In defence of Israel

Every country is deserved of criticism. I’ve yet to find a country whose domestic and foreign policies I agree with in their entirety. As such, it is entirely justified to level criticism when criticism is due. What I object to however is criticism that is mounted in a highly discriminatory and ad-hoc manner. I have Israel in mind.

There are most certainly Israeli government policies of which I am critical. I criticise the Israeli government for not being as pro-active as it could be in regard to finding a solution for peace with the Palestinians. What I object to however is exaggerated and discriminatory criticism. I find, ever increasingly, particularly amongst the so-called ‘intellectual elite’ in Australian society (i.e. academics with an overinflated sense of self-importance, who consider themselves the pinnacle of mankind’s intellectual achievement) that criticism of Israel is disproportionate and rife, hypocritical and downright discriminatory. Sure, I don’t agree with everything that Benjamin Netanyahu says or does, but does this really justify a widespread, concerted international effort to criticise, demonise and undermine Israel? Aren’t there other countries more deserving of criticism than Israel? Why is there an all-out effort to attack Israel, on the basis of territorial disputes and counter-terrorism efforts, when there are so many other wrongs in the world? Why do we have organisations like this one, why are there proposed labour union-sponsored academic boycotts in the UK, and why is our own Australian electorate of Marrickville proposing a total boycott of all Israeli products, when there are so many others more worthy of criticism? The answer is, very plainly, that it’s discrimination and racism. People hate Israel. There, I said it – people hate Israel. Do the same organisations, unions and local councils suggest that we boycott China for oppressing Tibetans? No. Do they boycott Australia, the UK and the US for the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan (which I know they disagree with)? No. Do they boycott Iran for persecuting the minority Bahai faith, or Saudi Arabia for executing homosexuals and stoning so-called ‘adulterers’ (i.e. rape victims)? No. When criticism is due, give it, but keep it in proportion and keep it fair. The international movement against Israel is not founded on fact and objectivity – it is founded on hatred and discrimination. I don’t agree with everything Israel says and does, but the same applies to every other country on Earth. Singling out a single country, and repeatedly attacking them for policies we disagree with, while ignoring the huge injustices in so many other countries is discrimination, plain and simple.

In a region of the Earth ruled by tyrants, dictators and Islamist fundamentalists, Israel is the only modern, Western-style, progressive, parliamentary democracy. Israel is a multicultural society, with a huge Muslim minority (about 20%) , and even takes a world-leading social stance by recognising same-sex marriage. Do they get credit for this? No. Instead her critics choose to focus all their efforts on degrading her and insinuating that she is a racist apartheid country, while ignoring her strengths, and completely forgetting the injustices in so many other countries including their own.

If Israel is deserved of a boycott for her attempts to protect herself against terrorism, then so is Australia for its participation in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. If Israel is criticised as an ‘apartheid country’, then we should look at our own – Israel has far larger ethnic minority groups than Australia does, all of whom have full democratic rights.

Israel is more like our own country than any other in that region of the World. Yet, there is an enormous international movement, led by the radical left and the ‘intellectual elite’, to demonise that country. Before you make a concerted effort to alienate Israel, take a long, hard look at your own country.

If you gave me a choice to live in any country in the Middle Eastern region, I know where I’d prefer to live, without a shadow of a doubt – and it wouldn’t be the country where they amputate my hands for opposing the rulers or stone to death my wife for being raped.

Rejected!

I recently submitted my first paper to the Journal of Universal Rejection. Here’s my correspondence.

---

Dear Editor,

Please find attached our manuscript “Entanglement dynamics and quasi-periodicity in discrete quantum walks” for consideration for rejection from The Journal of Universal Rejection. In this paper we study the use of the quantum walk formalism in the preparation of entangled states as a resource for other quantum information processing tasks. We show that, surprisingly, highly irregular, almost chaos-like dynamics emerge when boundary conditions are imposed on the graph on which the walk is taking place. As numerous experimental groups are beginning to experimentally demonstrate elementary quantum walks, our study is topical and relevant. We hope you will consider our paper for rejection.

Sincerely,

Dr. Peter P. Rohde
BE (Hons I), PhD

---

Dear Dr. Rohde,

Thank you for your submission “Entanglement dynamics and quasi-periodicity in discrete quantum walks” to the Journal of Universal Rejection.

A thorough review of your paper led us to the conclusion: revise and resubmit.  Here is what we would like to see:
* Perform a linear walk experiment on an infinite graph
* Put in a picture of the Bifurcation diagram of the logistic map, because that is cool, and
* Translate your paper into rhymed couplets.

Let me know if you should need further clarification about any of these suggestions.

Should you carry out the above steps, acceptance is not guaranteed. We will of course need to review your paper again.

Best regards,
Caleb

---

Dear Dr. Emmons,

Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript. Regrettably our institution is undergoing funding cuts which will rule out the possibility of performing an experiment with an infinite sized graph. Thus we will be unable to satisfy the requirements of the reviewers.

Kind regards,

Peter Rohde.