BDS Lynch Mob

This is from a comment left by A/Professor Jake Lynch on the article put up by New Matilda about the Shurat HaDin action against Lynch and perhaps in time the other BDS louts who believe that marching and shouting outside private businesses associated with a particular single tiny minority is a good way to advance the human condition; according to their world view. 

“Glad NM has run some good reporting and commentary on this story, to balance some of the material that has appeared in The Australian”,  says Prof  Lynch.

Try reading this without getting a nasty chilly stabbing twinge somewhere between the shoulder blades and the right jaw. If you are not yet convinced that BDS is a dangerous and sinister thing straight out of the past, with labels on, then this must do the job.

Israel is singled out for boycott, not because of the religion followed by the majority of its citizens but because of its record of militarism and lawlessness. There are other countries that occupy territory recognised as not their own; kill large numbers of civilians in military action; stockpile nuclear weapons without joining the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and violate the 1973 UN Convention against apartheid. But only one does all four. There is no non-Jewish state in that category, so the charge of discrimination is easily disproved on that count as well.

Jake Lynch

Reading this invokes what I can only call a folk memory. Mind you I’ve seen it before first hand. I think we all have. This is a man come in judgement who has already found you guilty and has defined the crime that he believes with passion best fits you.You came first. Then the crime made to custom like a ghetto shirt. He could be an inquisitor priest straight out of the fifteenth century. He even looks the part. There’s no point arguing with him. He has come too far to get where he is. The only thing to do is expose him.

Or do what Shurat HaDin is doing.

Note the technique. Jake defines the subject for us. The “Jews” are a “religion”, as if they are Presbyterians. No hint of a nod to Jewish nationhood not even in Israel. Therefore any claim the Jews have to the land they lawfully settled and the brilliant state they built and where they live is based on their religion. Never mind the law. The Zionists are lawless.

Then come the Goebbels lies.  The attack is always multi-layered. There are seven lies in less than six lines. To tackle them all is to retreat and defend. To ignore them is to confirm.

Most of all is the fit up. This is how this works. Pick a country. Any country will do. It doesn’t even have to be an especially unpleasant country. Be sporting.  Iran, Syria, Algeria, Saudi Arabia … dozens of others, are no challenge.Then think of some unpleasant things. It doesn’t have to be true. It is enough that there are those who say it is true. In the case of Israel you can look to the neighbours for all the material you need and I don’t mean what they say.

There are other countries that have annexed whole countries and driven their leadership into exile, stock pile nuclear weapons, ruthlessly suppress and imprison dissidents, aggressively confront other states in all directions, carry out executions in public on an industrial scale and even humiliate the families of the executed. But only China does all of these.  This is not discrimination.  Boycott China.

There are other countries that stock pile nuclear weapons, execute people for blasphemy, persecute minorities, inflame sectarian divisions, savagely oppress women, assassinate civilian politicians and harbour and supply terrorists and terrorist gangs active over the borders while filching billions in aid as a form of extortion. But only Pakistan does all of these. No discrimination here. Boycott Pakistan.

There are other countries that exterminate wallabies as if they are vermin, bludge off neighbours for their defence, expose anti-terrorist operations that they benefit from and put at risk the lives of brave agents in the process, spread cheap antisemitic conspiracy theories, insult visiting Israeli diplomats, discriminate systematically against indigenous people ground down by war and dump their surplus population on the welfare system of the nearest functional state. But only New Zealand does all of these …

And so on.

In just a few lines Jake Lynch has revealed all you need to know about Jake Lynch. There is a law at work here. To shrug off allegations of bigotry you must discriminate against the target group as much as possible. Simple discrimination is not enough. You must isolate and zero in with perfect malice one layer at a time until the target stands bare and alone. Then you boycott.

This can be called Lynch’s Law.

Check Also

Closing Jews Down Under Website

With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.        It is …


  1. The established strategy of comprehensive denial of accusations against Israel has not been working at all on the international scene so far.

    We are dealing here, of course, within the parameters of political, ideological dialectics, confrontations carried out mostly at the level of public relations.

    A major distinction must be made between engagement with such entities to which a Lynch and Rees belong and the coal face political exchanges of the current Israel-PA negotiations. This distinction is essential for a number of reasons, no less in terms of a rational connection between a redundant non-effectual confrontation at the PR level and the realistic confrontation at levels where the REAL destiny of the involved parties ( countries ) is decided.

    To this extent I believe that one must retort the four principal accusations levelled here by Lynch by agreeing that, within their rational context, all charges ARE, in principle, CORRECT, save the proper modes of expression.

    Let’s see them again:
    (a)- Israel is present inside certain areas which prior to 1967 belonged to Jordan. Some call now those areas Judea and Samaria, some call them the West Bank , some call them Occupied Territories ( see Lynch)and some call them already Palestine. Regardless of the name(s), Israel is officially present “there”. I agree totally. Here we must develop the notion of “circumstances”. Lynch has his own version , we have our own. We can easily predicate here the notion of inevitability.

    (b)- Israel killed civilians during military actions against targets which were functioning as destructive forces against Israel. Any such action, as what Israel was compelled to undertake, inevitably carries civilian casualties. Let’s see our version of “circumstances”, because we DO have one. We can easily predicate here the notion of inevitability.

    (c)- Israel would stockpile nuclear weapons. It may be very true. And if so, what difference does it make if this would be registered officially somewhere or NOT. Compelled by circumstances, Israel could be seen easily as justified in having nuclear weapons. ANY OTHER country possessing the same weapons and/or developing them would argue in favour of this inevitability. Israel, unlike ANY OTHER country in the World is most justified in doing so, among other reasons , at least for reasons seen in points (a) and (b).

    (d) – Israel DOES differentiate in many circumstances within all its territories, including those described here in (a), between reliable individuals and respective groups, and unreliable individuals and respective groups. Regardless of varied and opposed opinions on the merits of the reasons, those individuals motivated to disrupt and cause harm to the functioning of a civilised society , need to be , inevitably, observed and monitored as to impede any realistically possible behaviour inimical to Israel’s population and respective institutions. If there would be an interpretation of such policies/actions similar to what one would prefer to use terms as “apartheid”, this can only be a tendentious choice in respect of the generally usage of the term, one which , even as farcically used, would NOT change the circumstances on the ground, as it would not affect the inevitability of the said measures taken for the said purposes.

    All this is to state that Lynch and his mob are being tendentious, they falsify and omit known facts and, as such, pervert reality.
    These are not unrealistic assertions, but true reflections of a verifiable reality. Lynch creates his own farcical version, one which can be debunked by simply presenting known facts.

    One of the most important facts is that Israel is being singled out constantly by the Lynch type critics as breaking international laws, transgressing fundamental civil/human rights principles.
    In his preamble, even Lynch agrees that “other” countries would be “guilty’ of similar transgressions.

    Why, then, is Israel pilloried for the same sins other commit but are allowed to get away with them? This is precisely because Israel is seen as a country which DOES function on Western civilised, democratic principles. Israel is considered not only capable but necessarily accountable to all for civilised norms, whereas all those other countries transgressing the same principles are regarded as being NATURALLY incompatible with any of the principles and practices Israel is expected to observe.

    What is missing from the above syllogism is the reality that those countries recognised as fundamental transgressors of the civilised principles function also on the State espoused functional aim of eliminating Israel. Simply, Israel is denied its right to defend itself, to defend the very principles it wishes to implement in it own existential space, well within the named fundamental civilised principles.

    • [The established strategy of comprehensive denial of accusations against Israel has not been working at all on the international scene so far.]

      So, it’s time to recognize a few basic facts of biology, and deal with the BDAssholes accordingly. Dead men don’t talk. They don’t carry sandwich board signs, nor do they block entrances to stores. The BDAssholes need to comprehend in their guts what it means to be a Jew under attack. This lesson is best absorbed at the graveyard. The MOST EFFECTIVE STRAGY IN DEALING WITH THEM IS TO SEND THEM TO THE GRAVEYARD TO MOURN THEIR OWN – INNOCENT OR NOT.

  2. Would be it be fair to say Jake Lynch is totally obsessed with Israel, Zionists and Jews ? Wonder why?

  3. Leon Poddebsky

    And yet the Vice-Chancellor of Australia’s oldest university defends him, and does so on specious grounds, and the taxpayers are paying the salaries of both of them.

  4. The Jews still the most hated minority in the world and they are not flying Planes into tall buildings.. go Figure !

    • Figure no more. The Lynch mob would tell you:

      – Zionists caused “whoever” rammed the planes on 09/11 to do it.
      – the same Zionists then commenced an islamophobic campaign in order to discredit the part-time/last time pilots. In Ramallah they were dancing in the streets !!!

      Only a few days ago a few Islamic leaders in Sydney blamed the NSW Gov. for inciting islamophobic feelings by accusing that Islamic school in Sydney of unfair stuff.
      IT WAS THE GOVERNMENT’S FAULT that the school did not comply with known regulations.
      Whichever way you turn and toss it THEY are the victims !!!!

    • Michael, it’s quite simple. If you are violent and barbaric, people leave you alone. If people know that, however much they provoke and threaten violence against you, you won’t retaliate, just grumble and write letters of complaint, they will continue to bully you.

      Jews, especially the Jewish leadership, need to show strength, not constantly appease and agree to more interfaith ‘dialogue’.

  5. Lynch reveals his hatred of Israel, or what he would probably term ‘the Zionist entity’. He fails to acknowledge that Jews were the indigenous people in Israel. There was a Jewish kingdom there long before Islam even appeared on the scene, but historical revisionism is a speciality of the BDS movement.

    Funny how other indigenous people are applauded by the left in their quest for self-determination and restoration to their homeland. Except Jews!

    • Trying to reason With anti zionists Including the many Jewish anti zionists Like Slezak loewenstein And Co. Would be like trying to convince Nazis that not all Jews are bad .

      Sent from my iPhone

  6. @ Otto Waldmann: “Israel is seen as a country which DOES function on Western civilised, democratic principles. Israel is considered not only capable but necessarily accountable to all for civilised norms, whereas all those other countries transgressing the same principles are regarded as being NATURALLY incompatible with any of the principles and practices Israel is expected to observe.”

    The irony of this is that it is, in fact, inverted racism. All those western, bleeding-heart liberals are displaying their racist assumptions about the inherently uncivilised Arabs/Africans/Asians, being INCAPABLE, by their very nature, of conforming to what the West considers “civilised norms”.
    Or one could see it as a back-handed compliment…..

  7. Shimona

    simply because you are a brilliant mind I can afford to post my slight contrary position.

    I would say that “inverted racism” cannot be accepted. Distinct “races” can dislike each other equally, so , instead of “inverted” let’s say “reciprocal”.

    You may be correct in saying that Western liberals would express a form of “racism” by accepting the lower standards of civilised norms of the countries which OFFICIALLY contain anti Israel policies.

    I am going further and say that the same Western liberals who harbour anti Israel “sentiments” in fact , promote indirectly quite practical ideologies of the same kind by the way in which they ENJOY the impunity with which countries openly inimical to Israel brandish their viciously antisemitic stands. Proof: there are NO efforts seen ANYWHERE at Western civilised/democratic countries admonishing at all those Nazi type regimes.

    Heaps of examples. Take any Arab or Muslim country which states or actually contains even Constitutional elements which specifically contain prohibitions in relation to Jewish matters.
    Malaysia can proclaim without any fear edicts which affect Jewish matters.

    This can be interpreted as a form of fascist atavism at the same Western liberal/democratic “civilised” entities. If they must be seen to uphold “at home” exemplary principles, the other, inferior societies, are permitted to breach those principles in their stead.

    Qatar even IRAQ would have similar anti Jewish and/or anti Israel LAWS. Show me ONE UN report or resolution addressing those KNOWN aspects. PA comes daily in official statements with stuff which is prohibitive of Jewish matters etc. etc.

    Who on Earth addresses those issues which are totally contrary to the norms by which the same Western liberals run their own societies and also expect Israel to observe? Yes, this is a back-handed compliment.

    Here we deal with the Lynch type which needs to demonstrate objectivity and equity and we see none. These are clear matters of academic failures within a higher learning institution, Sydney Uni.

  8. @Otto Waldmann: “simply because you are a brilliant mind I can afford to post my slight contrary position.”

    Flattery will get you (almost) everywhere 😉

  9. Leon Poddebsky

    The Idiot Left deludes itself into believing that collaborating with jihadism to bring down the USA’s most reliable and among the most useful allies, Israel, will hasten the downfall of democracy and capitalism, and will usher in the socialist paradise.
    Under jihadist sharia the Idiot Left, having demonstrated to the jihadists its manifest propensity for treachery, will be the first to depart this planet.

    • Leon, that’s why they’re called Useful Idiots. They are very useful to jihadis, but once they’ve passed their used by date, they will be the first to be disposed of. At least that’s one consolation!

    • Leon
      sorry to be nit picking, but today’s “left’, as we find it rambling among us, is no longer interested in demolishing capitalism. They have reconcilled themselves ideologically with the capitalist society and have become an erratic mob cherry -picking causes, such as the “palestinian struggle” .
      A few months ago I found myself in Perpignan, Southern France, at a public rally of the PCF ( French Communist Party ). The cause there was the rights of the Catalan people, but placcards re the Palestinian cause were being carried just as well. The meet ended with the famous song “Bandiera Rossa”, sang, of course, in Italian.To make it complete, most of the demonstrators were the local Arabs………………..

      • Leon Poddebsky

        I guess you’re right, Otto. With the manifestly utter failure of their ideology, they’ve had to look around for a new cause to fight for from their cosy armchairs; what easier target is there than the Jews?
        It’s not that they love the “Balestinians”; it’s that they despise the Jews and regard them as easy prey.”

        • ….spot on Leon, easy peasy prey, except for blokes like you and Shirlee and her mates who frequent these pages, the rest are out there looking for safe and confy hiding communal holes. And there IS plenty of them…………………

          ( dont get me started !!!!!)

  10. CIF Australia (the comment/opinion/editorial section of the Guardian) now publishes pro-BDS hate from antony loewenstein, who also openly calls for a “one-state solution” that erases the world’s only Jewish state.

    Everyone here needs to actively start complaining to the Guardian, Guardian Australia and the editors of CIF. And the people who hire them, if anyone here knows how to get in touch with such people.

    And by get in touch I mean phone calls, emails, letters, etc. not just tweets at the general Twitter accounts of the Guardian, where some intern probably reads it, laughs and doesn’t reply.

    • Leon Poddebsky

      Anton von Lowenstein has no more significance than the toilet brush in Himmler’s toilet had.
      We’ve seen these kinds before: in the Middle Ages some of them were worse than the Inquisition. In modern times the Karl Marxes and the Leon Trotskys and the Isaac Deutschers-dross that’s disappeared into the bowels of the Earth.

  11. Leon

    Your disgust with Lowenstein is more than just justified. I am sure that he is a special case in regards to his position on the situation of Israel in general. His Jewish background adds a few elements of interest, but not of urgency.

    I also believe that ranking him together with Marx, Trotsky and even Isaac Deutsch affords Lowenstein a reputation he most definitely has NOT earned and just as most definitely not likely to. I insist that his Jewish connections are of very little, if any , relevance, not that you seem to make a point of it. Anyway, in the scheme of things that matter, Lowenstein does NOT matter very much at all. He is an irritant of the local kind, easily neglectable, in fact, best left as such. ( I cannot believe that me, of all people, can be so bloody philosophical about this scum-bag )

    • Leon Poddebsky

      Otto, of course Von Lowenstein’s intellectual capacity and stature are microscopic or, if you like, of microbial proportions compared to Marx et al, but even those thinkers have faded into irrelevance, how much more so irrelevant is an intellectual microbe like V. L.

    • He mightn’t matter to you but he is dangerous given the air space he is given on the ABC and SBS

      • Leon Poddebsky

        Shirlee, the enemy might pretend to love him, but in their hearts they have only contempt and ridicule.

      • Shirlee
        I could not possibly disagree with you simply because we may not ignore or minimise the pernicious activities of Lowenstein , Porzsolt, Slezak and , of course , Jake Lynch and those in their specific ideological camp. Individually and collectively they represent a very important phenomenon of “transplanted” foreign matter on boiling bodies of concern, being the entire palestinian political disease.
        What we could do, in fact we are doing this right now, is disect the motivation these people have in being engaged in such a vicious way in attacking a Jewsih entity, Israel, my emphasis on Jewish, of course.
        Lowenstein and Lynch share a common ineterest, public exposure through writing/journalism. There is an obvious desire/need for them to address and entice the public eye. The individual impact each seeks would have individual peculiarities as far as their ethnic/religious base. Interesting is that Lowenstein promotes himself as an “atheist Jew”.
        The repudiation by Low. of the religious character of the Jewish identity is important. He wishes to retain the “Jew’ while rejecting “Judaism” as a religious, spiritual element. This makes the job of a disgusted cinyc quite easy. I, for one, would venture that , while one is keeping the attribute Jew and rejects the Jewish ethics contained in the “religion” one deserves to be spiritually relegated to the level of utter ignorance about his/her own claimed identity, qualified by” part “exclusion as it is. This is the case of ignorance which leads to rejection. It means that those who respect Judaism do so by virtue of being aware of its ethical values, its indispensible norms. In this case we cannot argue with Lowenstein from the position of known specific Jewish values simply because we do not have a dialectics counterpart. We practically speak completely different languages. On one side we have those who are acquinted, if not well imersed into Judaic knowledge, on the other one individuals who could not sustain the subject matter in discussion/dialectics simply because their understandin/knowledge of it nil. How do we know that ?! Simple, if one encounters the ethical values of Judaism one can only be enthrolled by them. It invariably occured with Christian thinkers delving into them !
        By virtue of the same argument, Jake Lynch falls (!!!) in the same category. While Lynch constantly claims that he is not concerned with Judaism as such or the Jewish character of his concerns, i.e. Israel, he ignores with good awareness the repeated FACT that Israel may not be seprated from anyting pertaining to Jewish, Judaism, Zionism, the imutable notion of Eretz. Lynch’s and Lowenstein’s qualified denials disqualify them from being credible, intellectually reliable counter-parts.

        Now, for the purpose of elucidating public matters which may have effects on processes of practical interest/importance, being the way in which fundamental political processes may rely on the public dissemination even of IRRELEVANT dialectical aspects, we cannot afford the luxury of ignoring these active irritants.
        Right here and now, I agree, we have the responsibility of lancing these infectious boils !!!

        ( my way, Shilee, of simply saying : You are right !!)

  12. Shirllee is spot ,Jews here that dismiss Loewenstein & Slezak as fools or nutters just don’t get it, how many times do we see Peter Wertheim, Danny Lamm, Colin Rubenstein for example invited on panels on SBS , ABC TV and Radio to give their views.
    Unfortunately self hating Jews are very much in demand particulsry from Fairfax, SBS & ABC . For example I went along to Loewenstein’s ‘ My Israel Question ‘ book launch at The Age writers festival { where else? ] Loewenstein had some impressive supporters on stage with him other Palestinian supporters ..
    Robert Richter QC , Julian Burnside QC, LOUise Adler [ His publisher] and and ex Australian ambassador to Israel in packed house over 2000 cheering supporters.
    Don’t discount these guys our Jewish community representatives would love to have this type of coverage , respect and following from the main stream .

    • Michael,
      you may not see the invitations, but I can assure you that the invitations ARE there. What you see are only the REFUSALS to attend.
      The last attendee, groomed by our groisse machers, was Irving Wallach on Q&A !!! That says it all.
      Aaaah, sorry, every now and again and that must be if a REALLY big something happens,Vic or Jeremy get up to and NO more than 14 seconds on the news and both Vic and Jeremy replay the same sentence from the past 23 such “lengthy” interviews. Usually then they make NO reference to the word “Jewish” at all, but “Universally” incredibly respectable and valid statements, relying that on the bottom of the screen the caption introducing them mentions something in relation to “Jewish”.

      • As far as the main stream Aussies go they think the <Loewensteins and Slezaks who appear in the media and are quoted so often are our Jewish community macha's…..

        • Michael, absolutely true the perception would be there and is made worse by the intentional absence of the “true” communal machers in the necessary immediate responses to the shlemils you mentioned.

  13. Leon Poddebsky

    Michael, the “impressive supporters” of Von Low at the book launch have nil capacity to harm Israel’s security. They’re self-important small fry, basking in the illusory warmth of their self-deluding posturing as “humanitarians.” That they associate with the likes of Von Low is an unflattering reflection of the scale of their self-respect.
    What really counts is the kind of thing which we have been witnessing in recent days: it is none other than France, a country which since de Gaulle, has been antipathetic to Israeli interests, which has derailed the Obama/Kerry/EU express train carrying goodies to Iran.
    Ask yourself why France has done this.