It's Almost Supernatural

STANLIB Responds to Criticism

After what appears to be numerous complaints about the Allister Sparks' presentation at STANLIB's International Investment conference STANLIB has sent the following generic letter to all conference delegates.

The primary aim of the STANLIB international investment conference was to give the audience an overview of global markets so that they could make more informed decisions about their offshore investments. The midday slot was designed to take a step back from the immediate "Where markets are going?" debate and focus on key big picture events that might impact the global investment scene. One of the most pressing concerns at the moment is what is happening with the oil price and the potential knock on effect a run away oil price could have on global inflation and global growth. Oil has been responsible for two of the more significant shocks in the last thirty years, and because it is still the world's primary energy source, it has the potential to do the same again. As the Middle East controls more than 80% of the world oil supply, events in this region are of interest to the investment community and a peaceful resolution to the conflict is of great importance. That is why we thought it a good idea to spend some time at the conference discussing this topic. Our intention was to give a dispassionate analysis of the situation. We had a dry run of the presentation with our investment team before the conference and thought the presentation did just that. However, there has been some criticism of the presentation from the Jewish community and in hindsight it is clear that our assessment of the content was naïve. I want to use this opportunity to give you the categorical assurance that STANLIB has no ideological prejudice with regard to the conflict in the Middle East in general or the Jewish community in particular and disassociates itself from that interpretation. Yours sincerely George Brits CEO

Whilst I welcome this admission of naivety from STANLIB it further confirms the point I made in my review.

I did not for one second think that STANLIB was in any way prejudiced with regard to "the conflict in the Middle East in general or the Jewish community in particular." I just thought that they were unaware of what Sparks was about to say. But The CEO thought that the presentation gave a dispassionate analysis of the Middle East conflict.

The points this confirm are

• Disproportionate focus on Israel works: The CEO of STANLIB thought that this presentation, with its disproportionate focus on Israel, was a thorough analysis of events in the Middle East and how their effects on oil could impact on our shores. The reality is that most of the Middle East conflicts and problems do not have anything to do with Israel.
• Apartheid Analogies work: That the CEO of STANLIB viewed this presentation from a "passionate" Allister Sparks as "dispassionate" only serves to reinforce what I have previously said - the endless propaganda we have been subjected to has now become the established fact.

To conclude, I want to reiterate that I have never once thought that STANLIB has any prejudice regarding the Jewish community. For me this matter just confirms that the biased reporting we are subjected to in the media has had deep routed effects on the minds of most South Africans. And that is why we keep this weblog going.

Sparks Smears Israel at International Investment Conference

With Israel bashing having become the celebrated sport of our media I often wonder just how far and deep this anti Israel sentiment has pervaded the rest of our society. A recent Stanlib International Investment Conference provided some uncomfortable answers.

What follows is the sad tale of a lecture at an International Investment conference that turned into an expression of prejudice, ignorance, and gross double standards.

Stanlib is a combination of two of the strongest financial services brands in the South African financial services industry – Standard Bank and Liberty Life.

Stanlib recently held their 2006 International Investment Conference. The Johannesburg leg of the conference took place at the Sandton Convention Centre on August 24. The Conference agenda, available here, read like any typical investment conference agenda.

One session however veered way off target and turned into an anti-Israel smear job. The session was entitled “Is it a threat? Global Politics – Best and Worst Case Scenarios for South Africa.” It’s a seemingly legitimate topic for an international investment conference –what goes on in the Middle East does have significant consequences for investors in South Africa. There was just one problem – Allister Sparks.

At this point I must point out that I did not attend the conference. Whatever I say is based on a presentation pack that I have in my possession which was handed out to all of the delegates at the conference. The pack contains the slides from all of the sessions. I base this review on an examination of the slides from the presentation pack coupled with my prior knowledge of the views held by Allister Sparks – who has been the subject of numerous critiques on this blog.

I am giving Stanlib the benefit of the doubt in this matter. Sparks is after all widely regarded as a leading South African political analyst. Stanlib would have expected Sparks to stick to the topic – that is, “Best and Worse Case Scenarios for South Africa.” I don’t think that one’s ability to discuss potential investment scenarios should be prejudiced by inverse-morality positions on the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

Sparks opened his presentation with a brief account of the Middle East and oil which seemed to subtly conclude that the US targeted Iraq in order to satiate their excess demand for oil.

The remaining 12 slides all focused on Israel.

First Sparks presented three slides showing questionable maps which were sourced from a Palestinian group called the Palestinian Mapping Centre. The first slide showed two maps with a West Bank that contains an almost horizontal southern border – something I have never seen on any map before.

The maps were designed to try and convince the audience that Israel is carving the West Bank up into a series of “Apartheid style” Bantustans. The final map goes so far as to project a fictitious eastern belt onto the Israeli security barrier. In reality this eastern belt does not exist nor is there any planned route for its future existence. It’s a complete invention by Sparks (or perhaps by the Palestine Mapping Centre) designed to create the illusion of disparate West Bank “Bantustans”. This point is significant - Sparks needs to use imaginary sections of the barrier because the current route simply does not support his Bantustan thesis.

In fact, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy last year commented on maps like the ones used by Sparks which allege that the Palestinians will be encircled by all sides.

“By contrast, official Palestine Liberation Organization maps, until recently, claimed that Sharon would build fences to encircle the Palestinians from all sides, taking approximately 50 percent of the West Bank and creating “bantustans” that would sharply undermine the idea of a two-state solution. Last week’s cabinet move seems to nullify, once and for all, that possibility.”

Sparks’ most recent article for the Independent group of newspapers also argued that Israel is turning the West Bank into a series of Bantustans. The argument doesn’t hold. Under Apartheid white South Africans created Bantustans to pen black people into reservoirs of labour. It was a racial separation.

Israel is not trying to create a reservoir of Palestinian labourers, on the contrary Israel is trying to reduce its number of Palestinian labourers.

The separation that Israel pursues via the two state solution is not a racial separation. It is a national separation of two separate peoples competing for the same land based upon compromise and the relinquishing of the dreams of total victory. The lines of division will be based upon separating areas with a Jewish majority from areas with a Palestinian majority, allowing two states for two peoples.

The last 5 slides supposedly show what the Arab media has been saying about this conflict. I think this was just a thinly disguised form of racism on the part of Sparks. Stanlib decided to censor these slides- Sparks was not allowed to display them during the presentation. But the damage was already done because these slides were already included in the presentation pack.

One of these censored-but-not-censored slides shows the graphical image of a dead Arab baby.

And so I am forced to conclude that anti-Israel sentiment has indeed made deep and dark penetrations into general South African society. How else can one explain the need to devote an hour to this at an International Investors conference?

I hope that STANLIB have learned that Sparks can no longer be trusted to speak at future events.

Update:
STANLIB have sent a letter to all delegates distancing themselves from interpretations of them having any "ideological prejudice with regard to the conflict in the Middle East in general or the Jewish community."

Their letter indicates that they were aware of the content of the presentation prior to the lecture but they viewed the contents as a "dispassionate analysis" of the situation in the Middle East. Whilst falling short of an apology their letters admits that they were naive.

Read the letter here.

Between Unilateral Withdrawal and a Hard Place

I have been feeling more and more empathy for the flip-flopping US Democrats of late. For on the disengagement I find myself in a similar predicament. I supported unilateral withdrawal before I opposed it. Faulty information too is my best defence. Had I known the consequences of Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon, I certainly would have opposed it in Gaza.

Truthfully however, more than bad intel led me to be duped by disengagement. It was not so much that I didn’t know about Hezbollah’s thousands of rockets, but that I believed that unilateral withdrawal had somehow magically resulted in a free and prosperous Lebanon at peace with Israel (and would so in Gaza). As much as I can try to deny it, I bought hook line and sinker the propaganda that the ‘occupation’ is the root cause of the conflict in the region. Given the opportunity, I assumed that Israel’s neighbours would choose their own development over Israel’s destruction. I was sadly wrong. Disengagement has proved to be far more disastrous than Oslo ever was.

But now is not the time for recrimination. We, the Jewish people, need to deal with the difficult political conundrums we face. Remaining in the Territories threatens the Jewish nature of the state (from a demographic and moral perspective) but withdrawing endangers the lives of Israel’s citizens. We have no viable peace partner in Lebanon or the Palestinian Authority. Seeing that feeble man that masquerades as the Prime Minister of the sovereign state of Lebanon weeping on international television as his country was collapsing all around him was not touching but pathetic. If he snivels in the face of Sheik Nasrallah we can’t possibly expect him to stand up to the Ayatollahs. Abbas, although showing more of a stiff upper lip in public, is unfortunately not much tougher.

At the present time, the only possible solution is a strong international presence in the Territories and southern Lebanon. Regular readers may remember that I have called for this before (in Judea and Samaria). The ceasefire in Lebanon could have provided an ideal test case for this option. But alas, I just don’t believe a reinforced UNIFIL will cut it. If history is anything to go by, the French and Italian forces’ (the largest component of the bigger and buffer UNIFIL) record against Nazism doesn’t give one much confidence in their ability to defeat radical Islam. In fact disarming Hezbollah is not even in their mandate.

According to the United Nations fact sheet on UNIFIL not one Arab or Muslim country has contributed troops. This is a tremendous shame. Bringing moderate Arab regimes like Jordan and Egypt and Islamic democracies like Turkey on board would have given the force much more legitimacy. Its current composition (mainly Christian Europeans) allows Islamist propagandists to assert that the Zionist occupation of southern Lebanon has merely been replaced by a crusader one. So in addition to being toothless, it actually provides a rallying cry for Jihadists everywhere like Afghanistan in the 80’s.

An international mandate is no longer a theoretical option for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict. This reality is taking shape on the ground as I write. It is crucial that we mould this reality so that it is most likely to succeed in bringing security and prosperity to the region. Israel could afford to lose the PR and military war in Lebanon but it cannot afford to lose the peace. This really is its last chance. It requires a diplomatic fight on a par with that which resulted in the creation of the state. I just don’t know if Ehud Olmert and his government are up to it.

From SA Jews, With Love

Support for the anti-Jewish ‘Jewish’ declaration of conscience continued to pour in this week. My favourite was an article entitled ‘Its up to decent American people to stop Israeli savagery’ by Mxolisi ‘Bra Ace’ Mgxdshe in the Cape Argus.

In this exceptionally shoddy piece of journalism, even by South African standards, Bra Ace calls on comrade Ronnie Kasrils and his mob of pseudo Jews (now at 400 so the article alleges) to

cc their peace petition … to the United States of America with a plea to the good American people to refuse to be misused by their government and the big monied business people in spreading wars of destruction and sorrow in the world under the guise of fighting terrorism and defending democracy.

Bra Ace begins this incoherent collection of Leftist dogma by explaining that

after taking an extended vacation from commenting on issues that really disturb the souls of decent people I have decided to say my piece on the tragedy of the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Like some sort of secular messiah, Bra Ace believes he has returned from the intellectual wilderness to save us wretched readers of the Cape Argus. This article reads like some bad Monty Python script.

Bra Ace unashamedly admits that while he was off holidaying, he neglected his Middle East reading. But fortunately before writing this piece ‘to freshen his mind on what is happening’ he read two letters in the Cape Argus on the current conflict. Knowledge of the intricacies of Middle Eastern history and politics in Bra Aces’s opinion is not the basis for greater understanding of the issues. Being Black under apartheid is the key. He claims that

We who have experienced most of the things Palestinians have complained of in their decades of struggle - what they describe as the "occupation of Palestine by the Jews" - will have a much better understanding of the causes of this conflict...Africans all over the world have been the victims of slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism and apartheid, and the wretchedness of diseases and under-development these have created. South African freedom fighters, especially those who have spent up to 30 years and more as refugees, exiles and "stateless" persons understand exactly why the Palestinians and Hezbollah in particular hate the Israelis the way they do to the extent of not recognising the legitimacy of the state of Israel.

Bra Ace doesn’t stop at justifying the destruction of Israel. He launches into some unintelligible rant about the South African Jewish Community as well.

The real problem in the Middle East is …most Jews in South Africa who do not seem to have been moved by the massacre of toddlers and innocent people.

(Steve adds: This seems to be an increasing trend amongst the newspapers from the Independent group – during the recent war an article in the Cape Time and Mercury charged that “Zionists are unmoved by photos of dead infants in Beirut ... (because) they don't feel death and pain like the rest of us”. Is this a case of collective defamation or dare I say...racism?)

But never fear, Comrade Ronnie is near. Now that Apartheid has been defeated, Comrade Ronnie and his 400 minions in the Not in My Name organisation are engaged in a new struggle against us (the mainstream South African Jewry). And Bra Ace believes ‘they deserve the praise of all men, women and children in this country.’

Not only does Bra Ace fancy himself as a Middle Eastern political pundit, but as a medical expert as well. He claims that because Palestinians ‘cannot prove they are a free people despite the existence of the Palestinian Authority which is nothing more than a glorification of the Bantustan system. That was what killed Yasser Arafat’. Well with logic and eloquence like that if BraAce doesn’t win the Nobel Prize for literature, perhaps he is in with a chance for medicine.

That this trash passes for journalism is a sad indictment of the mainstream South African media. But I assure you this will not be the last we see of Bra Ace’s Middle Eastern insights. South African Jewry waits anxiously for his second coming.

Letters to: [email protected]

Arab Nobel Science Prize Winner Calls for Change

One of the most unfortunate consequences of the Middle East wars is that they deflect attention away from the real issues facing the Arab world. By maintaining the focus on the Twin Satan’s (America and Israel) Arab and Islamic leaders are able to present a façade of unity behind a common goal of destruction. These enemies are convenient and useful – instead of introspective focus the Arab world uses these enemies as a pinboard of blame for all the calamities they face.

The need for reform in the Arab world was the subject of a refreshing article in The Mercury on Friday: Arab world in need of change.

The author of the article, Ahmed Zweil, is the only Arab scientist EVER to have received the Nobel Prize in Science (won in 1999). Zweil identified “four pillars of change” as a remedy for the calamities faced by the Arab world (problems which include: low Gross Domestic Products, low levels of literacy and deteriorating performance in education and science).

First, a new political system must be established with, at its core, a constitution defining the democratic principles of human rights, freedom of speech, and governance through contested elections. A select delegation of honorable intellectuals, respected political personalities, and thoughtful religious scholars, perhaps under the patronage of Supreme Court judges, should form a council to debate and chart a new constitution for a final referendum involving the people. The co-existence of religious values in the lives of individuals and secular rules in the governance of the state should be clearly defined. There is no need to fear conflict, as reason and faith are driving forces in Western democratic societies and in some Muslim countries such as Turkey and Malaysia. Second, the rule of law must, in practice, be applied to every individual, independent of caste, faith, or background. Currently, some rules of law are either unenforced or selectively enforced, resulting in demoralising practices. Besides being a prime cause of poor economic growth, poor governance breeds corruption which cripples investment, wastes resources and diminishes confidence. If rules are applied fairly, people acquire security and faith in their system. Third, the methods used in education, cultural practices, and scientific research must be revisited, reviewed and revitalised. The goal should be to promote critical thinking and a value system of reasoning, discipline, and teamwork. Fourth, an overhauling of the Arab media is necessary. Currently, there are numerous satellite TV channels and several so-called media cities generously financed, perhaps much more than research institutions. Yet, people are inundated with mind-numbing and propaganda programmes. The conceptually new al-Jazeera has become a very effective news media among millions of Arabs; similar media outlets concerned with cultural, social, and educational events should be established.

Calling a Fascist a Fascist

‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing’ by Edmund Burke, is one of my favourite quotes.

It does not surprise me that wicked people do wicked things, but I find the acquiescence of so many of the rest quite alarming. Unfortunately this latest war between freedom and tyranny has been no exception. In post Apartheid South Africa, given our own history of oppression, the almost uniform silence (or worse support) for the advance of radical Islam is even more disturbing. But Stephen Mulholland’s piece last week in the Citizen entitled ‘Sorry, but they are fascist’ reaffirms my faith that there are still some good people with the courage to stand up to evil.

Mulholland, despite the risk to his career and possibly his wellbeing, came out in support of George Bush’s statement that the free world is at war with Islamic fascism. In this feisty attack on radical Islam (perhaps the most fierce ever seen in mainstream South African newspapers) he asks

Who is that has been bombing embassies in Kenya and Tanzania slaughtering the innocent including blacks and Muslims? Who is it that blows up people who have nothing to do with Islam’s issues in Bali nightclubs? Who is it that murders 52 commuters going about their lawful business on the London Underground? Twice these maniacs attacked the World Trade Centre in New York finally assassinating thousands of poor souls including Muslims and achieving nothing but the visitation on the Middle East of America’s angry vengeance. Who was it who attacked commuter trains in Madrid on March 11 2004 at the peak rush hour wounding 2 050 ordinary citizens and executing 192 others?

No it was not the CIA, MI 5 or the Jews. Mulholland makes it clear who is to blame. ‘It was Islamic fascists’, he bravely declares. But Mulholland doesn’t stop there. He proceeds to debunk the myth that so many Islamist apologists repeat ad nauseum that Israel’s ‘occupation’ is the root cause of terrorism.

Don’t give that tired old claptrap about how the Jews have robbed the Palestinians of their homeland. For pity’s sake there are in the entire world a mere 15 million Jews against almost 14 billion Muslims. Fewer than half of those Jews live in tiny Israel where they are crowded in at 300 to the hectare. The fact of the matter is that the Israelis have withdrawn from disputed areas. They have shown themselves willing.

Mulholland also exposes the true agenda of the jihadists. Quoting Bibi Netanyahu he writes

It is not a conflict about this or that settlement. It is a conflict about Israel’s very existence. And to them any Israeli sovereignty over any piece of land is anathema.

Then he insightfully asks ‘how do you negotiate with this nonsense?’

Winning this war against radical Islam will take more than guns and tanks; it requires us to be victorious on the battlefield of ideas as well. Publicly naming and shaming the enemy in a major South African newspaper as Stephen Mulholland has done is a small but significant step in the right direction. Hopefully his courage will influence other good men not to do nothing.

Write to the Citizen in support of Mulholland's opinion piece: [email protected]

Zapiro Would Be Feted at the Ghoulish Iranian Holocaust Cartoon-Fest

An Iranian cleric visits the Holocaust International Cartoon Exhibition in Tehran August 14, 2006.

UPI describes some of the entries on display at the exhibition

Entries include cartoons of Ariel Sharon, the incapacitated former Israeli prime minister, in an SS uniform...

It seems our very own Zapiro could have sent one of his own cartoon's into the exhibition - he has also depicted Ariel Sharon in an SS uniform. I think that this piece of Zaptrash may have even earned him the $12,000 first prize!

Also of note - attending the exhibition's opening was one of our "partners in peace", the Palestinian ambassador to Iran, Salah al-Zawawi.

What Was All This Fighting About?

Now that the war in Lebanon is officially over (who knows for how long), Israeli society is engaging in a rigorous post-mortem of the conflict. The preliminary conclusions are not particularly flattering for Prime Minister Olmert and his government.

The pages of Israel newspapers are now awash with criticism of how this war was conducted. The most telling is a petition signed by IDF reservists who served in the Spearhead Brigade in Lebanon.

The soldiers write

As we were signing on the battle equipment and weapons, we knew that we were signing for much more. We left behind wives and children, girlfriends and families. We put aside our jobs and livelihoods; we were prepared to carry out our mission under the most difficult of conditions, in heat, thirst or hunger. At the back of his mind, each and every one of us knew, that for the just cause of protecting the citizens of Israel, we would even put our lives on the line.

But the determination of these brave defenders of Israel was unfortunately not shared by the elected political leaders in Jerusalem.

The heavy feeling that in the echelons above us there is nothing but under-preparation, insincerity, lack of foresight and inability to make rational decisions, leads to the question - were we called up for nothing? We paid a heavy price in order to fight and come out of the battle victorious, and we feel this has been denied of us.’ The "cold feet" of the decision-makers were evident everywhere. The war's aim, which was not defined clearly, was even changed in the course of the fighting. This indecisiveness manifested itself in inaction, in not carrying out operational plans, and in canceling all the missions we were given during the fighting. This led to prolonged stays in hostile territory, without an operational purpose and out of unprofessional considerations, without seeking to engage in combat with the enemy.

While Prime Minister Olmert and members of his government continue to spin the line that we were victorious, the evidence seems to indicate the contrary. After hundreds of lost lives and millions of dollars of destroyed infrastructure, what did Israel really achieve? Hezbollah has agreed for the moment not to display their weapons in public and there will be an enlarged U.N. force in Lebanon. I hardly call that a victory. Besides for Hezbollah, Iran and Syria, the biggest winner in all of this is going to be the bars and prostitutes of southern Lebanon who will do a roaring trade with all the new U.N. recruits.

After the disastrous Yom Kippur war, Golda Meir did the admirable thing and resigned. I doubt the current leadership has that much integrity. Olmert will no doubt soldier on. Withdrawal from the Golan … convergence from Judea and Samaria. Who knows what he has in store for us next.

Of Fog Horns and Quiet Diplomacy

Did You Know? 1110 people were killed during the 34 days of fighting in the Israel-Hizballah war. During this time 1750 people were murdered in SA.

Why does the ANC concern itself with petty resolutions against Israel in an area where it has zero influence when it should be focusing on areas where it has influence such as Zimbabwe and here in South Africa?

These were some of the questions posed by Douglas Gibson of the Democratic Alliance during the Parliamentary debate over the ANC's outrageously anti-Israel draft resolution on Friday.

As reported by the Business Day

Democratic Alliance chief whip Douglas Gibson said SA had little influence in the Middle East, and yet it protested loudly. But in Zimbabwe, where it could make a difference, it remained silent. “The world was shocked at the loss of life in the 34 days of the war, with 1110 killed. “In those 34 days 1750 people were murdered in SA at a rate of 51 a day. Those who express concern and outrage at these violent crimes are accused of being whingers and are invited to leave the country. “Where the government and (National Intelligence) Minister (Ronnie) Kasrils have the power to act, they do not,” Gibson told the Parliament. He urged government to resist the temptation of partisanship, saying there had been mistakes and strategic errors on both sides. SA needed to remain equidistant and to stress the great values of its own constitution.

It certainly is true. As Wyndham Hartley (the author of the Business Day report) has previously asked - "Why fog horns for Israel and quiet diplomacy for Zimbabwe?"

We truly are the Democracy of Hypocrisy.

Lebanese Website: Hizballah War Losses

The Christian Lebanese website Libanoscopie looks at the losses suffered by Hizballah and slams their claims of victory.

The website is published in French but here is a translation.

As for the objectives of Hizballah: the recovery of the Shabaa farms and the return of three Lebanese detainees in Israeli jails, the first is not near, and the Israelis now hold 15 more Hizballah militiamen. According to semi-official sources, Hizballah has undergone total destruction of its logistic and economic infrastructures, and suffered about 1,500 deaths of militiamen and leaders.