Over 700 attended the rally in support of Israel on Wednesday 2nd June, 19.00-20.00 outside the Israeli Embassy of London – organized by the Zionist Federation.
Photo’s attached for your information. More photos available upon request.
Photos courtesy of Adrian Korsner.
Banners were held with the following messages:
Aid not Arms
Israel Wants Peace, not Terror
Peace activists don’t use weapons
End Hamas rockets = End Blockade
Free Gaza from Hamas
The following people spoke at the event:
MP Louise Ellman
Author, Commentator, Director of the Centre for Social Cohesion Douglas Murray
Chairman of the Zionist Federation Andrew Balcombe
Representative of Christian Friends of Israel Candido Giraldo
Rabbi Shisler
The peaceful rally ended with the 700+ crowd singing both the British and Israeli national Anthem.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
ATTACK ON ISRAELI DEPUTY AMBASSADOR IN MANCHESTER
The Zionist Federation unreservedly condemns the attack on the Deputy Ambassador of the State of Israel last night. It calls on the police and the University to take the strictest possible action against these would-be deniers of free speech. Those reponsible must be sent down from the unversity and prosecuted if responsible for criminal damage.
It is the abject failure of university Vice Chancellors to deal with extremism which fuels this kind of hateful action. Do we have to have serious injury or a death before Vice Chancellors see that the right to protest does not include the right to endanger life and limb?
The ZF again calls on Universities UK to stop extremist action at Universities; if it cannot, the next government has to step in quickly. The Universities were asked to act in 2006, in the Report of the All Party Committee on Antisemitism. But - as was shown last night and as is shown by the numbers of former Islamic Society activists who have been arrested and/or charged for terrorist offences - inaction opens the door to campus extremism.
It is the abject failure of university Vice Chancellors to deal with extremism which fuels this kind of hateful action. Do we have to have serious injury or a death before Vice Chancellors see that the right to protest does not include the right to endanger life and limb?
The ZF again calls on Universities UK to stop extremist action at Universities; if it cannot, the next government has to step in quickly. The Universities were asked to act in 2006, in the Report of the All Party Committee on Antisemitism. But - as was shown last night and as is shown by the numbers of former Islamic Society activists who have been arrested and/or charged for terrorist offences - inaction opens the door to campus extremism.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
LATEST HADAR-ISRAEL VIDEOS: HOW TO CHALLENGE DELEGITIMIZATION OF ISRAEL
How can Israel respond to the strategic multi-dimensional campaign against it that is increasing in intensity daily?
D.J Schneeweiss, Israel's Coordinator of Anti-Boycott Strategy in Europe recently told Hadar-Israel that "we must respond to every challenge and in every arena," and that citizen action can play a crucial role.
"Israel's enemies are trying to change the rules of the game" by laundering their anti-Israel positions through use of human rights language and universal values rather than facts, Schneeweiss said. Their strategic goal is to tear asunder Israel's legitimacy. We must be ready to combat the lies that are being spread.
Israel's self-defense in response to missile attacks from terrorist armies exceeds international law standards according to IDF Lieutenant Colonel (res.) David Benjamin who was legal advisor to the IDF in Gaza for many years. Benjamin told Hadar-Israel that the good news is that, so far, Israel is winning the war against terrorist attacks despite having one hand tied behind its back, as it fully adheres to international law and basic moral standards, while its enemies do not.
The two spoke about combating terrorism, the Goldstone Report, and more at Hadar-Israel's most recent forum in Jerusalem. The event was headlined by international human rights lawyer Irwin Cotler on the topic "Lawfare! Fighting False Legal Actions and Boycotts that Demonize Israel."
Click here
to view the new videos of David Benjamin and D.J. Schneeweiss, as well as other exclusive and important videos of Irwin Cotler, Dore Gold, Danny Ayalon and Alan Baker.
D.J Schneeweiss, Israel's Coordinator of Anti-Boycott Strategy in Europe recently told Hadar-Israel that "we must respond to every challenge and in every arena," and that citizen action can play a crucial role.
"Israel's enemies are trying to change the rules of the game" by laundering their anti-Israel positions through use of human rights language and universal values rather than facts, Schneeweiss said. Their strategic goal is to tear asunder Israel's legitimacy. We must be ready to combat the lies that are being spread.
Israel's self-defense in response to missile attacks from terrorist armies exceeds international law standards according to IDF Lieutenant Colonel (res.) David Benjamin who was legal advisor to the IDF in Gaza for many years. Benjamin told Hadar-Israel that the good news is that, so far, Israel is winning the war against terrorist attacks despite having one hand tied behind its back, as it fully adheres to international law and basic moral standards, while its enemies do not.
The two spoke about combating terrorism, the Goldstone Report, and more at Hadar-Israel's most recent forum in Jerusalem. The event was headlined by international human rights lawyer Irwin Cotler on the topic "Lawfare! Fighting False Legal Actions and Boycotts that Demonize Israel."
Click here
to view the new videos of David Benjamin and D.J. Schneeweiss, as well as other exclusive and important videos of Irwin Cotler, Dore Gold, Danny Ayalon and Alan Baker.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
ISRAEL AND THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS
Israel and the upcoming elections – Please ask your Parliamentary candidates to agree to the following:
1. In December 2008 Israel had the right to attack Hamas terrorists in Gaza , after being subjected for eight years to their rocket attacks and that in future Israel has the right to defend itself.
2. The loophole in the Universal Jurisdiction Law - which enables Israelis visiting London to be arrested with no reference to the Attorney General - must be closed as a matter of urgency.
3. The biased Goldstone Report must be rejected in the UN.
4. There must be no boycott against Israel .
5. Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons.
6. There must be no UK government contact with Hamas and Hizbolla until those organisations have proved beyond doubt that they renounce terror.
1. In December 2008 Israel had the right to attack Hamas terrorists in Gaza , after being subjected for eight years to their rocket attacks and that in future Israel has the right to defend itself.
2. The loophole in the Universal Jurisdiction Law - which enables Israelis visiting London to be arrested with no reference to the Attorney General - must be closed as a matter of urgency.
3. The biased Goldstone Report must be rejected in the UN.
4. There must be no boycott against Israel .
5. Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons.
6. There must be no UK government contact with Hamas and Hizbolla until those organisations have proved beyond doubt that they renounce terror.
FULL TEXT OF LETTER FROM RONALD S. LAUDER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA
15 April 2010
Dear President Obama:
I write today as a proud American and a proud Jew.
Jews around the world are concerned today. We are concerned about the nuclear ambitions of an Iranian regime that brags about its genocidal intentions against Israel. We are concerned that the Jewish state is being isolated and delegitimized.
Mr. President, we are concerned about the dramatic deterioration of diplomatic relations between the United States and Israel.
The Israeli housing bureaucracy made a poorly timed announcement and your Administration branded it an “insult.” This diplomatic faux pas was over the fourth stage of a seven stage planning permission process – a plan to build homes years from now in a Jewish area of Jerusalem that under any peace agreement would remain an integral part of Israel.
Our concern grows to alarm as we consider some disturbing questions. Why does the thrust of this Administration’s Middle East rhetoric seem to blame Israel for the lack of movement on peace talks? After all, it is the Palestinians, not Israel, who refuse to negotiate.
Israel has made unprecedented concessions. It has enacted the most far reaching West Bank settlement moratorium in Israeli history.
Israel has publicly declared support for a two-state solution. Conversely, many Palestinians continue their refusal to even acknowledge Israel’s right to exist.
The conflict’s root cause has always been the Palestinian refusal to accept Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. Every American President who has tried to broker a peace agreement has collided with that Palestinian intransigence, sooner or later. Recall President Clinton’s anguish when his peace proposals were bluntly rejected by the Palestinians in 2000. Settlements were not the key issue then.
They are not the key issue now.
Another important question is this: what is the Administration’s position on Israel’s borders in any final status agreement? Ambiguity on this matter has provoked a wave of rumors and anxiety. Can it be true that America is no longer committed to a final status agreement that provides defensible borders for Israel? Is a new course being charted that would leave Israel with the indefensible borders that invited invasion prior to 1967?
There are significant moves from the Palestinian side to use those indefensible borders as the basis for a future unilateral declaration of independence. How would the United States respond to such a reckless course of action?
And what are America’s strategic ambitions in the broader Middle East? The Administration’s desire to improve relations with the Muslim world is well known. But is friction with Israel part of this new strategy? Is it assumed worsening relations with Israel can improve relations with Muslims? History is clear on the matter: appeasement does not work. It can achieve the opposite of what is intended.
And what about the most dangerous player in the region? Shouldn’t the United States remain focused on the single biggest threat that confronts the world today? That threat is a nuclear armed Iran. Israel is not only America’s closest ally in the Middle East, it is the one most committed to this Administration’s declared aim of ensuring Iran does not get nuclear weapons.
Mr. President, we embrace your sincerity in your quest to seek a lasting peace. But we urge you to take into consideration the concerns expressed above. Our great country and the tiny State of Israel have long shared the core values of freedom and democracy. It is a bond much treasured by the Jewish people. In that spirit I submit, most respectfully, that it is time to end our public feud with Israel and to confront the real challenges that we face together.
Yours sincerely,
Ronald S. Lauder
President
World Jewish Congress
Dear President Obama:
I write today as a proud American and a proud Jew.
Jews around the world are concerned today. We are concerned about the nuclear ambitions of an Iranian regime that brags about its genocidal intentions against Israel. We are concerned that the Jewish state is being isolated and delegitimized.
Mr. President, we are concerned about the dramatic deterioration of diplomatic relations between the United States and Israel.
The Israeli housing bureaucracy made a poorly timed announcement and your Administration branded it an “insult.” This diplomatic faux pas was over the fourth stage of a seven stage planning permission process – a plan to build homes years from now in a Jewish area of Jerusalem that under any peace agreement would remain an integral part of Israel.
Our concern grows to alarm as we consider some disturbing questions. Why does the thrust of this Administration’s Middle East rhetoric seem to blame Israel for the lack of movement on peace talks? After all, it is the Palestinians, not Israel, who refuse to negotiate.
Israel has made unprecedented concessions. It has enacted the most far reaching West Bank settlement moratorium in Israeli history.
Israel has publicly declared support for a two-state solution. Conversely, many Palestinians continue their refusal to even acknowledge Israel’s right to exist.
The conflict’s root cause has always been the Palestinian refusal to accept Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. Every American President who has tried to broker a peace agreement has collided with that Palestinian intransigence, sooner or later. Recall President Clinton’s anguish when his peace proposals were bluntly rejected by the Palestinians in 2000. Settlements were not the key issue then.
They are not the key issue now.
Another important question is this: what is the Administration’s position on Israel’s borders in any final status agreement? Ambiguity on this matter has provoked a wave of rumors and anxiety. Can it be true that America is no longer committed to a final status agreement that provides defensible borders for Israel? Is a new course being charted that would leave Israel with the indefensible borders that invited invasion prior to 1967?
There are significant moves from the Palestinian side to use those indefensible borders as the basis for a future unilateral declaration of independence. How would the United States respond to such a reckless course of action?
And what are America’s strategic ambitions in the broader Middle East? The Administration’s desire to improve relations with the Muslim world is well known. But is friction with Israel part of this new strategy? Is it assumed worsening relations with Israel can improve relations with Muslims? History is clear on the matter: appeasement does not work. It can achieve the opposite of what is intended.
And what about the most dangerous player in the region? Shouldn’t the United States remain focused on the single biggest threat that confronts the world today? That threat is a nuclear armed Iran. Israel is not only America’s closest ally in the Middle East, it is the one most committed to this Administration’s declared aim of ensuring Iran does not get nuclear weapons.
Mr. President, we embrace your sincerity in your quest to seek a lasting peace. But we urge you to take into consideration the concerns expressed above. Our great country and the tiny State of Israel have long shared the core values of freedom and democracy. It is a bond much treasured by the Jewish people. In that spirit I submit, most respectfully, that it is time to end our public feud with Israel and to confront the real challenges that we face together.
Yours sincerely,
Ronald S. Lauder
President
World Jewish Congress
ASA ADJUDICATION ON ISRAEL TOURISM ADVERT
The Zionist Federation was disturbed to read the adjudication (14 April) of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) about an advert for tourism in Israel.
This adjudication is grossly disproportionate since there is not the slightest risk that the British public would be misled by the inclusion of photos of the Western Wall and the Dome of the Rock into thinking that East Jerusalem was not disputed territory. There is no other way for tourists to see these sights other than through Israel. Indeed Israel took responsibility to support the religious sites of all denominations, a commitment which formed part of the obligations of an agreement with the Palestinian Authority signed in 1995. East Jerusalem was annexed by Israel over 40 years ago. Legally, from Israel’s point of view, it is one City with no difference between East and West
By saying that photos of the Western Wall and Dome of the Rock cannot be shown in Israel tourism advertising, the ASA is therefore preventing them being shown in ANY tourism advertising. That cannot be to the benefit of tourists.
We note that this ASA adjudication can be reviewed by the Independent Reviewer (Sir Hayden Phillips) at the request of the advertiser and that he can call for a review if there is “a substantial flaw of process or adjudication …. or where additional relevant evidence becomes available.”
We hope that there is such a review and that this results in the ASA Council changing its ruling.
For further information:
Alan Aziz
020 8202 0202
alan@zfuk.org
This adjudication is grossly disproportionate since there is not the slightest risk that the British public would be misled by the inclusion of photos of the Western Wall and the Dome of the Rock into thinking that East Jerusalem was not disputed territory. There is no other way for tourists to see these sights other than through Israel. Indeed Israel took responsibility to support the religious sites of all denominations, a commitment which formed part of the obligations of an agreement with the Palestinian Authority signed in 1995. East Jerusalem was annexed by Israel over 40 years ago. Legally, from Israel’s point of view, it is one City with no difference between East and West
By saying that photos of the Western Wall and Dome of the Rock cannot be shown in Israel tourism advertising, the ASA is therefore preventing them being shown in ANY tourism advertising. That cannot be to the benefit of tourists.
We note that this ASA adjudication can be reviewed by the Independent Reviewer (Sir Hayden Phillips) at the request of the advertiser and that he can call for a review if there is “a substantial flaw of process or adjudication …. or where additional relevant evidence becomes available.”
We hope that there is such a review and that this results in the ASA Council changing its ruling.
For further information:
Alan Aziz
020 8202 0202
alan@zfuk.org
Friday, April 16, 2010
ZIONIST FEDERATION GENERAL ELECTION 2010-GUIDANCE NOTES
ZIONIST FEDERATION GENERAL ELECTION 2010-GUIDANCE NOTES
(In conjunction with Christian Friends of Israel)
1. Regardless of which candidate you may vote for, it would be very helpful if you-preferably in conjunction with some of your neighbouring colleagues (who must reside within the same constituency)- meet briefly with each of the mainstream party candidates to ascertain their attitudes on some or all of the issues mentioned below. The principal reason is to keep track on not only the next MP for your area but also on those aspiring to Parliament, either in the constituency you live in or- as inevitably many unsuccessful candidates do-where they move on to what they perceive as a more winnable seat. Your notes of their response will be helpful for our community in the future.
2. Organising hustings meetings after an election has been called is very unlikely to be accommodated in the candidate’s crowded programme, but holding a brief meeting with concerned constituents from a faith/religious community will usually be allotted in as each candidate will want to maximise their potential votes. Logically, asking for such a meeting-the best way to approach the candidate directly or through their agent-should be undertaken as soon as possible, rather than leaving it to the last few days before polling. If the candidate has already been approached, ask if he/she will either include you in the meeting or arrange for you to see any notes made by those who have already requested the meeting. Please remember you are dong so as concerned Jewish constituents.
3. In any constituency in which there is a BNP candidate attending for election, it is vital that all members of the community use their vote wisely. Ask neighbours and friends in the constituency to spread the word throughout the wider community: ‘Please use your vote for any of the mainstream parties’. Further details are available from the ‘Hope not hate’ campaign-which is supported by the Board – at www.hopenothate.org.uk
4. Discussing the following issues with candidates may result in their asking questions about the matters concerned or aspects of the subjects. If you are unsure of the facts, indicate that you will arrange for a briefing sheet to be sent to them and then please let us know the information required and the contact details for the candidate(s) concerned. We will ensure that such briefing notes are sent to them regardless of whether they are successful or not, after the 6th May, though if a candidate-should they become the constituency’s MP- post the election, to hold more detailed discussions on the suggested and other subjects of interest or concern.
5. If you have any questions- please do not hesitate to either email office@zionist.org.uk or call the Zionist Federation (0208 202 0202) and ask to leave a message for Eric Moonman or email info@bod.org.uk or call the Board of Deputies (0207 543 5400) to ask for advice or guidance. And please remember to notify your findings to the Zionist Federation requesting it is forwarded onto the Board of Deputies Elections Desk.
SUGGESTED SUBJECTS TO BE DISCUSSED WITH ELECTION CANDIDATES 2010
1) Israel & Middle East
[a] Have you visited Israel and or the Palestinian Administrated Territories?
[b] What is your position on Israel, its security concerns etc?
[c] Do you favour a two state solution: Israel and Palestine?
[d] Will you support strong sanctions being taken against Iran as long as it pursues nuclear ambitions?
[e] Would you agree ‘no recognition’ of Hamas & Hezbollah until each renounce terrorism?
[f] Do you oppose the campaign for an academic boycott of Israel?
[g] What is your view of calls for boycott of Israeli products and goods?
[h] Will you support legislation on Universal Jurisdiction making action against suspected war criminals subject to the approval of the Attorney General/DPP?
2) Anti Semitism & Racism (optional)
[a] Are you aware of the scale of the problem including a record number of race hate incidents against Jewish people and property last year (924 incidents-CST Annual Report)
[b] What suggestions would you make to help combat anti Semitism?
[c] What initiatives would you consider to tackle racism in general?
(In conjunction with Christian Friends of Israel)
1. Regardless of which candidate you may vote for, it would be very helpful if you-preferably in conjunction with some of your neighbouring colleagues (who must reside within the same constituency)- meet briefly with each of the mainstream party candidates to ascertain their attitudes on some or all of the issues mentioned below. The principal reason is to keep track on not only the next MP for your area but also on those aspiring to Parliament, either in the constituency you live in or- as inevitably many unsuccessful candidates do-where they move on to what they perceive as a more winnable seat. Your notes of their response will be helpful for our community in the future.
2. Organising hustings meetings after an election has been called is very unlikely to be accommodated in the candidate’s crowded programme, but holding a brief meeting with concerned constituents from a faith/religious community will usually be allotted in as each candidate will want to maximise their potential votes. Logically, asking for such a meeting-the best way to approach the candidate directly or through their agent-should be undertaken as soon as possible, rather than leaving it to the last few days before polling. If the candidate has already been approached, ask if he/she will either include you in the meeting or arrange for you to see any notes made by those who have already requested the meeting. Please remember you are dong so as concerned Jewish constituents.
3. In any constituency in which there is a BNP candidate attending for election, it is vital that all members of the community use their vote wisely. Ask neighbours and friends in the constituency to spread the word throughout the wider community: ‘Please use your vote for any of the mainstream parties’. Further details are available from the ‘Hope not hate’ campaign-which is supported by the Board – at www.hopenothate.org.uk
4. Discussing the following issues with candidates may result in their asking questions about the matters concerned or aspects of the subjects. If you are unsure of the facts, indicate that you will arrange for a briefing sheet to be sent to them and then please let us know the information required and the contact details for the candidate(s) concerned. We will ensure that such briefing notes are sent to them regardless of whether they are successful or not, after the 6th May, though if a candidate-should they become the constituency’s MP- post the election, to hold more detailed discussions on the suggested and other subjects of interest or concern.
5. If you have any questions- please do not hesitate to either email office@zionist.org.uk or call the Zionist Federation (0208 202 0202) and ask to leave a message for Eric Moonman or email info@bod.org.uk or call the Board of Deputies (0207 543 5400) to ask for advice or guidance. And please remember to notify your findings to the Zionist Federation requesting it is forwarded onto the Board of Deputies Elections Desk.
SUGGESTED SUBJECTS TO BE DISCUSSED WITH ELECTION CANDIDATES 2010
1) Israel & Middle East
[a] Have you visited Israel and or the Palestinian Administrated Territories?
[b] What is your position on Israel, its security concerns etc?
[c] Do you favour a two state solution: Israel and Palestine?
[d] Will you support strong sanctions being taken against Iran as long as it pursues nuclear ambitions?
[e] Would you agree ‘no recognition’ of Hamas & Hezbollah until each renounce terrorism?
[f] Do you oppose the campaign for an academic boycott of Israel?
[g] What is your view of calls for boycott of Israeli products and goods?
[h] Will you support legislation on Universal Jurisdiction making action against suspected war criminals subject to the approval of the Attorney General/DPP?
2) Anti Semitism & Racism (optional)
[a] Are you aware of the scale of the problem including a record number of race hate incidents against Jewish people and property last year (924 incidents-CST Annual Report)
[b] What suggestions would you make to help combat anti Semitism?
[c] What initiatives would you consider to tackle racism in general?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
