Barry,

It is self-evident that Susan Chandler's comments are anti-semitic and she deserved to be thrown out of the party. I also agree with you about the selective condemnation of Israel.

However, I cannot agree that it is inapropriate to mention that someone is a Jew in a story about them - whether they have covered themselves in glory or in shame. This applies not only to Jews but to people of all religions - Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Buddhist.

Someone's religion is an important fact in our understanding of who they are. If they are devout it is arguably the most important fact. It would only be wrong to identify a Jew's religion if this was done on a selective basis when they had done something wrong and not when they had done something good, thus giving a biased impression of the Jewish community's overall contribution to society.

Duncan 73

Why precisely is a person's religion an important fact in our understanding of who they are? What assumptions are you making by hearing that they are Jewish?

You may as well say someone's height, marital status, colour of eyes etc. is important which, in most cases, it clearly isn't.

This is one of the most fundamental points about antisemitism and racial / religious prejudice in general. How can you assume an understanding of who someone is from their religion or racial background? It is behaviour that is important not their being.

Dear Barry,
Loved your story and presentation
All you said is accurate
Regarding the golfclub rules, they were "no Jews,Catholics nor professional sportsmen"
My club in 1955 was Bonnie Doon and this rule applied.
Jews to Monash and RC's to St.Michaels.
I have never voted labor but I have always admired your various stances
I thought you lived outside Canberra at Bungendore
Rommel

Note that I am NOT calling for laws that prevent the media from mentioning the ethnicity, religious adherences, political ideologies, etc. of anyone they are covering. If a newspaper wants to write "So-and-so, who is a greedy Jewish bastard, defrauded widows and orphans of millions of dollars" that is their right in a society that values freedom of speech.

Similarly I would defend the right to deny the Holocaust.

In other words, I might not like what people say but I shall defend their right to say it.

In what follows I am simply expressing a PERSONAL VIEW on what I consider appropriate. It is, if you like, the policy I would follow if I were a media mogul.

The test I would apply is this:

Is ethnicity, religious belief, ideology, etc part of the story?

For example if, as has happened, a Jew uses a Jewish charity as a cover for money laundering then clearly the ethnic and religious connection is a part of the story and should be mentioned.

Likewise if terrorists kill 200 plus people on Bali "in the name of Allah" then clearly the Muslim connection is an important element of the story.

But if someone who happens to be a Muslim robs a bank because they want the money then Islam is not part of the story. I would NOT have a headline "MUSLIM ROBS BANK."

NOW FOR THE ISRAEL QUESTION.

Clearly many attacks on Israel are motivated by Jew hatred.

However Israel should not be immune from criticism. Further, people also have the right to question the whole concept of a Jewish state.

Equally clearly many attacks on Islam are motivated by racism.

However Islam, like Israel, should not be immune from criticism. Further, people have a right to discuss and decide for themselves whether Islam constitutes a danger.

Islamophobia is as legitimate as Israel-o-phobia.

> I hoped that anti-Semitism would gradually fade away. Regrettably, that has not been the case. It is alive and well <
And, regretably, obviously growing.

Aaaaw.

Did somebody call paw wittle tweety bird a nasty name.

Get over it and move on.

You address these twits and you just empower them.

All well enough, and not a lot for posters to say. Had the article addressed Israeli exceptionalism, belief in "the promised land" and claims of being "the chosen ones", the responses would be more telling.

"How dare they refuse to accede to the absurd demands of the people who had created the problem by refusing to accept the UN decision?"
And what about the people who deliberately exacerbated the problem by refusing to accept UN decisions to allow Palestinian refugees to return home, and to withdraw to pre-1967 borders? Pot calling the kettle black, Barry. You come across as all chip and no shoulder.

I find it incredibly misleading and decptive to title this post in such a way. Anyone can create a similar anecdote then load up the article with a tirade about how they are hard done by. Stick to the facts. As far as Israel is concerned, it and it's people (who prop up the fascist denialists and apologists in power, do not look pretty in any way shape or form). That is not anti-semitism it's a fact. The illegal occupation of Palestine is a crime that is happening right now. Where are the sanctions? Oh that's right the USA has abused it's veto power on the UN for decades.

At what point does one give the issue the oxygen of publicity by standing up and saying that you think these attitudes are unacceptable? Silence is not the answer, it is the best way of ensuring the growth and spread of these sick ideas. Effectively silence is a wink and a nod allowing people to continue on without ever having to justify their vile beliefs. Standing up even in small ways allows for ideas that are not valid to be exposed and beaten by truth.

The demonization of the Jews emanates from the curse of envy. It's due to the "demonic" ability of Jews to succeed brilliantly in wordly affairs, in the fields of science, literature, law--and may I add politics in respect to Cohen, not to mention Disraeli--and most of all in business. Their presumed scapegoating on the basis of religion is merely a cover which hides this mundane envy of the less succesful.

http://kotzabasis8.wordpress.com

I've just had a very twisted thought.Paedophiles turn innocent boys into future paedophiles.Could it be that Hitler turned some Jews into future Nazis?

Domestic abuse seems to perpetuate itself in the form of more abuse,because those who seek revenge become the abusers.

The Jewish culture is guilty of the same insular egocentric attitudes as that of Islam,the Catholic Church and many of our trendoid lefties.Our tribal genes are showing.

From now on when I hear reports which end with the term '...police are looking for youths of middle eastern appearance' I will no longer imagine gangs of yarmulke topped hoods.

Cohens point is valid when he says that Israel cops more than its share of criticism; altho he conveniently ignores the problem of couple hundred thou Palistinian refugees, the Golan Heights, the West Bank etc.

Since the UN created Israel, does the UN have the authority to un-create Israel?

Re: "Someone's religion is an important fact in our understanding of who they are. If they are devout it is arguably the most important fact. It would only be wrong to identify a Jew's religion if this was done on a selective basis when they had done something wrong and not when they had done something good, thus giving a biased impression of the Jewish community's overall contribution to society."

And Jews have done more good than bad, compared to any other peoples in Geo-History. Jews are also the most self-critical of themselves. But because the world has few real charges, they resort to abstract, unprovable nonsense: jews are born of pigs [checked the Nobels lately?], prophet killers [shw an example of beedy eyed Jews flogging and revelling of someone's death OUTSIDE the Gospels?], zionist plotters [like the Holocuast?], and the best one yet:

THE ZIONISTS ARE ZIONISING ZION.

Wow. Is the water wetting the oceans too? Maybe Jews should also be accused of having mothers?

Today, in pathetic desperation, Europe and the Muslim world is aghast Israel still occupies "12%" of the land allocated her in the Balfour: perhaps those guys need a new golf course built on soccer-sized Israel - you think?!

The truth will set you free - if and when you dare to confront it:

'VE VILL NEVER SUPPORT THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO *THEIR HOMELAND* - BECAUSE THEY REJECTED JESUS' - Oh So Pious Pope.

Should European Christianity also be tossed out of Europe - because they rejected Mohammed? Behold - this appears occuring to Eurostan - because life is what happens to you when your busy making other plans.

Heaven has her vays too, huh!

Re. "altho he conveniently ignores the problem of couple hundred thou Palistinian refugees, the Golan Heights, the West Bank etc."

The least effected refugees are the pretend pals - not just in the world today, but also in Geo-History. They have more options and facilities than any other group anywhere else. The world does not care about a falseified name attached to a false people - but it is the JEW factor which tickles the innards of those pretending they are not anti-semitic, or that they care about the Arabs in Palestine. The Pretend Pals issue would never make the news even in column 101, if Jews were not involved here. Who's kidding whom and who's being fooled?!

By all moral, legal and ethical reasonings, the Balfour Declaration should be restored - Jordan be made part of the Jewish homeland as originally declared; the Golan and Sinai should also be part of the Jewish homeland - because land won after an unprovoked attack, with a declared goal of genocide, against a UN established state - is not returnable. But because this worst of all UN violations was given a turn cheek - it occured repeatedly again and again - and stil without a UN Reso #. Who's fooling whom - what's the UN Resolution number for its worst violation - #0000?!

'IT WILL BE A HISTORIC COMPROMISE TO GRANT TWO STATES IN PALESTINE - ONE FOR THE JEWS AND ONE FOR THE ARABS' - Churchill.

Today, Briton shamlessly fosters a deathly 3-state in what's left of Palestine - and still calls it a 2-state. At least the Nazis were honest about it. Both JC and Mohammed have harkened to the God of Israel, which was returned when it was least possible - in your faces and despite all means to stop it. The truth will always bop up to haunt the guilty - and no one can fool Heaven.

THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE - OR CALL YOU TO ACCOUNT.

Today, Briton shamlessly fosters a deathly 3-state.
IamJoseph,
I am not british, not religious, never been to the middle east, had only minor dealings with those religious whatever they should be called. Have you ever asked yourself why jewish people are perpetually having trouble anywhere they go ? If you have that answer could you please tell us ? I am someone who values harmony but how can we ever have harmony if some people always make a point of being so different and yet complain about being not accepted. On a small scale some difference is natural but for millions of people over thousand or more years ? I can't help thinking that maybe the bleaters of victimhood are actually the problem.

IamJoseph, I see a lot to admire in the Jewish people and in their achievements in Israel. Per Lowenstein, they even tolerate debate about a future state not based on Zionist myth.

What on Gods earth is a 'pretend pal'? Is it a child, maybe third generation to be born in a camp in Lebanon, without citizenship rights?

Maybe your 3 into 1 state is not a bad idea- so long as it is democratic and run on secular principles.

Sometime the insanity has to stop.

to reply to the question asker
are James Packer, Rupert Murdoch, Christopher Skase, Kerry Stokes or Alan Bond jewish?"

a search that ended here
http://www.jewishmag.com/48mag/nazis/nazis.htm

BUT THe writer asked is alan bond etc jewish
so i searched and found
http://jewsforjesus.org/about/chicago/alan

ok
its not THE [our] bond but then the question asker didnt specify which alan bond, which paker etc.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3902455.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3904813.ece
more searching lead me to the australian
[quote]
Larry Adler ($300 million),
a penniless Jewish refugee who built FAI into an insurance giant.

Back then, another immigrant who called Perth home, Robert Holmes a Court
was a dead end

rupert murdoch [by now many searches came up error404]
[read a previous link re google searhing censure]

but i persisted
another 404 error

but the cache still is up
http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:pmzubyTR2iAJ:www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/05/Murdoch2.html+Rupert+Murdoch+jewish+%3F%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=au
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-entertainment-news-monopoly-murdoch-jew-part1.html
,
murdoch pipped Kerry Packer by a mere $100 million to take the mantle
with a fortune topping $1.4 billion.
his search ended here

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/27/obituaries/27packer.html
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-leaders-list-of-jewish-millionaires.html#anchor17967

the search for james turned up many more 404 errors
but

Australia’s Former Top Model Explores Her Jewish Heritage In Los Angeles
... her engagement to Australia’s richest man James Packer between 1996 and 1998. ...
but the link was 404 [supressed][not found]

http://lukeford.net/blog/?p=2728
50% Channel 7 under Christopher Skase;
the other 50% funded by 30 Jewish businessmen from Sydney,
who put in between $5000 and $10000 each.
It was a vintage year:

a nose ahead of Bond was fellow corporate crook George Herscu, who, like Bond, made questionable payments
to questionable Queensland politicians, followed by a battalion of colourful,
interesting Australians,

including Frank Lowy ($400 million),
Born in Czechoslovakia to a Jewish family. Lowy migrated to Australia....

Carlton Football Club boss and price-fixer Richard Pratt,
Pratt was born in the Free City of Danzig of ethnic Polish Jewish parents on 12 March 1934
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pratt_(Australian_businessman)
and thats all folks
i note that asking the question in the way the writer did the INFERANCE was that none were
as it turns out more than half had strong links?

Similarly I would defend the right to deny the Holocaust

Stevenlmayer.........there is a limit even to freedom of speech.

To deny the existence of the Holocaust which is the most researched and documented historical event ever to occur merely shows the ignorance and/or malfides of the denier.

A right is something that can be enforced by law.

No law should exist to protect Holocaust deniers.

Great article, Barry.

Judging by some of the responses here, any mention of anti-Semitism is an excuse for people to launch into a rant about the alleged crimes of Israel and the "plight" of the Palestinians, and to show anti-Semitism.

I agree that Holocaust denial should be a crime, because such denial is in itself a form of anti-Semitism.

individual

"Have you ever asked yourself why jewish people are perpetually having trouble anywhere they go ?"

Not true. Jewish people had no troubles in India, or China, or later in Japan where the Hindu, Buddhist and Shinto religions accept the beliefs of all. Antisemitism is confined to Christianity and Islam, both offshoots from Judaism, who both took the view that their adherents were the only ones destined for a good afterlife. Jewish theology like that of the Eastern religions teaches that divine benefits are dispensed only on the goodness of the people, not on their faith.

Christianity and Islam are always unhappy bedmates because of that attitude. Both have been harsh to non co-religionists. Australia was initially free from the antisemitic disease simple because a convict society held little regard for religion.

Look at the Middle East where non-Muslims have been continually leaving as a result of pressures. Bethlehem and Lebanon no longer have Christian majorities. Nearly a million Jews were pushed out of countries such as Morocco, Iraq, Egypt, Yemen etc etc. The Baha'i and the Druze found refuge in Israel. Saudi Arabia does not allow Churches.

Yet all we hear about is the Palestinians, you would think Christian countries, while criticising Israel would find some sympathy for their co-religionists in the West Bank, but on that they are silent. Only Israel is criticised, even though it allows religious freedom for all. It appears that Israel is not permitted to ensure that the majority of its population are Jewish, but the Islamic states are allowed to conduct a policy which amounts to ethnic cleansing.

I bet the only response to these comments will be "Zionist Propaganda".

Logic,
explanation appreciated. Please tolerate another ignorant question. Do India, Japan & China permit the purchase & ownership of of land & other property as well as permanent settling by outsiders like western countries ?
I was always led to believe that with jewish people it was their closed circuit economy financial exploits rather than their religion which causes them much envy, hence problems. If the above countries are so tolerant why aren't more jewish people moving there & have the peace they crave & deserve ? Why go through the agony of living in a packed quarry when there're so many nice places to go to ?

"led to believe...closed circuit economy financial exploits rather than their religion which causes them much envy, hence problems".
This insinuates one of the many myths spread about Jews, that they somehow control world finances. The truth of the matter is more mundane, while it's true that many Jews are bankers, there are historical reasons for this. Jews in Europe until around the 19th century were forbidden to own property, i.e. bricks and mortar, and moved into banking. Similarly, they were forbidden from many trades, hence their tendency to be jewellers and goldsmiths (reflected in European Jewish names such as Goldsmith, Silver and Diamond).

individual

One of the main areas of Jewish success was not in the finance industry bur in medicine and more recently law. Elizabeth I had a Jewish physician, the Jewish doctors were less encumbered by religious dictates than the Christians and made better doctors. Earlier it is known that the Crusader King Richard was treated by Saladin's doctor, who was Jewish.

Jews have excelled in science medicine and the arts more than in business, but the antisemitic stereotype prefers the money lender image.

The Broadway musical was created by Jews, Irving Berlin, the Gershwins,Lorenz, Hart, Richard Rogers, Sondheim, Bernstein, Lerner and Lowe were all Jews, as in fact was the Viennese Johann Strauss the elder. Then we have writers Heinrich Heine, Pinter, Arther Miller etc.

The first heart transplant was done by a Jewish doctor, all the Jewish artists doctors and scientists were very outward looking people. Perhaps it is the religion which is at the core of Jewish success. Converts such as Marilyn Monroe and Sidney Portier seemed to have flourished.

Israel continues the creative stream, with more Nobel Prize winners per capita than any other land. In fact Jews have done badly only some of the time, the Israelis have created an extraordinary land out of desertand at the same time provided refuge for other refugees from the ME. Israel is not perfect but it would be given a much higher scorecard were it not for the antisemitic attitudes which still prevail, they are underlying ones in our culture which never seem to go away completely.

Viking & Logic, thanks for the enlightenment.

Great info, logic.

Jews got a bad name as moneylenders because the Church banned usury (charging interest) for centuries. As the only non-Christians around (there were some Muslims in Christian countries, but they also ban usury, and still do, under sharia) Jews gravitated to moneylending (since there were few professions available to them) and so raised Christian ire. One presumes that it was easy to hate someone to whom one owed money (plus interest) when Christians did not (officially) charge interest.

Logic: "The first heart transplant was done by a Jewish doctor"

Who was that? I don't recall that Christiaan Barnard was Jewish?

Viking: " there are historical reasons for this"

Which don't change the fact of the current situation, which is that the proportion of people who have control of the world's finances who are also Jewish is much higher than the proportion of Jews in the population. That is not the same as saying "all Jews are rich", which would be simply stupid, but to ignore a common bond between many of the super-rich would be equally as dumb. I am firmly of the view that the reason Israel is allowed to behave so poorly is directly and overwhelmingly due to that disproportionate influence. I have no other concerns about it.

Logic: "Israel is not perfect but it would be given a much higher scorecard were it not for the antisemitic attitudes which still prevail,"

Poppycock. In my own case, my anger at Israeli misbehaviour is mostly because I was so much a fan of the early years of the place. I am similarly disappointed and hurt when one of my friends does something that I feel is below par.

It is precisely because Judaism has been such a positive influence in so much of Western culture that the behaviour of the Jewish State is so castigated. Modern Zionism seems at odds with all the Jews have achieved.

Revealing.

I'd say most if not all of Barry Cohens best friends are either Labor Party Members, Unionist, or Labor supporters.

Thanks for the honesty Barry

Antiseptic

I am basically happy with what you say, but am a bit at odds with your statement about Israeli "misbehaviour". Faced with an enemy which has vowed to destroy it, and which is training children to hate and to become suicide bombers, how do you expect it to behave?

This hatred developed in the early 20th century, and was already extreme long before the establishment of the Israeli state. Consider the treatment of Jews from the ancient communities in Hebron and elsewhere, with the growth of Islamic fanaticism.

Consider also the move against Christians, Jews, Samaritans and even Islamic offshoots like the Baha'i and the Druze by fanatics in Islamic states. These states had always given a lower status to non-Muslims and were now allowing, often encouraging, attacks on Jewish citizens, and attempting to drive out non-Muslims. And it is by no means only Jews who suffered from these fanatics. This is deliberately ignored by most of the Western Press but not in parts of Asia where a more balanced picture is given.

With this background, the half of the Israeli population who come from other ME countries, and whose presence there predates Mohamed rightly wish to defend themselves and their families. If Israel is guilty of overreaction here, how much more guilty are the Allies whose attacks on Germany were far more vicious than those of Israel? The Israeli raids are a picnic compared with the allied bombing of that country.

Suggest by all means better methods which Israel might employ, but remember that Hezbollah rockets and Hamas suicide murders also killed Muslims and Christians. And please realise that Hamas is spoiling the lives of the ordinary Gazans. Stopping these religious zealots would benefit a lot of Muslims.

And don't wear the argument that Israel is blockading Gaza. Israel still supplies electric power to that region, treats Gazans in their hospitals (it Hamas lets them go there) and that Gaza has a border with Egypt. It was once part of that country, which after the 6 day war refused to take it back when Israel returned the Sinai.

"Jews got a bad name as moneylenders because the Church banned usury (charging interest) for centuries. "

Actually, the church commited horrific crimes against the Jews. Money lending was the only item missing in a long list of things forbidden to Jews, and this omission came from an error as the church never thought of it.

Jews were banned from owning property, moving outside of designated ghettoes, had to wear special attire, they were banned from universities, government jobs, legal and medical professions, owning a shop, restaurant and any service businesses. The aspect of money lending was the only thing Jews could think of, without facing death or imprisonment. This business began amongst the ghettoe jews within themselves, then speard to a bartering system, and then expanded to non-jews borrowing moneys at better rates. Those who did not want to pay, simply made false charges on the Jews, and it was successful.

The break from this prison came when the Jews invented Travel's Cheques, with a guatantee it could be transferred and encashed in many countries for traders and travellers, upto the Middle and Far east, marking the first time peoples' money was not in the European church's control, and that people did not have to travel carrying money in their persons. The facility of banking emerged from this point. Jews were trusted more than the church, because the Jews were good at protecting peoples' money without robbery. It was the 'control' of other peoples' moneys, and not that Jews controlled the world's moneys, which created banking instutions such as Rothschild Bank.

It is ubsurd that the Jews, who were the victims of persecution, be accused, when the church should be the one pointed at as the prime culprit of racism and discrimination. The church's deeds backfired - and they lost control of the peoples' moneys.

[quote]Further, people also have the right to question the whole concept of a Jewish state.[/quote]

On what grounds?

There are 100s of christian and islamic countries - why pick on the smallest, singualr one, who has an existential reason to have a state?

Israel, unlike other nations, was re-established legally via the UN, and that document reconises her as a jew state. It is clear Israel cannot survive without this, so those who favor such are inadvertantly promoting a genocide.

One cannot use the term Jewish state to distort Israel's histotical, factual rights - this was the Jews' ancestral homeland, and they were barred from returning by the medevial church. If anyone should be question, is that such an evil man is beaitified, when he proclaimed genocide, while persecuting the Jews in Europe:

'WE WILL NEVER SUPPORT THE RETURH OF THE JEWS TO THEIR HOMELAND BECAUSE THEY REJECTED JESUS' - Pope not so Pious.

For sure, that Pope will have to answer for his crimes. I doubt he will meet Jesus and get a tap on the shoulder plus 70 vestal virgins.

If Israel's rights are question, why not the other Muslim states, all created at the same time, by the same British Mandate, for corrupt reasons of oil. The Jews, like the copts and kurds, pre-date both islam and the Arab race, and none of their borders are based on historical veracity. The arab states are made of oil borders. Jews have never stolen anyone's lands in all their 4000 year history - those who accuse her have an opposiite history.

THE TRUTH CAN SET YOU FREE - OR CALL YOU TO ACCOUNT.

logic: "how do you expect it to behave?"

I expect the State to behave as a responsible and worthy member of the International community that voted to give the land to Israel in the first place. As it stands, the hypocrisy of the State and its Zionist apologists is quite breathtaking. The desperate behaviour of a few rag-tag slum-dwellers, even if they have minimal support from elsewhere cannot be used to justify the behaviour of an entire modern, highly-industialised, wealthy nation. The State has enormous resources that could be employed in improving the lot of those in Gaza, but chooses to spend its efforts acting like a totalitarian State in a perpetual war with its citizens. The Palestinian is to Israel what the Jew was to Nazi Germany and that is a disgrace. The most significant difference I can see is that the Palestinian is fighting back.

Israel is not the only state to behave badly and the Israeli model of disproportionate response to perceived threat is now the norm for the US, thanks to the Zionist neocon influence. That doesn't mean it is a policy worthy of respect.

Antiseptic

"The desperate behaviour of a few rag-tag slum-dwellers".

Here is where we are at odds. These slum dwellers have been given enormous amounts of international aid, some from Israel, who supplies them with water, electric power and hospital treatment, even when the Israeli border towns are bombarded with thousands of rockets and mortar shells. And what have they to show for it?

Greenhouses left to them by the departing Israelis were bombed by hot heads and can no longer be used. Sewerage pipes given to them to fix their sewerage systems were used instead as the barrels for rockets. Their administration squirreled away millions of aid money for themselves in Swiss banks. Their education system, instead of teaching their people to do things which would benefit them instead taught them to hate the Jews and glorified suicide murders. Their TV has a children's program which shows a Mickey Mouse like puppet character who became a martyr!

All of this is being sponsored by money from Iran and Saudi Arabia (who will not allow Churches in their land).

Take a note from history, the anti-Israel left are saying exactly the same as things their counterparts said when Hitler was in charge. Admittedly the ME lacks the military capacity and manufacturing skills to do most us harms, but keep away from Bali, London and Spain.

Criticise Israel by all means, but make sure you understand what is behind it, and consider what we would do if we were faced by a fanatical group doing to us what Hamas and Hezbollah are doing to Israel.

I agree with some of Cohen's comments and conclusions, but others I think are quite unreasonable. I might as well say that 'some of my best friends play the victim card.'

In some instances, the jewish people are indeed victims. Nobody would deny that about the holocaust, nor would any reasonable person excuse Chandler's nasty comments.

But stop for a moment, and think about this comment by Thomas Friedman, which Cohen repeats:

"But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction, out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East, is anti-Semitic and not saying so is dishonest"

Opprobium and international sanction out of all proportion to ANY other party in the middle east?

Ahem. Sorry, but no. Considering the 'opprobium' visited upon Iraq at present or the talk about sanctions against Iran, I hardly think this comment is at all sensible.

I'm not saying the talk on sanctions against Iran is unreasonable, and there is much debate about Iraq - my point is, that there is significantly higher comment and indeed action in other places in the middle east, who receive far worse from the international community, whether that action is justified or not.

Israel, cops little from the West, save for some harsh rhetoric from certain quarters, though it receives significant symbolic and practical assistance from the US. Again, without needing to go into significant detail on whether it's justified or not, we have a situation where ultimately Israel receives help and succor from the west, while the other middle eastern nations often are often embroiled in military action. Yes, sometimes it is needed (sometimes not) but this "oh, poor Israel, isn't it so terrible they're being criticised!" really does seem like a tad much.