Archive | July 2024

Internal Jewish Divisions Pose the Greatest Threat of All

Internal Jewish Divisions Pose the Greatest Threat of All

Pini Dunner


Thousands of Jews gather for a mass prayer for the hostages in Gaza at the Western Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem, Jan. 10, 2024. Photo: Yaacov Cohen

On June 28, 1863, Samuel Goodwin Stout wrote a letter to his mother from Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. He was 20-years old and bursting with the optimism and adrenaline of a young Confederate soldier.

“Dear Mother,” he began, “I can inform you that I am well at this time, and I hope those lines will find you all well. We have been through Maryland, and we are now going through Pennsylvania. But we don’t think that we shall get far into Pennsylvania before we shall get into a fight. But we are all in good spirit. We have got a strong army with us — we have got 122,000 now across the Potomac.”

Days later, Samuel was on the battlefield at Gettysburg. It was one of the bloodiest days of the Civil War, often cited as the turning point of the conflict. There were approximately 51,000 casualties (killed, wounded, captured, or missing), with 23,000 from the Union Army and 28,000 from the Confederate Army.

Samuel survived that dreadful day, and — against the odds — survived the Civil War, dying in 1919 at the age of 75. But the positive spirit he displayed during the early part of the conflict, evident in his letter home, quickly disappeared, and by the time the war was over, he was damaged goods. Indeed, Samuel’s early letters were filled with zeal and a sincere belief in the cause he was fighting for, but as the war dragged on, the tone of his letters shifted dramatically. The eager participant was transformed into a war-weary young man, deeply affected by the brutal realities of conflict.

On February 10, 1864, he wrote a letter brimming with dejection: “I see no cessation of it. Now only to look to the all-wise and merciful God for peace, and that is the only way we are to have peace anyway. We have to give in to a higher power than Jefferson Davis or General Lee to end this horrible conflict in which we are struggling.” The idealism had faded, replaced by a longing for the war’s end and a divinely inspired return to peace.

The American Civil War is often referred to as the “War of Brothers.” This evocative phrase captures what was undoubtedly the most devastating aspect of this horrific conflict: that the war pitted family members and close friends against each other. It was truly a Milchemet Achim — the Hebrew phrase for civil war.

Stories abound of brothers fighting on opposite sides, like the Terrill brothers, James Barbour Terrill, a brigadier general for the Confederate army, and William Rufus Terrill, a brigadier general for the Union Army. Both were killed in battle. Another Terrill brother, Philip Mallory of the Confederate 12th Virginia Cavalry, was also killed in battle.

Every American family was somehow affected. The eager letter writer Samuel Goodwin Stout’s great-great-grandson is Mike Wise, the award-winning Washington Post sportswriter. While researching his family, Wise discovered that another ancestor, his great-great-great-grandfather Tilman Settles, was a Union Army corporal, killed by Confederates while walking back to his Missouri home in December 1861.

The impact of such a deeply personal conflict cannot be overstated. Families were torn apart, friendships shattered, and communities divided. The war forced individuals to confront loved ones as enemies, challenging their loyalties and convictions. This internal division was more devastating than any external threat could have been.

The emotional and psychological toll was immense, leaving scars that would last for generations. The Civil War’s legacy of bitterness and animosity lingered long after the last shot was fired, evidence of the profound damage caused by internecine strife. Unlike other conflicts that are fought against foreign adversaries, this war was fought within the national family, making the violence and suffering all the more personal and tragic.

In every epoch of human history, division and discord within societies and national groups have often paved the way for the most harmful consequences. The American Civil War may have been triggered by disagreements on states’ rights and slavery, but it was the tearing apart of a nation not yet a century old that left the deepest scars.

The memory of the blood-soaked fields of Gettysburg and Antietam act as grim reminders of what happens when a society turns against itself. But beyond the battlefield, it underscores a critical point: countries and societies are much more vulnerable to collapse because of internal strife than they are from external enemies. It wasn’t an invading force that brought the United States to the brink of destruction; it was its own internal divisions.

The theme of internal division resonates profoundly in the Torah portion of Korach. The story of Korach’s rebellion is one of the most distressing narratives in the entire Torah. Korach, a Levite, led a coup against his first cousins Moshe and Aaron, challenging their leadership and looking to overthrow them with the help of a group of malcontents, all of whom were part of the Jewish nation. As such, Korach’s challenge was more than just a power struggle — it was an insidious attack on the unity of the Israelite people.

In his writings, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks often reflects on the grave danger posed by fraternal strife, drawing from various episodes in the Book of Genesis, such as the conflicts between Cain and Abel, Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, and Joseph and his brothers. Sacks notes that these narratives highlight how sibling rivalry and internal discord lead to devastating consequences, which he says is the reason the Torah gives these stories so much attention.

As Rabbi Sacks puts it, “The greatest challenge to humankind is not the stranger, but the brother. Peace in the world begins with peace at home.”

Korach’s rebellion is a stark reminder from the dawn of Jewish history of the dangers of internal division, illustrating how internal discord can threaten our stability in ways that no other threat can. The rebellion against Moshe and Aaron by their cousin was more dangerous than any external threat the Israelites faced in the wilderness, as it came from within and sought to destabilize the core of their society.

The narrative of Korach’s rebellion concludes with a dramatic and divine resolution: the earth opens up and swallows Korach and his immediate family, and a fire consumes his 250 princely followers as they offer up incense (Num. 16:31-35). This powerful and terrifying punishment is intended to indicate the severity of the sin of causing and perpetuating division within the community.

We are living through a critical time in our history, when the threat of “Milchemet Achim” is very real, and probably poses the greatest danger we have faced as Jews for millennia.

The intensifying split between Jews in the Diaspora who have taken to using Israel as a punching bag, and the Jewish community in Israel, is deeply worrying. The factionalization of Israeli society, with the rifts that exist between right and left, religious and secular, haredim and non-haredim, are far more worrying than the threats from our enemies.

Divided we fall, but united — we not only stand, but we thrive beyond our dreams. Let us take on board the lessons of Parshat Korach, and learn from the devastation caused by the American Civil War. Rather than focus our energies on fanning the flames of division, we must use all our resources to find the common ground that can give us the foundation for a future full of light and hope.


The author is a rabbi in Beverly Hills, California.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


Michael Rapaport: I’m not voting for Biden

Michael Rapaport: I’m not voting for Biden

CAROLINE B. GLICK


Journalist and author Caroline Glick interviews American actor and comedian Michael Rapaport, who since the terrorist attacks in Israel on Oct. 7 has been outspoken about his support for the Jewish state and return of some 120 hostages being held captive by Hamas in Gaza since then. In this far-reaching interview, Rapaport describes his journey to becoming an “Oct. 8th Jew”; the silence from Hollywood celebrities; what he loves about the Israeli people and being Jewish; and ultimately, why he has fallen out of love with Joe Biden.

This is an interview you don’t want to miss!


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


Judaizm o zbawieniu wyznawców innych religii

Prof. Stanisław Krajewski podczas odbierania Nagrody im. ks. Stanisława Musiała w Collegium Novum w Krakowie 6 marca 2014 r. Fot. Adam Walanus / adamwalanus.pl


Judaizm o zbawieniu wyznawców innych religii

Stanisław Krajewsk


Misja Żydów wobec świata ma polegać na byciu świadkami Najwyższego, ale nie na narzucaniu innym jakichkolwiek form religijnej ekspresji.

.

Tekst ukazał się w miesięczniku „Więź” nr 5/2001.

Judaizm jest religią dla Żydów, a nie dla członków wszystkich innych narodów. Zbawienia może dostąpić każdy – w tym celu nie trzeba urodzić się Żydem ani też nim się stać. Nawracanie innych nie powinno być nikomu potrzebne. Oto najkrótsze streszczenie stanowiska judaizmu w sprawie zbawienia. Miałbym nawet ochotę na tym skończyć, ale jednak – gdy spojrzeć na szczegóły i historię – problem trochę się komplikuje.

Niewątpliwie w podejściu biblijnym najważniejsze jest odróżnienie Izraela, który czci jedynego prawdziwego Boga, od narodów pogańskich (gojim), które czczą bożków. Biblia pokazuje, że Izrael ma dbać o nieuleganie bałwochwalstwu, o oddzielanie się od tych, którzy go praktykują. Niemniej nawet poza Izraelem można znaleźć takich ludzi, którzy czczą prawdziwego Boga: i Melchizedek, i Hiob, nie mówiąc już o Noem – to ludzie, którzy wyznają Najwyższego, nie będąc Żydami. Co więcej, każdy się może nawrócić na właściwą drogę, a Pan to doceni – o tym uczy historia Niniwy, która usłuchała napomnień Jonasza.

Późniejsza literatura rabiniczna kontynuuje wizję biblijną. Mówi nie tyle o „zbawieniu wiecznym”, ile o dostąpieniu „świata przyszłego”. Czy nie-Żydzi mają szansę? W Talmudzie znajdziemy zarówno pogląd, że nie, jak również opinię, że tak. To drugie stanowisko jest potem cytowane i przeważa. Majmonides (XII-XII wiek), a za nim inni, twierdzi, że pobożni spośród narodów, którzy zasłużyli na przyszły świat, to ci, którzy przestrzegają praw danych Noemu. Są to zasady podstawowej moralności, a także zakaz bluźnierstwa i bałwochwalstwa. To ostatnie stwierdzenie jest niejasne: jeśli praktyki bałwochwalcze są zakazane, to czy wśród pobożnych mogą być wyznawcy innych religii? Interpretacja zasadnicza wydaje się następująca: mogą, ale z jednym wyjątkiem: nie odnosi się to do ziemi Izraela, w której rządy sprawowaliby – znowu – Żydzi. Tam obowiązywać ma monoteizm. Czyli co?

Obie wielkie religie – chrześcijaństwo i islam – mogą być traktowane jako „ubijanie drogi dla kroków Mesjasza”

Judaizm okresu diaspory rozwija się – poza okresem początkowym – w obecności swoich cór: chrześcijaństwa i islamu. Jak traktuje ich wyznawców? Czy jako niewiernych, a więc skazanych na potępienie, jak chrześcijaństwo ujmowało tę sprawę z własnego punktu widzenia w stosunku do Żydów? Czy też jako innych, ale też religijnych, idących drogą monoteizmu, choć inną niż żydowska? Otóż – jednak to drugie. Islam jest monoteizmem, a chrześcijaństwo – mimo kultu obrazów i koncepcji sprzecznych z judaizmem, takich jak Wcielenie – jest jednak odnoszeniem się do prawdziwego Boga. Obie wielkie religie mogą być traktowane jako „ubijanie drogi dla kroków Mesjasza”.

Dla ludzi współczesnych pojawia się problem: jak potraktować buddyzm i inne religie spoza nurtu biblijnego? Tradycja o nich nic nie mówi. Jednak nawet dla nich można mieć szacunek. Judaizmowi stosunkowo łatwo jest okazywać szacunek innym, szanować inność drugiego. Przymierze zawarte pod Synajem bowiem obowiązuje Żydów, ale nie resztę ludzkości. Nakłada na Żydów szczególne obowiązki, od innych nie wymaga tak wiele. Misja Żydów wobec świata ma polegać na byciu świadkami Najwyższego, ale nie na narzucaniu innym jakichkolwiek form religijnej ekspresji. Bóg może mieć innych pomocników, do pomyślenia są inne powołania religijne.

Franz Rosenzweig stworzył wielką wizję, która przypisuje szczególną rolę zarówno judaizmowi, jak i chrześcijaństwu. Judaizm ma pilnować ognia Objawienia, a chrześcijaństwo roznosić pochodnie z tym ogniem po całym świecie. Rosenzweig nie przyznawał wprawdzie szczególnej misji islamowi i religiom Wschodu, ale otworzył możliwość mówienia o religiach już nie tylko jako równoległych drogach, ale równoległych a równie ważnych misjach. Chodzi o ważność wobec ludzkości, cenność w oczach Stwórcy.

Na fundamencie poglądów tradycyjnych oraz podejścia w stylu Rosenzweiga możliwy jest poważny dialog międzyreligijny. Jak bardzo może być on poważny, widzimy po fundamentalnej akceptacji chrześcijaństwa zawartej w oświadczeniu „Dabru emet”, podpisanym rok temu przez ponad 150 rabinów i teologów żydowskich. W oświadczeniu tym czytamy m.in.: „Żydzi i chrześcijanie czczą tego samego Boga. Przed powstaniem chrześcijaństwa Żydzi byli jedynymi, którzy czcili Boga Izraela. Jednak chrześcijanie również czczą Boga Abrahama, Izaaka i Jakuba, Stworzyciela nieba i ziemi. Choć chrześcijańskie praktyki religijne nie są życiodajnym religijnym wyborem dla Żydów, my, jako żydowscy teologowie, cieszymy się, że poprzez chrześcijaństwo setki milionów ludzi weszło w związki z Bogiem Izraela. […] Chrześcijanie poznają Boga i służą mu poprzez Jezusa Chrystusa i tradycję chrześcijańską. Żydzi poznają Boga i służą mu poprzez Torę i tradycję żydowską”. Mam nadzieję, że „Dabru emet” wyznacza przyszły kierunek myślenia większości Żydów, także religijnych konserwatystów.

O ile judaizmowi nie zagraża wywłaszczanie innych z ich tradycji poprzez działalność misyjną, to musi mierzyć się on z innym niebezpieczeństwem: judaizm łatwiej pozwala na odwracanie się do innych plecami

Warunkiem dialogu – ze strony żydowskiej – jest pewność, że nie chodzi o nawracanie. W tym względzie po stronie judaizmu jest wobec chrześcijaństwa wiele podejrzliwości. Żydzi są natomiast przekonani, że judaizm nigdy nie był misyjny, choć historycy mówią, że w starożytności bywało inaczej. W judaizmie istnieje problem misyjności do wewnątrz: niektórzy Żydzi, np. chasydzi z grupy Lubawicza, chcą koniecznie skłonić innych Żydów do swojej formy judaizmu. Niemniej jednak z perspektywy judaizmu stosunkowo łatwiej akceptować jest niewierzących niż w islamie czy chrześcijaństwie, tzn. akceptować ich jako ludzi i jako pełnoprawnych Żydów. Dobrze by było, gdyby byli pobożni, ale i tak są drogocenni w oczach Stwórcy.

O ile judaizmowi nie zagraża wywłaszczanie innych z ich tradycji poprzez działalność misyjną (groźba zawsze obecna w religiach misyjnych), to musi mierzyć się on z innym niebezpieczeństwem: judaizm łatwiej pozwala na odwracanie się do innych plecami. Kwestia zbawienia wyznawców innych religii staje się wtedy mało istotna. Jak się wydaje, wielu Żydów myśli według mniej więcej takiego schematu: „w zasadzie inni mają szansę na życie wieczne, ale to ich sprawa, nie nasza”. Mam wrażenie, że nie ma ucieczki od trudności, jaką sprawia znalezienie właściwej postawy, by okazywać szacunek wyznawcom innych religii. Bo albo się ich nawraca, czy choćby myśli o nawracaniu, a wtedy można mówić o braku szacunku dla inności drugiej osoby, albo się drugiego człowieka nie nawraca, akceptuje go – ale wtedy stajemy wobec groźby obojętności na los drugiego, ten doczesny i ten wieczny. Być może rozwiązanie sugeruje tradycyjna postawa judaizmu: nie wszyscy mają być Żydami, ale wszyscy powinni zostać monoteistami, wyznawcami jednego Boga.

Perspektywa eschatologiczna judaizmu jest jasna: wszyscy kiedyś uznają prawdziwego Boga i docenią wierność Izraela. To perspektywa mesjańska.


Stanisław Krajewski – ur. 1950, profesor w Instytucie Filozofii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, żydowski współprzewodniczący Polskiej Rady Chrześcijan i Żydów od jej powstania w roku 1990. Autor m.in. książek „Żydzi, judaizm, Polska”; „54 komentarze do Tory dla nawet najmniej religijnych spośród nas”; „Poland and the Jews: Reflections of a Polish Polish Jew”; „Tajemnica Izraela a tajemnica Kościoła”; „Nasza żydowskość”; „Co zawdzięczam dialogowi międzyreligijnemu i chrześcijaństwu”.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


‘This Is 1984’: Faculty Participation in Pro-Hamas Demonstrations a ‘Wake-Up Call’ for Americans, Professor Says

‘This Is 1984’: Faculty Participation in Pro-Hamas Demonstrations a ‘Wake-Up Call’ for Americans, Professor Says

Dion J. Pierre


Students at George Washington University in Washington, DC on April 25, 2024 obeying a call to pray while facing east towards Mecca, a form of worship particular to the Muslim faith. Photo: Leah Millis/Reuters Connect

University faculty have been joining pro-Hamas demonstrators in taking over US campuses over the past week, fueling concerns that higher education institutions have become hatcheries of dangerous, anti-Western political ideologies that foster hatred for Israel and could hasten a new age of antisemitism.

wave of anti-Israel demonstrations has erupted on university campuses across the US over the past week, beginning at Columbia University in New York City.

Since last week, college students have been amassing in the hundreds at a growing number of schools, taking over sections of campuses by setting up “Gaza Solidarity Encampments” and refusing to leave unless administrators condemn and boycott Israel. Footage of the protests has shown demonstrators chanting in support of Hamas, calling for the destruction of Israel, and even threatening to harm members of the Jewish community on campus. In many cases, activists have also lambasted the US and Western civilization more broadly.

On many campuses — including George Washington University in Washington, DC, New York University, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Michigan, and the University of Southern California, among others — members of the faculty have attached themselves to the anti-Israel, pro-Hamas demonstrations.

In some instances, faculty attempted to prevent police from dispersing unauthorized demonstrations and detaining lawbreakers, resulting in their arrest. That happened, for example, on Thursday at Emory University in Atlanta, where economics professor Caroline Fohlin intervened to stop the arrest of a student. In response, officers tackled her to the ground while she said repeatedly, “I’m a professor!”

At Northeastern University in Boston, professors formed a human barrier around a student encampment to stop its dismantling by officers, and at the University of Texas at Austin, members of the group Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine have openly called for the resignation of their president, Jay Hartzell, because he requested police assistance in restoring order.

At Columbia University, anti-Zionist faculty at the school, as well its affiliate Barnard College, staged a walkout in support of the demonstrations and demanded the abeyance of disciplinary sanctions against anti-Zionist students — dozens of whom cheered Hamas and threatened more massacres of Jews similar to Oct. 7 — who have violated school rules.

“We are working to overturn the student suspensions that have been issued and to ensure that administrators are not allowed to summon the NYPD [New York City Police Department] on a whim, when there is self-evidently no danger,” the faculty said. “Most of all we want you to feel at home here.”

Mass participation of faculty in pro-Hamas demonstrations marks an inflection point in American history, according to Asaf Romirowsky, an expert on the Middle East and executive director of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East.

Since the 1960s, he told The Algemeiner on Friday, far-left “scholar activists” have gradually seized control of the higher education system, tailoring admissions processes and the curricula to foster ideological radicalism and conformity, which students then carry with them into careers in government, law, corporate America, and education. This system, he concluded, must be challenged.

“The cost of trading scholarship for political propagandizing has been a zeal and pride among faculty who esteem and cheer terrorism, a historical development which is quite telling and indicative of the evolution of the Marxist ideology which has been seeping into the academy since the 1960s,” Romirowsky said. “The message is very clear to all of us who are looking on from the outside at this, and institutions have to begin drawing a red line. The protests are not about free speech. They are about supporting terrorism, about calling for a genocide of Jews.”

Romirowsky pointed to Columbia University temporarily banning Shai Davidai, an outspoken Jewish professor, from campus as a portent of the gradual embrace among progressives of anti-Jewish attitudes not seen in higher education since Nazis took over German universities in the 1930s. What the country is witnessing, he continued, is a synthesis of Marxism and fascism which cannot tolerate a liberal-democratic state in which Jews have an active role in public life nor the existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East.

“This is 1984,” he continued, alluding to George Orwell’s classic novel about a dystopian state. “As we can see, these rallies are not peaceful as their supporters have insisted. They are violent, verbally and physically. People are ending up in the hospital with injuries. This is analogous to Nazi Germany, and that should be a wake-up call to the American people. If these are the institutions that should be the vanguard of American democracy and Western values and this is what they are producing, we should be seriously questioning the functionality of higher education as a whole.”

Information about the beliefs of the organizers of the pro-Hamas demonstrations have circulated on social media all week. On Thursday, it was revealed that a principal organizer of protests at Columbia University, Khymani James, filmed himself proclaiming that Zionists, a category that includes a vast majority of Jews around the world, should be murdered and that they are fortunate that he has not begun killing them himself.

“I think that taking someone’s life in certain case scenarios is necessary and better for the overall world,” James said. “Be glad, be grateful, that I’m not just going out and murdering Zionists … they don’t deserve to live comfortably, let alone, Zionists don’t deserve to live … they shouldn’t live in this world … so yes, I feel very comfortable calling for those people to die.”

On Friday, US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and her daughter — Isra Hirsi, who was recently suspended and arrested for trespassing — were filmed greeting and hugging James while someone nearby said, “We are family, we are family.”

It has been widely reported that Columbia officials are negotiating with James personally to reach a compromise that could end in the university adopting aspects of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel in exchange for the end of the demonstration there. Those discussions are ongoing.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


UN Launches Probe Into Anti-Israel Rapporteur for Allegedly Accepting Trip Funded by Pro-Hamas Organizations

UN Launches Probe Into Anti-Israel Rapporteur for Allegedly Accepting Trip Funded by Pro-Hamas Organizations

Corey Walker


Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, attends a side event during the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, March 26, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse

The United Nations has opened an investigation into allegations that its special rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Palestinian territories accepted an all-expense paid trip to Australia from various pro-Hamas groups.

In November 2023, Francesca Albanese allegedly traversed around the Australian continent on a trip whose high price tag was covered by anti-Israel organizations, according to documentation acquired by UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO that monitors the UN.

Albanese initially landed in Sydney and subsequently enjoyed flights into Melbourne, Adelaide, and Canberra, as well as Auckland and Wellington in New Zealand. The glamorous excursion is estimated to have cost a staggering $22,500. 

The UN Investigations Division of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) told UN Watch last week that it had alerted the High Commissioner for Human Rights of the allegations of financial impropriety levied at Albanese. 

In a letter sent to UN leadership last month, UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer outlined evidence based on multiple sources indicating that Hamas-supporting organizations funded Albanese’s trip to Australia, which has been experiencing an alarming spike in antisemitic incidents since the start of the Israel-Hamas war in October.

Australian Friends of Palestine Association (AFOPA), an organization that lobbies Australian politicians on behalf of the pro-Palestinian cause, claimed on its website that it “sponsored Ms. Albanese’s visit to Australia” to speak at its annual Edward Said Memorial Lecture in Adelaide. During the lecture, Albanese thanked AFOPA for “organizing such a busy visit,” in which she met with numerous Australian politicians and foreign ministry officials. 

Free Palestine Melbourne (FPM) and Palestinian Christians in Australia (PCIA) both claimed to have “supported her visit to Victoria, ACT [Australian Capital Territory] and NSW [New South Wales].” Both groups also publicly declare that they participate in explicit lobbying of Australian politicians in an attempt to “change their minds” on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

While on her visit, Albanese served as a keynote speaker at a PCIA fundraiser. FPM encourages politicians to endorse the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to isolate Israel on the international stage economically and politically as the first step toward the Jewish state’s eventual elimination.

Australian Palestinian Advocacy Network (APAN) said it was “honored to support” Albanese’s visit. The organization’s president, Nasser Mashni, openly endorses the terrorist group Hamas and has stated that the eradication of Israel is necessary to secure “the liberation of earth.” APAN states that it “facilitated a range of meetings” for Albanese with Australian parliamentarians.

Palestinians in Aotearoa Co-ordinating Committee (PACC) and Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) both organized and likely bankrolled Albanese’s trip to New Zealand, according to UN Watch. At the behest of these groups, Albanese helped lobby a New Zealand sovereign wealth fund to divest from Israel-linked companies.

Albanese outright denied that her trip was funded by Palestinian lobbying organizations, insisting that the UN footed the bill.

“Yet another trail of egregiously false claims agst me,” she tweeted. “My trip to Australia was paid by the UN as part of my mandate’s activities. Continuous defamation agst my mandate may be well remunerated,but won’t work. It just wastes time that should be used to help stop violence in [the Palestinian territories].”

Albanese did not present any documentation confirming that the UN paid for her travel and accommodations. Rather, she pointed at a statement from AFOPA reading, “Ms. Albanese was authorized by the UN to accept AFOPA’s invitation to deliver the Edward Said Memorial Lecture. The UN funded Ms. Albanese’s travel & accommodation costs. No Palestinian Solidarity group paid for this trip.”

Albanese has an extensive history of using her role at the UN to denigrate Israel and seemingly rationalize Hamas’ attacks on the Jewish state.

In April, Albanese issued public support for the pro-Hamas protests and encampments on American university campuses, saying that they gave her “hope.” She has also repeatedly falsely accused the Jewish state of committing “genocide” against Palestinians in Gaza and enacting “apartheid” in the West Bank without condemning Hamas’ terrorism against Israelis.

In February, Albanese claimed Israelis were “colonialists” who had “fake identities.” Previously, she defended Palestinians’ “right to resist” Israeli “occupation” at a time when over 1,100 rockets were fired by Gaza terrorists at Israel. Last year, US lawmakers called for the firing of Albanese for what they described as her “outrageous” antisemitic statements, including a 2014 letter in which she claimed America was “subjugated by the Jewish lobby.”

Albanese’s anti-Israel comments have earned her the praise of Hamas officials in the past.

Additionally, in response to French President Emmanuel Macron calling Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel the “largest antisemitic massacre of the 21st century,” Albanese said, “No, Mr. Macron. The victims of Oct. 7 were not killed because of their Judaism, but in response to Israel’s oppression.”

Video footage of the Oct. 7 onslaught showed Palestinian terrorists led by Hamas celebrating the fact that they were murdering Jews.

Nevertheless, Albanese has argued that Israel should make peace with Hamas, saying that it “needs to make peace with Hamas in order to not be threatened by Hamas.”

The UN did not respond to a request for comment for this story.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com