Arab youths assault Charedi Jews in Jerusalem

Not sure if I wholly agree with the general consensus on the plight of the Charedi in the video .
These people think nothing about throwing stones at seculars travelling on the Sabbath ,spitting at girls who they consider in appropriately dressed or insisting women sit at the back of the bus . Yet they are defenceless and fail to respond when a few kids toss snowballs at them .
Pathetic .

http://colemanzone.com/Time_Machine_Project/eloi.htm

Joke to even think these passive clowns could ever be conscripted .

Harvey not one of your better posts - suggest you look at this http://cifwatch.com/2013/01/14/what-the-guardian-wont-report-arabs-bully... and think long and hard before you label every charedi as a stone throwing misogynist spitter. Does every cabbie steal money from a blind lady?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262237/Callous-cabbie-Shafak-Hussain-conned-blind-passenger-270.html Thought not!

Dear Richard

Thank you very much for your enquiry and for your support of the initiative.

Reports that the Board presented conditions to Oxfam with a request that they agree to them before the project and that Oxfam accepted preconditions to be able to work with BOD are completely inaccurate. The document in question reflects Oxfam's policy lines anyway rather than make Oxfam change its position.

Oxfam’s policy making is independent and will continue to remain so.

It is driven by its mandate and experience on the ground and is underpinned by international human rights and humanitarian laws. Oxfam's policy positions in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Israel are stated on its website .
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/~/media/Files/OGB/What%20we%20do/Countries%20we%...

The document in question is an internal Board of Deputies ( BOD) document that specifies the BOD terms of engagement with Oxfam. Oxfam did not have to either accept or reject it as it was shown to Oxfam as a matter of courtesy. Oxfam has no objections to the document as it reflects its policies anyway.

Oxfam does not campaign for consumers or companies to boycott trade with the State of Israel and is not associated with the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement. We support the right of consumers to know the origin of the products they purchase. Oxfam welcomed the UK government’s decision in 2009 to provide guidance to supermarkets on how to better label products that come from the West Bank. Oxfam urges the Israeli government to ensure proper labelling of Israeli products and of settlement products in order to clearly differentiate between them and to refrain from encouraging or facilitating investment in the settlements as they are illegal under international law.

Oxfam does not work with organisations that incite hatred or violence , that have connections to terrorism and call for the destruction of Israel.

If there is any other information you need please do get back to me on 0300 200 1300 or e-mail me by reply I would be happy to hear from you.

With best wishes

Michelle Parkinson

The British police get in on the act -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9802694/Police-t...

What's that phrase not a snowball's chance in hell?

Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) - says it all really Oxfam has an anti-Israel agenda driven ask her why the so-called charity she featured an orange dripping with blood in support of a boycott of Israel? Or ask her to actually show us the law which says the settlements are illegal - the Geneva Convention to which she presumably alludes was promulgated to prevent the forced transportation of enemy aliens to other territories as an answer to the transporatation by the nazis of Jews to the concentration camps.
Now Oxfam believes this applies to prevent Jews seeking to live in territory set aside for their settlement by the League of Nations.
Ask the lady to tell us when an entity called Palestinian had hegemony of the land she calls OPT and why until 1948 it was called Judea and Samaria that is before the Jordans illegally occupied and annexed it? Or why the 1964 Founding Charter of the PLO states it has no claims on Judea and Samaria which it unlawfully recognised as being Jordanian.
Every word lady writes attests to Oxfam's anti-Israel bias.

This is what Oxfam has to say about Gazahttp://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2012-12-06/people-gaza-need-more-ceasefire

In the briefing note, Oxfam is calling on the world leaders to:
1.Press the Government of Israel to immediately end its military enforcement of the land and sea buffer-zone and find alternative means to protect its border with Gaza, which do not harm civilians;
2.Deploy a well-resourced international inspection force mandated to monitor and secure the opening of all crossings, including Rafah crossing and tunnels, in line with international law;
3.Support the rebuilding of the Karni cargo terminal and the opening a new sea port, ensuring commercial goods freely enter and leave Gaza;
4.Press the Government of Israel to facilitate the free movement of people between Gaza and the West Bank including the opening of transit systems.

Notice anything? Not a word about the terrorist organisation which controls Gaza and the thousands of rockets fired at Israeli civilians the reason why Israel is forced to maintain a naval blockade and to take measures to protect its citizens - so very telling!

The BoD have no business doing business with Oxfam until it drops its bias.

Jose I think she alludes to the advice of Her Majesty's government. You think it would be better advised to take the advice of Jose ?

Anyway it looks like the JC got it hopelessly wrong. Maybe everyone can move on, give this valuable initiative some peace and see how it works out.

"Anyway it looks like the JC got it hopelessly wrong. Maybe everyone can move on, give this valuable initiative some peace and see how it works out."

Again.

For the uninitiated Armbach = Fake Zionist's pseudo intellectual alter ego.

Advis3r
You misunderstand my comment . It angered me to see two Jews take that sort of cr@p from a bunch of snotty nosed kids without so much as a word let alone a fight back .
We have all seen the images of Jews in pre war Germany, heads down taunted by jeering Nazis . This was not Nazi Germany . It's Israel where Jews are finally able to stand up for themselves on their own terms .
The point about the spitting etc is that the Haredim are not shy in venting their animosity towards secular Israel knowing full well they will get away with it .
If they are brave enough to harass defenceless women they should be brave enough to face down a few yobs but it s obvious they are incapable of defending themselves .
No need for gratuitous ad Homs either . We are supposed to be on the same side .

On the subject of Oxfam
Oxfam partners have included:

East London Mosque - an extremist institution whose speakers have included Saad Al Beraik, a hate preacher who calls for the enslavement of Jewish women.
Islamic Relief - a charity which the Israeli government has designated a “terrorist front”. Ayaz Ali, the head of the charity’s Gaza operations, was deported after being accused of funnelling money to Hamas. Neo-Nazi images were found stored on his computer.
MADE in Europe - a charity whose staff are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamist groups, and whose offices are based at the extremist London Muslim Centre.

Human Appeal International - a charity identified by the US Government as one of a number of groups used as conduits for funds to terrorist organisations, including Hamas.

Zaytoun - a trade collective run by members of the anti-Israel, pro-terror International Solidarity Movement. Zaytoun works to promote the boycott of Israeli goods.
Palestine Solidarity Campaign - an anti-Israel lobbying group which the BBC has described as a ‘radical’ organisation that supports Hamas. The Board of Deputies of British Jews has stated the PSC’s views include “racist conspiracy theories, the propagation of antisemitic stereotypes and Holocaust denial”.

Muslim Aid - According to its own accounts, Muslim Aid paid £325,000 to the Islamic University of Gaza, where leading Hamas figures teach; and £13,998 to the al-Ihsan Charitable Society, designated by the US government as a “sponsor of terrorism” and a front for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist group.

Federation of Student Islamic Societies – a radical student movement which has, in the past, promoted Al Qaeda recruiter Anwar Awlawki and has provided a platform to hate preachers such as Haitham Al-Haddad, who has said that Jews are “apes and pigs” and that the Gaza war made him happy because “it clearly encouraged Muslims to prepare themselves for jihad, all over the world”.

My grand dad had a hamster who knew a man who had a cousin who had a second cousin who knew a budgie that was owned by a man whose uncle sought a boycott of Israel.

But getting back on topic. I am inclined to be with Hoffie
on this one. I didn't think it was trivial. I thought it was horrible and difficult to watch. My only issue is the gleeful self promoting presentation of it and the obvious racist implied suggestion that it proves something other than that there are arseholes in the world.

As for Harv,they were two and the baiters were at least a dozen. I guess Harv has decided that, having had the courage to point an iphone held in portrait instead of landscape at a noisy but not threatening crowd, surrounded by police officers,and having wrestled with a woman in a supermarket,he is some kind of latter day Bielski brother.

Armbach
Your comments have begun to resemble those of the deeply disturbed tragic comedy that has become Tony Greenstein . It's not a good thing !

Aw I don't wanna be Tony I wanna go home to my mum

Now you are sounding like Josh 17 3/4

I'm sure that Harvey and Jonathan and anyone else who has a heightened sense of justice will be outraged that

Two teenagers indicted in the lynching of Jamal Julani will not face assault charges, Ynet learned Tuesday.

The two's lawyers were apparently able to strike a deal with the Jerusalem Prosecution, according to which they will be charges only with inciting violence.

I'm sure this doesn't mean that in Israel there's one rule for Arab hooligans and another for Jewish ones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fiOJ6lrX0zY

No comment necessary.

joemillis1959: …anyone else who has a heightened sense of justice will be outraged that

Two teenagers indicted in the lynching of Jamal Julani will not face assault charges, Ynet learned Tuesday.
The two's lawyers were apparently able to strike a deal with the Jerusalem Prosecution, according to which they will be charges only with inciting violence.

I'm sure this doesn't mean that in Israel there's one rule for Arab hooligans and another for Jewish ones.

joe, that's a rather dishonest selection of the facts nine jewish youths have been indicted, for this gang attack causing life-threatening injuries six are still indicted for aggravated assault and incitement to violence one is indicted only for incitement to violence and two are now indicted for incitement to violence and promoting racism (this is, of course, all taken from the link you supplied) in any trial for a mob attack, in any country, the prosecution (and the jury) always has difficulty distinguishing between major and minor participants each defendant will claim "yes, i was with the attackers, but i wasn't really doing anything" it is standard procedure (in any country) for the prosecution to drop or lower charges which it feels it cannot prove against some defendants, and to concentrate on those defendants against whom it can prove them beyond reasonable doubt joe, what is there to be "outraged" about in the israeli prosecutor indicting six youths for aggravated assault, and lowering the charge to incitement to violence (which btw is an assault, with substantial sentencing powers) against only two?

This comment by Ben F has been moderated

Comments for this page are now closed.