Why Do British Royals Refuse To Visit Israel?

Business Insider ^ | 11/28/2014 | Elliot Abrams

[Jan_Sobieski]

The bizarre story of the refusal of British royals to visit Israel, while they are constantly in the Arab world, continues.

I wrote about this phenomenon here, last February, when Prince Charles visited Saudi Arabia. As I noted then, the Queen has never set foot in Israel and Prince Charles set foot there briefly only once, for the Rabin funeral.

By contrast, in just the month of November 2014 we found Prince Andrew and Prince Harry at what the Foreign Office must have considered a diplomatic necessity: the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix. Prince Andrew also visited Saudi Arabia (at the request of the Foreign Office, it was announced)...

[elcid1970]

Leon Uris poked fun at supposed English fascination with the noble savages of the Arabian desert.

As in the movie where Prince Feisal says to Lawrence, “I think you are another of these desert-loving Englishmen. No Arab loves the desert; we love water and green trees. There is nothing in the desert.”

[Zionist Conspirator]

The British royal family probably still believes it is the Davidic ruling house and resents getting kicked out of Israel. It's the whole British-Israel/"identity" thing.

The British royals need to issue a statement renouncing any claim to being Davidic just as the Emperor of Japan renounced pretensions of "divinity."

[the scotsman]

‘Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun......’

[trekdown]

You wrote: “They even murdered a Swedish count, who’d spent WW2 SAVING thousands of Jews!.”
______

It doesn’t look like you know what you are writing about ...

Swedish diplomat Folke Bernadotte, who was assassinated on Friday 17 September 1948 by members of the armed Jewish Zionist group Lehi did not (!) spend “WW2 SAVING thousands of Jews!”.

He mostly was known as vice-president of the Swedish Red Cross in 1945, who attempted to negotiate an armistice between Germany and the Allies... In April 1945, Heinrich Himmler asked Bernadotte to convey a peace proposal ... The main point of the proposal was that Germany would only surrender to the Western Allies (Great Britain and the United States), but would be allowed to continue resisting the Soviet Union.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte#World_War_II

Raoul Wallenberg was a Swedish diplomat who saved thousands of Jews in Hungary ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_Wallenberg#Mission_to_Budapest

[stuck_in_new_orleans]

So that excuses someone for being a anti-Semite?

LOL @ you

[the scotsman]

Yes, you’re correct, my error. Still a terrible murder though.

[the scotsman]

Prince Harry, as most people here would agree, and he has many admirers on FR, is a brave young man who has served his country. And many people see him as what the Royals should be. Also this young man has helped raise millions for British and American war injured through charity and the British Invictus Games and his public support of your Warrior Games.

He is not an anti-Semite. Ridiculous accusation because, of what exactly, because he once wore a Nazi armband at a fancy dress party when he was about 19. Yes, that was stupid, but laughable if that’s your ‘proof’ of ‘antisemitism’.

[stuck_in_new_orleans]

You are a sad sad person. How many Princess Diana plates do you own?

[the scotsman]

None. I hated the woman, and I am no Royalist. I like or dislike the Royals as individuals.

[SamuraiScot]

Naturalman1975 is a close friend of the Prince. I take exception to you calling him an anti-Semite, I think that’s a terrible and simply incorrect accusation. I know Naturalman will take greater exception.

Let me emphasize that I am pro-royal, and pro-Mountbatten. But Prince Charles's public pronouncements in recent years have been bizarre. I loved his public dig against modern architecture decades ago; his recent enviro-obsession has been embarrassing. And as to anti-Semitism, I'm open to other interpretations, but I have trouble seeing much daylight between siding with countries whose foreign policy consists of promoting the extermination of the world's only Jewish state and antipathy toward the Jews themselves.

An ethnic group and its government can represent very different things. For example, you can love Persians and despise the Iranian government—in fact, if you love Persians, you should. But Jerusalem is not Tehran. It's not as if the Jews had set up some barbarous, totalitarian splinter regime that oppressed its own people, was a threat to other countries, and was unrepresentative of the Jewish people as a whole. On the contrary, Israel is practically a Nobel-prize factory, with freedom of speech, the press, and religion—even for crazy Moslems, whom it permits to be citizens. The arts, commerce, science, medicine, literature, and the intellectual life flourish there at a world-class level. Israel has (IIRC) more patents per capita than any other country. Its soldiers are renowned the world over for their courage, effectiveness, selflessness, and protection of non-combatants. Its medical services are famous for offering top-level treatment, not only to Israelis, but to wounded enemy soldiers and citizens of hostile Arab countries.

One can agree or disagree with this or that policy of any country. But to shun it like a pariah while embracing states that target not only Israel, but the entire Christian West with terrorism? If that's not anti-Semitic, it's something worse—such as cowardice and the betrayal of civilization at a time of crisis.

If there is more to the picture, I would seriously like to know of it. You raise an important question. So far, I can't see meaningful difference between these two things: 1) the push from Western intellectuals and diplomats to banish Israel from the community of nations; and 2) accepting today's renewed persecution of the Jews in cities all over Europe and the Middle East—where schools and synagogues are being burned and Jews are attacked on the street.

[Oztrich Boy]

He didn't

Given that is was a "Colonials and Natives" theme dance and meant to be in bad taste, his choice of Deutsches Afrikakorps (and Not a Nazi) was actually fairly brilliant.

But I guess brit subtlety is wasted on the ignorant, uneducated, and Americans.

[SJackson]

Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

Yes, the Royals are German, probably not an issue. I'm sure they're aware of history. William of Norwich, Hugh of Lincoln (left the Saint stuff out so as not to engender controversy), they've good reason. People who ritually slaughter English children for their blood, why deal with their descendents.

[stuck_in_new_orleans]

Awwww....another sympathizer

[rmlew]

The British occupation regime recanted their mandate for the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine in 1922. The installed Haj Amin Al Husseini as the Grand Mufti. They collaborated with him to create anti-Jewish pogroms and then use these as an excuse to renege on the creation of a Jewish state. In czarist-like fashion they responded to futher Muslim pogroms by arresting Jews who defended themselves and the community. The British used this violence, which they promoted, as an excuse to cut of migration of Jews to Palestine, while promoting Arab migration and creating a safely Jew-free protectorate of TranJordan. The net result was the death of tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Jews who could have escaped Europe. This pattern continued in the 1930s, where the British and their socialist "Jewish" collaborators conspired to blame an Arab murder of a Jewish couple on REvisionist Zionists, in order to sway a World Zionist Organization election. The British and their collaborators then ensured that Revisionist Zionists could not migrate to Palestine, while allowing a trickle of socialists. But as seen in the Evian conference, even this was too much for the British, who were so happy to let Jews die, rather than provide refuge for any but some wealthy Jews and a token collection of children.
The British armed the Arabs during World War 2, doing virtually nothing afterwards to stop the influx of Nazis or to prosecute Nazi collaborators returning.

So, yes. The Irgun blew up British military occupation HQ after calling in a warning, and killed 2 occupation sergeants in response to the hanging of members of the Irgun.
Seems quite fair to me.
The former British collaborating Soclaists killed plenty of Jews with the Altalena affair, where they fired upon a ship carrying refugees and weapons. Better to kill Revisionist Zionists, than allow them to save Jerusalem from the British armed and led Transjordanians. (See Pasha Glubb, who ordered the Kfar Etzion massacre.)

[dennisw]

just read this....your post

[rmlew]

You just read what, DennisW?