Quantcast
Channel: Tony Greenstein's Blog
Viewing all 2412 articles
Browse latest View live

A Picture of Apartheid - One Picture, Two Images

$
0
0

The Difference in Treatment Between Palestinian and Israeli Youth 

This picture from Jerusalem made yesterday “shows a dual system that discriminates” against Palestinians. Dalia Hatuqa’s twitter feed


Israeli security forces arrest a Palestinian man during clashes after Israeli authorities limited access for Muslim worshipers to the flashpoint al-Aqsa mosque compound in the old city of Jerusalem on July 26, 2015. Israeli police entered the compound, one of Islam’s holiest places, to tackle suspected Palestinian rioters, police said. AFP PHOTO / AHMAD GHARABLI



Labour Witchunters Try to Bar Corbyn Supporters from Voting

$
0
0


Time for Jeremy Corbyn to Speak Out and Throw Caution to the Wind



Guardian Letter 21.8.15. attacking Zionist & Jewish Chronicle Attempts to Smear JC as 'anti-Semitic'
It was but short and sweet and had a certain logic to it.  Yes you can register as a supporter and vote in the Leadership elections but if you vote or intend to vote in the wrong way then you will not be allowed to vote.  It is surely something that that Tony Blair, that great democrat, he of the heart transplantation, would certainly admire.  If you don’t get the right result change the electors.
Don't start applauding yet - and don't accept advice to please our political enemies

And so it is happening.  Thousands seem to be  barred for nothing more than the wrong type of name, face of the mere fact that they want to join the Labour Party.
Carlos Latuff cartoon - Latuff is denounced as 'anti-semitic' by the Zionists & Jeremy Corbyn has pulled out of appearing with him though there is no proof that he is anti-semitic
There is of course a logic to the process.  It is the last ditch hope of the 3 right-wing candidates and almost certainly won’t be enough to help them.  But at least they will have tried.  The more panicky of the Labour Right wanted to call off the elections altogether until there had been a more thorough purge.  That was too risky and instead they are simply purging voters. 

And Jeremy Corbyn wants to shake off his advisors and throw caution to the wind.  Being perpetually on the defensive is not good enough and will possibly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  He should speak out now and condemn what is happening and threaten that those taking part in this purge will themselves be purged.

More generally Jeremy is beginning to sound too cautious.  When he was attacked today over comments made on RT re ISIS and the United States he should have done the obvious thing - point to the fact that there would have been no ISIS but for the USA and also point out the treacherous game the US is playing with Turkey at the moment, whereby they are attacking the Kurds.

Jeremy Corbyn needs less caution and more attack at the moment.  Attack is the best form of defence.

Tony Greenstein
 

Michael Chessum
20 August 2015
The UK Labour party is cancelling the memberships of significant numbers of people who joined in order to vote in its leadership election - and even some who joined before.

Labour is rejecting reams of legitimate membership and supporter applications. Is this a desperate purge aimed at tipping the leadership result? 

It sounds like a murder mystery. Everyone had a reason for promoting the idea that the Labour leadership ballot was being undermined by Tory infiltrators and ‘entryists’. Anything that could destabilise the ballot and make it look like a mess is good news for the right and much of the press. It suits some groups on the hard left to seem bigger than they are. Once it became clear that Corbyn might win, anything that de-legitimised his victory was music to the ears of the Labour Right. And some knew, deep down, that if enough of a storm was created about infiltration, this would provide cover for the party apparatus to deny more leftwing activists a vote, and that this could, just about, influence a close result. 

Now, after a lot of noise about weeding out infiltrators, and one batch of more obvious candidates for expulsion which included Ken Loach and other prominent figures from other parties, there is a clear drip-drip of new rejections. Many are young left wing activists from the student movement and other social movements who joined Labour, enthused by the Corbyn campaign, and had every intention of remaining in the Party. The reasoning behind these new rejections looks, at least at first sight, murky.

Hattie Craig is a recent graduate from the University of Birmingham, and a relatively prominent activist the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts – the biggest organisation on the student left. “I was inspired by the Jeremy Corbyn campaign,” she says “and the possibility that Labour could truly represent and fight for those most oppressed in society.” Like many others, she has received an email stating that she was rejected because “we have reason to believe that you do not support the aims and values of the Labour Party or you are a supporter of an organisation opposed to the Labour Party.” But, Craig tells me, she has never been a member of any other electoral project – or indeed any other party at all.

A large number of the rejections appear to be students. Rachel O’Brien is also a student activist and a current student in Birmingham. She describes herself as “heavily critical of the Labour Party and their current policies – but not opposed to the party as a whole”, and has, like Craig, never been a member of another party. “I think they are missing a nuance there.”

Marienna Pope-Wiedemann, another rejectee, is a freelance writer and producer who was also politically active as a student and has continued activities outside Labour. But she is no longer in anything else and, as she points out, being active outside Labour is rather inevitable: “most people are active through organisations other than Labour because the Labour Party has been so long disconnected from community struggle and afraid of taking on the big issues,” she says. “This is the first time my generation has seen Labour stand up and fight for ideals most of them are too afraid even to speak of anymore.”

Bernard Goyder’s example looks even stranger. Now a financial journalist, Goyder was a student activist in 2010, and then involved in Occupy and a number of housing campaigns. “I was involved in Young Labour as a sixth former, and joined properly in 2010, days after the election. I rang the party to notify them of my new address, and found that it had lapsed a few years ago.” Now his application to re-join has been rejected.
In the past, Goyder voted for a mix of parties – including the Lib Dems and the Greens – but he campaigned and voted for Labour in 2015. “In 2010, the NUS and the parliamentary system failed young people so we had to make our own politics. I'm proud to have been involved in the 2010 student movement and the 2011 occupy protests, but see no contradiction between this activity and 'the aims and values of the Labour party’”.

Quite apart from how this all looks, Goyder’s cases raise another rather glaring issue: people changing their minds. Labour at high school, fighting on the outside at uni, and then back into Labour – it’s a well-trodden path. By definition, everyone now joining Labour is, to an extent, changing their mind; many are being swayed by the real possibility of an anti-austerity alternative in the form of Corbyn. Across the course of the campaign, many thousands have changed their minds about Labour – giving Labour hordes of new members and supporters, and a good deal more credibility in places where it previously had none. This was, after all, the entire point of having a supporter sign-up system – and many will have joined, as the system’s architects hoped, from Labour’s right as well as its left.

Large swathes of the PLP and Labour establishment were once in, or voted for, other parties. John Reid and Peter Mandelson were once members of the Young Communist League, and Shaun Woodward, current Shadow Cabinet member, was a Tory MP until he crossed the floor of the House in 1999. Hell, some Labour MPs have campaigned for other candidates while in office: when Lol Duffy, a member of the now-proscribed Socialist Organiser platform, won the Labour selection in Wallesey in 1987, neighbouring MP Frank Field openly refused to support Duffy as the Labour candidate.

But for a large chunk of those who have had their membership or supporter applications rejected, it doesn’t even get that far. For Craig and O’Brien, who have never been supporters or members of other parties, the implications of being rejected seem clear: “I had already voted when I got the email, and it is also very clear from my Facebook that I support Corbyn,” says Craig. “I do not think this is unconnected.”

Of course many, if not all, of those who have been rejected have been critical of Labour policy and the Labour leadership – often in the public domain and on social media, where Labour staff are reportedly trawling for evidence. But then, within Labour’s broad church, so have most members. In fact, so has every candidate for leadership. Those of us on Labour’s left flank, many of whom have door-stepped for the party, held minor office and never voted for anyone else, could be forgiven for nervously refreshing their email inboxes.

None of this is helped by the vigilante attitude that seems to have gripped some on the Labour Right. One post currently doing the rounds on Facebook states: “If you know that someone who has recently signed up as a member, supporter or affiliate, who is not in fact a supporter of the Labour party, you should email their name to leadership2015@labour.org.ukwith proof.” The post concludes: “Please do report anyone you suspect should be ineligible – and you too could be called a star by the Compliance Unit”.

There is no way to verify whether or not Labour's Compliance Unit have in fact called informants 'stars', but adverts to report your neighbour like this one, posted in relation to a university labour club, are breeding an atmosphere of McCarthyite fervour.

If, as the post says, “any written expression of support for a party or group other than Labour, or opposed to Labour” is enough proof to have you expelled, then we had all better be careful about praising so much as the individual policies of another party. That could go for Liz Kendall’s supporters just as much as Jeremy Corbyn’s.

John Mann MP Complains of being called a Zionist Scumbag

$
0
0

What did he object to?  Zionist or Scumbag?


I thought I'd write a short letter to my old friend John Mann MP, who's been wetting himself at the thought that Jeremy Corbyn might be elected as leader of the Labour Party.
Mann is a particularly disgusting reptile who first suggested that Jeremy Corbyn was soft on child abuse.
Mann has built a reputation on linking 'anti-Semitism' and anti-Zionism.  
Mann has been complaining of late that he is being targetted for abuse. Now it is difficult to know how it would be possible to accuse John Mann MP (to give him his full title) of abuse since the real thing is so horrific, but he has nonetheless complained. [see Labour to investigateafter MP called ‘Zionist scumbag’ for opposing Jeremy Corbyn]

When Mann first entered the fray I reminded him of what the Chairman of the Employment Tribunal in Fraser v UCU (where the lecturers union were accused of 'anti-semitism' for boycotting Israeli universities) had said:
"We did not derive assistance from the two Members of Parliament who appeared before us. Both gave glib evidence, appearing supremely confident of the rightness of their positions. For Dr MacShane, it seemed that all answers lay in the MacPherson Report (the effect of which he appeared to misunderstand). Mr Mann could manage without even that assistance. He told us that the leaders of the Respondents were at fault for the way in which they conducted debates but did not enlighten us as to what they were doing wrong or what they should be doing differently. He did not claim ever to have witnessed any Congress or other UCU meeting. And when it came to anti-Semitism in the context of debate about the Middle East, he announced, “It’s clear to me where the line is …” but unfortunately eschewed the opportunity to locate it for us. Both parliamentarians clearly enjoyed making speeches. Neither seemed at ease with the idea of being required to answer a question not to his liking."


When I first wrote to him and accused him of being a Zionist, he wrote back saying I was being racist/anti-Semitic.  Clearly he doesn't understand any difference between Zionism and anti-Semitism.

The Sad Delusions of New Labour

$
0
0

The BBC/Mail Myth of ‘Infiltration’



The anti-Labour Daily Mail is concerned for the leadership of the Labour Party!!
You would have thought that with thousands, up and down the country, attending his rallies, compared to the handful turning up for the other candidates that the penny might have dropped.  Jeremy Corbyn is riding the crest of a wave of revulsion and hatred of this government, something New Labour MPs who abstained on the budget proposals don’t understand, yet all they can bleat about is that it must be due to ‘infiltration’.
Desperate allegations from the defeated New Labour entryists
The hundreds of thousands who have registered as supporters or joined the Labour Party have all been got up to it by the hard Trotskyite left who couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery.  We have tales of a handful of Tory self-publicists joining the Labour Party to vote Labour, but of course nothing is said about the daily drip drip of poison from the Tory Press.  Most of these Tory nerds are playing a game of double bluff – i.e. deliberately providing New Labour with a ready made excuse to halt the elections.

Burnham complains of 'infiltration' yet speaks to a handful
We even have the master of the dark arts, Alistair Campbell, complaining that Corbyn’s supporters are behaving like the nasty SNP cyber-nats oblivious to the sewer rat MP for Bassettlaw John Mann, who tried to insinuate that Corbyn was soft on child abuse (something even the Daily ‘Hate’ Mail has steered clear of. ['A new low for Labour leadership race': Jeremy Corbyn hitsback at rival's attempt to accuse him of 'non-action' on child abuse.]
Part of the Labour Right - knowing they've lost - want to stop the election and change the electorate!
We have had the ‘hate’ Mail and the Zionist Jewish Chronicle effectively alleging that Jeremy Corbyn was anti-Semitic. The Guardian’s description of one rally in Middlesborough, ideal UKIP territory where the Left is a small handful, is indicative:
Corbyn speaks to over 1,000 in Middlesborough
You almost feel sorry for the other Labour leadership candidates after attending a Jeremy Corbyn rally. Yes, Andy Burnham got a decent reception and even a little wolf-whistle at the People’s History Museum on Monday. And Yvette Cooper nearly filled the upstairs room at a cinema in Manchester last Friday.


Yet while they fight for what is looking increasingly like second place, Corbyn speeds up to Middlesbrough on a train service he has promised to renationalise, drawing more than 1,000 excited supporters on a wet Tuesday in August. He doesn’t even seem to be trying that hard, yet receives wild applause when discussing the most arid topics – who else could prompt such fervour when outlining his position on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership? (He’s against it.)
Like all places he speaks - Corbyn draws in hundreds if not thousands
First in the rain-sodden queue outside Middlesbrough town hall on Tuesday was Maggie Gee, a retired tutor from Redcar. The rally wasn’t scheduled to start until 4pm but the 66-year-old was taking no chances. Arriving at noon to find herself alone, she popped off for some dinner and returned at 1.15pm with her brolly. She voted Green in the general election but is a member of Ken Loach’s Unity party. Gee said: “I was driven away from the Labour party when we had Vera Bairdimposed on us,” she said beforehand, referring to the former solicitor general who was parachuted into the (then) safe seat of Redcar in 2001.

John Mann MP – Zionist Scumbag and Apologist for Phil Woolas, New Labour Racist Kicked Out by an Electoral Court

$
0
0

A Gentle Correspondence with 

Tony Greenstein

  
John Mann Portrayed by the Richard Desmond's Express as the Innocent Victim
Phil Woolas - ex-New Labour Immigration Minister Thrown Out by Electoral Court - Campaign based on making Whites 'Angry' - Best Friend of John Mann MP
UPDATE:  John Mann now denies he is a Zionist but his record on the subject is crystal clear.

One thing John Mann MP cannot be accused of is being too clever by half, the term used by the Marquess of Salisbury about the then Tory Shadow Chancellor Iain McLeod (originally used to describe Disraeli). 

Portrait of a New Labour Opportunist
Woolas's Leaflet  - Racist to the Core - John Mann Stood by Him Regardless

In my post ‘John Mann MP Complains of being called a Zionist Scumbag’ subtitled ‘Which did he object to?  Zionist or Scumbag?’ I focussed attention on one John Mann MP, who's been waging a one man vendetta against Jeremy Corbyn.  Not being a subtle man, he took to suggesting Jeremy was soft on child abuse
The Hard Done-by Mann
Styled ‘rent-a-gob’ by Matthew Norman of the Independent, because of his habit of commenting on anything and everything, John Mann is not known for his cerebral brilliance.  In other words he’s thick.  After protesting loudly at the fact that I made the, fairly obvious point to someone who’s not Jewish, that he might not really understand what anti-Semitism is, he protested at how dare I challenge his right to self-identity. 
Interview with Jewish Chronicle when Mann Declares Himself non-Jewish

Well for one thing, I am not a relativist.  I don’t believe there is any inalienable right to self-identify and not have that identity challenged.  If I say I am a visitor from Jupiter I would expect people to challenge this rather than have anti-Jupiterism as the next form of anti-racist multi-cultural smooching.  So I did a google search and guess what?  Mann himself identifies as non-Jewish!  In his interview in the Jewish Chronicle with Simon Round of 12 February 2009 which begins 'Labour MP John Mann is not Jewish'.  It continues 'There may be nothing Jewish in his background but... Indeed, he is adamant that the fight against antisemitism should be led by non-Jews.' http://www.thejc.com/lifestyle/the-simon-round-interview/interview-john-mann-mp

John Mann though is a sensitive creature and of late he has been complaining that he is being targeted for abuse. Labour to investigate after MP called ‘Zionist scumbag’ for opposing Jeremy Corbyn 

John Mann is Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group against Antisemitismand came to my attention when the debate took place over the European Monitoring Committees Definition of Anti-Semitism, which was a Zionist definition which conflated criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.  But John Mann understands nothing about anti-Semitism though he poses as an expert.  The most skilful putdown of him and his collaborator, the corrupt ex-MP Dennis McShane was by the Chairman of the Employment Tribunal in Fraser v UCU (where the lecturers union were accused of 'anti-semitism' for boycotting Israeli universities): 
"We did not derive assistance from the two Members of Parliament who appeared before us. Both gave glib evidence, appearing supremely confident of the rightness of their positions. For Dr MacShane, it seemed that all answers lay in the MacPherson Report (the effect of which he appeared to misunderstand). Mr Mann could manage without even that assistance. He told us that the leaders of the Respondents were at fault for the way in which they conducted debates but did not enlighten us as to what they were doing wrong or what they should be doing differently. He did not claim ever to have witnessed any Congress or other UCU meeting. And when it came to anti-Semitism in the context of debate about the Middle East, he announced, “It’s clear to me where the line is …” but unfortunately eschewed the opportunity to locate it for us. Both parliamentarians clearly enjoyed making speeches. Neither seemed at ease with the idea of being required to answer a question not to his liking."

Well John Mann and myself have conducted a vigorous email debate today and I thought I should share the contents with others, so it is copied  below.  Incidentally one nugget of information I found  was that John Mann was a political ally of Phil Woolas, the disgraced former New Labour MP and Minister whose election was overturned by an electoral court in 2010.  Woolas had been a particularly nasty and racist immigration minister and in the fight against the Liberal Democrats in his Oldham East & Saddleworth constituency, one e-mail in the debate within his election team stated, that ‘"If we don't get the white folk angry he [Woolas]'s gone."  This was the basis of the election campaign that Woolas fought.  This played to anti-Islamic racism in a constituency which had already seen race riots.

John Mann, dedicated opponent of racism though he is, had no hesitation in supporting Phil Woolas when he was suspendedby Harriet Harman.   ‘Among those to have spoken out in support of Woolas was John Mann, a close friend of his.


Such is the nature of the double standards that operate within the Zionist supporting community of Labour MPs these days.  Racists to a Mann.

Correspondence
On 23 Aug 2015, at 15:39, Tony Greenstein <tonygreenstein111@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Mann,

I am puzzled.  What is it you are objecting to?  Being called a scumbag, when that would seem a more than appropriate description of someone who alleges that Jeremy Corbyn is soft on child abuse?
Or is it being called a Zionist when it is clear that you use the term 'anti-Semitism' as a form of abuse of those, Jewish included, who criticise Israel and Zionism.  To use a Yiddish word, it is something of a chutzpah for a non-Jew to accuse Jews of 'anti-Semitism', but well let that pass. 
Zionism incidentally, since you don't seem to understand the word, is a political movement that sought to establish a Jewish state by accepting the anti-Semitic notion that Jews don't belong in the countries they were born in.

Of course your Parliamentary Committee on anti-Semitism is really a means of attacking critics of Zionism and Israel, since it has nothing to say about the far-Right, which is where anti-Semitism comes from.  But as someone who is not even Jewish, you wouldn't understand what anti-Semitism is about in any case.

So what's your objection?  To 'Zionist' and 'scumbag' being combined?  I am puzzled.

Regards

Tony Greenstein


UK Parliament Disclaimer: This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.

On 23 August 2015 at 16:10, MANN, John <john.mann.mp@parliament.uk> wrote:

I will publish a full response including your email. 

John Mann

Sent from my iPhone

On 23 Aug 2015, at 18:06, Tony Greenstein <tonygreenstein111@gmail.com> wrote:

It's already been posted on social media

Tony Greenstein

On 23 August 2015 at 18:24, MANN, John <john.mann.mp@parliament.uk> wrote:
There is a surprise. Your lies no bounds and are calculatedly designed to deceive. 
You ought to re-read Steve Cohen. 
Sent from my iPhone

On 23 Aug 2015, at 18:44, Tony Greenstein <tonygreenstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
You are a fool aren't you?  Is that why you were appointed to the Chair of Parliament's anti-Semitism Committee?  You don't have a clue as to what racism or anti-Semitism is.  When was the last time you spoke up about asylum seekers?  It's people like Jeremy Corbyn who have spoken up against the treatment of refugees.  You are a New Labour scumbag, remember?

If this had been the 1900's you would have been in the forefront of opposing Jewish refugees from Czarist Russia entry into this country and in 1938  you would have stood alongside the Daily 'Hate' Mail in opposing the entry of Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany.

But that isn't the type of anti-Semitism you oppose.  Your anti-Semitism is solely concerned with opposition to Israel and Zionist racism.  You stand full square with Netanyahu and his concern that 'droves' of Arabs are voting or Deputy Defence Minister Eli Dahan who believes that Arabs are 'beasts that aren't human'.

For the record I knew Steve Cohen.  I stood alongside him and I spoke at his commemoration meeting after he had died (and I reprimanded the Engage group's attempt to exploit Steve's memory).  Steve and myself were the targets of fascist violence whereas you and New Labour condemned fascists and anti-fascists as the same.  Steve was a supporter, as I am, of No Borders.  People like you want to make Europe into a Fortress against immigrants.

Towards the end of his life Steve moved firmly into the anti-Zionist camp holding that a Jewish state was inevitably a racist state.  According to your Committee he was also, no doubt, an anti-Semite.

Tony Greenstein

On 23 August 2015 at 19:17, MANN, John <john.mann.mp@parliament.uk> wrote:

Time you read his book then and thought about the split in Socialist organiser. You cannot move beyond your Trotskyist mentality. It dominates your mind

You know full well that I receive the same abuse from right as from ultra left.

Who got action taken against Bonehill! Who did national action target this spring? 

Oh dear. Who chaired the FA task force on islamophobia? 

Don't give me this political analysis crap.

If you bothered to look you would see my views on every issue- I don't hide on obscure websites.

And as for the idea that racism must only be opposed by its victims. Interesting position. 

How dare you define my identity? Who do you think you are defining any bodies identity? 
That's your big problem - you do.

You have no idea who I am or where I am from. You know nothing of me, my family or my background. I will identify myself not you . 

As for you, I only know that your ultra left friends used to call you tony greenslime, something that indicated to me a in built racism. 

Strangely it was only self identified Jews or presumed Jews who received such casual racism

As for your pathetic slur only likely approach to Jewish refugees, I recommend you buy my book on anti Semitism. 

As for steve Cohen, perhaps we should ask jane Ashworth . You are not and never will be a steve Cohen and if you were to use his book as a campaign tool....

Read it.   

Your ranting is too comical to be obscene. Have s walk on the beach, it will help

Sent from my iPhone

John Mann

you tell me to read his book.  Steve Cohen wrote at least 3 books.  I assume you mean his book on 'left anti-Semitism'.  I have a copy of it and I disagree with much of its political analysis.  A strange concept to you no doubt.

What split in Socialist Organiser?  Between the right and further right, the closet supporters of imperialism and the invasion of Iraq and the open supporters of imperialism and the invasion of Iraq?  I am not interested in a tiny ex-Trotskyite sect like SO/AWL and Jane Ashworth who has long abandoned any pretensions of being on the Left. 

Although I have not examined your positions on other political matters I assume you too were a supporter of Bush & Blair's genocidal invasion of Iraq and will therefore take responsibility for all that happened, such as the growth of Isis and Sunni Fundamentalism.  No doubt you still support the alliance with Saudi Arabia as well as Israel (which also supports Al Qaeda group al-Nusra as well as Isis).

Bonehill is an isolated nonentity on the far-right.  He represents nothing, absolutely nothing.  Likewise National Action.  The main fascist groups in this country - BNP and EDL - are both ardent supporters of Israel and no doubt agree with everything you say about 'anti-Semitism'.

Yes it's quite cuddly to be opposed to 'Islamaphobia' whilst in practice supporting the main agents of anti-Muslim racism.  Did you oppose Labour's 'anti-terrorist' legislation that criminalised thought?  A step taken even further now with Theresa May's attack on 'extremism' which is introducing the method of the Police state into schools and universities, with vetting of speakers?  You have opposed none of this.  New Labour prepared the ground for all that is following in terms of civil liberties and naked racism.  You helped build the Jihadist groups with your support for attacking Iraq and Afghanistan.  You then have the audacity to trumpet some minor chairing of an FA committee.  Pathetic.

Jeremy Corbyn, the man you demonise, opposed the Iraqi invasion root and branch alongside that giant of the socialist left, Tony Benn.  You were always part of the New Labour cast that used the defamatory scarecrow of 'anti-Semitism' to attack opponents of Israel's murderous and horrendous racism.  A racism which ends up in the burning alive of an 18 month old child.

I don't doubt that the man termed 'rent a gob' by Matthew Norman has his views spread everywhere.  Unfortunately they lack any substance.  Of course I don't suggest racism should be opposed only by its victims but when people who are not victims of racism take it upon themselves to try and define that racism, anti-Semitism in this case, in order to use it as a stick to beat those who are the victims of a far greater evil, then I certainly step in.

You can self-identify yourself as much as you like but you are not Jewish.  That is a fact.  Perhaps in your sojourn around the media you have forgotten your interview in the Jewish Chronicle with Simon Round of 12 February 2009 which begins 'Labour MP John Mann is not Jewish'.  It continues 'There may be nothing Jewish in his background but... Indeed, he is adamant that the fight against antisemitism should be led by non-Jews.' 

The fact that someone makes a play on my name (in fact it has been done by people from right to left) doesn't mean that they are anti-Semitic.  Merely puerile like your good self.

I doubt if I would learn anything from your book.  My own book on fighting fascism in Brighton and the South Coast is of far greater interest.   These days books on anti-Semitism are two a penny.  What I judge is your record.  You were, as I have already  pointed out, heavily criticised by the Employment Judge in Fraser v UCU.  Because when it came to it allegations by you of anti-Semitism could not be backed up, because there was no anti-Semitism.  And therein lies the rub.  Accusations of anti-Semitism that are false and made for naked political ends by the Right, to defeat a Boycott of Israel for its Apartheid policies, are extremely damaging.  Like the boy who cried wolf you actually help legitimise anti-Semitism (of the real kind).

I suggest you try informing yourself of the situation of Palestinians and why we support boycott.  The fact that the Dawabshe family in Duma, West Bank, two of whom have died because of the firebombing, will not receive anti-terrorist compensation because they are not Jewish and on the West Bank there are 2 sets of laws i.e. Apartheid.

Acquaint yourself with the fact that Arabs can't buy or lease 93% of land in Israel because they are not Jewish nationals or that Arab stone throwers can be gaoled now for 20 years whereas settlers who throw stones receive no penalty.  Or that the Chief Rabbi of Safed, Shmuel Eliyahu receives no penalty for issuing an edict against letting out flats or apartments to non-Jews and Arabs (oh he was criticised by Netanyahu when the publicity spotlight was on him but he is still paid a state salary as befits a rabbi in Israel).  Or why the authors of Torat HaMelech by 2 rabbis inc. Yitzhak Shapira are not prosecuted for writing a book detailing when it is permissible to kill non-Jews yea even infants.  And then tell me that Boycotting such a state is 'anti-Semitic'.

I make no claim to be Steve Cohen.  I am my own person.  Steve and I had a comradely relationship and we became closer over the years.  You can read my obituary on my blog.  We were both of the Left.  You are not which is why Steve would have chosen me above you any day of the week.  Steve would have had contempt for you and the tragedy is that you don't understand why he wouldn't support a New Labour MP.

There are things that Steve wrote to me, which would support the above, that I would even divulge to you in open correspondence because I have too much respect for him.  And it is because I respected Steve, and vicer versa, that we could disagree.

Tony Greenstein

I   forgot to mention your support of the racist New Labour ex-Immigration Minister Phil Woolas.  Thrown out by an Electoral Court for trying too hard to make 'Whites Angry'.  You stood by him through thick and thin.  No doubt part of your anti-Islamaphobia campaign?
Tony Greenstein

On 24 August 2015 at 06:09, MANN, John <john.mann.mp@parliament.uk> wrote:
I do not define myself as a Zionist under any definition of the word , you cannot evidence me being a Zionist on your definition. 
Yet you use the term pejoratively against me. Interesting. ( and many others do the same)
Your only basis for doing so is that I chair a committee on anti Semitism

Better that you followed cohens bravery in challenging anti Semitism on the left
Sent from my iPhone
You may not define yourself as a Zionist, however that does not mean you aren't a Zionist.  Having been an active anti-fascist for over 30 years, unlike your good self, nearly all members of the National Front and BNP that I came across denied they were fascists.  They purported to be 'patriots'.  However fascists they were and are - and a Zionist you are.
A Zionist is someone who supports the Zionist movement and its creation, the State of Israel.  There is no doubt that you fit into that category and the best example of that is the Report of the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism which you chaired in 2014.
It is a classic example of the 'new anti-Semitism'.  It took evidence almost wholly from Zionists.  I recognise just one person who might possibly come under the rubric of a non-Zionist.  The eminent expert in how the term anti-Semitism is misused, notably in the European Monitoring Committee's Working Definition of anti-Semitism, which you approve of, Dr Brian Klug is a notable omission.  So too is Tony Lerman, the former Director and founder of the Institute of Jewish Policy Research, who was forced out of his job for not toeing the Zionist line on matters such as 'anti-Semitism'.
The Report complains about the fact that people associate British Jews with what Israel does.  In itself a fair comment, but not once does it make even the tiniest criticism of the Board of Deputies of British Jews who strenuously seek to align British Jewry with Israel's crimes, proudly proclaiming that British Jews support Israel.  It is no wonder that some misguided people do therefore equate Jews with Israeli war crimes when Jewish representative bodies, albeit not as representative as they believe themselves to be, do their best to make such connections.
Indeed you note, with approval, (para 169) that in the House of Lords, a cross bench peer’s comments that “much antisemitism is a reaction to the appalling Israeli treatment of its Arab neighbours” were roundly condemned by others attending the debate.  Why?  It's obvious from the spike in anti-Semitic incidents that you draw attention to that the two are related.
The Report, quite disingenuously, seeks to associate the Boycott of Israel with anti-Semitism.  As someone who has proudly taken part in a number of Boycott activities, including those which closed the Ahava shop in London and Sodastream in Brighton, as well as the disruption of Israel's Philharmonic Orchestra at the Proms, I cannot see there is a trace of anti-Semitism therein.  Boycott actions are directed at Israeli commercial concerns not at Jewish ones, despite your conflation of the two.
The fact that you turned up at the Fraser v UCU Employment Tribunal, where you were roundly criticised by the Tribunal, to give evidence that UCU had been anti-Semitic for boycotting Israeli universities, institutions that provide support and backup to the military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, demonstrates in itself where your sympathies lie.
Your criticism of the Tricycle Theatre for having initially refused to sponsor a Jewish Film Festival because it received Israeli Embassy funding, even though it said it would provide the equivalent subsidy itself, apparently 'caused shock and tremendous concern' to those who gave evidence to you.  It is a pity that they weren't shocked and concerned by the death of over 2,000 people in Gaza as a result of the actions of the Israeli government, which the Embassy represents.
Although it may be due to ignorance rather than malevolence, you report that the Home Secretary spoke out against antisemitism at a Conservative Friends of Israel even.  Perhaps, given your remit is anti-Semitism, you could have focussed on the fact that CFI has previously invited noted anti-Semites such as Michal Kaminski, a Polish MEP who has campaigned against a Polish apology for Jedwabne or  Robert Zile MEP of Latvia, who marches annually with the Waffen SS veterans.  But then that would be embarrassing since Israel has strong links with all manner of pro-Zionist anti-Semites.
You even attack John Prescott MP for writing in his Sunday Mirror column that Gaza was comparable to a concentration camp and that “What happened to the Jewish people at the hands of the Nazis is appalling. But you would think those atrocities would give Israelis a unique sense of perspective and empathy with the victims of a ghetto” para. 167
The Report seemed disturbed by the fact that 'flowers with a card naming three children killed in Gaza were left outside a prominent Jewish centre in North West London, deliberately in time for Jewish schoolchildren being collected from a summer scheme to see them.'para. 128
What has that to do with anti-Semitism?
Attacking its critics as 'anti-Semites' is a standard Zionist trope.  Telling Jewish anti-Zionists that it is a pity they didn't die in the holocaust and other abuse, is another form of Zionist anti-Semitism.  One lovely example, among many, that I have received at my blog was:
'It's a shame that either Hitler or the Angel of Death, missed your family's house. Or Neturei Karta's.Don't even call yourself a Jew,traitor.'  http://azvsas.blogspot.co.uk/2010/01/zionist-holocaust-denier-hold-hands.html
A large percentage of anti-Semitic comments comes from Zionists but that would be inconvenient to you or your fellow travellers.
So when you ask for evidence that you are a Zionist, you might now understand why your Report more than fits the bill.
I note that you were one of the Labour MPs not to support the creation of a Palestinian state and I am unaware, though no doubt you will provide some evidence to the contrary if you have any, that you have ever raised your voice in opposition to what Israel does in stealing the land of the Palestinians and killing thousands of them.
Your concern about 'anti-Semitism' is entirely devoted to the cause of Zionism which is why the firm of Mishcon De Reya provided you with pro bono support, as they did in the Fraser v UCU case.

Tony Greenstein

Better to be a dog than Bedouin in Israel

$
0
0

The Story of Umm al-Hiran and the Bedouin of the Negev (Naqab)

24 August 2015
I have written recently about Israel’s efforts to wipe off the map the 1,000-strong Bedouin community of Umm al-Hiran in the Negev (Naqab) so that Jews can live in their place. Dozens of other Bedouin communities in Israel – known as “unrecognised villages” and representing tens of thousands of Palestinian citizens – are facing similar fates.
The short animated film below adds another absurdist angle to the Umm al-Hiran story.
Appealing to racist assumptions about the Bedouin, Israel has claimed that it cannot provide services such as electricity and water to what it calls “scattered” communities like Umm al-Hiran, even though the Bedouin have been settled in Umm al-Hiran in large numbers and in permanent homes for decades after their forced removal from their own ancestral lands at Israel’s creation.
Right next to Umm al-Hiran is one of what Israel terms Negev “ranches” – usually run by a single (Jewish) family and styled on the huge ranches familiar from Texas. Ariel Sharon owned a famous one in the Negev. Despite the tiny number of (Jewish) people living on these ranches, and their scattered nature, they are instantly connected to water and electricity by the state.
The family running the one next to Umm al-Hiran has made it a dog hotel (and a pet cemetery), where the dogs have more rights than the inhabitants of Umm al-Hiran. You can visit the dog hotel’s website here.
As the film concludes, there’s a word for this: it’s called apartheid.
- See more at: http://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2015-08-24/better-to-be-a-dog-than-bedouin-in-israel/#sthash.vowHJDba.dpuf


Unreported in Western Media - Syria Downs Israeli Warjet

$
0
0
US F-16 fighter jet
It’s strange that this hasn’t been reported anywhere in the British media.  An Israeli F-16 was shot down over Syria.  It had been engaged in bombing the Syrian army i.e. in support of the Islamist and Al Qaeda al-Nusra groups that they pretend not to support.  Israel is openly attacking the Syrian regime, on behalf of its Saudi and Turkish friends and has now paid a heavy price.

Hopefully we will see more Israeli planes shot down if they engage in similar attacks.  After all there is a War on Terror!!

Tony Greenstein
Downed warplane

Map of Syrian defence installations


GR Editor’s Note:
The shooting down of an Israeli warplane by Syria has not been reported by Western and Israeli media sources. According to Sputnik, on August 21, “the Israeli Air Force resumed airstrikes on Western Syria, targeting a government army base at Khan Al-Sheih in Damascus province and another in the al-Quneitra province after a six-hour halt in attacks that followed their multiple air raids over the Golan Heights.”

Fars News Agency (FNA) also confirmed the Israeli attacks and the shooting down of an Israeli fighter plane

The Syrian air defense system shot down an Israeli warplane violating the Arab country’s air space.
The Israeli fighter jet was targeted over the city of Al-Quneitra on Friday.

Israel regularly violates the Syrian airspace and it launches missile attacks against the Arab country.
On Friday, the Israeli Air Force resumed airstrikes on Western Syria, targeting Brigade 68 Base in Khan Al-Sheih in Damascus province and Brigade 90 Base in the al-Quneitra province after a six hour halt in attacks that followed their multiple air raids over the Golan Heights.
*     *     *
Yesterday, Friday, August 21, 2015 in the early hours, Damascus time, an Israeli US made F-16 fighter-bomber, flew into Syrian airspace brazenly and fired at Brigade 68 and, then, turned and flew back toward Brigade 90 in Qunaytra in order to insure a safe landing in occupied Palestine if the aircraft was struck.  It was struck.  An SA-9 from the Iftiraas Air Defense Base and an SA-2 near the Khalkhaala AB were fired.  But, the technical wizardry was most on display when an S-300 (SA-10 “Grumble) super-air-defense missile was fired from the Republican Guard base near the Mazza AB at the foot of Qaasiyoon Mountain west of Damascus.  This was done so that the F-16’s electronic countermeasures would first fix on the SA-2 and SA-9 while the S-300 plowed forward to exterminate the vermin inside the Israeli aircraft.   The S-300 vaporized the Israeli bomber.  No evidence was seen of the pilot ejecting.  Instead, eyewitness accounts described a ball of fire over the Golan and the remains scattering into the air over the Huleh Valley in Palestine.
Also, the Israelis lost 2 helicopters while flying missions over the Golan Heights in an effort to bolster the sagging morale of the Takfiri rats of Nusra/Alqaeda and Al-Ittihaad Al-Islaami li-Ajnaad Al-Shaam.   The 2 helicopters went down over the area near Qunaytra City and were reportedly shot down by shoulder fired, heat-seeking missiles deployed throughout the Syrian Army.

Syria’s Right to Self Defense

It had to happen, sooner or later.  The seeming diffidence of the Syrian brass had to transform into a bolder and more pugnacious articulation of Syria’s right to self-defense.  With Russia now inevitably bound to the Syrian government for reasons discussed at length on our website; and Iran, now dazzled by a new role to play in regional politics;  the green light turned on, finally, with Moscow withdrawing all restrictions on the use of advanced weaponry sold to the Syrian military.  If you want to know what the former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Martin Dempsey, meant when he told Congress Syria had a “robust air defense system”, the Zionists just found out for themselves.
Yesterday, there was despondence after Israel assaulted Qunaytra and killed civilians seated in a public vehicle.  The Israelis also killed one Syrian soldier and wounded several others in the Brigade 68 base.

Via Wikimapia: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.080898&lon=36.612282&z=12&m=b

But, the Syrian Army Chief of Staff, in consultation with the president and the Defense Minister, had no intention of letting this episode slide by especially in light of President Putin’s recent meeting with the Turkish ambassador in Moscow during which he flatly told the diplomat that relations with Turkey would be severed if Erdoghan did not stop supporting terrorism.  It also came just after Sergei Lavrov called the Saudi foreign minister an “imbecile” just as the latter was renouncing any intention to treat with the Syrian government.  There is a new belligerency in both Moscow and Teheran and it is being translated into action over Syria.

Iran's Jewish Community

$
0
0
An interesting article on the largest Jewish community in the Middle East outside Israel.  It’s strange that a country that is pilloried as run by the ‘new Nazis’ happens to have a Jewish community that, unlike Nazi Germany, has a representative in their Parliament and is remarkably free.  Unfortunately, in the hands of Zionism, ‘anti-Semitism’ is a malleable instrument.

Of course Iranian Jews do not have full equality with Moslem Iranians although it would seem to be much greater than that which Arabs experience in Israel.  However within the context of a repressive society for Muslims too, with one of the world's highest execution rates, Iran's Jewish community is living proof of the lies of Zionism.

Tony Greenstein

 How Iran’s Jews Survive in Mullahs’ World
August 18, 2015 Image: Getty Images

The first thing I noticed about Shahab Shahamifar as we strolled to synagogue on a Saturday morning in July was his yarmulke. It was a medium-size, black knitted one, and he was wearing it as we walked the busy streets of Tehran.

Then I noticed that no one looked up.

Later, when the rabbi went on a bit too long with a sermon on the week’s haftara portion, I left services early, and Shahamifar rushed out to accompany me the first block or so before returning to pray. This time, in addition to his yarmulke he wore a long tallit, a prayer shawl, also with no sense of self-consciousness.

Dr. Siamak Moreh Sedgh, the Jewish community’s elected representative in Iran’s parliament Image: Larry Cohler-Esses
Saturday is a workday in Iran’s capital, and women in chadors and men in business suits hurried by us without so much as a glance. Moreover, the night before, when several hundred worshippers gathered for Friday night services at the Yousef Abad Synagogue in North Tehran, I noticed, too, that the sanctuary’s large entrance remained open to the street as people spilled out for breaks to shmooze in crowds on the sidewalk outside. No security of any kind was in sight.
“Compared to Europe,” boasted Dr. Siamak Moreh Sedgh, the Jewish community’s elected representative in Iran’s parliament, “synagogues here are one of the safest places.” He also said proudly, “We have a high rate of people following Halacha,” or traditional Jewish law, “and a low rate of assimilation. The rate of intermarriage among Iranian Jews is less than 1%.”

Of course, there are a lot fewer Jews now than before Iran’s 1979 Revolution.
Homayon Najafabadi, the Executive Director of Tehran Jewish Committee Image: Larry Cohler-Esses
Homayoun Sameyah Najafabadi, the current chair of the Tehran Jewish Committee, Iranian Jewry’s central body, told me there were just 9,000 Jews, citing Iranian government census data on which people must list their religion. Other Jewish leaders insisted there were something like 18,000 to 20,000. They based their estimates on their knowledge of communal affiliations in Iran’s various cities. Either way, that’s a big drop from the 80,000 to 100,000 Jews that lived in Iran prior to 1979.
Many of these Jews left in the months immediately after the fall of the shah. A largely business-oriented community, its members often maintained ties to Israel under the shah. Many were shocked into flight when Habib Elghanian , one of the country’s leading businessmen and philanthropists — and the titular head of their community — was executed by a firing squad on charges that included “contacts with Israel and Zionism.”

In 1998, another Jew, Ruhollah Kadkhodah-Zadeh, was executed, reportedly for helping Jews to emigrate illegally.

Shortly after this, restrictions on emigration were lifted. So those who live in Iran today are choosing to do so. Even cash bonus offers from Israel ranging from $10,000 for individuals to $61,000 for families have failed to move those now living there to leave.

According to Moreh Sedgh, those who have stayed are primarily members of the middle class — shop owners, small businessmen and professionals. “The rich had the money to move to America and re-establish themselves there,” he said. “The poor, who had nothing to lose, moved to Israel.” But Najafabadi assured me that a strong contingent of the poor remained among Iran’s Jews.

“We have people who receive charity from the community, including meat, rice and fruit,” he said.
Those making the choice to stay, even as their leaders bristle with hostility toward Zionism and the State of Israel, live under an umbrella of government protection.
Image: Larry Cohler-Esses Jewish hospital
And Jewish life in Iran can be rich. In Tehran alone there are 13 active synagogues, five Jewish schools, two kindergartens and a 100-bed Jewish hospital, where Moreh Sedgh serves as director. There are active communities in several other cities, including Shiraz, Isfahan and Kermanshah, with institutions of their own.
But living as protected second-class citizens under a Shiite Islamist regime is complicated.
As Najafabadi put it: “There is no oppression. But there are limitations.

Working in the Jews’ favor is the deeply embedded nature of their presence in Iranian society, where they have never been ghettoized, and in which they are seen — and see themselves — as pre-eminently Iranian, woven into 2,700 years of Iranian history. This facilitates the rigid compartmentalization the government maintains between Zionists, who are seen as a malign outside force, and the unquestioned indigenous character of their own Jewish citizens.

But implicitly, this also means Iranian Jews must take care not to be seen as interested or involved in Israel, though it is an open secret that many have family there, and that many have even visited Israel themselves via third countries.

The Jews’ security is aided by a fatwa that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic’s founder, issued shortly after he came to power. Even as he shifted Iran into an anti-Israel mode, his fatwa declared Iran’s Jews to be a fully protected minority community and forbade any attacks on them.

But Jews’ place in Iranian society is perhaps vouchsafed most by the Jewish community’s own willingness to fight for its right to that place. Its leaders do so while avoiding any challenge to the fundamental legitimacy of Iran’s regime. But it is not a quiet or quiescent Jewish leadership.
Image: Larry Cohler-Esses - Shiraz Jewish compound
When then-president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad questioned the historical reality of the Holocaust during his tenure, Jews and others worldwide denounced his statements. But so did Haroun Yashayaei, who was then head of the Tehran Jewish Committee.

“How is it possible to ignore all the undeniable evidence existing for the killing and exile of the Jews in Europe during World War II?” he asked Ahmadinejad in an official letter he wrote the president as head of the committee. Yashayaei condemned Ahmadinejad’s reference to the Holocaust as “a myth,” describing it as “an infected wound for Western civilization.”

Maurice Motamed, who at the time represented the Jewish community in Iran’s parliament, told a reporter for the Persian service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, “Denial of such a great historical tragedy that is connected to the Jewish community can only be considered an insult to all the world’s Jewish communities.”

In 2012, when Ahmadinejad’s first vice president, Mohammad Reza Rahimi, claimed at a United Nations drug conference that the Talmud teaches “how to destroy non-Jews so as to protect an embryo in the womb of a Jewish mother” and charged that Zionists controlled the world’s illicit drug trade, the community also condemned his remarks.

During Ahmadinejad’s tenure, “there were huge insults toward our religion,” Najafabadi recalled. “He insulted Talmud. And we answered him.”

Outbursts of anti-Semitism did not just stop with Ahmadinejad’s departure in 2013.

Just last April, Alef, a prominent Iranian website run by Ahmad Tavakkoli, a conservative
Member of Parliament, cited Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and argued: “Blood shedding by Jews is not a new theme…. By examining Jewish history in past centuries, it becomes evident that they insist on blood shedding and even bloodthirstiness based on their altered religion and teachings.” 
Nevertheless, the community is vocal about the multiple forms of discrimination under which its members live — but without questioning the legitimacy of the regime or the system of Sharia, or Islamic law, by which it governs.
Image: Larry Cohler-Esses
Their approach could be seen in what community leaders consider one of their biggest recent victories: gaining equality in “blood money” compensation. That’s the amount a person must pay to a family when he is responsible for an accident that caused a family member’s death.

We succeeded in getting blood money compensation equalized for minorities,”

Motamed said. “Before, there was a big difference between the money for minorities and the main population…. It was a very big achievement.”

But the community’s approach did not involve any criticism of Sharia, which rules on such matters. Instead, Motamed, recalled, “We consulted a lot of ayatollahs and took testimony from high-ranking clerics to show there must be equality” under Sharia.

Pleased as he was, Motamed noted that blood money compensation for non-Muslims remains unequal in cases of murder — and that they are continuing to push on this.

Under Sharia… if a Muslim kills a Jew, there will be blood money payment. But if a Jew kills a Muslim, the penalty is execution,” he said. Here, too, “we’ve consulted with a lot of ayatollahs and gotten letters. But it’s still not solved.”

Other unresolved issues the leaders cited involved access to high-ranking posts in government ministries and the requirement that a Muslim serve as principal at Jewish schools.

“We have five schools,” Najafabadi said, “and the principals in all of them are Muslim. There’s no enmity. They’re very cooperative. But it’s kind of insulting.”

Then there is inheritance law: Under Sharia in Iran, if one sibling in a non-Muslim family converts to Islam, he inherits the entirety of his parents’ assets. This, too, community leaders are pushing to change.
Shiraz Jewish compound - Image: Larry Cohler-Esses
On Israel, the community’s leadership must be more circumspect. But it is no secret that many in the community have family there, or that a significant number of Jews in Iran have visited Israel themselves. One teenager in Shiraz told me how excited he had been to visit three years ago.

There are people traveling to Israel,” Najafabadi volunteered. But since the Gaza War of last summer, the government had clamped down, he said. Some who go are imprisoned, fined and interrogated. Two community members had been sentenced to 91 days, though this was later reduced to 20 days. Travel to Israel “is declining now because of these problems,” he said.

Moreh Sedgh even voiced concern for Israel, in his way — his way being to criticize Israel’s policies as harmful for Israel’s own interests.

Speaking about Israel’s policy of opposing Syria’s regime under Bashar al-Assad, which Iran supports, Moreh Sedgh said, “The main enemy of Israel today is Daesh” — a reference to the extremist Islamic State fighting to oust Assad. “Of course, the Assad family are not the ideal leaders for Syria,” he said. But he noted that if Assad is ousted, they “must be ready for ISIS. What benefit for Israel would that be?”

Despite all these issues, those Iranian Jews who choose to stay can live a very active Jewish religious and communal life. My second-to-last night in Iran, I was invited to meet with the local leaders of the Shiraz community in the large open-air compound that serves as their community center. About the size of a football field, the compound is surrounded by high walls that ensure the privacy of those who come. Tables were spread out with ample food, and by 11 p.m., Jewish families totaling some 50 or 60 individuals, including children, were dining and moving around from table to table to catch up on the local gossip.
Shiraz Jewish compound pizzeria - Image: Larry Cohler-Esses
Told I was a vegetarian, the community elders treated me to cheese pizza from the kosher pizzeria on the premises. For meat eaters there was a kosher butcher. And just about everyone used matzo from the matzo factory on the grounds during Passover, I was told. The compound also contained a home for the elderly with nine or 10 residents.


We are a country of paradox,” Moreh Sedgh said. Noting other recent communal victories, such as permission to close Jewish schools on Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, rather than Friday, the Muslim day of rest, he said: “Sometimes we do something and have some success…. We think all these problems can be solved as domestic problems. If it comes from the outside. that will make it harder.”

Stephen Pollard Jewish Chronicle Editor & Apologist for Europe's anti-Semitic politicians

$
0
0

The Hypocrisy of Jeremy Corbyn’s Accusers

'What have they left to throw?'
On 7th August the Daily Mail branded Jeremy Corbyn as someone who was happy to associate with holocaust deniers and one Paul Eisen in particular.  Jeremy was alleged to have given money to Deir Yassin Remembered, a pro-Palestinian organisation that morphed under Eisen into an organisation of holocaust deniers, loony tunes and flat earthists. 
Whilst his opponents speak in phone booths - Corbyn's meetings overflow with 'infiltrators'
On 12th August the Jewish Chronicle picked up on the theme asking Corbyn seven loaded questions as to his relationship with Eisen and various alleged anti-Semites.  The list of anti-Semites included not only the Eisen, but Carlos Latuff a Palestinian cartoonist, whose cartoons often employ a Nazi metaphor.  The Jewish Chronicle’s list also included the leader of Israel’s Northern Islamic movement, Raed Salah. 

The only Labour candidate capable of winning back Scottish Labour seats
The Case of Raed Salah

Raed Salah  Wins Deportation Case After CST Evidence Shown to be Fixed
In June 2011 Raed Salah was banned from entering Britain but as no one was notified he entered the country for a speaking tour before being arrested.  The information supplied to Home Secretary Theresa May by the Community Security Trust [CST] , who sought to deport him, on the grounds that he had allegedly made a series of antisemitic statements in sermons and a poem, and that his presence in Britain was not conducive to the public good, was ‘very weak’ according to Justice Ockleton, the Vice-President of the Upper Immigration Tribunal.  Theresa May was ‘misled’ as to a poem by Salah and the misleading was perpetrated by the CST, which is notorious for physically attacking left-wing and anti-Zionist Jews at Jewish meetings.  It combines two roles – defending Jewish premises from attack and attacking Jewish opponents of Zionism.
Mark Gardener of CST with fellow bigot - Richard Littlejohn
David Hearst [Theresa May's haste to ban Raed Salah will be repented at leisurequotes David Miller, a sociology professor from the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, who submitted his report on the CST as part of the evidence. It gives a short history of the CST and its “controversial monitoring of pro-Palestinian activists,” summarizing that it has a “tendency to treat denunciation of Israel or Zionism as evidence of anti-Semitism.”  
Theresa May, thanks to the CST, bungles a political deportation
As Robert Lambert, a retired head of the Metropolitan police's Muslim Contact Unit, and David Miller noted, the CST:  "failed to distinguish between antisemitism and criticism of the actions of the Israeli state and therefore gives an unbalanced perspective." [Palestinian activist wins appeal against deportation

, Ben Quinn]
Raed Salah
Justice Ockelton said on 8 February that the original text of a poem by Salah was “completely different” from how it appeared in a government order banning him from UK territory. The original banning order had accused Salah of anti-Semitism, citing an altered version of the poem. Raed Salah deportation case disintegrates in UK court, but verdict still to follow 
Fighting 'racism' is a lucrative business for Gardener - some £150,000 a year
According to Ockelton, the decision by Theresa May to ban Salah had been based not on the original text, but a “Jerusalem Postinaccurate summary” of the poem,  entitled Civil Liberties. In a June 2009 editorial, the Post had added the words “you Jews” to the poem, making it appear anti-Semitic. The original Arabic version was printed in a 2002 edition of an Islamic Movement publication.  
They've moved on from supporting Hitler and Moseley
A UK Border Agency document of 21 June 2011 admitted that the agency had not been able to find the original text “despite extensive research.” See Court victory for Raed Salah deals blow to UK “anti-terror” policy Despite this May went ahead with her decision to ban Salah on 23 June.  The original text of the poem later emerged, as revealed by The Electronic Intifada in October. 
Raed Salah
The Postarticle was cited by people like Henry Jackson Society Research Director, Michael Weiss, (“PSC comes to Parliament …,” The Telegraph politics blog, 29 June 2011) to misleadingly portray Salah as an anti-Semite.  Such is the quality of Henry Jackson Society researchers.  Rosenorn-Lanng, a caseworker, had earlier admitted that the UK Border Agency had not sought the original text of the poem, relying instead on Internet sources.
Surprising given the flack thrown at him
But Salah was clear that the poem was addressed to all perpetrators of injustice, regardless of religion, race or group. He pointed out that his poem also addressed Arab oppressors with certain references to the Quran, and also addresses Pharaoh as an oppressor. Salah had said that Pharaoh was an Arab. And that he had oppressed the followers of Moses and that “God is not a racist,
Aside from the distorted poem, the other main citation of the government was a speech Salah gave in Jerusalem in 2007, in which he had talked about Israeli soldiers shedding the blood of Palestinians. The citation had reportedly included the line: “Whoever wants a more thorough explanation, let him ask what used to happen to some children in Europe, whose blood was mixed in with the dough of the holy bread.”
Hostile press coverage in Israel inserted the word “Jewish” in square brackets before the words “holy bread” (“Islamic Movement head charged with incitement to racism, violence,” Haaretz, 29 January 2008). 
Jeremy Corbyn packs them in as Yvette, Andy and Liz speak to empty rooms
Contrary to the assertions of the British press, Raed Salah was not convicted of making blood libel allegations against Jews.  He was convicted of racist incitement.  That might sound like a semantic difference, but note that according to the Jerusalem Post,‘The conviction was a reversal of an acquittal on those charges by the Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court in 2013 when that court convicted him of incitement to violence, but acquitted him of racist incitement.’  In other words the evidence before what is a colonial court for Israeli Arabs was not strong enough to convict him of the charge of racism before the lower court.  It was a political decision by the higher Jerusalem District Court that found him guilty.  Clearly the evidence was not unambiguous.  Islamic Movement leader Salah convicted of racist incitement on appeal 
An example of Latuff's anti-Semitic cartoons
When the Home Office’s Neil Sheldon QC accused Salah of invoking the blood libel, Salah responded that: “this interpretation is out of bounds, and has no origin in fact.” He then went into some detail, saying that his purpose had been to liken the Israeli occupation forces to the inquisitions in Europe that used to shed the blood of children, and which used religion to perpetuate injustice.  UK government conflates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism in Salah trial
Applauding the fair-mindedness of New Labour
Sheldon admitted that the government had relied on a “misquotation” of Salah’s poem in The Jerusalem Post. Salah’s lawyer Raza Husain argued the misquotation could only have been a “malign” attempt to defame the character of his client, not an innocent misunderstanding.  Ockelton questioned the value of May’s decision to ban since it was based on incorrect information.
In the Appeal hearing Dr. Stefan Sperl, an expert in Arabic poetry from the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, gave an analysis of the original text of a poem by Salah called “A Message to the Oppressors” saying it was addressed to all “perpetrators of injustice,” whether Jews or not. He said a Jerusalem Post article characterizing it as anti-Semitic was deliberately misleading. A version with the words “you Jews” inserted into the poem seems to have been used in the UKBA document.
So the allegation, by Cathy Newman of Channel 4 and others, that Jeremy Corbyn had associated with someone convicted of holocaust denial is patently false.
[much of the research quoted above was done by Asa Winstanley, a correspondent for the Electronic Intifada]

The Invention of anti-Semitism – The Lies of Stephen Pollard

Stephen Pollard - It's the nearest he gets to what others call deep thought
The key protagonist in the allegations of anti-Semitism and associating with holocaust deniers is however Stephen Pollard, editor of the Jewish Chronicle and member of the cold war Henry Jackson society.  Pollard is ex-editor of the Daily Express, owned by Britain’s largest porn merchant Richmond Desmond. 
Pollard is an Israel firster.  A dedicated Zionist who has turned the Jewish Chronicle from a newspaper with strong Zionist allegiances into a Zionist propaganda rag which brooks no opposition.  It has completely cut out of its pages not only anti-Zionists but non-Zionist dissidents like Tony Lerman and Dr Brian Klug and indeed anyone who doesn’t toe the Israel right or wrong line.
Ex-Editor of Sunday Express - owned by Britain's largest porn merchant Richard Desmond - He's turned the Jewish Chronicle into Political Porn
Pollard has taken to heart the traditional Zionist line that anti-Semitism is not a Zionist concern unless it concerns anti-Zionists such as Jeremy Corbyn.  But mindful of the libel laws and knowing his own case is reliant on guilt-by-association, as befits a McCarthyist, Pollard denies that he is accusing Corbyn of anti-Semitism. 
Robert Zile and the European Conservatives that Cameron formed
Pollard hasn’t always been so keen to call out an anti-Semite, especially when the anti-Semite is a far-right politician who is also a Zionist.  One such was Michal Kaminski MEP of the Polish Law & Justice Party and Chairman of the European Conservatives and Reform Group.  Another such is Robert Zile of the Latvian Fatherland and Freedom Party [LNNK], who were both guests at the Conservative Party Conference in 2009 and of the Conservative Friends of Israel.
Kaminski of Poland's Law & Justice Party
To understand the controversy at the time one has to understand the background.  Kaminski was an MP for an area of Poland including a village Jedwabne.  On July 10, 1941, more than 300 Jews were burnt alive in a barn by their Polish neighbours, in a Polish village Jedwabne under the watchful eye of the SS and Order Police.  Although over 60% of Jedwabne's pre-war population was Jewish, today there are no Jews left of what was a 300 year old community. [“Burning Alive” by Andrzej Kaczynski, published May 5, 2000 in the Polish newspaper “Rzeczpospolita”,  Introduction by Morlan Ty Rogers, June 27, 2000]
A Somewhat Flustered Fascist
The massacre in Jedwabne was the subject of a book by Polish-Jewish historian Jan Tomasz Gross.[Neighbours: The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland, May 2000]  It caused a far-reaching public debate that split public opinion. [The Legacy of Jedwabne]   Most of the population of Jedwabne opposed President Aleksander Kwasniewski’s belief that a national apology should be made, in Jedwabne itself, to mark the massacre's sixtieth anniversary (10 July 2001).  Michal Kaminski, was instrumental in urging Jedwabne residents to oppose the President's apology and boycott the ceremonial event in 2001.

The campaign against an apology had ‘strongly anti-Semitic overtones,’ according to Dr Rafal Pankowski, author of The Populist Radical Right in Poland. The Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich said: “Mr Kaminski was a member of NOP, a group that is openly far-right and neo-Nazi. Anyone who would want to align himself with the Committee to Defend the Good Name of Jedwabne… needs to understand with what and by whom he is being represented.Yet again, Tories fawn overthe far right, By Alex Hern, October 6, 2011 
Kaminski - a Skinhead Politician
In an interview with Martin Bright of the Jewish Chronicle [EXCLUSIVE Michal Kaminski: 'I'm no antisemite'] 9.10.09. Kaminski stated that

‘If you are asking the Polish nation to apologise for the crime made in Jedwabne, you would require from the whole Jewish nation to apologise for what some Jewish Communists did in Eastern Poland.’
It was, of course, a false comparison.  Poland, where anti-Semitism had been endemic among the middle class, sections of the peasantry and the military/aristocracy, had not been an easy place to live for Jews before the war.  The welcome given by many Jews to the Soviet invasion was therefore understandable.  But the fact that some Jews collaborated with the Soviet invaders in 1939 doesn’t mean that all Jews or the ‘Jewish nation’ should be held collectively guilty.  The mass murder of the Jews of Jedwabne, which was carried out by only a minority of Poles in the village, is something that the Polish state should apologise for in its own terms.  Yet Pollard was quite happy with this explanation.
In his interview with Bright, Kaminski claimed that he did not remember giving an interview to the ‘ultra-nationalist’ Nacza Polska, when he is alleged to have said he would only apologise for Jedwabne when “someone from the Jewish side will apologise for what the Jews did during the Soviet occupation between 1939 and 1941, for the mass collaboration of the Jewish people with the Soviet occupier.”

He also denied wearing the Chrobry sword, the symbol of the National Radical Camp Falanga, a Catholic fascist group formed in 1935. He issues a categorical denial: “No, I never wear it. I don’t even know which symbol you are referring to. In a later statement to the Jewish Chronicle he admited that he did wear the sword but that it was After 1989 it was used as one of the symbols of the Christian National Union and many Conservative politicians would wear it, including politicians now in the Civic Platform. In recent years it has been taken as a symbol by the Far Right.’  

According to Pollard ‘The real story behind the accusations against Michal Kaminski has nothing to with antisemitism.’ Rather ‘It is, rather, a grubby story about the EU and base politics.’  As for joining the NOP, well Kaminski was only 15 and and anyway ‘when he joined the NOP in 1987 when it was still an underground movement.’

Indeed the Jews had no better friend than Kaminski.  In Poland's Kaminski is not an antisemite: he's a friend to Jews Pollard argued that Kaminski’s concern was merely that a national apology for Jedwabne would let the actual killers ‘off the hook’. It had nothing to do with Poles against Jews, ‘but was a vile crime committed by specific individuals.’  It is  true that not all Poles are guilty.  The Polish working-class had an honourable record of fighting fascism and anti-Semitism, though Pollard as a Zionist is the last person to make such an argument, but as a national minority Poland’s Jews suffered hideous anti-Semitism and an apology on behalf of the whole Polish nation would be at least a token act of amends.  But Pollard argued, since President Kwasniewski ‘was a former communist’ what was required was an apology for the ‘antisemitic campaign of 1968’.  Pollard’s anti-communism trumps his alleged concern for anti-Semitism.  I’m not aware that in the 1968 ‘anti-Zionist’ campaign 300 Jews were burnt alive.

Replying to an article by the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland, Pollard also dismisses the fact that Roberts Zile's Latvian party, the LNNK "have played a leading part in the annual parade honouring veterans of the Latvian Legion of the Waffen-SS". Pollard says ‘I know the facts about Kaminski, but I can think of no source for evidence against Zile other than those who so disgracefully besmirch Kaminski.’  The information was, of course, widely known and on March 8 2012 Emma Stock wrote, in the Jewish Chronicle, an article Calls to ban Baltic neo-Nazi marches in which she referred to the fact that ‘Disturbingly, the Riga march is supported by Latvian officials and MEPs such as Robert Zile, who sits alongside UK MEPS in the new European Conservatives and Reformists party in the European Parliament.’  Or Pollard can consult The little European problem that the Conservatives would prefer to forget’ by his Political Correspondent, Martin Bright on October 11 2012: ‘Still more troubling for the Jewish community is the hard-right Latvian MEP Robert Zile, whose also sits in alliance with the Tories in Europe. Mr Zile is a long-time supporter of the Latvian “Legionnaires Day” rally which each March celebrates the Waffen SS.’  For some strange reason, Pollard hasn’t seen to update his apologia for Zile and the LNNK.  He must be too busy dealing with his Corbyn problem!
Mickey Davis of the Jewish Leadership Council and mining company Xstrara - the big Zionist Capitalists who give the orders to the Board of Deputies were not happy with anything questioning their fascist friends
Toby Helm argues  that "As a local MP, Kaminski played a key role in the campaign questioning the Polish responsibility for the Jedwabne massacre. The campaign had strongly antisemitic overtones,"quoting Dr Rafal Pankowski, a member of the Never Again Association and author of The Populist Radical Right in Poland.  Is Michal Kaminski fit to lead the Tories in Europe?

But when Kaminski was contacted he denied all. "I never tried to stop the commemoration, that is not true," he said. He had always been in favour, he insisted. But when asked if he had, as the local MP, attended the event in Jedwabne, he couldn’t remember!

Kaminski also denied having conducted the interview with Nasza Polska or telling the paper – which is known for carrying far-right material – that the Poles should not apologise until the Jews apologised to them. "I never said it. It is absolutely not true,"

However the Observer contacted the editor-in-chief Piotr Jakucki, who confirmed that the interview had been conducted with Kaminski by the paper's Kaja Bogomilska and that the article had been published on 20 March 2001. He also sent a hard copy.

When the row over Kaminski and Zile first blew up, the Conservatives achieved what they ‘believed to be a decisive counter-strike’.  They obtained the support of Stephen Pollard, editor of the Jewish Chronicle, who leaped to Kaminski's defence, saying there was nothing to suggest the Polish MEP was an anti-Semite.  Pollard claimed there was not "a shred of evidence" that Kaminski had demanded a Jewish apology for crimes against Poles as a condition for Polish contrition.

As Denis MacShane wrote in ‘The curious case of Michal Kaminski’ Kaminski made a Polish apology condition on ‘someone from the Jewish side’ apologising ‘for what the Jews did during the Soviet occupation between 1939 and 1941. As if Jews were not also Polish.  It seems that the visit to Yad Vashem had had no effect too on his consciousness (and maybe, being a propaganda showpiece it didn’t).  However half the Jews, 3 million, who died in the holocaust were Polish.

And further evidence of Kaminski’s anti-Semitism is provided by Craig Murray, who became the British Ambassador in Uzbekistan and who was then First Secretary at the British Embassy in Poland. 

When Alexander Kasniewski defeated Lech Walesa to become President of Poland in 1995, Kaminski was involved in lobbying the media to publish stories stating that Kwasniewski’s grandmother was Jewish. That accusation became the focal point of the entire election campaign. ‘Michal Kaminski, The Tories and Polish Anti-Semitism  

Antony Lerman observed that Kaminski’s Law & Justice party, was hardly a home for anti-racists.  Citing the Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Racism and Antisemitism, it contained radical nationalists and former members of antisemitic organisations and maintained a strategic alliance with Radio Maryja, "the mass-audience nationalist Catholic radio station and a key force on the far right", which gives airtime to antisemitic demagogues.  None of this stopped Kaminski speaking to to the Global Counter-Terrorism Conference in Herzliya, Israel in September 2009.  But is Kaminski good for the Jews?

In ‘Kaminski apologists play with firePeter Beaumont notes how the defenders of Kaminski so easily resorted to anti-Semitism.  David Miliband, when he criticised the Tories for their alliance with the Kaminski and Zile, (opportunistically no doubt) the comments of Tory supporters either defended members of Zile's party who marched with the Latvian SS, because they fought the Bolsheviks, or ‘more scandalously, suggested that Miliband had no "right to comment on Nazism", as he was a Jew with "Bolshevik grandparents".

However, to be fair to Pollard, he wasn’t alone in having a problem with criticism of the Tories far right and neo-Nazi allies in the European Parliament. [Leaders split over David Cameron's Euro allies

When Vivien Wineman of the Board of Deputies wrote to David Cameron concerning the Tories’ allies in the European Parliament it caused a rift with the Jewish Leadership Council [read big Zionist capitalists]  One JLC member described colleagues as “livid” at the timing of the letter. Another said he was “incandescent”.

A senior Jewish Conservative said: “The Board… has been manipulated by left-wing interests into a completely inappropriate position. The irony is that the new Tory European group will be the most pro-Israel lobby group.”  And this is true, anti-Semites are often the Zionist best friend.  A point made by Pollard in his original defence of Kaminski ‘David Miliband's insult to Michal Kaminski is contemptible’  Far from being an antisemite, Mr Kaminski is about as pro-Israel an MEP as exists.’

Dean Godson, of the Policy Exchange think tank, accused Wineman and others who had criticised the Tories' links with Robert Zile of Latvia's Fatherland and Freedom party [LNNK], of “a certain form of left McCarthyism’.   

It would seem that those who are so keen to examine the finest details of those Jeremy Corbyn has encountered over the years  are nonetheless happy to give a carte blanche to bona fide 24 carat anti-Semites.  Hypocrisy doesn’t somehow seem a strong enough word to describe the behaviour of the Stephen Pollard’s of this word. Perhaps given the credentials of his friend and ex-employer Desmond, we can call it Political Pornography.

The million missing Israelis

$
0
0

Why more Jews leave Israel than enter each year

Ben-Gurion Airport
The  Bigot's Poster is aimed at African Jews in Israel
An interesting article from 2011 which I’ve just seen.  Despite having longed for a Jewish state for over 2,000 years, according to the Zionist myth, over 1 million of the ingrates have nonetheless packed their bags and headed for Western Europe, the United States and elsewhere.
What is particularly interesting is that nearly half of Israeli youth would prefer to live somewhere else if they could. And ironically, one of the most prized passports that Israelis can obtain is a German passport.  So much so that a few years ago, Israeli Foreign Minister David Levy made a trip to Germany, the sole purpose of which was to persuade Germany not to admit Jews as citizens.

Fluctuating Jewish population in Europe
Over more than six decades of statehood, successive Israeli governments have repeatedly stressed the centrality of Jewish immigration and the Law of Return of all Jews to Israel for the well-being, security, and survival of the nation. Yet while much is published on Jewish immigration to Israel, considerably less information is available about Jewish emigration from Israel.
The Departure Board at Ben-Gurion
Government estimates of the numbers of Israelis residing abroad vary greatly due mainly to the lack of an adequate recording system. Consequently, scholars and others have questioned the accuracy of government figures. Besides the statistical and methodological shortcomings, the number of Israeli expatriates is open to considerable debate and controversy because of its enormous demographic, social, and political significance both within and outside Israel.
At the lower end is the official estimate of 750,000 Israeli emigrants — 10 percent of the population — issued by the Israeli Ministry of Immigrant Absorption, which is about the same as that for Mexico, Morocco, and Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government places the current number of Israeli citizens living abroad in the range of 800,000 to 1 million, representing up to 13 percent of the population, which is relatively high among OECD countries. Consistent with this latter figure is the estimated 1 million Israelis in the Diaspora reported at the first-ever global conference of Israelis living abroad, held in this January.

Current estimates of Israelis living abroad are substantially higher than those for the past. During Israel’s first decade, some 100,000 Jews are believed to have emigrated from Israel. By 1980, Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics estimated some 270,000 Israelis living abroad for more than a year, or 7 percent of the population. Several decades later, the number of Israeli emigrants had swelled to about 550,000 — or almost double the proportion at the end of the 1950s.

Spanish Synagogue - Spain is issuing passports to Jews who fled the Inquisition
Of the Israelis currently residing abroad, roughly 60 percent are believed to have settled in North America, a quarter in Europe, and 15 percent distributed across the rest of the world. It is estimated that about 45 percent of the adult Israeli expatriates have completed at least a university degree, in contrast to 22 percent of the Israeli population. The Israeli emigrants are deemed to be disproportionately secular, liberal, and cosmopolitan. Furthermore, the emigrants are generally younger than the immigrants to Israel, especially those from the former Soviet Union, hastening the aging of Israel’s population.

The often-cited reasons for Israeli emigration center on seeking better living and financial conditions, employment and professional opportunities, and higher education, as well as pessimism regarding prospects for peace. Consistent with these motives, one of the most frequently given explanations for leaving Israel is: "The question is not why we left, but why it took us so long to do so." And recent opinion polls find that almost half of Israeli youth would prefer to live somewhere else if they had the chance. Again, the most often-cited reason to emigrate is because the situation in Israel is viewed as "not good."

Another important factor contributing to the outflow of Jewish Israelis is previous emigration experience. As 40 percent of Jewish Israelis are foreign-born, emigration is nothing new for many in the country. Moreover, as Israeli emigrants cannot yet vote from abroad, they are likely to feel marginalized from mainstream Israeli society, further contributing to their decision to remain abroad as well as attracting others to do the same. Whether the Netanyahu government’s effort in the Knesset to approve a bill granting voting rights to Israelis living abroad will slow the trend is uncertain.
Adding to emigration pressures, many Israelis have already taken preliminary steps to eventually leaving. One survey found close to 60 percent of Israelis had approached or were intending to approach a foreign embassy to ask for citizenship and a passport. An estimated 100,000 Israelis have German passports, while more are applying for passports based on their German ancestry. And a large number of Israelis have dual nationality, including an estimated 500,000 Israelis holding U.S. passports (with close to a quarter-million pending applications).

Population projections show that Jewish Israelis will remain the large majority in Israel for the foreseeable future. However, it will be a challenge for Jewish Israelis to maintain their current dominant majority of approximately 75 percent, primarily due to higher fertility among non-Jewish Israelis — nearly one child per woman greater — the depletion of the large pool of likely potential Jewish immigrants, and large-scale Jewish Israeli emigration. Consequently, demographic projections expect the Jewish proportion of the country — which peaked at 89 percent in 1957 — to continue declining over the coming decades, approaching a figure closer to two-thirds of the population by mid-century.

The emigration of a large proportion of a country’s population, especially the well-educated and highly skilled, poses serious challenges for any nation. However, large-scale emigration is particularly problematic for Israel given its relatively small population, unique ethnic composition, and regional political context.

Moreover, not only is Israeli emigration increasing the influence of the orthodox Jewish communities, it is also boosting the need for temporary, non-Jewish foreign workers, especially in agriculture, construction, and care-giving. The presence of more than 200,000 foreign workers — nearly half of whom are unauthorized and mainly from Asia (in particular Thailand and the Philippines, but also increasingly from Africa) — is also contributing to the changing ethnic composition of the country.
The departure of Jewish Israelis also contributes to the undermining of the Zionist ideology. If large numbers of Jewish Israelis are opting to emigrate, why would Jews who are well integrated and accepted in other countries immigrate to Israel? Furthermore, up to a quarter of young Israelis in Europe marry outside their faith. The majority do not belong to a Jewish community and do not participate in any Jewish activities. As with other expatriate groups in Western nations, Israelis living abroad often profess their intention to return. However, Israeli emigrants are likely to remain in their adopted countries insofar as they and their families have become successfully settled and integrated.
Israeli governments have already consistently perceivedimmigration levels as too low and emigration levels as too high. In addition to policies encouraging immigration for permanent settlement, Israel has programs and media campaigns actively promoting the return of Israelis residing overseas. The government also maintains connections with the country’s expatriates through mandatory registration in its consulates overseas and outreach programs and activities — and provides counseling, guidance, financial assistance, and tax benefits to returning citizens.

Despite these efforts, it is doubtful based on past and current trends that these various incentives and appeals will be sufficient to entice the return of the million missing Israelis. Large-scale emigration has not only resulted in critical demographic and socioeconomic imbalances in the country, but more importantly poses grave political challenges and jeopardizes the basic Jewish character and integrity of Israel.

Joseph Chamie is research director at the Center for Migration Studies, and Barry Mirkin is an independent consultant.

Bye, the Beloved Country - Why Almost 40 Percent of Israelis Are Thinking of Emigrating

According to a new survey, more than a third of Israelis would leave the country if they could, citing economic opportunities as the main reason. Who are the wannabe leavers, and what can be done to induce them to stay?

Sivan Klingbail and Shanee Shiloh Ha’aretz Dec 15, 2012

The idea of emigrating from Israel is present at every family dinner in the home of Shirlee (Haaretz has her full name), a scientist from the center of the country. More accurately, it’s conspicuous by the absence of two of her three sons. Her eldest son, Nir, 28, left Israel last February to join his brother Idan, 27, in Toronto, where he’s been living since completing his compulsory army service. The youngest brother is about to begin his military service.

The sons’ move was gradual. Idan went to Toronto to study and worked as a security guard for El Al while he was in university. He also became involved in the Jewish community and received a job offer from a large local company. According to Shirlee, “He had many opportunities there to develop personally and professionally, without begging and without favors, so he decided to stay.”

His older brother joined him because he felt, as his mother puts it, that “no one cared about him here. The people that get preferred are the ones who don’t serve, don’t contribute and don’t work, and in the end there is the difficulty of finding a job that suits his skills and will give him and his future family a decent living.”

But even though Shirlee is able to identify with her son’s feelings, she regrets his choice. “We did not educate our children to leave,” she says. “We are very involved and active socially, and we find it sad that they do not see their future in this country.”

Shirlee’s sons have not yet declared that they never intend to return, but she is afraid they will find it hard to come back. For her, it’s an ideological crisis. “We educated them that this is our home and our country, and that it’s wrong to give up your country. For us as parents, it is very difficult. We are left alone and it also involves a breakdown of values. This was not our dream.” In any event, Shirlee believes it’s the partner of each of her sons who will be the one to decide whether they return.
In her opinion, Israel’s finest sons and daughters are the ones leaving the country. “They are good, high-quality people who can contribute -- from doctors and nurses to engineers. The emigration phenomenon here was once branded ‘a fallout of cowards’ [by Yitzhak Rabin], but these days the people who are leaving are talented. They stand out abroad. They are considered smart and successful compared to the Canadians. Many don’t come back.”

Shirlee’s gut analysis is interesting against the backdrop of a survey conducted for Haaretz by the market-research firm Meida Shivuki C.I., under the management of Noam Raz and Merav Shapira. The survey found that 37 percent of Israelis are considering a move to a different country at some time in the future. At the same time, it’s noteworthy than only 2 percent of those surveyed said they are certain they will leave Israel -- it’s only a matter of time.

The primary reason the potential emigrants cite is the difficulty of getting ahead economically in Israel -- cited by 55 percent of those considering emigration. Raz terms this notion a “fantasy.” “We want to think we have a way out of here, but only 2 percent really intend to leave,” he explains.

Fantasy or reality, the fact cannot be ignored that many Israelis want, at some level, to live elsewhere. The tendency to consider leaving is most prominent among voters for center and left-of-center parties; the 30-49 age group; secular, salaried individuals; as well as among inhabitants of the south of the country and the Greater Tel Aviv area.

It’s important to point out that both the research for the article and the survey were carried out before Operation Pillar of Defense in the Gaza Strip last month, though the military escalation in the south was already intensifying and the winds of a potential war against Iran were blowing strong.

Equally important, however, is the fact that, according to various data, most of those who are thinking of leaving are not motivated by the security situation -- in fact, it’s the exact opposite. When the security threat mounts, the Israeli public views leaving as treason, and few emigrate at such times. Indeed, according to the researchers, few Israelis leave for ideological reasons, such as the occupation, antidemocratic legislation or even the emergency call-up orders, which have been widespread in recent years.

According to the State of the Nation Report for 2011-2012, published last month by the Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel, the situation of the country’s young working families has worsened in the past five years (not taking into account Arab and Jewish ultra-Orthodox families, whose situation has been even more aggravated).

Figures issued by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development, of which Israel is a member, show that Israel is lagging in most of the relevant indices. For example, Israel is 29th out of 36 countries in terms of investment in education. In health investment, Israel is third from last. Israel is in 25th place in the quality-of-life index and in last place in terms of government administration.
“What’s happening today in Israel recalls the process undergone by Jerusalem,” says Tomer Treves, a cofounder of URU (Wake Up), an association that promotes a civil agenda for the country. Jerusalem, he explains, “lives every possible conflict every day. Those who left the city over the years were people able to make a living, and the city grew poor. Without state funding it would not be sustainable.”

Treves terms this “the moving of the capable.” People are leaving, he says, “because of what became of the Zionist idea. The moment the tie with Israel is weakened, the point of remaining is measured by the quality of life, and Israel is not in a good place from that point of view.”

Indeed, the Haaretz survey shows clearly that voters for right-wing parties and people who are religiously traditional or Orthodox tend to say that they will not leave because Israel is the central place of the Jewish people. Not everyone who took part in the survey would agree with that proposition. Treves: “The right and the left in present-day Israel are in dispute over one issue: where on our scale of identity we place Jewish identity. The more of a humanist and liberal you are, the lower you situate your Jewish identity. It’s been like that ever since Benjamin Netanyahu whispered into the ear of [the late kabbalist] Rabbi Kaduri, ‘The leftists have forgotten what it is to be Jewish.’”

Many of those who categorize themselves as belonging to the political center or left will probably reject that claim (maybe even angrily). Nevertheless, a chasm seems to have opened between their conception of what it means to be Jewish and the way they grasp the state’s conception of what it means to be Jewish. The moment the decision to live in Israel is no longer based on values, economic parameters enter the equation -- at which point no few Israelis think their future lies in other, greener pastures.

Yes, it’s the economy. A graph published by Prof. Sergio DellaPergola, from the Institute of Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in the online journal Hagira (Migration) shows a rise in emigration from Israel in recent years. DellaPergola’s research was based on the data for departures from the country as compared with arrivals. His conclusion: in 2011, approximately 14,000 Israelis left the country and did not return.

At the same time, DellaPergola hastens to point out that the situation in Italy, where he was born, and in other Western countries is more acute. “I spent two months in Italy last summer,” he says. “The situation there is far more serious, particularly in terms of unemployment. The jobless rate is 9 percent for the country as a whole, but 34 percent among young people. Here in Israel, many people in the young age groups are working, whereas many in Italy have nothing. Even people in their late thirties are out of work. They do not marry and they live with their parents.”

Insurance policy

According to research done by Yossi Harpaz for his M.A. thesis in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Tel Aviv University, in 2007 more than 100,000 Israelis also held citizenship of countries in Central and Eastern Europe, twice as many as in 2000. Obtaining a foreign passport is considered a type of insurance policy rather than indicating an intention to emigrate. Also noteworthy is the ethnic identity of those who are getting the European passports: they are the children and grandchildren of people of European descent – generally speaking, Ashkenazim.

“It might not be politically correct to say this, but the Ashkenazim have been transformed from being identified with the state into a segment of their own,” says Noam Manella, a strategic consultant and lecturer in Israel and abroad about the effects of Generation Y --people born from the early 1980s -- on organizations and society. “The Ashkenazim have become one more population sector, like the ultra-Orthodox, the Arabs and the Russians,” he says. “Many Ashkenazim like to say humorously, ‘We have become a negligible minority in Israel,’ and then go on to ask themselves, ‘What connects me to the country?’ People today are looking for belonging based on fields of interest and life values, not only national belonging. If I feel alienated, then it’s preferable to feel that way in a more comfortable location -- one that also offers me diverse and interesting possibilities for professional development. A young Israeli start-up person can feel more of a kinship with an American counterpart in Silicon Valley than with the neighbor across the hall.”

The reason the local connection has become weakened, Manella says, is because the state itself unraveled the thread that links it to its citizens, in a decades-long process. He cites unequal army service, religious radicalization, the economic abandonment of the disadvantaged, and sweeping privatization.

The country has become more religious, he believes, and people who define themselves as liberals are finding it more difficult to connect with it. Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, he adds, is trying to deepen people’s connection with the state but is doing so by evoking controversial symbols, such as sending schoolchildren on mandatory visits to Rachel’s Tomb in the territories.“That is a big mistake in terms of understanding the new ties that link people in the open world,” Manella says.
The solution, he says, entails a renewed sense of belonging, which he considers a national mission: “At one time, people were connected through large national symbols, but today the only thing that can create the connection is mutual commitment, and the state has to seize that -- equality in bearing the burden. The existential danger that once connected us is now separating us. That’s because the state has failed to generate compensation or a fair exchange for the existential problem in our region. The classic mistake is to try to connect people to the state through patriotic symbols, when what they are looking for is mutual commitment,” he concludes.

Glass ceiling

When it comes to the reverse direction of migrants – into the country – Israel occupies a special place. It’s seventh in terms of the number of immigrants in the country relative to population size. As a whole, the phenomenon of migration between countries has been growing in recent years. According to United Nations Population Division figures, in 2010 there were 214 million people living in a country different from the one in which they were born – an increase of 25 million in a decade.
In short, Prof. DellaPergola says, the rise in migration is a global phenomenon. “Switzerland has a higher emigration rate than Israel,” he notes. “Switzerland seems like an ideal country and its population is roughly the same size as Israel’s. The explanation for the leaving phenomenon there is the limitations caused by size. The result is an employment problem for talented people, who can easily find jobs abroad.”

In DellaPergola’s view, the limitations imposed by size in Israel are more significant and make many Israelis feel they have reached their own glass ceiling. He chooses to illustrate his analysis from his own milieu, the academic world. “It frustrates me as an academic to see the number of available teaching positions shrinking,” he says. “That is the problem faced by small countries.”

Israel’s mobility index for academics is very developed, DellaPergola says, owing largely to the large-scale cooperation with universities abroad. “Researchers nowadays talk about multinationalism,” he says. “Most of us have more than one significant attachment in life, even though for most of us the center of gravity lies in one location. Every emigrant can visit Israel 20 times a year if he wants. That influences the way we identify migrants.”

Despite the world trend and the fact that people with a good education get job offers abroad, DellaPergola believes that Israel can cope with the problem. “Policy in this regard needs to be reinforced,” he says. “We need to think more about suitable opportunities for the population structure here. When there is an educated population, as in Israel, the society needs solutions of employment for the educated. Research and development should be expanded.”

In any event, DellaPergola emphasizes that Israeli society continues to be very optimistic. He draws on UN data, which are untainted by bias, he points out. “The situation should be grasped as an opportunity, not a calamity. There are people who spend a day here and a day over there, five days in London and the weekend in Israel. The concept of who is a migrant needs to be revised accordingly; obstacles have to be removed and help should be given to those who want to live and work in Israel.”
According to the hard data, the scale of migration in Israel is three leavers per 1,000 residents. Michal Sabah, a doctoral student in demographics at the Hebrew University who also works for the Central Bureau of Statistics, notes that in comparison with developed countries -- such as, among others, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Australia -- migration from Israel is low.

Every society has a migrant profile, she explains. Israel follows the pattern of other developed countries: the higher the education level, the greater the likelihood of migration. Holders of doctorates are more likely to leave than people with high school or lower education.

Earlier studies show that holders of academic degrees are twice as likely to migrate as high school graduates. “Generally speaking, the migrants will have a technological education and have a male-dominated occupation. The prospect of a woman engaged in a ‘male’ occupation migrating is twice as high as that of a woman who is in a ‘feminine’ or mixed occupation,”Sabah adds.

The studies on which Sabah draws suggest that Jewish migrants have cause to be optimistic. Research conducted in the United States, which is the most popular target country for Jewish migrants, shows that Jews integrate within a relatively short time and improve their socioeconomic status. But don’t rush to pack your bags just yet. Sabah emphasizes that “in any event, 20 percent of the emigrants return to Israel.”

She continues: “Those who leave do so because they can. The assumption that underlies the theoretical models is that people make decisions rationally and compare the possibilities that they have in another country.”

It’s more difficult for Israelis to give up the perception that the country is their home. “Most people do not leave in order to migrate,” says Prof. Tamar Hermann, from the Open University’s Department of Sociology, Political Science and Communication. Hermann, who has done considerable research on the Israeli migration phenomenon, adds that many leave because of a specific job or for studies, but in some cases extend the time they intended to devote to that pursuit. “It is not planned migration but an ongoing development, which in the end comes down to emigration,” she says. “Few people pack their life’s belongings in advance with the aim of moving elsewhere permanently.”

According to Hermann, emigration from Israel is still not perceived as a success story. “It’s true that there is less criticism of those who leave. No one will speak of ‘a fallout of cowards’ any longer, but most [leaving] lead a middling life. They do not feel pride in their success and instead feel a need to apologize.”

The fact that Israelis tend not to declare their leaving as an act of emigration is related to their attachment to Israel, even after they have left. Israelis abroad maintain a warm relationship with Israel, Hermann notes, and quite a number return because of their children -- or, more accurately, because of the change their children undergo. “The children become Americans, Canadians or Europeans, and the parents feel they have lost their common language with them. Israeliness is generally not sustained in the second generation.”

Lack of hope

None of this comes as a surprise to Sharon Eyny and Amit Noy Nevo. A year and a half ago, they founded a company in New York to assist Israelis who move to the city. The company, called Get it Done NY, helps new arrivals find housing and a school for their children -- in short, to acclimatize. Nevo and her husband moved to New York in 1997. “We really wanted to try New York,” she says. “We were here for our honeymoon, fell in love with the city and decided to give it a try. We didn’t plan on staying this long,”she adds.

Eyny went to New York at a far younger age. Her parents left Israel when she was eight. At 17 she decided to return to Israel, but after a few years moved back to New York. “We founded the company after we identified the need for a service like ours,” Nevo says. “We were both involved even before. We knew about people who were coming here and that the number was increasing. We understood that many of them need help.”

As a longtime New Yorker, Eyny says she discerns a change in the profile of the Israelis coming to the city. “In the past they were in the 18-30 age bracket. They didn’t have much and came to New York to try their luck. These days there are a lot more families. That also has to do with the fact that there are now more options for families. The feeling used to be that New York is far away, but now people feel that it is much more accessible. To hop aboard a plane and go to Israel is also no big deal anymore, and people have more courage to go in the knowledge that they can always go back to visit.”
From conversations with families they have worked with, Nevo says the main reason people move from Israel to New York is economic. “These are people who feel they can earn more here than in Israel, and that in Israel they have run the gamut.” She adds that another reason is higher education: many people leave, because overseas they can develop academically in a way that is not possible in Israel. In addition, many of the families that leave think the educational level in Israel is not up to par.
Ran Harnevo, a high-tech entrepreneur, is much more blunt. “I have a relatively good excuse for not living in Israel,” he says with a smile. “We established a start-up in Israel, and after we raised $5 million I went to New York to develop the business side and get to know the market. That was four and a half years ago. The company was sold to AOL in 2010, but it’s still an Israeli-American company, with 70 employees in Israel.”

Harnevo, 38, moved to the United States with his wife; they now have an American-born daughter. In the period in which they have been living in New York, the number of Israelis working in the Internet sphere has grown apace. These days they are known as the “Israeli mafia,” Harnevo laughs. “There is talk in the city about why there are so many Israelis here,” he says. “We feel the growing desire to move in the form of more relocation requests. These days, when I think about going back to Israel, the question that comes up is, What I could do there?

“The Internet has become one of the big, attractive professions,” he adds. “It is totally global. It can’t be managed from Israel. We would not have succeeded if we had tried to run the company [5min Media] from Israel.” There are other reasons, too. “The feeling is that there is economic and political distress in Israel. That the Israeli middle class -- of which I see myself a part -- faces two stumbling blocks: one is the difficulty of being unable to do well economically, due to an uncompetitive, cartel-driven market; and the other is a lack of hope.

Politically, the discourse is one of despair. It’s a fanatic, illiberal discourse. An educated secular individual in his thirties, who is part of the smart, successful Internet industry in Israel, understands that this same route makes it possible for him to leave Israel.”

The tendency by high-tech people to leave the country seems clear and natural, but they are not the only ones who are finding work abroad with comparative ease. Even though the fact that Europe and the United States are reeling under the impact of the economic crisis would appear to make immigration more difficult, in practice there are certain professions which are in high demand abroad. They belong to what has been called the “creative class.”

The term was coined by the American-born economist and social scientist Richard Florida, as part of a theory he developed about urban renewal and economic development in post-industrial cities. According to Florida, cities that are able to attract members of the “creative class” will enjoy economic prosperity.

Many theoreticians reject his approach, but mayors of many big cities have warmly adopted it. The result is that the members of professions that fit the “creative” category -- designers, architects, high-tech personnel and others -- are considered desirable and find it easier to obtain work and residence permits.

Tel Aviv is considered a city that the creative class is fond of. But, for example, the architects who work for a salary in architectural firms will find it difficult to pay the city’s high rental fees. For Israelis, globalization -- which is nourishing the interest in the creative class -- has made the perennial question about the difficulty of living outside Israel almost anachronistic.

Harnevo hesitates for a moment when asked if it was hard for him to make the decision to live far from his native land. “I think there is something a little childish about the Israeli narrative,” he says. “The narrative insists that there is no place like Israel. It’s a powerful narrative and is implanted in you, but suddenly you discover that it’s not so. There are places like Israel and the skies do not fall when you leave. Those who go back do so not because there is no place like Israel, but because it’s their home and it really is hard to switch homes.”
Point of no return
Conversations about emigration from Israel often come down to the issue of the brain drain the country is experiencing. “The number of European university lecturers working in the 40 leading faculties in the United States is between 0.5 percent and 4 percent. In other words, for every 100 lecturers who work in Germany, 2.9 work in the United States. But for every 100 lecturers working in Israel, there are 25 working in the United States.” The speaker is the economist Prof. Dan Ben-David, who is the executive director of the Taub Center and teaches in the Department of Public Policy at Tel Aviv University.

Ben-David conducted a study of the brain-drain phenomenon five years ago. He explains that although the brain drain to the United States is not exclusively an Israeli phenomenon, there is nothing like it anywhere else in the world in terms of its proportions. “There are eight Israelis in the Computer Sciences Department of Stanford, which is almost a subdepartment,” he says with a half-smile. He is concerned not only about the future of the universities in Israel but about the country’s character and image as a whole. “I am apprehensive that we will reach a point of demographic no-return here.
 “Demography refers not only births but also to those who remain here to live,” he explains. “At present, it is still possible to shift the country onto a sustainable track, but in another decade that will no longer be possible. Today, half the children in Israel receive a lower-level education than is the case in Third World countries, and that number is only increasing. That’s what the elections should be about.”

Does the brain drain exist in fields other than computing? According to a 2008 paper, written by Profs. Omer Moav and Eric Gould for the Jerusalem-based Shalem Center, the educated public – those holding a B.A. and above – are more inclined to emigrate than those with a high school education or lower. The authors note that more than 2.6 percent of educated, married Jews in the 25-40 age group were categorized by the Central Bureau of Statistics as emigrants in 2002, as compared with 1.1 percent among those with lower education.

Moav and Gould analyzed the data of the 1995 population census combined with an indication of the status of emigration in 2002. They add that the percentage of educated young people leaving the country is significantly higher than their share in the general population. On the basis of their study, they conclude that Israel and Italy are the only two developed countries in which the number of educated people emigrating from the country exceeds the number of educated immigrants entering the country. This is a migration pattern that is found in poor countries.

Another interesting finding by Moav and Gould concerns the occupations of those who choose to leave. In first place are senior university faculty, with a 6.5 percent emigration rate. They are followed by physicians, at 4.8 percent, and then engineers and scientists (not from universities), whose emigration rate is slightly above 3 percent. The study found a correlation between level of education and emigration, primarily among males; and that holders of an M.A. (or its equivalent in the sciences) are more likely to emigrate than holders of a B.A. Academics and physicians head the list.
In general, the data on emigration from Israel are extremely difficult to analyze. Passport control does not ask each person where he is going, so it is difficult to determine who has left and for how long. Researchers therefore qualify their findings, and this is why we can talk confidently about a trend of leaving but less so about a phenomenon.

Poor everywhere

Sagi Balasha is the CEO of the Israeli Leadership Council, whose mission, according to its website, is “to build an active and giving Israeli-American community in order to strengthen the State of Israel, our next generation, and to provide a bridge to the Jewish-American community.” He, for one, feels that fewer Israelis have been coming to the United States in the past few years, because of the economic situation there as contrasted to Israel.

In fact, he says, the desire to move to America is the product of mythmaking. “In Israel we grew up with the perception that America is the height of ambitions, the land of possibilities, in contrast to the self-laceration in Israel. A whole generation was raised in that light. Israel is characterized by frenetic activity and has become a start-up nation, and the feeling is that America is sleeping.”

Nevertheless, Balasha says, there are many who view the United States as the next step in their career. He says he recently met a young Israeli who chose to leave a comfortable, well-paid career with good social conditions and even tenure, for the United States.“It’s likely he will have to compromise, so I asked him why he did it. He said he also wanted to try America. That is an illusion, and if you probe it you find that with the exception of a few Israelis who really did make it, the majority live at a middling level and most of them did not triumph.”

Balasha’s organization is trying to create an Israeli community and Israeli culture for the Israelis in Los Angeles. One of its activities is to distribute food to poor families from Israel. “Every week we distribute dozens of crates to Israelis who don’t have food to eat. You have the whole gamut here, from the poor to the upper class. The living standard is also very similar to what you have in Israel.”
There are 250,000 Israelis in the United States, Balasha says. That’s more than the population of Netivot, Ofakim, Beit She’an and Nesher put together. The large number of people translates into large differences in terms of success. Even though the statistics say that one in every five emigrants return, in practice even longtime emigrants find it difficult to admit -- even to themselves -- that they are not likely to go back.

Israel is home

Roy Azoulay, 34, and his partner, Liat Reuveni, 38, have been living in Oxford, England, for the past four years. They made the move so he could obtain an MBA. Azoulay notes that even though the MBA studies take a year, their original plan was to stay for five years. “We were always curious about how it might be to live abroad, and we wanted to get a little experience of the outside world,” he says.

After obtaining his MBA, Azoulay started to work in a subsidiary of Oxford University, a kind of technological hothouse that supports about 15 companies. Reuveni, a dental technician by profession, does not work. She is raising their son, Yonatan, who is 18 months old and was born in England, and their Israeli-born daughter, Mika, age 5. “It’s common here for one of the spouses to take a break from the world of work and allow the family to subsist less materialistically, in order to give the children the optimal conditions until the start of school,” Azoulay says. “In Israel, that is not considered a legitimate choice.”

In addition to the legitimacy of being able to be with the children, Azoulay also notes the “sanity” of the English working day, adding, “Obviously, life here is more comfortable in many ways.” Nevertheless, he insists that from the family viewpoint, their home is Israel and they do not intend to stay in Oxford forever.

An impressive declaration, but a few weeks ago he received a job offer he will find hard to refuse, and if he accepts it, the family will remain abroad for two more years. “The decision is being made with mixed feelings, because we very much were waiting to return. We hesitated to leave, because we loved the life in Israel and enjoyed ourselves. But this offer is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity,” Azoulay explains, in an apologetic tone.

All the emigrants we interviewed for this article come from the middle class -- the class which most economists maintain is the basis of a viable democracy with a healthy economy. The middle class bears the tax burden (its members don’t have the smart accountants that the upper decile can afford to hire) and also the burden of army reserve duty. When the Israeli middle class took to the streets in the social-protest movement of summer 2011, it discovered that the decision makers are indifferent to its problems.

Still, though no significant change has occurred, it can be argued that the protests brought about at least one change: the perception of an eroding middle class is now axiomatic. Middle-class salaries have dropped by 7.7 percent in the past decade. The possibility for further erosion among the middle class remains high: sometimes all that separates social well-being from dire poverty is a health or employment catastrophe.

No fewer than 15.5 percent of those who sought help from aid agencies in Israel last year categorized themselves as former middle-class families,” attorney Eran Weintrob, executive director of Latet -- Israeli Humanitarian Aid, told TheMarker in September 2012. The economic ailments of Israeli society are not confined solely to the middle class. The past few years have seen a dramatic growth in inequality here, with large disparities forming. As a result of the concentration of wealth among a few families, even those who are by definition part of the upper decile don’t always feel they have anywhere to progress to economically. If we add the high cost of real estate, it’s not surprising that a generation has grown up here feeling economically stymied and believing that it can have a better life elsewhere. The fusion between economic insecurity and a sense of hopelessness explains the desire to leave.

If we don’t think our children’s lives will be better than ours, why stay?

Scratching an itch

Ruthie Meiri Newgrosh, 35, filmmaker, on why she swapped Israel for England.
I am writing this on my iPhone. At the moment it’s my connection to the outside world, because most of the time I am closely connected to a 5-week-old baby girl. I’ve been living in Manchester for the past two and a half years, happily married to Alex, an English Jew who was born here.

About three and a half years ago, I started to feel an itch in my stomach telling me I could no longer stay in Israel. That was before the missiles were aimed at Tel Aviv, before the social protest movement, before a lot of the wrong things that have subsequently occurred. Not that it was a new idea.

Ten years ago, I persuaded my grandfather to apply for the Slovakian passport to which he was entitled. Since then he has used it a few times to get a pensioner’s discount on European trains. My father obtained a passport a few years later, and I launched the process to get one around the time the itch started.

I received the coveted passport exactly a week before I moved to England. It saved us a lot of grief and a lot of money. A visa for a fiancee or married woman means plenty of British bureaucracy.
Before the itch began, and while it was still bugging me, I was your typical Tel Aviv type: flourishing career in television, dog, going out a lot, yoga, the beach. I loved every second of my life. But I was also a left-wing activist, highly motivated to bring about change and equality. I organized a group to learn Arabic, went to demonstrations, edited film clips for free. I worked on behalf of my art. Until I was worn down. Seriously worn down. The state won.

Then came the itch. The itch told me to start expending a little more energy on myself and my future, and a little less on an insensitive state that didn’t give two hoots for me.

I met Alex at the wedding of our best friends. The ultimate schmaltz. About a year after I embarked on the process of moving to England, the universe sent me the love of my life. An English love. After three days together, we both knew this was it.

It was obvious I would move to England rather than him moving to Israel. Not that it wasn’t hard to give up so much. Especially family and career.

I often have dreams about Israel and thoughts about what could have been if Alex had moved into my rented apartment in Tel Aviv. But then reality seeps into the fantasy and I know I would still be awash in debt, with no chance of us ever having a house or apartment of our own. I would have remained frustrated.

Not that everything here is perfect. Far from it. But in Manchester, too, as in London ‏(in the words of the Chava Alberstein song‏), the despair is a lot more comfortable.

Jewish migration from Israel to Europe on the rise 

Friday, 21 September 2012 09:00

Almost 1 million Israelis left the state to live in the US, Britain, Australia and Germany in 2011. The figure was revealed by researcher Michel Sharon, who added that they end up having a prosperous life in their new countries.

The details of Israel's migration statistics were given in a television programme on Israeli Channel 2. Migrants to Canada told the programme that life there is "more peaceful" than in Israel. Around 2,500 Israelis migrate to Canada every year; one of the reasons given is that there is no talk of death and destruction there. This is causing the Israeli government some concern.

According to Israeli newspaper Maariv, the state is losing out on the migration stakes. The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics said that the number of migrants to Israel in 2010 was 18,129, the lowest since 1988.

Maariv also reported that 70 per cent of American Jews have not been to Israel and do not even intend to visit the country which is given vast amounts of tax dollars by the US government. More than 50 per cent of those Jews are married to non-Jews and 50 per cent do not care if Israel ceases to exist. For this reason, Israel's government is preparing an initiative which aims to reinforce the relationship of Jews around the world with Israel.

Of the 87 per cent of Jewish youth from the countries of the former Soviet Union who want to migrate, only 36 per cent would be willing to go to Israel, claimed Maariv. The newspaper said that Jews from Eastern Europe are no longer regarded as potential immigrants by the Israeli government "in reserve" to counter the demographic reality of a growing Palestinian population. US Jews are not expected to fill the migration gap.

Thousands of migrants from the former Soviet Union left Israel and returned to their countries of origin either because they are really Christians and went to Israel simply to benefit from government inducements, or because of the better economic situation at home. Jewish organisations in the former Soviet empire have been working hard to keep their fellow Jews in their countries, claimed Maariv, while the situation in Israel is still very unstable.

Commenting on this, Israeli geographer Arnon Sofer said, "The future of Jewish Galilee [sic] is uncertain as the number of Jews decreases, while the number of Arabs is increasing." The specialist in water issues and demography at the University of Haifa said that the number of Arabs in Galilee stands at 640,000 whereas there are only 570,000 Jews. He suggested the need for a government-funded Jewish migration project to change the demography of the region in favour of the Jews.

See also the Pew Research Centre’s February 9, 2015 The continuing decline of Europe’s Jewish population 

By /


When Settlers are Killed – Israel’s Military/Police State Goes on Offensive – When Palestinian Dawabshe family is burnt alive nothing is done

$
0
0
At the end of August settlers, who were seen running off in the direction of the nearest settlement in Duma, set alight to the house of the Dawabshe family in Duma village.  Out of the four family members, just one – an infant – is till alive.  The parents and another child are dead.  Fires were lit at the entrance to the building to make sure that the family couldn’t escape.

What has been the response of the Israeli authorities?  Despite promises to detain and arrest the culprits, absolutely nothing.  Indeed theonly raids they carried out were on other family members of the Dawabshe’s.  

Moshe Yalon has admitted that the Israeli police, Shin Bet, know who is responsible.  He told a group of young Likud activists that he was ‘protecting sources’ and thus they couldn’t be arrested. 

Contrast this with those who killed the 2 settlers.  Hundreds of troops are sent to smash up Palestinian villages, shoot, beat and arrest any and everyone.  Houses are demolished and the full panapoly of Israeli state terrorism is employed.  But when it came to the Dawabshe family none of this happened.  There were no raids on the settlements.  There were no house demolitions.  No searches, no nothing.  After all Palestinian life is cheap.

True Netanyahu visited a hospital and made a few PR speeches about how much they condemn the attack on the Dawabshe family.  And then?  Nothing.

This is the reality of the Apartheid state of Israel.  Because the West Bank is a part of Israel today.   There is no Green Line, on Israeli maps it doesn’t exist.  It only appears outside Israel to ward off accusations that Israel is ruling in perpetuity over nearly 4 million Palestinians who have no democratic rights whatsoever.

It should be added that Israel’s accomplice is the Palestinian Authority.  It acts as Israel’s security contractor.  It does the dirty work and is rewarded with American and European aid.  It perpetuates the idea of a 2 State solution when no such solution is possible today, not that it ever was.  Its complicity in ‘the peace process’ helps maintain the Zionist camouflage that the present situation is a temporary one whereas the obvious truth is that it is   permanent.

Tony Greenstein
Palestinian protesters stand amid blazes of fire during clashes in the West Bank village of Burin on October 3, 2015.AFP

Less than a day after deadly attack in Jerusalem's Old City, Israel Defense Forces carry out numerous arrest operations.
By Amira Hass | Oct. 4, 2015 | 2:11 PM


Violent clashes broke out Sunday morning across the West Bank between Palestinian youths and Israeli security forces.

Israel's military deployed hundreds of troops in the West Bank following a drive-by shooting that killed a Jewish settler couple [AP]
Palestinians report that since the terrorist attacks in Jerusalem's Old City, in which Nehemia Lavie and Aharon Benita were killed and two were wounded, in addition to a separate attack that left a 15-year-old teen wounded, more than 100 Palestinians were wounded by gunfire and teargas in clashes with the army. Palestinians also report attacks by settlers. Demonstrators are protesting the Israel Police ban on non-resident Palestinians from entering the Old City. 
Zionist settlers, illegal colonists coming from all over the world to steal and occupy Palestinian land, armed with a green light to shoot and kill ...
The confrontations broke out at the Atara checkpoint north of Bir Zeit, at the Bayt Furik checkpoint, at the Al-Arub refugee camp between Bethlehem and Hebron, the Jalazun refugee camp north of Ramallah, and Jerusalem's Old City and Isawiyya neighborhood. The police have blocked entrance into Isawiyya, the home of Fadi Alon, who was shot to death by the police after moderately wounding a 15-year-old in Jerusalem's Musrara neighborhood.

Palestinians cast doubts on the Israeli report that Alon tried to stab a Jew. Based on a video that was distributed, they report that a group of Jews attacked him and called on the police to shoot him without reason.

Israeli soldiers patrol a street during an Israeli army raid in the West Bank City of  Nablus on Saturday.
(Photo: Reuters)

Before dawn on Sunday, a large military force broke into the Jenin refugee camp and surrounded the home of Qays a-Sa'adi, a member of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades. It remains unknown whether he was in the home when it was hit by a LAW missile and destroyed.

At least 18 Palestinians were wounded, some seriously, in clashes that erupted between the army and youths. Three were arrested. A special army force entered the Arab hospital and arrested one of the patients, Karm al-Masri, 23, hospital officials told the Ma'an news agency.

The youth was hospitalized two days ago because of a broken hand, according to the hospital. While dragging Masri through the building stairwell toward the outside, the soldiers broke hospital surveillance cameras, the hospital director reported.

Around 2 A.M., army forces entered the village of Surda, north of Ramallah, in which lives the family of the terrorist from Saturday night's Old City attack, 19-year-old Mohannad Hallabi. The troops entered from different directions, accompanied by gunfire. According to the report, Palestinian youths spread out in the village streets late in the evening to protect the Hallabi home.

The soldiers dispersed them with teargas, stun grenades and live fire. According to the report, armed Palestinians also shot at the soldiers, who arrived by foot and in military vehicles. The force entered the home, conducted a search, interrogated the father and confiscated some of the terrorist's effects. The family removed all the home's contents, expecting the army to demolish it, although it had yet to receive a demolition order.

A group of Palestinian youths danced Saturday night next to the house, praising Hallabi and his deed, while his parents stood on the side, shocked and mute.

There were clashes between Palestinian youths and soldiers next to the Jalazun refugee camp, northeast of Surda. Soldiers shot and damaged and Palestinian ambulance, according to a Palestinian report. Two volunteers accompanying the medical crew were wounded.

There were also clashes in the Hebron area. Palestinians reported that a firebomb was thrown at a military jeep in Halhul, and a homemade explosive device was thrown an army position in Bayt Umar. Soldiers fired teargas and sponge bullets at Palestinian demonstrators both there and in other Palestinian communities in the Hebron area.

Three days have passed since the murder of the Henkin couple, and Palestinians in the West Bank know they have to drive cautiously on main arteries. Some reported hearing warnings from Palestinian security representatives. Official Palestinian sources have been reporting attacks and provocations by settlers in villages and in the areas of Nablus, Hebron and Ramallah. 

Immediately after the Saturday night terror attack in Jerusalem, Israelis attacked Burin, south of Nablus, setting village fields and groves on fire, according to Palestinian reports. The Israelis reportedly descended from the settlements of Yizhar and Bracha.

Palestinian media also reported on Israeli citizens, most likely settlers, attacking and wounding a 65-year-old security guard in Yatta's Sheikh Park. Another group of Israelis damaged the car of a Palestinian doctor at Reef Junction, south of Hebron. Others attacked the Dana family home in Hebron, next to Kiryat Arba, and broke into the A-Salayma neighborhood.

The army on Sunday morning set up temporary checkpoints on roads across the West Bank, causing long delays for Palestinian drivers and passengers. According to a Voice of Palestine report, the road between North Ramallah and Nablus was closed during the morning hours because of gatherings of settlers on the roadside and clashes between Palestinian youths and soldiers.  Nablus on Saturday.
(Photo: Reuters)

In Israel - the Army has Full Access to Schools

$
0
0

Screaming: An Israeli officer drags five-year-old Wadi'a Maswadeh towards an army vehicle after he threw a stone at soldiers - Five-year-old Palestinian boy dragged away by Israeli soldiers who then bind and blindfold his father because the child threw stones at them 


Contrary to the myths of Israeli hasbara, it is in Israeli schools that the indoctrination of the settler young take place.  Arabs are the baddies in school books.  The terrorist is the Arab.  Army involvement in schools is from kindergarten upwards.  At the same time Israel is doing its best to prevent any independent Palestinian school network in Israel though it has suffered a setback with the attempt to cut the funds of the only independent group of schools, the Christian schools network mainly based around Nazareth.  
Tony Greenstein

Israel’s army and schools work hand in hand, say teachers
Zionist troops attacking Gaza

28 September 2015  Jonathan Cook

Close ties mean Israeli pupils are being raised to be ‘good soldiers’ rather than good citizens

Middle East Eye – 27 September 2015

The task for Israeli pupils: to foil an imminent terror attack on their school. But if they are to succeed, they must first find the clues using key words they have been learning in Arabic.

Arabic lesson plans for Israel’s Jewish schoolchildren have a strange focus.

Students and teachers create signs on June 30, 2015, to cover the racist graffiti spray painted on the walls of one of Israel's few mixed schools, the Hand in Hand in Jerusalem, the night before. (Courtesy: Hand in Hand)
Those matriculating in the language can rarely hold a conversation in Arabic. And almost none of the hundreds of teachers introducing Jewish children to Israel’s second language are native speakers, even though one in five of the population belong to the country’s Palestinian minority.

Israel's army and schools work hand in hand, say teachers

The reason, says Yonatan Mendel, a researcher at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem, is that the teaching of Arabic in Israel’s Jewish schools is determined almost exclusively by the needs of the Israeli army.

Mendel’s recent research shows that officers from a military intelligence unit called Telem design much of the Arabic language curriculum. “Its involvement is what might be termed an ‘open secret’ in Israel,” he told MEE.

“The military are part and parcel of the education system. The goal of Arabic teaching is to educate the children to be useful components in the military system, to train them to become intelligence officers.”

Article: Israel's army and schools work hand in hand, say teachers | OpEdNews

Telem is a branch of Unit 8200, dozens of whose officers signed a letter last year revealing that their job was to pry into Palestinians’ sex lives, money troubles and illnesses. The information helped with “political persecution”, “recruiting collaborators” and “driving parts of Palestinian society against itself”, the officers noted.

Israeli military personnel visit Israeli kindergarten. Israel's army and schools work hand ...

Mendel said Arabic was taught “without sentiment”, an aim established in the state’s earliest years.

The fear was that, if students had a good relationship with the language and saw Arabs as potential friends, they might cross over to the other side and they would be of no use to the Israeli security system. That was the reason the field of Arabic studies was made free of Arabs.”

Officers in classroom

The teaching of Arabic is only one of the ways the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), as the Israeli military is known, reaches into Israeli classrooms, teachers and education experts have told MEE.

And many fear that the situation will only get worse under the new education minister, Naftali Bennett, who heads Jewish Home, the settler movement’s far-right party.

Most Jewish children in Israel are subject to a military draft when they matriculate from high school at the age of 17. Boys usually serve three years, and girls two.

However, the army and the recent rightwing governments of Benjamin Netanyahu have been concerned at the growing numbers who seek exemptions, usually on medical, psychological or religious grounds.

Israeli Defence Forces in schools

Nearly 300 schools have been encouraged to join an IDF-education ministry programme called “Path of Values”, whose official goal is to “strengthen the ties and cooperation between schools and the army”.

In practice, say teachers, it has led to regular visits to schools by army officers as well as reciprocal field trips to military bases for the children, as a way to encourage them to enlist when they finish school.

Although what takes place during visits is rarely publicised, the Israeli media reported in 2011 that on one simulated shooting exercise children had to fire their weapons at targets wearing a keffiyeh, or traditional Arab headdress.

“Militarism is in every aspect of our society, so it is not surprising it is prominent in schools too,” said Amit Shilo, an activist with New Profile, an organisation opposed to the influence of the army on Israeli public life.

“We are taught violence is the first and best solution to every problem, and that it is the way to solve our conflict with our neighbours.”

Fear of being sacked

MEE has had to conceal the identities of the teachers it spoke to, because the education ministry requires pre-approval of any interviews with the media.

Most of the teachers were concerned that they might be sacked if they were seen to be criticising official policy.

All the teachers noted that schools have come under mounting pressure to actively participate in the IDF programme.

Each school is now graded annually by the education ministry not only on its academic excellence but also on the draft rate among pupils and the percentages qualifying for elite units, especially in combat or intelligence roles.

Schools with a high draft rate can qualify for additional funding, said the teachers.

Ofer, a history teacher in the centre of the country, said: “When it comes to the older children, you have to accept as a teacher that the army is going to be inside the school and in your classroom. All the time the students are being prepared for conscription.

“The army is treated as something holy. There is no way to speak against the army at any point.”

Rachel Erhard, an education professor at Tel Aviv University, recently warnedthat Israel’s schools risked becoming like those of Sparta, the city in ancient Greece that famously trained its children from a young age to be warriors.

Public hounding

There are additional pressures on principals to participate, note teachers.

Zeev Dagani, head teacher of a leading Tel Aviv school who opted out of the programme at its launch in 2010, faced death threats and was called before a parliamentary committee to explain his actions.

The public hounding of teachers who oppose the militarisation of Israel’s education system, or are simply active outside the classroom in opposing the occupation, has continued.

Adam Verete, a Jewish philosophy teacher at a school in Tivon, near Haifa, was sacked last year after he hosted a class debate on whether the IDF could justifiably claim to be the world’s most moral army.

As the new school year started this month, parents and city mayors launched high-profile campaigns against two teachers for their anti-occupation views.

Avital Benshalom, who had just taken up her new post as head of the School of the Arts in Ashkelon, was forced to issue an apology for signing a petition 13 years ago supporting soldiers who refused to serve.

Herzl Schubert, a history teacher, similarly found himself facing a storm of protest after he was filmed taking part in a West Bank demonstration in support of the Palestinian village of Nabi Saleh during the summer vacation.

Notably, neither Bennett nor Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intervened to support the two teachers’ right to free speech.

Racist depictions

Teachers and education experts who spoke to MEE said such incidents had created a climate of fear that was intended to intimidate other teachers.

Neve, a history teacher at a school near Tel Aviv, said: “Teachers are afraid to speak out. The pressure comes not just from the education ministry but from pupils and parents too. The principals are terrified something bad will happen to the school’s reputation.”

The education ministry declined to respond to the accusations.

Teachers and education experts point to examples of collusion between schools and the IDF in all aspects of the education system.

Nurit Peled-Elhanan, a professor of education at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, said her studies of Israeli textbooks showed depictions of Arabs and Palestinians were “racist both verbally and visually”.

“They are necessary to legitimise a Jewish state, the history of massacres of Arabs, discrimination against Palestinian citizens and a lack of human rights in the occupation territories,” she told MEE.

“The aim is to create good soldiers, those who are prepared to torture and kill and still think they are doing the best for the nation.”

Separate studies of maps in textbooks have shownthree-quarters do not indicate the Green Line separating Israel from the occupied Palestinian territories, suggesting the whole area accords with the right’s idea of Greater Israel.

Revital, an Arabic language teacher, said the army’s lesson plans were popular with pupils. “I don’t approve of them, but the students like them. They celebrate and laugh when they kill the terrorists.”
Revital said she had been disciplined for speaking her mind in class and was now much more cautious.

“You end up hesitating before saying anything that isn’t what everyone else is saying. I find myself hesitating a lot more than I did 20 years ago. There is a lot more fascism and racism around in the wider society,” she said.

Holocaust studies

Some of the close ties between the IDF and the education system are well known.
The education ministry funds several prestigious schools, such as the Reali in Haifa, whose students combineeducation with military training as cadets.

Ofer said many senior teachers and principals were recruited directly from the army, when they retired at 45. “They then go on to a second career instilling ‘Zionist values’ into the students,” he said.
But the examples of overtly militarised education tend to overshadow the more subtle engineering of the curriculum of ordinary schools, complain teachers.

There are particular concerns about the emphasis in the curriculum on the Holocaust, including a decision last year to extend mandatory Holocaust studies to all ages, including kindergartens.

Following objections from the small leftwing Mertz party, the then education minister, Shai Piron, instructed kindergartens that soldiers should not bring guns into the classroom to ensure children’s safety.

Meretz legislator Tamar Zandberg, however, observed that uniformed soldiers should not be in kindergartens in the first place.

“People see inserting the army into the educational system as something natural, and it’s time that the educational system internalized the fact that its place is to educate to civic values,” she said.

Neve said the students no longer learnt about human rights or universal values in history classes.
“Now it’s all about Jewish history – and the Holocaust is at the centre of it.
“When we take the children to the deaths camps in Poland, the message is that everyone is against the Jews and we have to fight for our survival. They are filled with fear.
“The conclusion most draw is that, if we had had an army then, the Holocaust could have been stopped and the Jewish people saved.”

Atmosphere of fear

The teachers said an atmosphere of fear and sense of victimhood dominated classrooms and translated into a young generation even more rightwing than their parents.

David, who teaches computer sciences in a Galilee school, said: “You have to watch yourself because the pupils are getting more nationalistic, more religious all the time. The society, the media and the education system are all moving to the right.”

A 2010 survey foundthat 56 per cent of Jewish pupils believed their fellow Palestinian citizens should be stripped of the vote, and 21 per cent thought it was legitimate to call out “Death to the Arabs”.

Subjects that have become particularly vulnerable to the promotion of military values, according to teachers, are Arabic, history and civics.

Naftali Bennett brought in a new head of civics in July. Asaf Malach is a political ally who believes the Palestinians should not be allowed a state.

A history lesson plan proposed last year, shortly after Israel’s 51-day attack on Gaza that left at least 500 Palestinian children dead, encouraged pupils to be “Jewish fighters”, modelling themselves on the Biblical figure of Joshua.

But Revital said most teachers were not concerned by these developments. “Out of the 100 teachers in my school, maybe two or three think like me. The rest think it’s important the army are in the school.”

Among those is Amit, who teaches Judaism in central Israel. He said: “Inviting soldiers into the classroom is not just about encouraging the students to enlist but for us to talk about the value of solidarity and the contribution every person can make to society.

“Our job is to prepare them for future challenges, and that includes the army. We can’t ignore the reality that we live in a country where there are soldiers everywhere.”

Neve, however, said hopes of ending Israel’s conflicts in the region depended on bringing a more civilian ethos back into schools.

“If our students don’t learn about others’ history, about the Palestinians, then how can they develop empathy for them? Without it, there can be no hope of peace.”

Charity Funding Illegal Settlements - Charity Commission Turns Blind Eye to Toremet

$
0
0

Charity Commission Chairman William Shawcross of the Henry Jackson Society Ignores Charity Funding of Terrorist Settlements – Because they are Zionist not Muslim

Helping Apartheid is a Charitable Objective
In 2012 the Tory/Lib coalition appointed William Shawcross as Chairman of the Charity Commission, the body charged with overseeing Britain’s 300,000+ charities.  Shawcross, in addition to the Government fluff about his experience is also a member of the Henry Jackson Society, a cold-war, pro-Zionist political outfit.  This has coloured the operation of the charity commission since his appointment.

Shawcross has led an unprecedented attack on Islamic charities as part of the Government’s overall attack on Muslims in Britain as ‘terrorist’.  It has instructed charities not to fund the Cage pressure group which supports detainees abroad (something which is at present subject to Judicial Review).
Toremet's Founder Stood for the Most Racist Jewish Home Party in the Knesset
At the same time a host of scandals has grown up around the activities of a number of charities which have been literally mugging vulnerable people and pensioners for contributions.

The Charity Commission has a history of supporting Zionist organisations.  Two years ago I was one of a number of Jewish people who was party to a challenge to the registering of JNF UK as a charity, even though the JNF deliberately discriminates between Israeli Arabs and Jews.  The former have no access to the land that they help purchase.  Because we could not demonstrate that we had standing, i.e. were particularly affected by the JNF’s activities, we were unable to progress the case.  This is a legal filter mechanism that the courts use to prevent challenges to the illegal practices of organisations.  The Court therefore never got  to rule on the substantive question.

Toremet goes even further.  Its funding is being used to support settlements which are illegal in international law, established on confiscated Palestinian land and which, as a matter of course, don’t include Palestinians.

Of course this is at one with Shawcross’s far-right views but it demonstrates the contempt for the law that our ruling class has.
Tony Greenstein  
Charity Commission Chairman and extreme right-winger William Shawcross approves of Zionist charities funding illegal settlements - Islamic charities are his main target

Ben White, Memo, 25 September 2015 11:00

UK Toremet’s CEO and founder Jonny Cline previously ran on the Jewish Home’s list in Israel’s 2013 municipal elections. Jewish Home, headed by Naftali Bennett, wants to annex most of the West Bank
Toremet's Facebook Page
A UK charity is acting as a conduit for donations to Israeli settlements in the West Bank, it has been revealed, prompting calls for action from the Charity Commission.UK Toremet receives donations on behalf of what it calls ‘recipient agencies’, organisations or charities in Israel and elsewhere, who donors wish to support.

Among the list of approved recipients are several groups operating in, or for the benefit of, Israeli settlements. These colonies are deemed illegal under international law, and are at the heart of a regime of discrimination and segregation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT).
Toremet puts out the begging bowl for Israel's murderous settlers - courtesy of the Charity Commission
One recipient is the Yeshiva High School for Environmental Studies at Susya, a settlement whose Palestinian ‘neighbours’ have suffered expulsions and dispossession (and may again). The schoolclaims to be home to “some of the finest sons of religious Zionism in Israel.”

Another recipient agency, Shavei Chevron, is a religious school built in the heart of Hebron in the Occupied West Bank. “Guarded like a fortress by army troops”, according to The Times of Israel, it is “one of the reasons that the IDF decided to close off the route to Palestinian traffic of all sorts.”
Under UK law, “a charity must not provide funding or support to an organisation that exposes beneficiaries to extremist views”, even if “the charity’s funding or support is applied for legitimate charitable activities.” Extremism is defined as “vocal or active opposition” to values like “democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.”

Other recipient agencies include the Efrat Development Foundation, established “for the benefit of the residents of Efrat”, an Israeli settlement in the southern West Bank. Donations can also be made to the Gush Etzion Foundation, which supports some 20 settlements south of Jerusalem and works to maintain “maximum Jewish presence in the region.”

All Israeli settlements established in the OPT are considered illegal under international law, a consensus position shared by the British government, the European Union, the United Nations, and the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

In addition to being a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel’s settlements policy is inherently discriminatory, in the words of Amnesty International, and “perpetuates violations against Palestinians” such as “infringing their rights to adequate housing, water and livelihoods.”
As Amnesty UK Campaign Manager Kristyan Benedict told me, “the presence and relentless expansion of settlements has led to mass violations of human rights of the local Palestinian population.” He added that “the often violent take-over of more and more Palestinian land for illegal settlements amounts to a war crime.”

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has statedthat Israeli settlements in the OPT “are not only illegal under international law but are an obstacle to the enjoyment of human rights by the whole population, without distinction as to national or ethnic origin.”

Asked whether settlements should benefit from charitable donations, UK Toremet’s CEO and founder Jonny Cline said that “the law on charity and the definition of charitable activity does concentrate upon the content rather than the geographical locus of activity.” Since “education is education and welfare is welfare”, he added, recipients take part in charitable activity “for all nationalities, religions and genders, anywhere.”

Pressed further if philanthropic values are compatible with a regime of systematic discrimination of which settlements are a core component, Cline said UK Toremet merely facilitates “donors’ wishes to support the provision of services in answer to human needs, wherever and for whomever they may be”, in line with the definition of charitable according to UK law.”

He added: “We try not to lose that thread, for to do so would be to put ourselves as the judge and jury, differentiating between blood and blood, tears and tears. Philanthropy and charity are human issues that are to be found on all sides of any human paradigm, sometimes this is complicated.”
UK Toremet also facilitates donations to a number of Israel advocacy organisations, such as UN Watch, The Israel Project, and Honest Reporting.

Recipient agency Shurat HaDin, meanwhile, uses courts around the world “to go on the legal offensive”against those it perceives to be “Israel’s enemies.” Its director has privately admitted to taking direction from the Israeli government over which cases to pursue.”
Asked to comment, Cline said the projects these organisations have asked to have supported through UK Toremet “are in the areas of media monitoring, legal research, education and human rights, all of which are charitable activity.”

The aim of UK Toremet is “promoting the culture of philanthropy in the UK by facilitating the fulfilment of aims deemed charitable by British law, in the UK and abroad.” The charity “facilitate[s] tax-efficient online donations to good causes around the world”, making it easier to gift money to charities outside the UK by facilitating a UK tax receipt and Gift Aid qualification.”

Serving as “a conduitfor charitable donations”, UK Toremet announced last year that it had distributed over £1 million in its first three years of operation, and represents “over 250 carefully-vetted Recipient Agencies.”

Asked about that vetting process, Cline explained that after a charity applies to be recognised, “including specifying the programmatic area for which donations will be used”, UK Toremet consults “independent 3rd party sources” – citing Guidestar, the media, and charitable reporting documentation – before “a cause is accepted.

According to Cline,“there have been cases of charities refused support, and there have been cases of charities that have specified specific programming that will be supported by funds coming from UK Toremet.” The charity’s website states: “we will not limit your (legal) choices.”

Cline, a self-described “social activist and entrepreneur, moved to Israel from Britain at the age of 18, and performed his military service in the Israeli army. He has worked as spokesperson for Ariel, a major West Bank settlement, and a former resident of Kiryat Netafim settlement.

Cline has also previously workedfor the Shomron Regional Authority, which provides municipal services to some 30 settlements in the northern West Bank. There he managedprojects for its then-head Benzi Lieberman, a man who told Jeffrey Goldberg in 2004 that “the Palestinians are Amalek.”
While Cline has previously described himself as “an active member of the World Likud and the Likud Party English Division”, in Israel’s 2013 municipal elections Cline ran on Jewish Home’s list for the Modi’in city council, narrowly missing out. Jewish Home, headed by Naftali Bennett, wants to annex most of the West Bank. Cline has confirmed that he is currently a Jewish Home member.

The role played by UK Toremet in facilitating donations to projects based in or for Israeli settlements raises a number of questions. For example, why can such organisations benefit from British taxpayers’ money through the Gift Aid system, when the UK government views such settlements as a violation of international law and an obstacle to peace?

Asked for comment, The Charity Commission noted that “charities can make grants for charitable purposes to non-charitable bodies”, as long as “the recipient non charitable organisations apply those funds for charitable purposes only.” The spokesperson added: “When funding organisations based in the OPT, charities must ensure they comply with the law of England and Wales.”

For Chris Doyle, Director of Caabu (Council for Arab-British Understanding), “serious questions need to be asked if any UK charity is channelling funding into projects in settlements in the West Bank.” Since settlements are illegal under international law, Doyle added, “charities have a duty not to assist in the violation of such laws”, and urged the Charity Commission to “take immediate action.”

The British government already actively discourages UK citizens from pursuing “economic and financial activities in the settlements”, based on the “legal and economic risks”, as well as the “potential reputational implications” and “possible abuses of the rights of individuals.”

For Amnesty UK’s Kristyan Benedict, “charities, donors, individual consumers and governments need to ensure they are not complicit in discrimination, violence and illegality.”

Campaigners for Palestinian rights are also dismayed. Sarah Colborne, Director of Palestine Solidarity Campaign, said “the question is, why is money from UK taxpayers – in the form of charitable donations – going to fund settlement activity?” Such donations, she insisted, “should be subject to proper scrutiny by the British government.”

Robert Reich and the War on America's Poor and Working Class

$
0
0
A brilliant little sketch on what the US and our ruling class is up to.  Begun by New Labour it is carried on by  Ian Duncan Smith and Cameron.

Israel Demands a Changed Headline – The BBC Jumps to Obey

$
0
0
The BBC’s coverage of Israel’s violence in Jerusalem didn’t meet with its approval.  The shooting of Palestinians took precedence over the killing of settlers.  So the Israeli state didn’t just complain, like you and me, it demanded that the headline on the story be changed. 
PSC picket in Brighton of the Biased Broadcasting Corporation
And so ‘aharshly-worded letter’ was sent to Richard Palmer, head of the BBC’s bureau in Israel.  Like any good police state, sorry ‘the only democracy in the Middle East’ warning that ‘it could face sanctions for running a news headline highlighting the death of the Palestinian terrorist shot by police’.  In Israel it is a normal democratic practice for the government to place sanctions on those whose coverage is deemed unacceptable.  Naturally the BBC jumped to obey.
BBC - the Voice of Israel
Nitzan Hen, head of the Government Press Office, told Palmer that the BBC’s efforts were “far from satisfactory.” The headline was changed at least three times, but each time to a phrase that ‘did not accurately reflect the events’.

The Press Office considered, in the best democratic manner, ‘annulling the press cards of BBC journalists, a decision that if implemented would not allow the network to continue operating in Israel.’  Now if this was Iran…

However all’s well that ends well, for Israel that is.  ‘The network, which has a long history of alleged anti-Israel bias… apologized and revised the headline to read, “Two Israelis killed in stabbing attack; Palestinian suspect shot dead.”

And now you see just how the BBC, that robust defender of press freedom behaves in practice.  Now if this was Mugabe’s Zimbabwe….

Note how in the crazy Zionist world of Israel the BBC ‘has a long history of alleged anti-Israel bias’.  News to some of us, that’s for sure.

Tony Greenstein

Israel raps BBC for ‘unethical’ terror attack headline

Al-Jazeera’s reporting sparks outrage on social media; neither network describes Saturday killings as terrorism

The Government Press Office on Sunday warned the BBC it could face sanctions for running a news headline highlighting the death of the Palestinian terrorist shot by police Saturday afterfatally stabbing two Israelis, rather than the attack itself.
For some reason people defend the BBC against the  Tories proposals when it's really an internal squabble amongst the British Establishment
A harshly-worded letter was sent to Richard Palmer, the head of the BBC bureau in Israel, by the head of the GPO after the British network initially published a headline that read “Palestinian shot dead after Jerusalem attack kills two.” 
PSC Brighton picket of BBC during Gaza attacks
The headline, which referred to the two Israeli victims in a passive voice and neglected to mention that the Palestinian casualty — Muhannad Halabi, 19 — was shot by police at the scene of the deadly attack, was widely condemned in Israel.

The BBC later amended the headline but the head of the GPO Nitzan Hen told Palmer in the letter that the BBC’s efforts were “far from satisfactory.”
The BBC changes its headline to one acceptable to Israel
Hen charged that the BBC coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was “unethical” and could serve to incite more violence against Israelis.

Officials in both the GPO and the Israeli Embassy in London asked the network to change the headline and it was changed at least three times, but each time to a phrase that did not accurately reflect the events of Saturday’s attack, the Hebrew language NRG website reported.

The network, which has a long history of alleged anti-Israel bias, claimed in its defense that the headline in question was written by a junior editor and was not the result of an anti-Israel agenda.

The BBC issued an official response Sunday saying the network “identified that the headline didn’t accurately reflect the events, nor the details reported in our online story, so changed it of our own accord.”

According to a GPO official, Israel expects an official apology from the network, and said the office was considering annulling the press cards of BBC journalists, a decision that if implemented would not allow the network to continue operating in Israel.

Officials in both the GPO and the Israeli Embassy in London asked the network to change the headline and it was changed at least three times, but each time to a phrase that did not accurately reflect the events of Saturday’s attack, the Hebrew language NRG website reported.
PSC picket in Brighton
The network, which has a long history of alleged anti-Israel bias, claimed in its defense that the headline in question was written by a junior editor and was not the result of an anti-Israel agenda.
Following the outcry, the network apologized and revised the headline to read, “Two Israelis killed in stabbing attack; Palestinian suspect shot dead.”

An al-Jazeera editor on Sunday wrote that the network “regretted” the wording of its headline and tweet of the attack, saying it appeared “to minimize the killings of the Israeli victims and leaves out the context that the Palestinian man was their attacker.” 
The editor said al-Jazeera was alerted to the post after “many people in our audience pointed out” its problematic nature. It said the post was written “under the pressure of breaking news.”


The news agency called the criticism by its viewers “valid” and said the story was updated with the amended headline.

In their reports, neither al-Jazeera nor the BBC referred to the deadly stabbing attack as terrorism.

On Saturday evening, Rabbi Nehemia Lavi and IDF soldier Aharon Banita were stabbed to death in Jerusalem’s Old City by Halabi. Banita’s wife was also stabbed and was taken to hospital in serious condition. The Banitas’ two-year-old was lightly wounded in the attack.

Police announced Sunday it would limit Palestinian access to Jerusalem’s Old City and the Temple Mount compound over the next two days.

Belltoons on Thatcher

$
0
0

Margaret Thatcher - Where Am I Now?

The Attack on Al Aqsa - as Settlers Plan its Division

$
0
0

Netanyahu seeks to impose a new reality at Al-Aqsa

Jonathan Cook
5 October 2015
Al Aqsa mosque
Since a boy named David slew the giant Goliath with a slingshot, the stone has served as an enduring symbol of how the weak can defeat an oppressor.

For the past month Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has tried to rewrite the Bible story by declaring war on what he terms Palestinian “terrorism by stones”.
Palestinian youth throw stones at Israeli police goons
There are echoes of Yitzhak Rabin’s response nearly 30 years ago when, as defence minister, he ordered soldiers to “break bones” to stop a Palestinian uprising, often referred to as the “intifada of stones”, against the Israeli occupation.
Al Aqsa Mosque
Terrified by the symbolism of women and children throwing stones at one of the world’s strongest armies, Rabin hoped broken arms would deprive Palestinians of the power to wield their lowly weapon.
Israeli border police thugs in action
Now the West Bank and Jerusalem are on fire again, as Palestinian youths clash with the same oppressors. Reports suggest soldiers killed one Palestinian youth and injured more than 100 others on Sunday alone.

The touchpaper is Israel’s transgressions at the al-Aqsa mosque compound, known as Haram Al Sharif, in Jerusalem’s Old City. During the weeks of Israel’s high holidays, tensions have risen sharply. Israeli government ministers and ever larger numbers of Jewish ultra-nationalists, backed by paramilitary forces, have been ascending to the mosque area.
Police and military deliberately damage mosque
In parallel, Palestinian access has been restricted and settlers have stepped up seizures of homes in occupied East Jerusalem to encircle al-Aqsa.

Palestinians believe Israel is asserting control over the site to change the status quo.

Israel refers to the Haram as the Temple Mount, because the ruins of two ancient Jewish temples supposedly lie underneath. As Israel has swung to the right politically and religiously, government and settler circles have been swept by an aggressive Jewish messianism.

Palestinian efforts to resist have been limited. Israel has long barred Palestinian factions and organisations from any dealings in the city it calls its “eternal capital”.

The situation at al-Aqsa has come to symbolise the Palestinian story of dispossession.

The mosque has also served as a red line, both because it is a powerful cause that unites all Palestinians, including Christians and the secular, and because it rallies the wider Arab world to the Palestinians’ side.

But like Goliath, the Israeli prime minister appears to assume greater force will win.
First, he outlawed last month a group of Islamic students, many of them women, known as the Murabitoun, stationed at Al Aqsa. They had not even resorted to stones. Their crime was to try to deter Jewish extremists from praying at the site by crying “God is great”.

Then, Israeli police stormed the compound to evict youths who had barricaded themselves in. Severe restrictions on access to al-Aqsa followed.

As youngsters took to the streets, Netanyahu authorised live fire against stone-throwers in Jerusalem, and minimum four-year jail sentences for those arrested.
Predictably, violence has not calmed but spiralled. On Saturday night a Palestinian youth stabbed to death two Jewish settlers who had been visiting the Western Wall, near al-Aqsa.

Israel has described such incidents as “lone-wolf attacks”. In truth, these unpredictable outbursts of violence are the inevitable result of the orphaned status of Palestinians in Jerusalem.

Israel responded with another unprecedented move. Palestinians were banned from the Old City for the following 48 hours unless they lived or worked there. Israel’s track record suggests this will soon become the new norm.

Netanyahu also approved fast-track demolitions of Palestinian homes, more soldiers in Jerusalem and even tighter restrictions at al-Aqsa.

So where is this heading?

Doubtless, Netanyahu is in part proving his credentials to an ever more religious and intolerant Israeli public. After Saturday’s deaths, Jewish mobs once again patrolled Jerusalem’s streets seeking vengeance.

But he is also cynically exploiting western fears to reinvent the David and Goliath story. He hopes the words “Islamic terrorism” – conjuring up ISIL’s threats to religious freedom – will scotch western sympathy for Palestinian youths facing armed soldiers.

Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, warned in his speech to the UN last week that Israeli measures were “aimed at imposing a new reality and dividing Haram Al Sharif temporally”.

These are not idle fears. In 1994 Israel capitalised on a horrific massacre of Palestinians perpetrated by a Jewish settler at the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron to justify dividing it. Today, Jews have prayer rights at the site, enforced by Israeli guns, and central Hebron has been turned into a ghost-town – much as Jerusalem’s Old City looks since the weekend ban on entry for Palestinians.

Most Palestinians fear an Israeli-engineered spiral of violence will be used to impose a similar division at al-Aqsa. There is little Abbas can do. His Palestinian Authority is barred from Jerusalem and committed to helping Israeli security elsewhere. Like the Muslim world, he watches helplessly from afar.

Which is why Palestinian youths will continue reaching for the humble stone, exerting what little power they have against a modern Goliath.

Quisling Palestinian Authority Does Its Best to Undermine Resistance to the Occupation

$
0
0
As resistance mounts in the West Bank and Jerusalem to the constant attacks on the Palestinians, including the death of more Palestinian children, Abbas demonstrates that his quisling PA should receive no support from solidarity organisations abroad.  The PA is nothing more than a sub-contractor to the Israeli military.  The Times of Israel article below makes it clear what Abbas sees as his priority, demobilising the Palestinian protests with his American trained security forces.  Jonathan Cook from Nazareth paints a similar picture and the third article is from the BBC, which as has already been shown, is more than willing to convey the message Israel wants to get across.

Tony Greenstein
Abbas ponders how best to jump to Netanyahu's tune

Abbas tells PA forces to urgently quell West Bank protests

3 Palestinians killed in clashes with Israeli troops Sunday-Monday, following Palestinian terror attacks in which four Israelis killed

By Times of Israel staff and Avi Issacharoff October 5, 2015, 9:38 pm 22

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the United Nations headquarters on September 30, 2015 in New York City (Spencer Platt/Getty Images/AFP)
Fire first, ask questions later
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas ordered his security chiefs to do their utmost to urgently quell surging West Bank protests Saturday night.

Abbas issued the orders to his security apparatus after days of escalating violence which saw four Israelis killed by Palestinian terrorists since Thursday and three Palestinians killed during clashes with the IDF on Sunday and Monday.
AFP - Image caption Israeli troops responded with "riot dispersal means", including live ammunition
The PA leader intervened as Israel’s security cabinet convened in Jerusalem to discuss new measures to halt the violence. Abbas said his forces needed to act more firmly in order to deny Israel the pretext for a West Bank crackdown, Israel’s Channel 2 reported.

Israel and the Palestinian Authority have been communicating in the past 24 hours in an attempt to calm the escalating violence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, a senior PA official told The Times of Israel earlier on Monday night.
Reuters - The Israeli military said it was investigating the incidents in which the youths were killed
The official noted that Palestinian protests in the past two days have started to draw hundreds of youths, underlining concerns, he said, “that we are witnessing the start of a third intifada.”

There were clashes between Palestinians throwing stones and petrol bombs and burning tires in some 25 locations in the West Bank on Monday, Israel’s Channel 2 said.

In their exchanges of messages, Israeli officials have told the PA that the Israeli security forces intend to take firmer measures to prevent settler extremist violence against Palestinians, the PA official said. 

Image copyright Reuters-Palestinian protesters threw stones at Israeli troops in the city of Bethlehem on Monday

The Israelis also noted that there will be a reduction in Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount as the High Holiday period comes to an end.
The PA source said that Palestinian security forces were still working to maintain calm, despite Abbas’s declaration at the UN last week that the PA was no longer bound by its agreements with Israel. However, he said it was getting increasingly difficult for the PA to do so.

“We are witnessing the start of a third intifada, and Israel is not doing enough to rein in violence,” the PA official charged. “The number of gunfire victims hospitalized today was out of the ordinary; it’s not clear to us if there have been new rules introduced on opening fire. This certainly won’t de-escalate the situation.”

Netanyahu said Sunday that Israel is “waging a fight to the death against Palestinian terror.” He has partly blamed Abbas for inciting the escalation in violence. Abbas has alleged — including during his speech to the UN last Wednesday — that Israel is allowing “extremists” into the al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount and that Israel plans to change the status quo regarding access to the contested holy site. Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected these claims.

Israeli security officials were also braced for demonstrations in the Israeli Arab sector on Monday night, with protests planned for Sakhnin in the lower Galilee, among other locations. Betar Jerusalem and local team Bnei Sakhnin were playing a soccer match in the Arab city Monday night, an encounter that is routinely tense.

In Nazareth, in northern Israel, masked youths burned tires, threw stones and blocked a junction Monday night. They were dispersed by police.

Netanyahu ‘better not disturb the status quo’

6 October 2015

Analysis: Israel’s crackdown on Palestinian unrest threatens to topple Abbas
Al-Jazeera – 6 October 2015

The rapid escalation in violence in Jerusalem and the West Bank in recent days suggests that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may be entering a new phase, analysts say.

While some observers were quick to label this a third Palestinian uprising or “Intifada”, the term risks obscuring as much as it reveals.

The latest clashes, according to analysts, are occurring in a new physical and political reality. Palestinian society has been atomised by separation walls, checkpoints, and an expanding network of settlements and military bases.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian national movement is deeply divided, the Arab world is in disarray, the West is focused on its own economic and social troubles, and Israel is adamantly opposed to negotiations.

Unlike the earlier intifadas, points out Menachem Klein, of Bar Ilan University, near Tel Aviv, the clashes are not chiefly about resistance. They have been provoked by the growing stranglehold the settlers enjoy, both on the ground and on government policy.

“There are now so many settlers that there is zero distance between Palestinian communities and the settlements,” notes Klein. “That ensures constant friction.”

Over the past few years, the settlers have dramatically increased their so-called “price-tag” attacks. They regularly stone neighbouring Palestinian villages or sometimes use army-issued weapons; they set light to Palestinian places of worship; they steal land, burn crops and take over water sources.

The Palestinians’ growing sense of vulnerability was underscored by the arson attack in late July on the village of Duma that left three members of the Dawabsheh family dead, including an 18-month-old baby.

In Jerusalem, settlers have been aggressively staking their claim at the most sensitive site in the conflict: the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City.

Faced with threats from the settlers and a leadership vacuum, Palestinians have begun organising themselves locally, “at the village or neighbourhood level”, points out Samir Awad, a political scientist at Birzeit University, near Ramallah.

Palestinian popular committees, which were created to defend against settler violence, have made clashes – and tit-for-tat revenge attacks – inevitable.

Locked into prison cells

Also confusing the picture is the lack of clarity about what Palestinians hope to achieve, aside from revenge or letting off steam.

Awad argues that Palestinians are no longer sure what they need to shake off first. “Is it the larger occupation, the individual miseries they endure from the settlers and army, or the Palestinian leaders, who have achieved so little for them?”

Jerusalem-based analyst Jeff Halper points to the Palestinians’ mounting hopelessness, describing current events as a kind of “lashing out”. “Palestinians see no political process. They are being locked into their prison cells. They feel they have nothing to lose.”

Until now, the Palestinian Authority (PA), which is committed to enforcing security in the islands of West Bank territory it ostensibly controls, has mostly succeeded in preventing the protests from spreading to the Palestinian cities.

But the PA’s ability to contain these frustrations are in doubt, observes Halper, given that they already suffer from a massive credibility problem among Palestinians.

The very unruliness of the current events means Israel is struggling to respond effectively.
For some time, Israel has been characterising most Palestinian attacks on Israelis, especially those in Jerusalem where the PA and Hamas are effectively barred, as “lone wolf” incidents.

These spontaneous outbursts of violence by Palestinian individuals have exposed the Israeli security services to a new kind of challenge.

Boiling point in Jerusalem

In Jerusalem, Israel has been trying to present an image of normality to the outside world and visiting tourists, while waging a low-level war against Palestinians. It has assisted the settlers in “Judaising” the city and strengthening their presence around al-Aqsa.

But the simmering violence has been close to its boiling point for the past year, since Jewish extremists burned alive 16-year-old Mohammed Abu Khdeir.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, says Klein, has only one option: more force. “His thinking is strictly short term. He is interested primarily in crisis management. He believes he can rebuild quiet for Israel through shock treatment.”

In an attempt to restore order, the Israeli government has been ramping up the pressure on Palestinians by imposing draconian measures, especially in Jerusalem.

It has, for the first time, temporarily shut Jerusalem’s Old City to Palestinians who are not residents.
Muslim guardians at al-Aqsa, commonly known as al-Mourabitoun, have been outlawed, and Palestinian worship severely restricted. Israel has authorised live-fire against stone-throwers and minimum four-year jail terms.There will also be fast-track demolition of the homes of relatives of Palestinians who carry out attacks.

Even so, the settlers are not satisfied.

On Monday night, thousands surrounded Netanyahu’s residence in a show of force, demanding he build a new settlement for every Palestinian attack. They have been egged on by settler leaders in his government.

Pondering invasion

There has been speculation that, as the pressure mounts, Netanyahu may order a large-scale reinvasion of the West Bank, similar to Operation Defensive Shield of 2002, which sought to crush the second Intifada.

Such a scenario is unlikely, observed Awad, because it would only risk bringing down Abbas and the PA.

“Israel has control. The Palestinian armed factions are no longer organised in the West Bank. Abbas is coordinating with Israel on security matters and is repressing his people and Hamas. It is better for Netanyahu not to disturb the status quo.”

Yaron Ezrahi, an Israeli political scientist at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, concurs. He believes Netanyahu wants to wait things out, on the model employed towards the Golan Heights, seized by Israel from Syria in 1967.

“For years, Israel was under pressure to return the Golan to Syria, but since the collapse of Syria, no one talks that way,” he said. “Netanyahu hopes something similar can happen with the West Bank.”

But even without an invasion of the West Bank, Abbas’ situation is precarious. Klein believes the Palestinian president will try to cling on to power. “He fears that if he steps down or the PA collapses, Hamas will fill the void and be impossible to remove.”

Nonetheless, most analysts agree that Abbas – or even the PA – could become a casualty of current events.

In these circumstances, Israel would be forced to install a new Palestinian leader more to their liking, or create a different political arrangement.

That might involve the creation of mini-fiefdoms in the West Bank based on each city, says Klein. Mayors could then be recruited to keep order.
That, he adds, would thrust the ball back in the PLO’s court to recreate itself as a resistance movement.
“Whatever the outcome, it won’t solve Israel’s problems [in the] long term. The impulse among the Palestinians for national liberation will still be there.”

Palestinian youths killed in West Bank clashes

Israel and the Palestinians


Syria - The Choice is Between the Bad and Far Worse - Assad or Isis

$
0
0
As the Britain's Guardian abandons what passes for any independent analysis for a cache of NATO press releases, The Independent's Robert Fisk demonstrates why, when it comes to an understanding of the Middle East, he is head and shoulders above any other correspondent.  Patrick Cockburn, who is also an Independent columnist, makes important observations on the reality of the Syrian conflict.

There is no doubt, and people should not gloss over it, that the Assad regime has a horrific human rights record.  Indeed it was the place where the United States used to render people.  However in the present situation the choice is quite clear - Assad or Isis.

Tony Greenstein

Syria’s ‘Moderates’ Have Disappeared... and There Are No Good Guys

An explosion rocks Syrian city of Kobani Getty
Western confusion reigns while the Russians go for the jugular 
By Robert Fisk

October 05, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "The Independent" - The Russian air force in Syria has flown straight into the West’s fantasy air space. The Russians, we are now informed, are bombing the “moderates” in Syria – “moderates” whom even the Americans admitted two months ago, no longer existed. 
Bashar al-Assad, center, speaks with Syrian troops during his visit to the front line in the eastern Damascus district of Jobar, Syria
It’s rather like the Isis fighters who left Europe to fight for the “Caliphate”.Remember them? Scarcely two months ago, our political leaders – and leader writers – were warning us all of the enormous danger posed by “home-grown” Islamists who were leaving Britain and other European countries and America to fight for the monsters of Isis. Then the hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees began trekking up the Balkans towards Europe after risking death in the Mediterranean – and we were all told by the same political leaders to be fearful that Isis killers were among them.
Russia claimed it hit eight Isis targets, including a "terrorist HQ and co-ordination centre" that was completely destroyed

It’s amazing how European Muslim fighters fly to Turkey to join Isis, and a few weeks later, they’re drowning in leaky boats or tramping back again and taking trains from Hungary to Germany. But if this nonsense was true, where did they get the time for all the terrorist training they need in order to attack us when they get back to Europe? 
Smoke billows from buildings in Talbiseh, in Homs province, western Syria, after airstrikes by Russian warplanes
It is possible, of course, that this was mere storytelling. By contrast, the chorus of horror that has accompanied Russia’s cruel air strikes this past week has gone beyond sanity. 

Let’s start with a reality check. The Russian military are killers who go for the jugular. They slaughtered the innocent of Chechnya to crush the Islamist uprising there, and they will cut down the innocent of Syria as they try to crush a new army of Islamists and save the ruthless regime of Bashar al-Assad. The Syrian army, some of whose members are war criminals, have struggled ferociously to preserve the state – and used barrel bombs to do it. They have also fought to the death. 
The aftermath of Russian airstrike in Talbiseh, Syria

“American officials” – those creatures beloved of The New York Times – claim that the Syrian army does not fight Isis. If true, who on earth killed the 56,000 Syrian soldiers – the statistic an official secret, but nonetheless true – who have so far died in the Syrian war? The preposterous Free Syrian Army (FSA)?
Fighting between government forces and the umbrella group the Army of Islam in Douma, near Damascus this week  Reuters
This rubbish has reached its crescendo in the on-again off-again saga of the Syrian “moderates”.  These men were originally military defectors to the FSA, which America and European countries regarded as a possible pro-Western force to be used against the Syrian government army. But the FSA fell to pieces, corrupted, and the “moderates” defected all over again, this time to the Islamist Nusrah Front or to Isis, selling their American-supplied weapons to the highest bidder or merely retiring quietly – and wisely – to the countryside where they maintained a few scattered checkpoints.
Washington admitted their disappearance, bemoaned their fate, concluded that new “moderates” were required, persuaded the CIA to arm and train 70 fighters, and this summer packed them off across the Turkish border to fight – whereupon all but 10 were captured by Nusrah and at least two of them were executed by their captors. Just two weeks ago, I heard in person one of the most senior ex-US officers in Iraq – David Petraeus’s former No 2 in Baghdad – announce that the “moderates” had collapsed long ago. Now you see them – now you don’t.

But within hours of Russia’s air assaults last weekend, Washington, The New York Times, CNN, the poor old BBC and just about every newspaper in the Western world resurrected these ghosts and told us that the Russkies were bombing the brave “moderates” fighting Bashar’s army in Syria – the very “moderates” who, according to the same storyline from the very same sources a few weeks earlier, no longer existed. Our finest commentators and experts – always a dodgy phrase – joined in the same chorus line.  
A video grab taken from the footage made available on the Russian Defence Ministry's official website, purporting to show an airstrike in Syria
So now a few harsh factoids. The Syrian army are drawing up the operational target lists for the Russian air force. But Vladimir Putin has his own enemies in Syria. 

The first strikes – far from being aimed at the “moderates” whom the US had long ago dismissed – were directed at the large number of Turkmen villages in the far north-west of Syria which have for many months been occupied by hundreds of Chechen fighters – the very same Chechens whom Putin had been trying to liquidate in Chechnya itself. These Chechen forces assaulted and destroyed Syria’s strategic hilltop military Position 451 north of Latakia last year. No wonder Bashar’s army put them on the target list.

Other strikes were directed not at Isis but at Islamist Jaish al-Shams force targets in the same area. But in the first 24 hours, Russian bombs were also dropped on the Isis supply line through the mountains above Palmyra. 

The Russians specifically attacked desert roads around the town of Salamia – the same tracks used by Isis suicide convoys to defeat Syrian troops in the ancient Roman city of Palmyra last May. 
They also bombed areas around Hassakeh and the Isis-held Raqqa air base where Syrian troops have fought Islamists over  the past year (and were beheaded when  they surrendered). 
Russian ground troops, however, are in Syria only to guard their bases. These are symbolic boots on the ground – but the idea that those boots are there to fight Isis is a lie. The Russians intend to let the Syrian ground troops do the dying for them.

No, there are no good guys and bad guys in the Syrian war. The Russians don’t care about the innocents they kill any more than do the Syrian army or Nato. Any movie of the Syrian war should be entitled War Criminals Galore! 

But for heaven’s sake, let’s stop fantasising. A few days ago, a White House spokesman even told us that Russian bombing “drives moderate elements… into the hands  of extremists”.  
Who’s writing this fiction? “Moderate elements” indeed…

By Patrick Cockburn

October 05, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "The Independent" -  Russia’s military intervention in Syria, although further internationalising the conflict, does however present opportunities, as well as complications. There are no simple solutions to this terrible war which has destroyed Syria. Out of a population of 22 million, four million Syrians are refugees abroad and seven million have been displaced inside the country.

I was recently in Kurdish-controlled north-east Syria, where the bomb-shattered ruins of Kobani look like pictures of Stalingrad after the battle. But equally significant is the fact that even in towns and villages from which Islamic State (Isis) has been driven, and where houses are largely undamaged, people are too terrified to return.

Syrians are right to be afraid. They know that what happens on the battlefield today may be reversed tomorrow. At this stage, the war is a toxic mix of half a dozen different confrontations and crises, involving players inside and outside the country. Intertwined struggles for power pit Assad against a popular uprising, Shia against Sunni, Kurd against Arab and Turk, Isis against everybody, Iran against Saudi Arabia and Russia against the US. 

One of the many problems in ending, or even de-escalating these crises, is that these self-interested players are strong enough to fight their own corners, but too weak to ever checkmate their opponents. This is why the involvement of Moscow could have a positive impact: Russia is at least a heavy hitter, capable of shaping events by its own actions and strongly influencing the behaviour of its allies and proxies.

Barack Obama said at a news conference after the Russian airstrikes that “we’re not going to make Syria into a proxy war between the United States and Russia”. But the US-Soviet Cold War, and the global competition that went with it, had benefits for much of the world. Both superpowers sought to support their own allies and prevent political vacuums from developing which its opposite number might exploit. Crises did not fester in the way they do today, and Russians and Americans could see the dangers of them slipping wholly out of control and provoking an international crisis.

This global balance of power ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and for the Middle East and North Africa this has meant more wars. There are currently eight armed conflicts raging, including Pakistan and Nigeria (the figure jumps to nine if one includes South Sudan, where the renewal of fighting since 2013 has produced 1.5 million displaced people). Without a superpower rival, the US, and its allies such as the UK and France, largely ceased to care what happened in these places and, when they did intervene, as in Libya and Iraq, it was to instal feeble client regimes. The enthusiasm which David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy showed in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi contrasts with their indifference as Libya collapsed into criminalised anarchy.

Overall, it is better to have Russia fully involved in Syria than on the sidelines so it has the opportunity to help regain control over a situation that long ago spun out of control. It can keep Assad in power in Damascus, but the power to do so means that it can also modify his behaviour and force movement towards reducing violence, local ceasefires and sharing power regionally. It was always absurd for Washington and its allies to frame the problem as one of “Assad in or Assad out”, when an end to the Assad leadership would lead either to the disintegration of the Syrian state, as in Iraq and Libya, or would have limited impact because participants in the Syrian civil war would simply go on fighting. 

The intervention of Russia could be positive in de-escalating the war in Syria and Iraq, but reading the text of President Obama’s press conference suggests only limited understanding of what is happening there. Syria is only one part of a general struggle between Shia and Sunni and, though there are far more Sunni than Shia in the world, this is not so in this region. Between Afghanistan and the Mediterranean – Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon – there are more than 100 million Shia and 30 million Sunni.

In political terms, the disparity is even greater because the militarily powerful Kurdish minorities in Iraq and Syria, though Sunni by religion, are more frightened of Isis and extreme Sunni Arab jihadis than they are of anybody else. Western powers thought Assad would go in 2011-12, and when he didn’t they failed to devise a new policy.

Peace cannot return to Syria and Iraq until Isis is defeated, and this is not happening. The US-led air campaign against Isis has not worked. The Islamic militants have not collapsed under the weight of airstrikes, but, across the Syrian and Iraqi Kurdish regions, either hold the same ground or are expanding. There is something ludicrous about the debate in Britain about whether or not to join in an air campaign in Syria without mentioning that it has so far demonstrably failed in its objectives.
Going into combat against Isis means supporting, or at least talking to, those powers already fighting the extreme jihadis. For instance, the most effective opponents of Isis in Syria are the Syrian Kurds. They want to advance west across the Euphrates and capture Isis’s last border crossing with Turkey at Jarabulus. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Turkey, said last week he would never accept such a “fait accompli”, but it remains unclear if the US will give air support to its Kurdish allies and put pressure on Turkey not to invade northern Syria.

The Russians and Iranians should be integrated as far as possible into any talks about the future of Syria. But there should be an immediate price for this: such as insisting that if Assad is going to stay for the moment, then his forces must stop shelling and using barrel bombs against opposition-held civilian  areas. Local ceasefires have usually only happened in Syria because one side or the other is on the edge of defeat. But wider ceasefires could be arranged if local proxies are pressured by their outside backers.

All these things more or less have to happen together. A problem is that the crises listed above have cross-infected each other. Regional powers such as Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies do have a strong measure of control over their local proxies. But these regional actors, caring nothing for the destruction of Syria and still dreaming of final victory, will only be forced into compromises by Washington and Moscow.


Russia and America need to be more fully engaged in Syria because, if they are not, the vacuum they leave will be filled by these regional powers with their sectarian and ethnic agendas. Britain could play a positive role here, but only if it stops taking part in “let’s pretend” games whereby hard-line jihadis are re-labelled as moderates.  As with the Northern Ireland peace negotiations in the 1990s, an end to the wars in Syria depends on persuading those involved that they cannot win, but they can survive and get part of what they want. The US and Russia may not be the superpowers they once were, but only they have the power to pursue such agreements.

Israeli police kill Fadi Alloun in cold blood after lynch mob chases him

$
0
0
The two videos below speak for themselves.  A Palestinian teenager was chased by an Israeli Jewish lynch mob and the Police then executed him.  He presented no danger, he had no weapon, they simply took the word of the racist mob.  Only then did they ask if there were any injured and of course there wasn’t.

This Nazi like murder of an innocent Palestinian boy speaks volumes about the ‘only democracy in the Middle East’.
Fadi Samir Alloun in an undated image posted on Facebook.

Video: Death-chanting Israeli mob rejoices as Palestinian teen is executed

This article contains graphic images of violence


Amid increasing violence in occupied Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank, Israeli forces executed a Palestinian youth in cold blood early on Sunday morning.

Israeli forces have declared that the Old City of Jerusalem will be open only to Jews and foreign tourists for the next 48 hours. No Palestinians except residents will be allowed in.

In a further escalation, Naftali Bennett, the Israeli education minister who openly boasts about how many Arabs he has killed, announced he plans to spend Sunday night’s Jewish holiday of Simhat Torah in the Old City.

Bennett heads the Habeyit Hayehudi (Jewish Home) party whose senior member, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, has openly called for genocide of Palestinians.

Execution

Fadi Samir Alloun in an undated image posted on Facebook.

Israeli authorities claimed that 19-year-old Fadi Samir Alloun was killed after a stabbing attack that wounded an Israeli teenager. They presented no evidence connecting Alloun to the alleged stabbing.
But videos posted online show that the youth was executed in cold blood as he was chased by a mob of Israeli Jews baying for his blood.

As the video above begins, voices can be heard in Hebrew shouting – apparently at police – “Shoot him! He’s a terrorist! Shoot him!” and “Don’t wait! Shoot him!”

Alloun can be seen backing away from the mob, along the tracks of the Jerusalem Light Rail.
The lights of a police car can then be seen and the sound of seven gunshots heard. Alloun falls to the ground. At no time in the video was he any threat to anyone.

Wattan TV saysthe killing occurred in the Musrara area, just outside the walls of the Old City, near the Damascus Gate.

Kill first, ask questions later

A police officer – apparently the shooter – can be seen approaching Alloun. Meanwhile celebratory voices are heard shouting “Yes! Yes! Son of a bitch!” and “Wow!” and “He’s an Arab!”

“Death to the Arabs!” others shout.

A police officer then asks, “Where are the injured?” This suggests that the police shot first and only asked questions afterwards.

It was a cold-blooded execution at the behest of a lynch mob.

This is confirmed by this second video of the same incident published by Alkhaleej Online.
It shows the mob clearly inciting for Alloun to be killed as they chase him. The Palestinian youth is trying to escape.

After police shoot him dead, an officer can be heard asking one of the mob, “Did he stab anyone?
The Israeli youth answers that Alloun did not. While details about the alleged stabbing – and whether Alloun had anything to do with it – are disputed, what is in no doubt is what is visible in the video: he was shot dead in cold blood when he presented no threat to anyone by police who were answering to a mob.

Beautiful voice

Friends and family toldthe Quds news site that Alloun was gifted with a beautiful singing voice.
He often gave the call to prayer from the Martrys Mosque in the Jerusalem village of Issawiyeh.
Alloun’s family had long been victims of Israel’s occupation policies in Jerusalem. According to Quds, his mother had been a permit to return to Jerusalem from Jordan, where she had gone after her father died. Israel refused to allow the family to reunite, meaning Fadi and his father lived in Jerusalem, while his mother and brother Muhammad remained in Jordan.

Friends said Alloun was a sensitive and quiet person who never showed anger toward anyone.

Violence

The execution of Alloun comes as Israel escalates its violent attacks on Palestinians in the wake of recent killings of settlers in Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank.

On Thursday, two settlers were killed in a drive-by shooting in the occupied West Bank.

On Saturday, 19-year-old Palestinian Muhannad Halabi fatally stabbed two Israelis in the Old City of Jerusalem. Nehamia Lavi, 41, was a rabbi in the Israeli army and Aaron Benita, 21, was a combat soldier. Lavi lived in occupied East Jerusalem and Bennett in the West Bank settlement of Beitar Illit.
Palestinian and Israeli media have reported a sharp escalation in attacks on Palestinians and their property across the West Bank by Israeli occupation forces and settlers in recent days.

The Palestine Red Crescent Society declared a “state of emergency” on Sunday throughout the West Bank following the upsurge of attacks by Israeli soldiers and settlers.

The society said it had faced 14 attacks against its medical staff and ambulances over the past 72 hours. It told Ma’an News Agency that 96 Palestinians had been injured by Israeli live fire, rubber-coated steel bullets and other weapons between Saturday and Sunday evenings.

In Burin village, in the northern West Bank, Palestinians had to defend their homes after Israeli settlers set fire to trees and plants in the village and threw stones and bottles at residents, Ma’an News Agency reported.
Viewing all 2412 articles
Browse latest View live