Two Questions to Her Majesty’s Government about Israel

Lord Hylton

From these two replies, one about the Shebaa Farms, and the other about mock air raids , it is clear that HMG know that the state of Israel is behaving provocatively, but are unwilling to do much about it.  It is important , therefore, that the friends of Israel exercise influence on the Israeli Government, in such a way that Israel may, sooner rather than later, come to be accepted as a normal part of the Middle East.

10 comments for “Two Questions to Her Majesty’s Government about Israel

  1. maude elwes
    20/06/2012 at 2:00 pm

    Why are we not banning all products from Israel to the UK and across all the EU countries?

    If this government and the European Commission was truly interestd in stopping this, they would do what they do to any other country not in favour.

    Why do we collude with israel in the torture of Palestinians?

    I am sure there will be more law suits brought against indidviduals in our government, who continue to conspire in these kinds of events, as was brought against Theresa May and upheld this week.

    This may be the only way to justice for some.

  2. Chris K
    20/06/2012 at 4:29 pm

    I’d have rather more respect for the ‘Boycott Israel’ brigade if they also refused the many life-saving medical treatments/devices developed in Israel.

    I wonder how many people are that principled.

  3. MilesJSD
    20/06/2012 at 5:24 pm

    Foul play !
    Lord Hylton says that
    “the state of israel is behaving provocatively”
    “HerMajestysGovernments know that but are unwilling to do ‘much’ about it”

    and says
    “it is therefore important that friends of Israel influence its Government such that Israel may be acceoted as a ‘normal’ part of ‘the Middle East’ ”

    Lord Hylton’s mindset appears belligerently biased against Israel
    and his pitching continues to come from a baseplate of “The Arabs-and-I Are Right, and the Israelis-and-Friends Are Wrong”*

    for instance,
    when it is the Arabs who have always been the initiating provokers, Lord Hylton again smears Israel’s self-defence as being

    To the best of my knowledge, Israel is willing to support a dispassionate Method III Resolution, not simply between itself and its aggressive Palestininan neighbours and infiltrators,
    but between all Nations of the World.

    Israel has both a vital-survival-need and a United-Nations-Responsible default-right**, to respond both ongoingly snd one-to-one, to Arab-destructively-genocidally-aggressive-force and intention mostly being pre-emptively and terrorist-like launched by Arabs, striking at innocent Istaelis and legitItimate Israel State peace-building infrastructure and habitats, often from INSIDE of Israel’s all-round geographic and nation-state-survival borders***.

    * = (see Edward de Bono’s “I Am Right You Are Wrong” published work about mind-sets, good-communication & honest-argumentation)

    ** “default-right” = in the absence of Agreed and co-implemented Method III Cooperative Resolutions
    1) The World’s Peoples
    2) The Arab-Palestininas
    3) The Israelis.

    *** = both politico-militarily and socio-economically, the Gaza strip and West Bank are in destructive-effect hostilely-alien Arab encampments within Israel’s geographic borders;
    and to the best of my knowledge none of the Arabs involved support peacefully cooperative Method III Resolution.

  4. Johnns
    20/06/2012 at 5:41 pm

    The grammar in Lord Hylton’s post is atrocious.

    • maude elwes
      22/06/2012 at 7:44 am

      And what does that mean?

      The public must not make a comment on the inhumanity of Israel if they have been educated in a British State school?

      What tosh.

      • Johnns
        23/06/2012 at 5:29 am

        What part of Eton College is a British state school? I would expect, at the very least, that you read a man’s Wikipedia page before fabricating rubbish about his schooling.,_5th_Baron_Hylton

      • Johnns
        23/06/2012 at 5:31 am

        Also, nice job with associating state schools with poor grammar. If that doesn’t say much about a person, I don’t know what does.

        • maude elwes
          24/06/2012 at 12:34 pm


          Well what does it tell you?…. Why beat around the bush? I didn’t. And as the policy for government is openess and honesty, you should give it a try. Takes a weight off.

  5. Senex
    20/06/2012 at 6:21 pm

    Lord Hylton surely you’re teasing when you say:

    “It is important, therefore, that the friends of Israel exercise influence on the Israeli Government, in such a way that Israel may, sooner rather than later, come to be accepted as a normal part of the Middle East.”

    You have land; I have a bit of land. Somebody once dug up one of my boundary lines and moved it. My recollection of that time was its intensity of feeling. Israel is simply operating the principle that ownership is nine tenths of the law especially when the boundary lines are historically vague and subjective.

    As to being a normal part of the Middle East, you can forget this until Zionism is thrown out by Israeli voters. Given that governments and their detractors keep the electorate in a perpetual state of fear and panic its not going to happen anytime soon.

    Israeli says that is represents ‘the Jewish people’.

    The right for the Israeli state to exist began with the League of Nations at a time when the Ashkenazi culture was under considerable stress in Europe. The League at this time did not understand or want to understand that it was the Ashkenazim who were pushing for their own state; to the League a Jew was a Jew, there were no shades of grey, the request was a reasonable one.

    But who are the Ashkenazim and what legitimate claim do they have to the holy land? Their claim is based upon faith alone. The Ashkenazim began or are a northern European culture that practices Judaism the historic faith of the holy land. In the Ashkenazim mindset a Jew is a Jew even though they have no bloodline connection with the holy land or its region. If we could say a Christian is a Christian, a Muslim is a Muslim without offering any distinction there would be no Israeli state.

    The Israel we know today is a bolt hole for Ashkenazim purists and given that world over, 90% of those who enjoy Judaism as a faith are the Ashkenazim their claim in Israel to represent the ‘Jewish People’ is reasonable at least to the Zionist mind. Human rights and minority protection legislation world over has undermined the need for such a bolt hole. It weakens the Zionist cause.

    What happened to the historic Sephardic culture? It was absorbed by Christian and Muslim cultures. The Jews of that time were absorbed and are in part the Palestinians we see today. What is particularly sad is that the Ashkenazim are in open conflict with Judaism’s holy land legacy. The Zionists are determined that absorbsion is not going to happen to them and as such they are ‘never’ going to be part of the region.

    Ref: Your Mother was a Hittite and Your Father an Amorite:
    Ethnicity, Judaism, and Palestine’s Cultural Heritage.
    Thomas L. Thompson: Professor Emeritus
    University of Copenhagen. Feb 2012

  6. Senex
    25/06/2012 at 3:23 pm

    When the Ashkenazi Zionists persuaded the League of Nations that a ‘Jewish People’ existed it took advantage of a convenient stereotype amongst the Gentiles that the Jews were a race in their own right.

    A study by Atzmon [1] says in its introduction: “Admixture with surrounding populations had an early role in shaping world Jewry, but, during the past 2000 years, may have been limited by religious law as Judaism evolved from a proselytizing to an inward-looking religion.” The merits of a Jewish race are scientifically tested.

    The notion of a ‘Jewish People’ by the Zionists is itself a matter of faith because Behar [2] discovers that the maternal ancestors of the Ashkenazi derive maternally from four women of uncertain origin.

    “This would correspond to an approximate average date of 15,000–16,000 years ago for the most recent common ancestor, under the same assumptions used to calculate the coalescence of the Ashkenazi lineages…First, our findings are not sufficient to answer questions about the extent and location of the ancestral deme from which Ashkenazi Jewry, as a population, arose. [2]”

    Indirectly, Behar also explains just where the historical Jews that succumbed to proselytizing by Muslims and Christians went or ended up.

    The question is not one of a ‘Jewish People’ rather its plural the ‘Jewish Peoples’. The central issue is why did the Jewish culture stop proselytizing during the Hellenic [3] period as the issue is relevant to both the future of Israel and the Arabs.

    If Judaism is inward looking one could make a case that it protects the genetic model and its association with the holy land. If the Israelis were to begin proselytizing on the basis that they were resident in Israel it would install a new genetic model that would weaken the older one. Judaism in Israel would no longer need to be inward looking.

    However, a new Israeli genetic model would evolve to lock out those Jews in the Diaspora who rely upon the older model as the basis of their claim to the holy land.

    The political process therefore cannot deal with Israel alone; it must also deal with Jews in the Diaspora. This is perhaps why Israeli politicians are so slippery; they are not in total control of their own destiny.

    If the European Ashkenazim were to accept that their entitlement to a place in the holy land was tenuous at best they could begin to proselytize just as the Americans have begun to do. Israel could then move forward by removing the ‘born Jewish’ right to citizenship, the Diaspora would vanish and Judaism would join the rest of the world’s outgoing religions.

    Ref: [1] Abraham’s Children in the Genome Era: Major Jewish Diaspora Populations Comprise Distinct Genetic Clusters with Shared Middle Eastern Ancestry. Gil Atzmon [et al] 2010
    [2] The Matrilineal Ancestry of Ashkenazi Jewry: Portrait of a Recent Founder Event
    Doron M. Behar [et al] 2006
    [3] Proselytism: Judaism

Comments are closed.