Quantcast
Channel: Tony Greenstein's Blog
Viewing all 2430 articles
Browse latest View live

This Wednesday 6 September the Shenstone 4 will be sentenced for the ‘crime’ of trying to prevent Elbit’s war crimes

$
0
0

If the repeated delays in sentencing have been unfair  on the Defendants think how much worse it has been for Jonathan Hoffman, the friend of every fascist and neo-Nazi supporter of Israel!

Join the Protest Outside Wolverhampton Crown Court Wednesday 6 September 9.00 a.m.

Palestine Action in action

As you will know from my many blogs, Jonathan Hoffman is the link man between far right Zionists in this country and neo-Nazi groups. See for example

When I first blogged this picture Hoffman called it 'photoshopped' until the camerman, David Hoffman, threatened to sue him for libel and Hoffie had to issue a grovelling apology - it shows him with the EDL in the background and Roberta Moore of the Jewish Defence League alongside him dancing down the street. See

EXCLUSIVE – Lifting the lid on EXCLUSIVE – We Name the Gang of Zionists Whose Purpose is to Disrupt Palestinian Events in LondonCollaboration between the Far Right and Zionist Activists

EXCLUSIVE - Board of Deputies and Zionist Federation Hold Joint Demonstration with Fascists

Tony Greenstein, Why I'm Outspoken - Crispin Flintoff

Hoffman's Delightful Email Shows the Hatred That Burns Inside the Average Zionist

On 17th May Hoffie sent me a delightful e mail hoping that I get as long a period of free board and accommodation, courtesy of King Charles III as possible.  How sweet of him I thought even though he told me I shouldn’t ask for kosher food because I was a JINO (Jews in name only)

I think 'repulsive lying piece of shit Greenslime' counts as a denial, but I'm not sure!

For over 3 months Hoffie and his band of Zio Zealots have been eagerly anticipating my being sentenced to a lengthy prison term.

The excitement was too much for some. Janet Clifford first asked if they still had capital punishment and then hoped that I’d get life with hard labour. It almost pains me to have to disappoint her. The charge only carries a maximum of 10 years and hard labour has been abolished.

Damon Lenszner and Francis Greg hoped that I’d be the victim of gay rape, preferably at the hands of a 300 lb Zio. I suspect that if the Zio in question was heavier than Hoffie he’d have trouble getting into and out of bed let alone in engaging in strenuous nocturnal activity. Still it’s the thought that counts.

Sinead O'Connor was an Israel hater - the worst crime in Hoffman's book whereas being a neo-Nazi isn't so bad by comparison

Skwawkbox has already covered Hoffie’s kind email to me back in May Criminal Israel activist tries to gloat over Greenstein, gets owned which I thought was a tad unfair as Hoffie always has the kindliest intentions.

 Jonathan Hoffman (right) and Paul Besser (left) former Intelligence Officer of the neo-Nazi Britain First protesting against 'antisemitism'

Attacked by John Ware for being 'disagreeable'

I thought that in what might be my swansong for a while that I should share a few gems to remember me by.

Note the delicacy of Hoffie's language and his varied vocabulary!

First and foremost is John Ware, the BBCs number one Islamaphobe who, in an attack on Jeremy Corbyn said (0.53) that I must be ‘one of the most disagreeable individuals I’ve ever set eyes on.’ Recommendations like that don’t come every day. So thank you John, it’s very kind of you.

Despite calling everyone a liar, Hoffman still can't explain why he keeps company with all manner of fascists and neo-Nazis

Debate Jonathan Hoffman v Daniel Sheldon Union of Jewish Students

The testimonial from John Ware, who produced the BBC Propaganda Film ‘Is Labour Anti-Semitic? even surpasses what Jon Lansman, ex-Momentum fuehrer’s kindly said about me. Lansman informed his audience that I was:

Hoffman's world consists of nothing but 'antisemites' and 'Israel haters'

“probably the rudest person I know in politics. He says many offensive things, most of the time”.

John Ware attacks the 'Disagreeable' Tony Greenstein

I know that Jon meant well but unfortunately the weasel word ‘probably’ crept in meaning that he had sowed doubt in some peoples’ minds. In the end I had to send him a solicitor’s letter warning him that anyone doubting my offensiveness to Zionists and racists was guilty of libel and slander and that I would not hesitate to sue to protect my reputation. I wasn’t ‘probably’ the rudest man in politics I was the rudest man.

Hoffman's Apology for Rape When Israelis Are involved

You may remember the case of the British woman who was raped by 12 Israelis and then convicted of making a false claim of rape and imprisoned. Eventually the woman was cleared.

Hoffie however was convinced that it was all a question of 'antisemitism'. The Israeli boys were framed and it was all consensual.   After all he had seen the videos and reached an impartial decision.

Even female journalists on the Zionist propaganda rag, the Jewish Chronicle, were having none of it.

The British Courts are Growing More & More Hostile to Direct Action Protesters

However these slights aside the question I have been asked most in the past few months is what sentence I think that we shall receive and the answer is, I don’t have a clue. My barrister, as with all the Defendants, will make a plea of mitigation and we shall leave it in the lap of the gods.

Hoffman ensconced with Kevin Caroll of the EDL and assorted fascists

The main thing is that whatever happens the struggle of Palestine Action to rid Britain of the factories of the Elbit war criminals must go on. People from PA have already been gaoled because the judges have reinterpreted the law in order to criminalise our actions. What the BBC praises when Hong Kong or Russian demonstrators take direct action is attacked and pilloried in the mass media when we protest in this country.

As is well known climate action protesters have been gaoled for merely mentioning climate change. Even The Times was moved to protest this outrageous attack on basic democratic rights by Silas Reid of Inner London Crown Court.

Hoffman breaks up Humanist meeting

Mention should also be made of Palestine Solidarity Campaign. In 2021, despite the hostility of the Executive and Director Ben Jamal, policy was passed instructing the Executive to give support to Palestine Action. That has remained a dead letter. PSC are determined to try and impress the Establishment with their moderation and the Bill outlawing BDS is their reward.

Likewise in the furore over the banning of Jeremy Corbyn – The Big Lie PSC  has remained silent. It has not raised the banning of the film by Unite or the attack on anti-Zionists by the GMB. It values the financial benefits of their affiliation rather than asking them to live up to their fine policies.

Why is PSC so anaemic? Because it thinks you can be pro-Palestinian without taking a position on Zionism. It’s as if activists 30 years ago had campaigned against human rights abuses in Apartheid South Africa without taking a position on Apartheid.

A freedom of information request by Palestine Action Shows that the Israeli Embassy sought to interfere in the Prosecution of Activists

Earlier this year Palestine Action sent in an Freedom of Information asking what contact there had been between the Attorney General’s office and the Israeli Embassy.

The answer was quite a lot. The Embassy must have felt very confident if they felt they could approach the prosecuting authorities in this country.

Eighteen pages of documents have been released, heavily redacted. What they clearly show is the highest level contacts between the Israeli Embassy and the British Government and close co-operation on repressive legislation such as the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.

The suspicion must be that the Israeli Embassy has had an input into the Public Order Act 2023 and previous law and order legislation. If this is true it is an outrage. Israel is not a democracy and yet the government appears to be taking advice on curtailing liberties in this country at the behest of the Israeli state.

See In the UK, Israel Has Spotted a Like-Minded Government - Birds of a feather flock together by Hedi Viterbo

Fining Hoffman for Speeding is Apparently Anti-Semitic!

Also amongst the various hate posts on his Facebook page, is one attacking Sadiq Khan, who I admit is a treacherous toe rag. However fining Hoffman for speeding is probably one of the few good things he has done, apart from getting rid of Cressida Dick from the Met.

Hoffman was convicted for harassing women activists on Palestine with fellow thug Damon Lenszner

'Heil Hitler' and 'I'm so glad that Hitler burned your grandfather'

But despite all the dross and bigotry on Hoffman's blog there was one jewel amidst the dross.  An Israeli, Anton Delin, described in detail the attack on anti-judicial reform protesters by Netanyahu's supporters.

“I want to share with you an incident that happened to me on Sunday night when we joined the demonstration in Kaplan.

As we walked past one of the buildings in Tel Aviv, a man wearing a kippa approached us. He was Mizrahi (and you will understand why I say this in a moment). He started giving us the “Heil Hitler” salutes and calling out “Heil Hitler”. This shocked me but what came next broke my heart. He said, “I am so glad that Hitler burned your grandfather.”

I have experienced antisemitism in my life, plenty of it, but this? This, from the mouth of a Jew, and a “religious” one at that, just stopped me in my tracks and took my breath away. I was shattered and all I could hear in my head was, “What have they (the government) done?”
Unfortunately, this was, and is not, an isolated incident. The violence that erupted on Monday night when pro-reformers, La Familia and Lahav were called to demonstrate, was atrocious. The vitriol that spewed out of their mouth was disgusting. The crude gestures that flew from the hands of children, never mind adults. And it escalated from there to physical violence and there is video evidence of each incident. All these incidents, from attacks on female police officers, to beating and kicking a female ant-reform protestors, to an almost lynch of an Arab taxi driver, to full face punching of an anti-reform protestor to the attack on a Channel 13 news reporter who sustained a broken rib and potential internal injuries to his spleen, were perpetrated by pro-reform demonstrators, many of them wearing kippot and tzitzit.

Hoffman of course ignored this because even he would find it difficult (though not impossible) to defend Zionists telling fellow Jews that they were glad that someone's grandfather had died in an extermination camp.  However it gives an insight into the mentality of the Zionist far-Right (and not so far right). The post for anyone who is interested is on the 30 March when a haredit couple tried to run over protesters in Tel Aviv.

A summary of the choicest posts agonising over the postponement of the trial

I copy below the sad saga of the excruciating wait that Hoffie’s fascist friends are being made to undergo as our sentencing has been postponed some four times.

For those who are interested in reading the maddest of the mad then you can read it all here on Hoffman's Facebook page.

Just one thing puzzled me.  The No. 75 besides Hoffie's name. Was it his age or IQ? Answers on a postcard.

Tony Greenstein

See also

Jonathan Hoffman’s Gang of Zionist Fascists Blame Anyone but themselves for the Suicide of their friend Jason Silver 15 February 2018

EXCLUSIVE - The Lies of David Collier (Gnasher Jew) and his Dodgy Dossiers 11 March 2018

EXCLUSIVE: David Collier – the ‘Independent Researcher’ who accused Corbyn of anti-Semitism keeps company with White Supremacists, Neo-Nazis and Islamophobes 21st March 2018

The Zionist – Fascist Alliance was Consummated at the Al Quds Demonstration 11 June 2018

EXCLUSIVE: More Revelations about Zionism’s Fascist Wing 3 August 2018

Exclusive – Leader of the Confederation of Scottish Friends of Israel, Nigel Goodrich is a member of a Secret Fascist Facebook Group, the Jewish Defence Forces 13 March 2019

EXCLUSIVE - MICHAEL ENGLISH, CLOSE ASSOCIATE OF JONATHAN HOFFMAN VISITED BY MANCHESTER COUNTER-TERRORISM POLICE . 20 May 2019

Al Quds Demonstration Sees the Zionist Federation and the Board of Deputies Join Hands with the Far Right 4 June 2019

https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2020/03/zionists-openly-admit-to-trying-to.html Marc 2020

Jonathan Hoffman of the Zionist Federation and the EDL’s Roberta Moore Hold a Joint Demonstration 14.8.10.https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2010/08/jonathan-hoffman-of-zionist-federation.html

Jonathan Hoffman's Lies in the Hackney Citizen  4.2.13. https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2013/02/jonathan-hoffmans-lies-in-hackney.html

Apparently whenever Hoffman leaves his house neo-Nazis and fascists appear out of nowhere, despite his best efforts to be rid of them!https://tonygreenstein.com/2019/03/in-defence-of-jonathan-hoffman-because-no-one-else-will-defend-him/ March 2019

The Thugs and Misfits of the neo-Nazi Jewish Defence League & Assorted Fascists Intent on Destroying Free Speech on Israel and Palestinehttps://tonygreenstein.com/2017/12/exclusive-we-name-gang-of-31-zionists/December 2017

Jonathan Hoffman, UJS, Tony Greenstein and the EDL

Jonathan Hoffman's Lies Catch Up With Him 29.8.10.

Union of Jewish Students Attack on Jonathan Hoffman7.11.11.

Setting the EDL Cat Among the Zionist Pigeons 25.10.10.

Zionist Federation & fascist EDL Join Hands in Supporting Israel's Murder at Sea - Jonathan Hoffman of the Zionist Federation Defends Allowing Fascists to Take Part3 June 2010

Jonathan Hoffman – Another Victim of anti-Semitism Hoffman Booted out as Zionist Vice-President





Gary Smith and the Jewish Labour Movement Attack Free Speech in the GMB as former International Officer Bert Schouwenburg is Suspended for Proposing Severing Relations with the JLM

$
0
0

Whilst the GMB Claims to Support the Palestinians in practice it is a Supporter of Israeli Apartheid


Bert Schouwenburg

On January 26 the Walthamstow branch of the GMB unanimously passed a motion which stated that

the decision to work with the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) runs contrary to GMB’s support for Palestine, has brought the union into disrepute

and that the JLM

is effectively the UK wing of the Israeli Labour Party, a racist organisation that governed Israel from 1948 to 1977 and was directly responsible for the massacre or the expulsion of three quarters of a million Palestinians

The motion noted that the ‘JLM conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism’ and that by continuing to support the JLM the ‘GMB is leaving itself open to accusations that it is supporting the racist treatment of Palestinian people.’ It therefore called on Congress to ‘instruct(s) the General Secretary and the CEC to sever all ties with JLM forthwith.’

It is a perfectly reasonable motion. There is nothing in the slightest anti-Semitic about it. Proposer, Bert Schouwenburg, was an organiser for the GMB’s London Region before taking up the post of International Officer until he retired in 2018 after Tim Roache, the General Secretary, who was alleged to have raped and molested female members of the GMB, took over. Roache was forced to resign and was in turn succeeded by Gary Smith, who is both a Starmer supporter and a racist Zionist.

Smith is such an ardent supporter of the Israeli state that even the far-right Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, praised him. The CAA, an Israeli state proxy, was set up specifically to counter solidarity with the Palestinians with accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’. It is so far to the Zionist right that even Margaret Hodge, the parliamentary representative of the JLM, attacked the CAA as being more interested in attacking the Labour Party than opposing anti-Semitism.

As Skwawkbox noted Smith

was a key participant in the campaign against Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard. He also led a campaign against Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon on the same issue.

The CAA’s Chairperson, Gideon Falter, is Vice Chair of the Jewish National Fund UK. The JNF funds the building of settlements in the Occupied West Bank. The JNF only allows Jews to rent or lease its property and it owns or control 93% of Israeli land. The JNF has consistently fought the idea that Jews and non-Jews should have equal access to its land. Faltiel is also a supporter of Hindutva, Hindu Supremacy as espoused by the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi (who is also an ardent admirer of Zionism).

Gary Smith is praised by the CAA, whose Chair Gideon Falter is Vice-Chair of the JNF which refuses to lease land to Arab citizens of Israel

Hardeep Matharu wrote about how

In 2018, the Hindu Forum of Britain arranged a private meeting with Gideon Falter, CEO of the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism (CAA). The chair – none other than Conservative MP Bob Blackman, who has a history of hosting Islamophobes– declared that there was a need to “learn from the way the CAA had got the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism passed in the Labour Party” with regards to supposed anti-Hindu sentiment.

A year later, two weeks before the 2019 General Election, a spokesperson for the Hindu Council UK supported Rabbi Mirvis’ claim that the Labour Party is antisemitic and added that it is anti-Hindu too because a conference resolution had criticised Modi’s policies in Kashmir. 

Amrit Wilson described how Falter assured the meeting that he and his supporters

would do all they could to help eradicate the ‘duty’ on the government to make Caste an aspect of race in the Equality Act of 2010.

In other words the CAA supports discrimination against Untouchables or Dalits. This is where the campaign against ‘anti-Semitism’ has ended up.

The far-right misnamed Campaign Against Antisemitism loves Gary Smith because they recognise a fellow racist

The same CAA described some of Gary Smith’s notable achievements noting that

he has spoken out against Richard Leonard, the former Scottish Labour leader, for failing to support the International Definition of Antisemitism.

The International Definition (the IHRA) has one purpose. Conflating support for the Palestinians and anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. The GMB has also adopted the IHRA. As Stephen Sedley, a Jewish former Court of Appeal judge observed the 500+ word IHRA ‘fails the first test of any definition: it is indefinite.’

The CAA recalled how, in March 2019, during the fake anti-Semitism campaign against the Labour left and Jeremy Corbyn, Smith

‘labelled the Labour Party’s handling of antisemitism “disgraceful” and revealed that he even thought about leaving the Party himself.

In a private email, Bert described how

‘for reasons I have never fully understood, there has long been a reluctance to fully embrace the Palestinian cause [in the GMB] despite numerous resolutions.’

On 28 April 2023 Schouwenburg received a letter from London Region Secretary Warren Kenny suspending his GMB membership because of the motion on the JLM. As Schouwenburg noted

I do not think that he [Warren] is capable of sufficient independent thought to have made the decision to suspend me himself though I can only speculate as to why it was considered necessary to shut me down

Speculating that ‘I needed to be made an example of pour encourager les autres.’ In other words anyone who decides that in order to support the Palestinians one needs to oppose Zionism, the Jewish Supremacist ideology that has led to the Palestinians dispossession, needs to be aware that they will be expelled.

In his barely literate letter, Kenny alleged that the motion ‘contained several factual inaccuracies. The motion also contains serious, potentially legally actionable, and antisemitic allegations.’

However there was nothing in Warren’s letter explaining what these inaccuracies were or why the motion was deemed anti-Semitic. Nor did Warren explain what was ‘potentially legally actionable.’

The reason why Warren’s assertions were unsupported was because they were false. Bert was immediately suspended from benefit, banned from holding any GMB office and banned from taking part in any GMB business and affairs.

The motion passed by the branch contained not a hint of anti-Semitism nor was it inaccurate. It read:

Congress accepts that the decision to work with the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) runs contrary to GMB’s support for Palestine, has brought the union into disrepute and should never have been countenanced.

Congress notes that the JLM is effectively the UK wing of the Israeli Labour Party, a racist organisation that governed Israel from 1948 to 1977 and was directly responsible for the massacre or the expulsion of three quarters of a million Palestinians. Today, some of their Knesset members support the most right-wing Israeli regime in history.

JLM conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism and by dint of its support, GMB is leaving itself open to accusations that it is supporting the racist treatment of Palestinian people.  Therefore, Congress instructs the General Secretary and the CEC to sever all ties with JLM forthwith.

In an article on Schouwenburg’s suspension Skwawkbox noted that the GMB officially supports the ‘Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions’ movement, which the JLM opposes and in both 2011 and 2013 passed resolutions not to allow its members to travel to Israel on delegations organised by ‘Trade Union Friends of Israel’.

There is very little on the GMB website concerning Palestine and no mention at all of BDS. Under the heading GMB Policy on Palestinewe learn that theGMB is a long-standing supporter of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Western Sahara Campaign and supports the statement below.’

The statement mainly opposes the Abraham Accords and for some reason includes GMB policy on the Sahrawi people of Western Sahara. The policy condemns Israel’s ‘continuing to flout international law through its ongoing occupation and colonisation of Palestinian land’, the expansion of settlements and the denial of the Palestinian right to self-determination. The policy states that:

global civil society must redouble its efforts to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian and the Sahrawi people until freedom, justice and equality are realised.’

Yet when Schouwenburg proposed a motion putting some teeth into this policy he was suspended which suggests that the GMB’s policy on Palestine is merely declaratory. 

Were there any ‘mistakes’ in the Walhamstow motion and why was it anti-Semitic?

The motion from Walthamstow branch noted that ‘the JLM is effectively the UK wing of the Israeli Labour Party’ [ILP]. If you go to the JLM website it states explicitly that the ILP is its ‘sister party.’ The motion described the ILP as

‘a racist organisation that governed Israel from 1948 to 1977 and was directly responsible for the massacre or the expulsion of three quarters of a million Palestinians.’

This too is a fact? The motion could have said that it was the ILP which kept Palestinians who weren’t expelled in 1948 under military rule from 1948 till 1966 and that it confiscated most of their land too.

The motion stated that the JLM

conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism and by dint of its support, GMB is leaving itself open to accusations that it is supporting the racist treatment of Palestinian people. 

This too is a fact. Anyone doubting this should read Asa Winstanley’s new book‘Weaponising Anti-Semitism – How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn’.

The JLM were refounded in 2015 solely in order to spearhead the attack on Corbyn using anti-Semitism as its weapon. The JLM joined the CAA in making a complaint to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission about the Labour Party.

The unspoken assumption running through Kenny’s letter is that the JLM is the Jewish section of the Labour Party but this is not true. One of the JLM’s Values is

To promote the centrality of Israel in Jewish life and its development on the basis of freedom, social justice and equality for all its citizens.

Promoting the centrality of Israel among Jews is a Zionist not a Jewish principle. The JLM is a Zionist group which no Jewish person who is not a Zionist would join. The JLM is affiliated to the UK Zionist Federation and the World Zionist Organisation.

The hypocrisy of the JLM is proven in their assertion that they support equality for all Israel’s citizens but that they also support a Jewish state. An ethno-nationalist state based on the religion of only some of its citizens cannot, by definition, be a state where all its citizens are equal.

When Israeli actor Rotem Sala posted on Instagram:

When will anyone in this government tell the public that this is a country of all its citizens, and all people are born equal. “Arabs are also human beings. And also the Druze, and the gays, and the lesbians and… gasp… leftists.

the reaction of Prime Minister Netanyahu was swift. He stated that:

Israel is not a state of all its citizens. According to the basic nationality law we passed, Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people – and only it.

The ILP did not contradict him. That is why ‘Jewish Settlement’ is one of the ‘values’ outlined in the racist Jewish Nation State Law, a principle that the Israeli Labor Party adheres too.

Kenny also doesn’t explain why Schouwenburg has been suspended and not all those present at the branch meeting where the motion was passed unanimously. When a motion is passed it is the property of the meeting not one individual. Why was Schouwenburg singled out?

The GMB’s defence of a Zionist group which supports a state which has been condemned as committing the crime of apartheid suggests that under Gary Smith the GMB is supporting Israeli Apartheid.

That Israel is an apartheid state is not a matter of dispute. Every major human rights organisation – Israel’s B’tselem, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have condemned Israel as an apartheid state.

The only conclusion that can be draw from Bert Schouwenburg’s proposed expulsion is, in his own words, that the

GMB are trying to shut down any voices that dissent from their newly-found enthusiasm for Israel’s apartheid regime. Under Gary Smith, a union that once backed the call for Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions (BDS) is now supporting the most vicious, right-wing government in Israel’s history.

It is not Bert Schouwenburg who should be suspended pending investigation but Gary Smith and his poodle, Warren Kenny.

Smith was instrumental in having Black rapper Lowkey banned from the Tolpuddle Festival at the behest of various Zionist organisations. See my blog of January 1 2023 detailing how Gary Smith acted as a messenger boy for the Apartheid State’s lobby groups.

Gary Smith's love affair with Zelensky, a Jewish fascist who has no problem with a national holiday for a mass murderer of Jews during  WW2

Smith’s opposition to ‘anti-Semitism’ doesn’t prevent him from being an ardent supporter of Zelensky who has banned Ukraine’s leftwing parties and has also abolished the right to strike, using the war as a pretext. Zelensky is a fervent Zionist and supported Israel’s attacks on Gaza. His support for self-determination doesn’t include the Palestinians. Yet the GMB is fundraising to buy a vehicle for the Ukraine military and London Region has, I understand, handed them a donation of £5,000, as if the billions from Joe Biden and Boris Johnson/Sunak weren’t sufficient.

Stepan Bandera's Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUP) played an integral part in the massacre of 33,000 Jews at Babi Yar in 1941. He is a national hero in Ukraine & the Zionists say nothing

Zelensky may be Jewish but he is also a Zionist and that explains why it is that he has formed alliances with Ukraine’s neo-Nazi militias. He has done and said nothing about the fact that Stepan Bandera is the only Nazi collaborator in the world to have a national holiday in his honour. Bandera’s Ukraine Insurgent Army murdered some 200,000 Jews as well as 100,000 Poles.

The GMB is affiliated to Palestine Solidarity Campaign. The silence of PSC in the face of Smith’s support for Israel and the Zionists, in blatant contradiction of his own union’s policy on Palestine, should have been called out. Instead PSC has remained silent as Smith and the JLM target Palestinian supporters like Bert Schouwenburg.

Members of PSC should be asking what is the purpose of a union’s affiliation if that union acts as an extension of the apartheid regime? I know that Barbara Plant, the GMB’s President is a genuine supporter of the Palestinians. PSC should be working with her to confront Smith and his Zionist sycophants like Warren Kenny.

Even past General Secretary Tim Roache, put his name to an advertisement in the Guardian in 2017 calling on the British government to apologise for the Balfour Declaration.

The British Brothers League was set up to campaign for anti-alienist legislation which Arthur Balfour, the Zionist hero, introduced in 1905. William Evans Gordon MP was a friend of Zionist Organisation President Chaim Weizmann and a supporter of the Zionist movement

Arthur Balfour was a dedicated anti-Semite who proposed the first immigration laws, the Aliens Act, against Jewish refugees in 1905. Weizmann, srael’s first President, described a conversation he had had with Balfour, who told him that he had met with Cosima Wagner, the anti-Semitic widow of Richard Wagner. Balfour explained that ‘he shared many of her anti-Semitic postulates.’ One suspects that Smith and Balfour would have got on quite well.

Tony Greenstein

#MeToo & #Guardian Hypocrisy - Why did the Guardian Protect Nick Cohen, who for 20 years Sexually Abused Young Female Journalists?

$
0
0

How does Kath Viner & Jonathan Freedland Square #MeToo with paying off Cohen and Penalising the Victims?


#MeToo in the media Good Law Project

As the old saying goes, hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtueand The Guardian’s hypocrisy is indeed a vice.

If there was an award for the most rabidly racist, war-mongering, anti-Corbyn ‘journalist’ the name of Nick Cohen would come high if not top of the list. Despite his name he isn’t Jewish though he began to claim that too with an article ‘Hatred is turning me into a Jew’.

Seven years later, as the anti-Corbyn campaign was getting going, Cohen penned an article Why I’m becoming a Jew and why you should, too. Clearly his conversion was taking a long time!

 ‘My name is Nick Cohen, and I think I’m turning into a Jew. Despite being called “Cohen”, I’ve never been Jewish before.

An open invitation from Nick Cohen for every racist troll to convert to Judaism

When anti-Semitism was a genuine form of racism, Jews were identified with the left and trade unionism. Zionism has managed to transform Jews into an object of admiration for the racist right.

Back in the early years of New Labour Cohen was a decent journalist, writing a weekly column on the back page of the Observer. His politics were Tribunite. He consistently attacked New Labour’s policies towards refugees. He even opposed the Blair government’s introduction of Holocaust Memorial Day.

My email to Jonathan Freedland, the Guardian's Zionist Gatekeeper Goes Unanswered

Then 9/11 happened and with it the War on Terror. Cohen jack-knifed to the right, becoming an Islamaphobe and a supporter of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Thus was born the anti-Corbyn fiend and sexual predator that Freedland and Viner did their best to protect.

My favourite Cohen article is Don’t tell me you weren’t warned about Corbyn which he wrote just before Theresa May called a general election in April 2017. This latter-day Nostradamus predicted that:

On current polling, Labour will get around a quarter of the vote. Imagine, though, how the Labour party will fare in an election campaign when its leaders are Corbyn, John McDonnell, Emily Thornberry and Diane Abbott… The Tories have gone easy on Corbyn and his comrades to date for the transparently obvious reason that they want to keep them in charge of Labour.

In an election, they would tear them to pieces. They will expose the far left’s record of excusing the imperialism of Vladimir Putin’s gangster state, the oppressors of women and murderers of gays in Iran, the IRA, and every variety of inquisitorial and homicidal Islamist movement… Will there be 150, 125, 100 Labour MPs by the end of the flaying? My advice is to think of a number then halve it.

Cohen’s final paragraph to those supporting Corbyn was:

In my respectful opinion, your only honourable response will be to stop being a fucking fool by changing your fucking mind.

It is such sentiments that make Cohen an object of admiration for Hadley Freeman, Tanya Gold and all the other journalistic detritus.

This blog was alone in predicting Corbyn's unexpected success in 2017

In the wake of the June 2017 election, when Labour – despite the sabotage of the right - gained 30 seats and the highest swing since 1945– I wrote a blog Jeremy Corbyn and the Humiliation of Nick Cohen. Almost alone amongst commentators I predicted the outcome. With the polls showing a lead of over 20% I wrote:

… it was Harold Wilson who said that a week is a long time in politics. Seven weeks is a political eternity. Theresa May has taken a gamble that her 21% lead will hold. It is a gamble that she may yet come to regret.

There is only one direction that her lead can go, and that is down. Once her lead falls, then a snowball effect can take over. What is essential is that Labour marks out the key areas on which it is going to base its appeal. The danger is that Corbyn is going to continue with his ‘strategy’ of appeasing the right and appealing to all good men and women....

Theresa May is a cautious conservative. She is literally the product of her background - a conservative vicar’s daughter. Reactionary, parochial and small-minded, she is a bigot for all seasons.

On 3 June I wrote General Election - Is Labour on the threshold of victory? After the result I wrote to Kath Viner, offering to replace Nick Cohen at half his salary. For reasons which remain difficult to understand to this day Viner ignored my generous offer!

Nick Cohen Leaves The Guardian for ‘Health Reasons’

In January 2023 Cohen left The Guardian. According to The Telegraph Guardian News and Media (GNM)

did not mention that Cohen left the newspaper with a settlement following complaints of sexual harassment that spanned a period of 17 years

The Guardian said that Cohen’s departure was for ‘health’ reasons whereas the real reason was that he had had been a sexual predator, preying on young female journalists, some with mental health problems, others on temporary contracts.

The Guardian’s deception was only successful because other newspapers colluded with them. [See Nick Cohen, Phillip Schofield and British media’s own #MeToo reckoning, The Week, 1.6.23].

Kath Viner got rid of its cartoonist of 40 years standing, Steve Bell, the only decent journalist left on the paper - Viner ruled that the appearance of Razan Al Najar - the 21 year old Palestinian medic killed by Netanyahu's snipers in Gaza, in Theresa May's fireplace was 'antisemitic'

My email to Guardian editor Kath Viner also goes unanswered

In a puff to gullible readers who are asked to fund Kath Viner’s half a million pound salary, The Guardiancommits itself to delivering

fearless, investigative journalism – giving a voice to the powerless and holding power to account.”

Novara Media on Nick Cohen cover up

Except, it seems, when the powerless happen to be young, female journalists in its newsroom.

The Guardian Investigates Cohen or Does It?

In January 2018 Lucy Siegle reported Cohen for groping her. Siegle started at The Guardian around 2001 as an editorial assistant. She described standing at a photocopier when Cohen appeared behind her, cupped her bottom with both hands, grunted and breathed heavily into her ear.

Siegle remembers returning to her desk, humiliated. She never considered reporting him. “I’m literally the least powerful person in the entire newsroom.”. For 14 years she avoided his desk and chaperoned interns “like a mother hen crossing a busy road.”

The #MeToo movement was sweeping through society on Feb. 1, 2018, when Siegle met with Guardian Managing Editor Jan Thompson. Siegle described what happened next.

The meeting began with me. I described why I was there, and went on to tell the senior executive about Nick Cohen’s assault on me. There was not much response at this point, just a blank stare which I felt to be slightly hostile. But when I mentioned that I was aware there had been another allegation, the senior executive became animated.

They set me straight (“That sort of Twitter allegation would not be investigated in that way ever…”) and pulled a face of disgust at the very idea of that allegation. The executive also denied any knowledge about any allegation.

The meeting continued and the exec pointed out a number of times that it would be difficult for me to proceed with my complaint anonymously and made it sound as if I will have to go head-to-head with “Nick”. He was called by his first name throughout, and there was lengthy speculation from the exec about what he might say and how he might be affected by such an allegation.

The main concern of Thompson was about the possibility that Siegle would write about what happened. Thompson’s main concern was the alleged abuse that Cohen faced for his political views, according to notes Siegle wrote afterward. She described the meeting as a “chaotic mess of defensiveness and attack.”

The exec then told me that Nick Cohen was frequently targeted for abuse because of his political standpoint. They sounded like they were defending a very precious asset, their star striker. I could not understand why this was remotely relevant, but my brain began to compute that this conversation was not welcome….

By the time the meeting finished, I felt like I had been in a laundry cycle, but also a bit like I’d been beaten up. As happens with these things, you pore over them afterwards to make sure that you haven’t been over-sensitive or misread.

Because of this hostile reaction, Siegle decided not to pursue the complaint within GNM.

You might think The Guardian’s response was strange given that in its Leader The Guardian view on #MeToo: what comes next? they wrote:

No woman should suffer socially, economically or professionally for challenging her abuser. But how much harder it is to speak out when the cost may be not only your career, but the ability to pay the rent or feed your children. And how much more likely you are to be targeted when predatory men know that...

Even now, women are paying a price for speaking out. Much discussion has skipped past the primary question – how women should be treated in the workplace – to fixate on how perpetrators should be treated, without pausing to acknowledge the penalties that victims have already paid.

The Guardian was keen to hear from victims of sexual harassment everywhere but the Guardian!

One week before Siegle’s complaint The Guardiansolicited tips about workplace sexual harassment. They said:

We take all allegations of workplace harassment extremely seriously and aim to support victims in all circumstances. We have processes which anyone can use to raise complaints so that they can be fully investigated.

Siegle wrote of how she was aware of several other women who had also been “discouraged” by The Guardian from taking forward their complaints.

New York Times Breaks the story that the British press, including Private Eye, Wouldn’t Touch

On 30 May the New York Times [NYT] ran British Reporter Had a Big #MeToo Scoop. Her Editor Killed Itabout what had happened at The Guardian and the Financial Times [FT]. It spoke of 7 women who had made allegations against Cohen but no paper would touch it because ‘Britain’s news media has a complicated relationship with outing its own.’

Lucy Siegle is one of multiple women to accuse the British columnist Nick Cohen of unwanted sexual advances and groping.Credit...Andrew Testa for The New York Times

The NYT revealed that FT journalist Madison Marriage secured a “potentially explosive scoop” on the real reason behind Cohen’s departure but her story was spiked by Editor RoulaKhalaf. Marriage had evidence that his departure followed years of unwanted sexual advances and groping of female journalists.

The FT’s explanation was that “Some reporting leads to published stories and some not.”

Jane Bradley interviewed more than 35 journalists at The Guardian and FT to examine sexual misconduct in Britain’s news media.

Marriage had already begun investigating Cohen but RoulaKhalaf halted the investigation, telling Marriage not to contact any new sources. Her team had already interviewed five of Cohen’s accusers.

Two women were willing to speak openly, and Marriage had supporting documentation on others. Khalaf said that Cohen did not have a big enough business profile to make him an “F.T. story”. Publicly, the FT had declared “no topic or scandal off limits.”

In February Khalaf said she would not run the investigation as a news article, several journalists recalled, and suggested that Marriage file it as an opinion piece. She did, but it still did not run.

The Financial Times editor Roula Khalaf during an appearance last year on the BBC. Credit...James Manning/PA Images, via Getty Images

A native of Lebanon, Khalaf is not a British media insider. Colleagues described her as a cautious editor, and some said the Cohen article had fallen victim to an institutional conflict between the newspaper’s investigative aspirations and its conservative, business roots.

The spiking of the FT article hit Siegle especially hard. ‘Now it seemed the whole industry was protecting itself.’ She described how the response to the story showed

“#MeToo is nothing but a convenient hashtag for the British media. The silence on its own industry is just really conspicuous.”

Cohen was seen as someone with influence, former colleagues said. Credit...Marco Secchi/Getty Images

Cohen however was unrepentant. He told the NYT that it wasn’t the women he abused who were the victims: He was the “only person whose life is turned over because of this”. 

A GNM spokesperson told The Telegraph that the organisation “instigated our own HR investigations” in 2018, but the group said the victim “did not wish to pursue the complaint”. Siegle asked

If Britain’s most stridently liberal newspaper fails to deal with claims of sexual harassment by one of its leading writers, what does it say about the supposed progress of the #MeToo movement

On October 6 2021 Siegle posted on Twitter describing her experience at The Guardian.

“I don’t normally read Nick Cohen’s column in the Observer. Ever since he ‘groped’ me at the photocopier (zero marks for originality) at work when I was an admin assistant in my early 20s I have avoided being anywhere near him. But I do think he is a total creep…. lurking in the shadows to lay your hands on an underling (or anyone) is not to my mind compatible with the position he presents.”

It was through going public that she heard from other victims of Cohen, as did the Good Law Project [GLP]. The experiences of Women 1-5, as the GLP refers to the complainants (Siegle is W2) featured in a thread posted by Jolyon Maugham. Many more have come forward since.

GNM turned down a request for an independent inquiry into its complaint processes and handling of the complaints. Siegle told how

Nick Cohen is now co-operating with GNM on an investigation and his column has been “paused”. He has previously denied allegations as “vile and untrue”. I am sure that if Jolyon, myself, and the other Ws had not pushed and posted threads it would still be business as usual in Guardian HQ.

On 4 August 2022 Siegle wrote, not in The Guardian but the New European that

It was during this time as an admin assistant that I was assaulted by Nick Cohen, a prominent and highly-regarded journalist and, until this week when his column was “paused” as he is investigated by the company, still a star columnist on The Observer, as well as other publications including The Spectator and Private Eye.

Cohen spent two decades as a columnist for The Observer. ‘Inside the newsroom, he was seen as influential, colleagues said, someone who could help your career.’

His resignation in January cited “health grounds.” Secretly, the newspaper group paid him a financial settlement for quitting and agreed to confidentiality, according to three colleagues and an editor with whom Mr. Cohen spoke.

This cartoon was also deemed 'antisemitic' by Freedland's witchhunters

In his farewell, editors praised his “brilliant” and “incisive” coverage. Seven women told the NYT that Cohen had groped them or made other unwanted sexual advances over nearly two decades. Four insisted on anonymity, fearing professional repercussions.

Siegle recounted Cohen grabbing her bottom in the newsroom around 2001. Five other women described similar encounters at pubs from 2008 to 2015. One said Mr. Cohen had pressed his erection against her thigh and kissed her uninvited when they met to discuss her career. A seventh said Mr. Cohen had repeatedly offered to send her explicit photographs in 2018 while she worked as an unpaid copy editor for him.

This cartoon too was deemed 'antisemitic' by Freedland's witchhunters

Cohen’s reputation was widely known in the newsroom, according to 10 former colleagues. Five women said he had groped them after work at pubs, including one who said he had groped her “five or six” times in 2008. One said she and other female journalists had used a different entrance to a pub to avoid being groped by him. Another woman said she had avoided the bar downstairs from the newsroom after Mr. Cohen grabbed her knee during work drinks.

Private Eye too did not cover his departure. When a reader emailed asking why, Editor Ian Hislop replied:

“Coverage of Nick Cohen’s departure from The Observer is obviously more problematic for The Eye than the others that you mention due to the fact that he used to write a freelance column for the magazine.”

Hislop said he had discussed the terms of The Guardian’s deal with Cohen. “Instead of any conclusion,” Hislop said of The Guardian investigation, “it ended up with a secret agreement and a big cash payment.”

In the end the ratbiter was bitten where it hurts most but Ian Hislop joined the Street of Shame in not telling the Eye's readers why

Cohen’s column in Private Eye was called Ratbiter, which regularly defamed Corbyn supporters including Greg Hadfield and myself. It was a litany of lies but Private Eye supported Cohen’s false ‘anti-Semitism’ accusations. Cohen’s departure from the Eye was mentioned only in The Press Gazette, a media trade website.

In a phone interview with the NYT, Cohen said he did not have the “faintest idea” about Siegle’s accusation and questioned why she had waited so long to report it. He said the conversation with the copy editor was “joking” among friends. He blamed the accusations on a campaign by supporters of Russia and transgender rights!

Steve Bell - the only honest journalist on the Guardian was sacked by Kath Viner

Informed that seven women had complained Cohen exclaimed, “Oh, God. I assume it’s stuff I was doing when I was drunk”. In a subsequent email, Cohen did not respond to specific accusations.

“I have written at length about my alcoholism. I went clean seven years ago in 2016. I look back on my addicted life with deep shame.

Jean Hannah Edelstein, an assistant at The Observer from 2007 to 2009, said Cohen was not alone in his behaviour. She recalled her editor hitting her with a sex whip as she walked by. Over one boozy lunch, she said, the same editor offered to help her career and suggested that she pose naked to promote her book.

Another woman, a freelancer who had recently been homeless and had depression, said she had met Cohen at a pub in 2010 to discuss her career. As they chatted, she said, he suddenly kissed her on the mouth and pressed his erection against her thigh. She said she fled.

“I just remember walking along Waterloo Bridge and thinking, ‘I can’t go to The Guardian with this. Who would they believe? He was one of their stars, and I was a freelance journalist with mental health issues.”

Heather Brooke, an investigative journalist, said she had initially dismissed her encounter with Mr. Cohen at the 2008 awards ceremony as “a one-off drunken mistake and didn’t take it further.” (“Nick Cohen got drunk and slapped my ass … ugh!” she wrote in her diary the next day.)

Rebecca Watson

Rebecca Watson, a writer and commentator, said Cohen had grabbed her bottom at a book party in 2009.

“To sexually assault a stranger at a book launch, to be one of the more prominent people there, and to just assume there will be no comeuppance,”

Not long after Siegle lodged her 2018 complaint records show that Cohen began working with a freelance copy editor, a single mother with autism.

She worked remotely for Cohen, unpaid. On June 29 2018, a work conversation on Twitter became punctuated with mutually flirtatious jokes. Cohen offered to send an explicit photograph. The woman declined. Cohen persisted and she deflected again.

In the following days, the copy editor said, Cohen turned cold. In messages, she apologised if she had misread the situation. Eventually, she told him continuing to work together “would be at a cost too high for my own mental health.”

Cohen, in an email to the NYT, said this was the only accusation to surface since he quit drinking and said it had been misrepresented.

It involves a friendship with a woman I never met that, sadly, went badly wrong.

In 2019, the copy editor asked The Guardian’s HR team about the process for raising sexual misconduct claims. She described the incident without naming Cohen, saying she felt “huge pressure” to go along with his “banter.”

Because she was not an employee, the copy editor said she was told that she would not be informed of the investigation’s outcome. Being frozen out of the process terrified her, so she backed off. This is almost certainly unlawful and someone personally contracting to do work is covered by discrimination legislation.

In the autumn of 2021, Siegle wrote on Twitter about her experience. Her lawyer, Jolyon Maugham, began making noises. Jan Thompson immediately emailed Siegle offering an investigation and accusing her of turning down a previous offer in 2018, which Siegle denied.

Eventually Cohen was suspended and The Guardian hired a law firm to carry out an independent inquiry. Neither Siegle nor the copy editor agreed to participate.

Suffice to say The Guardian has not offered Lucy Siegle or any other woman journalist the opportunity to put their side of the story. Freedom of the press and #MeToo  has its limits, after all!

Tony Greenstein

The Financial Times building in London. The newspaper spiked an investigation into Nick Cohen, a columnist at The Observer. Credit...Andrew Testa for The NYT

Defend the Right to Protest & Defend the Right to a Fair Trial Public Meeting

$
0
0

From 1670 Onwards Juries Had the Right to Decide Cases According to their Own Conscience & Conviction – That is What is Now at Stake in the decision of the Court of Appeal in Colston

The right to acquit on conscience

As people may know, together with 3 others, I was convicted recently at Wolverhampton Crown Court of the heinous offence of ‘intending without lawful excuse to destroy or damage property belonging to UAV Engines Ltd.’ which is owned by Elbit Systems Ltd, the Israeli arms company.

The British state and its Judiciary, have always put a higher premium on the protection of property than the protection of people from that property, in the case of arms factories. Likewise those who pour effluent into the rivers and pollute the seas around us are immune from criminal prosecution unlike those who protest against the pollution.

As capitalism lurches from economic to environmental crisis, it lashes out like a wild animal. We see that in the nuclear poker game that is being played out in Ukraine as NATO wages a proxy war against Russia.

At home the Tory government, riddled with corruption and nepotism, of which Boris Johnson’s resignation honours list is only the latest example, passes repeated legislation– the Police, Crime & Sentencing Act, the Spycops (Covert Human Intelligence) Act, the Anti-Strikes (Minimum Services Levels) Bill, and now the Public Order Act 2023 curtailing our liberties and giving state immunity to its operatives as they bug, abuse, murder and torture.

The POA allows police to pre-emptively arrest demonstrators is a new low but nothing is too low for the supine Labour ‘Opposition’ under Starmer, the Zionist without qualification. Labour MPs were ordered to abstain on the 3rd reading and Starmer has promised to allow the Act to ‘bed in’.

Meanwhile the Judiciary, after a relatively liberal spell under Lady Hale and before her Lord Neuberger, as President of the Supreme Court, has reverted to type as the enemy of civil liberties. Epitomising this is the Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoH8AXgFCIw&t=32s

Contempt For Justice

The political establishment – from Cruella Colston Starmer, Braverman to Keir Starmer– reacted with horror at the decision of a Bristol jury to acquit the 4 demonstrators who rolled mass murderer and slave trader Edward Colston into Bristol harbour. Braverman’s reaction was to be expected but it spoke volumes about Starmer’s taking the knee during the Black Lives Matter ‘moment’ as he called it. Racism and Starmer go together like Tom and Jerry.

The Colston verdict or rather the judge’s directions that the defence could employ human rights defences in a case involving criminal damages was overturned at the end of last year by the Court of Appeal in a referral from Braverman in Attorney General’s Reference No. 1 2022.

According to Judge Chambers Rosa Parks was wrong to break the segregation laws in the Deep South of America

Here is how Henry Hill of Conservative Home saw it:

It was easily missed,… but the Court of Appeal yesterday afforded an important victory to Suella Braverman.

As Attorney General, she asked it to review the judgement in the ‘Colston Four’ trial, which saw four vandals acquitted on the grounds that tearing down a public artwork was protected under human rights legislation. 

Hill is quite right. The Court of Appeal under Sir Ian Burnett, the Lord Chief Justice, ‘afforded an important victory to Suella Braverman.’

The decision negated the decision of the Supreme Court in Ziegler that obstruction of the road was protected by the European Convention of Human Rights.

In our case under Judge Michael Chambers KC, all defences of ‘lawful excuse’ were ruled out, despite the factory we targeted manufacturing engines for drones which kill civilians.

The tortured ‘logic’ of Chambers and Debbie ‘ghoul’ Gould, the Prosecutor, was that it was necessary to identify which engine goes into which drone and which child it has murdered It is not enough to show that Elbit drones comprise 85% of Israeli drones nor that they manufacture 80% of Israel’s ammunition.

Acts ancillary to war crimes committed in other countries are treated as committed in this country under Section 52 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001. But Judges have effectively rewritten the law to grant immunity to those who profit by the death of others.

Judge Chambers is very hot on drug dealers who convey their wares down Britain’s motorways yet their crimes pale into insignificance compared to the death and destruction of Elbi.

The twisted and artificial ‘logic’ of the judiciary is that drones manufactured in Britain is ‘too remote’ from the war crimes they inflict to be prosecuted. This is a racist rationale for the crimes of British imperialism and its Israeli allies.

No such principle was espoused in the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials and the prosecution of IG Farben which manufactured Zyklon B, hydrogen cyanide, which was used to exterminate millions of people. No doubt if today’s judges had participated in the Nuremberg war crimes trials they would have argued that it was necessary to link each crystal of Zyklon B with each person who was gassed.

The reality is that whenever democratic rights and freedoms have been under attack – whether it be the Taff Vale Judgment which overturned trade union protections for the right to strike, or the attacks on the Suffragettes or the Official Secrets prosecution of Clive Ponting – judges have always been the nodding dogs of a reactionary Tory Establishment.

With at least 3 Insulate Britain activists have been gaoled for contempt of court for having the gall to explain to the jury why they had taken the action they did, we are seeing judges like Silas Reid and others in the forefront of the attack on civil liberties.

Whilst rogues like Boris Johnson and Lady Mone have immunity from prosecution over the Jennifer Arcuri and COVID frauds, because the Met Police refuse to investigate the crimes of fraud and embezzlement that have marked the Covid contracts, those of us who take direct action against the participation of Elbit in war crimes are prosecuted with the full force of the law.

That is why tomorrow there will be a Right to Protest meeting in Brighton at the BMECP Centre, 10 Fleet Street Brighton.

There will also be a Zoom meeting on Saturday 24 June with a host of speakers including Huda Ammori from Palestine Action, Tim Crosland, Deepa Driver from the Defend Julian Assange campaign and Tony Greenstein, one of 4 convicted Defendants.

To register for the meeting click here

The deportation of Julian Assange looms ever closer after the decision of a single High Court judge last week to reject his attempt to stop his extradition to the United States for the ‘crime’ of having exposed US war crimes in Iraq and elsewhere. The hypocrisy of British judges who deliberately turn a blind eye to the war crimes of the US and British governments is nothing new. The millions who died under the British Empire did so under the knowing gaze of Britain’s judges.

As always when confronted with challenges to state authority the judicial system seeks to criminalise political protesters. In 1912 the Prosecuting barrister in the trial of Emmeline Pankhurst said that:

Suffrage is not the issue, it is the criminal behaviour of the suffragettes and their incitement to partake in militant activity at which 54 windows were broken

None of this is new. All challenges to the British state are met with attempts to criminalise the protesters. But in ruling out all defences of lawful excuse and in particular gaoling protesters for explaining their motives to juries, there is an arguable case under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights:which states:

In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

How can a trial be fair when the Defendant can’t explain his/her motives to the jury? Craig Murray described how

The current legal establishment will adapt themselves to the legal framework of whatever sort is ordained by the rulers. Anybody expecting judges to defend liberties is likely to be sorely disappointed. They will happily remove the ability of juries to defend liberty too.

And to cap it all, despite what Judge Michael Chambers said viz. that:

“It’s a serious contempt to invite jurors to return outcomes which are not in accordance with the facts, but in accordance with their conscience.

The fact is that this is the common law of Britain as evidenced by the plaque to Edward Bushells on the Old Bailey.

Tony Greenstein


Free all Palestine Action Protesters – Preventing War Crimes is Not A Crime

$
0
0

The Public Order Act 2023 which Starmer Supported is Intended to Criminalise All Effective Protest


Brighton & Hove Protest in Support of Palestine Action Prisoners

As people may know I together with 3 other Defendants am awaiting sentence after having been convicted of ‘intent to cause criminal damage without lawful excuse’ to the Shenstone Elbit factory of Israeli arms factory, Elbit.

The Judge ruled out all lawful excuses holding that there were no lawful excuses, thus leading inevitably to our convictions.

All five Defendants, including one whom the jury was deadlocked on, have issued the following statement:

When Justice is Neither Done Nor Seen to be Done

Statement from the Elbit 5

On March 9 2021 we were arrested by the Police before we could reach Elbit’s Shenstone factory where some of us intended to occupy the roof and decorate the factory with paint in the blood red colour of the victims of its drones. Elbit is an Israeli arms company.

On May 15 2023, after a 7 week trial, we were found guilty of intent to cause criminal damage without lawful excuse. Judge Michael Chambers refused to admit all lawful excuse defences under s.3 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 or let us explain why it was that we had targeted Elbit. The jury was therefore left with the impression that our only purpose was to commit criminal damage.

At no point was the jury told that they have the right to reach a verdict based on whether it was unjust to convict and whether or not the use of the CDA in this case was oppressive. This is despite it being a longstanding feature of British jurisprudence since Bushell’s case in 1670, that a jury has the right to reach a verdict according to their conscience.

Patrick Devlin, a former Law Lord said that the right to bring in ‘perverse acquittals’ gives protection against laws which the ordinary man regards as harsh and oppressive . . . an insurance that the criminal law will conform to the ordinary man's ideas of what is fair and just. If it does not, the jury will not be a party to its enforcement.

Similarly Heather Hallett, a member of the Court of Appeal from 2005 to 2019 and who is now chairing the COVID Inquiry, said in her 2017 Blackstone lecture on the Role of the Jury, A jury may refuse to convict in spite of the law and the evidence because it concludes that the law is an unjust law. The jury passes its verdict on the law. Secondly, it ensures that the prosecution and the judge are on trial….

Israel’s recent attack on Jenin where 12 Palestinians, including 4 children, were killed is precisely why we targeted Elbit. We should have been allowed to use the defence of necessity whereby it is permissible to commit a smaller crime in order to prevent a far greater ill. However the courts have decided that the victims of Elbit’s drones are too ‘remote’ from Elbit’s factories in this country.

The ‘logic’ that was employed in our trial was that in order to avail ourselves of this defence it was necessary to identify the particular engine in the particular drone that killed the particular child. We believe that this is merely playing with words whilst people are dying. In practice it enables Elbit to avoid responsibility for the death of hundreds if not thousands of civilian victims, including children and allows it to evade legislation on the prevention of war crimes. Elbit are merchants of death plying their lethal trade with the protection of the law.

The International Association of Democratic Lawyers  in a statement calling for the release of Palestinian Action prisoners noted  how, on 21 June 2023, an Elbit drone extrajudicially assassinated three Palestinians in Jenin. This was a war crime as was the attack on Jenin where thousands of people were evicted from their homes and forced to wander the streets without food, water or shelter.

The International Criminal Court Act 2001 make the commission of war crimes by British nationals or residents, or being ancillary to war crimes, be they in this country or abroad, an offence. It would seem obvious that actions intended to prevent the production of Elbit Drones in this country must be lawful in so far as such actions are intended to prevent the commission of far greater crimes.

In the eyes of our judiciary, criminal damage against Elbit factories is more serious than the enabling of war crimes.

We are at the moment awaiting sentence and have been remanded for reports. HHJ Chambers has stated that our offences ‘cross the custody threshold’. The date of sentencing was originally intended to be on June 26. It was then postponed to July 10 and then August 11. The latest date is September 1 and we understand that it may be postponed again.

This continual delay in sentence is in itself a form of punishment as a cloud of uncertainty hangs over all of us. One of us lost his job due to the conviction imposed and finding other means of employment will be extremely difficult while there is no closure. Overall, this case has been hanging over us for more than two years and now it is being delayed again for reasons that we have not been given but which we understand to relate to the inability of the court to agree a date with our barristers."

We have therefore decided to issue this statement in order that people who have been following the trials and prosecution, some would say persecution, of Palestine Action activists, are made aware of what is happening in this case.

Tony Greenstein

Jeremy Parker

Ibrahim Samadi

Alex Waters

Helen Caney (not convicted)

 

Mike Lynch White (centre), cofounder of Scientist Rebellion was sentenced to 27 months in prison at Chester Crown Court 

I seem to recall a saying that Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. This was first coined by Sir Edward Coke, the greatest jurist of the Elizabethan and Jacobin periods, who was variously Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas and King’s Bench as well as Attorney General.

In the Case of Proclamations and Dr. Bonham's Case, Coke declared the King to be subject to the law, and the laws of Parliament to be void if in violation of "common right and reason". Cases which foreshadowed Bushel’s Case of 1670 where a jury decided not to enforce a tyrannical statute.

A week ago, Saturday 22 July, was Prisoners’ Day of Action. There are currently 7 supporters of Palestine Action in prison for taking action to disrupt the production of Israeli weapons on British soil.

Four of them are detained after dismantling American weapons factory, Teledyne Labtech in Wales. Teledyne are the largest listed exporters of weapons from Britain to the Apartheid State of Israel. Two others are in prison for occupying APPH, a Canadian weapons factory, and supplier of parts for Israeli Elbit drones and fighter jets.

Over 100 more face trials for taking direct action against a range of weapons companies, mainly Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons firm. Elbit supply the majority of Israel’s military drone fleet, land equipment and munitions. Their weapons are used against the Palestinian people, and then marketed as “battle-tested” and sold on to other oppressive regimes across the world. Using the captive population of Gaza as a laboratory is a crime against humanity. All strikes against that industry are not only legitimate but essential.

The British State’s complicity with the colonisation of Palestine goes back all the way to the Balfour Declaration when, in the words of Arthur Koestler ‘“One nation solemnly promised to a second nation the country of a third.”  

Palestine Action  to date have shut down two Israeli weapons factories and cost Elbit hundreds of million pounds in lost contracts. By imprisoning activists, the British state is demonstrating that it prioritises protecting the military supply chain of a foreign apartheid state over the freedom of its own citizens.

In addition to handing down prison sentences, the State has imprisoned activists without trial and on occasions the Crown Prosecution Service have reintroduced previously dropped charges, after Elbit asked for a review. In reaction to both growing public support for direct action and the number of ‘perverse acquittals’ by juries, especially the Colston acquittals the Court of Appeal ruled, on reference from the Attorney General, that ‘lawful excuse’ defences such as Necessity (preventing a greater crime) and Human Rights defences of proportionality did not apply to cases of criminal damage.

For further information see Palestine Action Prisoners Day of Action on Saturday 22nd July

Almost 80 public figures, including members of the European Parliament, screenwriters, lecturers, musicians, writers and journalists, have signed an open letter calling on the UK to release detained Palestine Action protesters who "sacrificed their liberty to challenge colonial violence".

The protesters were arrested while obstructing the entrances to several sites belonging to Israel's largest weapons manufacturer, Elbit Systems, in the UK. Elbit, the letter says, manufactures "an array of weaponry, including drones equipped with payloads", and "profit from the captive population of Palestine — they have turned civilians into a human laboratory where experimental weaponry can be tested, improved on, and then marketed as "field-proven" and branded as "battle-tested" surveillance technology and components for tanks and fighter jets."

The signatories, who include Palestinian writer and activist Mohammed El-Kurd and musicians Roger Waters and Lowkey, added:

We demand the charges are dropped against those already incarcerated and at risk of prison over their work to disrupt the criminal production of Israeli weapons on British soil.

We stand with those who have sacrificed their liberty to challenge colonial violence and we call on others to do the same until they, and the Palestinian people, are free.

Palestine Action demo outside Newcastle Crown Court

Steps taken by Palestine Action, the letter continued,

have resulted in the closing down of two of Elbit's sites, and the loss of millions of pounds through the severance of MoD contracts. Palestine Action has inspired local communities across the country to rise up against these immoral factories which profit from the business of war and destruction.

In spite of this, the UK government

has decided to prioritise its interests in protecting the military supply chain of a foreign apartheid state by incarcerating its own people.

The heroes who have taken courageous action to expose and dismantle Britain's role in the colonisation of Palestine should be celebrated and rewarded, not imprisoned. We therefore call for the release of all Palestine Action political prisoners, and for the charges to be dropped.

Signatories to the letter also include British-Palestinian filmmaker Farah Nabulsi, lawyer and winner of the Palestine Book Award 2019 Academic Award, Professor Noura Erakat, and 2020 Creative Award Winner Susan Abulhawa, in addition to CAGE Director Moazzam Begg, MEPs Mick Wallace and Clare Daly and academic David Miller, who was fired from Bristol University following a campaign by the Israel lobby over his criticism of the Zionist state.

Here is the full statement calling for the release of Palestine Action prisoners

Solidarity from Greece



Banner Drop Manchester

Dabka in Leicester

Liverpool Protest


Leicester Keysight Technologies

Victory for Elbit 4 as Judge Chambers Backs Down Over Threat of Immediate Imprisonment

$
0
0

Zionists & Hacker (Lee) Harpin vent their fury over an ‘institutionally anti‑Semitic’ justice system

Tony Greenstein speech outside Wolverhampton Court on 6 September 2023 before 4 of the defendants were sentenced

The first thing I want to do is to thank the hundreds of people who stood in solidarity with the four of us who were given between 9 and 12 months suspended sentences last Wednesday. Our ‘crime’ was trying to prevent the genocidal arms factory, Elbit, from continuing to operate.

The importance of solidarity when activists are under attack from the State should never be under estimated. It emphasises that we are not alone in our fight for justice and the struggle against the war makers.

The demonstration outside the court and the willingness of activists to turn up from as far away as Wales emphasised the support we have. It is to the shame of Palestine Solidarity Campaign that at no stage, despite its 2021 conference policy supporting Palestine Action, did they lift a finger in our support. PSC Executive and its Director Ben Jamal are interested in only one thing – living off the back of the Palestinian struggle in order to build yet another NGO.

The demonstration outside Wolverhampton Crown Court when 4 Palestine Actionists were sentenced and walked free on September 6th 2023

When I walked into the dock and listened to HHJ Michael Chambers, a notoriously reactionary Tory judge, even by the standards of his profession, I was prepared to be sent down and I had packed my prison bag, as had my fellow Palestine Actionists.

Chambers had clearly prepared his speech well before he entered the court. The mitigation speeches of our barristers I suspect made little or no impression. His intention was to instil fear in us, so it was a pleasant surprise when he gave us the ‘benefit’ of his doubt that we ‘would no longer undertake violent protests’.

Of course Palestine Action has never indulged in violent protests. Noone has ever been injured by Palestine Action. Attacking an arms company which specialises in the supply of lethal weaponry to some of the most horrific regimes in the world is the opposite of violence. However these simple truths elude some of the brightest minds in the judicial system.

Nonetheless we were happy to promise the probation service that we would not be involved in similar protests in the next two years and we all intend to abide by that promise. Of course we don’t intend to desist from participating in protests against Elbit’s Death Factories.

A short resume of what led to my conviction

On 7 March 2021 I was rung up out of the blue by someone from Palestine Action who asked me to drive a van to the Midlands and to collect some ladders. Having hired a van I set off at about 9 pm. It was only when I phoned a number from a service station on the M40 that I was given a phone number and the address I was going to.

The disappointment of the Zionists is the best thing about the sentencing. Note that Zio Fascist Fiona Sharpe tells Brighton & Hove News editor Jo Wadsworth that she is doing 'a great job'

Arriving at an Airbnb just after 1 am I almost immediately left with Jeremy Parker to see if we could buy lock-on gear. Whoever had bought the other equipment had forgotten to buy anything to lock on. So much for the efficient military-style operation that the Prosecution sought to portray the action as. It more resembled Dads Army than the SAS.

When I arrived back at the flat all the bags were sealed and apart from the paint tubs I had no idea what they contained. It was only later after we were stopped on our way to Shenstone that I learnt that they contained sledge hammers and a crow bar.

I have no principled objection to damaging an arms factory. None at all. However I don’t think that for the sake of causing £¼m damage that activists should risk 2-3 years imprisonment unless they make that decision collectively at the outset.

However that is water under the bridge. The pontificating of Michael Chambers about damage to the factory – its CCTV, air-conditioning units etc. is the purest of hypocrisy when compared to the damage that Elbit's drones cause to people's bodies.

Palestine Action in action at Manchester recruitment agency iO Associates - The demonstration was successful - all ads for Elbit's death factories were taken down 

I envisage that Chambers could have sat in the Nazi Peoples Court denouncing individuals who had caused damage to IG Farben’s factories, which manufactured the gas Zyklon B, used to murder an estimated 4 million people. When your only concern is for property not people then it doesn’t matter what the factory produces.

Fiona Sharpe of Sussex Friends of Israel is a well known anti-Palestinian racist who describes opponents of a Factory of Death as 'thugs' - she finds  Dr Iain Darcy's comments I should have been given a medal incomprehensible

I watched Chambers closely over the 7 weeks of the trial. Not once did it even occur to him to question the lawfulness Elbit’s operations at Shenstone, which manufactures drones that are used to murder innocent civilians. Prosecutor Rachel Gould, who I assume is Jewish, also displayed no concern but she is probably a Zionist.

British law prioritises concern for property over people. As Lord Denning, former Master of the Rolls explained in Southwark LBC v Williams 

"... if hunger were once allowed to be an excuse for stealing, it would open a door through which all kinds of lawlessness and disorder would pass... if homelessness were once admitted as a defence to trespass, no one's house could be safe. Necessity would open a door which no man could shut. … So the courts must, for the sake of law and order, take a firm stand. They must refuse to admit the plea of necessity to the hungry and the homeless; "

Denning also intoned in respect of the Birmingham 6, who were wrongly convicted of the Birmingham pub bombings in 1974:

“We shouldn’t have all these campaigns to get the Birmingham Six released if they’d been hanged. They’d have been forgotten, and the whole community would be satisfied… It is better that some innocent men remain in jail than that the integrity of the English judicial system be impugned.”

I imagine that this is carved in stone in the Chambers home. At times he seemed to operate in tandem with the Prosecutor who has no doubt appeared before him for many years. It was on very rare occasions that they disagreed. 95% of the time he upheld her objections and 95% of the time he overruled the defence barristers’ objections. He even ruled that I had to disclose what I had said to my solicitor, which is a clear breach of legal privilege.

Good Law Project on right to defend yourself 

One of the few occasions in which he overruled the Prosecutor was on the    question of whether I had lied. Gould had originally asserted that when I was stopped by the Police and asked where I was going I lied when I said ‘I’m going for a drive’. I successfully persuaded her that what I said was factually true even though it wasn’t the answer the policeman wanted.

Chambers was having none of it. It was, as far as he was concerned, a lie albeit he then issued what is called a Lucas direction.

Chambers is a man who operates in a moral vacuum. He is certainly no philosopher and gave no indication that he is capable of deep thought or reflection. That is not true of all judges and in recent years there have been a number who were capable of both.

Lord Steyn - South African born Jewish judge who sat as a Law Lord

People such as Baroness Hale, former President of the Supreme Court, Law Lord Johan Steyn, Appeal Court Judge Stephen Sedley, who in Redmond-Hate v DPP  stated that

Free speech included not only the inoffensive but also the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome, and the provocative, as long as such speech did not tend to provoke violence.

Thomas Bingham

Other notable judges included Thomas Bingham, described as the greatest judge of his generation, who formulated 8 principles of the Rule of Law, Lord Philips the first President of the Supreme Court and Lord Woolf.

Even some of the more right-wing judges such as Jonathan Sumption were capable of straying from black letter law. In his final diatribe Chambers quoted Sumption to the effect that the Suffragettes had set back the cause of women’s emancipation by 5 years. However he forgot to mention that Sumption, in the Reith lecture, had stated that there was ‘no moral obligation to obey the law”. Sumption went on to say that there was no obligation to obey the COVID laws. 

The one thing Chambers was good at was in his ability to be selective in who and what he quoted. During the case and in his summing up Chambers quoted what is clearly his favourite judge, Lord  Hoffman. What he didn’t quote was  Hoffman’s observation that

Civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country. People who break the law to affirm their belief in the injustice of a law or government action are sometimes vindicated by history.

Mentioning the suffragettes Hoffman went on to say that “It is the mark of a civilised community that it can accommodate protests and demonstrations of this kind.” However most judges, Chambers included, are incapable of understanding that the law can be an instrument of tyranny.

As has often been pointed out, there was nothing illegal under German law in exterminating people because of their race. Demolishing peoples' homes in Israel and using torture is not illegal in Israel either. 

Patrick Devlin, a former Law Lord said of the jury system that

It is a protection against tyranny. It is also an insurance that the criminal law will conform to the ordinary man's idea of what is fair and just. If it does not the jury will not be a party to its enforcement. They have in the past used their power of acquittal to defeat the full operation of laws which they thought to be too hard…. One way or another they are prone to give effect to their repugnance to a law by refusing to convict under it. The small body of men, who under modern conditions, constitute the effective body of legislators have to bear this in mind. It affects the character of the laws they make, for it is no use making laws which will not be enforced.

Devlin pointed to the reality of laws. Most MPs never read what they vote for before it is passed into law. They are written by parliamentary draughtsmen.

Dame Heather Hallett, a member of the Court of Appeal from 2005 to 2019 and who is now chairing the COVID Inquiry, said in her 2017 Blackstone lecture on the Role of the Jury that

A jury may refuse to convict in spite of the law and the evidence because it concludes that the law is an unjust law. The jury passes its verdict on the law. Secondly, it ensures that the prosecution and the judge are on trial.

Yet when I put the same sentiments in a blog Chambers stated that

“He’s also been calling on jurors to return outcomes according to conscience. That’s a serious matter of contempt.

“It’s a serious contempt to invite jurors to return outcomes which are not in accordance with the facts, but in accordance with their conscience

If it is a serious contempt of court to point out what is a part of the Common Law, then why is there a plaque on the walls of the Old Bailey which refers to the Bushel case of 1670, that says exactly this?

Chambers, whatever his other sins might be, cannot be accused of originality. He is incapable of comprehending any social or political analysis that challenges his conventional conservative upbringing.

Chambers favourite comparison when challenged on police malpractice was of the police uncovering a gang plying drugs on the motorway. This was in connection to the Public Immunity Certificate that Chambers granted before the swearing in of the jury, thus preventing any discussion on what information the police possessed. Chambers had difficulty comprehending the difference between a gang of drug smugglers and human rights activists.

It is clear that the Police had intelligence on our action even before it occurred yet when they stopped the van they told us that it was because the van was not registered in the area. A clear lie. When they opened the van and saw the Palestinian flags they asked ‘are they Israeli?’ In other words the Police were given a license to lie on oath.

Chambers was fond of quoting the reactionary new Lady Chief Justice, Sue Carr who succeeded the even more reactionary Ian Burnett, distinguished only by the umbrella that others held for him. Carr’s only claim to fame is that she is the first woman to take the post. Like Thatcher the only acceptable woman for the most senior judicial post is a deeply reactionary one.

Carr demonstrated her mettle at the end of July when she refused to grant a right of appeal to Morgan Trowland and Marcus Decker who had scaled Dartford Bridge as part of a Just Stop Oil protest. I say this despite disagreeing with their method of protest. It is oil refineries not people who should be blockaded. However the sentences were grossly disproportionate and intended to chill the right to protest.

Amongst the more stupid of Chambers statements were that “It was clear from the evidence you gave to the jury that you were unrepentant.” Were we seriously expected to ‘repent’ for having targeted an Israeli arms factory?

Other equally stupid statements were that “You each demonstrated an unswerving, blinkered commitment to your cause.’ Blinkered?  Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Elbit doesn’t just supply Israel with 85% of its drones. It supplies every genocidal state in the world. There is no conflict – from Yemen to Kashmir to Myanmar– in which Elbit doesn’t help murderous regimes kill their own citizens. The case of Myanmar is particularly egregious since the Burmese Generals have massacred and expelled the Rohinga people in their thousands. Even the UK government has sanctioned this regime but as far as Elbit is concerned no regime is out of bounds.

For Chambers the real evil is not the children whose lives are snuffed out by Elbit weapons but the daubing of the company's walls with red paint.  The immorality of our judges, and Chambers is just an example, has a long tradition. The International Criminal Court Act 2001 has become a dead letter.

Other idiotic observations of Chambers were that:      

“It’s apparent to everyone that … public attitudes have hardened towards tolerance for extreme actions or minorities choosing disruption or criminal damage rather than using the main routes that are open to protest in a democratic society.

“That has also been reflected by recent decisions of the court of appeal.”

Leaving aside whether we are an 'extreme minority' it is true that the recent decision of the Court of Appeal on Colston was hostile to direct action and follows the move to the right of the Supreme Court. But there is no evidence that public attitudes have hardened. On the contrary. The Colston decision which provoked the Court of Appeal into reinterpreting the law occurred  precisely because a jury had acquitted the protesters.

What is true is that the Courts have bowed to the desire of Tory Ministers to outlaw direct action and the right to protest.

Throughout the trial Chambers displayed his political bias, referring to the Israeli-Palestinian ‘conflict’. Would he have termed the occupation of France by Nazi Germany a ‘conflict’ or an occupation?

Israel pours concrete into water wells to deprive Palestinians of water

Whenever there is a coup e'etat, such as in the case of Rhodesia in 1964, when it declared UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) the courts are quick to fall into line.

I quoted in my book the decision of the Dutch Supreme Court in November 1940 by 12-5 that there were no grounds to refuse to sign the Aryan Declaration. This meant the Nazis were given the legal go ahead to dismiss all Jewish government employees. In the process they betrayed fellow Supreme Court Judge Lodewijk Visser who was Jewish. The decision was a recognition of who held power. There was no basis in Dutch law for such a decision.

The decision to prosecute Palestine Action activists was itself a political act

I mentioned the eight principles of the Rule of Law as set out by Thomas Bingham.  The third of these rules was that:

The laws of the land should apply equally to all, save to the extent that objective differences justify differentiation

The fifth rule was that

The law must afford adequate protection of fundamental human rights.

The eighth rule was that

The rule of law requires compliance by the state with its obligations in international law as in national law.

Suffice to say all three of these rules were broken when this prosecution was brought.

According to the Good Law Project some £10 billion of the £12.5 billion spent on PPE during the COVID crisis was written off. The government set up a VIP lane, subsequently declared unlawful, in order that it could hand contracts to its friends and cronies who then recycled some of it back to the Tory Party.

The most infamous case was that of Tory peer Lady Michelle Mone who trousered £200m and made a £100m profit on PPE that was unfit for use. Matt Hancock’s pub landlord Alex Bourne got away with £30m for a PPE contract that never delivered anything. Has there even been a whisper of an investigation still less a prosecution?  Of course not. The rule of law in today’s Britain applies almost exclusively to those without means.

We saw that in the refusal of the Met to prosecute Boris Johnson for his violations of COVID regulations. It was only the threat of judicial review which forced them to do so. When they did reverse their position they chose to investigate just 1 of the 10+ parties Johnson had attended.

As the Good Law Project, which had brought the judicial review said of the Met's reasons for not investigating:

It points to a Met that does not want to investigate potential criminality in Government, or to a police force that is excessively deferential to those in power. It is a policy which dramatically undermines the rule of law.

The Court of Appeal ruling that those acquitted in the Colston case should not have been able to rely on human rights defences is a continuation of a long tradition of judicial racism that ignored the plunder and genocide of the British Empire. That Ian Burnett and fellows should oppose the toppling of a statue celebrating a mass murderer should be no surprise.

Liar Lee Harpin, or as I call him, Hacker Harpin, described me as a prison escapee!

The decision to bring our prosecution is a clear contradiction of Bingham’s rule no. 8, compliance with international law. Elbit’s factories manufacture drones, not for civil but military use. It supplies these drones knowing full well that they will be used against civilians, be it in Gaza, Myanmar or Sudan. As the New York Times reported after the 2021 military coup in Myanmar:

The generals, who staged a coup a month ago, are now back in charge with a far more sophisticated arsenal at their disposal: Israeli-made surveillance drones, European iPhone cracking devices and American software that can hack into computers and vacuum up their contents.

Chamber’s only concern was the £30,000 loss that might have been caused to Elbit Systems. The man is morally bankrupt yet he sits in judgement on others.

The real question is the lawfulness of Elbit operations at Shenstone  not minor and petty criminal damage.

Fellow racist Gaynor Bond expresses her sympathy to Jonathan Hoffman - 'so sorry JH. X'

It is no wonder that Chambers repeatedly called Britain a ‘mature democracy’ when the word kleptocracywould be more apposite. Clearly the word ‘democracy’ means something different to judges, even those as elevated as the Recorder of Wolverhampton and ordinary people.

Today there is an attempt by the Tory government, backed up by Starmer, to criminalise all effective public protest. The courts are making it clear that they will not place any obstacles in their way. That is why there is an urgent need for greater collaboration between climate action and Palestine solidarity groups such as in Oldham where Elbit’s factory was shut down.

The Zionists were not happy with Hoffman's fellow criminal Damon Lenzner accusing the justice system of 'institutional antisemitism'

But this is the week when we can rejoice at the discomfort of the Zionists. There was Damon Lenzner, the crooked crony of Jonathan Hoffman telling his coterie of Zionist fascists that the justice system was ‘institutionally anti-Semitic’ for not gaoling someone who is Jewish! And there was Hacker Harpin, arrested for eavesdropping on other peoples’ phones (including the parents of a dead child) with his usual quota of mistakes in the Jewish News – I counted 4 (see letter).

My letter to the Jewish News pointing out their mistakes - it was sent last Friday - has still not been corrected

But when it came to it, HHJ Chambers proved that his bark was worse than his bite as he recognised that gaoling those who oppose a genocidal company is not a good look – even for the judiciary.

There is just one part of the sentence - 20 days of rehabilitation - that might prove problematic. We have no need of 'rehabilitation'. This sounds very much like a Chinese or North Korean re-education camp which teaches protestors to love their government.

Tony Greenstein

I have reinstated all the blogs I was forced to take down

I was forced, at the end of the trial on May 16, to take down all my blogs written during the trial because of the threat of being immediately gaoled for Contempt of Court. Now the trial is over, a jury can't be prejudiced and they can be put back, which is what I have done.  They are:

Free all Palestine Action Protesters – Preventing War Crimes is Not A Crime

Sharon Graham & Gary Smith – War Whores and Zionists Stand in Solidarity with Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis As the Slaughter Continues

$
0
0

 The TUC Decision to Support NATO’s Proxy War in the Ukraine is Shameful but Not Surprising Given Its Record of Subservience to the British State


It is no surprise that Gary Smith of the institutionally sexist and racist GMB and an avid Zionist, has backed NATO's neo-Nazi allies in Ukraine. The fact that Zelensky has approved laws stripping workers of their rights and banning left-wing parties, including Platform for Life, which has 44 seats in the 450-seat Ukrainian parliament, has been no deterrent to Smith, since he also does his best to suppress workers’ struggles.

What is more remarkable is that Sharon Graham, who has a reputation for supporting strikes but declared herself ‘non political’ when she was elected General Secretary, has also got into bed with the Zionists. In particular taking advice from the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, an organisation set up and funded by the Israeli state and the Jewish National Fund,about banning Jeremy Corbyn – The Big Lie. Graham also has given her support to NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine.

One can only hope that the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Party, who have both up till now supported Graham, see the error of their ways and reconsider their support for this British chauvinist.

The TUC motion, which was opposed by only two unions – the FBU and Bakers Union with the RMT and NEU abstaining – called for more weapons to be supplied to Ukraine. These reactionary union bureaucrats, fools all, should bear in mind that a large percentage of the arms already supplied have found their way onto the private market. Ukraine is Europe’s most corrupt state.

Azov Demonstration 2014

The United States and Britain have been directly supplying neo-Nazi forces in Ukraine since 2014, despite a Congressional motion cutting aid to Azov in 2018. We face the prospect of a new Libya in Europe with private militias and an ongoing civil war.

There have already been credible threats that if Ukraine doesn’t receive enough weaponry then they will resort to terrorism in Europe. What does NATO think is going to happen when the war ends? Do they think the fascists will disarm? We could see an outbreak of terrorism in Europe which will make ISIS seem like a tea party.


flag of the Ukrainian NPGU mining union courtesy of Skwawkbox


Azov symbol bears remarkable similarity to that of the NPGU mining union

The sonnenrad or sunwheel is one of a number of ancient European symbols appropriated by the Nazis. It bears a remarkable similarity to that of the NPGU mining union which was on display at the TUC Congress

Mark Serwotka of PCS, who has previously been considered on the left, joined the warmongers in offering “unequivocal support for those currently suffering occupation by a brutal Russian invasion”. Serwotka said that ‘We are with the Ukrainian people and for Russia out, only the people of Ukraine should decide what the outcome looks like.” For Serwotka the activities of open neo-Nazis and the attacks on Russian speaking Ukrainians since 2014 count for nothing.

Paul Massaro is a senior US governmentpolicy advisor for counter-corruption and sanctions

Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State in the Biden administration admitted that the US had funded, to the tune of over $5 billion, the overthrow of the elected President Yanukovych in 2014. Fascists were heavily armed when they outgunned the police.

“Our solidarity must know no borders,” said GMB President Barbara Plant. Not a word that the GMB is used to using when it comes to workers nearer home. Unite backed the motion despite its Executive having issued a statement saying that “wars are never in the interest of working people”. One wonders whether Sharon Graham even realises that opposing war and supplying more weapons to Ukraine is a contradiction.

The GMB has never extended solidarity to anyone outside Britain. It has consistently supported Israel’s ethnic cleansing and has repeatedly sided with the Jewish Labour Movement, the British wing of Israel’s racist Israeli Labor Party. At the moment it is trying to expel a former International Officer Bert Schounberg for moving a motion at his branch calling for the disaffiliation of the JLM.

Last year a GMB resolution supported by Unite under its war mongering General Secretary, Sharon Graham, called for increased arms spending. Unbelievably it called on the TUC to back an increase in arms spending to 3 per cent of GDP. This at a time when the NHS and schools are being starved of money. As Chris Nineham of Stop the War Coalition wrote

‘It actually put the TUC to the right of the Tory government which even now only dares to push for 2.5 per cent arms spending.

John McDonnell has thrown in his lot with Ukraine's neo-Nazi infested armed forces

Andrew Murray wrote

Last year GMB general secretary Gary Smith persuaded the TUC Congress to vote, shamefully if narrowly, to campaign for increased military spending.

At a time of austerity and a cost-of-living crisis, that decision prioritised the arms industry over the vital interests of millions of working people, not least the tens of thousands of GMB members in the beleaguered public services.

It also revealed that Smith believes that the British government can be trusted with more weapons, despite overwhelming evidence that they are used either for wars of aggression or for sale to despotic regimes.

Given Smith’s support for Apartheid Israel, it is no surprise that this appalling reactionary should demand that the Tories divert yet more money from the NHS and their own workers in the health service to feed America’s war industry. It is a shameful comment on the British trade union movement that this motion was passed.

The neo-Nazi credentials of the Azov battalion, which has been integrated into the army and now promoted to brigade status, is well documented. That did not stop Arsen Avakov, Ukraine’s Interior Minister, a man personally responsible for integrating far-right groups into the state from defending them to the online newspaper Ukrayinska Pravda in 2019.

“The shameful information campaign about the alleged spread of Nazi ideology (among Azov members) is a deliberate attempt to discredit the ‘Azov’ unit and the National Guard of Ukraine,”

As even NBC had to admit

even though Putin is engaging in propaganda, it’s also true that Ukraine has a genuine Nazi problem… important as it is to defend the yellow-and-blue flag against the Kremlin’s brutal aggression, it would be a dangerous oversight to deny Ukraine’s antisemitic history and collaboration with Hitler’s Nazis, as well as the latter-day embrace of neo-Nazi factions in some quarters.

NBC went on to remind us that

On the eve of World War II, Ukraine was home to one the largest Jewish communities in Europe, with estimates as high as 2.7 million, a remarkable number considering the territory’s long record of antisemitism and pogroms. By the end, more than half would perish. When German troops took control of Kyiv in 1941, they were welcomed by “Heil Hitler” banners. Soon after, nearly 34,000 Jews — along with Roma and other “undesirables” — were rounded up and marched to fields outside the city on the pretext of resettlement only to be massacred in what became known as the “Holocaust by bullets.”

The Babyn Yar ravine continued to fill up as a mass grave for two years. With as many as 100,000 murdered there, it became one of the largest single killing sites of the Holocaust outside of Auschwitz and other death camps. Researchers have noted the key role locals played in fulfilling Nazi kill orders at the site.

Those locals were led by Stepan Bandera’s Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and its armed wing the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA). Ukraine is the only country in the world to have a national holiday in memory of a Nazi collaborator, Stepan Bandera. The Times of Israel described how Hundreds of Ukrainian nationalists march in honor of Nazi collaborator.

Today the British press plays down the threat of the neo-Nazis in Ukraine. However at the time of the Maiden coup in 2014 they were singing a different song. The Guardian described how Azov fighters were both Ukraine's greatest weapon and its greatest threat.

They quoted Dimitary, a member of the Azov group as saying that

"I have nothing against Russian nationalists, or a great Russia, but Putin's not even a Russian. Putin's a Jew."

You might think that Zionist groups like America’s Anti-Defamation League would be prominent in denouncing these neo-Nazis and anti-Semites. After all they are usually able to spot ‘anti-Semites’ before they have time to unfurl the Palestinian flaga. But strangely enough they have kept remarkable quiet. Even worse they have been excusing and justifying them.

In 2019 – before it became politically necessary to whitewash them – the ADL itself warned that an “extremist group called the Azov Battalion has ties to neo-Nazis and white supremacists” and issued a report on how the Ukrainian militia was trying to “connect with like-minded extremists from the US.”

Ali Abunimah described how the ADL has been turning a blind eye to Hitler’s accomplices in Ukraine and even justifying their record. As Abunimah observed ‘So when Washington goes to war, the lobby will often lend its propaganda services to the cause.’

This shows that the Zionist lobby, of which the ADL is the most prominent, are first and foremost supporters of US imperialism. So now it is rehabilitating the Ukrainian collaborators who helped Hitler exterminate Jews and Poles.

This Holocaust revisionism is motivated by the need to whitewash the present-day, far-right Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis.

The reason the US, NATO and the European Union gives for sending weapons and mercenaries to Ukraine is that they are helping a fellow democracy defend its independence and sovereignty against an illegal invasion by an expansionist, megalomaniacal madman.

Anrdrii Melnyk is currently Ukraine's Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs

It is therefore very awkward from a Western perspective that the Ukrainian regime is underpinned by hard-right fascists and neo-Nazis.

Acknowledging this fact, Western war propagandists fear, would legitimize Putin’s claim that the Russian invasion – which has been overwhelmingly condemned by the UN General Assembly – is justified by a need to “de-Nazify” and demilitarize Ukraine.

The dilemma is summed up in an NBC News headline: “Ukraine’s Nazi problem is real, even if Putin’s ‘denazification’ claim isn’t.”

But most Western media will no longer even go as far as NBC News in acknowledging this reality.

The current war can be traced directly to the 2014 coup in Ukraine, during which the US and its allies supported far-right and neo-Nazi elements. The goal was to install a US-friendly regime that would bring Ukraine into NATO. Moscow has long seen NATO expansion as an existential threat.

Key actors in the US-supported coup were neo-Nazi groups like Right Sector, the Azov Battalion and C14. They are part of a broader Ukrainian nationalist movement that venerates Bandera, the leader of the OUN, which collaborated with Hitler during World War II.

In an interview with Andrew Srulevitch, ADL Director of European Affairs, Professor David Fishman exonerated the UPA and Bandera, who were responsible for the slaughter of 300,000 Jews and Poles. Asked about torchlit marches in Kyiv with red and black flags, Fishman had this to say:

“For Ukrainian nationalists, UPA and Bandera are symbols of the Ukrainian fight for Ukrainian independence. The UPA allied with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union for tactical – not ideological – reasons.... When Ukrainian nationalists and Jews look at those red and black flags, we see two different things.’

In fact UPA attacks on Jews were so ferocious that Jews sought the protection of the Germans.

The Banderite bands and the local nationalists raided every night, decimating the Jews

a survivor testified in 1948.

Jews sheltered in the camps where Germans were stationed, fearing an attack by Banderites. Some German soldiers were brought to protect the camps and thereby also the Jews.

ADL, which purports to oppose anti-Semitism, carried the interview with Fishman on its website and in its newsletter. Zionist organisations, which are usually so concerned about ‘anti-Semitism’, simply echoed NATO propaganda. As Abunimah observed:

Fishman’s excuse that Bandera and other Nazi collaborators are “symbols” of the “fight for Ukrainian independence” mirrors the claims from American white supremacists that their display of the Confederate battle flag is merely to honor their “heritage” and not to celebrate a regime that went to war to protect its “right” to enslave people from Africa.

Dozens of Ukrainian streets are named after Bandera and in a particularly nice touch Bandera’s street runs right up to the site of Babi Yar.

Daniel Lazare, in a review of Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe’s Stepan Bandera: The Life and Afterlife of a Ukrainian Nationalist wrote:

Although Bandera and his followers would later try to paint the alliance with the Third Reich as no more than “tactical,” an attempt to pit one totalitarian state against another, it was in fact deep-rooted and ideological. Bandera envisioned the Ukraine as a classic one-party state with himself in the role of führer, or providnyk, and expected that a new Ukraine would take its place under the Nazi umbrella, much as Jozef Tiso’s new fascist regime had in Slovakia or Ante Pavelić’s in Croatia.

What we are seeing is a cynical attempt to rewrite history in order to portray Bandera and the OUN/UPA as mere Ukrainian nationalists. Why? Because NATO’s Ukrainian friends identify with Bandera’s alliance with Nazi Germany. Bandera saw things differently explaining that Ukrainian nationalism had taken shape “in a spirit similar to the National Socialist ideas”.

That the BBC and the yellow press is engaged in trying to prettify the Azov Battalion and assorted neo-Nazis is one thing (see Ros Atkin’s apologia What untruths is Russia spreading about Nazis in Ukraine?) but for a Zionist organisation which purports to oppose anti-Semitism to do the same is something else.

As Jimmy Dore observed, there are now good Nazis as well as bad Nazis. The good ones are pro-Western and publicly, at least, play down their anti-Semitism.

An example of Azov’s handiwork was the body of a woman found in the basement of Azov’s HQ in Mariupol. She had been tortured and a swastika was scratched into her chest. For which Western media blamed Russians.

Oleksiy Kuzmenko’s Far-Right Group Made Its Home in Ukraine’s Major Western Military Training Hub[George Washington University, September 2021] makes for sombre reading. Kuzmenko wrote that:

...  since 2018, the National Army Academy (NAA), Ukraine’s premier military education institution and a major hub for Western military assistance to the country, has been home to Centuria, a self-described order of “European traditionalist” military officers that has the stated goals of reshaping the country’s military along right-wing ideological lines and defending the “cultural and ethnic identity” of European peoples against “Brussels’ politicos and bureaucrats.” The group envisions a future where “European right forces are consolidated and national traditionalism is established as the disciplining ideological basis for the European peoples.”

The group, led by individuals with ties to Ukraine’s ...  Azov movement, has attracted multiple members, including current and former officer cadets of the NAA now serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Apparent members have appeared in photos giving Nazi salutes and made seemingly extremist statements online.

The group has been able to proselytize Ukraine’s future military elite inside the NAA. Members have also gained access to Western military education and training Institutions.

The presence of the far right within the NAA is alarming because that institution is central to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Western support for that country, and Western military presence there. Foreign military instructors routinely engage with the Academy’s cadets at both the Academy proper and the International Peacekeeping and Security Center it oversees....

Azov figures and groups linked to Azov also heaped praise on Centuria and shared its messages online. In January 2019, for example, Eduard Yurchenko, an ideologue of the Azov movement, praised the group on Telegram, where he now has more than 1,100 subscribers. “You should know that this is our legendary future growing,” Yurchenko wrote of Centuria, emphasizing that the group was holding events within the NAA. ...

Galician Youth, a group that is linked to the Azov movement and operates in the Western part of Ukraine, similarly shared Centuria propaganda on Telegram in 2019.

In May 2021, the United Jewish Community of Ukraine... accused Galician Youth of spreading anti-Semitic posters in Lviv. The group denied having any connection to anti-Semitic posters and stated that it condemned anti-Semitism and xenophobia. Belying these statements, however, Galician Youth events, patches, etc., feature white nationalist symbols.

The evidence is overwhelming that the AFU is being penetrated at all levels by neo-Nazi groups.

Hope not Hate, which never lost an opportunity to attack anti-racists like Chris Williamson for ‘anti-Semitism’, went out of its way to downplay genuine anti-Semitism in Ukraine. HnH withdrew an award to Joe Solo for having supported Chris, though it ended up with egg on their faces writing that:

Ukraine's contemporary Jewish community, while facing antisemitism that all Jewish populations sadly receive, has, in the post-communist era, become a thriving community in the country with freedoms and protections written in law.

Eduard Dolinsky, the leader of Ukraine’s Jewish community clearly disagreed:

Our government encourages nationalistic groups. Our government encourages glorification of Nazi collaborator mass murderers and murderers of Jews.

Literally there are hundreds of monuments, streets named after killers of Jews. You can’t imagine in the West... a monument to a policeman who was escorting Jews to Nazi death camps.... We have anti-Semitic incidents every day – vandalism on Holocaust mass graves, vandalism on Jewish monuments. ... No one was ever convicted. They always deny the issue.

Zelensky’s Alliance with Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis

Western propaganda uses the fact that Zelenskyy is Jewish to legitimise Ukraine’s Nazis. This is not strange however. Zelensky is a rabid Zionist and Zionism historically has always koshered anti-Semitism. It did so with Nazi Germany.

Less than 3 weeks ago the Israeli  Ambassador to Romania, together with settler leader Yossi Dagan, met with the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians party. This is a party that openly denies the holocaust and is descended from the Iron Guard who in 1941 staged a pogrom in Bucharest and hung the bodies of Jews from meat hooks in butcher shops. As Ha’aretz observed in its editorial ‘Shared Values’: Netanyahu’s Israel Cements Another Grim Alliance With Europe’s Far Right

Zelensky is a puppet of Ukraine’s fascists who came to power thanks to patronage from Ukrainian oligarch, Ihor Kolomoisky. Kolomoisky funded  Zelensky’s election campaign whilst also funding the Azov Battalion and other far-right militias.

In 2019 Zelensky met with a range of fascist groups telling reporters “I met with veterans yesterday. Everyone was there – the National Corps, Azov, and everyone else.” A few seats away from Zelensky was Yehven Karas, leader of the neo-Nazi C14 gang.

In 2019, Zelensky defended Ukrainian footballer Roman Zolzulya against Spanish fans taunting him as a “Nazi.” Zolzulya had posed beside photos of Bandera and openly supported the AB. Zelensky, described Zolzulya as “not only a cool football player but a true patriot.”

In April 2021 Zelensky tried to appoint the neo-Nazi former head of the Right Sector in Odessa, Serhiy Sternenko as head of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU). As the former head of the neo-Nazi Right Sector in Odessa, Sternenko was directly implicated in the 2014 Trade Unions House massacre in Odessa, when 46 trade unionists were burnt alive or shot whilst attempting to flee the burning building. It is a massacre that Smith and Graham are remarkably unconcerned or ignorant about.

In November 2021 Dmytro Yarosh, announced that he had been appointed as an advisor to the Commander-in-Chief of the AFU. Yarosh led the Right Sector from 2013-2015, vowing to lead the “de-Russification” of Ukraine.

A month later, as war with Russia drew closer, Zelensky awarded Right Sector commander Dmytro Kotsyubaylo the “Hero of Ukraine” commendation. Kosyubaylo keeps a pet wolf in his frontline base, and likes to joke to visiting reporters that his fighters “feed it the bones of Russian-speaking children.”

On March 1, Zelensky replaced the regional administrator of Odessa with Maksym Marchenko, a former commander of the extreme right Aidar Battalion, which has been accused of an array of war crimes in the Donbas.

Zelensky’s visit to Greece in April 2022 backfired dramatically in a country which was occupied during WWII. Zelensky’s address cut away to broadcast two members of the AB. Both said that they were of Greek heritage. It caused outrage. “Nazis Return to Parliament — Thanks to Mitsotakis” ran one headline referring to the fact that only recently had Greece managed to drive out its own neo-nazis.

The decision of the TUC to give blanket support to NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine, knowing full well that neo-Nazi groups are integrated armed forces is or should be a matter of shame. Clearly Gary Smith and Sharon Graham have no shame.

Tony Greenstein

Why the Palestine solidarity movement should have nothing to do with Peter Gregson

$
0
0

Statement from Palestine solidarity activists and organisations concerning Peter Gregson

For a number of years Peter Gregson has been an activist on the fringes of the Palestine solidarity movement. Whereas previously he has been treated as a nuisance today his activities pose a threat to the solidarity movement and should be treated as such.

Gregson is notorious for setting up his own ‘campaign’ groups such as LAZIR (Labour Against Zionist Islamophobic Racism) and the Campaign Against Bogus Anti-Semitism. Now it is the One Democratic Palestine [ODP].

In setting up ODP he is deliberately misleading people into believing that it is the same as the One Democratic State Campaign and One Democratic State Initiative.

Gregson was initially expelled by Labour Against the Witchhunt in 2019 for posting a petition linking to an article by Ian Fantom that defended a holocaust denier Nick Kollerstrom, who Gregson described as a ‘holocaust sceptic’. Fantom wrote that Kollerstrom ‘had been targeted in a witch-hunt for a literature review he wrote on ‘The Auschwitz “Gas Chamber” Illusion and a… swimming pool at Auschwitz.’

When requested to take this link down Gregson refused. Fantom and Kollerstrom are co-founders of the Keep Talkinggroup which has hosted a variety of conspiracy theorists like Piers Corbyn and anti-Semites such as Gilad Atzmon.

Gregson’s reasons for participating in the ‘Keep Talking’ group’ was that we need to use every single platform we can find to get our message out.’ This included the anti-Semitic far-Right. The Jewish Chronicle published an article based on correspondence which Gregson had made public detailing what had happened.

Gregson has since been refused membership by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Jewish Network for Palestine and a host of similar groups.

Recently Gregson has espoused openly anti-Semitic arguments seeing the source of the government’s support for Zionism as being due to the undue influence of Jews. In an article on the anti-Semitic Redress site, he stated:

The people who foisted the IHRA definition upon us were the Jews in the UK who support Israel, so the question arises: do Jews in the UK have significant leverage within the bodies that represent our interests – our courts, our media, our trade unions, our political parties, our government?

Gregson answered his question in the affirmative. In a section ‘Rich Jewish bankers’ Gregson declared that ‘Right from the outset, rich Jewish bankers such as Lord Rothschild backed Zionism. It is unlikely we would have Israel now were it not for his influence.’

The suggestion that Israel owes its existence to ‘rich Jewish bankers’ is a classic anti-Semitic stereotype. It is also untrue. The Rothschilds were a house divided with the majority of the British family opposed to Zionism. For example the President of the anti-Zionist League of British Jews, formed in the wake of the Balfour Declaration, was Sir Lionel Rothschild, a Tory MP.

The Jewish bourgeoisie were overwhelmingly opposed to Zionism. The only member of the Lloyd George cabinet who opposed the Balfour Declaration was its only Jewish member, Sir Edwin Montagu. However facts rarely disturb Gregson.

Gregson wrote that ‘Plenty of politicians too… are Jewish and support Israel.’ Support for Israel is common to all politicians, Jewish and non-Jewish. Gregson singled out Jon Lansman and Rhea Wolfson who ‘used their tribal background shamelessly in 2018 to successfully remove our freedom of speech on Israel.’ Gregson completely ignores non-Jewish and Christian Zionist support for Zionism.

Gregson asserted that ‘it was the wealthy and influential Jews in politics and the media who foisted the IHRA definition upon us’. Gavin Williamson, who threatened universities with a loss of funding if they didn’t adopt the IHRA, is not Jewish. In conflating being Jewish with Zionism and Israel, Gregson echoes Zionist propaganda and the IHRA itself.

The struggle for Palestinian liberation and against Zionism is an anti-racist struggle. There is no place in the Palestine solidarity movement for those who spread anti-Semitic propaganda under the guise of support for the Palestinians. In so doing Gregson plays into the hands of the Zionists and Israel’s supporters.

We advise supporters of Palestine to reject Peter Gregson and keep a wide berth from his many and varied organisations. 

Representatives of religious Zionist youth group Bnei Akiva Meet Jewish Racist Bezalel Smotrich in London

Gregson’s Anti-Semitism Doesn’t Hurt Jews But It Does Hurt Palestinians

As Palestine solidarity activists are well aware, accusations of anti-Semitism are the only defence that apologists for Israeli Apartheid have left in their armoury. With Jewish neo-Nazi Ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich in Israel’s coalition government and the reign of terror that is being conducted by the military junta in the West Bank, ‘anti-Semitism’ is their only answer to the call for Boycott Divestment and Sanctions.

It is with extreme reluctance that I circulated the statement below to activists asking them to sign a call for people to avoid Peter Gregson and his increasingly bizarre anti-Semitic statements such as his remark that

The people who foisted the IHRA definition upon us were the Jews in the UK who support Israel

Those of us with longer memories than the day before yesterday will recollect that it was the distinctly non-Jewish Gavin Williamson who foisted the IHRA fake definition of anti-Semitism upon universities by threatening their funding.

Jonathan Freedland - Led the Fake 'Antisemitism' Campaign Against Corbyn

Even worse was the remark of Gregson that the Zionist movement supported the annihilation of European Jews. Such hyperbole is totally unnecessary. As I show in my recent book Zionism During the Holocaust the Zionists did many terrible things, from blocking routes of escape for Jewish refugees to entering into an trading agreement with the Nazis that destroyed the Jewish Boycott but there is no evidence that they supported Hitler’s final solution.

until 1940 most Jews refused to move to Israel on religious grounds. These were the people that Hitler gassed. With Zionist support. Proof? Over the period 1942-44, Rabbi Weissmandl of Hungary made a deal with Adolf Eichmann whereby the Germans would “sell” the Jews to him

Weissmandel made no deal with Eichmann, that was Rudolf Kasztner, the leader of Hungarian Jewry. If Gregson is referring to the Europa Plan of Weissmandel it was with Dieter Wisliceny not Eichmann. To accuse any Jew, even Zionists, of having supported Hitler’s extermination of the Jews is clearly anti-Semitic because it is blaming the dead for their own murder. The Nazis did not distinguish between Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews in the gas chambers.

A Political Health Warning - Why Palestine Solidarity Activists Should Have Nothing to do with Peter Gregson

As Boris Johnson demonstrated with his racist and anti-Semitic novel 72 Virgins the Zionist movement has no objection to genuine anti-Semitism. Instead it seeks to redefine opposition to racism as racism in an exercise of double think that Orwell long ago predicted.

Jews in Britain are overwhelmingly White and suffer no discrimination on account of being Jewish. Jews in Britain are a largely middle class community as Jewish historians Geoffrey Alderman and William Rubinstein have documented. Of course not all Jews are prosperous but on average they are. Nor do they suffer from state racism.

Nonetheless anti-Semitic prejudice is to be condemned, not because of its effect on Jews but because it is extremely damaging to the Palestinian cause. It lends weight to the false accusations of the Zionists that support for the Palestinians is anti-Semitic.

It is welcome that Asa Winstanley, author of Weaponising Anti-Semitism, which documents the scurrilous ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign waged against the left and Jeremy Corbyn,has signed the statement. Altogether 57 people and organisations have added their signature, representing a cross section of the Palestine solidarity and Jewish anti-Zionist spectrum. It is regrettable that noone in the Jewish Socialists Group signed the statement although people are welcome to add their signatures by commenting on the article or emailing me.

Although national PSC declined the opportunity to sign the statement activists from 6 PSC branches have added their signature in addition to two branches, Norwich and Cambridge. Mick Napier, founder member and former Chair of Scottish PSC has also signed.

Palestine Action Activists Picketing Court Hearing

Five activists from Palestine Action, including founders Huda Ammori and Richard Barnard as well five members of Jewish Network for Palestine have added their names as has John Tymon of Football Against Apartheid.

The Rev. Stephen Sizer - Victim of Justin Welby and the Zionists

Especially welcome is the Rev. Stephen Sizer, who was defrocked earlier in the year after false allegations of anti-Semitism from the Board of Deputies were upheld by a rigged Church of England tribunal. Justin Welby, the most right-wing Archbishop of Canterbury since George Carey, presided over the campaign against Stephen. Carey was later found to have covered up child abuse in the Church of England as Welby has also done.

The statement below conveys a very simple message. The cause of Palestine is an anti-racist one and when anti-Semites take up the cause we will act to isolate them in just the same way as we did Gilad Atzmon a decade ago.

Unlike the Zionists and the multiplicity of lobby groups such as the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism/CST/Board of Deputies etc. we will not tolerate racists in our ranks and we will call them out.

Speaking of which Joseph O’Neill’s Interfaith for Palestine based in Chester also needs to be ostracised. As this report of a speaking engagement by Alain Alameddineof One Democratic State Initiative shows,

Joseph O’Neill’s Interfaith for Palestinegroup is stuffed the most appalling bigots and anti-Semites. They invited me to speak a few years ago but when I took a look at their other speakers, who included holocaust denier Israel Shamir I declined.

Tony Greenstein 









Book Review: Asa Winstanley’s Weaponising Anti-Semitism – How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn

$
0
0

How the Labour Right, the BBC, the Israel lobby & the Establishment Destabilised a Political Party

How they brought down Jeremy Corbyn

It speaks volumes that Asa Winstanley could not find a British publisher, not even Pluto Press or Verso Books, willing to publish the definitive account of how ‘anti-Semitism’ was weaponised to remove the only socialist leader the Labour Party [LP] has ever had.

The so-called left press has retreated into identity politics and abandoned the terrain of race and class politics. I found exactly the same with my book Zionism During the Holocaust.

Winstanley’s book is the story of how the British Establishment, their US counterparts and the Israel lobby set out to destroy what they saw as a threat to their interests. Winstanley notes how documents revealed in the failed deportation case against Raed Salah

‘demonstrated the intimate relationship between the UK’s Home Office, the Israeli government and the British pro-Israel lobby group Community Security Trust.’ (38)

In a passage that reflected what I wrote in the Anti-Semitism Wars, Winstanley wrote of how Corbyn’s election ‘must have set off warning sirens in Whitehall and in Langley Virginia [CIA HQ].’ [13]

Corbyn in his pre-leadership days

Why Anti-Semitism?

‘Anti-Semitism’ wasn’t the first line of attack against Corbyn but it proved to be ‘the most successful attack vector.’ (p.20) Why? Because it enabled his opponents to wrap themselves in the mantle of a false anti-racism. It imbued them with a moral righteousness that opposing Corbyn’s economic policy didn’t have. When imperialism goes to war it always does so for the best of reasons such as women’s rights.

‘Anti-Semitism’ became a ‘wedge issue’ to play off ‘soft’ supporters of the Palestinians like Owen Jones, to ‘hardline’ anti-Zionists. This was put into effect during the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign when Jones became a guest speaker at JLM conferences and spoke out in support of the expulsion of Jackie Walker and Ken Livingstone. (125)

If anyone is in a position to write the history of how ‘anti-Semitism’ was used to destabilise Corbyn and the Labour left it is Winstanley, who almost alone broke a series of stories revealing the truth behind the ‘anti-Semitism’ narrative that the BBC and the media ran with.

The Jewish Labour Movement [JLM]

Winstanley revealed how the JLM, which led the ‘anti-Semitism’ attacks, far from being the continuation of Poale Zion [PZ], an affiliated socialist society of the LP since 1920, had been refounded in 2015 with the specific task of undermining and removing Corbyn from the leadership of the LP.

PZ's original affiliation was agreed, not because it was the Jewish section of the LP, at that time very few Jewish workers were Zionists, but because, Labour leaders like Herbert Morrison:

Saw in Jewish agricultural labour a form of purification, redeeming the anti-Semitic projection of the Jew, which Morrison took for real. (156)

Richard Crossman, vehement Zionist supporter and Labour Minister, who believed that civilisation meant the genocide of native peoples

Winstanley describes the anti-Semitic imperialism of Labour’s pro-Zionist hierarchy. People like Hugh Dalton and Richard Crossman who was of the opinion that the Palestinians were fortunate not to have been exterminated like other indigenous people before them. (53)

As an affiliated socialist society the JLM was able to move motions to LP conference and propose rule changes. The JLM repeatedly threatened to disaffiliate from the party. Instead of welcoming such a prospect, Corbyn ‘practically begged them to stay.’ The JLM repaid Corbyn’s appeal to his enemies to make his life even more miserable by passing a motion of no confidence in him in April 2019.

It was by no means the last concession Corbyn made to the Israel lobby. (71)

Almost at the same time Al Jazeera had made an under-cover documentary, The Lobby, infiltrating the JLM. He was able to listen to Newmark boasting about how, in 2015, he had sat in a café in Golders Green planning to revive a moribund JLM.

One of Winstanley’s revelations was that the JLM’s new Director Ella Rose was a free transfer from the Israeli Embassy and she admitted in The Lobby to having worked with spy Shai Masot.

The JLM was effectively an Israeli Embassy front. (117). Likewise Labour Friends of Israel [LFI], founded in 1957 by PZ, had become an empty shell. In 2015 the Israeli Embassy all but took it over. (12)

Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry developed a series of groups in Britain, such as the Friends of Israel, passing them off as Jewish community groups whereas they are extensions of the Israeli state. The CST, which collates anti-Semitism statistics is a Mossad project.

The only time Winstanley got it wrong was when he wrote of

an apparent power struggle in the wake of Newmark’s forced departure, Katz was appointed chairperson in 2019.’ (65)

Newmark resigned as JLM Chair when the Jewish Chronicle [JC] ran an expose of how he had defrauded the Jewish Leadership Council.

There was no power struggle. When Newmark departed former Hove MP Ivor Caplin became Chair. I described what happened in my blog:

Early last week a report appeared in the Jewish Chronicle stating that the JLM’s war criminal Chair, Ivor Caplin… after having met with Labour’s General Secretary, Jennie Formby, was happy with the Labour Party’s new Anti-Semitism Code of Conduct. 

However when news of this leaked out Caplin was subject to furious attacks by his fellow Zionists…. What his opponents objected to in the new Code was best put by Pollard

Caplin had clearly forgotten that the anti-Semitism witchhunt had nothing to do with anti-Semitism... Even worse he didn’t seem to grasp that the purpose of the anti-Semitism witch-hunt was that it had to continue until Corbyn’s resignation.

You might expect that the New Statesman would cover these things fairly and accurately. That would be naive. Instead it ran a PR puff on behalf of Caplin’s critics The Jewish Labour Movement did not approve Labour’s anti-Semitism guidelines. Here’s why.

Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson was an ardent Zionist, seen here alongside Golda Meir,  the Labour Zionist Prime Minister Who Believed that there was no Such Thing as Palestinians

JLM chair Caplin condemned over Labour antisemitism meetingwas the JC heading. The New Statesman, obliged the JLM’s efforts to cover their embarrassment with an article by Katz.

The JC was right. The next JLM Conference elected Katz when he stood against Caplin for Chair. He won over 90% of the votes. It was no power struggle. More of a coup.

Len McLuskey hit the nail on the head when he wrote Corbyn Has Answered Concerns On Anti-Semitism, But Jewish Community Leaders Are Refusing To Take 'Yes' For An Answer. But this aside Winstanley’s reporting on the JLM cannot be faulted.

Oxford University Labour Club & Anti-Semitism

Winstanley describes the role played by Michael Rubin, Chair of Labour Students, in the Oxford University Labour Club affair. The Report he compiled into allegations of anti-Semitism by its Chair Alex Chalmers consisted of a series of rumours. (98) In The Lobby Rubin admitted that LFI was funded by the Israeli Embassy.

Winstanley revealed who was behind Oxford’s ‘anti-Semitism’ affair and how Chalmers had been an intern with Israeli PR group, BICOM. (79) Every newspaper reported Chalmer’s allegations of ‘anti-Semitism’ but gave no details. Yet on his own Facebook page he had written that he resigned over the club’s support for Israel Apartheid Week. That was the extent of the ‘anti-Semitism’ problem.

Corbyn appointed Baroness Royall to head an Inquiry into what had happened but she could find no anti-Semitism. Royall wrote of her ‘disappointment and frustration’ that she could find no ‘institutional anti-Semitism’ at the club. She found a ‘cultural problem’ of anti-Semitism instead. Anti-Semitism was now metaphysical. (83)

The Labour Video Keir Starmer Doesn't Want You To See

The Ken Livingstone Affair

In Nazi Comparisons Winstanley rebuts the argument that there was anything anti-Semitic in Ken Livingstone’s statement to BBC London presenter, Vanessa Feltz, that Hitler supported Zionism.

‘Recounting the historical fact that in the early 1930s, Hitler’s new Nazi government had extensive and well-documented links with the German Zionist movement is not anti-Semitic - precisely because it is a fact…. Instead of throwing Livingstone under the bus… Corbyn should have brought Livingstone on side. (142) (264-5)

In the words of veteran Israeli socialist, Moshe Machover:

It is correct to expose Zionism as a movement based on both colonisation and collusion with anti-Semitism. Don’t apologise for saying this. If you throw the sharks bloodied meat, they will only come back for more. (159)

The overwhelming majority of world Jewry supported a Boycott of Nazi Germany in 1933 yet the Zionist movement negotiated a trade agreement, Ha'avara with it in August 1933. The intention was not to save Germany’s Jews but to save their wealth.

Whereas 99% of Jews wanted to strangle the Nazi state in its infancy, the Zionist movement only saw opportunities to build their ‘Jewish’ state. Even the JC condemned this ‘unclean act’.

Instead of defending Livingstone Corbyn threw him to the wolves. It was the same with Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and myself. I repeatedly argued at the time that Jackie, Marc, Ken and myself were collateral damage. The real target was Corbyn.

The Zionists had been out to get Livingstone, one of the few Palestinian supporters in a position of power in the LP. The fake ‘anti-Semitism’ crisis provided the ideal opportunity.

Livingstone, during his interview with Feltz, defended Naz Shah who had joked that if Israel was relocated in the USA then there would be no more trouble. Shah was an aide to John McDonnell:

The Livingstone affair was a key moment in the manufactured anti-Semitism crisis. It was a moment when the whole affair could have been turned around. (133)

Instead of defending Livingstone, Corbyn intoned that Livingstone ‘has caused deep offence and hurt to the Jewish community’. Causing offence to Muslims is a question of free speech but offending Zionists was an entirely different matter. Corbyn and the Lansman ‘left’

Set a long running pattern of concession, retreat and compromise which would undermine untold numbers of Labour activists in the years ahead. If the Labour left would not defend one of its most heavyweight veterans from politically motivated charges of anti-Semitism, then what chance would anyone else have? (133)

The abandonment of Livingstone by Corbyn and much of the Labour left, such as Novara Media, ‘sent a message to the grassroots that none were safe should they step out of line.’

Appeasing the Unappeasable

Winstanley’s argument that Corbyn’s overthrow was inevitable given he refused to fight back cannot be faulted. Rather than challenge the fake charges of ‘anti-Semitism’ Corbyn tried to appease his accusers.

Corbyn’s response to the false accusations was not to call them out but to emphasise how much he opposed anti-Semitism. Corbyn never understood that when Zionists talk about anti-Semitism, they don’t mean the Oxford English Dictionarydefinition, ‘hostility or prejudice to Jews as Jews’ but hostility to Zionism and the Israeli state.

What Winstanley doesn’t explain is why Corbyn was unable, despite his years in the Palestine solidarity movement, of realising that anti-Semitism is a go to defence of Zionists against Palestinian supporters. Why did Corbyn behaved like a rabbit frozen in a car’s headlights?

The answer is simple enough. Corbyn was determined to appease the Labour right. This was the fatal strategy of the Labour left historically. It was summed up by Tony Benn when he compared the LP to an airplane which needs two wings.

It was a superficially clever analogy but fallacious. The LP is a political party not a flying machine. How can pro-capitalists and anti-capitalists co-exist in one party indefinitely?

Winstanley quotes Bob Crow’s maxim: ‘if you fight you might lose but if you don’t fight you’ll certainly lose.’ Instead of fighting back Corbyn exhibited the symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome.

Terrorism

Another damaging allegation was that Corbyn supported ‘terrorism’. (33) Winstanley cites the interview Khrishnan Guru-Murthy (5-6) of Channel 4 conducted with Corbyn in the summer of 2015.

At a meeting addressed by spokespersons for Hamas and Hezbollah, Corbyn had referred to them as ‘friends’. Corbyn’s answer was they were part of the peace process therefore he was simply being polite.

The terrorist hobgoblin repeatedly came back to bite Corbyn.. that would contribute heavily to his ultimate downfall. (7)

The obvious answer was that Hezbollah and Hamas weren’t terrorists. Corbyn knew that they were the representatives of their people. As Lord Carrington, Thatcher’s Foreign Minister said: ‘One person’s freedom fighter is another person’s terrorist.’ Corbyn had said as much himself. The real terrorists were those who bombed apartment blocks with families inside. Yet Corbyn refused to take the anti-imperialist track.

The JLM's attack on Jackie Walker brought out the Zionists' visceral racism

The ‘Left’ Witchhunters

Those around Corbyn, like Jennie Formby and Laura Murray, became better witch-hunters than Iain McNicol and Sam Matthews. Whereas the former reinstated Walker when she was first suspended, Murray would have expelled her straight off.

Corbyn’s staff boasted at how efficient they were at expelling people compared to their predecessors. They thought they were very clever in having expelled so many more socialists than McNicol.

What they didn’t understand was that the more people they expelled, the more they confirmed that there was an anti-Semitism problem in the LP. It was the historic role of the Labour left to dig its own grave.

The IHRA misdefinition of anti-Semitism

Winstanley points to the adoption by Labour of the IHRA ‘definition’ of anti-Semitism as the point of no return.

Winstanley is right when he says that it was Corbyn who bore the responsibility for the adoption of the IHRA:

the long, slow trickle of concessions Corbyn made to the Israel lobby in the face of the sustained ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign made capitulation inevitable.

Opposition to the IHRA became ‘anti-Semitism’ in the eyes of the witch-hunters. (260)

Corbyn had conceded to the JLM the right to ‘police the discursive boundaries of the conflict.(242). But despite all the concessions 77% of LP members refused to accept this false narrative. (244) Amongst Momentum members the figures were even higher, at 92%. (353)

Jewish Voices for Labour [JVL]

Winstanley describes uncritically the foundation of JVL, a group that was not anti-Zionist. Initially JVL contained Zionists whose sole purpose seems to have been to destabilise it – people like Rob Abrahams and Colin Appleby who later surfaced in the JLM arguing that it should disaffiliate from the LP because of ‘anti-Semitism’.

Although JVL’s Zionists soon departed they were symptomatic of a wider political problem. JVL never fully understood that the ‘anti-Semitism’ witchhunt was never about anti-Semitism. They naively believed that by forming a non-Zionist Jewish group they could take the sting out of the JLM’s claim to represent all Jews.

But the JLM’s support derived, not from the ethno-religious make-up of its members but its support for Zionism. Playing off one identity against another would not overcome what was a political question.

Being a wholly Jewish group with a second class membership for non-Jews was politically wrong and did not avail them any because they were the ‘wrong sort of Jews.’ JVL’s belief that they could include Zionists in the ranks of Corbyn supporters was naïve at best.

Corbyn’s self-imprisonment meant that ‘despite JVL’s efforts, Corbyn effectively ignored the group while he was leader.(271)

Jackie Walker

In The Crucible, a nod to Arthur Miller’s play of the same name, Winstanley writes about Jackie Walker, one of the earliest victims of the witchhunt. Jackie was suspended twice.

The first time Jackie was suspended she wrote, during a private Facebook conversation, that, ‘I will never back anti-Semitism but neither am I a Zionist’. She spoke about her Jewish-African heritage:

I hope you feel the same towards the African holocaust?  My ancestors were involved in both – on all sides… millions more Africans were killed in the African holocaust and their oppression continues to this day on a global scale in a way it doesn’t for Jews and many Jews, my ancestors too, were (among) the chief financiers of the sugar and slave trade… so who are the victims and what does it mean .  We are victims and perpetrators, to some extent by choice.  And having been a victim does not give you a right to be a perpetrator.’

On the basis of omitting, in an informal conversation, one word, ‘among’ she was pilloried as an anti-Semite by those whose sole agenda was propping up an apartheid state. So flimsy was the case against Jackie that even McNicol’s witchhunters quickly reinstated her. (see The lynching of Jackie Walker).

Jackie Walker speaking on the same platform as John McDonnell at the LRC's TUC fringe meeting in Brighton

As I predicted, the JLM were determined to get a Black-Jewish anti-Zionist expelled. When John McDonnell spoke on the same platform as Jackie at a meeting during the TUC Congress, the JLM withdrew an invitation to him to speak at their LP conference meeting.

Free Speech on Israel picket of Momentum Executive Meeting at TSSA HQ which removed Jackie Walker as Vice-Chair of Momentum

The JLM’s agenda was clear and the soft Momentum left under Jon Lansman were willing to do the JLM’s bidding a second time around.

The pretext for Jackie’s suspension and later expulsion was a JLM training session on ‘anti-Semitism’ at which Katz, a political lobbyist for the privatised rail industry, expounded on why the IHRA, which conflated anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, was the only definition acceptable to the ‘Jewish community’ i.e. the Zionist lobby.

This was the kind of racist abuse that the Jewish Labour Movement encouraged


During the session Jackie said that she hadn’t found a definition of anti-Semitism that she could live with asking:

‘Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Holocaust Day was open to all peoples who experienced holocaust.’

Cue for Zionist outrage, fed by the national media. Corbyn and his coterie immediately capitulated and Jackie was suspended. Yet the website of the Holocaust Memorial Day only commemorates the Nazi Holocaust and ‘subsequent genocides’ not slavery.

Jackie Walker speaking on the same platform as John McDonnell at the LRC's TUC fringe meeting in Brighton

Jackie was right yet the truth was lost in the hypocritical outrage of the former Hitler supporting Daily Mail and The Guardian. As a Black Jew, Jackie suffered from vile racism at the hands of the Zionists. No one, neither Corbyn or Lansman protested this racism because anti-Black racism was invisible. Black Jews are not accepted as real Jews by many Zionists or are treated as second class Jews.

The Zionists took a few words out of context and relied on Lansman and Owen Jones to do the rest. Jackie was from a well-known Jewish family in Jamaica who were fleeing persecution in Spain. But as with virtually all Europeans in the West Indies at the time, they were involved in the slave trade as financiers or slave owners. (173)

It wasn’t only Zionists who questioned Jackie’s Jewishness. Novara Media’s Aaron Bastani said that Walker ‘is as Jewish as I am. And I’m not Jewish.’ Guido Fawkes, the Tory blogger was happy to quote Bastani’s call for Walker’s suspension. As Winstanley noted even Mike Creighton, a long standing Blairite staff member described Walker’s suspension as ‘the weakest of the recent suspension.’

It wasn’t just Lansman, Jones and Bastani who were hostile to Walker. So too was the Jewish Socialists Group which only very reluctantly, after being publicly shamed, released a tepid statement of support, see Better Late than Never - Jewish Socialists Group Finally Supports Jackie Walker. David Rosenberg, its Secretary had criticised the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network for heckling the JLM at the 80th anniversary commemoration of the Battle of Cable Street.

David Rosenberg backed up Zionists in JVL

Instead of treating the JLM as an Israeli surrogate, Rosenberg saw it as a legitimate Jewish organisation. The JSG also controlled the Jews for Jeremy Facebook group which removed those who criticised Corbyn’s surrender on ‘anti-Semitism’. This refusal to allow criticism of Corbyn ensured that his mistakes were never corrected.

I was removed from the Jewish Socialists Facebook group by Julia Bard for criticising one of their members, Jon Lansman! Others like Debbie Fink of J-Big, were also removed.

Marc Wadsworth

In an attempt to end the anti-Semitism crisis, Corbyn commissioned the Chakrabarti Report. But when, at its launch press conference, Black anti-racist activist Marc Wadsworth criticised Ruth Smeeth MP, who was working with Telegraph journalists, he was subject to a political lynching. Smeeth angrily walked out resulting in Marc’s expulsion in 2018. Smeeth gave evidence to Marc’s expulsion hearing accompanied by an all-White, KKK style march by Labour MPs.

Labour Against the Witchhunt [LAW]

Winstanley describes the refounding of LAW, which in the 1980s had Jeremy Corbyn as its Secretary. Now it fighting a witchhunt led by Corbyn. Winstanley compared it to the Salem witchhunt where

‘confessing to the sin of witchcraft meant you were damned by your own word. But pleading your innocence also condemned you to death.’

At Salem the only people who were hanged were those who denied their guilt. Those who confessed were spared. Denial of guilt was taken as proof of the accusation. The same was true in Labour’s witchhunt. ‘Denialism’ was itself proof of one’s guilt.

The JLM insisted that if they made an accusation of anti-Semitism then it had to be treated as true because it had come from Jews. When Lara McNeil, the youth representative on Labour’s NEC defended Corbyn from one particular accusation she was told by Izzy Lenga of the JLM, who had trained with the Israeli army, that McNeil had no right to  disagree with the Jew JLM because ‘You’re not Jewish.’

Zionist accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ were entirely subjective and dependent solely on the perceptions of the ‘victim’. Of course this only applied to Zionist, not the ‘wrong sort’ of Jews!

Winstanley wrote that ‘marginalising anti-Zionist Jews has been a key goal of the Zionist movement from its outset.’ Jamie Stein-Werner, an academic researcher, observed that ‘virtually every allegation’ of anti-Semitism in 2017 concerned statements by Jews. When Michael Kalmanovitz of IJAN called for the expulsion of the JLM, the Guardian’s Zionist gatekeeper, Jonathan Freedland equated this to a call for the expulsion of all Jewish groups citing a right-wing Labour MP as saying the situation was ‘redolent of the 1930s.’ (204)

Winstanley recalls how Lansman used the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign to undermine any fightback. Lansman worked closely with the JLM and he attacked JVL as not being part of the Jewish community. (205) Momentum, set up to defend Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the LP, was now actively engaged in undermining him. In Brighton, as a member of the local Committee, I witnessed this at first hand.

BBC Panorama’s Is Labour Anti-Semitic?

The ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign reached its climax with the Panorama programme Is Labour anti-Semitic’ presented by John Ware. The programme centred on Liverpool Riverside, the constituency of Louise Ellman MP. It contained an allegation that at the disciplinary hearing of a Jewish member, Helen Marks, her representative had asked investigator Ben Westerman, whether or not he was from Israel.

The interview was recorded so it was easy to disprove. Westerman had been asked which branch of the LP he was from. Despite this the BBC rejected all complaints and Ofcom refused to even investigate it. The British Establishment closed ranks behind a wall of lies. This notorious programme, which hadn’t had the honesty to even divulge that all the Jews who participated were officers of the JLM, was nominated by the BBC for a BAFTA award. (271-220)

The Turning Point

Winstanley described Margaret Hodge’s attack on Corbyn as ‘a fucking anti-Semite and a racist.’ in summer 2018 as the ‘turning point’. Disciplinary action was considered but who should ride to her rescue? John McDonell who proclaimed she ‘had a good heart.’(245)

Thanks in part to the intervention of John McDonnell, Hodge remained unpunished. The Rubicon had been crossed. (247)

The summer of 2018 was an important milestone on the road to defeat. (231) It was the year of the ‘discovery’ of a 6 year old mural of bankers sitting on the heads of the oppressed. There was nothing obviously anti-Semitic about the mural but that didn’t stop Luciana Berger producing it like a rabbit out of a hat in order to undermine Labour’s local election campaign. 2018 was also the year that over 200 unarmed Palestinian demonstrators, including 50 children, were mowed down by Israeli sniper fire. Labour’s response was inaudible.

The Israeli Labor Party is irrelevant in Israeli politics, holding just 4 out of 120 seats in the Knesset. For 30 continuous years they formed the government of Israel. Today their main role is outside Israel, sanitising the far-Right in Israel using ‘anti-Semitism’ as their chosen weapon. As former leader Avi Gabbay made clear when cutting links with the LP, when it comes to violence against the Palestinians there isn’t a chink of light between them and Likud. (240)

Chris Williamson

I said to Chris Williamson at the LAW fringe meeting at the 2018 LP conference that the decision of Corbyn to oppose Open Selection of Labour MPs was the final nail in the coffin of the Corbyn Project.

In his concluding chapter Winstanley, in my view correctly, attributes to the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign the loss of credibility that Corbyn sustained. By repeatedly apologising he made himself seem weak and shifty rather than standing up for his previous beliefs:

Corbyn’s eventual embrace of the false ‘Labour anti-Semitism’ media narrative constituted a series of own goals and his embrace of the Jewish Labour Movement was politically suicidal… That the left-wing leader should actively support a group openly dedicated to his removal was an entirely avoidable mistake. The mass base never abandoned him but slowly, Corbyn seemed to abandon some of his supporters.’ (268-9)

Chris Williamson was the strongest supporter of Corbyn amongst MPs yet Formby, instead of defending Williamson’s right to show the film Witchhunt in parliament led the attack on him. It was alleged he had said, at a meeting of Sheffield Momentum, that the LP was doing too much to tackle anti-Semitism. What he actually said was:

The party that has done more to stand up to racism is now being demonised as a racist, bigoted party.

I have got to say I think our party's response has been partly responsible for that because in my opinion… we've backed off far too much, we have given too much ground, we've been too apologetic...

We've done more to actually address the scourge of anti-semitism than any other political party. Any other political party. And yet we are being traduced.

Williamson’s words were distorted into meaning their exact opposite. What he said was that the LP had backed off too much against the false allegations of anti-Semitism.

On 27 February 2019 Williamson was suspended by Formby for a "pattern of behaviour". (259) When a Labour disciplinary panel reinstated him, there was uproar from the right. Instead of defending him Corbyn remained silent and Formby re-suspended him, which the High Court later held was unlawful.

Capitulation was nowhere more evident than in Corbyn’s willingness to allow his most dependable allies to be purged.(254)

‘He has got to go’ raged Lansman (259) and just in case they lost the case Formby suspended Williamson for a third time. Corbyn’s own General Secretary ended up doing the work of the Right

Formby, by now a discredited figure, warned local Labour Parties that resolutions opposing Williamson’s suspension were not ‘competent business’. When Corbyn was suspended this ruling was used by David Evans, Starmer’s General Secretary, to prevent any discussion.

The NEC in 2019 had proposed a ‘fast track’ expulsion procedure for the most ‘egregious’ examples of ‘anti-Semitism’. In practice it applied to everyone henceforth including, ironically, Corbyn himself.

The Corbyn Project had imploded. Corbyn’s promises to Williamson that he would support his reinstatement were untrue. Corbyn had jettisoned his last ally.

Corbyn’s abandoning friends like Chris Williamson were anything but honest. As Winstanley notes Corbyn was not a leader. He was well intentioned but incapable of fighting back against the right.

What Winstanley called ‘the greatest single moral failure of Corbyn’s leadership’ was his disavowal of a meeting that he chaired in 2010. John Ware Louise Ellman Helen Marks, her representative had asked investigator Ben Westerman, Margaret Hodge’s Avi Gabbay Hajo Meyer, an Auschwitz survivor, was the speaker. Hajo was an anti-Zionist who rejected the Zionist movement’s weaponisation of the Holocaust against Palestinians. This meeting was anything but anti-Semitic yet still Corbyn issued a toe-curling apology: (273)

I have on occasion appeared on platforms with people whose views I completely reject. I apologise for the concerns and anxiety that this has caused.

Why was Corbyn incapable of defending his previous beliefs? Winstanley quotes Steven Garside as saying that ‘his critique of Zionism is evidently far from internally consistent or rigorous.(274) I would go further. Corbyn supported the Palestinians but had never understood Zionism, the ideology that led to their dispossession.

In part this was intellectual laziness, a common trait on the Labour left. Corbyn supported the two state solution, which meant supporting a racist Jewish state. He never called Israel an apartheid state. His problem was that he was not an anti-Zionist.

This is why supporting the Palestinians solely on a human rights or ‘peace’ basis is insufficient. Zionism has to be opposed as the racist, ethnic cleansing settler-colonial ideology/movement that it is.

This is true not just of Corbyn but Palestine Solidarity Campaign [PSC] of which Corbyn was a patron. The cowardly refusal of PSC to oppose Zionism, believing that if you stand on a street corner and shout about human rights abuses then you don’t have to challenge the Jewish Supremacist ideology that causes these very same abuses, led to Corbyn’s inability to defend himself.

That was why, when PSC abandoned its opposition to Zionism in 2021 I resigned from the organisation I had helped found in 1982.


A ‘disinformation paradigm’


The Media Reform Coalition termed the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign a ‘disinformation paradigm’. It was led by the Guardian. From 2015 to 2019 the Guardian published 513 articles on Labour ‘anti-Semitism’ compared to 62 on Conservative anti-Semitism, despite Boris Johnson’s anti-Semitic 72 Virgins novel which spoke of Jewish magnates fixing elections, hook noses and the rest.

It was this that led Corbyn to treating LFI, as a friend. (277)

no matter how much Corbyn tried to pander, the Israel lobby always refused to take yes for an answer.’

Yet the intellectual and political mediocrities surrounding Corbyn never once worked this out. Where was Corbyn’s strategic director, Seamus Milne, a man who must have known better? Why did no one suggest a major speech on Anti-Semitism and Zionism early on when Corbyn could have made it explicit that although he opposed anti-Semitism he also opposed its weaponisation?

Corbyn’s failures were not simply ones of intellect but political strategy. He entered the leadership intend on appeasing the Right. That was the strategy of the whole Labour left, including Tony Benn.

The final denouement under Starmer was predictable. Starmer was responsible as DPP for the persecution of Julian Assange and for blocking the prosecution of MI6 over torture. But it was Corbyn who harboured this viper within his Shadow Cabinet and allowed him to dictate Labour’s disastrous strategy on Brexit.

Despite Corbyn’s commitment to a host of good causes, including Palestine, as leader he was prepared to jettison each and every one to please the right. Corbyn’s work for Assange today doesn’t excuse his failure to support him when he could have made a difference. Corbyn was betrayed by McDonnell, Lansman and Jones but Labour members and hundreds of thousands of trade unionists supported him.

As Bob Dylan wrote in ‘I Threw It All Away

Once I had mountains in the palm of my hand
And rivers that ran through ev'ry day
I must have been mad
I never knew what I had
Until I threw it all away.

Corbyn’s failures were not the failure of one man but a Labour left that has always sought to reform capitalism rather than abolish it.

Asa Winstanley has generously acknowledged the fact that I proof read chapters 2 and 5.

I have just one minor criticism of the book. The ‘anti-Semitism’ witchhunt did not begin in Oxford. It was during the summer of 2015, even before Corbyn was elected, that the Daily Mailaccused him of having associated with a holocaust denier Paul Eisen.

This was followed up with a campaign against the late Gerald Kaufman, a Jewish MP and self-declared Zionist, for having used the term ‘Jewish money’ a phrase commonly used by influential Jews. Kaufman was referring to the funds that Conservative Friends of Israel ploughed into the Tory party.

Kaufman made one of the outstanding speeches of all time to the House of Commons during Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in 2008/9. When he died the JC's Marcus Dysch wrote an obituaryGerald Kaufman: Jewish MP reviled by the community’. Hatred for Jews is part of the psychological make-up of Zionism.


Gerald Kaufman’s Speech to the House of Commons comparing Israeli killers to the Nazis

Tony Greenstein

Crowdfunder to Support Palestine Action Defendants

$
0
0

 Palestine Action Activists Take the Risks But Our Crowdfunder Will Ensure That They Don’t Also Have to Bear the Costs

 

Please go this link



When Palestine Action activists take action against the Death Factories of Elbit, whose sole purpose is to enable war crimes they take a personal risk such as the deprivation of liberty, assault, attacks in the media and so on.

The purpose of the Crowdfunder I have set up is to meet the £156 Victim Surcharge we have all  been landed with, despite there being no victim and to make a contribution towards our costs. Four of the five defendants had to travel hundreds of miles, find accommodation in a strange town, eat out etc. I am proposing that each of the 5 Defendants receive £250.

In order that people don’t think this is a subtle attempt at self enrichment I will not be taking anything except the Victim Surcharge.

Any surplus will go towards the costs that other Palestine Action Defendants will occur. We applaud people who take the risk to get rid of Elbit we should not expect them to also pay for the privilege. Many people are literally on the breadline.

Only in the twisted mind of the British State can war criminals be considered victims and their accusers criminals yet it is us who have to pay a Victim Surcharge. If Elbit was forced to pay for each of their victims they would have been bankrupt years ago.

Elbit are a company totally without any ethics or morality. Not only do they supply the apartheid regime in Israel with 85% of its drones but they supply any genocidal state in the world with what it wants. Myanmar, whose military junta even Britain has put an arms embargo on and which has murdered thousands of the Rohinga people, is supplied with Elbit’s latest weaponry.

Being on bail, subject to curfew, tagged and remanded in custody is enough of an ordeal as it is, in addition to the uncertainty and the threat of imprisonment that hanged over us for more than two years. For more than two years we could not get our lives back together or make plans for the future.

We were willing to make these sacrifices but we are asking you to make a small sacrifice. We are asking you and all supporters of the Palestinians and human rights to contribute towards the costs and expenses of the 5 Defendants, 4 of whom were found guilty in May this year of ‘intent to cause criminal damage’ to the Shenstone Engine Factory of Elbit.

We have each been sentenced to between 9 and 12 months imprisonment suspended for 2 years and between 80 and 150 hours of unpaid labour as well as 20 hours of ‘rehabililtation’ -  re-education isn’t confined to countries like China and North Korea it is alive and kicking Britain too!

Each of the 5 Defendants (the jury was deadlocked on the fifth) has had to find the money to pay for accommodation, meals out and travel expenses to attend court for 7 weeks (only one of us lived locally).

Please give as much as you can afford, however little or however much it is still appreciated.  Thank you.

Tony Greenstein

Sharon Graham & Gary Smith – Zionists and Imperialists Stand in Solidarity with Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis As the Slaughter Continues

$
0
0

 The TUC Decision to Support NATO’s Proxy War in the Ukraine is Shameful but Not Surprising Given Its Record of Subservience to the British State


It is no surprise that Gary Smith of the institutionally sexist and racist GMB and an avid Zionist, has backed NATO's neo-Nazi allies in Ukraine. The fact that Zelensky has approved laws stripping workers of their rights and banning left-wing parties, including Platform for Life, which has 44 seats in the 450-seat Ukrainian parliament, has been no deterrent to Smith, since he also does his best to suppress workers’ struggles.

What is more remarkable is that Sharon Graham, who has a reputation for supporting strikes but declared herself ‘non political’ when she was elected General Secretary, has also got into bed with the Zionists. In particular taking advice from the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, an organisation set up and funded by the Israeli state and the Jewish National Fund,about banning Jeremy Corbyn – The Big Lie. Graham also has given her support to NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine.

One can only hope that the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Party, who have both up till now supported Graham, see the error of their ways and reconsider their support for this British chauvinist.

The TUC motion, which was opposed by only two unions – the FBU and Bakers Union with the RMT and NEU abstaining – called for more weapons to be supplied to Ukraine. These reactionary union bureaucrats, fools all, should bear in mind that a large percentage of the arms already supplied have found their way onto the private market. Ukraine is Europe’s most corrupt state.

Azov Demonstration 2014

The United States and Britain have been directly supplying neo-Nazi forces in Ukraine since 2014, despite a Congressional motion cutting aid to Azov in 2018. We face the prospect of a new Libya in Europe with private militias and an ongoing civil war.

There have already been credible threats that if Ukraine doesn’t receive enough weaponry then they will resort to terrorism in Europe. What does NATO think is going to happen when the war ends? Do they think the fascists will disarm? We could see an outbreak of terrorism in Europe which will make ISIS seem like a tea party.


flag of the Ukrainian NPGU mining union courtesy of Skwawkbox


Azov symbol bears remarkable similarity to that of the NPGU mining union

The sonnenrad or sunwheel is one of a number of ancient European symbols appropriated by the Nazis. It bears a remarkable similarity to that of the NPGU mining union which was on display at the TUC Congress

Mark Serwotka of PCS, who has previously been considered on the left, joined the warmongers in offering “unequivocal support for those currently suffering occupation by a brutal Russian invasion”. Serwotka said that ‘We are with the Ukrainian people and for Russia out, only the people of Ukraine should decide what the outcome looks like.” For Serwotka the activities of open neo-Nazis and the attacks on Russian speaking Ukrainians since 2014 count for nothing.

Paul Massaro is a senior US governmentpolicy advisor for counter-corruption and sanctions

Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State in the Biden administration admitted that the US had funded, to the tune of over $5 billion, the overthrow of the elected President Yanukovych in 2014. Fascists were heavily armed when they outgunned the police.

“Our solidarity must know no borders,” said GMB President Barbara Plant. Not a word that the GMB is used to using when it comes to workers nearer home. Unite backed the motion despite its Executive having issued a statement saying that “wars are never in the interest of working people”. One wonders whether Sharon Graham even realises that opposing war and supplying more weapons to Ukraine is a contradiction.

The GMB has never extended solidarity to anyone outside Britain. It has consistently supported Israel’s ethnic cleansing and has repeatedly sided with the Jewish Labour Movement, the British wing of Israel’s racist Israeli Labor Party. At the moment it is trying to expel a former International Officer Bert Schounberg for moving a motion at his branch calling for the disaffiliation of the JLM.

Last year a GMB resolution supported by Unite under its war mongering General Secretary, Sharon Graham, called for increased arms spending. Unbelievably it called on the TUC to back an increase in arms spending to 3 per cent of GDP. This at a time when the NHS and schools are being starved of money. As Chris Nineham of Stop the War Coalition wrote

‘It actually put the TUC to the right of the Tory government which even now only dares to push for 2.5 per cent arms spending.

John McDonnell has thrown in his lot with Ukraine's neo-Nazi infested armed forces

Andrew Murray wrote

Last year GMB general secretary Gary Smith persuaded the TUC Congress to vote, shamefully if narrowly, to campaign for increased military spending.

At a time of austerity and a cost-of-living crisis, that decision prioritised the arms industry over the vital interests of millions of working people, not least the tens of thousands of GMB members in the beleaguered public services.

It also revealed that Smith believes that the British government can be trusted with more weapons, despite overwhelming evidence that they are used either for wars of aggression or for sale to despotic regimes.

Given Smith’s support for Apartheid Israel, it is no surprise that this appalling reactionary should demand that the Tories divert yet more money from the NHS and their own workers in the health service to feed America’s war industry. It is a shameful comment on the British trade union movement that this motion was passed.

The neo-Nazi credentials of the Azov battalion, which has been integrated into the army and now promoted to brigade status, is well documented. That did not stop Arsen Avakov, Ukraine’s Interior Minister, a man personally responsible for integrating far-right groups into the state from defending them to the online newspaper Ukrayinska Pravda in 2019.

“The shameful information campaign about the alleged spread of Nazi ideology (among Azov members) is a deliberate attempt to discredit the ‘Azov’ unit and the National Guard of Ukraine,”

As even NBC had to admit

even though Putin is engaging in propaganda, it’s also true that Ukraine has a genuine Nazi problem… important as it is to defend the yellow-and-blue flag against the Kremlin’s brutal aggression, it would be a dangerous oversight to deny Ukraine’s antisemitic history and collaboration with Hitler’s Nazis, as well as the latter-day embrace of neo-Nazi factions in some quarters.

NBC went on to remind us that

On the eve of World War II, Ukraine was home to one the largest Jewish communities in Europe, with estimates as high as 2.7 million, a remarkable number considering the territory’s long record of antisemitism and pogroms. By the end, more than half would perish. When German troops took control of Kyiv in 1941, they were welcomed by “Heil Hitler” banners. Soon after, nearly 34,000 Jews — along with Roma and other “undesirables” — were rounded up and marched to fields outside the city on the pretext of resettlement only to be massacred in what became known as the “Holocaust by bullets.”

The Babyn Yar ravine continued to fill up as a mass grave for two years. With as many as 100,000 murdered there, it became one of the largest single killing sites of the Holocaust outside of Auschwitz and other death camps. Researchers have noted the key role locals played in fulfilling Nazi kill orders at the site.

Those locals were led by Stepan Bandera’s Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and its armed wing the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA). Ukraine is the only country in the world to have a national holiday in memory of a Nazi collaborator, Stepan Bandera. The Times of Israel described how Hundreds of Ukrainian nationalists march in honor of Nazi collaborator.

Today the British press plays down the threat of the neo-Nazis in Ukraine. However at the time of the Maiden coup in 2014 they were singing a different song. The Guardian described how Azov fighters were both Ukraine's greatest weapon and its greatest threat.

They quoted Dimitary, a member of the Azov group as saying that

"I have nothing against Russian nationalists, or a great Russia, but Putin's not even a Russian. Putin's a Jew."

You might think that Zionist groups like America’s Anti-Defamation League would be prominent in denouncing these neo-Nazis and anti-Semites. After all they are usually able to spot ‘anti-Semites’ before they have time to unfurl the Palestinian flaga. But strangely enough they have kept remarkable quiet. Even worse they have been excusing and justifying them.

In 2019 – before it became politically necessary to whitewash them – the ADL itself warned that an “extremist group called the Azov Battalion has ties to neo-Nazis and white supremacists” and issued a report on how the Ukrainian militia was trying to “connect with like-minded extremists from the US.”

Ali Abunimah described how the ADL has been turning a blind eye to Hitler’s accomplices in Ukraine and even justifying their record. As Abunimah observed ‘So when Washington goes to war, the lobby will often lend its propaganda services to the cause.’

This shows that the Zionist lobby, of which the ADL is the most prominent, are first and foremost supporters of US imperialism. So now it is rehabilitating the Ukrainian collaborators who helped Hitler exterminate Jews and Poles.

This Holocaust revisionism is motivated by the need to whitewash the present-day, far-right Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis.

The reason the US, NATO and the European Union gives for sending weapons and mercenaries to Ukraine is that they are helping a fellow democracy defend its independence and sovereignty against an illegal invasion by an expansionist, megalomaniacal madman.

Anrdrii Melnyk is currently Ukraine's Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs

It is therefore very awkward from a Western perspective that the Ukrainian regime is underpinned by hard-right fascists and neo-Nazis.

Acknowledging this fact, Western war propagandists fear, would legitimize Putin’s claim that the Russian invasion – which has been overwhelmingly condemned by the UN General Assembly – is justified by a need to “de-Nazify” and demilitarize Ukraine.

The dilemma is summed up in an NBC News headline: “Ukraine’s Nazi problem is real, even if Putin’s ‘denazification’ claim isn’t.”

But most Western media will no longer even go as far as NBC News in acknowledging this reality.

The current war can be traced directly to the 2014 coup in Ukraine, during which the US and its allies supported far-right and neo-Nazi elements. The goal was to install a US-friendly regime that would bring Ukraine into NATO. Moscow has long seen NATO expansion as an existential threat.

Key actors in the US-supported coup were neo-Nazi groups like Right Sector, the Azov Battalion and C14. They are part of a broader Ukrainian nationalist movement that venerates Bandera, the leader of the OUN, which collaborated with Hitler during World War II.

In an interview with Andrew Srulevitch, ADL Director of European Affairs, Professor David Fishman exonerated the UPA and Bandera, who were responsible for the slaughter of 300,000 Jews and Poles. Asked about torchlit marches in Kyiv with red and black flags, Fishman had this to say:

“For Ukrainian nationalists, UPA and Bandera are symbols of the Ukrainian fight for Ukrainian independence. The UPA allied with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union for tactical – not ideological – reasons.... When Ukrainian nationalists and Jews look at those red and black flags, we see two different things.’

In fact UPA attacks on Jews were so ferocious that Jews sought the protection of the Germans.

The Banderite bands and the local nationalists raided every night, decimating the Jews

a survivor testified in 1948.

Jews sheltered in the camps where Germans were stationed, fearing an attack by Banderites. Some German soldiers were brought to protect the camps and thereby also the Jews.

ADL, which purports to oppose anti-Semitism, carried the interview with Fishman on its website and in its newsletter. Zionist organisations, which are usually so concerned about ‘anti-Semitism’, simply echoed NATO propaganda. As Abunimah observed:

Fishman’s excuse that Bandera and other Nazi collaborators are “symbols” of the “fight for Ukrainian independence” mirrors the claims from American white supremacists that their display of the Confederate battle flag is merely to honor their “heritage” and not to celebrate a regime that went to war to protect its “right” to enslave people from Africa.

Dozens of Ukrainian streets are named after Bandera and in a particularly nice touch Bandera’s street runs right up to the site of Babi Yar.

Daniel Lazare, in a review of Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe’s Stepan Bandera: The Life and Afterlife of a Ukrainian Nationalist wrote:

Although Bandera and his followers would later try to paint the alliance with the Third Reich as no more than “tactical,” an attempt to pit one totalitarian state against another, it was in fact deep-rooted and ideological. Bandera envisioned the Ukraine as a classic one-party state with himself in the role of führer, or providnyk, and expected that a new Ukraine would take its place under the Nazi umbrella, much as Jozef Tiso’s new fascist regime had in Slovakia or Ante Pavelić’s in Croatia.

What we are seeing is a cynical attempt to rewrite history in order to portray Bandera and the OUN/UPA as mere Ukrainian nationalists. Why? Because NATO’s Ukrainian friends identify with Bandera’s alliance with Nazi Germany. Bandera saw things differently explaining that Ukrainian nationalism had taken shape “in a spirit similar to the National Socialist ideas”.

That the BBC and the yellow press is engaged in trying to prettify the Azov Battalion and assorted neo-Nazis is one thing (see Ros Atkin’s apologia What untruths is Russia spreading about Nazis in Ukraine?) but for a Zionist organisation which purports to oppose anti-Semitism to do the same is something else.

As Jimmy Dore observed, there are now good Nazis as well as bad Nazis. The good ones are pro-Western and publicly, at least, play down their anti-Semitism.

An example of Azov’s handiwork was the body of a woman found in the basement of Azov’s HQ in Mariupol. She had been tortured and a swastika was scratched into her chest. For which Western media blamed Russians.

Oleksiy Kuzmenko’s Far-Right Group Made Its Home in Ukraine’s Major Western Military Training Hub[George Washington University, September 2021] makes for sombre reading. Kuzmenko wrote that:

...  since 2018, the National Army Academy (NAA), Ukraine’s premier military education institution and a major hub for Western military assistance to the country, has been home to Centuria, a self-described order of “European traditionalist” military officers that has the stated goals of reshaping the country’s military along right-wing ideological lines and defending the “cultural and ethnic identity” of European peoples against “Brussels’ politicos and bureaucrats.” The group envisions a future where “European right forces are consolidated and national traditionalism is established as the disciplining ideological basis for the European peoples.”

The group, led by individuals with ties to Ukraine’s ...  Azov movement, has attracted multiple members, including current and former officer cadets of the NAA now serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Apparent members have appeared in photos giving Nazi salutes and made seemingly extremist statements online.

The group has been able to proselytize Ukraine’s future military elite inside the NAA. Members have also gained access to Western military education and training Institutions.

The presence of the far right within the NAA is alarming because that institution is central to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Western support for that country, and Western military presence there. Foreign military instructors routinely engage with the Academy’s cadets at both the Academy proper and the International Peacekeeping and Security Center it oversees....

Azov figures and groups linked to Azov also heaped praise on Centuria and shared its messages online. In January 2019, for example, Eduard Yurchenko, an ideologue of the Azov movement, praised the group on Telegram, where he now has more than 1,100 subscribers. “You should know that this is our legendary future growing,” Yurchenko wrote of Centuria, emphasizing that the group was holding events within the NAA. ...

Galician Youth, a group that is linked to the Azov movement and operates in the Western part of Ukraine, similarly shared Centuria propaganda on Telegram in 2019.

In May 2021, the United Jewish Community of Ukraine... accused Galician Youth of spreading anti-Semitic posters in Lviv. The group denied having any connection to anti-Semitic posters and stated that it condemned anti-Semitism and xenophobia. Belying these statements, however, Galician Youth events, patches, etc., feature white nationalist symbols.

The evidence is overwhelming that the AFU is being penetrated at all levels by neo-Nazi groups.

Hope not Hate, which never lost an opportunity to attack anti-racists like Chris Williamson for ‘anti-Semitism’, went out of its way to downplay genuine anti-Semitism in Ukraine. HnH withdrew an award to Joe Solo for having supported Chris, though it ended up with egg on their faces writing that:

Ukraine's contemporary Jewish community, while facing antisemitism that all Jewish populations sadly receive, has, in the post-communist era, become a thriving community in the country with freedoms and protections written in law.

Eduard Dolinsky, the leader of Ukraine’s Jewish community clearly disagreed:

Our government encourages nationalistic groups. Our government encourages glorification of Nazi collaborator mass murderers and murderers of Jews.

Literally there are hundreds of monuments, streets named after killers of Jews. You can’t imagine in the West... a monument to a policeman who was escorting Jews to Nazi death camps.... We have anti-Semitic incidents every day – vandalism on Holocaust mass graves, vandalism on Jewish monuments. ... No one was ever convicted. They always deny the issue.

Zelensky’s Alliance with Ukraine’s Neo-Nazis

Western propaganda uses the fact that Zelenskyy is Jewish to legitimise Ukraine’s Nazis. This is not strange however. Zelensky is a rabid Zionist and Zionism historically has always koshered anti-Semitism. It did so with Nazi Germany.

Less than 3 weeks ago the Israeli  Ambassador to Romania, together with settler leader Yossi Dagan, met with the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians party. This is a party that openly denies the holocaust and is descended from the Iron Guard who in 1941 staged a pogrom in Bucharest and hung the bodies of Jews from meat hooks in butcher shops. As Ha’aretz observed in its editorial ‘Shared Values’: Netanyahu’s Israel Cements Another Grim Alliance With Europe’s Far Right

Zelensky is a puppet of Ukraine’s fascists who came to power thanks to patronage from Ukrainian oligarch, Ihor Kolomoisky. Kolomoisky funded  Zelensky’s election campaign whilst also funding the Azov Battalion and other far-right militias.

In 2019 Zelensky met with a range of fascist groups telling reporters “I met with veterans yesterday. Everyone was there – the National Corps, Azov, and everyone else.” A few seats away from Zelensky was Yehven Karas, leader of the neo-Nazi C14 gang.

In 2019, Zelensky defended Ukrainian footballer Roman Zolzulya against Spanish fans taunting him as a “Nazi.” Zolzulya had posed beside photos of Bandera and openly supported the AB. Zelensky, described Zolzulya as “not only a cool football player but a true patriot.”

In April 2021 Zelensky tried to appoint the neo-Nazi former head of the Right Sector in Odessa, Serhiy Sternenko as head of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU). As the former head of the neo-Nazi Right Sector in Odessa, Sternenko was directly implicated in the 2014 Trade Unions House massacre in Odessa, when 46 trade unionists were burnt alive or shot whilst attempting to flee the burning building. It is a massacre that Smith and Graham are remarkably unconcerned or ignorant about.

In November 2021 Dmytro Yarosh, announced that he had been appointed as an advisor to the Commander-in-Chief of the AFU. Yarosh led the Right Sector from 2013-2015, vowing to lead the “de-Russification” of Ukraine.

A month later, as war with Russia drew closer, Zelensky awarded Right Sector commander Dmytro Kotsyubaylo the “Hero of Ukraine” commendation. Kosyubaylo keeps a pet wolf in his frontline base, and likes to joke to visiting reporters that his fighters “feed it the bones of Russian-speaking children.”

On March 1, Zelensky replaced the regional administrator of Odessa with Maksym Marchenko, a former commander of the extreme right Aidar Battalion, which has been accused of an array of war crimes in the Donbas.

Zelensky’s visit to Greece in April 2022 backfired dramatically in a country which was occupied during WWII. Zelensky’s address cut away to broadcast two members of the AB. Both said that they were of Greek heritage. It caused outrage. “Nazis Return to Parliament — Thanks to Mitsotakis” ran one headline referring to the fact that only recently had Greece managed to drive out its own neo-nazis.

The decision of the TUC to give blanket support to NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine, knowing full well that neo-Nazi groups are integrated armed forces is or should be a matter of shame. Clearly Gary Smith and Sharon Graham have no shame.

Tony Greenstein

The Elephant in the Room – The Stalinist Legacy of the Communist Party on Palestine Still Haunts It

$
0
0

Why does the Morning Star’s Communist Party of Britain harbour within its ranks an open racist & Zionist Mary Davis?

'Oh, Jeremy Corbyn - the Big Lie'

A friend of mine sent me a copy of the Communist Review(CR), journal of the Communist Party of Britain. In it was an articleThe contested relationship between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism’ (No 108, summer 2023) by Mary Davis.

I wrote to the Editor of CR, twice, offering a reply but I had no response. I then wrote to Mary Davis challenging her to a debate. Suffice to say the good Professor did not respond either, which is no surprise since her article is indefensible.

I couldn’t find Davis’s article on the Internet. I have therefore put it on myself. It is as if the CPB didn’t want to wash their dirty linen in public!

Corbyn made capitulating under pressure and throwing his friends to the Zionist wolves into a fine art

What I did find was another article in the Morning Star The socialism of fools: anti-semitism in the Labour Party?, by Mary Davis of July 27 2019. Davis’ article accepted the anti-Semitism smears of the Labour right and the Zionists that led to the fatal undermining of Jeremy Corbyn and the left leadership of the Labour Party.

For a party that calls itself ‘Communist’ this is shocking. Is the CPB unaware that the ascent of Corbyn to the leadership was bound to set off a reaction in the British Establishment and the form their narrative took was ‘anti-Semitism’?

Despite claiming to be a Marxist Davis ran with the Zionist fable that anti-Semitism had been one unchanging phenomenon for 2000 years. She didn’t attempt to analyse the different forms anti-Semitism has taken historically, in particular the distinction between feudal and racial anti-Semitism.

Briefly feudal or Christian anti-Semitism was from below. For Marxists it represented the economic antagonism between the peasants and the Jews as the agents of within an economy based on use values. With the advent of imperialism in the late 19th century anti-Semitism took on a racial form.

Wilhelm Marr's pamphlet ' The Way to Victory of Germanism over Judaism, 1879'

In 1879 Wilhelm Marr, who popularised the term ‘anti-Semitism’, formed the League of Anti-Semites. To him and his successors once a Jew always a Jew. Whereas the anti-Semitism of Martin Luther ended with conversion to Christianity to the Nazis a Jew was always a Jew. Which is why the phenomenon of the Christian Jew made an appearance under the Nazis. Christian by religion, Jewish by race. They too had to wear a yellow star and they too were destined to be annihilated.

It is as if the CPB has never read Abram Leon’s The Jewish Question - A Marxist Interpretation. Davis is a relic of Stalinism, which has its own history of anti-Semitism (the Doctor’s plot, Slansky trial etc.). Trotsky was Jewish as were many of the old Bolsheviks who Stalin murdered.

It is not surprising that Davis has no acquaintance with Leon’s book since Leon was a Trotskyist. In this Marxist classic Leon wrote:

Zionism transposes modern anti-Semitism to all of history and saves itself the trouble of studying the various forms of anti-Semitism and their evolution.

Davis and her co-author Phil Katz subscribe to the Zionist idea of 2000 years of unchanging anti-Semitism. The title of their articleThe socialism of fools’’ was popularised by August Bebel, a founder of the German Social Democratic Party in a speech to their 1893 Congress.

Davis’article is shocking in that it accepts that anti-Semitism in the Labour Party was not an invention of the Zionist Right but was actually true. She argued that there was no contradiction between saying that anti-Semitism was weaponised and also saying that anti-Semitism was a problem. This is a typical Stalinist sleight of hand which Orwell described when he spoke of doublethink.

Despite Gordon Brown appealing to backward racist sentiments using a fascist slogan, he was very much opposed to 'anti-Semitism'

These fools never once asked themselves why, if anti-Semitism was a problem in the Labour Party, it was the Right in the form of Tom Watson and John Mann who were its most ardent advocates. Why Gordon Brown, who used the fascist slogan British Jobs for British Workers, was so disturbed by ‘anti-Semitism’. Why the Daily Mail etc. ran with this nonsense given their own racist record including campaigning against the admission of Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany. How it was that the BBC produced a Panorama programme ‘Is Labour Anti-Semitic’ by the racist Islamaphobe John Ware who is now writing for the Zionist journal Fathom?

Wilhelm Marr

Today, with the advent of Keir Starmer we can see exactly where the anti-Semitism witchhunt has led. If you are Jewish in the Labour Party today you are five times more likely to be expelled than a non-Jew. Indeed if you are Jewish and a member of a proscribed organisation you are 13 times more likely to be expelled. However this is no excuse for Davis’ reactionary verbal gymnastics. Davis asked:

‘Is the charge of anti-semitism in the Labour Party a fiction manufactured by a conspiratorial alliance between the Israeli government and anti-socialist forces seeking to discredit Jeremy Corbyn, thereby undermining the prospect of a left-led Labour government?

Davis even mimics the methodology of the Right. She caricatures opposition to the fake anti-Semitism narrative by portraying its critics as alleging that there was a ‘conspiratorial alliance’ between the Israeli government and the Labour Right. But there is no need for a conspiracy when they already agree on everything. There are very obvious contacts between the two in the form of Labour Friends of Israel and the JLM.

As I show in my recent book Frumka Plotniczki, a Zionist resistance fighter was ordered to abandon the fight in the ghettos & escape to Palestine where the real fight, against the Arabs, was taking place

Davis sought to discredit opponents of the anti-Semitism witchhunt on the grounds that Corbyn accepted that there was a problem.

The fact is that the leadership of the Labour Party itself has acknowledged that there is an anti-semitic element within its ranks.

Corbyn acknowledged that there was a problem because he never understood the attack in the first place. Since his strategy was to appease the right he was in the end forced to accept the legitimacy of their fake narrative. I said at the time to every meeting I addressed that Jackie Walker, Marc Wadwsorth, Ken Livingstone and myself were collateral damage. It was Corbyn they were after. Unfortunately Corbyn preferred to throw us under the bus but it didn’t help him because the Zionists main aim was to remove him.

Davis cited John McDonnell to prove her case but she must have known that McDonnell was the arch exponent of appeasement. When Corbyn was called an anti-Semite by Margaret Hodge McDonnell rushed to her defence saying that this shyster, who the BNP had sent a bouquet of flowers to for her Houses for Whites policy, had ‘a good heart’.

The Morning Star's Editor Ben Chako

Mary Davis is ironically an inheritor of the Stalinist tradition of anti-Semitism on the one hand and support for Zionism on the other. It is strange that the Communist Party of Britain, which claims to support the Palestinians, should carry an article repeating the hoary old Zionist smear that anti-Zionism leads to anti-Semitism. After all Ben Chako, the Editor of the Morning Star, was the guest speaker at the inaugural showing of Jeremy Corbyn –The Big Lie at Conway Hall last February.

During the witchhunt in the Labour Party the Morning Star had a generally good record in defending the left. For example they carried a poem by the late and great Kevin Higgins on my expulsion and an articleLike the boy who cried wolf’ by me.

The time has come for the CPB to make a choice between supporting the Palestinians, including dropping its support for the apartheid two state solution and harbouring a Zionist cuckoo. It cannot do both. It wouldn’t have given time of day to a supporter of South Africa apartheid so why does it do so in the case of Israeli apartheid?

Tony Greenstein

The Elephant in the Room is the Relationship Between Zionism and Anti-Semitism not anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism 

A Reply to Mary Davis of the Communist Party of Britain

This appears as Elephant in the room in Weekly Worker

Mary Davis’s ‘The Contested Relationship Between Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism’ is an exercise in obfuscation and dishonesty. As George Orwell observed political language is

largely the defence of the indefensible…. (which) can indeed be defended but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face… Thus political language has  to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness…’

Was Zionism just another form of nationalism?

The reason why Zionism cannot be considered a national movement of the Jews was that it was not seeking to liberate territory where Jews lived nor did it fight anti-Semitism. Quite the opposite. The Zionist movement formed alliances with and befriended anti-Semites, a fact Davis ignores.

Zionism was a racial nationalist movement that sought an alliance with imperialism. Ethno-nationalism was common in Eastern Europe in the 30s/40s. There was the Iron Guard in Romania, Arrow Cross in Hungary, Hlinka Guard in Slovakia and Croatia’s Ustashe, all of which were vehemently anti-Semitic.

Zionism was supported by only a small minority of Jews before the Holocaust. If any group could be considered a Jewish national movement it was the Bund, which operated over an identifiable territory, the Pale of Settlement and which represented Yiddish speaking Jews.

Pictures of the Nakba that Davis 'forgot' to mention

The History of Zionist colonisation in Palestine.

Davis paints, with a broad brush, the history of Zionist colonisation in Palestine but amazingly fails to mention the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948. We are given a saccharin version of history whereby the Yishuv (the Jewish community)‘sometimes, although by no means always, co-existed relatively peacefully with the indigenous Arab population.’ That is it.

The aftermath of a massacre during the Nakba - to Davis this was an example of good relations

The first Aliyah (wave of immigration) in 1882 was a traditional form of colonisation in which Arabs were employed in the colonies whilst continuing to live on the land. These were the colonies of Barons Edmond de Rothschild and, after his death in 1896, Maurice de Hirsch’s Jewish Colonisation Agency, (ICA) later the Palestinian JCA (PICA). They were not Zionist.

The second Labour Zionist aliyah (1904-14), was the beginning of Zionist settlement. The policy of Jewish Labour, (Boycott of Arab Labour), was at its heart. Jewish Labour, David HaCohen, a leader of Mapai (Israeli Labor Party) and a member of the Knesset for many years, explained that:

I had to fight my friends on the issue of Jewish socialism, to defend the fact that I would not accept Arabs in my trade union, the Histadrut; to defend preaching to housewives that they not buy at Arab stores; to defend the fact that we stood guard at orchards to prevent Arab workers from getting jobs there. ... To pour kerosene on Arab tomatoes; to attack Jewish housewives in the markets and smash the Arab eggs they had bought; … to throw the fellahin [peasants] off the land – to buy dozens of dunams from an Arab is permitted, but to sell, God forbid, one Jewish dunam to an Arab is prohibited; to take Rothschild, the incarnation of capitalism, as a socialist and to name him the “benefactor” – to do all that was not easy. (Ha'aretz 15.11.69)

The best analysis of Zionist colonisation was contained in the 1930 Report of Sir John Hope-Simpson, set up in the wake of the 1929 riots:

the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialised. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, [JNF] he is deprived for ever from employment on that land. … The land is in mortmain and inalienable. It is for this reason that Arabs discount the professions of friendship and good will on the part of the Zionists in view of the policy which the Zionist Organisation [ZO] deliberately adopted.

Not only did the Labour Zionists follow a policy of economic apartheid they sought to extend it to the PICA settlements.

The principle of the persistent and deliberate boycott of Arab labour… [is] confined to the Zionist colonies, but the General Federation of Jewish Labour [Histadrut] is using every effort to ensure that it shall be extended to the colonies of the P.I.C.A., and this with some considerable success. Great pressure is being brought to bear on the old P.I.C.A. colonies in the Maritime Plain and its neighbourhood—pressure which in one instance at least has compelled police intervention.

The Report quoted from the terms of the lease that the JNF issued to its Jewish tenants.

" . . . . The lessee undertakes to execute all works connected with the cultivation of the holding only with Jewish labour. Failure to comply with this duty by the employment of nonJewish labour shall render the lessee liable to the payment of a compensation of ten Palestinian pounds for each default."

The lease also provides that the holding shall never be held by any but a Jew. If the holder, being a Jew, dies, leaving as his heir a nonJew, the Fund shall obtain the right of restitution.

Davis criticises ‘the blanket identification of Zionism with racism, apartheid, colonialism and worse.’ and lectures the reader that ‘moral judgements… must not be allowed to obscure an analysis of the Zionist movement’. Unfortunately Davis is guilty of the very crime that she ascribes to others.

From its inception at the end of the 19th century, Zionism saw itself as a colonial movement. On 11 January 1902 Theodor Herzl, its founder, described a letter he had written to Cecil Rhodes, the White supremacist leader in southern Africa.

How, then, do I happen to turn to you, since this is an out-of-the way matter for you? How indeed? Because it is something colonial, and because it presupposes understanding of a development which will take twenty or thirty years. … But you, Mr. Rhodes, are a visionary politician or a practical visionary. You have already demonstrated this. And what I want you to do is … to put the stamp of your authority on the Zionist plan…’ [1]

Today, when colonialism has gone out of fashion, the Zionist movement disavows its colonial roots but when it was in fashion the ZO had a Colonization Department.

David Ben Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister, regularly referred to the settlements as ‘colonies’. For all her bluster Davis cannot deny the fact that the Zionist movement saw itself as a settler-colonial movement. As we can see from HaCohen and Hope-Simpson, racism was integral to Zionist colonisation.

The relationship between Zionism and anti-Semitism.

Davies is at pains to infer that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism have much in common and that the former leads to the latter. She tells us that anti-Zionism ‘‘per se’ is not anti-Semitic’ however ‘there is currently a strain of anti-Zionism… which has normalized hostility to Israel as a Zionist entity founded by Jews.’ This apparently ‘can and often does lead to anti-Semitism.’ Davis gives no examples and relies on pure assert ion.

Despite the efforts of the Zionists to redefine anti-Semitism as hostility, not to Jews but to Zionism and Israel, Davis does not once mention the IHRA.

Why does Davis argue that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic? ‘because it singles out Israel for special treatment.’ and because ‘questioning the existence of the State of Israel ignores the motivation for its foundation as a refuge for Jews…’.

The argument about ‘singling out’ Israel for criticism echoes the complaints of supporters of Apartheid in South Africa who were keen to point to the iniquities of surrounding countries as if that was any kind of justification.

Apartheid South Africa was founded as a refuge for the Afrikaaners and the USA was a refuge for Christian dissenters. It is irrelevant why a state was founded. What matters is what it does.

Nor was Israel founded in order to save the victims of anti-Semitism from persecution. Chaim Weizmann said in 1919 that ‘Alas, Zionism can’t provide a solution for catastrophes.’ Palestine was closed to thousands of survivors of the Ukrainian pogroms in the early 1920s. Gur Alroey described how Chaim Weizmann, Israel’s first President

preferred productive immigrants over needy refugees and thought the Land of Israel needed strong, healthy immigrants, not refugees weak in body and spirit.

Rabbi Abba Hillel-Silver, President of the Zionist Organisation of America asked:

Are we again, in moments of desperation going to confuse Zionism with refugeeism which is likely to defeat Zionism?... Zionism is not a refugee movement. It is not a product of the Second World War, nor of the first. Were there no displaced Jews in Europe... Zionism would still be an imperative necessity.[Robert Silverberg, If I Forget Thee O Jerusalem, p. 335, 1972]

The Zionist movement opposed the rescue of Jews from the Nazis to any country bar Palestine. After Kristallnacht in November 1938, Britain agreed to admit 10,000 Jewish children, the Kindertransport, to England. The Zionists were furious. Ben Gurion told Mapai’s Central Committee on 9 December 1938 that

If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel.[2]

A week later, on 17 December 1938 Ben Gurion wrote a memo to the Zionist Executive expressing his fears that

If the Jews are faced with a choice between the refugee problem and rescuing Jews from concentration camps on the one hand, and aid for the national museum in Palestine on the other, the Jewish sense of pity will prevail and our people's entire strength will be directed at aid for the refugees in the various countries. Zionism will vanish from the agenda and indeed not only world public opinion in England and America but also from Jewish public opinion. We are risking Zionism's very existence if we allow the refugee problem to be separated from the Palestine problem.

A Jewish state was founded, not in order to rescue individual Jews but in order to perpetuate the Jewish race. That was the basis of the cordial relationship between the Nazis and the Zionists during the 1930s. How else to explain the fact that the German Zionist Federation [ZVfD] pressurised the Gestapo not to allow Jews to emigrate to countries other than Palestine? The Gestapo ‘did everything in those days to promote emigration, particularly to Palestine.[3]

When Roosevelt called the Evian Conference to discuss the plight of Europe’s Jewish refugees, the Zionists were appalled. A meeting of the Jewish Agency Executive [JAE] on June 26 1938 decided to:

belittle the [Evian] Conference as far as possible and to cause it to decide nothing…. We are particularly worried that it would move Jewish organizations to collect large sums of money for aid to Jewish refugees, and these collections could interfere with our collection efforts.[4]

Ben-Gurion at a meeting of the JAE of 26 June 1938. explained: ‘No rationalizations can turn the conference from a harmful to a useful one. What can and should be done is to limit the damage as far as possible.'[5] Menachem Ussishkin at the same meeting said that

He hoped to hear in Evian that Eretz Israel remains the main venue for Jewish emigration. All other emigration countries do not interest him… The greatest danger is that attempts will be made to find other territories for Jewish emigration.[6] (my emphasis)

The Zionist leaders welcomed the rise of the Nazis to government. It vindicated everything they had said about the impossibility of Jews living amongst non Jews. Zionist leaders saw the Hitler regime as a golden opportunity to prosper. Francis Nicosia spoke of the ‘illusory assumption’ that Zionism ‘must have been well served by a Nazi victory’. Hitler’s victory ‘could only bolster Zionist fortunes.’ Nicosia also spoke of the tendency to ‘view Zionist interests as distinct from those of the larger Jewish community in the Diaspora.[7]

So positive was its assessment of the situation that, as early as April 1933, the ZVfD announced its determination to take advantage of the crisis to win over the traditionally assimilationist German Jewry to Zionism [8]

Berl Katznelson, Ben-Gurion’s effective deputy, saw the rise of Hitler as ‘an opportunity to build and flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have.’[9] Ben-Gurion was even more optimistic. ‘The Nazis’ victory would become “a fertile force for Zionism.”’[10]

Noah Lucas, a critical Zionist historian, wrote:

‘As the European holocaust erupted, Ben-Gurion saw it as a decisive opportunity for Zionism... In conditions of peace,… Zionism could not move the masses of world Jewry. The forces unleashed by Hitler in all their horror must be harnessed to the advantage of Zionism. ... By the end of 1942… the struggle for a Jewish state became the primary concern of the movement.’  (Noah Lucas) [11]

Zionism began as a reaction to anti-Semitism, especially the pogroms that followed the assassination of Czar Alexander II in 1881. Unlike all other Jewish groups Zionism accepted the main premise of the anti-Semites, that Jews did not belong in the countries where they lived. That was why anti-Semites endorsed the Zionist movement as a way of being rid of their unwanted Jews.

Zionism believed that anti-Semitism could not be fought because it was inherent in every non-Jew. In the midst of the Dreyfus Affair, when over half of France had taken up the struggle for a Jewish officer, Herzl wrote that

In Paris... I achieved a freer attitude towards anti-Semitism, which I now began to understand historically and to pardon. Above all, I recognise the emptiness and futility of trying to 'combat' anti-Semitism. [Diaries, p.8]

The leader of the anti-Dreyfusards Edouard Drumont favourably reviewed Herzl’s pamphlet The Jewish State, in ‘Solution de la Question Juive’ in La Libre Parole on 16 January 1897. Herzl expressed his delight in his Diary.[12]

Jews viewed Zionism as a form of Jewish anti-Semitism. Davis mentions that the first Zionist Congress was held in Basel, Switzerland in 1897. What she doesn’t mention is that it was supposed to have been held in Munich but the Jewish community there protested against it holding that the authorities were condoning anti-Semitism. As Sir Samuel Montagu, a Liberal MP wrote:

Is it not... a suspicious fact that those who have no love for the Jews, and those who are pronounced anti-Semites, all seem to welcome the Zionist proposals and aspiration.? 

Zionism was a counter-revolutionary movement. After the Kishinev pogrom in April 1903 Herzl journeyed to see Czarist Interior Minister von Plehve who had organised the pogroms. Herzl asked Plehve: ‘Help me to reach land sooner and the revolt will end. And so will the defection to the Socialists.[13] Plehve approved the publication of a Zionist daily, Der Fraind. Uniquely Zionism was a legal political movement in Russia. Herzl promised that the revolutionaries would stop their struggle in return for a charter for Palestine in 15 years. The Bund were outraged.[14]

Davies makes great play of the ‘Marxist’ Zionist Poalei Zion [PZ] omitting to mention that its founder, Ber Borochov, was expelled from the Russian Social Democrats in 1901 for Zionism. Socialist Zionism only began because mainstream Zionism held no attractions for Jewish workers.

In Poland Left PZ effectively abandoned Zionism. In Palestine PZ moved to the right as the rhythms of colonisation and conflict with the Arabs took over.

Davis argues that PZ ‘advocated a harmonious relationship between Jew and Arab in Palestine.’ Either she knows nothing about Zionist colonisation or she is lying. PZ and Ahdut Ha'avodah eschewed unity between Jewish and Arab workers.

Does Zionism have a Left and a Right?

Davis argues that Zionism ‘was never a monolithic movement with a settled ideology.’ Rather it was ‘fractured from its early days and remains so until the present time.’

Although it is true that the Zionist movement was divided into different groups it is not true that there wasn’t a common ideology. All wings agreed that Jews formed a nation worldwide and there was also unanimity, with the exception of the tiny Brit Shalom, that their goal was the establishment of a Jewish state.

Whereas the Revisionists sought to achieve this goal at once, Ben Gurion realised that the Yishuv had to build up its strength numerically before they could realistically achieve statehood. There was an unspoken consensus among all wings that the achievement of a Jewish state would involve the transfer of the Arabs.

The Revisionists wanted to jettison Zionism’s imperialist partners, the British, before the Yishuv was ready whereas Ben Gurion realised that until they reached a critical mass the British presence was indispensible. The differences were not ones of principle but tactics.

The Histadrut, the Zionist trade union, which Golda Meir described as a ‘great colonizing agency’, was formed in 1920.The class struggle was seen as weakening the settler enterprise. In April 1924 the Palestine Communist Party adopted an anti-Zionist, anti-imperialist outlook. It was expelled from Histadrut.[15]

The Labour Zionist slogan was ‘From class to nation’. The class struggle was to be waged, not against the employer but the Arabs. It was Labour Zionism which built the State of Israel. The Nakba was carried out primarily by the Labour Zionist militias, Haganah and Palmach, not the Revisionists.

What is a ‘Jewish State’? Is such a state inherently racist?

What does a Jewish State mean? Davis ignores this question. Being Jewish in such a state is a national/racial not a religious category. In Israel you can be registered as of no religion but Jewish in terms of nationality.

The Jewish Nation State Law 2018, which Davis references, states that in Israel only Jews have the right of national self-determination. Arabs are guests, they are not part of the national collective. Israel is unique in having no single nationality.

To this day, Israel’s Palestinian citizens face having their villages demolished in order to make way for Jewish towns. In July 2023 the residents of Ras Jrabah in the Negev were given until March 2024 to destroy their homes and leave their village to make way for the expansion of a nearby Israeli city. Half of all Israel’s Arab villages are ‘unrecognised’. They are on state land, which is a ‘Jewish’ state. Such villages have no piped water, electricity or even ballot boxes in elections. This is internal colonisation.

As Netanyahu remarked, “Israel is not a state of all its citizens. … Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people – and only it.’ Ethno-religious states are a throwback to the days of feudalism. It was the bourgeois revolution in France which established the idea that a nation includes all the people living within its territory, not just those of a particular religion.

Davis sees opposition to a Jewish state as anti-Semitic. If so then it was also racist to oppose the apartheid state in South Africa.

6.      How Anti-Semitism was Weaponised in order to Undermine Corbyn and the Labour Left

It is astounding that someone who calls themselves a communist cannot see how anti-Semitism was weaponised by the right to defeat the Corbyn project. Jeremy Corbyn has allowed vile anti-Semitism to fester and growscreamed the Daily Express. The same paper that campaigned against the admission of Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany was to the fore in opposing Labour ‘anti-Semitism’.

‘No-one is swallowing the asylum seeker lie anymore, the game’s up’wrote Carole Malone. We had the Sun and Mail, fresh from employing neo-Nazi Katie Hopkins as a columnist, protesting their shock at Labour ‘anti-Semitism’. Is Mary Davis really unable to join the dots?

Tom Watson and the Labour Right, who had made demonisation of Muslims and asylum seekers into a fine art, protested their abhorrence at Labour ‘anti-Semitism’. Gordon Brown, whose sloganBritish Jobs for British Workers’ was coined by fascist groups such as the BNP and National Front, fulminated against the ‘stain’ of Labour ‘anti-Semitism’.

If there was one thing that destroyed the Corbyn Project it was the inability of the Labour left to fight back against false accusations of anti-Semitism. Yet what conclusion does Davis draw?

It is an undoubted fact that the conflation of anti-Zionism and antisemitism, has been and still is, a constant theme of left discourse.

It is as if Davis no longer recognises the meaning of words. The equation of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is a Zionist not left theme. Mary Davis is the CPB’s Humpty Dumpty:

When I use a word,… it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.

Boris Johnson, whose racist utterances are notorious  and whose 2004 book 72 Virgins was replete with racist and anti-Semitic stereotypes, was also concerned about Labour anti-Semitism. Nor does Davis point out the hypocrisy of Labour MPs who attacked Corbyn’s ‘anti-Semitism’ but supported Theresa May’s ‘hostile environment’ Immigration Act 2014?

Davis signals that there was no smoke without fire. She uses weasel words, talking about ‘persistent allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party’. John Mann and Watson were certainly persistent but they also backed the racist Labour MP Phil Woolas in 2010 when the High Court removed him from Parliament. Woolas had fought an election campaign based on ‘making the White folk angry.’

Davis treats the EHRC ‘investigation’ of Labour anti-semitism as if the EHRC was some a human rights group rather than an instrument of the British state. The same EHRC has refused to investigate Tory Islamaphobia and whose Board is stuffed with right-wing appointees. The Commissioner who conducted the Inquiry, Alisdair Henderson, was later found out to have been tweeting in support of fascist philosopher Roger Scruton and making derogatory comments about feminism.

Davis cannot bring herself to mention the expulsion of Jewish members of the party such that Jews in the Labour Party face a five times greater chance of being expelled than non-Jews.

Does Israel have a vibrant left

Davies says that ‘vibrant oppositional forces exist in Israel’. What she doesn’t do is explain how today Labour Zionism is an endangered species. Having formed every government from 1949 to 1977 the Israeli Labour Party has not formed a government since 1999. Mapam/Meretz, who were once the second largest party in the Knesset, has no elected members.

Israel is a society where the phrase ‘leftist’ is a term of abuse, where racism amongst the young is rampant and where a plurality of Jews support the expulsion of Palestinian Israelis. On every count Israeli Palestinians are discriminated against by the State. What remains of the left in Israel is extremely weak.

In the demonstrations over Netanyahu’s judicial reforms, the Anti Occupation Block has been regularly attacked by other demonstrators. The demonstrations are primarily a protest within the Jewish collective from which Palestinian Israelis are absent. When it comes to the army’s attack on Palestinians in Jenin and elsewhere there is Zionist unanimity.

Davies mentions Israeli human rights organisation B’tselem but omits to mention that last year it concluded that Israel was an apartheid state and that a regime of Jewish supremacy’ extends ‘from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid.’

Today we have the phenomenon of the Jewish neo-Nazi Otzmah Yehudit being part of the third largest block in the Knesset yet Davies has nothing to say about this or the continuing ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in the West Bank. Of course in the protests some Israeli Jews will become radicalised and begin to understand that you can’t maintain a military dictatorship in the Occupied Territories and a Jewish democracy in Israel. In South Africa repression of the Black population led to democracy for White people being eroded. So too in Israel.

Two States is an Apartheid Solution

Davies harks back to 1947 and Stalin’s decision to support the establishment of Israel as a ‘Jewish state’ which resulted in the expulsion of ¾ million Palestinians.

If there is one thing that the past half century teaches us it is that Israel has no intention to create a Palestinian state. The Oslo Accords replaced the faces of Israeli soldiers with Palestinian faces. Palestinians now recognise that the ONLY solution is the creation, like in South Africa, of a unitary state which guarantees equal rights for all. Only racists and Zionists oppose such an outcome.

A two state solution would leave an apartheid Israeli state in place together with a repressive bantustan in the West Bank. The 700,000 settlers aren’t going anywhere and there is no appetite or desire within Israel to remove them. The Israeli Communist Party is wrong to cling to this ‘solution’ which would be an invitation to Ben Gvir to expel Israeli Palestinians into such a state.

Davis began her article by telling us how many times Zion occurs in the Bible as if this proved anything. Zionism has always been a political not religious movement. Yes Jews prayed for a return to the Holy Land but as Bernard Lazarre, an early Zionist noted, what this prayer was really saying was that they wished to be free.

When 2.5 million Russian Jews emigrated from Czarist Russia between the mid-19th century and 1914, some 99% went to the USA and Britain. A mere trickle of Zionist activists, most of whom returned, went to Palestine. Whenever Jews have been given the chance, they have chosen to go anywhere but Palestine.

Mary Davis article is one long apologia for Zionism. Its mistakes are too many to count. It is tendentious and is based on an imperialist imposed, partition.

Israel today reflects the anti-Semitism that Jews once experienced. Instead of ‘death to the Jews’ we have ‘death to the Arabs’ chantged. This is the state Mary Davis wants to keep. Her article is the exact opposite of international solidarity.

Davis turns a blind eye to the fact that Zionism has always been supported by anti-Semites, from Trump and Richard Spencer to Tommy Robinson.

Israel has excellent relations with anti-Semitic regimes in Eastern Europe from Hungary’s Orban to Poland’s Morawiecki. At the end of August a meeting took place between Israel’s Ambassador in Romania, Reuven Azar, with the holocaust denying Alliance for the Union of Romanians leader George Simion. This is the Zionism that Mary Davis denies.

Tony Greenstein



[1]          Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl, p. 1194, Ralph Patai (ed), 1960.

[2]          Yoav Gelber, ‘Zionist policy and the Fate of European Jewry,’ Yad Vashem Studies (1939-42) p. 199; see also Tom Segev, The Seventh Million, p. 28; Teveth p. 855; Gabriel Piterberg p. 99.

[3]          Francis Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question, p. 57.

[4]          Boas Evron, Jewish State or Israeli Nation, fn 3, p. 260 quoting letter by Georg Landauer to Stephen Wise, 13.2.38. This shocking letter was written at the behest of Chaim Weizmann.

[5]          Ibid.

[6]          Ibid.

[7]          Nicosia, The Yishuv and the Holocaust, p. 534.

[8]          Nicosia, ZANG, p.146.

[9]          Ibid., p. 91. Segev, The Seventh Million, p. 18 attributes this quote to a report by Moshé Beilinson, a cofounder of Davar, to Katznelson.

[10]        Segev, The Seventh Million, p. 18.

[11]        Lucas, pp. 187/8, A Modern History of Israel, Weidenfield & Nicholson, 1975.

[12]        Stewart, Herzl, p. 251.

[13]      Herzl, Complete Diaries, p. 1526

[14]     Henry Tobias, p. 252.

[15]     Mario Offenburg, Kommunismus in Palaestina Nation und Kalassein der anti-Kolonialen RevolutionMeisenheim am Glan 1975 (PhD Thesis, West Berlin, 1975) p.187. Khamsin No 7, pp. 4l-5l.

Jeremy Corbyn film … the Big Lie

$
0
0

The Film They Don’t Want You To See is Showing in Brighton this Thursday

Register Here

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/oh-jeremy-corbyn-the-big-lie-screening-and-discussion-tickets-715914307967



The Establishment have gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent people seeing Jeremy Corbyn – The Big Lie. The attempts to ban it were first started by Keir Starmer – the Labour Liar who banned Labour councillors from seeing it.

The cudgels were then taken up by Paul Mason, the spook who wants to wage war on anti-imperialist academics and all manner of socialists with his MI5 friends. The British Establishment – which is all in favour of free speech when it comes to racists, homophobes and other assorted bigots of the right – condemned the film, in Mason’s words because it allegedly

presents a full-blown conspiracy theory about Corbyn’s opponents, conflating Zionists, Jews and Israel as part of a force that “orchestrated” his overthrow.

There were many conspiracies by state forces, Israeli, British and American, to undermine and  bring down Jeremy Corbyn. The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism admitted as much after Corbyn lost the 2019 General Election. But there’s all the difference in the world between conspiracy theories and conspiracies.

Of course it’s not the exposing of the plots and machinations by the press, BBC, Tory and Labour politicians that bothers them it is the truth of what happened between 2015 and 2019.

The desperate attempts of Starmer, Mason and co. to prevent the film screening is not because it is a conspiracy film but because they don’t want people being exposed to the truth of what happened.

The film is being put on by Brighton’s Unite SE/6246 branch despite the scabby role of Sharon Graham who has become desperate of late to suck up to Starmer and the Labour Right.

If you live in the Brighton and Hove area come and see the film. Register here to get a free ticket and find out why it is that under Keir Starmer Jews are up to 9 times more likely to be expelled as part of the fight against ‘anti-Semitism’

Elbit Tried and Failed to Get Our Crowdfunder for Palestine Action Defendants Taken Down

$
0
0

 WarCrimes’R’Us Used Their Lawyers to Intimidate Chuffed Into Taking Down Our Crowdfunder But We Are Now Back Up

Demonstration Outside Wolverhampton Crown Court - the Banner Speaks Volumes

If capitalism is an immoral, asocial system that knows only profit and war then its most immoral part are the arms companies, what Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex. And no one but no one is more immoral than Elbit, Israel’s largest arms company.


For 36 hours our Crowdfunder was suspended but now it's up and running

Perhaps the title of the most genocidal and murderous regime in the world goes to the military junta in Myanmar (Burma). The junta has waged war against the Rohinga people, burning them out of their villages and massacring them. Elbit is happy to step in to enable them to commit more war crimes.

The text I agreed to remove from our Crowdfunder

Last Saturday I set up a Crowdfunder on Chuffed, which I’d been recommended to as a socially conscious crowdfunding platform. I wanted to avoid American corporations like Just Giving. By the end of Monday we had raised over £3,000 and then disaster struck.

What greeted me on Tuesday

On Tuesday I woke up to an email saying that the Crowdfunder had been temporarily taken down and we had to remove all references to Elbit as they were defamatory.

Chuffed on Twitter/X

There followed a long conversation in which I was prepared to take out most of the text criticising Elbit but I wasn’t prepared to remove the title Help Support Elbit Protesters and nor was I prepared the photograph which pictured two people holding a placard saying ‘Elbit are the real criminals’. After all that is a photo of a demonstration that took place. How can that possibly be defamatory? News organisations showing pictures of a demonstration would be protected under ‘fair comment.’

By the end of Monday we had reached a deadlock and I did some research and found out that yes, Chuffed did hold itself out to be a socially conscious crowdfunder for all sorts of campaigns, which is to its credit, but it was giving us a hard time.

What I didn’t realise was that Elbit’s overpaid lawyers had been on to Chuffed and threatened them unless the blog was taken down.

So we left it with me telling Carl that I would be left with no option but to run the Crowdfunder from my own blog and I would of course have to explain why this had happened which would inevitably mean that Chuffed suffered reputational damage amongst activists.

At this point Jennie Smith, their acting CEO emailed me from Australia asking for a WhatsApp meeting. Unfortunately because I had been blogging till the early hours and because of the different time zones we never did manage it. However Jennie made it clear that she wanted to restore the Crowdfunder.

I also contacted all those who had donated and asked them to contact Chuffed and explain why they were disappointed at what had happened and expressing the hope that it would be resolved as quickly as possible, which many did.

I am pleased to say that Jennie was happy with my compromise which was to take the criticism of Elbit out of the text but to leave in the heading and the photograph which says everything really.

So to end the story on a happy note the Crowdfunder is up and running and at the time of writing has raised £3,100. This is more than enough for the 5 Elbit Defendants in Wolverhampton and I propose to distribute it to other Defendants in Elbit trials so it should be seen as a more general defence fund.

Prominent amongst these is Amber whose crowdfunder for £5 ,000 is to pay for her legal fees as she has been denied legal aid. I intend that we donate £1,000 towards this and I hope others do too.

So this is a story with a happy ending. Unlike some other crowdfunders Chuffed did enter into correspondence with us and we reached a mutually satisfactory outcome so I would definitely recommend people use them.

Elbit provided the White Phosphorous Used for Bombing a UN School

The moral of the story is that Elbit is quite happy enabling war crimes and blowing kids to bits but it is very sensitive when people criticise them. And this is the company that British Judges have bent over backwards to protect.

Tony Greenstein

The Standing Ovation Given by Canada’s Parliament to a Veteran of the Waffen SS Galicia Division was No Accident – It Came From Supporting Today’s neo-Nazis in Ukraine

$
0
0

SPECIAL OFFER – Free Copy of ‘Fighting Fascism in Brighton’ for the next 25 People Who Purchase Zionism During the Holocaust


Review in Brighton & Hove Argus 15.3.12.

I will give the  next 25 purchasers of my book Zionism During the Holocaust a free copy of my first book, ‘Fighting Fascism in Brighton and the South Coast’. Buying Zionism During the Holocaust directly from me costs £10 paperback and £15 hardback (inc. p&p), one-third less than the publisher’s price!

If you want to order a copy email tonygreenstein104@gmail.com

As Zionism During the Holocaust shows the Israeli state and Zionist groups, even after the holocaust, continued to work with neo-Nazi groups and governments. Major Nazi war criminals such as Walter Rauf, who was personally responsible for the death of over 100,000 people and the inventor of the gas truck, was employed as an Israeli agent after the war. They even paid his passage to Ecuador to escape prosecution as a war criminal.

Review in Morning Star 14.3.2012

During the period of the Argentinian Junta (1976-83) Israel supplied weapons and training to those who were, at the very same time, murdering up to 3,000 Argentinian Jews.

March by the Mothers of the Disappeared in Buenos Aires - Israel was a Major Supplier of Arms to this Genocidal neo-Nazi Regime

You will also read about why the accusations against Ken Livingstone, that he was anti-Semitic for mentioning the collaboration of the Nazis and the Zionists, in particular the Ha'avara trading agreement, was false. When world Jewry was building a Boycott of Nazi Germany campaign, which had already inflicted major economic damage on the Nazi economy, the Zionists rode to the Nazis’ rescue with an agreement which resulted in 60% of capital investment in Jewish Palestine between 1933 and 1939 coming from Nazi Germany.

Canadian Parliament Gives SS ‘Hero’ a Standing Ovation

This has been the week when the hypocrisy of Western foreign policy was on display for all to see with the honouring of Yaroslav Hunka, a volunteer in a Ukrainian Waffen SS unit.

Speaker of the Canadian Parliament Anthony Rota introduced Hunka as a Canadian and Ukrainian war hero who fought for the Waffen-SS Galicia Division or the SS 14th Waffen Division.

Canadian Deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland, posed with a Banderite Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) flag in February 2022. Image credit: Sputnik News/Wyatt Reed

Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland  is a long standing supporter of Canada’s Ukrainian neo-Nazi exiles. See ChrystiaFreeland: Canada’s fascist queen

It was neither a mistake nor an accident. In his introduction Rota said that Hunka ‘fought for Ukrainian independence against the Russians.’ And who was it who fought against the Russians in the Second World War if not the Nazis and their collaborators in Eastern Europe?

The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) of Stepan Bandera was prominent in that fight just as it was prominent in the holocaust and mass murder of hundreds of thousands of Jews and Poles.

The West, including Israel, has openly armed and trained Ukraine’s armed forces knowing full well that they have integrated the neo-Nazi Azov Brigade (now upgraded to a battalion) and other far-right forces into them. In the process the West and the Zionists have transformed Nazis into nationalists.

The fact that Ukraine is the only country in the world which has a national holiday in memory of a Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera should have been enough in itself. But that too was simply ignored.

The Anti-Defamation League, America’s premier Zionist organisation, has openly set about whitewashing Ukraine Nazis. In an interview by Andrew Srulevitch, its Director of European Affairs with Dr. David Fishman, we were told that ‘“When Ukrainian nationalists and Jews look at those red and black flags, we see two different things.” He was referring to the Nazi colours black and red.

Fishman went on to say that

For Ukrainian nationalists, UPA and Bandera are symbols of the Ukrainian fight for Ukrainian independence. The UPA allied with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union for tactical – not ideological – reasons. 

Walter Rauf - The Nazi Agent  that Israel Employed Post WW2

But this is simply not true. They were willing participants in the holocaust. As Daniel Lazare wrote in a 2015 review of Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe’s book Stepan Bandera: The Life and Afterlife of a Ukrainian Nationalist.

“Bandera envisioned the Ukraine as a classic one-party state with himself in the role of führer, or providnyk, and expected that a new Ukraine would take its place under the Nazi umbrella.”

 “The OUN had played a leading role in the anti-Jewish pogroms that broke out in Lviv and dozens of other Ukrainian cities on the heels of the German invasion, and now they served the Nazis by patrolling the ghettoes and assisting in deportations, raids and shootings.”

In 1943, Banderite members of the OUN formed their own militia, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, or UPA. The UPA began the ethnic cleansing and extermination of Poles from territories they saw as belonging to Ukraine. See

Israel lobby group ADL rehabilitates Hitler’s accomplices in Ukraine& Chrystia Freeland: Canada’s fascist queen about Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister, a supporter of Bandera and Ukrainian neo-Nazis and

Canada’s honoring of Nazi vet exposes Ottawa’s longstanding Ukraine policy by Max Blumenthall’s Grayzone

Chrystia Freeland - Canada's Fascist Queen and Deputy Prime Minister

Ukraine Designates National Holiday to Commemorate Nazi Collaborator

Ha’aretz 27.12.2018

Separately, the state banned 'Book of Thieves' which criticizes the anti-Semitic actions of a different national leader for 'inciting ethnic, racial and religious hatred'

Activists of the Svoboda (Freedom) Ukrainian nationalist party hold the photo of Stepan Bandera in Kiev, October 14, 2013. Credit: Gleb Garanich/Reuters

Ukraine designated the birthday of a Nazi collaborator as a national holiday and banned a book on the anti-Semitic actions of another national leader.

The Ukrainian parliament last week declared January 1 as a national day of commemoration for Stepan Bandera, who briefly joined forces with the Nazi occupation of Ukraine. A nationalist, Bandera hoped the Germans would allow his country sovereignty from the Soviet Union, though the Nazis later arrested him.

Some of his supporters at the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, which he headed, committed countless war crimes against Jews.

The region of Lviv, Bandera’s native city, this month declared 2019 “Stepan Bandera Year,” sparking protests by Israel. Tarik Youssef Cyril Amar, the former academic director of Lviv’s Center for Urban History of East Central Europe, this week returned an award conferred on him by the city in protest.

Separately, Ukraine’s State Committee on Television and Radio Broadcasting banned “Book of Thieves” by Swedish historian Anders Rydell, which includes critical analysis of the actions of Symon Petliura, an early-20th century nationalist whose troops murdered countless Jews in pogroms beginning in 1919.

The December 10 decree banning the book accused Rydell of “inciting ethnic, racial and religious hatred,” the Regnum news agency reported Wednesday.

A Russia-born Jew killed Petliura in Paris in 1929 as revenge for the pogroms.

The whole book ban is very symbolic in itself,” said Ukrainian Jewish Committee Director Eduard Dolinsky. Both communist and Nazi authorities systematically banned books.

For Reviews and Talks About Zionism During the Holocaust See:

Communist  Party of Great Britain meeting 12.12.2022

Amazon reviews

Zionism and the holocaust – Future of the Left Events

Electronic Intifada Podcast

Over the Edge Bookfair Galway

Interview Tony Gosling, Bristol Community Radio

Official Book Launch Jewish Network 4 Palestine

Review Palestine Chronicle

ReviewWeekly Worker 

ReviewJewish Voices for Labour 

Book Review Middle East Monitor 

Israel and Argentina During the Military Junta

Why lefties need a big book about anti-Semitism – Kay Green

Penniless Press – reviewed by Alan Dent

Mondoweiss Podcast with Phil Weiss

Review in Electronic Intifada by Asa Winstanley

South Africa PSC Book Launche for Zionism During the Holocaust

Brighton Book Launch

How Zionism helped the Nazis perpetrate the Holocaust - Asa Winstanley

Al Hiwar TV -Tony Greenstein speaks about his book Zionism During the Holocaust

The Struggle - Rescue of Jews was NOT the Zionist Priority During the Holocaust

See Zionist Review by Marc Goldberg of Fathom – ‘The Worst Book I’ve Ever Read’


Why You Can’t Be a Genuine Supporter of the Palestinians Unless You Are Anti-Zionist

$
0
0

 Just as Supporters of Black Liberation in South Africa Opposed Apartheid, Supporters of the Palestinians Must Oppose Zionism and Israel as a ‘Jewish’ State


This is the logic of Zionism – if you believe in universal values then you are no better than the Jews who perished in the gas chamber – indeed it is a pity that you weren’t among them

I have written many hundreds of articles, thousands if you count my blogs, but my article in today’s Electronic Intifada Only anti-Zionists are real supporters of Palestineis one of the most important, I have written.

I have long grappled with the question as to why it was that those who purported to support the Palestinians in the Labour Party, gave their support to an ‘anti-Semitism’ smear campaign, whose sole purpose was to remove Jeremy Corbyn as leader because of his support for the Palestinians.

On 11 April 2016, I wrote to Ben Soffa, Secretary of Palestine Solidarity Campaign about the Zionists’ ‘anti-Semitism’ smear campaign. Rereading it today it seems prescient.

Despite initiatives from a number of Jewish groups… to stem the [anti-Semitism] attacks from the Board of Deputies, the BBC and the Guardian in particular, there has been complete silence from PSC. PSC prides itself on being the largest solidarity organisation in Britain. The Executive boasted in its Annual Report that it had contacted 1,042 candidates at the General Election, yet it hasn’t seen fit to contact any Labour parliamentarians to speak up against the attacks of the Zionists and the Labour Right… 

Why haven’t you for example organised a large public meeting on the issue with say Ken Livingstone and a sympathetic MP as speakers or issued press releases, produced leaflets, called press conferences, pressed for articles in the Opinion columns of the quality press etc?  I know that PSC is renowned for its caution and timidity but there must be some limits to this….

PSC has resources that other groups do not…. It is inexcusable that it has done absolutely nothing to respond to the Zionists daily attacks. …

… Part of the problem is undoubtedly the political weakness of PSC, which supports the Palestinians whilst not opposing Zionism. Historically PSC has prefered to act as a campaigning group around human rights whilst avoiding thorny issues such as Zionism and anti-Semitism. 

The ceaseless political attack by the Zionists on support for the Palestinians in the LP cannot simply be ignored.  They will not go away because their campaign is linked with the determination of the Right in the LP to remove Corbyn.  ‘Anti-Semitism’ is their weapon of choice….

Until Jeremy Corbyn firmly rebuts his critics he will continue to come under attack.  Appeasement rarely works.  It is no use Corbyn saying that he opposes anti-Semitism because what he means by anti-Semitism and the Zionists mean by it are two different things.… Until Corbyn speaks out saying that yes he opposes anti-Semitism but yes he supports the Palestinians, including the Boycott of Israel, giving chapter and verse on why Israel is a racist and apartheid state, then the attacks will continue.

Ben Soffa’s response oozed complacency. He began his letter to me of 20 April 2016 by quoting the 2010 Report of the Reut Institute.

A central objective is to change this situation by forcing them [Palestine solidarity organisations] to 'play defense'.

This means systematically exposing information about delegitimizers, their activities, and the organizations that they operate out of. The goal is to eventually frame them, depending on their agendas, as anti-peace, anti-Semitic, dishonest purveyors of double standards.

Despite saying that ‘It is clear that the upsurge in attempts to link support for the rights of the Palestinian people with anti-Semitism requires a new a concerted response.’ Soffa went on to say that

… I make no apology for the fact that we do not engage in every debate some would wish to involve us in. As the Reut Institute set out, there is a plan to force us to 'play defence' on the terrain chosen by those wishing to preserve the status quo in Palestine. We must not fall into the trap of allowing our opponents to set our agenda, which is precisely why PSC chooses to make the intervention we feel are most helpful to the situation, rather than seeking to make every intervention which might be possible…

There is much work to be done, but it is also not necessarily most effective for PSC to be the organisation leading on all aspects of this.

The problem with not engaging with the ‘anti-Semitism’ smear campaign was that it didn’t then go away. What it did mean was Britain’s largest Palestine solidarity group was absent from the fight against the Zionist lobby and their allies, the Labour Right.

There is good reason to believe that PSC did not want to align itself with the Corbyn left since their strategy involved aligning and working with those bitterly opposed to Corbyn. The problem with this was that the Labour Right, even those like Nisa Nandy who professed to support the Palestinians, would willingly throw the Palestinians under the bus to get rid of Corbyn.

Almost all the trade unions affiliated to Palestine Solidarity Campaign, who proudly use their affiliation as ‘proof’ that they support the Palestinians, were at one and the same time supporting the IHRA ‘definition’ of anti-Semitism and the Jewish Labour Movement. The IHRA’s sole purpose was to label supporters of the Palestinians as anti-Semitic.

Lisa Nandy's Concern for Palestinian Children's Rights Didn't Prevent Her 'Barnstorming' Speech to Labour Friends of Israel - PSC was happy to provide a Platform for these Creatures

In some unions like the GMB, the IHRA has been used to expel genuine supporters of the Palestinians like Bert Schouwenburg.

Even the most stupid trade union leaders, like Gary Smith or Sharon Graham, understand the purpose behind the IHRA. Nearly all of the IHRA’s examples of ‘anti-Semitism’ involved opposition to Israel and Zionism. It completely ignored the genuine anti-Semitism of the far-right, yet PSC took a conscious decision not to raise the IHRA with its trade union affiliates.

Since PSC never asked anything of Nandy, Thornberry et al. they got nothing back except platitudes

When PSC held a trade union conference in 2019 Director Ben Jamal asked me to leave because I had distributed leaflets opposing the IHRA. Why is it that PSC is so reluctant to raise ‘difficult issues’ like the weaponisation of anti-Semitism with trade unions? Why does PSC value affiliations which are politically worthless?

First She was Chair of Labour Friends of Palestine

The conclusions I reached don’t make for easy reading but we have to face up to unpleasant truths. The trade unions, with the support of PSC, were able to proclaim their support for the Palestinians at one and the same time as they supported a Jewish Supremacist state.

and then a regular on PSC Platforms

As Jesus wisely observed you cannot serve two masters, God and Mammon. You have to make a choice between opposition to Israeli settler colonialism and support for the Palestinians or support for Israel as a Jewish State.

and then the JLM's preferred candidate for leader

PSC has chosen to ride two horses which is why it is ineffectual politically. On the one hand it supports the Palestinians and on the other it refuses to challenge the imperialist neo-colonial narrative of support for the two state solution. It doesn’t even challenge the anti-Semitism narrative that says Jews are an oppressed group still less argue that Israel as a ‘Jewish’ state must inevitably be a racist state.

PSC has failed to master the art of riding 2 horses at the same time

The result is that PSC’s narrative is entirely incoherent and all that it can do is point to Israel’s human rights abuses. That of course is fine but how is PSC different from a human rights NGO such as War on Want? In many ways PSC is less effective than WOW.

When it came to supporting Corbyn against the Zionists PSC was conspicuous by its absence. PSC put up no opposition to the Zionists’ anti-Corbyn campaign for fear of upsetting trade union leaders and the Labour Right. PSC abandoned Palestinian supporters inside the Labour Party. They left the field clear to the Zionists.

Anyone claiming to support both Black people in South Africa and Apartheid would have been ridiculed yet today you have large numbers of people who claim to both support the Palestinians and the Israeli state. Quite simply you cannot support the Executioner and the Condemned Man – politics is about making choices not compromises.

No one was too opportunistic or right-wing to go on PSC's platforms

Today supporters of a two state solution are in reality supporters of an Apartheid Solution in Palestine. They are supporting the continuing existence of a state based on ethnic cleansing whilst at the same time supporting their victims. The time has come for genuine supporters of the Palestinians to say to groups like PSC that you have to make a choice. You cannot continue to try and ride two horses.

I resigned from PSC in 2021 when it adopted a Constitution which abandoned opposition to Zionism. PSC did this with the support of the Socialist Workers Party and others who claim to be on the left.

I hope that my article stimulates the discussion that is necessary if we are going to see a strategic change of direction for the Palestine solidarity movement in Britain. PSC’s ‘strategy’ of ‘mainstreaming’ is dead in the water. The British Establishment is wedded to support for Zionism, as it has been for over a century. No amount of rational argument will change the minds of racists like Robert Jenrick.

I am grateful to Electronic Intifada, the most important Palestinian news site there is, for carrying my article.

Tony Greenstein

Only anti-Zionists are real supporters of Palestine

Tony GreensteinThe Electronic Intifada 3 October 2023

Britain’s Palestine solidarity movement is at a crossroads. Loredana SangiulianoZUMA Press

The statement that you can’t be a supporter of the Palestinians unless you are an anti-Zionist may seem dogmatic, even sectarian to some.

But it is the failure of Britain’s Palestine solidarity movement to understand this simple truth which is responsible for so many of our recent setbacks. It is this which has enabled the successful weaponization of anti-Semitism.

Subjectively speaking, it is perfectly possible to support the Palestinians and the “right of Israel to exist” at the same time. In theory, there was no reason at all why good men and women could not sit down and draw the boundaries of a two-state solution equitable to all.

There was only one problem. Such a solution failed to take into account the dynamics of settler-colonialism and of Zionism in particular.

Many supporters of the British Empire, liberal imperialists such as Thomas MacCaulay and the Labour Party Fabians, really did believe that there could be a benevolent imperialism that was compatible with supporting the rights of the colonized. It was called“trusteeship.”

Moving from PSC to Labour Friends of Israel is effortless for Emily Thornberry because PSC asks so little of its speakers

Many honest people believed that the colonies were the “White Man’s Burden,” as the British novelist and poet Rudyard Kipling infamously put it, and that we were only in India and Africa out of the goodness of our hearts.

The Church Missionary Society and people like John Philip would have been aghast if you had accused them of supporting white supremacy. Yet that is what they did.

Thornberry repays PSC's invitation by attacking BDS to Israeli Embassy Group Labour Friends of Israel

Holding contradictory ideas inside one’s head is what most people do, for much of the time. It’s called “cognitive dissonance” or as George Orwell termed it, “doublethink.”

However, for a solidarity organization to do the same renders its task impossible. Sooner or later a choice has to be made.

Solidarity with the Palestinians, although it involves opposing many egregious abuses of human rights, is not at bottom a question of human rights. Just as apartheid in South Africa was not primarily about human rights but Black liberation from white minority rule, so too is the Palestinian question primarily about liberation from Zionism and a state of Jewish supremacy.

PSC climbdown

In 2022 I resigned, for the second time, from the organization I had helped found, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, because it had adopted in March of that year a new constitution which eliminated its previous opposition to Zionism. If the truth be told, opposition to Zionism had long been abandoned by PSC. But by removing this from its constitution PSC made explicit what before had been implicit.

Prior to its March 2022 annual general meeting (when the PSC executive railroaded through the changes) the PSC’s old constitution had included an unambiguous clause stating that one of the group’s objectives was “opposition to racism, including … the apartheid and Zionist nature of the Israeli state.”

The new constitution has watered this down significantly, stating only that Israel’s system of apartheid and settler colonialism is “motivated by Zionism,” without explaining PSC’s position on Zionism. The argument privately used by the PSC to “justify” this change was that Zionism means different things to different people.

Zionism is the racist creed and movement which led to the dispossession and expulsion of the Palestinians.

It was the failure of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and much of the Labour left to combine support for the Palestinians with opposition to Zionism that was their Achilles’ heel. It was no surprise that the Jewish Labour Movement and its faithful poodle Jon Lansman wanted to abolish any mention of Zionism.

Their reasoning was that some people used the term “Zionist” when they really meant “Jew.” But it was the Zionists themselves who had deliberately sought to confuse the distinction in the minds of people.

Their other argument was that “Zionism” covered a multitude of sins – from left to right, obscuring the fact that all wings of Zionism agreed on establishing a Jewish state with a large majority of Jews.

Corbyn was undoubtedly a supporter of the Palestinians but he had no understanding of Zionism and could not therefore explain why or how the Palestinians had become marginalized and oppressed in Israel.

Appeasement

When the “anti-Semitism” campaign first began, Corbyn effectively became a Zionist.

He supported a Palestinian state but also recognized the legitimacy of the Jewish Labour Movement’s claim to represent Jews in the Labour Party. Instead of seeing the JLM as a lobby group, the primary purpose of which was support for the Israeli state and therefore the oppression of the Palestinians, Corbyn accepted that the group’s purported concerns about anti-Semitism were genuine.

There was absolutely no excuse for Corbyn’s pathetic response to the JLM and the Board of Deputies of British Jews (another pro-Israel group which led the “anti-Semitism” campaign against him).

Having spent 30 years as a campaigner for Palestinian rights, Corbyn above all was familiar with the Zionist accusation of “anti-Semitism.” Yet when he became leader he forgot all of this.

Support for the two-state solution enabled Corbyn to both support the Zionists and support the Palestinians. Saying, as he did, that there was a place for both Zionists and anti-Zionists in Labour was in effect saying there was a place for both racists and anti-racists in the party.

Corbyn’s human rights concerns disappeared as he lent his support to the very organization, the JLM, which was formed to remove him.

Those who accept Israel’s “right to exist” accept the legitimacy of Zionism. They fail to understand that a “Jewish” state, as an expansionist ethno-nationalist settler-colonial state, could never accept anything more than a set of mini bantustans.

When Corbyn decided to commission the Chakrabarti inquiry he set the seal on this process. He accepted that there was a problem of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party.

Having appeased the Zionists once, Corbyn went on to appease them repeatedly until he himself became a victim.

The resulting report, authored in 2016 by human rights lawyer Shami Chakrabarti, found no evidence that Labour was dominated by anti-Semitism as was being claimed at the time. Nevertheless, it made some key concessions to this false narrative.

Chakrabarti defined Zionism not as a political creed or movement but as a form of Jewish identity. In so doing she completely failed to understand where the accusations of anti-Semitism were coming from.

She wrote in the report that:

A further complexity comes from left-wing British Jewry, including, but not exclusively, young people becoming increasingly critical of, and disenchanted with, Israeli government policy in relation to settlements in the West Bank and the bombardment of Gaza in particular. This has led to some people personally redefining their Zionism in ways that appear to grant less support to the state of Israel and more solidarity to fellow Jewish people the world over … It seems to me that it is for all people to self-define their political beliefs and I cannot hope to do justice to the rich range of self-descriptions of both Jewishness or Zionism, even within the Labour Party, that I have heard.

Of course, anyone can self-define their political beliefs and what they understand Zionism means. However, there is no obligation on anyone else to accept such an identity.

The only meaning of Zionism that counts is that of those who suffer its ill effects – the Palestinians. People who define themselves as Zionists tell us nothing other than what is going on in their heads.

Confusion as a badge of honor

The ability to combine both support for the Palestinians with support for Zionism enabled political charlatans like the lawmaker Lisa Nandy to chair Labour Friends of Palestine whilst denouncing opposition to Zionism as anti-Semitic.

Just imagine that someone had said that although they supported the rights of Black South Africans they refused to oppose apartheid. They would have been ridiculed, yet that is precisely what is happening when people claim to support the Palestinians yet refuse to identify as anti-Zionists.

This is why I term support for a two-state solution, with its assumption that a racist “Jewish” state could co-exist alongside a Palestinian state, as support for the continued oppression of the Palestinians.

Jeremy Corbyn, with his support of the two-state solution, made his own political confusion over Palestine into a badge of honor. He also disarmed his supporters and gave confidence to his detractors.

By supporting the state of Israel, Corbyn also supported the idea that Israel was the nation state of the Jews.

If this was the case, and if Jews were indeed a nation, despite living in most of the world’s countries, then clearly Jews have the right to self-determination. Ipso facto, one must welcome Israel’s new neo-Nazi police minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir.

Theirs is the monstrosity that is called Israel.

Instead of calling out the Jewish Labour Movement as supporters of a racist, settler-colonial state, Corbyn bought into the idea that Israel was guilty of nothing more than Jewish nationalism and its opponents were guilty of anti-Semitism. The tragedy was that the Palestinians themselves, in the form of the Palestine Liberation Organization, had abandoned their own anti-Zionism in the belief that Zionism could be confined within only part of historic Palestine – what the Zionists term Eretz Yisrael (Hebrew for the land of Israel).

To say you support the Palestinians while refusing to oppose Zionism, the movement with a primary goal not of fighting anti-Semitism but fighting the native Arab Palestinians, is to accept the left-Zionist narrative of a “conflict” between two peoples, a clash of right vs right. It renders any solution, other than a neo-colonial one, impossible and in practice it means surrendering to the existing power structure in Palestine.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Britain’s trade unions.

Nearly all major trade unions are affiliated to the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. All of them claim to support the Palestinians.

Yet Gail Cartmail, the assistant general secretary of Unite – which calls itself Britain’s leading union – justified banning the film Oh Jeremy Corbyn: The Big Lie and a talk by Asa Winstanley covering his new bookWeaponising Anti-Semitism (which documents the fake “anti-Semitism” campaign) all on the grounds that Jews have been hurt and even made afraid by journalism that seeks to tell the truth.

The reality is that by adopting Israel’s twisted definition of anti-Semitism, British unions are facing both ways at the same time. They support the Palestinians yet also support the Jewish Labour Movement and those who took down Corbyn.

The trade unions can only get away with this because supporters of the Palestinians in the Labour Party, including Corbyn, fail to understand how anti-Semitism has been weaponized in the service of state and nation.

Tony Greenstein is the author ofZionism During the Holocaust.

See my blog from January 2020

Without an anti-Zionist critique solidarity with the Palestinians is nothing more than charity

Open Letter to Justin Welby –ex-Etonian, Trinity College Graduate & Oil Trader who the Tories chose to be Archbishop of Canterbury,

$
0
0

 How do you reconcile your duty to speak the truth and seek justice with your refusal to speak out against Israeli Apartheid and the Persecution of Palestinian Christians?

Christian Zionist Justin Welby Gazes Benignly on Israeli Apartheid

 

Ben Gvir Defends Spitting as an ‘Old Jewish Tradition’

Dear Justin Welby,

You are the senior bishop and principal leader of the Church of England (CoE). Besides being a pillar of the British state, the CoE has, I believe, at least a passing relationship to Christianity and the Gospels.

I realise that having risen to the dizzying heights of Treasurer to Enterprise Oilyou clearly have great difficulty reconciling your allegiance to God with your devotion to Mammon. As the Gospel says:

No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money. [Matthew 6:24]

Even you must be familiar with Jesus telling his disciples that

it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!”

It appears that you have resolved this contradiction by choosing Mammon.

Jesus told Pontius Pilate that ‘for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth.’ Yet the truth appears to be a stranger to you.

On September 6th you gave a talk on “Reconciliation” at the Embrace the Middle East event at St Martin-in-the-Field. You said that the region was “complex and fraught”, “a tragedy”. You argued that we “must avoid binaries…” insisting that peace in the Middle East can only come from within the region with the stronger party making the first move.

Justin Welby in his City days

You said, and I quote

“I’m extremely conscious that there do not exist, ready-made solutions from this vantage point or any other outside the region. We’re not there. There is not our home. It’s not our base. It’s not where we find our life and our roots. I am speaking as a white, British Archbishop of Canterbury.”

These are weasel words. These sentiments could equally have been applied to apartheid in South Africa or Nazi Germany as a pretext for turning a blind eye to what was happening. After all we weren’t in those places either.

These are arguments for why we should be selfish and turn a blind eye to oppression. They are the exact opposite of the lessons to be drawn from the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Instead of passing by on the other side of the road, as others had done, the Samaritan stopped to help the injured Jewish traveller. It is very clear what you would have done.

About the only true thing that you said in your selfish, meandering passage was that you were White, British and the Archbishop of Canterbury. You accepted no blame for the fact that Britain above all was responsible for the Palestinian refugee problem when it gave away Palestine to the Zionist settlers when it issued the Balfour Declaration.

It is true that the ethnic cleansing and persecution of the Palestinians is a tragedy, however it is untrue that it is complex. It is very simple and the only people who say it is complex are those who defend the status quo.

When European Jewish settlers came to Palestine, the existing Jewish population were opposed to them. Zionism was not a Jewish but a Christian Evangelical project. The first Zionists were Christian imperialists such as Lords Palmerston and Shaftesbury. The latter was an anti-Semite who combined support for Zionism with opposition to Jewish Emancipation.

The enthusiasm of anti-Semites for Zionism was to recur constantly. After all, if you want to be rid of your Jews where better to send them than Palestine? As AB Yehoshua, a famous Israeli novelist said: “Even today, in a perverse way, a real anti-semite must be a Zionist.” [Jewish Chronicle 22.1.82] When Zionism first began most Jews saw it as a form of Jewish anti-Semitism.

As Sir Samuel Montagu (Lord Swaythling), a Liberal MP noted:

Is it not... a suspicious fact that those who have no love for the Jews, and those who are pronounced anti-Semites, all seem to  welcome the Zionist proposals and aspiration.?

That was why the only opponent of the Balfour Declaration in Lloyd George’s War Cabinet was its only Jewish member, Sir Edwin Montagu.

The author of the Balfour Declaration, Arthur James Balfour introduced, as Prime Minister in 1905, the Aliens Act designed to keep Jewish refugees out of Britain. Balfour was an avowed anti-Semite.

Zionist settlers began colonising Palestine from the end of the 19th century, using the Bible as their justification and began evicting the indigenous Palestinians, first from the economy and then from the land altogether. This culminated in the Nakba in 1948 resulting in the expulsion of over ¾ million Palestinians. Zionism aimed at creating a Jewish state and that, by necessity, meant expelling the Palestinians.

The CoE was a devoted servant of the British Empire and colonisation. From 1710 until Abolition it owned two slave plantations, Codrington in Barbados. 40% of the slaves it bought were dead within three years. Although Christopher Codrington had stipulated that his bequest was to be used for the education of slaves, when Codrington College was opened in 1745, it was for Whites only.

Slavery, like apartheid, was also ‘complex and fraught’ and it was certainly a ‘tragedy’ –for the slaves - although it was extremely profitable. When slavery was abolished the slave owners, including the CoE, were handsomely compensated, unlike the slaves.

What interested me most about your speech was your assertion that the first move must come from the stronger party. If that is the case then the Palestinians are destined to wait forever. As Martin Luther-King wrote, in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail:

it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but… groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

If Black people in South Africa had heeded your advice then they would still be waiting for an end to Apartheid. It is of course easy for you to offer such advice. You are not a Palestinian forced to buy bottled water because your wells have been filled with cement by the Israeli army whilst Jewish settlements have unlimited free water, to give just one example of the Apartheid you deny.

You made a plea for “listening” which you then proceeded to ignore. Your two other speakers explained to you Israeli apartheid. Your real reason for refusing to call out Israeli apartheid was that it would bring forth accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’. The Holocaust would have been invoked by Israel’s apologists, as if those murdered by the Nazis would have given their approval to racial discrimination similar to that which German Jews experienced between 1933 and 1939.

Welby with his Zionist friends at the Board of Deputies

Part of the problem is your exceptionalising anti-Semitism as the only form of racism. In your speech to the Board of Deputies you said:

antisemitism is the root of all racism and the absolute foundation of all racism in our societies. If it’s permissible to hate Jews, it’s permissible to hate all others who are different to ourselves.

This is absolute nonsense. Was anti-Semitism responsible for slavery? Was anti-Semitism responsible for the famine in Ireland and Apartheid in South Africa? Anti-Semitism has become the false anti-racism of the Right and your comments paint you firmly as an out and out racist.

Of course those who subscribe to a racist agenda domestically against refugees – the Sunaks, Starmers and Bravermans – would be outraged by the suggestion that Israel is an apartheid state. It seems that you have made political cowardice into an art form. It wasn’t always like that.

Your predecessor Robert Runcie was a man of courage who commissioned Faith in the City which challenged Thatcher’s disregard of the urban poor and her monetarist policies. He also stood up to Thatcher’s chauvinism over the Falklands whereas you have remained silent over this government’s demonisation of refugees. The only group you have defended are the bankers with whom you socialised.

Israeli Apartheid

You referred to Israel’s non-existent constitution as proof that it is not an apartheid state. Perhaps you can tell us what qualifications you possess that Amnesty International, B’tselem and Human Rights Watch lack given that they have all reached the opposite conclusion?

It is clear that your view of Israel does not have any factual or evidential basis. Rather it is a question of political expediency. Instead of taking the trouble to learn about what is happening to the Palestinians you prefer the cheap applause of Tory tabloids and the government.

You are not the first Archbishop of Canterbury to turn a blind eye to racial oppression and injustice. Your predecessor during the Nazi era, Cosmo Gordon Lang was of the opinion that the Jews were responsible for Nazi anti-Semitism . Supporting Zionism and settler colonialism aligns you with the British Establishment and that is your main concern.

What I found particularly disturbing was the Report of the Israeli Committee Against  House Demolitions (ICAHD) and your conversation with their British Director, Linda Ramsden after the Embrace Annual Lecture.

During the reception which followed, Linda spoke to the Archbishop and asked if he would meet with Jeff Halper when he is in London this autumn because as an Israeli Jew, he has spent nearly 30 years specifically working in support of Palestinians. She was shocked and embarrassed by his discourteous response. The Archbishop drew near to her face, looked her directly her eyes and said, “No. I have no time in my diary.” He then turned away.

Perhaps you might tell us what it is that is so important that you refuse to find out about Israel’s practice of demolishing Palestinian (but not Jewish) homes? Or are you worried that once you have learnt the facts you might be expected to act upon them?

You deny that Israel is an Apartheid state yet in the West Bank today there are two sets of laws for Palestinians and Jewish settlers. The former are subject to military law whereas the latter are governed by Israeli civil law.

Two legal regimes for two sets of people in the same territory is the quintessential definition of apartheid. Even Tamir Pardo, the former head of Israel’s Mossad (MI6) has recently stated that

“There is an apartheid state here. In a territory where two people are judged under two legal systems, that is an apartheid state.”

So what is it about this that you don’t understand?

It is clear Welby that your refusal to accept that Israel is operating an apartheid regime has everything to do with British politics and nothing to do with the situation in Palestine. In other words your behaviour is the complete opposite of the lessons that are drawn from Jesus and the Disciples. It would be easy to put it down to political cowardice but it is clear that it also stems from your reactionary politics.

Desecration of Christian Graves

I haven’t even mentioned the situation of the Christian Church itself in Palestine and Jerusalem such as the wave of spitting attacks, which the Kahanist Minister of Police Ben Gvir has justified as being an old Jewish tradition! To say nothing of the desecration of graveyards, the seizure of Church lands and the destruction of sacred objects.

Your silence over these attacks reminds me of when the exiled Polish bishop Karol Radonski attacked Pius XII as ‘et papa tacet’ (‘and the Pope remains silent’) over the murder of Polish Catholics.

What you fail to understand is that an ethno-religious state, be it Christian or Jewish, is inevitably racist because it automatically consigns those of a different religion to a second class citizenship, at best. Israel is an inherently racist state and your refusal to criticise it is also racist.

I am sure that you are familiar with the saying that ‘“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”It is somewhat ironic that you of all people should be living proof of its truth. I won’t call you, as Noel Edmonds did, ‘the reincarnation of evil’ but your silence over the evils of Zionism is in contrast to yourplea for forgiveness and understandingof the bankers whose frauds ushered inthe age of austerity and misery for millions.

In July 2013 you warnedagainst naming and shaming bankers, which you compared to the behaviour of a lynch mob. I don’t recall you speaking up when refugees and disabled claimants are under attack.

You were, of course, following in the footsteps of your predecessor George Carey, a Christian Zionist, who actively protected Bishop Peter Ball who was gaoled in October 2015 for 32 months for abusing those in his care.

In May 2021 you apologised after allegations that barrister and evangelical Christian, John Smyth,beat boys at church camps in the late 1970s until their wounds bled and left permanent scars. Smyth was the Chair of Christian charity the Iwerne Trust.

You were a dormitory officer at camps run by the Iwerne Trust. Smyth was described by you in 2017 as "charming" and "delightful." You even swapped Christmas cards for some years. Andrew Atherstone in Risk Taker and Reconciler, described you as having been

involved in the camps as an undergraduate […] businessman and theological college student in the 1980s and early 1990s.

At first you said "I had no contact with them at all". It later materialised that you had attended the camp in this period and had continued to receive the camp newsletter. In 2017 you issued an ‘'unreserved and unequivocal' apology’ after your links to Smyth were revealed.

In 2012 a victim of Smyth reported the abuse to the Church of England and you say you were informed in 2013. You maintained that this was the first time you had heard of the abuse by your old friend. However there are credible doubts about your story.

In 1982 Mark Ruston carried out an investigation into the allegations on behalf of the Iwerne Trust, of which you were an officer. Although Ruston confirmed that the allegations were true, the trust decided not to refer Smyth to the authorities.

The New York Times of 14 October 2017 quoted a senior Church of England figure as saying that

all senior members of the trust, including officers like Archbishop Welby, had been made aware of the allegations against Mr Smyth, even those who had been abroad

Alan Wilson, a CoE bishop who is friends with former Iwerne members, said that he found it hard to believe your denials.

I have no evidence, but I haven’t met a single Iwerne person who thinks it’s credible that Justin Welby didn’t know that Smyth had left the country under a cloud connected to his behavior toward boys who had been on Iwerne camps.

Questions have remained among Smyth victims as to when you first knew. Some have labelled you an "observer", a term denoting a person who knew about abuse but who did not report it.

Unfortunatelyyou have refused to take your own advice on ‘the highest possible standards’. Despite multiple callsto resign you stayed on.

See also The Revd. Stephen Sizer – Crucified by the Church of England for supporting the Palestinians

In the meantime you are employing your undoubted talent to turning a blind eye to abuse and injustice to covering up the abuse of the Israeli State against Palestinian Christians.

Tony Greenstein

Israeli Forces Storm Al-Aqsa Mosque

The War Against Palestinian Christians

Despite the Zionist myth that their control of Jerusalem enables freedom of worship the opposite is the case. The repression of Muslims and the attacks on Al Aqsa worshippers, with police batons and stun grenades, are a matter of record. Imagine that the same happened in a Tehran synagogue. It would be heralded as the return of the Third Reich yet Israeli attacks against Muslims go unremarked.

In June Al-Monitor reported that there had been multiple verbal and physical attacks by Jews since the beginning of the year against Christians and Christian sites in Jerusalem. Hate crimes in Jerusalem are nothing new, but they have been treated as a fringe occurrence. That perception had changed in the last few months.

Father Francisco Patton, the Vatican’s Custodian of Christian Sacred Sites in the Holy Land described how

I am very concerned as I watch the rise in acts of violence and hatred against Christians. Not a week goes by without Christians being heckled and spat at, graffiti, vandalism and other forms of harassment.

In an interview with Israeli TV, Patton, blamed Israel’s politicians, arguing that the wave of attacks began “when the political language became more violent.” Amongst the incidents were the desecration of a Lutheran cemetery, the vandalizing of a Maronite prayer room and the spraying of “death to Christians” on Armenian property.

In June an undercover journalist from Channel 13 spent a day dressed as a priest in Jerusalem to investigate hate crimes against Christians. Donning a priest's robe, Channel 13’s Yossi Eli was spat at just five minutes after setting out with a Franciscan clergyman, Father Alberto.

A bit later a man mocked them in Hebrew, saying, “Forgive me father for I have sinned.” Then an 8-year-old spat at them, as did a soldier. This is not the first time that soldiers have been caught committing hate crimes against Christians in Jerusalem. In November, troops from the Givati infantry brigade spat at the Armenian archbishop.

In July it was reported that an event organised by Messianic Jews was attacked by dozens of young religious nationalists. Most of them were from Lehava which opposes intermarriage and gay rights and Or l’Achim, which counters Christian proselytization in Israel.

Weeks earlier Arieh King, Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem led hundreds of religious Jews in chants of “missionaries go home” as hundreds of Christians gathered near the Western Wall for a prayer event. Because it isn’t a secular state, any attempt to convert Jews to another religion is considered akin to treason. King said that “As far as I’m concerned, let every missionary know they are not welcome in the Land of Israel.

In June a conference organised by the Open University in Jerusalem to discuss the increasing violence against Christians in Palestine “Why do (some) Jews spit on Goyim” was held. It was denounced by the Mayor of Jerusalem and boycotted by the Israeli government.

According to a report the Israeli Foreign Ministry boycotted the conference because according to Yisca Harani, one of Israel’s leading experts on Christianity, “I got a call from a Foreign Ministry official who said that the name of the conference is inappropriate and, therefore, they are not going to attend,”.Complicity in Hate: Israeli Government Boycotts Conference on Attacks Against Christians

Nikodemus Schnabel, who presides over the Benedictine Abbey of the Dormition in Jerusalem, told the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung that attacks against Christians have increased because “those who hate Christians now sit in the government.” In an interview with America Magazine, he was more specific.

In 2015, I could say there are these Jewish terrorists [attacking Christians and Christian holy sites], but the official Israel is supporting us.

Now we monks have to live under a government, one of whose members is an extreme Christian hater. The minister of national security [Itamar Ben Gvir] was the defence lawyer of the Jewish terrorists who carried out the arson [on a church] in Tabgha…

How should I feel secure and safe under this government?

Middle East Eye reportedin July that Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, was elevated to the rank of Cardinal. The Archbishop interpreted it as “a sign of attention from the Church of Rome towards the Mother Church, the Church of Jerusalem”.

The nomination was the first extended to the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem since the seat was established in 1847. It is perceived as a statement by the Pope against rising Israeli violence in the Holy Land.

Wadie Abu Nassar referred to the spike in anti-Christian hate crimes, in which the atmosphere of Jewish supremacy had translated into violence against Christians and harassment of clergy. These include trespassing on churches, spitting on churchgoers, destruction of Christian symbols and vandalising Christian graves.

There are about 185,000 Christians in Israel and occupied East Jerusalem, representing just under two percent of the country's population. The vast majority of them are Palestinians living in Nazareth and Haifa, while around 13,000 live in Jerusalem.

Pizzaballa in an interview with the Associated Press said the new far–right government had made life worse for Christians, emboldening extremists who harass clergy and vandalise religious property.

The frequency of these attacks, the aggressions, has become something new. These people feel they are protected… that the cultural and political atmosphere now can justify, or tolerate, actions against Christians.

The situation today in Israel, and Jerusalem in particular, contradicts the propaganda of Netanyahu who proclaimed in a 2018 speech to Christian Zionists in Brazil that "There is only one safe place for Christians in the Middle East… That's in the State of Israel,"

Ahead of Christmas 2021, Francesco Patton wrote an article warning that "Holy Land Christians are at threat of extinction".

Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem Pierbattista Pizzaballa leads a mass on Easter Sunday at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem on 9 April 2023 (AFP)

Judaisation

Physical and verbal harassment are not the only disturbing phenomena. Many Christian leaders believe that they are just manifestations of a far-reaching plan aimed at the Judaisation of Jerusalem's Old City, with churches being one of many obstacles in the city to be removed.

A new national park planned on the Mount of Olives is of particular concern to the Christian community and local churches. If implemented, the park will be built on church-owned lands belonging to several churches, among them the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate, the Catholic Church and the Armenian Patriarchate.


In recent weeks there has been an upsurge in spitting incidents. Ha’aretz reported several incidents of Jews in Jerusalem’s Old City. Tens of thousands of Jews joined in events and prayers for the Sukkot holiday during which many of the spitting incidents were recorded. Most of the individuals filmed in the act were Jewish youths who spat on church buildings or at Christian worshipers they have encountered.

One such spitting incident was recorded as a group of Christian worshippers made its way out of a church by the Lions' Gate in Jerusalem's Old City while carrying a large cross. As the group walked up the street, it ran into a procession of hundreds of Jews. As soon as they noticed the Christian worshippers they began to spit.

Nuns at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.Credit: Ohad Zwigenberg

An editorial in Ha’aretz noted how the video of this spitting incident sparked outrage from around the world and shocked many Israelis. But there were also those who justified the spitters, one of whom is Elisha Yered, a far-right activist and the spokesman for Limor Son Har-Melech MK, of the Religious Zionism party. According to Yered, spitting at Christians is an “ancient Jewish custom”.

A desecrated statue of Jesus was vandalized by a Jewish extremist in the Church of the Flagellation in Jerusalem, in February.Credit: AMMAR AWAD

But although the phenomenon isn’t new, it’s changing in nature and becoming more common. The most important development recently has been its spread to the Muslim Quarter. In the past it was mainly the members of the Armenian Church, which is adjacent to the Jewish Quarter, who suffered from the spitting.

In recent years it has expanded to the route of the Via Dolorosa that passes from Lions’ Gate to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which passes mainly through the Muslim Quarter. This is a route on which hundreds of thousands of Christian pilgrims march every year.

From Stella Maris to St. Elijah, what is happening with the Christians in Haifa

Haifa’s Stella Maris church has had to put up with ultra-Orthodox Jews making pilgrimage to what they consider is the grave of the Prophet Elisha. It started with only a few visitors then it progressed to include dozens "bursting" into the church and holding prayers in a "provocative manner", according to George Shehade, a Haifa resident:

For the monastery, things are clear. There is a [Jewish] religious group who came to seize the monastery, saying they have a right, but this is an aggression that we will stand against".

The monastery is the world headquarters of a Catholic religious order, the Carmelites. The order was formed at the end of the 12th century when according to tradition, a French crusader who had gone to the Holy Land had a vision of Christ denouncing the evil done by soldiers.

Fearing the loss of their church, Palestinian Christian volunteers are now present day in day out, determined not to allow any more Jewish prayers at the site. A metal fence has been erected to keep out undesired visitors.

Also in Haifa, Orthodox Jews have attempted to storm the St. Eljah Cathedral, a Melkite Greek Catholic church serving Greek-Catholics that was constructed in 1939. The incidents at Haifa's Stella Maris monastery and St. Elijah Cathedral are occurring following multiple attacks against Christian sites in Jerusalem, the most recent of which was at the Church of the Tomb of Mary in occupied East Jerusalem.

Following the attack on the Church of the Tomb of Mary in March, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem finally appealed for "international protection" of holy sites citing"terrorist attacks, by radical Israeli groups, targeting churches, cemeteries, and Christian properties".

At the beginning of the year, two young Jewish men vandalised a Christian cemetery near Jaffa Gate. Then in February, A Jewish-American tourist vandalised a statue depicting Jesus at a Catholic Church inside the Old City near Bab al-Asbat (Lion's Gate).

Palestinian Christians ask why it is that the authorities' reactions are swift and robust when Jews are attacked yet soft and insufficient when indicting a Jew for attacking a Christian person or property.

Tony Greenstein



Full Support for the Gaza Ghetto Uprising

$
0
0

The Hypocrisy of Biden & Cleverly is  nauseating - they Support Ukrainian Resistance but Condemn the Palestinian Resistance

Like most people it was with shock and surprise that I woke to learn that the Palestinians in Gaza led by Hamas had launched a counter-offensive against Israel’s occupation.

My first reaction though was the opposite of the political hypocrites and presstitutes who wondered how it could be that Palestinians were once again attacking those poor, defenceless and long suffering Israelis. My mood in contrast was elation not despair.

Gaza city fighters drive captured Israeli jeep

My first thoughts were that finally the inhabitants of the Gaza Ghetto had struck back at those who had maintained a 15 year, suffocating siege on the Strip. A siege that meant 95% of Gaza’s water was polluted, that thousands of its inhabitants were living on the brink of starvation, that nothing could move in or out without the agreement of the Israeli state. All with the agreement of Egypt’s police state under its President and US puppet, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi

SS General Jurgen Stroop, who led the attack against the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance and who was executed after the war 

Of course the retribution of Israel will be bloody and savage. So was the revenge of General Stroop, the Commander of the Nazi forces that retook the Warsaw Ghetto after the Ghetto Uprising in April 1943. The savagery of the colonialist is always far greater than the violence of the oppressed.

 

rocket fire towards Israel

We see that with the call from Al-Qassam leader, Mohammed Deif who called on Resistance fighters not to target old people or children. Israel is now bombing Gaza mercilessly, it has topped 5 tower blocks already. Israel makes no distinction between men, women and children but the only thing we shall hear from Biden, Not So Cleverly and the other hypocritical western leaders is about how Israeli suffering not that of the Palestinians.

Israeli-anti-tank-missile

To those who object to the comparison with the Warsaw Ghetto all I have to say is that it was the last Commander of the Warsaw ghetto resistance, Marek Edelman, who compared their resistance with that of the Palestinian resistance. Which is why the Zionists wrote Edelman out of history.

Two hundred Israelis have so far been killed and many captured. The bias of BBC and Sky News were on full display as they interviewed at length Jotam Confino, the Foreign Editor of the right-wing Zionist Jewish News who constantly referred to ‘terrorists’ rather than guerillas or resistance fighters.

The Palestinian Resistance has undoubtedly killed many Israeli civilians but we have to remember that most Israelis are not only reserve soldiers but they have given overwhelming support to the slaughter of Palestinians.

Damaged Israeli apartment block

The massive demonstrations against Netanyahu’s judicial reforms went out of their way not to include in their demands any call for democracy in the Occupied Territories. The murder of over 240 Palestinians including 45 children in the West Bank was not part of their agenda. Their demands were wholly within the settler community.

Residential building hit in Tel Aviv

It is ordinary Israelis who have elected Israel’s neo-Nazi Police Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Rabbi Dov Lior, the Chief Rabbi of the settlers’ rabbis issued a statement at the time of the last attack on Gaza that

“There is no such thing as enemy civilians in war time. The law of our Torah is to have mercy on our soldiers and to save them … A thousand non-Jewish lives are not worth a Jew’s fingernail.”

This is the voice of a genuine Jewish Nazi yet Israelis are quite happy with having this genocidal maniac controlling its Police and Security forces. So let no one tell us that Israeli civilians are innocent. It was they who elected the present ethnic cleansing far-right coalition government.

Operation Protective Edge in 2014 killed 2,200 civilians including 551 children. This war was supported by 95% of Israel’s Jewish population (rising at one stage to 97%). In Tel Aviv mobs took to the streets chanting‘There's no school tomorrow,there's no children left in Gaza! Oleh!’

Rockets from Gaza

 

In 2014 there were Israelis who set up armchairs and coffee machines on a hilltop in order that they could get a better view and cheer on the ongoing destruction taking place in Gaza.

As Harriet Sharwood wrote in The Guardian of 20.7.14

Israelis gather on hillsides to watch and cheer as military drops bombs on Gaza, People drink, snack and pose for selfies against a background of explosions as Palestinian death toll mounts in ongoing offensive.’

This attack by Hamas and other groups was also aimed at the normalisation with Israel by the corrupt and treacherous Arab regimes led by the chief snake of all, Mohammed Bin Salman, the mass murderer who presides over Saudi Arabia.

The Arab regimes believe that they can make their peace with the Zionist settler colonial regime in Tel Aviv but they are very mistaken. As the football fans made clear in the World Cup last year in Qatar the Arab street is firmly behind the Palestinians.

The task of the moment is for the Arab masses to rise up and overthrow MBS and Sisi in Egypt and all the other corrupt Arab regimes who, with Israel have been responsible for maintaining the siege of Gaza. The Palestinians in the West Bank also have the task of overthrowing the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah which acts as Israel’s military subcontractor.

Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanon's Hezbollah - A Paper Tiger? 

But it is not only the Arab regimes who are normalising the Israeli state who should be criticised. So too should Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanon’s Hezbollah. In response to a call by Hamas for them to join the resistance, Hasrallah’s response was that

“The leadership of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon is closely following the significant developments on the Palestinian scene, monitoring the field conditions with utmost interest.’

That sounds very much like Hezbollah are not going to do anything except sit it out and allow Israel, at a time of its choosing, to attack Lebanon again. The time to fight is now.

Whatever criticisms one can make of Hamas, we should congratulate them on this well planned and audacious attack on the Zionist enemy.

Israeli Weapons Industry’s Bottom Line: EthnicCleansing

Haaretz Editorial, 1st Oct 2023

Nearly all the Armenian residents of Nagorno-Karabakh have become refugees overnight, following a blitzkrieg by the Azerbaijani army which put an end to the district’s independence.

More than 100,000 victims of ethnic cleansing have had to abandon the towns and villages their families have lived in for generations, fleeing to Armenia across the border. More than 100 years after the Armenian holocaust under the Ottoman Empire, members of this small nation are again running for their lives in fear of occupation and oppression.

However, Azerbaijan was not alone in this campaign. Israel supplied Azerbaijan’s army with the best and most advanced weapons that enabled the cleansing operation. This included surface-to-surface missiles, offensive drones, guided rockets, air defense systems, artillery, mortars, tank upgrading equipment, assault rifles, naval vessels, anti-tank missiles, and, obviously, cyber and espionage tools.

As reported in Haaretz (March 6), Israel allowed an airlift from the Uvda airbase to Azerbaijan to carry huge amounts of armaments and ammunition, on their way to the Nagorno-Karabakh front. Unlike other customers of Israel’s defense industry, who wish to keep their relations with Israel under wraps, Azerbaijan’s ruler Ilham Aliyev actually enjoyed boasting about his blue-and-white weapons systems.

Now that the results of the fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh are evident to everyone, it’s appropriate to ask the heads of Israel’s defense industries and all the people who supported, aided and enabled the billion-dollar deals with Aliyev: How do you feel when you see Armenian families running for their lives, the terror in the eyes of children, the new refugee camps in Armenia?

Do Michael Federman (Elbit Systems), Yuval Steinitz (Rafael Advanced Defense Systems) and Amir Peretz (Israel Aerospace Industries) see the ethnic cleansing and the horrific war crimes, or just the bottom line of the companies they head? Do they feel any empathy toward the victims or are they engaged only in calculating the dividends their investors will receive, the royalties paid to the government and the bonuses they’ll be paid? What passes through the head of Rachel Klein, the director of the Defense Exports Control Agency, who spearheaded a “reform” that loosened the regulation of such exports? Is she happy that all the forms were correctly filled, or does she feel a twinge in her heart?

Aliyev is not the first tyrant whose army relies on weapons from Israel. He was preceded by the heads of the apartheid regime in South Africa, the generals in Argentina, Pinochet in Chile, the regime in China and the Shah of Iran. Azerbaijan supplies oil to Israel and helps it in its confrontation with Iran.

And yet, despite these precedents and the strategic justifications, Israel’s partnership in the ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh requires a change in Israel’s export policies, and the curbing of sales to aggressive dictatorships. Israel must also provide aid to Armenia to help the country absorb the refugees.

Hostages: Learning From Israel

Norman Finkelstein

The crocodile tears have begun over Israeli hostages taken by Gaza militants.  But Israel has held the 2.1 million people of Gaza, including one million children, hostage in one of the most densely populated areas on the planet for nearly 20 years.  In fact, Israel was the only country in the world to have legalized hostage taking.  Revered President of the Israeli High Court Aharon Barak held in 1997 that “a detention is legal if it is designed to promote State security, even if the danger to State Security does not emanate from the detainees themselves,” and that “detention ... for the purpose of release of ... captured and missing soldiers is a vital interest to the State.”  (The decision wasn’t reversed until 2000.) If the past is any guide, Gaza’s leadership will swap the Israelis for some of the 4,500 Palestinians being held in Israeli prisons on alleged “security grounds.”  Gaza is only playing by the book written by Israel.

“All the chorus of calumny, which the Party of Order never fail, in their orgies of blood, to raise against their victims, only proves that the bourgeois of our days considers himself the legitimate successor to the baron of old, who thought every weapon in his own hand fair against the plebeian, while in the hands of the plebeian a weapon of any kind constituted in itself a crime.” Karl Marx, The Civil War in France

John Brown's Body - in Gaza 

Norman Finkelstein 

Pete Seeger – John Brown’s Body

Dolores Ibarruri, La Passionaria, famously exhorted during the Spanish Civil War, “Better to die on your feet than live forever on your knees.”  

For the past 20 years the people of Gaza, half of whom are children, have been immured in a concentration camp.  Today they breached the camp’s walls.  If we honor John Brown’s armed resistance to slavery; if we honor the Jews who revolted in the Warsaw Ghetto—then moral consistency commands that we honor the heroic resistance in Gaza.

I, for one, will never begrudge—on the contrary, it warms every fiber of my soul—the scenes of Gaza’s smiling children as their arrogant Jewish supremacist oppressors have, finally, been humbled. 

The stars above in heaven are looking kindly down.  Glory, glory, hallelujah.  The souls of Gaza go marching on!

Yoav Gallant’s Statement that Palestinians are ‘Human Animals’ Echoes Hitler’s Description of Jews as ‘Human Cattle’

$
0
0

The Palestinian Uprising has Destroyed the Myth of Israeli Invincibility – Neither Hamas Nor Hezbollah are Terrorists –Israel Alone Deserves That Label


Register here

https://tinyurl.com/2s43ddzf


https://youtu.be/w6W17dFLBpA

Varoufakis statement on Gaza Uprising

I will be speaking this Wednesday at a meeting on the Gaza-Ghetto Uprising and the significance of the attack by the Palestinian resistance on Israel. What will be the political fall-out? What has changed? What does the reaction of the United States and the western powers signify? What are Israel’s intentions etc.

Socialists should be crystal clear. Palestinians have every right, after a siege of Gaza lasting over 17 years to resist their oppressors. Anyone who denies that is no supporter of the Palestinians.

We should also be under no doubt as to the dangers. Netanyahu has already promised, as if a Nazi General, to raze Gaza to the ground. Yoav Gallant, Israel’s Defence Minister has already called the Palestinians ‘human animals’ thus betraying the racist nature of Zionism and its treatment of the Palestinians. This is not an emotional response of the moment. In 2015 Deputy Defence Minister Eli Dahan also called Palestinians ‘animals.’

To the more faint-hearted amongst us who recoil at some of the atrocities that the Palestinian guerillas are alleged to have committed I say this. There is no war yet when human rights crimes haven’t been committed by both sides. The mass rape of German women at the end of the last war, the undoubted war crimes committed by the British when they bombed Dresden and Nuremburg did not mean that we were neutral as between the Nazis and the Allies.

It is perfectly possible to condemn rape, the alleged parading of a naked Israeli woman in Gaza City and yet support the Palestinian Uprising. Because we all know that whatever war crimes have been committed by Palestinian fighters they pale into insignificance compared to the endless Israeli atrocities. The violence of the oppressed can never be compared with the violence of the oppressor. In today's Times of Israel I came upon this report of the killing of two Israelis:

At 8:20 a.m., terrorists entered Dvir’s home, he lunged at them with an axe, tried to protect my two kids who were with him, and was murdered in front of their eyes,” she posted. “His partner Stav also tried to protect them, but was murdered as well. The terrorist calmed down my Daria and Lavi, covered them in a blanket, took lipstick and wrote on the wall: ‘The al-Qassam [Brigades] people don’t murder children.

When has Israel ever spared Palestinian children?  Israel’s bombing of Palestinian homes is indiscriminate by definition. The death of Palestinian children does not disturb the average Israeli. So far this year 47 Palestinian children have been murdered in the West Bank yet this and the brutal military occupation didn’t figure once in the demands of Israelis in their mass demonstrations against the judicial reforms. Ex-Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked called Palestinian children ‘'little snakes'.

Let us also be clear that terrorism has a very specific meaning. It is the deliberate use of violence against civilians for political purposes. It is Israel which has been responsible throughout its existence for using terrorism as its weapon of choice – be it the bombing by the Zionist Irgun of the King David Hotel in 1946 when 92 people were killed and 46 injured  to the Sabra and Chatilla massacres in the refugee camps of Beirut in 1982 when around 2,000 unarmed Palestinians were murdered by the Lebanese Phalange as Israeli troops lit up the skyline for them.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad are NOT terrorist organizations and they are only deemed as such by a Tory Home Secretary Savid Javid who bowed to the pressure of the Zionist Lobby. If interpreted literally the provisions of the Terrorism Act 2000 could be used to render illegal any meeting or action supporting the uprising in Gaza.

It is quite possible that a meeting where support is given to Hamas and Islamic Jihad’s attack on Israel could be deemed to ‘encourage support for a proscribed organisation or to further its activities.’ under s.12 of the Act. Thus we see, once again, how Britain’s anti-terrorist legislation is there, not to prevent ISIS style terrorism, but to crack down on free speech that the government does not like.

In the explanation justifying the proscribing of Hamas the government said that the reason for this was that

This is an outrageous abuse of the law. In the same 2001 clash 67 Palestinian children were murdered by Israel. Is indiscriminate rocket attacks worse than Israel’s targeted attacks on civilians and its bombing of residential streets and peoples’ homes? This law is not about terrorism it is about the suppression of free speech.

Although I support the attack on Israel by Hamas and Islamic Jihad I am not a supporter of the two groups politically. They are Islamist groups whereas I believe that the liberation of the Palestinians has nothing to do with religion. It is a political struggle.

Of course the misnamed Campaign Against Antisemitism has issued a typically dishonest, lying statement headed ‘We will do whatever it takes to defend the Jewish community’. If the CAA, which was formed in the summer of 2014 on the instigation of the Israeli state, in order to try and smear solidarity action with Palestinians under attack in Gaza with anti-Semitism, was seriously concerned with anti-Semitism, then they would disband tomorrow.

Because there is nothing more likely to increase anti-Semitism in Britain and attacks on Jews than those who do their best to associate British Jews with Israeli war crimes.  Even the Zionist Community Security Trust admitted this in its 2014 Anti-Semitic Incidents Report.

The single biggest contributing factor to the record number of antisemitic incidents recorded in 2014 was antisemitic reactions in the UK to the conflict in Israel and Gaza that began on 8 July 2014 and ended on 26 August 2014. CST recorded the highest-ever monthly total of 314 antisemitic incidents in July, and the third-highest ever monthly total of 228 incidents in August.

The CAA, which is no more than an extension of the Israeli state and which is directly funded by the Israeli para-state organization the Jewish National Fund does its best to equate Hamas attacks on Israel with the safety of British Jews.

In its statement the CAA accused Hamas and Islamic Jihad of supporting the ‘genocide of Jews.’ If anyone supports genocide it is people like Israel’s Police Minister Itamar Ben Gvir who had a poster of Baruch Goldstein on his living room wall. Goldstein entered the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron and opened fire with an assault rifle killing 29 worshippers and injuring nearly a hundred. It is those in Israel who march to the chant of ‘Death to the Arabs’ who are the genociders but of these people the CAA has nothing to say.



When the CAA say

Those who glorify terrorism and delight in the massacre of Jews, and those who use the events still unfolding as cover for antisemitic acts should be under no misapprehension: we will pursue justice against you.

Note how the CAA conflates ‘terrorism’ i.e. support for Palestinian organisations with murder of Jews, which is the prerogative of the friends of the CAA – fascist groups like Britain First and people like Tommy Robinson – both of whom they keep company with.

Nonetheless we should treat seriously their legal threats. The reason is that Britain’s racist Home Secretary Suella Braverman combines her racism against refugees, with her talk of hurricanes, with putting political pressure on the police to arrest those who support the Palestinians.

Tory MP threatens use of Anti-Terrorism Act to suppress free speech

And just to make it clear to Braverman and her racist friends in the CAA, I support totally the right of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and others to launch attacks on Israel in response to the years of suffering and murder that they have experienced at the hands of the Israeli state and furthermore there is nothing you will ever be able to do about it.

Tony Greenstein

LLA statement on Israel/Palestine: Oppression inevitably feeds resistance

The situation in the Middle East is more volatile than it has been for many decades. We want to discuss what's going on - and if there is a solution. Join us on Wednesday October 11 at 7pm for an open discussion forum jointly sponsored by the LLA and the Republican Labour Education Forum, which will be introduced by Tony Greenstein. More details below, where you can also find the LLA's statement on the issue.

Hamas’ attack on Israel was certainly not ‘unprovoked’. The systematic and racist oppression of the Palestinians by the colonialist state of Israel has massively worsened with the introduction of the blockade 15 years ago and, more recently, with the state-sponsored extension of illegal settlements and pogroms on Palestinian land. These actions have created the horrific conditions which have led to this dramatic act of resistance. The aim of the Israeli state is simple: to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian population. It does not exploit the Palestinian people, as the apartheid regime in South Africa did – it simply wants to get rid of them. As a major ally of US-led imperialism in the otherwise unstable Middle East, Israel is supported politically, financially and militarily in this campaign by most ‘Western’ governments and receives more than 3 billion dollars a year from the US alone (over 150 billion since its foundation).

This attack however will be a long-awaited opportunity for the Israeli government to distract from its own problems, rally the divided population behind it, move to the right politically and expand its programme of ethnic cleansing. The US government on the other hand might well use this attack as a precursor to heat up its conflict with Iran.

The results for the Palestinian population remain the same: Further Israeli repression, particularly in the Gaza strip, is inevitable. Israel has no interest in getting rid of Hamas, otherwise it would have to govern Gaza directly, at great cost politically and financially. But they will want to destroy as much of Gaza as possible, in front of the TV cameras, before declaring ‘revenge’ has been served.

The attack has naturally been described as “anti-Semitic” – that is, after all, what the smear campaign in the Labour movement was all about, to prepare for a moment like this. Getting rid of Jeremy Corbyn was just a convenient side effect and it remains true that the failure of the official Left to stand up to the witch-hunt has helped to prepare the current ground. Any opposition to the programme of brutal ethnic cleansing and the coming expansion of military and financial support for the Israeli government is likely to be branded ‘racist’ and anti-Jewish.

All the more important that socialists continue to fight:

  • for an end to the occupation of Palestine
  • against the conflation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism
  • against any political, financial or military support for Israel
  • against war on Iran

Genocide in Gaza - Israel's Blitzkrieg Follows in Hitler's Footsteps

$
0
0

We will not be silenced by Braverman's Cries of ‘Terrorism’ as Sussex University Student Hanin Barghouthi is Arrested By Brighton Police Acting as The Tories' Political Messenger Boys    


Israel has made it clear that the death of its hostages - at least 4 of whom have been killed in its bombing - will not stop the ethnic cleansing and genocide

This is Haneen Barghouthi’s Speech to a Brighton Palestine Solidarity Demonstration

We are seeing a determined and concerted attempt to conflate support for the Palestinians and opposition to Israel’s Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in Gaza with support for ‘terrorism’. Words have become meaningless to the war criminals and liars who rule over us.

Suella Braverman, the most racist Home Secretary Britain has ever had, issued an extraordinary Open Letter on Tuesday 10 October virtually instructing Britain’s Chief Constables to use the Terrorism Act 2000 to attack supporters of the Palestinians. (see below for details of Braverman’s racism)

Sussex Police Attack on Free Speech – Arrest of Sussex University Student Haneen Barghouti for Speaking at Palestine Demonstration

Right on cue, Sussex Anti-Terrorism Police, in their desire to please Braverman, arrested Sussex University student Hanin Barghouti for the crime of speaking at a demonstration in Brighton last weekend in support of the Al Aqsa Flood Uprising. They have also taken her phone giving her a police phone which is constantly monitored!!

Two days previously Sussex University Administration, instead of defending the right of their students to take part in political debate and activity, preemptively suspended Hanin after a witchhunting article in the Daily Mail.

When Kathleen Stock, the gender critical feminist, was targeted by students demanding her dismissal, Sussex University Administration went out of their way to defend her on the grounds of freedom of speech. 

As with the Tories Higher Education (Freedom of Speech Act) 2023, freedom of speech for the Right only applies to ideas and things they agree with. Anti-racism and support for the Palestinians don't count, as we saw with their imposition of the IHRA fake definition of anti-Semitism on universities under threat of loss of funding

Haneen Barghouti didn't mention Hamas once in her speech. It is clear that her arrest is about preventing solidarity with the Palestinians not preventing terrorism

What is the difference between Kathleen Stock and Haneen Barghouti other than the fact that anti-trans ideas accord with Conservative ideology whereas support for the Palestinians is anathema to the Right. Sussex University, instead of defending freedom of speech did the Police’s bidding.

Now that the Police have arrested Haneen, Sussex Vice Chancellor Sasha Roseneil  should immediately reinstate Haneen and  failing that Sussex University Student Union, of which Haneeen is an officer, should defend her  and demand her reinstatement.

After Haneen’s arrest, Sussex Police immediately lied by connecting the arrest with making people feel safe. It takes a particular distortion of logic to connect a speech to a Palestine Solidarity demonstration with people, Jews, feeling afraid.

The only form of racism that Braverman opposes is 'antisemitism' which suggests it's not a form of racism

What Braverman fears, as she transforms Britain’s Police into a nakedly political police, is the expression of support for Palestinian resistance  to Israel and Zionism. The hidden lie is that supporting Palestinians is somehow a threat to British Jews.

In this insidious way a connection is made between Israel’s war crimes and British Jews. It is the British state and its Zionist foreign policy which makes the linkage between Jews in Britain and Israel’s actions. The purpose of the Police’s actions is to sanitise Britain’s pro-Zionist Middle East policy by pretending that opposition to Zionism and Israel is connected with anti-Semitism and support for terrorism. All this under the pretence of defending British Jews when in fact they are the ones who are making them unsafe. And then they have the gall to call us anti-Semites!!

Injured girl in Khan Yunis carried away after Israeli bombing

This is the rationale for proscribing Hamas as a 'terrorist' group - a child could see that if there is any terrorism it is by Israel which slaughtered 551 children in 2014 and another 700+ and rising this time around. 

Hamas is NOT a Terrorist Organisations – it is Israel and Netanyahu who are the Terrorists

When proscribing Hamas in 2019, Home Secretary Sajid David relied on the thinnest of gruel to define Hamas as a terrorist organisation. There was no allegation that they had ever operated in Britain. Hamas was accused of killing 2 Israeli children in rocket strikes.

The hypocrisy is staggering. In 2014 in Operation Protective Edge Israel murdered 551 Palestinian children. By any neutral and impartial criteria Israel is a savage terrorist state. So too is Saudia Arabia which has killed thousands of Yemeni children.  But here's the rub. Israel and Saudi Arabia are our friends so they can commit any amount of war crimes. Hamas on the other hand is fighting our friend Israel which is the real reason they are proscribed.

The decision to proscribe Hamas is a purely political decision. It is not based on any neutral assessment of the evidence. There is no panel to weigh up the evidence and decide. The decision is made on purely political grounds by one person, which is why, even if someone were to openly support Hamas that would NOT be support for terrorism.

In her letter to the Chief Constables Braverman wrote that

Sadly, experience indicates that whenever Israel is attacked, Islamists and other racists, seek to use legitimate Israeli defensive measures as a pretext to stir up hatred against British Jews and increase fear within the Jewish community. In the past, this has included vandalism of Jewish businesses, desecration of memorials and religious sites, physical and verbal abuse of Jews on the streets, convoys driving through Jewish neighbourhoods hurling antisemitic abuse, and proliferation of antisemitism online. There is an obvious risk that this pattern will be repeated during the current conflict.

This statement was one long lie. There is no evidence whatsoever that support for the Palestinians and opposition to Israel’s murderous attacks on them have resulted in increased anti-Semitism of the type that she describes. It is an evidence-free assertion.

What does make British Jews  susceptible to increased anti-Semitism is the repeated assertions by their so-called representatives in the Board of Deputies that British Jews support Israel’s war crimes even to the extent of supporting the use of snipers in 2018 against peaceful Palestinian protesters at Gaza's fence. It is the association between being Jewish and Israeli war crimes that causes anti-Semitism and it is Braverman and her ilk who are guilty.

Despite establishing a reputation for extreme racism the CST, which allegedly fights antisemitism, invited Braverman to be their guest of honour at their AGM - this proves once again that the fight against the Zionist definition of antisemitism has nothing to do with anti-racism

Cruella Braverman is a Despicable Racist

Isn’t it strange? Cruella Braverman has made a name for herself as an out and out racist calling refugees an invasion and hurricane.

Braverman is a despicable racist who falsely claimed that child grooming gangs in the UK were “almost all British-Pakistani”. The claims was made in a Mail on Sunday article published in April, where she singled out British-Pakistani men as being involved in child sexual abuse gangs due to “cultural attitudes completely incompatible with British values” that “have been left mostly unchallenged both within their communities and by wider society”.

Zionist Violence in Oakland, USA against Palestinian demonstrators

IPSOS, the press regulator said Braverman’s decision to link “the identified ethnic group and a particular form of offending was significantly misleading” because the Home Office’s own research had concluded offenders were mainly from white backgrounds. Four days later the Mail on Sunday offered to amend the online version. Braverman has neither retracted the claim or apologised yet Sunak still keeps this racist liar on as Home Secretary.

Yet strangely enough Braverman is concerned about ‘anti-Semitism’.  Uniquely this is the one form of racism that moves her. Anyone who falls for Braverman’s ‘concern’ for anti-Semitism literally needs their head examining. It is also no surprise that the CST, a Mossad project which claims to monitor anti-Semitism in Britain, invited this vile racist to their annual dinner. By their own admission fighting racism and fighting ‘anti-Semitism’ are two entirely different things.


Jewish MP Gerald Kaufman Comparing Israel's Attack on Gaza During Israel's Operation Cast Lead to the Nazi Murder of his Grandmother in a Polish Ghetto

Terrorism

Terrorism means violence and terror against civilians. Hamas have never operated outside the conflict zones of Palestine/Israel unlike ISIS or Al Qaeda. The designation of them as ‘terrorist’ is a political decision. It is not factually based. It is part of the British Establishment’s attack on free speech whilst at the same time saying that the left opposes free speech.

Hamas is an elected political party with a military wing. ISIS and Al Qaeda, both the creations of the United States, are purely military, sectarian murderers who were once the allies of the United States and Saudia Arabia.

It is not Hamas which is guilty of terrorism but the Israeli state, aided and abetted by Biden, Sunak and Europe’s leaders. Israel is openly proclaiming that it is refusing to allow food, water and electricity into Gaza, at the very same time as it is bombing everything that moves. Such a siege should be called by its proper name – it is a Nazi strategy. Even the Nazis never refused to allow food and water into a ghetto although, like Israel previously, they restricted the amount of food to the bare minimum.

The Lies of Our Politicians

Orwell described the purpose of political speech in his essay Politics and the English Language. It could almost have been written with Gaza today in mind:

political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenceless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.

#KayBurley: "Basic human rights are water, electricity and food, & [people] are being denied that in Gaza"

Israel Aims to Do in Gaza City What Hitler Intended for Moscow

Israel is pursuing a combined policy of genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza. Palestinians have been told to evacuate northern Gaza or die and not one word of criticism has been uttered by their imperialist backers. Those who claimed to be upset with Russian human rights violations in Ukraine  have no problem with far worse crimes in Gaza.

Biden and Sunak have even been boasting of the weaponry they are sending to Israel to complete their genocidal task. They do this under the pretext of ‘supporting Israel’s right to defend itself’ when it is clear that it is the Palestinians who are in need of defence.

 

Israel has bombed hospitals and the HQ of UNWRA, the UN Relief and Workers Agency for Palestinian refugees which Israel has always hated, killing 9 of their workers. Israel has also used White Phosphorous in Gaza against the population. This substance burns people alive. This is terrorism, state terrorism but about that Biden, Sunak, Starmer and the rest of Israel’s apologists have nothing to say.

The Starmeroid Labour party 'opposition', meanwhile, has sided unequivocally with the oppressors and their apartheid regime, backing Israel's 'right' to commit war crimes against Palestinians - and has banned MPs from participating in pro-Palestinian demos. 

Constituency Labour Parties have been forbidden to even discuss resolutions on Palestine because it might make certain people (Zionists) feel unwelcome in the party. Of course any decent party would want to make Zionists and racists, of whatever religious persuasion or none, feel very unwelcome but in Starmer's Labour racists are being made to feel at home.

Ironically the only MP to speak out unequivocally against the massacre of the innocents in Gaza and to say openly that war crimes are being committed is the Tory MP Crispin Blunt. All the 'left' Labour MPs - John McDonnell, Zarah Sultana, Diane Abbot, Bell Ribaire Addy, Lloyd Russell-Moyle - have remained silent. They obeyed Starmer's dictat not to participate in the Palestine solidarity demonstration at the weekend. They are utter political cowards. McDonnell is happy to take part in demonstrations supporting NATO's proxy war in Ukraine but not willing to defy the nonentity Starmer.

Half of Northern Gaza's 1.1 million Palestinians have fled south ending up in Khan Younis, a city normally of 400,000 now home to over a million. With a blockade of food and water we are seeing the imminent possibility of mass starvation and death but to Israel's war criminal prime minister Netanyahu and his accomplices in the West that is nothing to worry about.

Whereas the Labour 'Left' has Remained Silent Tory MP Crispin Blunt Has Spoken Out

When asked whether he supports the food and water blockade Starmer, the human rights lawyer, gave it his full support, as did the pitiable Lady Nugent (Emily Thornberry). Not one single major British politician, apart from the SNP leader Humza Yousaf, has said a word opposing Israel’s promise to commit genocide.

To talk of Israel’s right to self-defence in a situation where over 724 children have been murdered according to Defence of Children International – Palestine (declared a ‘terrorist organisation’) and thousands already killed is obscene. It is like saying that when the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising took place that Nazi Germany’s burning down of the ghetto was an exercise in self defence. These are Nazi ideas as Israel embarks on its own final solution of the Palestinian question.

Gabor Mate speaks about Palestine and Israel

We are witnessing a new Nakba being carried out with the full support of Western leaders

Did Hamas Commit War Crimes Equivalent to Israel?

Whatever criticisms there may be of the Palestinian resistance and the killing of Israeli civilians, many of whom were reserve soldiers, in what Israel boasts is its Citizens Army, they pale into insignificance compared to the thousands of Palestinians who have died at the hands of Israel’s murder machine and its ongoing second Nakba.

The handwringing by certain Jewish groups evidenced by Jewish Currents in an article We Cannot Cross Until We Carry Each Other and many of the messages I have seen in Jewish Voice for Peace discussion groups, smack of nothing so much as Jewish Exceptionalism and Angst.

Sometimes it isn’t easy to come from the oppressor, because Jews today are not victims but oppressors.  Most Jews, by virtue of the support that the Board of Deputies and their representative organizations give to Israel, identify with the oppression of the Palestinians. Most Jews have family ties and friends in Israel and even the most committed Jewish anti-Zionists began to wobble under the pressure as they experienced a conflict between the personal and the political.

The Disinformation War & Atrocity Propaganda

Alongside Israel’s program of genocide and ethnic cleansing there is its Siamese twin, the Disinformation War. Britain’s newspapers and media are complicit in the lies and distortions that Israel relies on in order to perpetuate the fiction that it is the victim and the Palestinians are the aggressors. 

For example Israel planted the leak reported by the Wall Street Journal, in which it falsely claimed that Iran ordered the Hamas attack against Israel. There was no truth in this as Anthony Blinken, US Secretary of State made clear.

The truth about Operation Al Aqsa Flood, the Palestinian resistance operation that swept through the Gaza Envelope is being distorted out of all recognition. There is no doubt that there were atrocities and human rights crimes but they pale in comparison with the massive, pre-planned war crimes that Israel feels able to announce publicly.


It is also the case that Hamas explicitly instructed its operatives not to kill women, children and the elderly. This press conference was held before the launch of Operation Al Aqsa Flood although it appears to have been made in retrospect.

 Even the Times of Israel reporting the killing of two Israelis wrote that:

At 8:20 a.m., terrorists entered Dvir’s home, he lunged at them with an axe, tried to protect my two kids who were with him, and was murdered in front of their eyes,” she posted. “His partner Stav also tried to protect them, but was murdered as well. The terrorist calmed down my Daria and Lavi, covered them in a blanket, took lipstick and wrote on the wall: ‘The al-Qassam [Brigades] people don’t murder children.

Many of the fighters came from other groups who did not have the same discipline but nonetheless far greater care was taken by the Palestinian resistance than Israel is doing yet some fair-weather liberals are taking fright at the fact that the Palestinian response has not accorded with the demands of human rights law. The expectation is that the Palestinians, the victims of repeated Israeli atrocities, should respect the Geneva Conventions and International Law at the same time as their heavily armed occupiers and the ‘international community’ i.e. western imperialism ignores international law.

Al Jazeera also reported that Hamas issued orders that women, children and the elderly were not to be harmed. Hamas’s instructions have been comprehensively ignored by the West’s free press. See here and hereكتائب القسام تنشر لقطات من تعامل مقاتليها مع الأطفال خلال معارك غلاف غزة (فيديو and صالح العاروري يكشف تفاصيل جديدة عن عملية “طوفان الأقصى” (فيديو

Contrast this with Israel which doesn’t even try to pretend that its bombing of residential areas is not indiscriminate.

CNN Spreading the Lie of Severed Babies Heads

The Beheaded Baby Hoax

‘40 beheaded babies’ : How media amplified an unconfirmed story | The Big Picture S3E3

There surfaced in the Western media a few days ago reports that Hamas fighters had beheaded 40 babies. It was reminiscent of the time when, during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, stories emerged that Iraqi troops had looted Kuwait City’s hospitals of their incubators ripping out the oxygen tubs from tiny babies and leaving them to die.

On October 10, 1990, a fifteen-year-old Kuwaiti girl “Nayirah”testified before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus. She told how Iraqi soldiers removed scores of babies from incubators and left them to die. Her story was originally corroborated by Amnesty International. It was credited for helping draw the U.S. into the Gulf War later that year.

According to the New York Times in 1992, the girl’s testimony was orchestrated by public relations firm Hill & Knowlton on behalf of the Kuwaiti-sponsored Citizens for a Free Kuwait whose aim was to secure military support from the U.S.

The girl who gave the testimony was later revealed to be daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S. She had never even been in Kuwait at the time, still less worked in a hospital. Hill & Knowlton is estimated to have been given $12 million by the Kuwaitis for their public relations campaign.

This time we had the beheaded babies story and like that of the Iraqi babies it has proved to be a total fake. This was first reported by an Israeli search and rescue officer, Yossi Landau, on CNN. It was repeated by IDF spokesperson, Maj. Libby Weiss also on CNN. From there it was reported by the Independent, the Los Angeles Times and other outlets.

Joe Biden repeated the calumny, stating he’d seen “confirmed photographs” of what happened. Later his press officers “clarified” that he had not actually “seen” the photos, but was basing his statements on “Netanyahu and Israeli media.” Israeli journalist, Oren Ziv, visited the southern Israel communities attacked and repeatedly asked IDF officers if they could verify the story. They told him they had seen no evidence supporting these claims. Yet CNN and other stations ran, as if it were the unvarnished truth, pieces about Hamas brutality in cutting off babies heads. 

See Richard Silverstein’s Beheaded babies and see the following list of media that ran with this fake story.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1822302/hamas-massacre-civilians-israel
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1822179/hamas-soldiers-beheaded-babies-during-massacre-israel-claims
https://metro.co.uk/2023/10/10/hamas-murdered-40-babies-dead-israel-war-19641362/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/24354049/hamas-slaughters-40-babies-kids-beheaded/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/10/babies-killed-hamas-attacks-kibbutz-israel/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/12/biden-calls-reports-hamas-beheading-children-cruelty/
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kibbutz-israel-kfar-aza-massacre-gaza-strip-z7nz56rn9
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/despite-refutations-from-israeli-military-headlines-that-hamas-beheaded-babies-persist/3016167

Maj. Libby Weiss, “bringing Israel’s realities alive for Americans.” In other words, bringing Israeli lies alive for the world

If Human Rights and War Crimes had been the Litmus Test Then We Would Have Been Neutral in World War II

I have no doubt that human rights crimes were committed by Palestinian fighters in their attack. There isn’t a war when war crimes haven’t been committed. But unlike Israel the Palestinians made an effort.

More importantly those fighting their occupiers, who by definition are in breach of international law, are not under the same obligations as the occupiers. It is perfectly understandable that the Palestinian fighters considered Israeli civilians to be complicit in Gaza's occupation and therefore legitimate targets. Who the hell elected this far-Right Israeli government if not Israel's civilians? The Israeli far-right has the support of 2/3 Israelis so let us have less of this liberal handwringing.

There is an obligation on occupiers to take prisoners and not kill or torture them.  An obligation Israel honours in the breach. Torture of prisoners is not only standard practice but legal in Israel. Israel even tortures and sexually abuses children.

There is no such obligation on a guerilla force which doesn’t have gaols to put prisoners in. Did the Partisans fighting the Nazis take them as prisoners?  Of course not. They shot them and quite rightly. When the Muslim SS Division in France rose up against their SS overseers, they spared some of them. This resulted in their being tortured and murdered.

wounded Palestinians arrive at Al Shifa hospital

But just suppose that the Palestinian fighters did kill every Israeli they encountered. Would that have been a reason to have remained neutral? In WW2 Russian soldiers engaged in mass rape of Germanwomen. Britain starved 3 million Bengalis to death in 1942 and firebombed Dresden and Nuremburg. America later used the nuclear bomb against Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Would that have been a reason to be neutral between the Nazis and the Allies?

The first slave revolt was in Santo Domingo/Haiti. In 1804 the Black slaves perpetrated a massacre of almost all the White population bar some Polish legionnaires and Germans. Is that a reason to condemn the revolt and maintain our neutrality between the slavers and the enslaved?

In the early hours of August 22, 1831, a slave named Nat Turner led more than fifty followers in a bloody revolt in Southampton, Virginia, killing nearly 60 white people, mostly women and children.

Even though Turner and his followers were soon stopped, panic spreads. In the days following the attack, 3000 soldiers, militia men, and vigilantes killed more than one hundred suspected rebels.

In a letter written a month later from North Carolina, Nelson Allyn described the retaliation against African Americans. Nineteen of the 30 who had been arrested were convicted and executed. The rest, along with 300 free blacks from Southampton County, agreed to be exiled to Liberia in Africa. Turner was hanged on November 11, 1831.

Presumably if we had lived then there would have been liberal anti-slavers who would have said we cannot support the slave rebellions because our friends were among the White slavers. It is incumbent upon all of us, and I address this to Jewish anti-Zionists in particular, to recognise these dilemmas between our own political positions and where we come from. That Israel not only claims us, whether we like it or not, but many of us have families in Israel which after all is the ‘Jewish State’. Sometimes it isn’t easy to come from the oppressor, because Jews today are not victims, and yet support the oppressed. I highly recommend Norman Finkelstein’s THE SLAVE REVOLT IN GAZA, and Bernie Sanders

An Israeli Border Police officer on a highway between Netivot and Sderot, where Israelis were killed by Hamas militants, October 7, 2023. (Oren Ziv) 

THE SLAVE REVOLT IN GAZA, and Bernie Sanders

Norman Finkelstein

The largest slave revolt in U.S. history against “White supremacy” was led by Nat Turner. Turner was a religious fanatic; he believed that the revolt was divinely inspired and sanctioned. Here’s how Wikipedia describes what ensued:

The rebels traveled from house to house, freeing enslaved people and killing many of the White people whom they encountered.... Historian Stephen B. Oates states that Turner called on his group to “kill all the white people”.... Turner thought that revolutionary violence would awaken the attitudes of Whites to the reality of the inherent brutality in slave-holding. Turner said he wanted to spread “terror and alarm” among Whites.

Scores of White innocents were deliberately killed. Nonetheless, the Nat Turner Rebellion now occupies an honored place in American history.

Turner’s rebellion provoked mass genocidal hysteria among Whites. To gain one’s moral bearings at this fraught moment, it repays to peruse the statement issued by the great Abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison right after the revolt:

What we have so long predicted,—at the peril of being stigmatized as an alarmist and declaimer,—has commenced its fulfilment. The first step of the earthquake, which is ultimately to shake down the fabric of oppression, leaving not one stone upon another, has been made. The first drops of blood, which are but the prelude to a deluge from the gathering clouds, have fallen. The first flash of lightning, which is to smite and consume, has been felt. The first wailings of bereavement, which is to clothe the earth in sackcloth, have broken up our ears. 

All law, even International Humanitarian Law, is an instrument of class rule which sooner or later is turned against those seeking their liberation. This is something that even Marxists and revolutionary socialists find hard to understand at times.

Viewing all 2430 articles
Browse latest View live