I only heard about this video tonight on the Channel Nine TV news. Some people are offended by it. Some Holocaust survivors don’t approve of Jews dancing at Auschwitz, but I take a different view.

I say “Hitler tried to kill us all, but he is dead and we are still here. Let us rejoice.”

As a person who is involved in The Jewish Holocaust Centre I am well aware of sensitivities. We should respect and mourn what happened. We should never forget and personally I will never forgive.

But be damned if I don’t glory in the fact that all those Empires and civilisations which tried to destroy the Jews are dust.

So if 89-year-old Holocaust survivor, Adolek Kohn wants to dance at Auschwitz with his daughter and three grandchildren, good luck to him!

I’m sure he has shed enough tears in his lifetime and I would encourage him to celebrate to his heart’s content.

If you have not seen the video, here is the link:-

Grandpa Kohn’s words at the end of it are what made me cry.

Looks as if the video has actually been removed from Youtube.

Now it’s back again. I strongly recommend that you view Parts 2 and 3 of the video too. We’ll see how long this one lasts but just in case I’d better explain what I meant by “Grandpa Kohn’s words at the end of it made me cry.”

The family did some very simple unchoreographed dance steps at the various sites with their aged grandpa.

And then the mood changed and Mr Kohn reflected on his life to the music of Leonard Cohen’s “Dance me to the end of Love.”

“If you had told me 63 years ago,” Kohn says, ” that I would be here dancing with my family, I would have said what you talking about?…what you talking about?

Had Hilter achieved his aim then none of that delightful family would have been born. No wonder he marvels at being back where he could have perished. He considers himself blessed.

So many people did not survive, including many members of my family. I wept for them but I also wept with joy that Mr Kohn is alive.

It’s because this is what we have come to expect from that group of people. They do it so often that it has become a humdrum matter of fact. In a market place, at a wedding, at a funeral or in a mosque, if you are a Muslim you have to expect that another Muslim faction is out to get you.

If you are a woman who has been caught talking to a man who is not your husband, brother or father, then you could be stoned. If you have been raped you may be accused of adultery unless you have four male witnesses to confirm the rape. Can you imagine a group of gang bangers coming forth in support of the woman they have just raped?

if you are a woman in Saudi Arabia you are not even allowed to drive a car.

Left wingers and women’s libbers don’t seem to be bothered by this discrimination at all. They are too busy picking on Israel for protecting its borders. Of course, there is a double standard here but it’s one that I’m proud of because it means that the world expects more from Israel than it does from the other side. And it does this because Israel is a democracy with a modern court system.

I have been writing about this double standard since 2007. Here and here and here.

If Israel defends itself by not allowing arms to be smuggled into Gaza and in the fracas nine Turkish activists are killed, then Israel is condemned.

If international navigation is placed in jeopardy because Somali pirates are constantly hijacking ships for ransom, we seem to accept the situation in a rather complacent manner. They need the money, the charities explain, as if any of that booty would go to feed the poor people of Somalia.

Anyway, they are Muslims and isn’t that what Muslims do?

If Israel were to do this sort of thing then there would be outrage at the UN. The Brits and the French would shriek in horror at such piracy as has been committed by the Somalis. Note that Israel only wanted to inspect the stunt aid flotilla and offered to transport legitimate aid to the Gazans.

Even this was not good enough. Israel is expected to sacrifice more than any other nation in the world. Its security, its right to exist and its desire for a peaceful life next door to neighbours who only wish it harm.

In other words, the double standard is at work here because Israel is not like its neighbours. It has a conscience and a system of justice that is not Neolithic and this is held against it in a perverse way.

It’s actually a reverse sort of compliment from the world which expects the highest of standards from Israel while accepting the lowest from its opponents. That is why the world shrugs its shoulders indifferently at suicide bombings, beheadings and stonings perpetrated by Muslims against their enemies as well as on their own fellow Muslims.

What these two bigots are really saying is that unless you are vehemently anti-Israel then you are soft on Israel.

Prime Minister Gillard has denied this accusation. All this happened because Gillard’s partner, Tim Mathieson, works in real estate for an Israel supporter. Apparently, that’s a crime according to Burns and Rodgers.

Which brings me to the topic of our former Prime Minister. I first met Kevin Rudd a few years ago in Queensland. He attended a Jewish function, praised the Jewish community and generally sucked up to everyone there assuring the Jewish community of his true and genuine admiration and loyalty.

When he became Prime Minister, however, Rudd revealed his true colours. He took hasty actions against a member of the Israeli embassy long before other nations in the alleged passport affair. He also directed his representative at the United Nations to vote against Israel.

He did this because he was sucking up to the Arabs in the U.N. Rudd’s ambition is so rapacious that he would be prepared to court anyone who can support his aim of becoming a bigshot at the U.N. And that is why he joined the enemies of Israel.

But then Rudd’s popularity polls went south and he suddenly remembered that he had betrayed an ally and that he had wounded the Jewish community in Australia. So just a few short weeks ago he tried to win over the Jewish community once again by meeting with some leaders and assuring them that he was “a friend of Israel.”

We all know the saying “With friends like these who needs…”

Moreover, Rudd is now regarded by Australia and the rest of the world (that’s if anyone else really cares about Australia) as a loser and so has no credibility in that representative role.

How can one introduce him as Foreign Minister after he has been kicked out of the Prime Minister’s office?

Julia Gillard is now in a bind because she has, no doubt, promised Rudd something so that he would leave without a fuss.

She could make him our ambassador to the U.N so that he can pal up with his friends there. The U.N is a circus with no credibility so it would suit Rudd perfectly, in my opinion.

Julia Gillard, on the other hand, remembered to thank the troops and did a fine job of explaining why she challenged Rudd. She also did a clever thing by acknowledging the contribution made by John Howard, something that Rudd never did. He should have done so. Why not give credit where credit’s due?

Rudd has only himself to blame for his downfall. He was a one-man band and a poor listener. I’m sure that nobody except his young minions and Ms Rein could give him any advice. He certainly did not listen to his party and now he has paid the ultimate price for his arrogance. I would be sorry to see him appointed as Foreign Minister, so fingers crossed that Gillard has not promised him that sweetener.

The bad news is that Lindsay Tanner will be leaving and that is disappointing. He always answered questions and stuck to the subject during interviews. I would have preferred him to be Federal Treasurer instead of our current one. Never mind, it has been a happy and exciting day and now we will see if Gillard can do any better.

He puts on a hard hat and inspects all kinds of factories and nods away as if he really understands what the workers are complaining about. He hugs babies and reads primers to school children. All this in front of the media who trudge along behind him hoping to get a glimpse of the real Rudd.

We have been told that he is unpopular with his staff because he screams at them. We are told he puts on a tantrum if he can’t get a blow dryer for his windswept hairdo. We are told that he does a Naomi Campbell impersonation when he can’t get the food he likes on a plane trip.

Until now, this was all hearsay. Last night, however, Rudd showed his true colours on The 7.30 Report on television.

He had been asked by interviewer, Kerry O’Brien, why he had deferred the ETS or Emissions Trading Scheme. Now according to Rudd, climate change is the greatest moral challenge facing this planet. Nothing is more important than climate change and Rudd was going to show the world how to tackle it.

He would be the Pied Piper of Climate Change and the rest of the world would follow!

But then in a shocking about turn that stunned the people of Australia Rudd decided to put off the legislation…for a while.

Well, things heated up as Rudd went on the defensive with O’Brien. All O’Brien had asked was why Rudd had not called for a double dissolution instead of deferring the ETS legislation. Rudd bristled, gave no answer and then called O’Brien “mate” in the same way that Americans call someone “buddy” when they mean the opposite.

I always suspected that Rudd had a Dorian Gray portrait stashed away in the cellar. Last night, our Prime Minister gave his inner self a proper airing. I predict that as the polls continue to go south and Rudd becomes more desperate, we will become intimately acquainted with that portrait.

If they continue to smoke then the tax hike should help pay for their medical costs when they succumb to the health problems caused by cigarettes.

What really annoys me, however, is Tony Abbott’s stupid comment that the extra excise is all about raising taxes. I am disappointed in this comment and would have preferred to hear Abbott applauding Rudd for his initiative. As a fitness fanatic, Abbott should have supported this decision.

My advice to the Leader of the Opposition who is not performing as well as I thought he would, is to get OFF his bike and start thinking without the aerobic high that is obviously clouding his intellect.

Abbott is an intelligent man but I am waiting for him to demonstrate his acumen. There is no time to lose or someone else will challenge him for the leadership of the Liberal Party.

He has approached the Muslim world in that fashion and even extends the hand of friendship to Iran which responds with a ‘get lost’ message to the U.S. This is undignified behaviour from the President of “the most powerful nation on Earth.” I use quotation marks because I am now questioning whether the U.S is still as powerful when China and India are growing at amazing speed while the U.S remains static and bogged own in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan.

I suspect that Obama has decided to be so totally different from the previous President that he has gone overboard with crawling to the enemies of the U.S. He wants the world to love the U.S. He wants to be a kind of messianic figure, a river to his people (lol) and he is making himself a laughing stock in the Muslim world.

So what do I really object to in his manner? In one word, it’s his capitulation. He can’t do anything about the rogue powers so he has decided to ignore them while talking tough to the one nation that is a genuine friend to the U.S. And that nation is Israel, a country surrounded by declared enemies who actually shout “Death to America!”

And yet Obama chooses to ignore such expressions of hatred. He has been extremely dismissive of Israel and has even threatened harsh treatment while not expecting the Palestinians to come to the party. Doesn’t Obama understand that Hezbollah and Hamas thrive on conflict and opposition to Israel and that their very existence would be threatened if peace in the Middle East could be achieved?

The latest delusion in the Obama circus is the nuclear proliferation treaty and Russia has “signed up”. Does anybody really believe that Russia will stick to this agreement even if the U.S does?

Yes, it would be wonderful if the world were at peace. All cosy and huggy. But the world has never been at peace. If you study history you study the story of wars, conflicts, hatred and persecution. That’s what it’s all about!

Does that mean we should stop trying to achieve some sort of peace? Probably not, because it’s in human nature to hope for a better world. But I am convinced that peace cannot be achieved from a position of weakness. Why should a strong power give in to a weak one? It simply doesn’t make sense.

In bending over backwards and forwards to its enemies, Obama makes the U.S appear very fragile and that’s not a good look. We all need America to be strong and determined. America should be respected and it’s hard to do that when its President is sucking up to everyone. Everyone except Israel, of course.

Rudd has done this sort of thing before. He refused to look at the Premier of N.S.W when she was discussing health with him. He purposely looked down and ignored her. No eye contact, no acknowledgment of the other person. Just look at your notes or straight ahead and be as uncouth as possible.

Well, Rudd did it again today during his debate with the Leader of the Opposition. Tony Abbott would direct a comment to him and Rudd refused to face him.

I find that kind of behaviour to be so crass but I am reluctant to put it down to bad upbringing. In Rudd’s case I feel it has more to do with arrogance. He exhibits many qualities of a narcissistic personality by failing to validate other people.

His spin may be annoying. Quite frankly, I’m totally fed up with his mums and dads references and that working families phrase. But what is worse is the way he treats other people. He simply can’t look them in the eye.

I wish that Abbott would have said “Hey Kev, look over this way, mate! Don’t you have the decency to face me?”

Evidently, the answer to that question is no.

For a man to appeal to women he has to possess the manly trait of inner strength, not to be confused with blind ambition. Rudd is brimming with ambition to strut the world stage at the United Nations.

I don’t get the sense that Rudd is a strong character by way of temperament. A bully he may be to all around him, but bullying is the antithesis of masculine strength.

Rightly or wrongly, the way women regard a man has to do with an hormonal response to him. Former Prime Minister, Paul Keating had masculine appeal, and in a different way, John Howard demonstrated it also. That certain something that makes a man a man. Hard to define, but a politician either has it or he hasn’t.

I suppose that it has to do with a woman being able to imagine the man having sex. I’m being intentionally basic here, but it really is comedic to imagine a sex scene with Rudd asking himself questions such as “So how do I feel about this?” “Am I having a pleasurable experience?” and then answering himself with “The bottom line is…”

Quite frankly, I suspect that Rudd would be more content doing it all by himself with only himself in mind. He is self-sufficient in a most unattractive way.

And it’s not about looks either. There are many handsome men who are not attractive to women. Take male models, for example. Say no more. And there are many plain men who exude masculinity. I guess it has to do with behaviour and getting things done in a quiet and dependable way. Less talk and more action would do it. It’s about time that the government stopped promising change and started getting down to business in a serious manner.

Those countless announcements of revolutions are becoming ho-hum and it appears that the public is tiring of them also if the polls are to be believed.

On the other hand, do we really have faith in a government that screwed up so badly on something as simple and finite as the insulation fiasco? So, as long as the Prime Minister keeps talking and ordering reports, we are probably safer.

Rudd has been eloquently described by Tony Abbott as ‘all hat and no cowboy’. He seems to be talking through it as well. To be honest, we could forgive him for not being appealing to women if he would just do something apart from talking all the time and pestering patients in hospital.