Kerry discovers peace deal is no deal for Abbas’s Palestinian ‘mafia’

COULD it be I’ve heard the first cuckoo of spring – or, more accurately, a cuckoo that’s changed its chirp to that of a wise, old owl?

Because, in a rare break from its traditional Israel-bashing and Palestinian tub-thumping, that bastion of liberal smugness, The New York Times, has acknowledged the ugly, flip side of its pet cause.

Temporarily shedding its prejudices, the self-style ‘newspaper of record’ reported how the Palestinian Authority (PA) plumbs the depth of incitement and peddles a diet of incessant, hate-bilge to its people, despite hollow promises to desist.

Jodi Rudoren, the snooty ‘Grey Lady’s’ Jerusalem bureau chief, revealed how Hitler is revered in West Bank schools and kids on TV vilify Jews as ‘barbaric monkeys’ and ‘murderers of Muhammad’ (that’s a new one on me, since the Prophet died in Jew-free Medina in 632 AD).

The report finally noted how PA maps obliterate Israel, a compelling clincher that the Arabs will never countenance a two-state solution, which they’re thrice tried – and abysmally failed – to solve by war in 1948, 1967 and 1973, and vicious blood-letting ever since.

Actually, the story’s so old, it could have grown bushy, white whiskers.

Yet, somehow, it has eluded other NY Times scribes, probing Guardian newshounds and all the BBC’s Mid-East hacks put together. In their defence, maybe they’ve been too obsessed with rubbishing Israel, they simply didn’t notice.

But Rudoren’s ‘discovery’ is bad news for rag-tag, Lefty apologists for Palestinian terror, many of whom cloak their anti-Semitism in chic anti-Zionism, amid the fervent wish democratic Israel is destroyed and replaced by what will inevitably become yet another Islamo-fascist tyranny.

APPRENTICE & SORCERER: A glum Mahmoud Abbas with a portrait of his predecessor as PA leader, the 'inventive' Yasser Arafat

ONE-STATE SOLUTION: Mahmoud Abbas, the PA boss ( with a portrait of his predecessor, the ‘inventive’ Yasser Arafat) won’t tolerate a Jewish state as next-door  neighbour

For years these witless dupes have bought into howling porkies, mostly invented by Yasser Arafat, delegitimising the viper’s nest of a region’s only egalitarian state, where people of 100 nationalities and a swathe of faiths are free to practice their credos, sexual orientations and traditions without fear of persecution.

In contrast, just try being a Christian or gay in Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, Gaza or Saudi Arabia – even if the PA’s propaganda machine has ‘rebranded’ Jesus a Palestinian. The facts that no country called Palestine ever existed and Christianity’s Messiah was incontrovertibly Jewish are conveniently airbrushed from history.

Truth, though, has never been an obstacle to Arab lie-mongers. But their latest claim is the most outlandish yet: Jews don’t deserve a reprised homeland, because they were never there in the first place!

Who says so? None other than those shambolic back-stabbers, the Arab League, who’ve shamelessly exploited the hapless Palestinians for decades and are united only when it comes to opposing any suggestion that Jewish sovereignty in the region has legitimacy.

Which is why the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, pulled an exhibit entitled: ‘People, Book, Land – The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel.

Due to open at the UN agency’s Paris HQ last Monday, it was cancelled after a zero-hour protest by the motley bunch of heinous nasties, who rule 350 million subjects with iron fists.

So forget Moses, Isaac, Joshua, Noah and other biblical patriarchs. Presumably, they didn’t exist or, like Jesus, were really Palestinians. And ditto the ancient, Jewish kingdoms of Judea and Israel, much mentioned in both Old and New Testaments.

Even the Nazis didn’t dream up such gobsmacking deceit.

More insidious still, the veto is blessed by the Obama Administration, even though the Americans were originally sponsors of the UNESCO event.

The flimsy reason? The so-called ‘peace process’ was ‘at a sensitive juncture’, claimed a spokesperson.

The real reason: once-mighty America is led by a wimpish, addled appeaser, who’s allowed Iran, Kremlin-backed Syria, the fanatical Muslim Brotherhood and Hizbollah crazies to turn the powder-keg Middle East into the world’s premier killing field.

EAR TO THE GROUND: Secretary of State Kerry knows what the real stumbling block is in his attempts to forge peace

EAR TO THE GROUND: Secretary of State Kerry knows what the real stumbling block is in his attempts to forge peace

So what chance an Israel-PA settlement, a desire shared by most sane folk, especially the majority of Israelis?

As John Kerry has discovered, pigs will fly first.

The US Secretary of State knows Israel has done land-for-peace deals before – with Jordan and Egypt – and will do again if conditions are fair. But not so Mahmoud Abbas, head of the PA’s ruling cabal-cum-self-serving mafia.

For all his pretence of Western-style governance, Abbas is way passed his rule-by date, having fobbed off elections since his four-yearly term in office expired in 2009.

Nor can he speak for the Islamic headbangers of Hamas, who usurped his quasi-democratic credentials in Gaza, murdered PA aparatchiks and stay wedded to a dogma that seeks the destruction of Israel and Jews everywhere.

So Kerry, latest bearer of the poisoned chalice of peace-seeker, now realises the stumbling block isn’t territory, borders, refugees or security, but the PA’s scary hate-world, where no state is better than two, if it means accommodating a Jewish one.

And, secular though their country is, Israelis are no more inclined to disavow their right to the most ancient of biblical faiths than the planet’s 57 Muslim-majority nations will renounce Islam or the Vatican cease to be Catholic.

Palestinian suffering, then, will continue unabted, so long as they have venal, inept, kleptocratic leaders, who line their own pockets with their people’s blood money – mainly donated by America, the EU and Britain – and peddle unremitting hatred.

Meanwhile, having been duped by nuclear-potty Iran, even gullible Obama is beginning to wonder what’s going on, as every initiative he promotes – such as this week’s farce in Geneva, designed to stem the Syrian bloodbath – disintegrates into chaos.

In a telling interview last week, the President admitted the chances of attaining peace anywhere in the Middle East were ‘no better than 50-50.’

‘We may be able to push the boulder partway up the hill and maybe stabilize it so it doesn’t roll back on us,’ claimed Obama optimistically.

‘I believe that the region is going through rapid and inexorable change. Some of it is demographics; some of it is technology; some of it is economics. And the old order, the old equilibrium, is no longer tenable. The question then becomes: what’s next?’

Answers on a postcard to B.H. Obama, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC.

All ideas welcome.

Hollywood shows the way in The Charge of the Crinkly Brigade

DON’T you just love movie award ceremonies! I do, especially when the camera pans to nominees who didn’t get the gong and shows them beaming like demented hyenas, cheering on recipients who’ve just stolen their glory, yet still displaying a veneer of sincerity.

That’s real acting. And I reckon an Oscar for Best Faked Appreciation should be struck in their honour, doled out before the also-rans skulk home, rip off their designer threads in teary rage, and pulverise every stick of furniture in the house.

As legendary producer, Sam Goldwyn, who put the ‘G’ into MGM and was famed for his malapropisms, observed, ‘Strip away the phoney tinsel from Hollywood and you’ll find the real tinsel underneath.’

However, this isn’t simply about Oscars, Emmys or BAFTAs et al; it’s just that the motion picture industry nicely illustrates a phenomenon that’s taken root in all sorts of unimaginable place: The Charge of the Crinkly Brigade.

Once upon a time in Tinseltown the first sag of a boob or crows’ feet blossoming into eagle talons meant an emergency nip-‘n’-tuck.

But, as last week’s Golden Globes ceremony amply demonstrated, a clutch of those voted Most Promising Newcomer (MPN) were none other than veterans, whom many in the audience long ago assumed had gone to the great studio in the sky.

Septuagenarian John Voigt (75) scooped a performance ‘orb’; so did Michael Douglas and Jacqueline Bisset, at 69, both well beyond free bus-pass qualifications.

Technically MPNs are now defunct. But Bisset, still remarkably nubile for her vintage, recalled in a rambling acceptance speech smacking of one bottle of Dom Perignon too many, she’d first been nominated 47 years earlier and finally stuck lucky.

BEST NEWCOMER: Jacqueline Bisset gets the Globe - 47 years after first being nominated

BEST NEWCOMER: Jacqueline Bisset gets the Globe – 47 years after first being nominated

As someone who now takes all night to do what he did all night, it’s heartening to know that in the fabled Land of Make Believe, of all places, age isn’t an impediment to progress, even if it means creaky, big-screen vets have had to scale down to the telly to pick up a pay cheque.

This got me thinking that there’s a silver lining to the UK government’s decision to raise the retirement age to 67 – a financial imperative, given the ageing population, insists UK Finance Minister, young Georgie Osborne (by the by, have you noticed how he’s changed his hairstyle to appear a tad more boyish) – a strategy other EU nations are mulling over.

Then I read of how senior citizens in Sweden, renowned for its cradle-to-the-grave welfare and no compulsory retirement age, are signing up in droves to an employment agency called Veteran Pool.

Specialising in finding work for those ordinarily thought well over their use-by date, it’s fronted by 71-year-old, ex-James Bond golden girl, Britt Ekland.

‘They are so many older people who have much more to give and they don’t want to stop working,’ explains Anna Brue, deputy chief of Veteran Pool, which now has 6,000 wrinklies on its books and 35 offices.

‘The life experience they have to offer is invaluable.’

AGE NO BARRIER: Ex-Bond Girl, Britt Ekland is the 'face' of Sweden's silver servers

AGE NO BARRIER: Ex-Bond Girl, Britt Ekland is the ‘face’ of Sweden’s silver servers

It reminded me of how an acquaintance of mine, one of the most curmudgeonly men you could possible not wish to meet – his long-suffering missus admits he’s a grumpy so-and-so (or words to that effect) even on a good day – has been rejuvenated, aged 75, by a job as a greeter at a supermarket.

‘The customers love him and call him Uncle Max,’ she tells me. ‘They’d much rather deal with him than the snotty kids at the check-outs.’

Of course, often it’s a matter of needs must that some retirees have to carry on working, scraping to find any job they can.

However, there are those who disagree that ‘work’ is a dirty word and dislike the idea of being forcibly tossed on the scrapheap of the great unwanted and have a burning desire to soldier on, in the firm belief they have skills to offer.

More often than not they have, especially after a lifetime in the line of duty to the office or factory floor.

And they’ve a thing or two to teach the young, because – likely or not – they are steeped in a work ethic, however humble; they turn up on time, put in a shift, don’t take ‘sickies’ and deliver the quality of experience no amount of frame diplomas can match.

The oldsters might not be able to navigate their way round an iPhone, like a bemused friend still cursing the day his grandkids gave him such a gizmo for his 65th birthday.

But, when it comes to fronting people, silver servers can outperform dozy dolly birds or surly teens, because they are less inhibited by how they look and their lack of educational ‘ologies’ don’t matter.

B&Q was the first British company to recognise this and, in the late 1980s, began to recruit people nobody else would hire: women returning after a career break, plus those over 50, and today more than a fifth of its 38,000 staff are over middling years.

‘There are clear business benefits to employing a workforce that is age diverse and reflects our customer profile, ’explained the DIY chain’s spokesman. ‘We’ve also found older workers have a great rapport with the customers, as well as a conscientious attitude and real enthusiasm for the job.’

Naturally, there are those who claim oldsters enjoying second careers in their third age are cheapo staff stealing opportunities from the young.

However, judging by the political contretemps over importing labour for jobs many of our feckless, unemployed youth feel are below their  dignity, where’s the crime in gran or granddad advising supermarket punters or watering flower pots at a garden centre?

Once, there was a time when the old were revered for their wisdom gained in the University of Hard Knocks and the young used their counsel to help overcome the challenges of life.

Somehow, that attitude diminished and the elderly became invisible, underscored by Oscar Wilde’s withering dismissal of juvenile superiority, when he remarked, ‘The old believe everything; the middle-aged suspect everything; the young know everything.’

So, hurray for Hollywood, where ageing stars don’t fade away – they just learn new tricks.

Who do you think you’re kidding, Monsieur M’Bala – there’s no alibi for the ‘humour of hatred’

FANCY a quenelle? Then take your pick from a choice of finely minced fish or meat dumplings, or a gesture viewed by many to be a pseudo-Nazi salute, going viral with morons everywhere.

I’ve no idea who conceived the tit-bit, a long-time French delicacy. And, no doubt someone with a greater insight in the cuisine that popularised grilled gastropods and pan-friend amphibian limbs will enlighten me.

However, I have some knowledge of the gesture and the rumpus it’s causing in France, where President Francois Hollande wants it banned and its creator, one M’Bala M’Bala Dieudonné, who affects to be a comedian, gagged.

Once, about a decade ago, he was hailed as a Gallic Will Smith. His stand-up was acidly satirical and provocatively teasing as he worked a double act with Élie Semoun, a Jewish friend from his childhood.

Dieudonné even began carving a reputation as an actor, appearing in mostly flop movies, except box-office hit, Asterix & Obelix: Mission Cleopatra in 2002.

Meantime, his political credentials were impeccably Left, so righteous he stood twice – unsuccessfully – in elections against the National Front, a party he derided as racist.

But somehow, sometime, that mysteriously changed and nice Doctor Heckle metamorphosed into repellent Monsieur Snide.

Some say this scion of a white, Breton mother and black, Cameroonian father seized on the virulent strain of anti-Semitism that cuts through certain stratas of French psyche with the stench of a rotten Camembert, and he couldn’t resist the avalanche of euros tumbling before his avaricious eyes if he exploited it.

Others in the black militant, disgruntled Muslim and white, jackboot communities – the unholiest and most improbable of alliances – claim Dieudonné merely reflected the sentiment of the underdog in a petit-bourgeois society and should be free to express opinions that are simply anti-Establishment.

HUMOUR OF HATE: Dieudonne's fans claim the quenelle is an anti-Establishment salute, not anti-Semitic, even though the comedian viciously attacks Jews

HUMOUR OF HATE: Dieudonne’s fans claim the quenelle is an anti-Establishment salute, not anti-Semitic, even though the comedian viciously attacks Jews

This travesty is backed by Jean-Marie Le Pen, inventor of the neo-fascist National Front – and godfather to one of the performer’s five children – plus motley, Holocaust-denying dregs, one of whom was allowed relatively free rein on BBC2’s Newsnight show last week to spew his opinions, without viewers appraised of his loathsome credentials.

The problem is Dieudonné’s ruse of using the ‘humour of hatred’ has lit a fuse in a constituency consumed by bigotry and hungry for racist fantasies crazier than even those propagated by Nazi spinmeister, Josef Goebbels.

Jews are the perennial target and Dieudonné, 48 next month, has been prosecuted six times in France and fined a total of €40,000 for peddling anti-Semitism bile (plus 75,000 dollars in Montreal for racially abusing Canadian-Jewish actor, Patrick Bruel).

The repugnant, unfunny man’s felonies, however, aren’t limited to broadcasting vitriol, because the French authorities fined him nearly €900,000 for tax evasion in 2012, which provides a useful insight into how much his anti-Semitic incitement has netted him.

But it is his corruption of the quenelle – the gesture, not the gastronomic delight – that’s propelled Dieudonné to international fame or infamy, depending on your viewpoint.

His fans claim it is the equivalent of two-fingers to the state, not a contortion of the Nazi salute and France’s ethos of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité should make it an acceptable form of protest.

In isolation, minus the baggage of Dieudonné’s long rap sheet for stirring up Jew baiting, Holocaust denial and religious mockery, it might pass muster.

But it misses that far-fetched target by a proverbial country mile, since lame-brain copycats have been snapped performing the gesture at – amongst other sensitive venues – the Auschwitz death camp, outside a school in Toulouse, where three infants and a rabbi were slaughtered by an Islamic fanatic, and Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall, Judaism’s holiest of shrines.

Veteran soccer star, Nicolas Anelka, even imported it into Britain, when he made sure it was captured on TV, after scoring a goal for West Bromwich Albion.

With an Football Association inquest into his antics pending, the black French Muslim – not for nothing nicknamed ‘Le Sulk’ – is unrepentant, claiming he was just ‘supporting a friend.’

FRIENDLY GESTURE? French Muslim soccer star, Anelka, claims he performed the quenelle in support of his friend, Dieudonne

FRIENDLY GESTURE? French Muslim soccer star, Anelka, claims he performed the quenelle in support of his friend, Dieudonne, during an English Premier League game

If we are judged by the mates we keep, unsurprisingly critics are questioning whether a brain lurks within the footballer’s shaven cranium or whether his any wisdom is solely confined to his feet.

So, no, let’s not pretend Dieudonné’s creation is a) just cocking a snook at officialdom; or b) that vilifying Jews – even if cloaked in thinly-veiled, detestably-trendy anti-Zionism, a neat excuse for many to hide their true sentiments – can somehow be an expression of free speech.

As I’ve said before, the right to express opinions openly comes with caveats and responsibilities.

Quite rightly, laws – criminal and civil – exist. Though, frankly the snot of holier-than-thou posers who comprise Europe’s liberal chatterati often turn commonsense on its head by allowing purveyors of hatred to spew their anti-Western, anti-Semitic and anti-gay poison unchallenged.

We witnessed that in Britain when a surprising number of the far Left’s best cavilled at a succession of Home Secretaries’ attempts to boot out that repugnant duo of Islamic nasties, Abu Qatada and hook-clawed Abu Hamza.

Again the addled, self-proclaimed elite perverted the ‘free speech’ argument to support a cause celebre no more than a sham.

At least the French government is doing its best to shut Dieudonné’s foul mouth.

Interior Minister, Manuel Valls, said that in mocking the Holocaust and painting a stereotypical trope of Jews, the performer is no longer artistic or comic but the ‘mechanic of hate’.

Backed by President Hollande, Valls called on regional mayors to ban local theatres from hosting Dieudonné’s 22-city tour on the grounds the act is an incitement to violence.

However, in Nantes, a local judge opposed any prohibition, forcing government lawyers to appeal to France’s highest court, where their plea to reinstate the mayor’s ban was met with an emphatic ‘Oui!’

Undoubtedly, legal shenanigans will play out like an X-rated soap opera. And the world’s vilest performer will milk every minute from the limelight and snatch every grubby euro such notoriety brings.

However, that this vile farce is happening today in an EU state says much about how far our society has travelled in the past 70 years.

Meddling Euro judges should stop making an ass out of the law

IN all probability you’ve never heard of Iulia Motoc, Ganna Yudkivska, Ineta Ziemele or Päivi Hirvelä, though you might guess they’re targets for top soccer clubs during this January’s transfer window – except all are female.

I could add a further 43 names and you’d be none the wiser. Nor would it help if I said Iulia is Rumanian, Ganna hails from Ukraine, Ineta is a Latvian and Päivi’s a Finn.

‘So what’, you might say dismissively. ‘They’re nothing to do with me.’

But how wrong you’d be. Because they have much to do with you – and the 733 million others populating our continent – in everything from how you work, who you rub shoulders with, what you buy, even to what opinions you choose to air in public.

In fact, in some respects, they are higher and mightier than all the prime ministers, presidents and parliaments in Europe put together.

What’s more, they’re answerable to no-one, because they are judges at the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), ostensibly the arbiter of last resort for disgruntled citizens to bring their governments to heel.

However, just as the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, so, is the ECHR. And it threatens to become such a judicial blight on almost every nation falling within it remit – which means most of us – serious concerns are being voiced as to whether it’s become too big for its boots.

Historically, the ECHR was the lovechild of the Council of Europe, formed in 1950 with the laudable intention of never again tolerating a regime as homicidally racist and wantonly thuggish as the Nazis.

Three years later the European Convention of Human Rights was drafted and in 1959 the Court constituted, with signatory states, including Britain, appointing judges, who – way back then – were mainly there for the kudos.

Each member nation still retained its own laws and the ECHR was chiefly hailed as an triumph of emerging, pan-European political goodwill rather than an instrument of judicial meddling.

CAUGHT OUT: The European Court of Human Rights comes under fire for some of its 'judicial frolics'

CAUGHT OUT: The European Court of Human Rights comes under fire for some of its ‘judicial frolics’

Until, that is, in their addled wisdom, Brussels Europrats decided that applicants to the EU – which operates the extraneous European Court of Justice – had to join the Council of Europe, thereby kow-towing to the primacy of the ECHR.

In theory the motives to protect and enhance human rights are noble, especially in regard to former Soviet bloc satellites; in practice, however, it has led to some gross violations of individual national rights.

Deep misgivings have also emerged about some appointees to the Strasbourg bench being novices and/or harbouring personal, prejudiced social and political agendas.

As an ECHR official privately admitted, ‘Around half the judges had no judicial experience before going to the Court, which means it’s no surprise they go off on judicial frolics of their own.’

So it matters little that countries – like Britain – with long, democratic histories, have evolved legal systems far superior to the upstart Europeans, whose often quirky rulings can beggar belief.

Probably nothing better illustrated Strasbourg’s ability to make an ass of itself when it rode, roughshod, over UK justice in the cases of hook-handed hate preacher Abu Hamza – who used the ECHR for years to block attempts to deport him to face terrorism charges in the USA – and the equally abhorrent Abu Qatada, wanted in Jordan.

The Euro judges also have other, festering bees in their non-existent wigs, firstly accusing Britain of ‘human rights abuse’ by denying criminals the vote while they’re in jail.

In a sane world it’s not unreasonable that convicts forfeit privileges enjoyed by law-abiders. And their incarceration certainly shouldn’t extend to the liberty of scratching an X on a ballot paper any more than good behaviour should earn them a week’s knees-up in Magaluf.

This time, however, Strasbourg’s arrogant twaddle is meeting with fierce hostility, not just from UK politicians, but the country’s judiciary.

Former Lord Chief Justice Judge recently stated his learned opinion that no judges should have the power of the ECHR and the Court wasn‘t ‘entitled to tell every country in Europe how to organise itself’.

DEPORATION DODGER: For years hate preacher, Abu Hamza, used the ECHR to avoid terror charges in America

DEPORATION DODGER: For years hate preacher, Abu Hamza, used the ECHR to avoid terror charges in America

While applauding the Human Rights Convention – largely written, as he pointed out, ‘by British lawyers for a war-torn, concentration-camp filled continent’ – the former law lord seriously questioned how Euro judges interpret it.

‘I think it [the Human Rights Act], means you take account of, have regard to [European rulings], but it does not mean we are bound by the decisions. My very strong belief is that this issue needs to be resolved by Parliament,’ he told Radio 4’s Today programme.

The second collision between Britain and the ECHR regards current English law that allows judges to impose ‘whole life’ tariffs, effectively sentencing a criminal to die in jail.

Strasbourg’s opinion is such sentences are a breach of the Human Rights Convention, because there was no possibility of a ‘right to review’.

That ruling therefore means at least one serial killer has avoided a whole-life sentence and opens the door for others to follow, completely ignoring the human rights of victims and their families.

Meanwhile, 61 years is a long enough stretch for any convention to exist unchanged, especially since it authors couldn’t foresee challenges ahead, like the threat posed by international terrorism.

Left unchecked, then, the Euro judges are free to impose their alien legal system on EU states and humiliate national governments, whose laws may be far more in lockstep with modern-day justice.

But, because the ECHR is the Council of Europe’s legal battering-ram, any member country found in contempt of its ‘judicial frolics’ could find itself an EU outcast.

As ECHR President, Dean Spielmann, warned, ‘I can hardly see how a member of the European Union could possibly withdraw from the Council of Europe. From a political perspective it might be very difficult to stay in the European Union.’

Of course, it would be simpler for the UK government to cave in and give serving cons the vote.

But, somehow, the notion of the likes of Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, and Gunner Lee Rigby’s killers enjoying the freedom to cast a ballot doesn’t sit easily with most Brits, a view backed by Prime Minister, David Cameron, who said the prospect made him ‘physically sick.’

So, maybe, it’s time to put the ECHR in its own dock – and judge whether its absurdities are bringing the law into disrepute.

Because, on the evidence so far, it is certainly guilty of putting the civil liberties of a few ahead of the human rights of the many.