PSNA says Foreign Minister Winston Peters is quite correct to identify Israeli-supporting members of parliament as ‘extremists’.
Peters has made a ministerial statement in parliament today where he defended New Zealand’s non-recognition of Palestine, condemned ‘extremists on both sides…including those in this House’ and claimed there was ‘violent targeting of politicians’ private homes’.
Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa Co-chair, John Minto says he would be curious to know which Israeli-supporting parliamentary colleagues Peters is accusing of having ‘fallen into a black hole of irrationality and senselessness’ and ‘preen hysterically and monomaniacally’.
“MPs are either critical of the Israeli genocide, or keeping their mouths shut out of embarrassment. But there seems to be some MPs who think it is possible Peters can be more supportive of Israel, and are privately giving him a hard time over it.”
“We are also curious about what Peters means by ‘violent targeting of private homes by some protesters’. He seems to have inflated one incident, which we have condemned, into an imagined epidemic.”
“People are frustrated at seeing the worst and most transparent crime of the twentieth century being brushed aside by our government.”
“Two million people are under a violent blockade, which compares with the Nazi siege and starvation of Leningrad in World War II. Obliteration of Gaza is much more of a concern than a single broken window.”
“The thousands of New Zealanders who are marching week after week to call for the implantation of international law, protest Israeli genocide and call for sanctions against it, are not extremists.”
“They endure and risk increasingly frequent physical, and rarely reported, attacks and threats by violent Israelis and their supporters. They werely want a just and enduring end to the cycle of violence which Peters is so critical of.”
But Minto says Peters’ statement of political demands for ending the conflict falls far short of what is necessary for breaking that cycle.
“He’s called for a negotiated ceasefire, and praised the Trump Plan as having Muslim countries signing it off.”
“For starters, there was no Palestinian participation at all in drafting the plan. It was originally negotiated between the US and leading Muslim countries. Trump then took it to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu who rewrote it. It’s much less a plan and more a list of take-it-or-leave-it demands.”
“There can be no peace without a complete Israeli military withdrawal. Peters makes no mention at all about that.”
“He cites the need to release hostages held by Hamas, which Hamas has agreed to several times. But Peters fails to mention the thousands of Palestinians hoovered up and tortured by the Israeli military and held in Israeli jails without charges.”
“The plan simply allows for continued Israeli ethnic cleansing, under the guise of some international body to provide legitimacy,” Minto says.
“It’s an historical circle. In 1917, British General Allenby marched into Gaza at the end of World War 1, to become the British Empire proconsul, under an international mandate to set up a ‘Jewish homeland’, for immigrants from Europe.”
“More than a century later, Tony Blair, a former British Prime Minister and architect of the destruction of Iraq, will govern Gaza the same way and is on standby to arbitrate the competing real estate claims of Trump’s son in law, Jared Kushner, and Israeli expansionist Bezalel Smotrich.”
“Peters says he’s familiar with the history of the region. If he is as informed as he says he is, then he would realise Israel’s true goals are land grabbing and ethnic cleansing more than peace, and he would not be so effusive in praising such disastrous and one-sided plans written by Israel.”
John Minto
Co-Chair PSNA
“People are frustrated at seeing the worst and most transparent crime of the twentieth century being brushed aside by our government.”
I’m assuming you mean the 21st century
Well it started in the twentieth
Winston is an ardent supporter of the apartheid state he always has been. He never mentions the Palestinian hostages because its inconvenient to his already well-rehearsed troupes he trots out on the media tarmac. Spitting in his food is the least any patriot against genocide could do to a genocidal supporter like Peters
Free Palestine
The genocide is not new and dates back just 2 years. The genocide in Qibya, northwest of Jerusalem, was carried out by Unit 101, under the command of Ariel Sharon on Wednesday 14th October 1953. The attack was the bloodiest and most brutal Zionist crimes since the infamous Deir Yassin genocide. Forty-two houses as well as a school and a mosque were dynamited over their inhabitants. Seventy-five women, men and children were killed.
Hamas were not the first to use hostages in the Middle East. Use of hostages as a means of putting pressure on a government: first used by the Zionists against the British in Tel Aviv on 18th June 1946. Beating of hostages: first used by the Zionists against the British in Tel Aviv, Netanya and Rishon on 29th December 1946. Murder of hostages as a reprisal for government actions: first used by the Zionists against the British in the Netanya area on 29th July 1947.
I understand the small amount of damage was caused by a grey hound racing person and has nothing to do with the anti genocide people or the scapegoated young actress .It will be interesting to see how many years the man gets for $100 worth of damage to a window .
When will name suppression of the person who smashed in Winston Peters’ window be lifted?
If it is proved true in court that this man was a pissed off greyhound racing owner, will Winston Peters be forced by the Speaker of the House to make a groveling apology for his smear against the Green Party?
Will Winston Peters be forced to recompense the actor he smeared for the loss of her livelyhood?
This will be an interesting case
Extremists
Winston Peters address in the House two years into Gaza conflict
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyRLHVNa3bg
Labour Party Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs · MP Peeni Henare:
“Mr. Speaker, further to the Minister, does the Minister agree that New Zealand was put on notice in 2024 by the International Court of Justice that it had a legal obligation to prevent genocide in Gaza, that it is not necessary for a definitive determination on genocide to be made before action is taken?
And what actions has the government taken to prevent genocide in Gaza?
[Parliament’s clown Shane Jones raises a pointless point of order trying to shut Henare down, but is overuled by the speaker]
Labour Party Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs · MP Peeni Henare:
“Mr. Speaker, to the Minister, what does the Minister believe constitutes the New Zealand government’s duty to prevent genocide under the Genocide Convention?”
Minister of Foreign Affairs · Rt Hon Winston Peters:
“The reality is, there has been no International Court of Justice ruling to that effect.
Or does he think that we should just ignore the International Court of Justice and just come to our own interpretation legally qualified or otherwise?”
Extremists
An as yet to be identified person broke a window in Winston Peters home with a crowbar, and will be tried in court for their crime.
I personally believe, that this deliberate act by this person, is at the very least an act of political immaturity, if not extremism, like most extremist acts it has not helped, but hurt the cause of the Palestinians.
I am grateful that the person who has committed this act, has had the decency to turn themselves into the police and has been charged and will face the judgement of the courts.
Winston Peters with the opportunism that has defined his political career, has tried to turn this irresponsible and politically immature act, into a mini Reichstag moment, and blamed this individual’s actions on his political rivals
This person, and this person alone, is solely responsible for their actions, Not the Green Party, not the wider Palestinian solidarity movement. Thankfully by turning themselves in, Winston Peters smear against his poltical rivals as being responible for this act of vandalism will be examined in court, and I am certain it will be disproved.
Extremists – personally speaking, I have no time for them.
While I condemn every act of extremism, I would be remiss of me to not mention the extremists in this government, and in particular, the extremist Foreign Minister, Winston Peters.
Winston Peters has the power and the rare privilege to make a difference.
As the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters has the ability and the duty to prevent and punish the crime of genocide with sanctions and legal action,
,
New Zealand has not placed sanctions on Israel, New Zealand has not taken legal action against Israel to prevent the genocide in Gaza. Instead the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been courting the favour of the Netanyahu regime on the world stage.
Contrary to the abundant evidence and the expert testimony of the vast majority of genocide scholars, and against the judgement of Amnesty International and the United Nations Investigative Committee, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, has steafastly refused to recognise that Israel is even committing a genocide in Gaza.
What does international law say about recognising a genocide?
In the case South Africa vs. Israel at the World Court, alleging genocide – 14 nations sent their best legal minds to the Hague,. 13 nations were in support of the plaintiff, 1 nation, (Germany), sent lawyers to argue in support of the defendant. New zealand has not participated in this legal action.
Outside the legal arena of the World Court, New Zealand has instead, collaborated with, and given political cover to the defendant.
In the case Ukraine vs. Russia, in a reverse compliance litigation, alleging misuse of the Genocide Convention by way of a false claim of genocide, 33 nations sent their best legal minds to the Hague in support of the plaintiff, New Zealand, was among them, spending over $2 million to pay for a high powered team of Kiwi lawyers to go to the Hague to present our nation’s legal argument in support of Ukraine.
Ukraine, (and New Zealand) lost their reverse compliance case against Russia.
Wrongly in my view, Ukraine’s case against Russia for the misuse of the Genocide Convention was thrown out of court, and did not proceed to the merits stage. And Russia was not forced to present their evidence, that of course doen’t exist, that Ukraine was practicing genocide iagainst Ukraine’s ethnic Russian minority as the Russian president claimed as his excuse for ordering the invasion.
Though we lost the case, this was the right thing to do. We were on the right side of history.
But not this time.
Extremism – genocide is the most extreme crime possible.
The Government Minister for Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, accused the Labour Party Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs, Peeni Henare of asking the government to ignore the International Court.
In law, and in fact, it is Winston Peters and the government that are ignoring the rulings of the International Court.
The ICJ has ruled that a state can be found guilty of not acting to prevent genocide. (whether it has been declared by a court or not) The ICJ has also ruled that it has no jurisdiction over a state rightly or even wrongly recognising a genocide.
At the Hague in the case Bosnia vs. Serbia; in its 1970 judgement, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Serbia was not guilty of committing genocide. The ICJ also ruled that Serbia was not guilty of complicity in committing genocide. But the ICJ found Serbia guilty of ignoring its obligations to the genocide convention, by not acting to prevent the Srebrenica genocide
In the case South Africa vs Israel, the ICJ ruled that there is a case to be heard. And will precede to the merits stage of South Africa’s case against Israel.
At the Hague in the case Ukraine vs. Russia; the International Court ruled that it had no jurisdiction to preside on Russia’s allegation that Ukraine had committed genocide. And declined to precede to the merits stage of Ukraine’s case against Russia.
Ukraine takes itself to court
‘Whatever happened to the ICJ case Ukraine vs Russia?’, Google Search:
(ICJ) Jurisdiction Over the Genocide Convention Claim Dismissed:
The most significant outcome was the rejection of Ukraine’s core argument that Russia violated the Genocide Convention by falsely alleging genocide as a pretext for the invasion. The court found that the use of force falls outside the scope of the Genocide Convention and, therefore, it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate that claim.
States can and do decide if a genocide is being committed
The Irish Government and 12 other states have determined that a genocide is being committed in Gaza.
The ICJ ruling on Ukraine vs Russia and the ICJ ruling on Bosnia vs Serbia show that in the first place, it is states, not courts that decide, rightly or wrongly, whether genocide is being committed.
Winston Peters says it is up to the courts to decide if a genocide is being committed.
He is dead wrong.
And he probably knows it.
On the scale of extremists, breaking a window, to supporting a genocide by inaction on fallacious legal grounds – Which is the most extremist?
Winston Peters is a lawyer and a liar and a genocide denier, Winston Peters is an extremist.
Comments are closed.