Don Krausz on Ahmed Kathrada

Victor Gordon of the Media Team Israel has examined Kathrada’s statements made over many years and concluded that the man is an anti-Semite. I have read Victor’s articles over many years and found them to be well-researched and accurate.

 

Half of Feinstein’s letter consists of quoting Irena Klepfisz, a child survivor of the Warsaw Ghetto, who does not approve of Israel’s treatment of West bank and Gaza Palestinians. I survived two and a half years of concentration camp and was listed for the gas chambers on three occasions.

 

After that war I knew that the only country to ever protect Jews would be a Jewish country. No other acceptable country had stood by us, offered us refuge. Jews could have been allowed entry into Palestine in excess of 15,000 a year at a time when that number was the daily murder tally in Auschwitz. American planes photographed gas chambers with people queuing up; eyewitness evidence was provided to both Churchill and Roosevelt of the atrocities. Nothing positive was done.

 

I view Israel as one’s mother, drunk or sober. If one does not approve of her actions then help her, support her until she mends her ways.

You don’t try and destroy her through Boycotts, Disinvestments or Sanctions. That our enemies can manage without your help.

 

Israel has won every war on the battlefield and lost each propaganda onslaught. The Arabs were offered their own state in 1947. They declined. They announced a war of annihilation in 1948 and killed 6,000 Israelis, wounding 30,000. One percent of the whole Yishuv. Does the press ever mention this?

 

This tiny country with a population of about eight million is faced by the hostility of some one billion Moslems. They have been forced to take unpopular actions in order to safeguard their Jewish population, the first land in the world to do so. Our treacherous enemies and ignorant useful idiots have labelled the security fence an act of apartheid. It has saved almost 1000 lives.

 There is mention of the Occupation. Historically and legally it is untrue. And even if it were not, when one inhabits a bit of land the size of the Kruger Park, eight kilometres wide in one place and has to defend it against an enemy sworn to one’s annihilation, possible atomically, and aided by the great powers, one does not need public approval to take the necessary steps for survival.

 

Don Krausz responds to Farouk Araie (The star)

he Letters Editor,

The Star,

 

Farouk Araie’s letter in today’s Star refers.

 

I always read his letters with interest and have found them to be balanced, open minded and tolerant of other points of view. It is therefore not surprising that he condemns terrorism and is willing to describe Moslem organisations such as Boko Haram and al-Shabaab as such.

 I have worked with Moslems since 1950. They share the building where I live and I like and respect them. I also own a copy of the Qu’ran and have read on Islam. It is no wonder that Farouk Araie wishes to dissociate himself from the ghastly acts of terrorism that have been perpetrated in its name.

 Araie quotes a condemnation from the Qu’ran against killing human beings. Some years ago the Time magazine published an interview with a prospective suicide bomber. He was asked what he expected the Deity to say to him after his ultimate sacrifice and he replied: “How many infidels did you kill?”

 Is Araie able to explain what drives these followers of the Qu’ran to commit acts that the vast majority of this world’s population find abhorrent and utterly unacceptable? When a three-month old baby in an Israeli settlement has its throat cut by a youngster who shows no remorse, that is one thing. When the citizens of Gaza then dance in the streets in celebration we are seeing something very different.

Victor Gordon: My response to the letter received from the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation.

The response by the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation to the letter by Ariel Zvi does little to dissuade one that Kathy has not, in his later years developed, what I will charitably refer to as, an antipathy towards Hebrews.

Despite their lengthy substantiation of his close and extended history with Jewish activists with whom he fought the struggle, shoulder to shoulder, it would seem that Kathy has some difficulty in extending these fuzzy feelings further and applying them to Jewish aspiration to  have a safe, existent and spiritual homeland of their own in the face of far greater hostility, far greater danger and a far longer history of brutal persecution and oppression than ever experienced by Kathrada and all oppressed South Africans.

While Kathrada obviously welcomed the unconditional support from a disproportionate number of Jews during the infamous apartheid years,  local Jews appear to have taken on a somewhat different persona with their striving to maintain their spiritual homeland despite the intense hostility that has continued, unabated, for the past 66 years.

How else but sceptically can we view Kathrada’s stated pro-Jewish sincerity when, at a Palestinian Solidarity gathering held in Ramallah in April 2013, he said,

“Our University students, supported by our trade unions and civil society organisations are making it abundantly clearer by the day that apologists of your oppressors are not welcome in our country”.

Here there is no ambiguity. Any Jew not in agreement with Kathrada’s  anti-Israel stance, must seriously consider leaving this country.

How else do we define an “apologist of your oppressor”? As virtually 100% of “the oppressor” are Israeli Jews how do we regard his sentiments as being anything other than anti-Semitic? Would it not be more honest of Kathrada to simply introduce the word “Jewish” next to the word “oppressor”?

It would have been strange had Kathrada, the humanist, not made some appropriate comment following his visit to Auschwitz –

“Auschwitz is arguably the most poignant reminder to mankind of the evils of racism.”  

Nowhere in his statement does he mention Jews murdered in Auschwitz despite the systematic annihilation of well over 1 million of them in that camp alone.

Having myself spent four days there, trying to absorb the enormity of what occurred, I would be surprised had Kathrada not made some suitable comment. However, his horror at the extent of the crime that occurred fails to prove that he has any further understanding of, and sensitivity towards the threats that Israelis face on a daily basis and the essential measures forced upon them to counter them. I base this conclusion on the fact that he has never, ever, said a word that reveals such an understanding.

While sympathising with and justifying everything Palestinian, in Kathrada’s mind there is no connecting the dots that lead to an appreciation of Israel’s security measures when coupled with  Palestinian inconvenience and humiliation; Israeli fears; the terrorist threats from Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and FATA; the  policies of annihilation contained within the Hamas and PLO Charters; the irrational hatred displayed by every one of the 22 Muslim/Arab nations that surround Israel; the incitement against Israel cultivated in Palestinian schools, etc etc. All these are the root cause of Israel’s reluctance to remove herself from the West Bank and place her future existence on the trust of her current enemies.

Why does  someone with Kathrada’s apparent intellect fail to comprehend this?

To say that, “Kathrada’s views on human rights and democracy are consistent with his support for the freedom of Palestinians … (which) includes Palestinian political prisoners, such as Marwan Barghouthi”, ignores the fact that Barghouiti is not a political prisoner as Kathrada wishes us to believe, but a cold-blooded killer, serving 5 life sentences for the criminal act of murder.

Would Kathrada view someone in our own country found guilty of a similar offence  a “political prisoner” and call for his release? Did Kathrada  have anything positive to say about Israel’s recent release of 78 Palestinian prisoners, many guilty of murder (some of mere babies),  in exchange for the so-called “Peace talks” that Mahmoud Abbas treated with indifference from the very beginning?

Saying, “Kathrada …. will speak out against the domination of one over another, whether this domination is manifested through colonialism, anti-Semitic pogroms, apartheid or Zionist occupation”, fails to explain why he has never ever condemned the most brutal attacks perpetrated by Palestinian terrorists against Israeli civilians. In a spate of suicide bombings in 2002-4, over 1200 Israeli men, women and children were murdered without Kathrada uttering a single word.  Why?

Is Ahmed Kathrada an anti-Semite?  I reserve the right to lable him as such depending on what he says and does from here on. However, his past utterances (and lack thereof) have given one sufficient pause to leave an uneasy feeling that with Kathy, all is not kosher. 

Victor Gordon: Catastrophe still haunts Palestine (New Age)

NEW AGE

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

Refer: “Catastrophe still haunts Palestine”   (2014/5/16)

 

If Imraan Buccus wishes to reflect on a “Nakba” (Catastrophe) I urge him to take a more objective view of history as the first Nakba did not occur in 1948. 

The first “Nakba”  occurred  as far back as 422 – 568 BC, when Solomon’s Temple,  located on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount,  was destroyed by the Babylonians, followed by a second “Nakba” in 70AD, when the Romans sent the Jews of Israel into a 2000 year exile following the destruction of the Second Temple.

“Nakba” (“Catastrophe”) after “Nakba” haunted the Jews  over this period, including the Spanish Inquisition of the 15^th century,  the expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290, culminating in the most horrific “Nakba” of all, the Holocaust, which accounted for the murder of 6 million European Jews, aided and abetted by the Grand Mufti of  Jerusalem, Haj amin al-Husseini,  who visited Hitler with the offer of  support in rendering the world Judenrein.    

Fresh from the Nazi death camps, the desperate survivors  found themselves facing yet another “Nakba” with Britain’s callous  refused to allow them to enter their one safe haven – their historic and spiritual homeland, Palestine, with which Jews have been intimately connected for over 3 millennia.

Instead, for three years they were incarcerated in squalid Displaced Persons Camps in Cyprus while an indifferent world mulled over this inconvenient problem.

In 1922 the Jews suffered another “Nakba” when Britain illegally stripped away 80% of the territory designated to them for a Jewish Homeland at the San Remo Conference in 1920 and enshrined into law by the League of Nations, utilizing it to form the new Arab state of Transjordan.

Thereafter, the “Nakba” of having to fight for their very survival within hours of declaring the newly sanctioned (by the United Nations)  Jewish State in 1948 and of subsequently burying 1% of their entire population who fell in that conflict,  coupled with the “Nakba” of having 800,000 Jews thrown out of every surrounding Arab/Muslim state with no more than the clothes on their backs, starts to place the one “Nakba”,  mourned annually by the Palestinians,  into stark perspective.

The “Nakbas” the Palestinians should be mourning are those of lost opportunities; the “Nakba” of turning down repeated offers to establish a state of their own and extract themselves from a misery of their own making.

Whilst Israel, in the face of all its “Nakbas”,  has become a world leader in almost every field of endeavour, the Palestinians, bogged down in ineffectual self pity, look to the world to save them from themselves.

Their “Nakbas” are self-inflicted for which, I, for one, have little sympathy. 

Monessa Shapiro responds to Fadeelah Patel’s “What is a Jewish state?”

Faadeelah Patel queries the definition of a Jewish state.

 

I have spent the last two weeks in Israel so will try to explain to her just what a Jewish state is.   It is the state where Jews walk their streets proudly celebrating the miracle that is the rebirth of their country.  It is the state where every Jew stands at attention for 2 minutes while the sirens drone on Yom Hashoah (the day commemorating the willful slaughter of 6,000,000 Jewish men, women and children during the Holocaust).  It is the state where every citizen stands at attention for 2 minutes while sirens drone on Yom Hazikaron (the day commemorating the loss of Israeli life, Arab and Jew, both on the battle-field and as a result of terrorism).  It is the state where businesses close on the Shabbat, the Jewish Sabbath, and it’s the state where religious Jews do not need to search for kosher restaurants.

 

But, it is also much else, and herein lies the true miracle of what Israel is.  It is the state where my family and I encountered a group of Arabs celebrating a birthday, laughing, singing and dancing on a boat-ride on Lake Kinneret.  We were the only Jews on this trip.  It is the state where, when alighting from the boat, and going into a kosher restaurant in the harbor, we were followed by many of the self-same Arabs who had shared the boat-ride with us.  It is the state where the lady in the queue in front of me in the clothing shop was an Arab dressed in a burqa, buying clothes for her grandchildren, as was I.   It is the state where Arabs picnic on the grass outside my apartment.   It is the state where the pharmacist on my corner is an Arab woman, and black and white walk hand in hand on the streets.  And it is the state where Jew, Moslem and Christian worship freely and without fear the G-d of their choice.

 

And so Ms. Patel, while Israel is and will remain the state of the Jewish people, it will always, because of, not in spite of, its Jewish character, be an oasis of human rights and human equality amidst a sea of oppression and brutality.

Victor Gordon to the Business Day re: “Hamas has changed”

 

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

I refer to the letter by Faadelah Patel, “Hamas has changed” in which this writer takes issue with Chuck Volpe’s contention that the Hamas Charter calls for the murder of all Jews.

In trying to refute Volpe’s claim,  Patel  refers to the ‘old’  Hamas Charter suggesting  that it is no longer relevant and that Hamas has relegated it to history. Simply because the Charter was written in 1988 does not invalidate it. Despite Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal claiming that it is “a piece of history”, the truth is that it has never been abolished  in any manner or form.  It is as valid now as it was 26 years ago.

Every one of the 36 articles that comprises the Charter  refers to the ultimate destruction of the State of Israel.

Based in past experience, for Israel and Jews to believe anything that Meshaal says is stretching trust beyond its limits.

As for Patel’s second claim that there is no invitation within the charter to kill Jews, I refer him to article 7 which says,

‘The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: ‘O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind  me, come and kill him.’  (See: https://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/880818a.htm)

 

A very recent children’s TV episode of the Hamas-affiliated television program Pioneers of Tomorrow featured a disturbing discussion of shooting Jews — all of them. There was no suggestion of ambiguity.

 

Whether Nelson Mandela would have agreed to a South African two State solution (as questioned by Patel),  has not the slightest relevance to the situation in the Israel/Palestine where the two state solution was  imposed by the UN in 1947. While South African’s were eager to negotiate a new deal for all, Hamas has steadfastly refused to even recognise the very existence of the State of Israel.

 

Finally, while Patel questions the meaning of a “Jewish State”,  he overlooks the 22 Muslim states that exist as such in the Middle East.

 

While Saudi Arabia would never countenance a Christian or Jewish citizen in its midst (where one can go to prison for owning a Christian Bible), Israel has 1,5 million Arab Israeli citizens who openly practise Islam with no problem. To say that the “Jewish State of Israel “excludes non-Jews is a blatant lie. The world headquarters of the Baha’i faith is located in Haifa.

 

Get your facts straight, Mr. Patel.

Victor Gordon responds to: Support the sanctions campaign against Israel

THE WITNESS

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

Refers:  “Support the sanctions campaign against Israel”

 

If Zuhayr Dawood won’t support a political party that supports apartheid, let me assure him – neither would I.  He is indeed a person of principle and has my full backing.

But then Dawood has nothing to concern himself about and should feel entirely comfortable in voting for the DA, for,  as stated by the DA councillor, Avrille Marcia Coen,  there is no factual basis to the well-worn mantra that Israel practices apartheid.

If Dawood contests this,  let him explain the following:

According to ‘Freedom House’ (est. 1941), the independent, internationally respected monitor of the levels of democracy practised by all nations, Israel is the only Free country in the entire Middle East.

In order to practise apartheid, how would such a restrictive policy co-exist within a democratic system of government ?  One either has freedom and democracy or one has apartheid.  As they are simply anathema to one another, one can’t have it both ways! 

Perhaps Dawood could apply his mind and explain how one fits a square peg into a round hole.

Victor Gordon to The Business Day