Is The MailOnline In Hock With Alan Duncan On Anonymous Anti-Israel Op-Ed?

1390

The MailOnline has taken a pretty big step for a UK Newspaper: they’ve run an anonymous opinion piece by a “Minister who served in David Cameron’s government”.

This comes at the end of their article unveiling the Al Jazeera hidden camera infiltration of the junior ranks of the Israeli Embassy in London.

The anonymous author claims: ”it is time to end the problem of Israel buying UK policy”. The anonymous Op-Ed begins:



Last month Theresa May, like David Cameron each year before her, spoke to the annual lunch of the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI).

She oozed praise for Israel as a democracy, spoke of the constant terrorist threat they face, and condemned the way that Palestinians supposedly incite violence and anti-Semitism.

Her own policy that considers Israeli settlements on Palestinian land illegal received only a passing mention.

The reason is clear: the Conservative Party wants pro-Israel donors’ money, and principle in the Government’s foreign policy has been relegated.

Matters deteriorated further over Christmas after US Secretary of State John Kerry’s forceful condemnation of the extremism and conduct of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government.

Instead of agreeing with his comments – which are identical to her own policy – she criticised Kerry.

Herein lies the first problem. As the author points out, we just had the embarrassing spectacle of the UK voting YES on UNSC 2334 and then days later Prime Minister Theresa May condemning John Kerry’s defence of the resolution. This seems to indicate that either Theresa May is duplicitous, an idiot or (by far the most likely) was deceived about the vote by her own Foreign Office and foreign ministers.

Behind this inconsistent and concerning attitude lies a serious and troubling problem. British foreign policy is in hock to Israeli influence at the heart of our politics, and those in authority have ignored what is going on.

This is a very important paragraph: note the use of the phrase “in hock to”. We’ll come back to this. And really, if Israel couldn’t make the UK vote No and thus veto UNSC 2334, the UK’s foreign policy doesn’t seem to be very much “in hock” to Israeli influence.

For years the CFI and Labour Friends of Israel (LFI), have worked with – even for – the Israeli government and their London embassy to promote Israeli policy and thwart UK Government policy and the actions of Ministers who try to defend Palestinian rights.

Lots of countries try to force their views on others, but what is scandalous in the UK is that instead of resisting it, successive Governments have submitted to it, taken donors’ money, and allowed Israeli influence-peddling to shape policy and even determine the fate of Ministers.

The purpose of foreign diplomacy and embassies is to put one’s country’s point of view. Only when you hate Israel (and perhaps Jews) excessively can you call that “influence-peddling”. As the author states “Lots of countries try to force their views on others”: all that’s being asserted here is somehow Israelis or Jews in the UK are better at this than any other special interest group. Is that what the author means?

Even now, if I were to reveal who I am, I would be subjected to a relentless barrage of abuse and character assassination.

Only character assassination? Are you sure you wouldn’t be targeted for real assassination by The Mossad?

The CFI is not affiliated to the Conservative Party. It is incorporated in a way that means it is not to transparent about donors. Yet it arranges for the support of MPs and funds regular visits to Israel which distort the truth. Cameron turned a blind eye to Israeli misconduct – if he ever cared about it – because he was persuaded any criticism would reduce Party donations.

How is the author so sure that a trip to Israel, paid for by the embassy of Israel would “distort the truth”? Perhaps it would simply present the truth which would run contrary to the lies of Al Jazeera and the BBC. Are Jews the only people in the UK giving money to UK political parties? I don’t think so.

It now seems clear people in the Conservative and Labour Parties have been working with the Israeli embassy which has used them to demonise and trash MPs who criticise Israel; an army of Israel’s useful idiots in Parliament.

This is politically corrupt, and diplomatically indefensible. The conduct of certain MPs needs to be exposed as the poisonous and deceitful infiltration of our politics by the unwitting agents of another country, which acts in defiance of international law, and whose government Kerry called its most extreme ever.

We need a full inquiry into the Israeli Embassy, the links, access and funding of the CFI and LFI, and an undertaking from all political parties that they welcome the financial and political support of the UK Jewish community, but won’t accept any engagement linked to Israel until it stops building illegally on Palestinian land.

This opaque funding and underhand conduct is a national disgrace and humiliation and must be stamped out.

It is astonishing that the MailOnline would publish an anonymous op-ed which ends with a complaint about “opaque funding and underhand conduct”. To think that Israeli is unique in public diplomacy is outrageous, and specifically antisemitic by the UK’s newly adopted definition:

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, […]

Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

But perhaps we can take a guess at who wrote this.

Let’s recall some of the on-the-record attributable nastiness of the MP named by a junior nobody at the Israeli Embassy in the Al Jazeera hit piece. He is a former junior minister at the foreign office. He is Alan Duncan.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4 in October 2014, following the debate in Parliament on Palestinian statehood, he said “all know that the United States is in hock to a very powerful financial lobby which dominates its politics.”

In his RUSI speech after the vote, he said that “no endorser of Israeli settlements should be considered fit to stand for election, remain a member of a mainstream political party, or sit in a Parliament.”

And “But our politics has rules… funding should not come from another country or from citizens of another country, or be unduly in hock to another country. This rule seems to apply to every country except when it comes from Israel. Jewish voters in the UK should be welcomed as supporters of, and donors to, their favoured political party.”

“…the support of any British Jew for any political party can hinge on whatever they want”

“…We need British Jews for the Conservative, Labour, or other UK parties; not the Israeli lobby for any party. The time has come to make sure above any doubt that the funding of any party in the UK is clearly decoupled from the influence of the Israeli state.”

Prior to his appointment at the Foreign Office, Duncan was special envoy for Oman and Yemen and ran a consultancy advising clients with interests in the Middle East. Not a surprise as he started his career (before Parliament) in the oil industry.

You may have noticed by now: I pointed out the phrase “British foreign policy is in hock to Israeli influence”. Here’s what happens if you search Google for “in hock” and “Alan Duncan”. It seems to be a phrase Alan Duncan is particularly associated with.

Just to save you the trouble, here’s the second link (after his Wikipedia page), from David Duke’s “Jewish Supremacism” category:

It seems Alan Duncan really likes the phrase “in hock to”.

Come on Alan, why the need to publish anonymously? You’ve said most of that before in public, why do you feel so shy now to take a swing at Israel in the wake of this unimpressive Al Jazeera sting?

If it is you, Alan, be a man, put your name on your Jew hatred.

Please help ensure Israellycool can keep going,
by donating one time or monthly