¿Por qué no vemos manifestaciones en París, o en Londres, o en Barcelona en contra de las dictaduras islámicas? ¿Por qué no lo hacen contra la dictadura birmana? ¿Por qué no hay manifestaciones, en contra de la esclavitud de millones de mujeres, que viven sin ningún amparo legal? ¿Por qué no se manifiestan en contra del uso de niños bombas, en los conflictos donde el Islam está implicado? ¿Por qué no ha liderado nunca la lucha a favor de las víctimas de la terrible dictadura islámica de Sudan? ¿Por qué nunca se ha conmovido por las víctimas de los actos de terrorismo en Israel? ¿Por qué no considera la lucha contra el fanatismo islámico, una de sus causas principales? ¿Por qué no defiende el derecho de Israel a defenderse y a existir? ¿Por qué confunde la defensa de la causa palestina, con la justificación del terrorismo palestino? Y la pregunta del millón, ¿por qué la izquierda europea, y globalmente toda la izquierda, solo está obsesionada en luchar contra dos de las democracias más sólidas del planeta, Estados Unidos e Israel, y no contra las peores dictaduras? Las dos democracias más sólidas, y las que han sufrido los atentados más sangrantes del terrorismo mundial. Y la izquierda no está preocupada por ello.

Y finalmente, el concepto de compromiso con la libertad. Oigo esa expresión en todos los foros propalestinos europeos. ‘¡Estamos a favor de la libertad de los pueblos!’, dicen con ardor. No es cierto. Nunca les ha preocupado la libertad de los ciudadanos de Siria, de Irán, del Yemen, de Sudan, etc… Y nunca les ha preocupado la libertad destruida de los palestinos que viven bajo el extremismo islámico de Hamás. Solo les preocupa usar el concepto de libertad palestina, como misil contra la libertad israelí.

Una terrible consecuencia se deriva de estas dos patologías ideológicas: la Manipulación periodística.

Finalmente, no es menor el daño que hace la mayoría de la prensa internacional. Sobre el conflicto árabe-israelí NO SE INFORMA, SE HACE PROPAGANDA. La mayoría de la prensa, cuando informa sobre Israel, vulnera todos los principios del código deontológico del periodismo. Y así, cualquier acto de defensa de Israel se convierte en una masacre y cualquier enfrentamiento, en un genocidio. Se han dicho tantas barbaridades, que a Israel ya no se la puede acusar de nada peor. En paralelo, esa misma prensa nunca habla de la ingerencia de Irán o Siria a favor de la violencia contra Israel; de la inculcación del fanatismo en los niños; de la corrupción generalizada en Palestina. Y cuando habla de víctimas, eleva a la categoría de tragedia a cualquier víctima palestina, y camufla, esconde o desprecia a las víctimas judías.

Acabo con un apunte sobre la izquierda española. Muchos son los ejemplos que ilustran el antiisraelismo y el antiamericanismo que definen el ADN de la izquierda global española. Por ejemplo, un partido de izquierdas acaba de expulsar a un militante, porqué ha creado una web de defensa de Israel. Cito frases de la expulsión: ‘Nuestros amigos son los pueblos de Irán, Libia y Venezuela, oprimidos por el imperialismo. Y no un estado nazi como el de Israel’. Otro ejemplo, la alcaldesa socialista de Ciempozuelos cambió el día de la Shoá, por el día de la Nakba palestina, despreciando, así, a más de 6 millones de europeos judíos asesinados. O en mi ciudad, Barcelona, el ayuntamiento socialista ha decidido celebrar, durante el 60 aniversario del Estado de Israel, una semana de ‘solidaridad con el pueblo palestino’. Para ilustrarlo, invitó a Leila Khaled, famosa terrorista de los años 70, actual líder del Frente de Liberación de Palestina, que es una organización considerada terrorista por la Unión Europea, y que defiende el uso de las bombas contra Israel. Y etcétera. Este pensamiento global, que forma parte de lo políticamente correcto, impregna también el discurso del presidente Zapatero. Su política exterior cae en todos los tópicos de la izquierda lunática y, respecto a Oriente Medio, su actitud es inequívocamente pro-árabe. Estoy en condiciones de asegurar que, en privado, Zapatero considera a Israel culpable del conflicto, y la política del ministro Moratinos va en esa dirección. El hecho de que el presidente se pusiera una Kefia palestina, en plena guerra del Líbano, no es una casualidad. Es un símbolo. España ha sufrido el atentado islamista más grave de Europa, y ‘Al Andalús’ está en el punto de mira de todo el terrorismo islámico. Como escribí hace tiempo, ‘nos mataron con celulares vía satélite, conectados con la Edad Media’. Y, sin embargo, la izquierda española está entre las más antiisraelíes del planeta.

¡Y dice ser antiisraelí por solidaridad! Esta es la locura que quiero denunciar con esta conferencia.

CONCLUSIÓN.
No soy judía, estoy vinculada ideológicamente a la izquierda y soy periodista. ¿Por qué no soy antiisraelí, como la mayoría de mis colegas? Porqué, como no judía, tengo la responsabilidad histórica de luchar contra el odio a los judíos, y, en la actualidad, contra el odio a su patria, Israel. La lucha contra el antisemitismo no es cosa de judíos, es obligación de los no judíos. Como periodista, estoy obligada a buscar la verdad, más allá de los prejuicios, las mentiras y las manipulaciones. Y sobre Israel no se dice la verdad. Y como persona de izquierdas, que ama el progreso, estoy obligada a defender la libertad, la cultura, la convivencia, la educación cívica de los niños, todos los principios que las Tablas de La Ley convirtieron en principios universales.
Principios que el islamismo fundamentalista destruye sistemáticamente. Es decir, como no judía, periodista y de izquierdas tengo un triple compromiso moral con Israel.
Porqué, si Israel fuera derrotada, serían derrotadas la modernidad, la cultura y la libertad.

La lucha de Israel, aunque el mundo no quiera saber es la lucha del mundo  !!!!

The “Occupation” was a direct result of the broader Arab-
Israeli conflict. The term “Occupation” implies an aggressive effort to take over and rule a foreign people, but the Territories came under Israeli control during its defensive war in 1967. Arab states and Palestinians refused to accept the Jewish State’s right to exist and mobilized again in 1967 to destroy it.
As Israel defended itself, it drove back Jordanian, Egyptian and Syrian troops and captured the Territories that fell on Israel’s side of the armistice lines.

Palestinians had not made any claims to the Territories
until Israel captured them from Egypt and Jordan in 1967.
During Egypt and Jordan’s 19-year occupation (1948-1967), no one called for a Palestinian state that would include Gaza and the West Bank. West Bank residents became Jordanian citizens. The original PLO Covenant (1964) explicitly excluded the Territories from its description of Palestine and called instead for the destruction of Israel and for replacing it with Arab rule. The PLO amended its Charter to include a claim to the Territories only after Israel captured them in 1967.
The PLO “does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area.”
—Article 24, PLO Covenant, 1964

Israel repeatedly tried to end the Occupation after 1967.
Israel had no wish to rule over the Palestinians. Within two weeks after hostilities ended, Israel offered to exchange land for peace, but Arab leaders categorically rejected the offer, offi cially
issuing the “Three NOs” in Khartoum. “No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel,
no negotiations with it.” —Khartoum Resolution, Sept 1, 1967
Between 1967 and 1969, again in 1979 in the letters attached to the Israel-Egypt peace treaty, and from 1991 until today, Israel’s leaders have sought to negotiate with the Palestinians to peacefully resolve the confl ict, but their efforts have been repeatedly rejected.

Israel was forced to continue its presence in Gaza and the West Bank from 1967 until 1993 because no Palestinian leader emerged as a peace partner. International law  and custom required Israel to administer the Territories until a successful peace treaty could be negotiated. International law and UN Resolution 242 required the belligerents to negotiate a solution with agreements about new borders that would be mutually recognized. Initially, the international community assumed that Israel would negotiate with Jordan and Egypt, which had occupied the Territories between 1949 and 1967, but Egypt and Jordan refused to negotiate at the time. When they renounced their claims to the Gaza Strip and the West Bank Territories in 1979 and 1988, respectively, Israel was left with the responsibility to continue its administration. Once Yasser Arafat and the PLO claimed they would accept Israel’s existence and negotiate for peace, Israel seized the opportunity to resolve the confl ict.

During its administration of the Territories, Israel sought to improve the lives of the Palestinians. Military barriers came down, and for the fi rst time since the 1948 War, Israelis and Palestinians could travel more freely between the Territories and the Jewish State. Israel also removed all the Jordanian and Israeli military barriers that had divided Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967. Israel helped modernize Palestinian infrastructure (aiding in the creation of more than 2,000 manufacturing plants), established seven universities, expanded schools, taught modern agriculture, set up medical programs and opened over 100 health clinics. Israel instituted freedom of the press, of association and of religion and “launched something entirely new, the first authentically Palestinian administration the local Arabs had ever known.”  Unemployment plummeted, life expectancy soared and the population nearly doubled in the 26 years between 1967 and 1993.
“During the 1970s, the West Bank and Gaza constituted the fourth-fastest-growing economy in the world—ahead of such ‘wonders’ as Singapore, Hong Kong and Korea, and substantially ahead of Israel itself.”
—Historian Efraim Karsh7
1993-2007: Israel gradually ends the “Occupation.” When the Oslo peace process began in 1993, Israel began ending its military administration as it turned civil governance of the Palestinian population over to the Palestinian-elected government. Since 2005, Israel has uprooted Jewish communities from land claimed by the Palestinians. Israel’s plan was to help create a selfgoverning Palestinian state in all of Gaza and most of the West Bank, incorporating land where 98 percent of Palestinians live.

• Israel began turning civilian administration of the Territories over to the newly created Palestinian Authority (PA) in 1994

• By 1997, Israeli troops had left Palestinian towns and cities and turned them over to the PA. These areas included 98 percent of all Palestinians who were now self-governing under the PA.
• After Yasser Arafat rejected the 2000 Camp David proposals and the Intifada began, Israel intermittently redeployed its troops in emergency counterterrorism operations that became necessary because terrorist groups refused to end hostilities against the Jewish State.
• Despite ongoing terrorism and the collapse of peace negotiations, Israel continued its withdrawals. In August 2005, Israel withdrew from the remaining few areas it still held in Gaza and from sections of the Northern West Bank, which was three times the size of Gaza. In the process, Israel uprooted more than 8,500 Jews who had built thriving communities over the previous 30 years in Gaza, where Israeli residents had employed over 10,000 Palestinians from the surrounding areas. Israel left their expensive infrastructure intact for future use by the Palestinians. After Israel’s disengagement, no Jewish or non-Jewish Israelis remained in Gaza. Even Jewish cemeteries were moved out of the area.

Facts about Israeli Administration of the Territories
(1967-1993)
• The Territories became the world’s fourth-fastest-growing economy in the 1970s
• West Bank per capita income rose 80 percent between 1967 and 19739
• Unemployment in Gaza plummeted to 2 percent
• Infant mortality plunged from 60 to 15 per 1,000 births between 1968 and 2000
• Israel disbursed millions of dollars to improve refugee camps
• The number of Palestinian school children rose 102 percent, and illiteracy dropped to 14 percent for adults over age 15

Unresolved Border Issues

The pre-1967 boundary (Green Line) is not an internationally recognized border. It is an armistice line, marking
positions held by Israeli and Arab troops when the fi nal truce was called at the end of the 1948 War. The Green Line remained an armistice line because Arab leaders refused to negotiate to set fi nal border lines. The Oslo Accords called for, among other things, Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate for a fi nal border between the State of Israel and a future Palestinian state. To date, these negotiations have not resolved outstanding issues to the satisfaction of both parties.

Since Israel left Gaza in 2005, 6300 rockets and mortars have been launched towards Israel, killing 10 civilians and wounding780.

With the support of Iran, Hamas has enhanced the range of its misiles, that hit Israek further in the North, putting even more civilians at risk.

Check out how it looks like to live under a rain of missiles, and then ask yourself : “would I accept living in these conditions, with no reaction from my  country ? “

Check this information and make your own opinion.

Hamas blocking humanitarian aid ?

On February 2007, members of the Palestinian Red Crescent, speaking on conditions on anonymity, said that Hamas had confiscated their humanitarian supply convoys that were destined for Palestinian civilians. Hamas claims the supplies were heading to former members of Fatah.

Extract from this article :
In the event, Egypt nevertheless made clear that it was prepared for the crossing to be opened to allow wounded Palestinians to leave for treatment and medical personnel to enter. Hamas demonstratively declined this offer. Egyptian sources have reported that a convoy of trucks and medical supplies was not allowed by Hamas to …  Read Moreenter the Strip. Hamas personnel also prevented wounded Gazan civilians from crossing the border.

Jonathan Spyer is a senior researcher at the Global Research in International Affairs Center, IDC, Herzliya.