Sympathy for the terrorists: as the UK, France, and Canada go, so goes Australia …
… and probably New Zealand, in preparing to recognize Palestine as a reward for its rape, murder, and torture of Jews; the sacrifice of Gazans to that cause; and the mendacious production of anti-Israel propaganda in order to play the victim card:
“Australia will recognize the right of the Palestinian people to a state of their own. We will work with the international community to make this right a reality,” Albanese told reporters in Canberra.
Albanese claimed that a two-state solution for the Arab-Israeli conflict is “humanity’s best hope to break the cycle of violence in the Middle East and to bring an end to the conflict, suffering and starvation in Gaza,” AFP reported.
The two-state solution or a magic wand, whichever comes first. Albanese is a fool and a knave, but he’s got a lot of company. Most of the English-speaking world seems determined to go down that path, except Trump. It occurs to me, however, that if Kamala Harris had been elected, the US probably would be following in their footsteps right about now.
And the hostages? What of them? It would be obvious to a second-grader that these promises to recognize a state would end any pressure on Gaza to release them in a deal. Why agree to a deal and give up the precious hostages, when the West is already promising to reward the Palestinians?
This concession by Australia represents a change:
The decision “undermines Israel’s security, derails hostage negotiations and hands a victory to those who oppose coexistence,” added the [Israeli ambassador to Australia], noting that Albanese’s government previously set strict conditions for it to recognize a Palestinian state, including “renouncing violence, freeing hostages and establishing credible, accountable governance.
“However, the Australian government has abandoned those conditions and proceeded with recognition for symbolic reasons rather than genuine progress toward peace,” Maimon wrote in an X post.
I think the word “symbolic” there is accurate. After all, what does this “recognition” mean in practical terms? I’m not sure, but it is morally repugnant and quite obviously rewards some of the worst terrorists and Jew-haters the world has ever known. Yes, these nations getting ready to do the recognition also say that Hamas has got to go, but in the meantime they are helping them and causing a prolongation of the war – without a single suggestion or even thought of how it is that Hamas will indeed go, or any proof whatsoever that the PA would be any better.
What can one say? The formerly “Christian West” has now become a laughingstock, governed by weak, whimpering, simpering catamites on their knees before their islamic masters. The only leader I can think of who is not (yet) in that position is Trump, thank God. If only the desired “palestinian state” could be located in the middle of Australia, I might agree with the proposal. After all, the geography is similar, viz., arid desert, and the inhabitants would have something in common with the poisonous insects and reptiles who abound in that God forsaken locale.
Israel allowed Gaza almost 20 years to try to govern themselves, only to get Oct 7. If the people of Gaza wanted a two state solution they had the chance to work for it.
It’s tricky for Israel to handle this situation. The old school way–what the Romans would do–is supposedly not on the table. What remains is some form of long term occupation.
Hear, hear
Australia set to recognize the Nation-State of Taiwan!
Ha-ha; no it’s not, just kidding.
By the way,, “occupation” is a canard. Y’all know that already, right?
Albanese/Wong are all the ridiculous limp-wristed wishcasting leftist platitudes wrapped up in skin suits. The whole damn Commonwealth is run by idiots who’d lose a slap fight with George Costanza.
Neo’s description of this as morally repugnant is correct.
What’s next? They can recognize an Islamic state in the Congo once the monsters behead a few more Christians.
“the right to a state of their own”
That clause makes my head spin. What right do they have? Does no one ever stop and think through such vapid platitudes? They have consistently and without fail turned down every offer of a state of their own (for the simple reason that these offers meant their state would exist alongside Israel). And after Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 why did they not exercise this purported right?
There is so much stupid here.
Forget it, Jake, it’s politics. And cowardice.
These countries get to score points with the globalists and the Muslims. After Israel does what it has to do, they can wash their hands and say they did what they could.
How sad. If only Israel gave peace a chance.
Ready to earn a truly substantial part-time income entirely online without ever leaving your home? We are currently offering an impressive $220 per hour for all dedicated and reliable online workers cde who meet our basic requirements. This is a fantastic and genuine opportunity to easily supplement your current earnings or even build an entirely new flexible career path that suits your needs. Discover many more important details about this opportunity right here. Visit this website
…..https://growfast456.blogspot.com/
Maybe we could let the Gazans have Venus.
The formerly Christian West has become the region of Jew-haters. Why, I ask?
Why has the world’s civilizing force for the past 2000 years, Christianity, sent itself to the dump and turned on the civilizing Jewish ethno-religion? Why?
I, for one, am glad Australia is on board. I mean, there’s plenty of room in the Australian outback for them to donate for a “Palestinian” state. All they’ve got to do is ship them all over there, drop them off in their new state and Bob’s your uncle.
BTW: If the Gazans have a “right” to their own state, why don’t the Kurds? Or the Tibetans? Or, for that matter, the Confederacy? Didn’t the south have the “right” to form their own nation? If not, why not?
Sorry, pipe dream. In order to answer that in a sensible manner, the left would require some semblance of consistency of thought. If it weren’t for double-standards, they’d have no standards at all.
Sailorcurt,
Those other ‘nationalities’ had no “right” to being states because they weren’t murdering Jews.
Americans and most OECD citizens want the war to end, right away, and to minimize casualties.
They blame Israel for the war continuing, and mostly don’t care or consider the hostages, nor the future.
Israel has failed to conquer & occupy & pacify Gaza, because of concerns about hostages and killing of civilians. Strategically, Bibi has failed to articulate who and how will Gaza be governed.
They should have been occupying & rebuilding for many months already in North Gaza & splitting up Gaza into 5 Swiss style Cantons. It’s not too late.
They don’t want to occupy, but every other alternative is worse for Israel.
those with a little hindsights would see these expeditions never end swiftly, israel entered into the Lebanese war and did not surrender for eighteen years, some circumstances have changed but much of the political directorate of Hamas has been crippled not all admittedly
the ignorant, Albanese, Starmer, Macron, Trudeau will not listen to reason, but thats not a new thing, they are inveterately wrong about everything, energy national identity, free speech
same with the prog chieftains on this end of the pond, take the twit who took selfies with Maryland man, same with Hezbollah which has been struck a strong blow, there are some concerns about face saving actions entertained by some policy figures, like Tom Barrack who is more an adjunct advisor
Smotrich’s reaction is rather bewildering but not surprising, he thinks there will be a better result
I’d like to presume that there is some objective, actual, reality-based benefit to the nations making such decisions. Not that I’d like it, or the results. But the other reason for such decisions is…..
A kind of Luigismus/itis; the passive getting all hot and horny for people who actually Do Stuff. And the worse it is, the more it transgresses the generally accepted ethical and moral understandings, the more DO STUFF ish it is.
Like some women go for the Bad Boy. They may be grateful for the Good Guy who decks the Bad Boy–when convenient for the woman–but that’s not Doing Stuff and doesn’t count. Are the leaders this type or are they this type and are they reading their voters?
Not Getting It.
Richard Aubrey:
In some of those countries – the UK, for example – there has been so much Moslem immigration that Moslems constitute a large voting bloc that needs placating.
— Richard Aubrey
As neo notes, the demographic balance has shifted in Western Europe. This map gives a visual indication:
https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Jewish-population.jpg
The huge majority of Jews live either in Israel, or the United States. Between them, they are home to ~90% of the Jewish population of the world. In much of Western Europe, they are hugely outnumbered by Muslims.
Demography may not be destiny, quite, but as Mark Stein is fond of pointing out, it comes close.
The whole point of the Founding Fathers, or a large part of it, was to do away with tribalism. With factionalism. With royalty. With nepotism. With religious persuasion allied to political ends.
With demography.
(To be replaced by Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…and a Constitution to try to encourage and ensure it, as much as HUMANLY possible in a new-fashioned country of, by and for the people….)
Worked out fairly well, with some speed bumps along the way, to be sure, mostly in the middish-19th century…that is, until the advent of ubiquitous social-media apps…and a rabidly faux-messianic (i.e., Bolshevik) Democratic Party….
…athwart which DJT shouted “STOP”…and then proceeded to follow through with prophet-like determination and precision so as to attempt to cement a successful and durable counter-revolution.