Limp Lettuce Leaves for Rogue Politicians and World Leaders

I enjoy good political cartoons because they condense a topical issue in one image which often combines a serving of truth and humour. There is one cartoonist who has illustrated a few toons that depict Albanese as some wandering waif with his bucket and that leafy, green, salad vegetable.

The leafy greens are used by the weak, ineffectual Albo as a tool to discipline and reprimand his disobedient subjects, or even to wander on the world stage and offer it to a friend in need. This portrayal of our PM is apt and often chuckle-worthy.

However, in the past few weeks, there has been a crossing the floor incident in federal Parliament, by a politician. This was Fatima Payman, until this week, a Labor Senator. She crossed the floor against party instructions and said she would consider doing it again. This defiance could have been condoned had it not been on an issue that concerns some very powerful forces at the global level, and their able and willing foot soldiers keeping check, within each of the major political parties. Thus, it required stern action from the PM and, in this, he failed to act as required.


Image source: The Australian, 2 July 2024

The discussion here is not about either Albanese or Payman. They are politicians and playing the game; they know how to work their way around the field. There are caucus rules which members sign up to, and they are expected to follow those. I want to focus attention on the motion that required the vote: Recognising the statehood of Palestine.

As already shared on this blog, there are examples, including a section (from here to here) in that post, proving that Palestine existed as a state, long before the Zionist Rothschilds hatched their plan for its takeover.

Palestine is a state. It has been one for a long time – well before the “state of Israel”.

If Palestine has already existed as a state, why is it controversial to say so? Why does there have to be a motion for its recognition? Why does anyone have to be penalised for stating a fact – one that has evidence to prove it? Does someone get labelled a “rogue” senator for stating geographical and historical facts, if those facts do not suit some narrative or political plan?

Last Thursday, a group of protestors managed to get to the top of Parliament House.
And once again, Albo’s response was deemed to be inadequate.


Image source: The Australian, 5 July 2024

The questions to be asked here are:

▹How is it that security around Parliament house is so lax?
▹How was it possible for anyone to breach security and get to the top?
▹Were no lessons learnt following the Higgins saga?
There should have been immediate tightening of security and access rules at that time.
▹Why is this building that is the law making seat of the country so lacking in high-level safety measures and surveillance?

It doesn’t matter what the professional activists were protesting over. It was unlawful.
The maximum penalty for their crime is a paltry sum of $2,750. A few months in a prison cell would be far more appropriate.

Albanese’s response to Payman’s crossing of the floor and the protestors on top of Parliament house may be compared to that of wet lettuce leaves. But, however disgraceful and wrong their actions may be, no one, no innocent person was injured or killed.

On the other hand, out there in the Middle East, the IDF under Netanyahu and his government have killed and injured thousands of innocent civilians – babies, children, women and men. As well as healthcare professionals, humanitarian aid workers and journalists. In addition to other despicable acts of threats, intimidation, starvation and destruction of property including universities, places of worship and healthcare facilities.

What is the response from the world and its leaders?
A few limp, wet lettuce leaves.
Most of them rush out to support him and his government with dollars and bombs to kill more innocent civilians and destroy Palestinian homes and properties.

Should violence, vile graffiti, doxxing, destruction of property, getting atop buildings,  illegal protest blockades, desecration of monuments and war memorials here in Australia be condemned and those responsible face harsh penalties?

Without doubt, YES.

Should Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and his ministers face trial at the ICC for crimes against humanity which can be proven?
Should they be held accountable for the murder of the innocent, and for the theft and occupation of land belonging to the people of another state?

You tell me.

 

This entry was posted in History, Law & Justice, Politics, War. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Limp Lettuce Leaves for Rogue Politicians and World Leaders

  1. Interested observer says:

    If Palestine has already existed as a state, why is it controversial to say so?

    Kaysee, can you define for me what are the components of statehood?

    There are ethnic communities existing within a number of countries e.g. the Kurds across several borders. I am not downplaying the violence occurring now in Gaza, simply that I understood the Ottoman Empire ruled prior to 1914 and the British Empire took control in 1917.


    Report comment
  2. Esme says:

    Another good cartoon might contrast the wet lettuce leaves for the protestors on the roof with the rubber bullets fired in Melbourne, or other weaponry deployed at the same site in Canberra, on Australian citizens protesting against immoral, unscientific house arrest orders and poison injection mandates in their own country. Did the latter group make it anywhere near the roof, for a gentle police escort back down? It almost seems as though the protestors on the roof were welcomed there, to play their part in the theatre.


    Report comment
  3. Esme says:

    I’m no expert but kaysee, your commentary stands out for what seems fearless intellectual honesty to me. I can’t read the standard ‘conservative’ take on this. It seems as blinkered and uncritical as the ‘leftist’/’progressive’. Candace Owens got in trouble for acknowledging the existence of innocent Palestinians. Jordan Peterson told Israel to ‘give ’em hell’. And we’re meant not see that our enemy perhaps isn’t across from us.


    Report comment
  4. kaysee kaysee says:

    Kaysee, can you define for me what are the components of statehood?

    According to the 1933 Montevideo Convention, these are the four key criteria for statehood:A defined territory, A settled population, An independent government and The ability to enter into relations with other states.

    Would that answer your question? Or did you want my response in connection to Palestine?

    If that is the case, I would like to check first whether you have been following the material that we have posted here since October. I don’t mean just the comments, but also most of the included links to articles, images, videos, interviews.


    Report comment
  5. kaysee kaysee says:

    I can’t read the standard ‘conservative’ take on this. It seems as blinkered and uncritical as the ‘leftist’/’progressive’.

    On some topics, the left-wing progressives and the right-wing “conservatives” in the media are on a unity ticket. The few journalists who care about the truth and will report the facts are not being allowed to do so.

    As for the politicians in Australia, they too are united in their quest for votes.


    Report comment
  6. mh says:

    Jordan Peterson told Israel to ‘give ’em hell’.

    ***

    Jordan Peterson crying at everything and anything compilation

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W9DRDp0T5s


    Report comment
  7. Interested observer says:

    According to the 1933 Montevideo Convention, these are the four key criteria for statehood:A defined territory, A settled population, An independent government and The ability to enter into relations with other states.

    kaysee, I asked the question from a genuine desire to learn why you define Palestine as a state. Yes, I have been following all of your comments, not scrolling by, with one exception. My daily routine is subject to constant interruption so I make it a point not to watch media interviews, youtube and videos as I rarely have more than 15 minutes to concentrate on any subject. You have referred to the displacement of families who have occupied this area for generations. This is not unique to Israel.
    Many religious sects have continued to exist in enclaves within a country’s borders with varying success. Oppression by the majority leads to a backlash and insurrection e.g. the Kurds across three borders. The Jewish state was recognised by the Roman Empire – is this displacement or return to their homeland?
    This is one comment from a search for Palestine State:

    While the State of Israel was established on 15 May 1948 and admitted to the United Nations, a Palestinian State was not established. The remaining territories of pre-1948 Palestine, the West Bank – including East Jerusalem- and Gaza Strip, were administered from 1948 till 1967 by Jordan and Egypt, respectively.

    Just as an aside, I find your constant description of all and sundry as “Zionists” to be eerily similar to the use of “Fascist” and “Hitler” to denigrate opponents. The truth is not that simple.


    Report comment
  8. kaysee kaysee says:

    I asked the question from a genuine desire to learn why you define Palestine as a state.

    Interested observer, I do not doubt your genuine desire to learn. If anyone asks me a question because they do want to know and understand, I will not post an instant, throwaway comment. I am prepared to put in the time and effort to research the topic and provide a detailed answer with links that provide the proof.

    I am not a historian or an authority on Middle-East politics. What I now know is due to the time I’ve spent over the past 10 months in researching, reading and listening to those who have been steeped in this subject for years or decades.

    It is not about why I would define Palestine as a state. It is the history and the proof that is available. I have looked into this question of Palestinian statehood and have more info, but I did not want to keep repeating what has already been posted. (To make it easy for readers, I connected it all in one thread).

    That is the reason why I asked whether you have checked out previous comments and the links. Those links contain the evidence to back up what I post, and my opinions. Based on your response, I could then post the relevant information and the links to the sites that will provide further details.


    Report comment
  9. kaysee kaysee says:

    Just as an aside, I find your constant description of all and sundry as “Zionists” to be eerily similar to the use of “Fascist” and “Hitler” to denigrate opponents.

    A general statement does not help a discussion or debate.

    Can you pick any comment that I have posted that would serve as an example for the quote above? We can then have a discussion on why that terminology is inappropriate/appropriate or incorrect/correct. I have stated often that I have no problem with accepting that I got something wrong – if there are facts to prove this.

    The truth is not that simple.

    Something is either the truth or it isn’t. If it has shades of grey, then that can be explained with clauses or exclusions.

    Since the topic of this thread relates to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, show a comment where I have simplified the truth. Explain why it is far more complicated, and what is the truth.

    We can only learn if we are prepared to share, ask questions, discuss and debate. There is no hurry as we are all busy people, and the blog is here 24/7. Respond when you can – if you want to continue this discussion.


    Report comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *