What they said: ALP are anti-Semites

When you’re siding with neo-Nazis, you’re on the wrong side.

Bill Shorten.

We are calling for the next Labor government to recognise the state of Palestine.

Tony Burke.

This entry was posted in Hypocrisy of progressives. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to What they said: ALP are anti-Semites

  1. Rafe Champion

    Nice! A perfect catch.

  2. Gavin R Putland

    So tell me, Professor: What positions on the [email protected]$tinian question would qualify as not being antisemitic?

  3. BrettW

    When you are siding with the CFMEU you are on the wrong side.

  4. Viva

    Gavin: Any position that does not endorse people who want to kill Je”s on sight.

  5. Roger

    Pray tell, what accounts for Tony Bourke’s urgent interest in Palestinian statehood?

  6. Sinclair Davidson

    Gavin – people who advocate a two-state solution are anti-Semitic.

  7. Dr Fred Lenin

    The “wukkas” have always been a bit anti semitic but I dont recall them ever being pro islamofascist. Must be a tertiary education thing, the “wukka” s party without one worker in the leadership?

  8. Gavin R Putland

    Sinclair Davidson @ #2901544:

    So the antisemitism is bipartisan. Thank you for the unexpectedly clear answer to the half of the question that I didn’t ask.

  9. Sinclair Davidson

    So the antisemitism is bipartisan.

    Oh yes. Definitely at a policy level. Yet the Liberals don’t support recognising a Palestinian state – not all of them anyway.

  10. Cassie of Sydney

    “Roger
    #2901535, posted on January 8, 2019 at 9:23 am
    Pray tell, what accounts for Tony Bourke’s urgent interest in Palestinian statehood?”

    Burka’s livelihood is why…..he has a lot of Muslims in his seat….he is just pandering to them.

  11. Stimpson J. Cat

    The United States has thus far sought to play the role of mediator; we have avoided public comment on the key issues. We have always recognized – and continue to recognize – that only the voluntary agreement of those parties most directly involved in the conflict can provide an enduring solution. But it has become evident to me that some clearer sense of America’s position on the key issues is necessary to encourage wider support for the peace process.
    First, as outlined in the Camp David accords, there must be a period of time during which the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza will have full autonomy over their own affairs. Due consideration must be given to the principle of self-government by the inhabitants of the territories and to the legitimate security concerns of the parties involved.
    The purpose of the five-year period of transition which would begin after free elections for a self-governing Palestinian authority is to prove to the Palestinians that they can run their own affairs, and that such Palestinian autonomy poses no threat to Israel’s security.
    The United States will not support the use of any additional land for the purpose of settlements during the transition period. Indeed, the immediate adoption of a settlement freeze by Israel, more than any other action, could create the confidence needed for wider participation in these talks. Further settlement activity is in no way necessary for the security of Israel and only diminishes the confidence of the Arabs and a final outcome can be freely and fairly negotiated.
    I want to make the American position clearly understood: the purpose of this transition period is the peaceful and orderly transfer of domestic authority from Israel to the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. At the same time, such a transfer must not interfere with Israel’s security requirements.
    Beyond the transition period, as we look to the future of the West Bank and Gaza, it is clear to me that peace cannot be achieved by the formation of an independent Palestinian state in those territories. Nor is it achievable on the basis of Israeli sovereignty or permanent control over the West Bank and Gaza.
    So the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not support annexation or permanent control by Israel.
    There is, however, another way to peace. The final status of these lands must, of course, be reached through the give-and-take of negotiations; but it is the firm view of the United States that self-government by the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza in association with Jordan offers the best chance for a durable, just and lasting peace.
    We base our approach squarely on the principle that the Arab-Israeli conflict should be resolved through the negotiations involving an exchange of territory for peace. This exchange is enshrined in United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which is, in turn, incorporated in all its parts in the Camp David agreements. U.N. Resolution 242 remains wholly valid as the foundation-stone of America’s Middle East peace effort.
    It is the United States’ position that – in return for peace – the withdrawal provision of Resolution 242 applies to all fronts, including the West Bank and Gaza.
    When the border is negotiated between Jordan and Israel, our view on the extent to which Israel should be asked to give up territory will be heavily affected by the extent of true peace and normalization and the security arrangements offered in return.

    Ronald Reagan – September 1 1982

  12. bespoke

    Sinclair Davidson
    #2901544, posted on January 8, 2019 at 9:33 am
    Gavin – people who advocate a two-state solution are anti-Semitic.

    I have. Can you point me or explain why?

  13. When you’re siding with neo-Nazis, you’re on the wrong side.

    Ahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
    [Takes deep breath]
    Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
    [Snort]
    Ahahahahaha…haha…ha…hem..

    Let’s have a look at the historical record shall we?

    1938 – the FAR LEFT OF SOCIALISM sides with the FAR RIGHT OF SOCIALISM (Nazi-Soviet Pact) and then, like the thieving socialist vermin they are, invade Poland and divide up the spoils.

    Meanwhile the Conservative Winston Churchill is imploring the world to take notice of the socialist threat in Europe.

    In Australia the spiv Unions steal and sabotage equipment going to the Diggers overseas.

    All until the FAR RIGHT OF SOCIALISM does what socialists always do and turns on their ideological rivals for power.

    So the Socialist Bill Shorten, himself a renowned back-stabber and dumper of people he made pacts with, should know all about siding with Nazis and being on the wrong side.

  14. W Hogg

    Other than actually being Muslim and killing Joooz, what exactly has Hamas done to warrant recognition? If the govt of (say) Philippines behaved like that they would not be recognised as a legitimate govt. Do the nice Muslim countries recognise E Jeroooosalem with diplomatic relations? Is there a Saudi embassy?

  15. PB

    “We are calling for the next Labor government to recognise the state of Palestine.”

    How exactly is that “anti-Semitic”? Seems as though anything that doesn’t suit them suddenly becomes “anti-Semitic”.

  16. W Hogg

    Recognising a terrorist cell as a “state” whose sole purpose is to eradicate every Joooo might be considered anti Semitic, yes. Particularly when the land they claim includes parts of Israel and indeed the whole region was Jooooish until the ethnic cleansing of Da Joooz.

  17. jupes

    Gold Sinclair.

    Good get.

  18. jupes

    How exactly is that “anti-Semitic”?

    Do some research. Find out what “the State of Palestine’s” policy is toward the J*wish inhabitants of Israel.

  19. Perplexed of Brisbane

    Cassie of Sydney
    #2901586, posted on January 8, 2019 at 10:39 am
    “Roger
    #2901535, posted on January 8, 2019 at 9:23 am
    Pray tell, what accounts for Tony Bourke’s urgent interest in Palestinian statehood?”

    Burka’s livelihood is why…..he has a lot of Muslims in his seat….he is just pandering to them.

    Cassie / Roger,

    If he really wanted to pander to them he would be calling for Israel to be driven into the sea. I wouldn’t be surprised if that was his private view.

    Socialists / Communists / Fascists don’t have a good history of supporting Jews.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.