The report concluded:
"Israel’s efforts were entirely necessary and justified in the defence of that country’s national security. Israel’s conduct in the 2014 Gaza Conflict met and in some respects exceeded the highest standards we set for our own nations’ militaries."
Compare the membership of the group in 2014 (LH image) with the membership now. (RH image). Notice anything?
The High Level Military Group has produced as assessment of every war in Gaza since 2014, plus the 2018 protests and Israel's unprovoked attack in August 2022. Every assessment is favourable to Israel. high-level-military-group.org
This is the group's assessment of Israel's unprovoked attack on Gaza in August 2022. It is difficult to imagine how it could possibly be more one-sided.
In 2014, two members of the group were from the Friends of Israel Initiative. One is still a member of the group.
Here is the website of the Friends of Israel Initiative. friendsofisraelinitiative.org
Here's what the Friends of Israel Initiative says about itself.
Why is an organisation that exists to promote Israel's right to exist represented on a High Level Military Group that says its purpose is to critique Israel's conduct in wars?
This is what the High Level Military Group's stated purpose is. There's no mention of promoting Israel's right to exist.
However, the Friends of Israel Initiative's website shows that in addition to Bardaji, several members of the High Level Military Group are founder members of the Friends of Israel Initiative. friendsofisraelinitiative.org/about/founder-…
Despite the way it describes itself, the High Level Military Group actually appears to be an offshoot or subgroup of this hardcore racist and Islamophobic organisation.
Here's a list of the reports the HLMG has produced since its foundation in 2014. There's a theme here, isn't there?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First, let's backtrack to Pope Francis's election. He chose his papal name in honour of St. Francis of Assissi. St. Francis is my patron saint, so I know a bit about him. 1/
St. Francis had a devoted disciple and close companion, who witnessed his stigmata and nursed him in his last illness. His name was Brother Leo. 2/
I wrote a post documenting the deaths by fire in Gaza, and observed that this meets the dictionary definition of "holocaust". Predictably, someone on Substack notes accused me of antisemitism. *sigh* /1
True, I didn't mention Oct 7th. I've covered it in previous pieces, so didn't think I needed to discuss it again. But he insisted that Oct 7th must feature in every piece about the Gaza conflagration. He accused me of "bad editorial practice" for omitting it. 2/
And because I dared to use the word "holocaust" (without capitalization and with an indefinite article) about the Gaza conflagration, and called the evil men responsible (on both sides) the "spawn of Moloch", he accused me of "conjuring older tropes". 3/
MP: "Do you believe that the Palestinians are entitled to a state?"
Hausdorff: "Self-determination does not give one a right to a state in international law."
MP: "I'd like to know whether Natasha Hausdorff believes that Palestinians have the right to a state?"
Hausdorff: "Palestinians have self-determination in autonomy. So according to international law, no".
Hausdorff shot herself in the foot. If "autonomy" is sufficient for Palestinians and they have no right to a Palestinian state, then autonomy must also be sufficient for Jews and they have no right to a Jewish state.
After all, as Hausdorff herself says, "the same rules have to apply".
I think Hausdorff's application of uti possidetis juris also undermines the legitimacy of a Jewish state. She said uti possidetis juris "sets the start point" for the new state. When the British mandate ended and Israel declared independence, Israel was a majority Arab state.
The Jewish-majority state that Israel became after the ethnic cleansing of 80% of the non-Jewish population is not the same as the state established under uti possidetis juris.
In my latest piece at @themintmag, I've outlined what I think the real purpose of Trump's tariffs is. Or rather, purposes. 1/
There are three different tariffs:
- the 10% universal tariff
- the "trade deficit" tariff, determined by country
- the product tariff, e.g. 25% on all car imports
As I explain in my article, each has a different purpose. /2 themintmagazine.com/trumps-card-wh…
The 10% tariff is a fee for use of the international dollar system, or perhaps an insurance premium. Trump wants the world to pay for its reliance on the dollar. themintmagazine.com/trumps-card-wh…
Your old company, Reform UK Party Ltd, still exists. It is a private limited company. You have sold your shareholding in this company to your new company, Reform 2025 Ltd. …te.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/116948…
Your members paid their subscriptions to your old company. But you did not sell your shareholding to them, @Nigel_Farage. You sold it to your new company, to which they have paid nothing.