows that Israelis continue to believe that their army must follow high moral standards, even when combatting an enemy that routinely commits war crimes.

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on April 9, 2009

The charge made by Peter Basquin (11.4.09) that Israelis are ‘Holocaust deniers’ is exceedingly vile, especially since the truth is exactly the opposite. Here is ‘the missing truth’: During post-Gaza discussions, some Israeli soldiers reported rumours of possible misdeeds by other soldiers. Such is the high standard of morality in the IDF that the officer conducting the discussion passed this information to higher authorities for investigation. It turned out that the charges were false, but in the meantime they were picked up by the press (including the Israeli press) and turned into ‘war crimes’ headlines. This is not to say that no mistakes were made in Gaza, or that every soldier acted like a saint, but it proves that the Israeli army is truly dedicated to what they call ‘purity of arms’, even while fighting an enemy that deliberately targets civilians. So much for ‘Holocaust deniers’.

Printed April 17, 2009

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on April 9, 2009

Despite Carl Dozell's insulting words (9.4.09), he did not attack or even question one statement in my letter (31.3.09). Strange.

As for his statements — yes, it is true that Hamas was democratically elected, but then so was Hitler. That doesn't mean they didn't evolve into a dictatorial regime, as did Hitler's. (Read the March 25 post at kbrm.org.nz for details.) Second, Hamas' avowed goal is to destroy the state of Israel, not to regain land taken over the past 50 years. This fact is at the root of the conflict and should be understood by everyone.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on April 2, 2009

Dear Editor
It must be a ‘slow news’ week for Middle East editors of New Zealand's major dailies. Despite the Arab League meeting in Cairo and Israel's new Prime Minister Netanyahu taking office this week, former leader of the PLO, Yasser Arafat, manages to hit the headlines again in NZ newspapers, five years after his death.

Despite the headlines, none of the reports cast any new light on the man who led one of the most powerful, well-organised and wealthy terrorist organisations of the twentieth century. Rather, they continue the mythologizing of Arafat — the supposedly Spartan life he lead and the rumours surrounding his final illness and death.

No mention is made of the enormous personal wealth he amassed in his lifetime, while the Palestinian people he led lived in abject poverty. No insights are given into the orchestrated killings he masterminded and executed during his terrorist career. There are no comments about his personal connections to the most notorious anti-Semitic regime in human history, or the legacy of hatred towards Jews he carried on from his uncle, Hitler's crony, Mohammed al-Husseini.

Arafat is gone, but the legacy of his hatred and the mythology of his peace live on.

Submitted to the Dominion Post on March 30, 2009

Regarding Tom Scott's cartoon (March 27), Israel is not always in the wrong (and Israel's supporters are not always Jewish). Granted, Scott's job as a cartoonist is to reduce the subtleties and complexities of life to a black and white, two-dimensional universe, but life is far more complex than his cartoons suggest.

Israel's actions in Gaza must be seen in context, which includes Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza; Hamas' unrelenting terrorist attacks on Israel's citizens; powerful Islamic states that support nations and organisations that seek Israel's destruction; violent anti-Jewish rhetoric that saturates Palestinian media, and peace partners whose ‘bottom line’ is Israel's annihilation.

Too often Israel is accused, judged and condemned before all the details of events are known. Rather than condemning Israel while details about Israel's and Hamas' actions in Gaza are still emerging, it would be responsible for the media, and cartoonists, to wait until all the facts are known before passing judgement on Israel.

Israel wants to coexist peacefully and safely with its neighbours, but, unfortunately, Israel's neighbours do not want a long-term, positive relationship with Israel. Israel's actions are not always right, but neither are those of its enemies.

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 30, 2009

Maryana Rooney (March 19) used questionable words and actions of a few Jews to condemn all Jews, saying ‘no wonder they got persecuted for more than 2000 years’. I find this an appalling sentiment and a classic example of anti-Semitism. She also got her facts wrong:

Israel did not support the Sabra/Shatila massacres. The Lebanese militia was allowed into refugee camps to root out terrorists and Israelis were appalled by what ensued. Israel forced its Defence Minister to resign because he ‘should have known’ what the Lebanese would do.

Regardless of what Menachem Begin may or may not have said, Israel accepted the partition and today 1.4 million Palestinians live in Israel as full citizens. The Arabs rejected the partition and killed or expelled all Jews from the land they retained. These are facts.

Finally, Father Elias Chacour was far more even-handed in his criticism than Ms Rooney implies. He wrote, for example, ‘Palestinians have been persecuted in the Arab countries, sadly enough, more than they have been in Israel.’ He urged both sides to find common ground: ‘Either we stop claiming we are children of Abraham, or we act as brothers and try to reconcile.’

When Israel's enemies are willing to reject hatred and terrorism and be reconciled with their Jewish neighbours, they will find in Israel a brother and a willing partner in peace.

Printed March 31, 2009

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on March 27, 2009

Sometimes figures lie. The number of Palestinian children killed by Israel, cited by Angus Macdonald (25.3.09), is highly dubious and in conflict with reports issued, for example, by the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, not to mention the Israeli Defence Force. But even if the true number were one-tenth that, it still would be of concern.

Second, many of these ‘children’ were actually young men who were actively working with and supporting terrorist activities. But even then, the remaining number is still of concern.

The real reason the number is a ‘lie’ is because figures alone don't tell the whole story. In WWII there were far more German civilian casualties than the UK, Canada, US, Australia and NZ combined, but that didn't mean the Allies were fighting an immoral war.

The important fact is that almost every one of the Israeli children were killed in deliberate attacks on Israeli civilians, while almost every one of the Palestinian civilian deaths occurred during attacks on terrorists who are bent on destroying Israel. Anyone who doesn't understand that, doesn't know the first thing about the Mideast conflict.

Mr Macdonald also wrote that after losing the war to evict the Jews in 1948, the Palestinians also lost ‘their homes, land, freedom, dignity, human rights, etc.’ This is certainly true of some Palestinians (but not the 1.4 million living peacefully today in Israel); however we disagree about the best way to regain these losses. Mr Macdonald thinks it is to continue the fight to destroy Israel. I think it is to finally accept the existence of Israel and get on with rebuilding their lives and their nation.

Finally, I agree that with Mr Macdonald that ‘we should all strive for the truth so we can form our own opinions’. The above statements are the truth.

Printed in abridged form on March 31, 2009

Submitted to All New Zealand Newspapers on March 24, 2009

Dear editor
I am saddened by the unbalanced media portrayal of the testimonies of Israeli soldiers. In times of war, mistakes are made and people can make wrong decisions. Any Israeli soldier found guilty of behaving inappropriately will be punished harshly. This illustrates Israel's strong moral standing and ability to self-reflect and admit mistakes. If only the other side could show these self-reflective abilities and transparency. If only the media could see the inversion of truth it perpetuates when it convulses with headlines of war crimes and massacres by Israel without properly checking the authenticity of these soldiers' claims. Israel's soldiers go out to kill terrorists and when civilians die, Israel shows anguish and regret. When the Hamas fails to kill civilians, Hamas is sad that they have failed in their mission to kill innocent people. When will the media become a responsible media and stop displaying its consistent prejudice towards Israel?

Submitted to The Southland Times on March 20, 2009

Point missed

Maryana Rooney (March 19) completely missed the point of my earlier letter. I did not ask her to ‘grieve and regret any massacres that have happened in this world.’ I asked her specifically to apologise to Germans in New Zealand for the deaths of German women and children caused by the Allied massacres in World War II, before she asks Ms Bennie to apologise for Israel's action against Gaza. I did this to point out that Israel's actions, which she called a ‘massacre’, were indeed not much different from Allied actions in World War II. In both cases a nation (or group of nations) was defending against an enemy that was trying to destroy it, and in both cases the attacks were directed at military targets. In fact, as I understand it, Israel took more precautions to prevent civilian casualties than did the Allies.

Printed March 24, 2009

Submitted to The Southland Times on March 19, 2009

Pauline McIntosh (Letters 17.03.09) claims that Israel is ‘following the pathway of Satan’ by defending itself from terrorist attacks and a very real threat of genocide. I cannot see how Israel allowing itself to be annihilated by hostile Islamist states and terror organizations could be construed as following what Ms McIntosh describes as ‘Christ's pathway for life.’

Israel exists in an intensely hostile political and religious environment, surrounded by nations and factions that only recognise Israel's existence when speaking of its impending destruction. Yet Israel does not breathe murderous threats against those who seek its demise, nor does it act against its enemies without enduring many years of provocation. Israel does not seek to impose its religious ideologies upon any other nation or people, and has sought peace with anybody that will simply recognise its right to exist on this planet. Israel has even tried the ‘loving thy neighbour’ approach Ms McIntosh's favours. Withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, Israel offered ‘land for peace’, with disastrous consequences, as Gaza rapidly descended into a terrorist-run state whose main pre-occupation was lobbing rockets and missiles at Israeli civilians.

While Ms McIntosh may be dissatisfied with Israel's record of keeping the Ten Commandments, they have done better than many, and certainly no worse than any other nation in that regard. Before criticising Israel, the nations of the world, and Ms McIntosh, should examine themselves and, as Jesus Christ said, let those who are without sin be the ones ‘to cast the first stone.’
Yours faithfully

Submitted to The Southland Times

One-sided obsession

It is a pity that Pauline McIntosh's one-sided obsession (March 17) has blinded her to the terror emanating from Gaza.
Thank goodness the Jewish people have never believed in ‘turning the other cheek’ to evil. Perhaps that is why they have outlived all those who sought to destroy them over the past 2000 years.

Printed March 19, 2009

The Otago Daily Times March 18, 2009

The following letter was written as a requested response to a letter that attacked KBRM's advertisements. It was published underneath that letter, preceded by ‘the, chairman, Kiwis for Balanced Reporting on the Mideast, replies:’ However the last paragraph, a response to ‘I wonder if Mr Brooks and his backers that pay thousands of dollars for pro-Israeli advertising are Jewish’, was deleted.

The 123 Israeli children cited were murdered between 2000 and 2005. The number of Palestinian children murdered during that time was zero. Even when Israel finally struck back, the number remained zero, because murdered means ‘killed with intent.’ While the/Users/leah/Desktop/KBRM web pages/Posts Israeli children were deliberately targeted, Israel made every effort to avoid inflicting civilian casualties.
The Palestinians in Gaza fled from a war that the Arabs started to drive out the Jews. They lost. If they had accepted the UN partition, as did the Jews, they would be there today, alongside the 1.4 million Arab citizens of Israel. Israel has no desire to occupy ‘what is left of Palestine’; that is Hamas' goal. When Israel withdrew from Gaza it was rewarded with non-stop rocket attacks that eventually forced it to take action. These statements are facts, not opinions.

KBRM's membership includes a broad range of faiths. We have received many letters thanking us for our advertisements that present ‘the missing truth’ (see www.kbrm.org.nz, Feedback). Unfortunately, there are always those who keep their eyes firmly shut.

Submitted to The Southland Times on March 17, 2009

Self-defence ‘pretext’?

Why does Pauline McIntosh (March 17) call Israel's need for self-defence a ‘satanic pretext’? What on earth does she think is the real reason — that Israel enjoys killing people? I suggest that she take a look at the faces of the 123 Israeli children murdered by Palestinians (google ‘123 children murdered’) and then tell their families that self-defence is just a pretext.
As for her ‘love thy neighbour’ advice, it would be better directed at the Gazans, who have launched over 6000 rocket attacks at Israel in the last four years.

Printed March 19

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 17, 2009

Turn the other cheek

Pauline McIntosh writes of ‘Christ's message of turning the other cheek’. History has shown that those who do so do not live very long. One example is the Moriori of Chatham Islands, whose elders made a covenant with God ‘not to war or fight anymore’. They were virtually wiped out by mainland Maori who ate some and enslaved others.

Jews in particular know what happens when you merely ‘turn the other cheek’, as is evidenced by 6 million graves. Should multicultural Israel not defend itself against the militant group Hamas, Israel would also cease to exist. Moderate Palestinians who recognise Israel's right to exist in peace are thwarted in their efforts by Hamas terrorists who are supplied with increasingly powerful rockets by Iran's President Ahmadinejad.
I suggest Pauline google ‘Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel’ and see what comes up!

Printed March 19 — Last sentence omitted.

Submitted to The Press on March 13 (short version of the letter of March 11 that was rejected)

I love Rosemary McLeod's column, but she missed the mark when she said Gazans ‘were entitled to their anger’ because of the lopsided body count (March 5). In fact, body count has nothing to do with who's right or wrong (compare with World War II). If you persist in throwing stones at a lion, you should expect to get bitten.

Printed March 16

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 12, 2009

Not a ‘massacre’

If Maryana Rooney (March 11) will find ‘space deep in her heart as a human being for grieving and regret for the deaths of German women and children caused by the Allied massacres’ in WWII and will apologise to Germans in NZ, I'm sure that Ms Bennie would be willing to do the same in regard to Israel's attack on Gaza.
However Ms Rooney should be more careful about slinging the word ‘massacre’. Israel's attack on Gaza was aimed at the Hamas infrastructure and every effort was made to avoid civilian casualties. The fact that only 1/3 of the fatalities were civilians (a finding not generally published in New Zealand, by the way) is remarkable, given that Hamas used civilians as human shields. Israel's action may or may not have been wise, but it was not a ‘massacre’.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on March 12, 2009

I would like to thank the NZ Herald for publishing an article about life in Sderot, southern Israel (12 March 2009). We hear little in the media of the trauma experienced by ordinary Israelis living with the Middle East conflict.

I do not deny the hardships experienced by Palestinian Arabs living in Gaza, however, Palestinians do not have the monopoly on human suffering. Israeli families raise their children in a difficult and dangerous environment, surrounded by hostile nations and organisations that call for their destruction, and are increasingly capable of carrying out their genocidal threats.

While Palestinians in Gaza receive support and financial aid from the international community, including Israel and wealthy Arab league nations, the suffering endured for years by ordinary Israelis, like families in Sderot, has been ignored or dismissed as insignificant.

The world has forgotten that it was the Palestinians' relentless bombardment of civilian towns, like Sderot, that finally led Israel to attack Hamas in an attempt to end the shelling. If there had been no Palestinian rocket and missile attacks on Israel, or if the international community had cared enough to speak in defence of beleaguered Israeli civilians, there would be no Palestinian casualties in Gaza.

Submitted to the NZ Herald on March 12, 2009

Good on you for presenting a news item that describes Israel's side of the conflict (‘Bomb-proof area welcomed by parents’, 12.3.09). Your readers should realise that it was this constant bombardment of Sderot (over 6000 rockets since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005) — not to mention bigger cities like Ashkelon — that was the direct cause of Israel's attack on Gaza. When the world did nothing to stop the bombardment, Israel felt it had no choice. Would any other nation do less]

Submitted to The Press, Christchurch on March 11, 2009

Rosemary McLeod usually hits the nail on the head, but on 5.3.09 she missed. Citing the lopsided casualty figures in Gaza, she wrote ‘[Gazans] were entitled to their anger’. But body count has nothing to do with right or wrong. In WWII, 7 million Germans were killed, including 1.5 million civilians — far more than English, Canadian, US, Australian and NZ fatalities combined — but no one said ‘the Germans were entitled to their anger.’

Israel has been under constant attack for 60 years. In the last eight years alone 123 Israel children were murdered. Does Ms McLeod think Israel should have waited until another 123 children were killed before counterattacking? Does she know that Israel made every effort to avoid civilian casualties, despite their being used by Hamas as human shields? Would she have been happier if more Israeli soldiers were killed?

Moral: He who throws stones at a lion should expect to get bitten.

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 5, 2009

Dear Editor,

The inconvenient facts

Pauline McIntosh should consider some inconvenient facts before criticising Natalie Bennie and Israel.

It is in Gaza, not Israel, that people are imprisoned, tortured and summarily executed when they make political protests against the ruling Hamas government.

It was Hamas, not Israel, that launched a ‘murderous assault’ against the civilian population of southern Israel for years before Israel responded, first with a partial blockade and finally militarily. It was Hamas that deliberately put their own civilian population in harm's way during Israel's military action.

It is Hamas, not Israel, that ‘covets its neighbour's property’ to the extent that Hamas openly declares its desire to destroy the entire nation of Israel, exterminate the Jewish population and turn Israel into an Islamist state.

It is Hamas, not Israel, that has close ties to Nazism, being ideologically descended from Hitler's ally, Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

Concerning Ms McIntosh's allusion to the command to ‘love thy neighbour’, a command found in both Jewish and Christian Scriptures, Israeli hospitals have cared for wounded Arabs and Jews for decades, without question, regardless of race or creed. Arab Israelis are granted the same rights and protection under Israeli law as Jews, Christians and secularists. It is Israel's neighbouring Arab and Islamic states that incite hatred against, threaten and attack their Jewish neighbours.

Here in New Zealand, we should also take note of this command, and act kindly towards our neighbours, regardless of race or creed, or events in other parts of the globe.
Yours faithfully,

Printed March 10

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 4, 2009

The privilege of human right

I was suprised by Pauline McIntosh's suggestion that Mrs Bennie, the lady who was refused service by Mr Tekinkaya in his Turkish restaurant should apologise for the fuss she caused. Her suggestion is quite bizaare considering that everyone else including the Mr Tekinkaya, the HRC and the majority of the general public acknowledge that it was MrTekinkaya himself who needs to apologise. One of the many things that make New Zealand such a great country is that every visitor and citizen is enjoys the privelage of human rights. For Mrs McIntosh to suggest that Mr Tekinkaya's forcible eviction of an innocent woman and her children is acceptable behaviour in New Zealand is insulting to those of us who respect the laws and who cherish fairness, democracy and decency. The HRC has dealt with and closed the matter, is it not time that the Pauline McIntosh and the Southland Times does the same?

Printed March 11

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 4, 2009

Incredible

So Pauline McIntosh (4.3.09) thinks Natalie Bennie should apologise to the cafe owner after he expelled her from his cafe for talking in Hebrew. Yeah, right. She then goes on to decry Israel's ‘murderous assault on its neighbours’.

When Ms McIntosh (and Mr Tekinkaya) begin to show as much concern for the 123 Israeli children murdered by Israel's ‘neighbours’ (google "123 children murdered" for their names) as they do for the casualties when Israel struck back at the murderers, I will give some credibility to her views. When she shows as much concern for the Israeli school that was hit by a Palestinian rocket on Feb. 28 as she does for the Gaza school that was almost hit by Israeli forces who were returning fire at militants, I will give some credibility to her views. When she shows as much concern over the intent (and actions) of Israel's neighbours to destroy Israel as she does for Israel ‘coveting its neighbour's property’ (and this after Israel withdrew from Gaza), I will give some credibility to her views. Perhaps she thinks Israel should wait until another 123 children are murdered before taking action.

As for other Kiwis, I hope they will show not just the same concern, but much more, because after all, it is the refusal of Palestinians to accept Israel and allow it to live in peace that is at the root of the problem, and has been for 60 years.

Printed March 10

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 4, 2009

Prejudice, ignorance

Thanks to Ms. McIntosh, for displaying her prejudice and lack of knowledge so openly for all to read. As a kiwi living in Israel I would like to inform those who may not be aware, that this country is one of the most ethnically diverse and democratic in the world and stands in stark contrast to the miserable human rights records of every Arab & Moslem country in the Middle East and beyond. Her gratuitous recipe for lasting peace is another example of her historical amnesia, the Jewish people having been at the lethal receiving end of Christian neighbourly ‘love’ for the last 2,000 years.

Submitted to the Southland Times on March 4, 2009

I am astonished that there are those like Pauline McIintosh who believe that refusing to serve a patron because they're from Israel is an acceptable ‘political protest’ in New Zealand. It is not. Ms McIntosh should also be informed that Israel is an extremely tolerant nation when it comes to protest — a multicultural democracy, where freedom of religion and the right to protest are anchored in law. Unfortunately, Israel is surrounded by people who do not recognise its right to exist and who launch rockets at its towns, schools and hospitals. The President of Iran constantly denies the Holocaust, refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist and supplies Hamas with increasingly powerful rockets smuggled in piecemeal via tunnels from Egypt to indiscriminately kill Jews who only have one little state no larger than Canterbury to call their own.
Pauline, Israelis long for peace with their Arab neighbours. Do you know that there are bilingual and multi-cultural schools such as ‘Hand in Hand Center’ (www.handinhand) which was founded to bring peace, where Jewish and Arab children learn together in the same classroom? Where are the peacemaking schools in Arab states and why can't Jews live safely there? It is not just a coincidence that Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf was translated into Arabic, distributed in The Palestinian territories and became a best seller (Middle East Media and Research Institute (MEMRI); Parade, (June 23, 2002), p. 13.). Israelis have good reason to fear their neighbours and react to terrorism.

Submitted to the Gisborne Herald on March 3, 2009

Luc Hansen attacked my recent statements (21.02.09), calling them ‘red herrings represented as cast-iron facts’, and ‘Israeli propaganda.’ He said he wants ‘independent verification.’ I'm happy to oblige.

In an earlier letter, David Zwartz provided verification for my statement that ‘historic Palestine... was divided... into Jordan, Israel and a Palestinian state’, so I will move on to Mr Hansen's surprising denial that Arabs started the 1948 war — a fact that is almost universally accepted. E.g.,

‘As independence was declared, Arab forces from Egypt, Syria, Transjordan (later Jordan), Lebanon, and Iraq invaded Israel.’ Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed.

Ben-Gurion declared independence on 14 May... Over the next few days, approximately 1,000 Lebanese, 5,000 Syrian, 5,000 Iraqi, and 10,000 Egyptian troops invaded the newly-established state. — Wikipedia: 1948 Arab-Isareli War.

A more detailed picture of events was supplied by Amos Oz, an eye-witness. ‘A few hours later [after the UN voted to create the Jewish state ]... shots were fired at a Jewish ambulance... All over the country Arabs attacked Jewish buses on the highways, killed and wounded passengers, and fired with light arms and machine guns into outlying suburbs and isolated settlements.’, Amos Oz, Tales of Love and Darkness, p. 346.

‘At one minute past midnight [May 15], without war being declared, the infantry columns, artillery and armour of the regular Arab armies poured into the country, from Egypt to the south, Trans-Jordan and Iraq to the east and Lebanon and Syria to the north. On Saturday morning Tel Aviv was bombed by Egyptian planes... The Trans-Jordanian Legion captured the Jewish Quarter of the Old City... and began a massive bombardment whose aim was to cause losses among the civilian population, break their spirit and bring them to submission.’ Oz, op. cit., p. 357.

I spend so much time on this point because the acceptance of the partition by the Jews and its rejection by the Arabs is the fundamental cause of the conflict even today. If the Arabs had accepted the UN plan as did the Jews, there would be a Palestinian state today.

Mr Hansen then said ‘Dr Brooks... continues to deny the events Palestinians named ‘al nakba’, the catastrophe.’ This is not true; I have never denied any of the events, nor have I denied that Palestinians refer to the creation of Israel as ‘the catastropheְ. In my opinion, that the Palestinians were not willing to divide the land was indeed a catastrophe.

Finally, Mr Hansen said ‘you never see Dr Brooks referring to Palestinians. They are always the catch-all ‘Arabs’... to delegitimise Palestinians as a pre-existing people.’ This is also not true. I have no hesitation in using the term Palestinians, and I acknowledge their pre-existence (although it doesn't go nearly as far back as that of the Jews). Nevertheless, the term Arabs was generally used at the time of the 1948 war (in the Wikipedia article cited, it appears 180 times) and it is commonly used today to describe Israeli Arabs —not ‘Israeli Palestinians’ (which they, indeed, are).

Published on March 4

Submitted to the NZ Herald on March 3, 2009

As Quartet envoy Tony Blair inspects the damage in Gaza, Hamas' rockets continue to rain down on southern Israel, destroying a school near Ashkelon on February 28. Despite this, Israel is under increasing pressure from the West to lift its partial blockade against the Gaza Strip. Although Israel allows humanitarian aid into Gaza, this is not considered enough by some members of the international community.

Have they forgotten that Egypt also closed its Rafah Crossing into Gaza when Hamas took control? It is only opened when Egypt deems the humanitarian situation in Gaza requires it. The Rafah Crossing remained closed during the Israeli military action in Gaza, and Egypt has only opened it for a few days at a time since then.

Since Gaza's Hamas leadership has expressed an implacable hatred for Israel and Jews and continues its rocket attacks on Israelis, one wonders why Western nations expect that Israel, a nation Hamas is sworn to destroy, should be first in line to supply Gaza's needs. Hamas should first seek help from its Muslim neighbours. If Egypt is unwilling to assist the people of Gaza while Hamas is in power, why should Western leaders expect Israel to do otherwise?

Submitted to the Timaru Herald on March 3, 2009

Melba Lord quotes some highly dubious sources in her criticism of Israel (Feb. 25). Regarding the late Israel Shahak, former (not present) president of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights; Werner Cohn, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of British Columbia, wrote: ‘Dr. Shahak is full of startling revelations, if that is the word, about Jewish history and the Jewish religion. None of those I was able to check had any foundation...Some are just funny.’
I think Sid Spicer was spot on in his criticism. Professor Benny Morris, a professor of history at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Be'er Sheva said, ‘Unfortunately much of what Pappé tries to sell his readers is complete fabrication.’ Professor Morris, a sometimes strong critic of Israel, wrote: ‘Righteous Victims: A history of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001’ and ‘The birth of the Palestinian refugee problem revisited’. Other people of note are Efraim Karsha a Professor at King's College, London, who accused Pappé of ‘factual misrepresentations’, and Seth J. Frantzman called Pappé's work ‘a cynical exercise in manipulating evidence to fit an implausible thesis.’

Printed on March 6

Submitted to the Gisborne Herald on March 2, 2009.

Response to anti-Israel critics

I could have written many letters to The Gisborne Herald about the nonsense of some of your anti-Israel critics, but will present some facts to Luc Hansen concerning his letter of February 25, 2009.

The League of Nations-sponsored San Remo conference, 1920, had the job of handing out mandate control of German and Turkish territories to the Allies.

France was given Lebanon and Syria. Britain, Palestine and Iraq.

Palestine and what is referred to as Trans-Jordan was one territory administered as such until 1921 when Trans-Jordan was given to Emir Abdullah, named Trans-Jordan with its border set on the River Jordan. Abdullah then closed his kingdom to Jewish settlement.

These changes took effect in 1922 and were recognised by the League of Nations.

In 1923, Britain ceded an area of the Golan Heights to French-controlled Syria. Smaller in size than the Israeli-controlled heights of today, the border ran about one mile or so west of Kuneitra.

The Palestine mandate document called for the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory. This the British tried to implement.

After World War 2 and the failure of the Peel and Woodhead commissions, Britain dumped the issue in the hands of the United Nations.

The UN special committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) came up with the partition plan complete with maps dividing the territory into two states, with Jerusalem under international control.

This is what formed Resolution 181 of November 27, 1947. The Jews accepted the plan. The Arabs inside and outside the mandate did not accept it and resorted to violence, attacking Jewish settlements throughout the territory.

Between November 30 and December 11, 1947, 79 Jews were killed by Arabs while 32 Arabs were killed, some by Jews defending themselves and some by British police.

This pattern of violence continued right up until Israeli's Declaration of Independence on May 14, 1948.

The next day, the armies of Egypt, TransJordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon invaded Israel. They failed to defeat Israel and as they say the rest is history.

Mr Hansen, I have taken the facts, dates and figures for this letter from the following three sources.

The Arab-Israel conflict readings and documents edited by John Norton Moore. Published by Princeton University.
The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli conflict 7th edition by Professor Martin Gilbert, Oxford University published by Routledge.
Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict 6th edition. A History with documents by Charles D.Smith, University of Arizona. Published by Beford St Martins. A Massey University Text Book. Note: The source of the dead of the period from November 30 to December 11, 1947 is from British Mandate records.

There are no red herrings or misleading information in this response Mr Hansen.

Published on March 4.

Submitted to the Gisborne Herald on 27 February, 2009

Don't distort history, Mr Hansen

Luc Hansen lambasts Dr Rodney Brooks over factual accuracy and then makes various unsupported and incorrect assertions about the Palestine Mandate and Partition.

The original Mandate for Palestine, from the League of Nations to Britain, was indeed divided in 1922 into Transjordan (east of the Jordan River) and Palestine (west of the Jordan). A fuller explanation can be read at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transjordan. Transjordan was excluded from the provisions for Jewish settlement, and so became, and still is, exclusively Arab.

The remaining mandate territory (west of the Jordan) was later allocated to Arabs and Jews by the 1947 Partition Resolution. The text of UNGA Resolution 181 says: ‘The Mandate for Palestine shall terminate as soon as possible ...’ and also ‘Independent Arab and Jewish States ... shall come into existence ...’ This was the informed and considered decision of world opinion - embodied in the UN General Assembly — at that time.

The UN determined that neither Arabs nor Jews could achieve what they each separately desired for themselves, and justice was best served by giving them an equal opportunity to have an independent state. The Jews took the opportunity and declared the State of Israel. The Arabs didn't take the opportunity and have regretted that decision ever since.

As requested by Mr Hansen, independent verification has been attached to this letter.

Printed March 5, 2009 with the heading changed to: Hansen assertions unsupported, incorrect

Printed in the Otago Daily Times on 25 February, 2009

The KBRM advertisement attacked by Peter Basquin (19.2.09) presented facts, not ‘propaganda’, related to Israel's right to exist. As to the Gaza war, perhaps Mr Basquin missed our earlier advert that presented facts showing why Israel's actions, founded on self-defence, were both moral and legal.

His charge of apartheid will be answered by an upcoming advert that will show that Israel is the most integrated nation in the Mideast.

The purpose of these KBRM ads is to present ‘the missing truth’ so that Kiwis can know the whole story before forming judgments. Slinging the epithet ‘propaganda’ doesn't change this truth.

Submitted to the New Zealand Herald on 25 February, 2009

Dennis McKinley's column draws attention to the plight of children caught up in regional conflicts around the world. I agree with him that no one should deny or belittle the suffering experienced by any group of children in conflict situations.

However, Mr McKinley neglects to mention the suffering of one group of children who are routinely ignored by the UN: Israel's children. Israeli children grow up in a world that increasingly questions their nation's right to exist. For generations they have endured terrorist attacks on their homes, schools and playgrounds. They have witnessed, and been the victims of Islamist suicide bombers on buses, in restaurants and market places. For years they have lived with Hamas' regular Kassam rocket and Grad missile attacks, which destroy their homes, maim their bodies, and scar their memories. They live with the constant threat of war as Israel's hostile neighbours seek to replace the Jewish nation with an Islamist state.

Like the children of Gaza, Israel's children suffer ‘stress, anxiety and fear’. They too are maimed, killed and traumatized.

If Dennis McKinley and the UN truly seek to recognise and alleviate children's suffering, they must have compassion for all children, everywhere, with no exceptions.

Submitted to The Press, Christchurch on 24 February, 2009

Dear Editor
G.A. Van Meurs (24.2.09) refers to Benjamin Netanyahu as a terrorist. His narrow and distorted picture of events speaks volumes of his agenda against Israel. The attack on the Beirut airport was in retaliation for the hijacking of an Israeli plane and no civilians were killed. It seems to be in vogue nowadays, with regards to Israel, to call suicide bombers freedom fighters and leaders of a democratic country terrorists. This would definitely have done Goebbels proud.

Submitted to The Press, Christchurch on 23 February, 2009

Last week Hamas "flatly rejected" Israel's offer to lift its blockade of the Gaza strip in return for releasing a captured Israeli soldier (guardian.co.uk). What does this rejection say about the oft-expressed concern for ‘humanitarian suffering’ in Gaza?
A year after Israel left Gaza, Palestinian militants crossed into Israel and captured Gilad Shalit, who was standing guard at a border post. Later when Hamas, with its open goal of driving the Jews into the sea, took over Gaza, Israel imposed a partial blockade that nevertheless allowed humanitarian needs to be met.
Now Gaza is given an opportunity to lift the blockade. All they have to do is release a captive that shouldn't have been taken in the first place. They refuse.
Either the level of "humanitarian suffering" caused by the partial blockade has been grossly exaggerated (likely), or the Palestinians have elected despotic madmen as their leaders (also likely).

Submitted to The Sunday Star Times on 23 February, 2009

Dear Editor,
According to the SST (22.2.09), ‘Hamas has flatly rejected Israel's demand that it free a captive soldier in return for lifting the blockade of the Gaza Strip’. So much for Hamas' concern for the ‘humanitarian suffering’ caused by the (partial) blockade!
Background. A year after Israel left Gaza, Palestinian militants crossed into Israel and, in an act of war, captured Gilad Shalit, who was standing guard at a border post. Later when Hamas, with its open goal of driving the Jews into the sea, took over Gaza, Israel imposed a partial blockade that nevertheless allowed humanitarian needs to be met. (According to the UN, a blockade is a first and legitimate action to be taken against an aggressor. For example, when Russia installed missiles in Cuba aimed at the US, the US imposed a blockade that led to their removal.)
Now Gaza is given an opportunity to have the blockade lifted. All they have to do is release a captive that shouldn't have been taken in the first place. They refuse.
Either the level of ‘humanitarian suffering’ caused by the partial blockade has been grossly exaggerated (likely), or the Palestinians have elected despotic madmen as their leaders (also likely).

Submitted to the Otago Daily Times on 20 February, 2009

Gwynne Dyer (ODT, 20.02.09)' says regarding the elimination of the Tamil Tigers: ‘Good riddance to the Tamil Tigers, for they were brutal extremists who killed their own Tamil people in order to enforce unquestioning obedience, just as readily as their suicide bombers killed the majority Sinhalese population....’. Replace ‘Tamil Tigers’ with ‘Hamas’, Mr Dyer. Thank you so much for exposing your prejudice towards Israel.

Published on March 3

Submitted to the Gisborne Herald on 18 February, 2009

If Mr Gretton will look at my letter again, he will see that there was no attack on his person — only on his (inaccurate) charges. Historic Palestine was not ‘wiped off the map’, but was divided, as were other Arab parts of the Ottoman Empire, into Jordan, Israel and a Palestinian state, the latter division taking place in 1948. However the land intended for the Palestinian state was instead taken over by Jordan and Egypt. While some of the Arabs who left Israel were ‘expelled’, most fled voluntarily from a war that they (the Arabs) had started. However Jews living in the lands taken by Jordan and Egypt were expelled or murdered — all of them. As for the Arabs that stayed, 1.4 million today are full-fledged citizens of Israel and have been from the beginning. There is an Arab Cabinet Minister, Arab Israelis in the diplomatic service, an Arab High Court Judge and other Arab judges in the lower courts. Life may not be ideal, but polls show that Arabs in Israel would rather remain Israeli citizens than become part of a Palestinian state, and that says a lot.

Published on line in the Waikato Times on February 17, 2009

Gaza Strip

Peter Stringer writes that he is not an expert on the Middle East. He has got that right.

Regarding the absence of an independent Palestinian state, the fact is that the Gaza Strip and the West Bank belonged from 1948 until 1967 to Egypt and Jordan respectively. For almost 20 years Palestinians and the Arab League had the perfect opportunity to establish a Palestinian state. Yet the Arab states chose not to do so, preferring instead to work towards the destruction of Israel. Following the Six Day War both these territories came under Israeli jurisdiction.

Israel has indicated time and again that they support the establishment of an independent Palestinian State that recognizes Israel's existence. In good faith, Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza, yet in return they received Kassam rockets and grad missiles from Hamas. Hamas does not want to build a prosperous and independent Palestinian State; it simply wants to destroy Israel.

If Mr. Stringer is looking for a racist state that ‘uses murder and terror to subjugate its non-Jewish population’, he need look no further than Hamas-ruled Gaza where political and religious minorities are intimidated, tortured and murdered.

These are the facts Mr. Stringer.

Printed in the Gisborne Herald on 17 February, 2009

Equal rights in Israel

To answer just one of the false charges in the anonymous letter (‘Iraq’) Feb. 12), present day Israel IS a united state with all citizens having equal rights, including the 1.4 million Arab citizens (who carry passports). It is the Arab nations, including Palestinian areas, that are not.

The rest of your charges are about as accurate as the misspelling of my name. Finally, the purpose of my letter was not to be an ‘apologia for Israel’; it was to present facts that many people are unaware of, including you. Unfortunately, as Oliver Wendell Holmes said, ‘The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you shine on it, the more it will contract.’ Think about it.

Submitted for publication in the Waikato Times on February 13, 2009

If Peter Stringer (Feb. 7) thinks that Israel is a ‘racist apartheid state’, he has obviously never been there. If he were to visit, he would find a thriving multi-cultural society where Jews, Christians and Muslims live together peacefully with equal rights for all. If he wants to find a racist apartheid state, he should visit neighbouring Arab states, especially his beloved Hamas-run Gaza, and see how Jews are treated there (if he can find any). He also claims that allowing the Palestinians to elect their own government was just ‘window dressing’. When that government turns around and bombards you with thousands of rockets, it is far from ‘window dressing.’ Mr Stringer has filled his letter with far more lies and 'vitriol' than M Krause (Jan. 29), who merely defended Israel's right to defend itself.

Printed in The Press, Christchurch on February 12, 2009

Contrary to Charles Drace's belief, (Feb. 11) Jews, Christians and Muslims live in multicultural, democratic, Israel. They wish to live in peace alongside a Palestinian State which recognises Israel's right to exist and stops firing rockets at them. Would Charles Drace prefer to live under Hamas's Sharia Law?

The original letter submitted had the word ‘alongside’ emphasised.

Sent to The Press, Christchurch on February 12, 2009

Charles Drace has got his history wrong. The real Palestinians are the Jews who lived in Judea at the time the Romans renamed the country Palestine. Those who call themselves Palestinians today are Arabs who migrated to Palestine in the 1900s looking for work. Hardly a continuous history!!

Printed in The Timaru Herald on February 11, 2009

While all recoiled in horror at the recent fighting in Gaza, I believe Israel did everything it could, under the circumstances, to keep casualties to a minimum. Hamas are Islamic extremists who have no regard for anything other than their idea of the Muslim religion, as evidenced by their war against Fatah in 2007.

It is well documented that Hamas stored ammunition and inflammable substances under or near houses, mosques, schools, UN facilities and hospitals and fired mobile rocket launchers from those areas contravening the Geneva Convention.

TV and the general media widely reported that Israel bombed a school in Jabaliya. Canada's Globe and Mail reported ‘Account of Israeli attack doesn't hold up to scrutiny’ ‘John Ging, UNRWA's operations director in Gaza, acknowledged that all three Israeli mortar shells landed outside the school and that ‘no one was killed in the school.’’ The Specator UK wrote: ‘The only good thing about all this is that people can now begin to get an inkling of the truth about UNRWA — that this supposedly impartial body supervising the tinderbox of Gaza is actually a major player in fuelling the murderous frenzy against Israel at the heart of the Middle East impasse.’

Alan Dershowitz, a law professor at Harvard University, wrote, ‘Until the world recognizes that Hamas is committing three war crimes — targeting Israeli civilians, using Palestinian civilians as human shields, and seeking the destruction of a member state of the United Nations... the conflict will continue.‘

Submitted to The Press, Christchurch on February 11, 2009

Sorry, Charles Drace (11.02.09), but you have it backwards. It's the Arabs who want to drive out the Jews, not the reverse. This is not a matter of opinion, it is a fact, evidenced by words and deeds on both sides. For example, compare the 1.4 million Arabs living peacefully within Israel with the number of Jews living peacefully in Arab lands (zero?(. If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

Printed in The Gisborne Herald on February 11, 2009

Don't print prejudice

Does your newspaper, The Gisborne Herald, seek out the most anti-Israel comments and trawl the anti-Zionist web sites for the most outrageous statements that can be found by anyone?

I have been unable to find anywhere else in New Zealand where any such situation exists.

It is obvious that there are plenty of people opposed to the existence of Israel and many of them are obviously virulent anti-Semites.

But surely that does not mean that a responsible newspaper should give space to their prejudices.

You are in danger of becoming the Der Sturmer of the New Zealand press.

What agenda do you have?

February 9, 2009

The Press, Christchurch included a portion of a letter (below) in the section ‘In a few words’ (On February 11 they printed a letter by Charles Drace claiming that the Zionist government of Israel is driving out the Arabs. — KBRM members' letters written in response will be on this page shortly.)

I am amazed at the letters from people who support Hamas in its goal of driving the Jews out of Israel. Jews have a continuous history of living in Israel going back thousands of years.

The original letter:

I am amazed at the letters from people who support the Islamist group Hamas in its goal of driving out the Jews — a goal that has grave similarities to Hitler's ideas. Jews have a continuous history of living in Israel going back thousands of years. Hamas's goal is to impose Sharia law on the world, with punishments such as crucifixion and amputation . Their idea of justice for women, e.g., honour killing, is totally abhorrent to Western thinking. Yet reporters parrot the militants' line, and the world sees a lopsided, orchestrated display of gruesome photos that evoke sympathy for the perpetuators of the misery. Alan Dershowitz, a law professor at Harvard University, wrote, ‘Until the world recognizes that Hamas is committing three war crimes — targeting Israeli civilians, using Palestinian civilians as human shields, and seeking the destruction of a member state of the United Nations... the conflict will continue.’

Submitted to the Gisborne Herald on February 8, 2009. — Not printed

I was surprised to read Gilad Atmon's article, ‘No Choice But To Speak Out’, in the Gisborne Herald (23 January 1009). Rather than a serious and intelligent commentary on the conflict in Gaza, it reads like a twisted litany of anti-Semitic libels.

He claims ‘Jewish ideology’ is ‘very similar’ to Nazi ideology. This is absurd, as Nazism was opposed to every possible form of Jewish ideology, from religious Judaism to secular Freudianism and Marxism. Nazism attempted to erase every trace of Jewish thought, life and culture from Western Europe, yet Israel has never attempted to do this to any culture, anywhere.

Mr Atmon describes Israel's efforts to stop Islamist terrorists from attacking its citizens as a ‘genocide of the Palestinian people’ and Israelis as ‘the most powerful people on earth’ — an unusual way to describe 5 million Jews surrounded by 140 million Muslims whose leaders actively seek to destroy the Jewish nation.

Mr Atmon's paranoid delusions, claiming that Mossad has nothing better to do than assassinate a Jewish saxophonist for speaking against Israel, should make even the most gullible reader think twice about the reliability of this man's opinions. If he had directed as much vitriol against Hamas or Hizbollah he may have had something to worry about, but since he is spreading their poison for them he will most probably enjoy a long and prosperous life. This is evidently more than what he wishes for the Jews of Israel.

Printed in The Timaru Herald on February 2, 2009

Hamas

Regarding the January 29 editorial: When the Timaru Herald decides to call for an investigation of war crimes by Hamas, a government whose open aim is to murder Jews and destroy Israel, with greater urgency than possible war crimes by Israel, committed while defending itself against an enemy that uses civilians as a shield (which is a war crime in itself), that's when I'll take your editorials seriously.

Submitted to the Timaru Herald on January 29, 2009. (not printed)

Dear Editor,
With reference to the editorial on Jan 29, while all recoiled in horror at the fighting in Gaza, I believe Israel did everything it could, under the circumstances, to keep casualties to a minimum. In war there are always going to be times when split second decisions are wrong and in hindsight regretted. I can understand Israel's desire to protect soldiers as false criminal accusations by Hamas and those who would see Israel destroyed are not new.

Hamas are Islamic extremists who have no regard for anything other than their idea of the Muslim religion, as evidenced by their war against Fatah in 2007.

Palestinian casualty figures are not to be trusted as militants dressed as civilians. Hamas glorify death, send young woman and children strapped with explosives into Israel, using them to further their agenda, which is the annihilation of Israel/Jews and indeed, our free multicultural Western way of life.

Printed by the Sunday Star Times on January 18, 2009

Conflict in Gaza

10 out of 10 for Michael Laws' Column. He did not follow the naive thinking of the short-sighted, anti-Israel, pro-Islamic fundamentalist propaganda, nor parrot the diatribe from journalists who suck up to Hamas, regardless of the truth. Have John Minto and his like thought about the outcome for the rest of the world if Israel is destroyed - which is the aim of Hamas? Even Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia are probably hoping that Israel can subdue Hamas and Hisbolah, as they also wish to stay free from the fundamentalist Islamic rule of Iran and Syria. And what about the 750,000 Jews who fled Arab lands, leaving all behind, and were absorbed into Israeli society in 1948? They were not kept as refugees or primed to become suicide bombers as were the Palestinians who have been indoctrinated to hate Jews and the West.

Printed in the SST on January 18

I WAS disgusted by your January 11 cartoon. Israel's army, despite all the difficulties of fighting a terrorist organisation that uses human shields as defence, does not purposely target civilians. Thousands of injured have been treated in Israeli hospitals since the war begun. Your biased cartoon demands some deep soul-searching on your part.