Thursday, February 22, 2018

942 US House of Representatives Calendar 2017 is Jewish rather than Christian

US House of Representatives Calendar 2017 is Jewish rather than Christian

Newsletter published on 3 December 2017

(1) US House of Representatives Calendar 2017 is Jewish rather than
Christian
(2) 'Merry Christmas': Trump opens new front in the culture wars
(3) Mainstream Media ignores study on Autism Link with
Aluminum-containing Vaccines
(4) Walmart selling ‘Antifa’ t-shirts
(5) NYT "practical advice on how to dress for a riot"
(6) NYT: What to Wear to Smash the State
(7) Soros vs Hungary - Interview with Kevin Barrett
(8) Prince Charles' comments on the Jewish Lobby - treated as an
embarrassment
(9) Prince Charles' comments on the Jewish Lobby - surrounded by refutations

(1) US House of Representatives Calendar 2017 is Jewish rather than
Christian

- Peter Myers, December 3, 2017

The following Jewish & Christian Holidays are listed in the House of
Representatives Calendar, 2017:

https://www.aiaa.org/HouseCalendar2017.pdf

https://www.majorityleader.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2017-MONTHLY-CALENDAR.pdf

April 2017

10 Passover Begins at Sundown
16 Easter Sunday
18 Passover Ends at Sundown

NB Good Friday is NOT shown

September 2017

20 Rosh Hashanah Begins at Sundown
22 Rosh Hashanah Ends at Sundown
29 Yom Kippur Begins at Sundown
30 Yom Kippur Ends at Sundown

December 2017

12 Hanukkah Begins at Sundown
20 Hanukkah Ends at Sundown
25 Christmas

Total Christian entries : 2 (Easter Sunday, Christmas; But there is no
entry for Good Friday)

Total Jewish entries: 8 (start & end dates of Passover, Rosh Hashanah,
Yom Kippur, Hanukkah)

Conclusion: the US House of Reps is more observant of the Jewish
religion, than of the Christian religion.

And the only 2 Christian holidays, Christmas and Easter Sunday, are
increasingly secularised - as per "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons
Greetings" rather than "Happy Christmas".

Why is there no entry for Good Friday? Perhaps because this day is
unpleasant for Jews?

Click on one of the above links, download the Calendar, and save it to
your computer. Also save this email with it.

Left, so-called 'Secular' sites seem not to notice, or not to care, that
the USA is becoming increasingly. not 'just Secular' but - Jewish.

(2) 'Merry Christmas': Trump opens new front in the culture wars

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/celebrating-merry-christmas-again-trump-opens-new-front-in-the-culture-wars/2017/11/30/e28a40e0-d5ee-11e7-a986-d0a9770d9a3e_story.html

‘Celebrating Merry Christmas again’: Trump opens new front in the
culture wars

{caption} As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump vowed to make
America say "Merry Christmas" again. He surely says it a lot himself.
(Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

By David Nakamura December 1 at 2:41 PM

In a St. Louis suburb this week to sell the Republican tax bill,
President Trump appeared on stage with twin symbols of his vision of the
country’s heritage — a pair of American flags and a row of Christmas
trees, adorned with red, white and blue ornaments.

"I told you that we would be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again," Trump
said, eliciting roars of approval from hundreds of supporters at the St.
Charles Convention Center. [...]

Trump was signaling to his base that he was following through on a
campaign promise to shelve what he and his supporters view as political
correctness aimed at marginalizing the nation’s Christian majority in
the name of diversity.

"Remember, I was the one when I was here the last time, I said, ‘We’re
going to have Christmas again,’ ’’ Trump said. "I was the one that said,
you go to the department stores and you see ‘Happy New Year’ and you see
red and you see snow and you see all these things. You don’t see ‘Merry
Christmas’ anymore. With Trump as your president, we are going to be
celebrating ‘Merry Christmas’ again."

More than a year before he was elected, Trump had begun working into his
stump speech references to the proverbial "war on Christmas," a familiar
refrain among some on the religious right and on Fox News during
President Barack Obama’s eight years in office. Trump even held a
Christmas rally in Grand Rapids, Mich., in December 2015, with giant
wreaths and the words "Merry Christmas" written in script on campaign
posters.

(3) Mainstream Media ignores study on Autism Link with
Aluminum-containing Vaccines

- Peter Myers, December 3, 2017

To check that the MSM has ignored this story, you need to do searches
which specify a time - specifically, "Last Week". Best to use Google
Advanced Search (bookmark it):
https://www.google.com.au/advanced_search

That way, you'll rule out hits from years ago, whereas the report was
only published in the last week. Do your check soon, or you'll have to
specify "Last Month" instead.

In the USA (spelling: aluminum), search for
search aluminum vaccines - for past week

In Britain (spelling: aluminium), search for
  aluminium vaccines - for past week

In both, search for
autism vaccines - for past week

When I checked yesterday, I found that The Daily Mail had covered the
story, and that Markets Insider did (but that's a minor publication).
Other MSM did not mention it, but Alternative media did - these are the
ones the MSM ridicule, and try to isolate by diverting traffic away from
them.

The study was done by Professor Chris Exley, and published in the
Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology.

It was also published in The Hippocratic Post.

When I checked yesterday, I noted that MSM did not seem to have used
Factcheckers to ridule the story - they just ignored it.

One or two 'Sceptic' sites did, however, ridicule it, using ad-hominem
attacks against Professor Exley.

You might like to do your own investigation of how the MSM have handled
this story, and let me know.

Imagine the lawsuits over Autism caused by Vaccines - there would be
thousands of payouts, each over $1 million. This would be one of the
Court Cases of the Century.

(4) Walmart selling ‘Antifa’ t-shirts

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/01/walmart-selling-antifa-fan-gear/

Walmart Selling ‘Antifa’ Fan Gear 25488 Walmart.com by AMANDA HOUSE1 Dec
20179,950 Walmart is selling "Antifa" clothing that "will [allow you to]
express yourself inside the opposition to the ideology, organizations,
governments and people from the far right (fascism)." The mega-retailer
is offering at least 13 different sweatshirts "made in Mexico of 100%
COTTON for all-day comfort" promoting the group whose activities were
"formally classified" by the Obama Administration "as domestic terrorist
violence" as early as April 2016, according to Politico, despite the
group’s efforts to downplay this determination.

"Antifa," or Anti-Fascist Action, is an informal grouping of communist,
anarchist, and other far-left street gangs. Drawing inspiration from the
German Communist Party’s street fighters of the 1930s, the modern
movement grew out of the European far-left punk scene in the 1980s.
These unapologetically violent bands of leftists were largely unknown in
the United States until recent years, when America’s post-Occupy Wall
Street far-left began adopting the name.

Antifa is well known for dozens of violent crimes against people they
consider "fascists" on both sides of the Atlantic. As Breitbart News’s
Ian Mason cataloged, to Antifa, "fascists" include "in no particular order":

…Trump supporters, other Trump supporters, members of Germany’s populist
AfD party, a 20-year-old woman who chose to wear a Spanish-flag
bracelet, a Philadelphia free speech rally, former UKIP and Brexit
leader Nigel Farage, libertarian VICE News co-founder Gavin McInnes,
French policemen, and Israeli-owned bookstores. Interesting, a Salafist
Muslim who attacked a "filthy white" Antifa writer because he
disrespected Islam does not qualify.

None of this has stopped Antifa from receiving a rash of positive press
from American left-leaning media outlets; acceptance from both
Democratic politicians and Republicans like John McCain, Marco Rubio,
and Mitt Romney; and, now, its own clothing collection at Walmart.

"Just remember to keep creating a better world," the clothing
advertisements encourage.

This glorification of Antifa was mirrored Friday by the New York Times,
which published a fashion style guide for the group: "practical advice
on how to dress for a riot." In their guide, the Times explains why a
uniform look is needed, from Breitbart News’s Charlie Nash:

"These defensive methods work only if there are enough black-clad others
nearby. A single person in all black and multiple face masks is an eye
grabber."

Finally, the Times claimed that dressing in black militant gear and
concealing your face forms an "emotional connection" with other rioters.

"Tactical considerations aside, it’s this emotional connection with
other members of the bloc that many practitioners highlight the most in
interviews," they proclaimed. "It’s why soldiers and police have uniforms."

Walmart has come under previous criticism for selling "Black Lives
Matter" shirts and other items. Following a request from the national
Fraternal Order of Police, the retail giant eventually removed one of
the items last December, shirts that said "Bulletproof," but refused to
remove the rest.

As with the "Black Lives Matter" paraphernalia, the Antifa products are
being sold by a third party manufacturer, in this case, Tee Bangers, on
Walmart’s website.

(5) NYT "practical advice on how to dress for a riot"

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/12/01/new-york-times-glorifies-violent-antifa-rioters-with-style-guide-tactical-advice/

New York Times Glorifies Violent Antifa Rioters with Style Guide,
Tactical Advice

by CHARLIE NASH

1 Dec 201767 The New York Times has glorified Antifa and its more
violent "black bloc" rioters with a style guide, complete with riot gear
advice. In their article, titled "What to Wear to Smash the State," the
New York Times detailed the fashion of violent far-left rioters who
enjoy "punching Nazis," before advising what to wear during violent
protests and riots.

"This mass of solid black descending upon the park in Berkeley, hunting
for fascists, was an intimidating aesthetic. That’s by design," they
declared, before quoting an anarchist who claimed that covering your
face and dressing in uniform "makes it easier for saboteurs to take the
offensive against storefronts, banks and any other material symbols and
power centers of capitalism and the state."

Despite quoting the anarchist, who openly admitted that the black
clothing and covered faces were used to evade police officers while
committing crimes, the New York Times attempted to claim that the style
is a safety measure to prevent being identified by "white supremacist
groups."

"The creation of mass anonymity protects practitioners from the threat
of post-action doxxing by white supremacist groups, a process by which
their identities and contact information, including addresses and places
of employment, are publicized," they claimed. "People at home can use
this information to harass and threaten. Similarly, police and other
agencies have staff devoted to documenting demonstrations, and they work
to identify people on film and video. These are among the reasons that
some anarchists and anti-fascists advocate smashing cameras at
demonstrations." Apparently, the New York Times favors the "two x"
spelling of "doxing" typically reserved for people new to the Internet.

In their article, the New York Times continued by giving "practical
advice on how to dress for a riot."

"There is more practical advice on how to dress for a riot. One should
decide on organic or synthetic gloves before participating in an action:
Wool and cotton may allow chemical contaminants, like pepper spray, to
absorb, while nylon can melt if you grab something hot, which
historically has included some kinds of tear-gas canisters but can
include various things on fire," they advised, before adding, "These
defensive methods work only if there are enough black-clad others
nearby. A single person in all black and multiple face masks is an eye
grabber."

Finally, the Times claimed that dressing in black militant gear and
concealing your face forms an "emotional connection" with other rioters.

"Tactical considerations aside, it’s this emotional connection with
other members of the bloc that many practitioners highlight the most in
interviews," they proclaimed. "It’s why soldiers and police have uniforms."

Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on
Twitter @MrNashington and Gab @Nash, or like his page at Facebook.

(6) NYT: What to Wear to Smash the State
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/29/style/black-bloc-fashion.html

What to Wear to Smash the State
Anti-fascist activists believe in dressing for the job they want. Right
now, many think, that job is punching Nazis.

By RICK PAULASNOV. 29, 2017

In late August, a crowd of thousands — primarily leftists and liberals —
cascaded down Martin Luther King Jr. Way in Berkeley, Calif. They were
marching on a spattering of right-wingers, Trump supporters and Nazis
who were gathering under the mission to say "no to Marxism in America."
At the front of the march were about 100 people dressed in head-to-toe
black.

According to many people present, this was the largest so-called black
bloc they’d seen. This medley of black-clad anarchists, anti-fascists
(known as "antifa" activists) and their fellow travelers was a response
to the previous week’s white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va.
There, protests ended with 19 injured and 32-year-old Heather Heyer
killed when James Fields, an admirer of Hitler who demonstrated with
white supremacists, drove his car into a crowd.

This mass of solid black descending upon the park in Berkeley, hunting
for fascists, was an intimidating aesthetic. That’s by design.

"Cops wear camouflage when they arrest people in city drug raids," said
Ben, a Bay Area activist. "But they’re in a city. It doesn’t help them,
but it makes them look more intimidating." Ben says he has participated
in protests since 2000, including Bush/Gore, Occupy Oakland and Black
Lives Matter. (The Times agreed to use only his first name because of
the threat of harassment, online or otherwise, by activists.) "A group
of people all dressed in black can be intimidating," he said.

Is that intimidation the motive or just a benefit? Do black bloc
practitioners dress up because, as many progressives wonder, they want
to commit crimes? What do they get out of "masking up"? Where does
uniform merge with tactic?

Credit Stephen Loewinsohn for The New York Times By now, you know the
look. Black work or military boots, pants, balaclavas or ski masks,
gloves and jackets, North Face brand or otherwise. Gas masks, goggles
and shields may be added as accessories, but the basics have stayed the
same since the look’s inception.

t’s impossible to say which anarchist street movement first donned all
black. The generally agreed-upon genesis for the bloc’s current
incarnation is the Autonomen movement of the 1970s, which grew out of
class struggles in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and beyond. (Antifa
groups, an overlapping but not at all identical set of people, trace
their lineage back further, to those who fought against the rise of
Hitler; generally, where there is "fa," there’s been "antifa.")

According to a history distributed by an anarchist news service in 2001,
by Daniel Dylan Young, a continuing struggle in Germany between
squatters and police evictors culminated in a 1981 action in which
activists dressed in "black motorcycle helmets and ski masks," wearing
"uniform black clothing."

Nearly immediately, the benefits of such a uniform were realized.

"Everyone quickly figured out," Mr. Young wrote, that "having a massive
group of people all dressed the same with their faces covered not only
helps in defending against the police, but also makes it easier for
saboteurs to take the offensive against storefronts, banks and any other
material symbols and power centers of capitalism and the state."

Both the ease of uniform procurement — the barrier to entry is just
getting black clothes, with only your own ethical purchasing guidelines
to steer you — and the aesthetic’s effectiveness allowed black blocs to
spread. During Ronald Reagan’s visit to Berlin in 1986, a group of 3,000
showed up, according to Mr. Young; in 1999, a bloc of 500 was part of
the "March for Mumia" in Philadelphia, protesting the imprisonment of
the journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal. That same year, between 100 and 300
people became the bloc at the World Trade Organization meeting in
Seattle. [...]

So, while they wear khakis and white polos, the black bloc are left with
some particular defensive and offensive benefits of their very own.

The creation of mass anonymity protects practitioners from the threat of
post-action doxxing by white supremacist groups, a process by which
their identities and contact information, including addresses and places
of employment, are publicized. People at home can use this information
to harass and threaten. Similarly, police and other agencies have staff
devoted to documenting demonstrations, and they work to identify people
on film and video. These are among the reasons that some anarchists and
anti-fascists advocate smashing cameras at demonstrations.

As surveillance techniques have advanced and proliferated — the rise of
the high-resolution portable phone camera along with social media means
more documentation and more distribution than ever — practitioners have
evolved from covering up obvious markers like tattoos, birthmarks and
scars to hiding biometric indicators like ears and noses. Some in black
blocs say they have heard of people placing weights in belts to alter
their gaits.

"I’ll often look through pictures from the demonstration and see if I
can spot myself in any of them," said Elle Armageddon, a Bay Area
activist and writer. "If I can’t find any pictures of myself, I feel
like I’ve done O.K." [...]

There is solid beauty advice as well: "A layer of glitter or highlighter
dusted over your cheeks can serve double duty, showing off your glorious
bone structure while simultaneously providing a helpful way to determine
which side of your bandanna was in contact with your face and which side
is saturated in tear gas particulate." (Also, jean shorts are probably
not ideal.)

There is more practical advice on how to dress for a riot. One should
decide on organic or synthetic gloves before participating in an action:
Wool and cotton may allow chemical contaminants, like pepper spray, to
absorb, while nylon can melt if you grab something hot, which
historically has included some kinds of tear-gas canisters but can
include various things on fire.

One Antifa "fashion don’t" is carrying cellphones. The American Civil
Liberties Union reports that 72 agencies in 24 states and Washington,
D.C., have "simulators" that mimic cellphone towers in order to track
people. [...]

"People sometimes do things that are illegal, but I think they’re
ethical," Ben said. "I’m happy to be in this mass that creates anonymity
for those people, even if they’re doing things I’m not willing to do."

Tactical considerations aside, it’s this emotional connection with other
members of the bloc that many practitioners highlight the most in
interviews. "Uniformity of characteristics" and a visual sense of
equality have a way of, as research published in 2015 put it, giving
"rise to feelings of solidarity." It’s why soldiers and police have
uniforms. It’s why sports teams have apparel for themselves and their
fans, why brands have logos and consistent colorways, why fascists get
slightly too-short versions of David Beckham haircuts and pin frogs to
their lapels.

But unlike hierarchal uniforms like those of the military, say — or even
the difference between worker and management clothes at somewhere such
as McDonald’s — black bloc fashion allows no room for rank to enter the
style. It’s all black and that’s it.

(Other leftist movements use similar techniques. The Zapatista Army of
National Liberation in Chiapas, Mexico, which rose after the 1994
passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, takes the approach
of cultivating equality through anonymity by wearing balaclavas or
handkerchiefs over the face, but pairs them with the militant gear of
armed struggle or indigenous elements.) [...]

A version of this article appears in print on November 30, 2017, on Page
D1 of the New York edition with the headline: Black Is Always in Fashion.

(7) Soros vs Hungary - Interview with Kevin Barrett

You can watch my video interview with Kevin Barrett about Soros vs
Hungary at https://www.patreon.com/posts/15473529

You can watch my video interview with Kevin Barrett about Harvey
Weinstein and Hollywood's Culture War at
https://www.patreon.com/posts/harvey-disgrace-14986044

You can hear my audio interview with Kevin Barrett about Karl Marx on
Jewish Finance at https://www.patreon.com/posts/peter-myers-asks-14766760

(8) Prince Charles' comments on the Jewish Lobby - treated as an
embarrassment

- Peter Myers, December 3, 2017

A few days ago, I sent out this news item, but I deleted 'extraneous'
material such as criticisms of Prince Charles over his statement. I just
let Charles' comments stand on their own.

But readers of the Daily Mail, which published the report, did not get
it that way. Charles' comments were preceded, and followed, by
criticisms and refutations. There was not one bit of support for his
position.

Read the whole story, in item 5 below, and you'll notice that Charles'
comments are treated as an embarrassment - as if they had to be
explained away. They are surrounded by refutations.

So much for the idea that the Royal Family runs the show.

(9) Prince Charles' comments on the Jewish Lobby - surrounded by refutations

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5073607/Letter-penned-Prince-Charles-sparks-controversy.html

Prince Charles suggested 'influx of foreign Jews' was partly to blame
for Middle East unrest and asked who will take on 'Jewish lobby' in
America in letter to close friend

   A letter penned by Prince Charles in 1986 reveals his views on the
Middle East

   The letter was written to his mentor, the Afrikaner explorer Laurens
van der Post

   He argues that the exodus of European Jews helped cause unrest in the
region

   He also writes his hopes that the 'American Jewish lobby'will be
stood up to

   'Jewish lobby' is considered by some to be an anti-Semitic term,
often criticised

   But Charles has always had a good relationship with the UK Jewish
community

By Ian Gallagher Chief Reporter For The Mail On Sunday

Published: 09:56 AEDT, 12 November 2017 | Updated: 19:49 AEDT, 13
November 2017

Prince Charles was fiercely criticised last night after it emerged he
once urged the US to ‘take on the Jewish lobby’ – and blamed ‘the influx
of foreign Jews’ for causing unrest in the Middle East.

The Mail on Sunday can reveal the incendiary comments are contained in a
letter in which the Prince lays bare his thoughts on one of the world’s
most bloody disputes.

Writing to his close friend Laurens van der Post in 1986, the Prince
makes a startling assessment of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

He argues it was the exodus of European Jews in the middle of the last
century that ‘helped to cause the great problems’.

He goes on to say terrorism in the region will only end when its causes
are eliminated.

He then expresses the hope a US President will find the courage to stand
up to the American ‘Jewish lobby’. [...]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5073607/Letter-penned-Prince-Charles-sparks-controversy.html

Friday, Dec 1st 2017 2PM 26°C 5PM 25°C 5-Day Forecast

Prince Charles suggested 'influx of foreign Jews' was partly to blame
for Middle East unrest and asked who will take on 'Jewish lobby' in
America in letter to close friend

   A letter penned by Prince Charles in 1986 reveals his views on the
Middle East

   The letter was written to his mentor, the Afrikaner explorer Laurens
van der Post

   He argues that the exodus of European Jews helped cause unrest in the
region

   He also writes his hopes that the 'American Jewish lobby'will be
stood up to

   'Jewish lobby' is considered by some to be an anti-Semitic term,
often criticised

   But Charles has always had a good relationship with the UK Jewish
community

By Ian Gallagher Chief Reporter For The Mail On Sunday

Published: 09:56 AEDT, 12 November 2017 | Updated: 19:49 AEDT, 13
November 2017

Prince Charles was fiercely criticised last night after it emerged he
once urged the US to ‘take on the Jewish lobby’ – and blamed ‘the influx
of foreign Jews’ for causing unrest in the Middle East.

The Mail on Sunday can reveal the incendiary comments are contained in a
letter in which the Prince lays bare his thoughts on one of the world’s
most bloody disputes.

Writing to his close friend Laurens van der Post in 1986, the Prince
makes a startling assessment of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

He argues it was the exodus of European Jews in the middle of the last
century that ‘helped to cause the great problems’.

The term ‘Jewish lobby’ is considered by many to be anti-Semitic –
suggesting wealthy Jews in the US operate behind the scenes to exercise
undue influence over government policy.

Other high-profile figures have been heavily criticised for using the term.

{caption}
Dodgy views: Charles, pictured with President Ronald Reagan in 1985, was
said to be critical of US Middle East policy
{end}

Last night, Stephen Pollard, influential editor of The Jewish Chronicle,
said: ‘To me this is the most astonishing element of the Prince’s
letter. The "Jewish lobby" is one of the anti-Semitic themes that have
endured for centuries. It is this myth there are these very powerful
Jews who control foreign policy or the media or banks or whatever.’

Mr Pollard described the letter as ‘jaw-droppingly shocking’, adding:
‘That they [the Prince’s comments] come from the heir to the throne is
unsettling, to put it mildly.’

While the letter is inflammatory, there is no suggestion Charles holds
anti-Semitic views.

He has many prominent Jewish friends and in 2013 became the first Royal
to attend a chief rabbi’s inauguration ceremony. In a speech that year,
he expressed concern at the apparent rise of anti-Semitism in Britain.

In the past it has been reported that the Prince is privately critical
of US policy in the Middle East, with one diplomatic source accusing him
of having ‘fairly dodgy views on Israel’.

Charles has always enjoyed a close and supportive relationship with the
Jewish community in Britain.

{caption}
New Start: Israel promised a home to tens of thousands of refugees
{end}

At the same time, he is seen as a defender of Islam, with one historian
noting that no other major Western figure has as high a standing in the
Muslim world.

It has also been suggested he has pro-Palestinian leanings, a perception
the letter appears to support.

State that offered hope for survivors of the Holocaust

Jews from Eastern Europe had been arriving in Palestine - part of which
would later become Israel - even before 1917, when the Balfour
Dedclartion set in motion the creation of the Jewish state. Among those
who came after the end of the Second World War in 1945 were many
survivors of the Holocaust.

In May 1948, when Israel came into existence, five Arab nations - Egypt,
Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon - invaded but were defated by the
Israeli military. From 1948 to 1951, nearly 700,000 immigrants - many of
them from refugee camps in Germany, Austria and Italy - arrived to
settle in Israel.

The Prince’s candid letter surfaced in a public archive.

It was written on November 24, 1986, immediately after an official visit
the then 38-year-old Prince made to Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Qatar with
Princess Diana.

He notes the tour was ‘fascinating’ and that he learned ‘a lot about the
Middle East and Arab outlook’.

He goes on: ‘Tried to read bit of Koran on way out and it gave me some
insight into way they [Arabs] think and operate. Don’t think they could
understand us through reading Bible though!

'Also I now begin to understand better their [Arabs’] point of view
about Israel. Never realised they see it as a US colony.

'I now appreciate that Arabs and Jews were all a Semitic people
originally and it is the influx of foreign, European Jews (especially
from Poland, they say) which has helped to cause great problems. I know
there are so many complex issues, but how can there ever be an end to
terrorism unless the causes are eliminated?

‘Surely some US president has to have the courage to stand up and take
on the Jewish lobby in US? I must be naive, I suppose!’

{caption}
Incendiary letter to his mentor, explorer Laurens van der Post: Prince
Charle's candid views on the Middle East were made to close friend
Laurens van der Post, the late Afrikaner author, war hero and explorer
who was godfather to Prince William...
{end}

Among those to come under fire for using the term ‘Jewish lobby’ are
General George Brown, the highest-ranking military officer in the US as
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was publicly rebuked and
disowned by President Gerald Ford in 1974 after claiming that a ‘Jewish
lobby’ controlled Congress.

Former Ukip leader Nigel Farage was criticised earlier this month when
he referred to ‘a powerful Jewish lobby’ in the US.

In 2006, Chris Davies, former leader of the Lib Dem MEPs, was forced to
resign after he used the term.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu also came under fire when he used the phrase in
a newspaper article in 2002.

The Prince’s reference in the letter to the influx of European Jews also
caused dismay.

It is not clear if he is referring to immigration before or after the
Second World War, or both. Mr Pollard said: ‘It is the absolute classic
Arab explanation of the problems in the Middle East.

'And it is what everyone has always said the British aristocracy
actually thinks – the idea that Jews were some kind of foreigners who
had no real place in Israel until we decided to make it their homeland.
Historically it is nonsense and it’s quite stunning when it comes from
the heir to the throne.’

A senior Israeli diplomatic source said last night: ‘He [Charles] was
travelling around the Gulf states [just before he wrote the
controversial letter], which in those years were very anti-Israel. It
seems he was presented with a narrative in a very convincing way.’

Earlier this month, Britain marked the centenary of the Balfour
Declaration, the document that paved the way for the state of Israel,
with a gala dinner in London attended by Theresa May and Israeli prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The Prince called the centenary a ‘deeply significant moment’, adding ‘a
great deal remains to be done if we are to bring about a just and
lasting peace for Israel and her neighbours’.

Suggestions that Charles holds pro-Palestinian views are supported by
his letter to van der Post.

He writes there is much to admire about Islam ‘especially its accent on
hospitality and accessibility of rulers’.

In 1993, Charles delivered what was then considered to be the most
pro-Islamic speech ever made by a member of the Royal Family.

He said: ‘Islam can teach us today a way of understanding and living in
the world which Christianity is poorer for having lost.’

He added: ‘These two worlds, the Islamic and the Western, are at
something of a crossroads in their relations. We must not let them stand
apart.’

In 2003, it was reported the Prince had not been to the US for the
previous six years on Foreign Office advice, largely because of his
criticism of US policy in the Middle East.

A diplomatic source said at the time the Prince had ‘in American terms
and international terms, fairly dodgy views on Israel. He thinks
American policy in the Middle East is complete madness.’

In 2007, leaked emails between senior Clarence House staff put Charles
at the centre of a row about the Royals’ attitude towards the Jewish state.

Exchanges between Sir Michael Peat, the Prince’s then principal
secretary, and Clive Alderton, Sir Michael’s deputy, contained
apparently disparaging remarks about Israel.

Earlier that year, the Israeli embassy invited the two senior aides to
Israel for a four-day visit as guests of the Knesset, the Israeli
parliament.

Sir Michael initially replied enthusiastically, saying: ‘The invitation
is hugely appreciated and Clive and I would love to come.’

But a month later, there was an exchange of emails between Mr Alderton
and Sir Michael that were apparently accidentally copied to the outgoing
Jewish ambassador.

In the emails, Mr Alderton complains of being ‘pursued’ by the
ambassador and says: ‘Safe to assume there is no chance of this visit
ever actually happening?

'Acceptance would make it hard to avoid the many ways in which Israel
would want HRH [Prince Charles] to help burnish its international image.
In which case, let’s agree a way to lower his expectations.’

Over the years, the Prince has forged a close relationship with the
Saudi royal family. But no Royal has ever visited Israel in an official
capacity.

Officials say it is because there is no permanent peace deal in the region.

Earlier this year, however, Charles was pencilled in to visit the
country to mark the Balfour centenary and honour thousands of British
war dead.

But the idea was vetoed by the Foreign Office amid claims it would upset
Israel’s Arab neighbours.

Last night a Clarence House spokeswoman said of the 1986 letter: ‘This
letter clearly stated that these were not the Prince’s own views about
Arab-Israeli issues but represented the opinions of some of those he met
during his visit which he was keen to interrogate.

'He was sharing the arguments in private correspondence with a
long-standing friend in an attempt to improve his understanding of what
he has always recognised is a deeply complex issue to which he was
coming early on in his own analysis in 1986.

'Over the years, the Prince has continued his study of the complex and
difficult themes he referenced here. He has built a proven track record
of support for both Jewish and Arab communities around the world and has
a long history of promoting interfaith dialogue and cultural understanding.’


No comments:

Post a Comment