Quantcast
Channel: Tony Greenstein's Blog
Viewing all 2417 articles
Browse latest View live

EXCLUSIVE Iain McNicol’s Dirty Tricks Brigade Infiltrates Labour Against the Witchhunt Meeting

$
0
0
Brighton Councillor Caroline Penn Makes Bogus Accusations of Harassment in bid to Help McNicol’s Court Case
Right-wing Brighton Caroline Penn's bogus complaints of harassment, which the Police have refused to act upon, is now being used to try and prevent the disclosure of documents in my application under the Data Protection Act.  In Penn's world an accusation is tantamount to guilt - and it is guilty until proven innocent
 On March 18th 2016 I was suspended from the Labour Party. I was given no details of what I was accused of and the first time I learnt about the charges was when those Labour supporting papers, The Telegraph and The Times printed spurious articles stating that I had been caught up in what had become Labour’s false anti-Semitism campaign, the latest victim of which is Israeli Professor Moshe Machover.  Both papers later retracted their allegations.

On May 30th 2016 I was interviewedby Harry Gregson, Labour’s Regional Organiser as part of the ‘investigation’. The meeting was recorded and a transcript can be viewed here.

McNicol claims to have 'lost' this document - clearly it's not just the identity of the sender or  recipient that has been 
Soon after I submitted a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for all the documentation they had one me.  On July 15th, 20 days late, the Labour Party responded with a bundle of over 350 pages.  The identities of most correspondents were blacked out and some pages were entirely blacked out.

In March of this year I filed an application with Brighton County Court to force Iain McNicol and the Labour Party to unredact the documents under s.7(9) of the DPA.  A date was set for the hearing on August 8th.  Unbeknown to me, the fools at Labour Party headquarters had forgotten that they had responded to my original SAR on July 15th and they decided to send me a second bundle on November 10th.  Not only that but they sent it to an address I hadn’t lived at for 14 years, so I didn’t receive it!
Caroline Penn has sent the  solicitor for Iain McNicol an email as part of an attempt to help keep secret the dealings of the Compliance Unit - I have redacted Penn's phone number

On the day before the hearing it dawned on me that we were talking about two different sets of documents.  McNicol’s legal team were unaware of the bundle of documents sent in July.  In some ways this has been a very useful exercise because it has been interesting to compare the two sets of documents.  On the retirement of Mike Creighton, who had been with the Labour Party for 23 years, a new set of bureaucrats had taken over who clearly had less scruples than Mike. 


They didn’t send me so many redacted documents because they decided not to send them at all.  Anyone applying for a SAR is to some extent reliant on the honesty of the Data Controller.  If they are dishonest and simply don’t reveal the existence of the documents there is little you can do unless you can persuade a court that a search warrant should be issued ex parte.  The Information Commissioner has done this on occasion but it is extremely rare.

This Twitter exchange is apparently proof of abuse - Poison Penn asks if I have a problem with Jewish people - a strange question from a non-Jewish Zionist and my response is no, just with racists like her

The result was that the hearing had to be postponed until next Monday 30thOctober.  [see Don’t Ever Underestimate the Stupidity of McNicol’s Witch-hunters]  They had put in for £7,000 costs but I persuaded the Judge that they should be disallowed any costs for the last hearing. 

Given their duplicity it is clear that McNicol’s minions are feeling the heat.  There is clearly information in the documents that they will move heaven and earth to ensure isn’t revealed.  When all else fails it seems it’s time to bring in McNicol’s dirty tricks brigade.

Last Saturday the inaugural meeting of Labour Against the Witch-hunt held its first meeting.  An Executive of 4, including myself were elected.  Amongst our first tasks was the setting up of a Facebook group. [see Labour Against the Witchhunt Forms in Response to Expulsion of Moshe Machover – Join Us]

Imagine my surprise when I received an email from McNicol’s solicitor, Jai Sharda today.  Perhaps he wanted to agree to a settlement?  Unfortunately not.  He told me that he had received an email yesterday from a person whose identity had been redacted ‘for obvious reasons’ warning me that ‘your actions of intimidation and harassment are continuing to cause considerable distress. You are requested, once again, to immediately refrain from any engaging in further such conduct.’
Pretty serious allegations, if true.  Indeed I wondered why this person hadn’t contacted the Police to have me arrested.  The problem was, of course that she had contacted the Police and they had sent her away with a flea in hear ear.  I am referring to Brighton Councillor Caroline ‘Poison’ Penn.  This blushing violet had made two complaints to the local constabulary. 

Caroline Penn, like Jeremy Newmark and all the Labour Party’s other witch hunters operate under the belief that if an accusation is made against the Left or anti-Zionists it must be believed.An accusation is itself proof of guilt.  The Jewish Labour Movement  even proposed a Rule Change to the last Labour Party conference to that effect.  The ‘victim’ is always right even when they aren’t a victim.
Here we seen 'Poison' Penn attacking people like Mel Melvin and Greg Hadfield who have been expelled or suspended.  She taunts Greg because he has been suspended twice -  'once in 2014 for intimidating behaviour'  yes but the allegation was dropped.  According to Penn, you are guilty of whatever she accuses you of until proven innocent.  The Compliance Unit however never clears someone they just drop the charges.  
Unfortunately for the JLM Shami Chakrabarti had to remind Jeremy Newmark that even bourgeois justice demands something in the way of evidence before you convict someone.  This isn’t Israel.  Labour can't implement the equivalent of Israel's Administrative Detention whereby someone can be detained for years on end without a trial on the basis of a secret policeman’s say so.
The Compliance Unit leaked the details of my suspension whilst refusing to tell me anything - below are the retractions of both papers
Of course it’s quite understandable why Penn and people like Brighton Council leader Warren Morgan are confused. When Brighton Labour Party was suspended on July 2nd 2016 after the Left had won a majority of the officer posts, Warren Morgan, backed up by Penn made false allegations of spitting.  Immediately McNicol and his lackeys suspended the party, cancelled the elections and handed power back to the defeated candidates!

So it is no surprise that  Caroline Penn has sent an email alleging she is suffering ‘enormous distress’ that she has received ‘further abuse’ and is now concerned about her ‘personal safety and of others that have also complained about Mr Greenstein.’ She also finds it strange that I have not already been expelled.  The amazing thing is that this email says absolutely nothing about what this abuse constitutes.  It is totally vacuous, like its writer.



What is however interesting is that the email is accompanied by the minutes of Labour Against the Witch-hunt of last Saturday.  These minutes were only distributed to members of the Labour Against the Witch hunt Facebook group.  It is therefore clear that someone on the Labour Right, with whom Penn is in contact with, has taken it upon themselves to infiltrate LAW under false pretences.  There is nothing in the minutes that is at all damning and nor is there anything in a screenprint containing dialogue between members of the group.

In other words by her own admission Caroline Penn is party to the infiltration of a group set up to fight expulsions and suspension in the Party by someone who has been operating under false pretences.  And yet she has the audacity to complain of ‘abuse’ and ‘intimidation’.  If  you go to the Police Information Notice that I was issued with you can find out what her complaints are:

Poison Penn's Complains
1.      I have used social media to make contact with Ms Penn – well yes but she has also contacted me on social media.  That’s the nature of Twitter and isn’t in itself an offence.

2.      I have encouraged other people to send abusive messages to her.  What she means is I have tweeted responses to her Zionist nonsense and encouraged others to do so.  On no occasion have I asked anyone to be abusive to her.

3.      I have also ‘used anti-Semitic abuse towards her.’  This is a difficult one.  She is not Jewish unlike me.  How can I be anti-Semitic towards someone who is not Jewish?  There is something called associative discrimination which is where you believe someone to be Jewish when they are not.  For example in Israel there have been a number of times when Jews who look like Arabs have been attacked by those who believed them to be Arabs.  That is an example of anti-Arab racism.
Police Information Notice Detailing the Allegations Against Me but taking no view of the merits of the allegations

      However I have encouraged no one to consider Poison Penn Jewish!  She is without doubt a racist non-Jew a Zionist and an anti-Semite!

4.      Its true I have used the term Zio which is short for Zionist.  Many Zionists are non-Jewish, like Penn and many Jews are not Zionists like me. 

5.      It is true I have called her a racist since she is a member of the JLM.

6.      It is not true I have said she is a Nazi or a member of the BNP.  
      
      I don’t for one moment believe that the email in question was the work of Caroline Penn herself.  To put it bluntly she is not the brightest tool in the box.  Someone in Labour Party HQ realising how weak their case is, has decided to try and use Penn’s already existing false complaints against me to the Police despite the Police themselves turning them down.

These two emails are from the Jewish Labour Movement, almost certainly Israeli state agent Jeremy Newmark, whining 'is it acceptable to publish a full transcript of a post-suspension interview in this manner?'  Newmark doesn't say what manner would be acceptable.

Britain First’s Leaders Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen 'On the Run' - Tales of a Fascist Duo!

$
0
0
Dig Deep for Fascist Scum!
For some reason Britain First keeps emailing me the latest escapades of their leaders, Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen.  For some reason they think I am a supporter!  

 It’s only exceptionally that I put up a fundraising appeal on this blog.  It has to be an especially deserving cause.  When the desperate plea from Golding and Fransen arrived in my Inbox I was particularly moved.  Both of these individuals are, it would appear, on the run from the British Police after having absconded rather than stick to bail conditions that prevent them from harassing people.

For some reason they keep writing to me.  I did unsubscribe a few months ago but they keep writing to me to ask for more cash which is why I am turning to you dear reader.  Why have I been resubscribed?  I suspect it is dirty tricks from one Jonathan Hoffman whose best friend is Britain First’s ‘Intelligence’ Chief Paul Besser.  Both like to picketPalestinian and other meetings on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’.
I guess it’s kind of flattering to be told that they need me, even if they offer me the alternative of signing up or do nothing.  At least, it would seem they take Jews!

Dig deep for these two neo-Nazi nuts.  You know they’re worth it.


Dear Tony,
I must admit, Britain First is in deep trouble.
For four weeks, Deputy Leader Jayda Fransen and I were literally “on the run” across Europe, unable to return to the UK because we would have been arrested at British border control and sent to prison.
After managing (against the odds and in disguise) to get back into the UK via a route with no passport control, we were picked up at a Scottish port and driven down to England where we "laid low" for 24 hours.
Deputy Leader Jayda Fransen was a guest speaker at the “Justice for Chelsey” protest in Sunderland the following day.
Britain First
With a team of security officers surrounding her, Jayda managed to smuggle herself into the crowd who marched her to a rally point and handed her a microphone so that she could speak about the injustice Chelsey Wright has suffered.
Over a hundred police officers rushed and surrounded the protesters, who linked arms to stop the police getting to Jayda!
But the bully boy coppers stormed the crowd of men, women and children, determined to apprehend Jayda.
Britain First
After seeing the police knocking over old ladies and manhandling fully grown men, and after they threatened to use CS gas on the crowd, Jayda decided to give herself up to avoid anyone getting hurt!
It was a disgraceful sight, watching an army of police bullies literally attacking a crowd of peaceful protesters!
The police thugs even choked a dog that Jayda had been pictured with during the protest.
Britain First
Jayda was led off and locked up for two nights in a stinking, rotten police cell, with nothing but four walls to keep her company!
Whilst Jayda was in custody, Sunderland police station received numerous calls from Kent Police demanding that Jayda be transported down to Kent where she would have to spend 100 days in prison on remand waiting for her trial!
But Northumbrian police ignored their demands and refused to transport Jayda to any court outside of their jurisdiction.
Come Monday morning, Jayda found herself cuffed in the back of a meatwagon and led into the dock at South Tyneside Magistrates court, with Kent Police still pressuring the court to remand her in prison.
By a stroke of divine luck, the Magistrates told Kent Police to take a running jump and they released Jayda from custody!
Britain First
Jayda then received a hero’s welcome in Sunderland and Kent Police skulked off to lick their wounds.
The following day, both Jayda and I were in the dock again, this time accused of “harassing” a gang of convicted migrant child rapists in Kent.
Kent Police, now angry that their plan to lock up Jayda had failed, tried to throw both of us in prison on remand, but to his credit the judge told them to sod off!
The judge fixed a date for our three-day trial and released us from custody to meet the national press who were waiting outside.
Britain First
Make no mistake: The establishment and their police stormtroopers are determined to destroy our movement!
Only your support can scupper their evil plans and stop Jayda and I going to prison after our trial for “harassing Muslim gang rapists”.
Britain First is being financially drained by the constant and relentless court, solicitor and legal costs incurred throughout this incessant harassment!
Britain First
This is part of their plan: Lock us up and drain all of our resources so that the Britain First movement ceases to exist!
But, they underestimate our British bulldog spirit and unwillingness to buckle in the face of their diabolical schemes.
We are British Lions, and we will not surrender or cave in, ever!
Can Jayda and I depend on your unwavering support as we battle the forces of evil that are destroying our nation?
Will you give us your most unshakeable backing during this dark and troublesome period?
We depend on you Tony, there is no one else we can turn to!
Please send your most generous financial gift as fast as you can - we need to keep the wheels turning on our legal fightback:
Yours sincerely,
Britain First

Paul Golding
Leader, Britain First

Israel applies to Israel's High Court in order to commit a War Crime

$
0
0
When Tom Watson, Luke Akehurst, Warren Morgan or any other creature of Labour’s Right talks about ‘anti-Semitism’ you can be sure that they aren’t talking about anti-Jewish racism but defending Israel’s colonial racism by making counter accusations of racism as a means of throwing sand in peoples’ eyes.
Palestinian Bedouin children playing at the Tyre School, Khan al-Ahmar, the only robust structure in the village (it is made of rubber tyres).The school has 170 students, of which 85 are girls, and is run by 15 teachers. The students come from five different Bedouin communities in the surrounding area. It is partially funded by EU governments. It has many classrooms, a small football field made with turf, and a playground. Photo uncredited.
Israel’s racism, in Judaifying an area, is no different to the Nazis 'deJewifying' areas of Jews.  It is indefensible politically or morally.   The only response is to ratchet up the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions campaign.  We know that this is the weapon that the Israeli state most hates because they have set up a $50m+ dirty tricks fund under the Minister of Public Security, Gilad Erdan.

Everywhere BDS is under attack because it is held to be ‘anti-Semitic’.  In America states such as Kansas are demanding of those who do business with the state that they declare they have nothing to do with BDS.  In Texas people are being refused aid as a result of the recent hurricane unless they agree to sign a piece of paper saying they oppose the Boycott of Israel. Apart from this being an outrageous infringement on the right to free speech under the First Amendment this shows the lengths that Israel's Apartheid Lobby will go to force people to support their state.

It is therefore good to see the American Civil Liberties Union taking legal action against the State of Kansas in order to stop it penalising people who exercise their right to engage in BDS actions.

In this country we see those apostles of anti-racism – the Daily Mail/Express/Telegraph et al in the forefront of labelling solidarity with the Palestinians as ‘anti-Semitic’.  Their hypocrisy is belied by their own racist record when it comes to discrimination against every other group bar Zionists.

Tony Greenstein

Israel asks court to approve forcible transfer of entire Bedouin community

By The Palestine Monitor
September 26, 2017

The Israeli government has asked the Supreme Court to approve plans to demolish an entire Palestinian Bedouin community. The government said the demolition should take place by mid-2018.
This would be the first time an entire Palestinian community has been demolished since 1967. Khan al-Ahmar, home to 173 people, is located in Area C – the 60 percent of the West Bank under full Israeli control. The Israeli government considers the community’s presence there illegal, and has issued demolition orders for all of its structures earlier this year.

The village is home to one of 20 Jahalin Bedouin communities at risk of expulsion due to Israeli settlement expansion in this area, strategically located between East Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim, the West Bank’s largest settlement. Known as E1, an Israeli construction plan for this area has been frozen since 2009, following international outrage. The communities are made up of 2,300 Palestine refugees who were originally displaced by Israel in the 1950s.

Plans for this area, critics have argued, are aimed at linking Ma’ale Adumim to Jerusalem, therefore breaking the territorial contiguity of a prospective Palestinian state – and jeopardising the feasibility of a two-state solution.
A Palestinian woman inspects the debris after Israeli authorities ordered the demolition of her home in the Bedouin village of Khan Al-Ahmar, February 2017. Photo by Hamza Shalash/Apaimages
Abu Khamis, the mukhtar of Khan al-Ahmar, knows that his community has become a symbol of the Palestinian struggle to remain in their lands.

“There’s proof this community has been here since 1967. We are only the first piece of the puzzle in the bigger picture,” Abu Khamis told Palestine Monitor. “If they relocate this community, they will relocate all other communities in the area,” he said, adding that he believes international pressure can help postpone the transfer – a strategy that has worked over the years, while leaving the community in a constant state of insecurity.

Residents of the nearby settlement of Kfar Adumim, together with the pro-settler organisation Regavim, have been filing petitions to evict the residents of Khan al-Ahmar and demolish its primary school – which serves 174 pupils from the village and five neighbouring communities – since 2009. Regavim, which is involved in other high-profile demolition cases in the West Bank, such as the village of Susyia in the South Hebron Hills, declares its mission to be “ensur[ing] responsible, legal, accountable & environmentally friendly use of Israel’s national lands and the return of the rule of law to all areas”, as stated on its website. The fourth and last petition was filed in 2016.

Unlike on previous occasions, the community’s lawyer, Shlomo Lecker, is concerned that this time the court will accept the State’s answer when asked to provide an alternative for residents. Israel plans to relocate them to lands near the Palestinian town of Abu Dis, in an area known as Jabal West.
“It’s a symbolic act to please the right-wing,” Lecker said, speaking at a meeting with representatives of NGOs and diplomatic missions last week.
The appearance of Bedouin villages, now often built from scrap materials, is, like Khan al-Ahmar L, often of a makeshift and ramshackle camp. Like other Palestinians, Bedouin cannot get permits to build more substantial homes.
Rights groups have opposed these plans.

While the government argues that the residents of Khan al-Ahmar will receive alternative housing, they will in fact be evacuated against their will for the benefit of settlers, and placed above the garbage dump in Abu Dis,” said a statement from Israeli anti-settlement NGO Peace Now after the government submitted its answer to the Supreme Court on the settlers’ petition on Monday. “This type of forceful evacuation of protected persons constitutes a severe violation of international humanitarian law.”

“It appears that the forceful displacement of the residents of Khan al-Ahmar is a form of “compensation” for his right wing supporters for the upcoming evacuation of the Illegal outpost of Derech Ha’Avot, following a High Court ruling,” the statement added.

B’Tselem said Israel was asking the High Court for “permission to commit a war crime.” Hagai El-Ad, B’Tselem’s executive director, said:

No sanctimonious language about a ‘planning, proprietary and realistic’ alternate, or ‘time to prepare’ can erase the disgrace or hide the facts: the destruction of Khan al-Ahmar means the forcible transfer of protected persons, and forcible transfer is a war crime.”

Abu Khamis told Palestine Monitor that voluntarily moving to the proposed location is not an option, and that the community will continue to fight to stay.
Learning to read and write, to paint and to play: what will happen to these children’s education if yet another Bedouin village is demolished?
Meanwhile, children at the “tyre school” nearby are taking a break and playing outside the class-rooms. The school, which stands out as the only real building in the village with its painted mud walls – the rest are makeshift structures made of wood and corrugated iron – provides a safe space for children to play as well as study in this isolated desert community. Despite its location just off a highway a few kilometres from Jerusalem, the only road that leads to the village is an unpaved, winding track.

“Students here, some of them from nearby villages, know the school is at risk,” said Halimeh Zahalka, the school’s headteacher. “They keep asking their teachers whether they will continue coming to the area if the school is demolished.”

Brutal Police Arrest by New York Police in an attempt to silence Norman Finkelstein

$
0
0

I have had my differenceswith Norman Finkelstein who, despite his pedigree as an ex-Maoist, is really an old time John Stuart Mill radical, over such things as BDS but no one can doubt that Norman is a powerful and brave intellect.  It is therefore with some shock that I read that he was brutally arrested in the middle of the night by New York Police, because of criticism he has made of 2 corrupt lawyers and a corrupt judicial system.  

Norman is 64 years old.  He was, in his own words, treated like a ‘sack of potatoes’, handcuffed, thrown to the ground and his head banged against the wall by these police thugs.  This is no doubt normal in the Trump State of America.
It is a lesson that even leftist intellectuals are not immune to the attentions of the State if they step of line.  It would appear that Norman did exactly that.

I’ve taken this article from Norman’s site.  It appeared in something called the New Nationalist.  As I’m not a nationalist I’ve edited certain phrases that could be considered anti-Semitic however the substance of what the article says should be widely disseminated.

Tony Greenstein


Dr. Norman Finkelstein Subjected to Knock-on-Door Arrest in Middle of Night


Dr. Norman Finkelstein has been an activist for Palestinian rights for decades, he has been a real thorn in the side of the Zionist machine. He’s decisively anti-war and an ardent defender of First Amendment rights to free speech. He has called Israel a “lunatic state” and asks, “Why should these Palestinians, who have lived in Jerusalem for hundreds of years, be evicted from their homes so that Jews from Brooklyn can live in them?”

For his troubles, Finkelstein was ultimately removed from his professorship. He’s a prime example of what happens to Jews who are opposed to Zionism.
He has also dwelled on the politics of the holocaust and wrote the books “The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering” and “Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History.” He has an acerbic tongue and tells it like it is, as demonstrated below. 

He is not afraid to go head to head with police state Zionists like Alan Dershowitz and Bernard Levy. See the next video in which he effectively called them overrated mouthpieces. In an NPR interview head to head with Dershowitz, he called the latter a plagiarist. Finkelstein was able to show rather convincingly some highlighted sections of Dershowitz’s book that were lifted directly from previous works without citations, including the same ellipses and spelling errors.

Dr. Finkelstein has a natural tendency to go to bat for those who are suffering from true (versus faux) injustices. In observing Finkelstein over the years, he sometimes wears his emotions on his sleeve. He also does not suffer fools lightly and can be combative. 
Recently he was involved in defending a Guyanese medical doctor who was once one of his students. According to Finkelstein, Dr. Rudolph Baldeo had fallen prey in a divorce case to a couple of Long Island matrimonial lawyers named Michael Chetkof and Allyson Burger. The case and the affronts are discussed on Finkelstein’s blog.

Finkelstein also gives the background at a site where he is organizing a petition to disbar these attorneys. For those who dislike injustice, you know what to do. Finkelstein states.
'They concocted this grotesque story that he (Baldeo) was a psychopath who had committed “countless” acts of “unspeakable violence.” I sat down to read the entire Court record.  I sat in the Courthouse during the trial. I was shocked. It was a transparent frame-up!  Their Court testimony flagrantly contradicted their written submissions to the Court.  (See www.NormanFinkelstein.com for irrefutable proof of their lies.)'
When I told these vulture-lawyers that I was writing an article to expose the shakedown, they threatened to “open Pandora’s Box” and destroy Dr Baldeo “Personally and Professionally.” Michael Chetkof and Allyson Burger are blackmailing Dr. Baldeo to silence me. 
On Oct. 9, the situation took a turn for the worst in what can only be described as star chamber justice. Star chamber justice is a topic we have written about before. Not surprisingly what is being put forth here is NOT being covered in any major media.
That night Norman received “the knock at the door” in the middle of the night. He was arrested by two Nassau County detectives who jailed him.

Update: Oppermann Report has the case details. Nassau First District Court Case # CR-022532-17NA Defendant Finkelstein, Norman

TOP CHARGE: Class A misdemeanor, two counts, arrest charge, arraignment charge description Aggravated Harassment 2, threat

So now we know Norman was arrested in the middle of the night in his undershorts for a misdemeanor, a vague one at that, of “harassment” and “threat.”

Curiously, he was due to appear in court the next day at his friend’s case. TNN can find no charges or due process for justifying this type of arrest. Finkelstein called the lawyers involved “mafiosi,” serial liars and the female half, Burger, “a normally loquacious yenta wannabe.” But libel cases are civil and don’t involve middle-of-the-night arrests. Nor do failures to answer a non-felony summon. Norman is now accusing his enemies of being behind these strong-arm star-chamber tactics.
He states, It’s unclear whether these mafiosi want to punish me, silence me, or — I mean this literally — kill me.”

He recounts the incident in his blog and in this video clip. Norman is 64 years old.

Two Nassau County (Long Island) detectives barged into my apartment in the dead of night without a search warrant. I was only wearing my boxer drawers. I refused to put on clothes. They pinned me up against the wall and handcuffed me. For the next 18 hours, I was relentlessly brutalized by these thugs. The next day at 2:30 p.m. I came before Hon. Judge William Hohauser. He was shocked! He was appalled! How could I be wearing my boxer drawers in court?! The judge demanded $7,500 bail and ordered that I get a full psychiatric evaluation.

Jewish Voice for Labour – Timidity is not a Strategy

$
0
0
Corbyn is seen as 'skipping' the Balfour dinner much as if he was a naughty schoolboy skipping compulsory classes 

Now is not the time to retreat into a Jewish ghetto

The recent Labour Party conference marked a break from the past two years of the false anti-Semitism smear campaign.  For the first time since Corbyn was elected it is the Zionists who are on the defensive:

i.            The Left of the Labour Party, despite a few Zionists such as Jon Lansman and Rhea Wolfson (and the remaining members of the AWL), are pro-Palestinian.  Not only have people not bought into the ‘anti-Semitism’ smears of but these allegations have had the effect that people have become educated as to the real nature of Zionism and the Israeli State's Apartheid policies.  We have to transform support for the Palestinians into opposition to Zionism, the racist political ideology that has spawned Israeli Apartheid.  

        What this means concretely is explaining that the 2 States Solution is a Zionist solution.  The reason Labour Friends of Israel and the Jewish Labour Movement support it is because it will never happen.  What it does is serve as a convenient smokescreen for the present, overtly Apartheid situation on the West Bank where there are 2 legal systems and segregation in every aspect of life between Jewish settlers and Palestinians.  As long as the fig leaf of 2 States, which neither Likud nor the Zionist Union opposition supports, remains as a diplomatic pretence, then Israel has an excuse not to grant equal rights in the Occupied Territories.  The call for recognition of a Palestinian state is even more absurd.  Labour's leaders love it but how can you recognise a state that doesn't exist?  

ii.     The tide has begun to change as a result of the alliance between the Zionists and the Labour Right.  LFI MPs such as Chair Joan Ryan, Peter Kyle and John Woodcock were in the forefront of distancing themselves from Corbyn in the last election.  Ryan went as far as to say she understood that her constituents liked May more than Corbyn! Labour candidate defending London seat admits people have more confidence in Theresa May than Jeremy Corbyn  The Jewish Labour Movement, when Owen Smith challenged for the leadership, voted by 92%-4% for Owen Smith.

People have also begun to see through the ritual accusations of 'anti-Semitism'.  For example when I was first suspended in Brighton 18 months ago even some people in Momentum supported my suspension on the basis that there was no smoke without fire.  Now it is clear to everyone that the accusations of anti-Semitism are weaponised and have no merit.
Rebecca Simon, Vice-Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, described Corbyn as 'rubbish' yet they were outraged when Jeremy decided he had better things to do than attend their fringe meeting
iii.             Jeremy Corbyn’s decision not to attend the Labour Friends of Israel fringe meeting at Conference went down well.  It is less than two years ago that the Vice Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, Rebecca Simon was quotedin the Jewish Chronicle as saying of Corbyn ‘And he is rubbish — never mind about the Israel stuff, he is just not a credible opposition.”  It was another supporter of LFI Michael Foster who went to court to stop Jeremy standing against Owen Smith.  LFI is a front for the Israeli Embassy.  It is Blairite through and through and is led by Joan Ryan MP, whose only achievementsince being in Parliament is to claim record parliamentary expenses in 2006-7, having been the runner up the previous year.  During the parliamentary expenses scandal she had to pay back over £5,000 having 'flipped' her main and second homes. What is amazing is why Corbyn’s advisers ever thought that he would gain anything by appeasing Labour’s Apartheid lobby and attending Labour Friends of Israel’s events.

Only the Sun came to the rescue of Warren Morgan
iv.           The attempts by the Jewish Labour Movement’s supporters on the National Policy Forum and this includes Emily Thornberry, to remove the Manifesto commitments to opposing Israel’s occupation, the settlements and the siege of Gaza, were reversed at Conference.
The fall out from Brighton Council Leader Warren Morgan's accusations of antisemitism at Labour Conference has led to calls for him to go

iv.           The attack by the Leader of Brighton and Hove Labour Group Warren Morgan on the Labour Party Conference as ‘anti-Semitic’ and his threat that Labour wouldn’t be welcome in Brighton has completely backfired with his only support coming from those well known anti-racist papers, The Sun and The Daily Mail..  At least 4 Brighton and Hove branches (including Preston Park, East Brighton, Queens Park, Brunswick & Adelaide) have called for his resignation or an apology. Veteran Labour Councillor Kevin Allen has broken ranks and called for Morgan to go.  Morgan has taken to turning up uninvited to Ward meetings to try and persuade them that he should not be censored. 

v.             Free Speech on Israel and the newly established Jewish Voices for Labour held large meetings at Conference and the JVL meeting was attended by union leaders, Len McLuskey of Unite and Tosh MacDonald of ASLEF, who promised support to an alternative to the racist Jewish Labour Movement.

vi.        Corbyn has turned down an invitation to a Balfour Declaration cententary dinner provoking apoplexy amongst the Zionists. It's not 'antisemitic' for Jeremy Corbyn not to celebrate the centenary of the Balfour Declaration – it's sensible.  Indeed throughout Britain the Zionist celebrations of the Declaration have fallen flat.  The Zionists had hoped to make propaganda out Britain’s agreement to steal the land of the Palestinians and hand it to the Zionists 100 years ago but most people have been unmoved.  Indeed a poll commissioned by the Israeli propaganda group BICOM foundthat the number of people supporting the Declaration had dropped from 43% in the past year.  

        News has just come in that the Balfour celebration event at the University of Manchester, which has recently come under heavy attack has now been moved elsewhere.  Officially the sponsors decided to move the event but it is clear that  they were made to feel unwelcome.

vii.      The Zionists were particularly outraged at the Labour Party Marxists newsletter at Labour’s conference entitled ‘anti-Semitism is not anti-Zionism’ and an article by Moshe Machover describing the support that the Nazis gave to the Zionists even whilst most Jews were trying to overthrow the regime.  This provoked the Right into ‘auto excluding’ i.e. expelling without a hearing Moshe Machover, the veteran Israeli anti-Zionist and founder of Matzpen.

This in turn has provoked a furious backlash by Labour Party members resulting in dozens of party units sending in motions condemning this outrageous breach of Labour Party democracy.  All the indications are that the witch hunters, led by Sam Matthews of the Disputes Committee are looking for a way to backtrack.  Expelling Jews and Israelis for ‘anti-Semitism’ may be the Zionist way of tackling ‘anti-Semitism’ but it is not how most people see it!

People are increasingly seeing through the ‘anti-Semitism’ smears and realise that the reason for the Right’s fondness for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism has less to do with hatred of Jews and more to do with their inability to defend Israel.  Everyone knows that anti-Semitism is negligible in the Labour Party.  That is why the behaviour of Jon Lansman in supporting the idea that anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is a problem is disgraceful and only gives comfort to Corbyn's enemies who aren’t in the least concerned about racism.

The fact remains that the Zionists are still strong and entrenched in the structures of the Labour Party.  The JLM is an affiliated socialist society with the power to move resolutions at Labour Party conference and have delegates to the CLPs.  The fact that the ‘sister party’ as it calls itself (in fact the British wing of the Israeli Labour Party) is represented inside the Labour Party at all and is taken to be the Jewish wing of Labour is an outrage.  It is the living proof that racism and the legacy of the British Empire have not been eradicated inside Labour.  The affiliation of what was Poale Zion was a direct consequence of the British Empire’s alliance with the Zionist movement.  Balfour, known as ‘bloody Balfour’ in Ireland was the foremost representative of the Empire.

There is a need for a genuine pro-Palestinian group in the Labour Party - Labour Friends of Palestine is a dead duck

Labour Friends of Palestine meeting chaired by arch Zionist Wes Streeting

The traditional pro-Palestinian group, Labour Friends of Palestine is worse than useless.  Its latest escapade was to hold a meeting at the House of Commons with one of the authors of the false anti-Semitism campaign, Progress MP Wes Streeting.  It has kept quiet during the past two years of the false anti-Semitism campaign.  It was blindingly obvious to most people that allegations of ‘anti-Semitism were weaponised against supporters of the Palestinians yet LFP said nothing saw nothing and heard nothing.  Indeed many of their supporters were up to their ears in this campaign because most of their parliamentary supporters were anti-Corbyn.

LFP have 133 MP supporters whereas LFI have just 76 MP.  Yet this is deceptive.  Not only has the LFP site not been updated for a long time, the late Gerald Kaufmann is still listed, as is Simon Danzuk but another curious factor stares out.  Nearly half the Labour Friends of Israel supporters, 36 in total are also supporters of the LFP.  

In other words half the LFP’s supporters are on both sides of the conflict between the oppressor and oppressed.  In practice most of these people are died-in-the wool Zionists like Streeting, Ian Lucas and Stephen Twigg.

The full role call of the opportunists is below but what this shows is that there is a need within the Labour Party for a new, pro-Palestinian organisation.  A campaigning group which is anti-Zionist and which calls for a democratic, secular not a Jewish state.  We can leave that to the LFI.  35 years ago, in the wake of the 1982 Lebanon invasion the Labour Committee on Palestine, later the Labour Movement Campaign on Palestine was formed.  At the 1982 Labour Party conference it was able to able to get a motion supporting a democratic, secular state on Palestine passed.  Any campaign on Palestine must tackle the racist and apartheid nature of the Israeli state.  Two states plays into the hands of the Zionists which is why LFI and JLM support it. 

The call for 2 states, apart from being impossible to achieve, which is why the Zionist organisations support it, is wrong in principle.  It accepts the partition of Palestine.  It accepts that an apartheid Jewish state will continue.  But worst of all, as long as there are illusions in such a state then Israel has a pretext not to grant the Palestinians of the West Bank full equality or indeed any democratic or civil rights.

One of the key demands must be for Labour to break with Zionism and that means the JLM must be disaffiliated.  We don’t call for them to be expelled as individuals although most of them would leave.  The idea that a supporter of Israeli Apartheid, affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation which funds the settlements in the West Bank, should be an affiliate should be a matter of shame.  

In 1984 Jeremy Corbyn sponsored and chaired an LMCP Conference which specifically called for the breaking of links with Poale Zion.  Corbyn may now prefer not to remember his previous role but it is our job to remind him.  The Israeli state should not have a presence within a socialist party.

What then of Free Speech on Israel and the new Jewish Voice for Labour?  All the indications are that with the formation of JVL, FSI has been cut adrift.  When Tom Watson attackedFSOI over the remarks that Miko Peled made when he said that everything should be discussed including the Holocaust, this was distorted as meaning he wanted a debate on whether the Holocaust occurred or not.  Elements in JVL, in particular David Rosenberg of the Jewish Socialists Group, refused to defend Peled or FSOI.

That leaves the newly formed Jewish Voice for Labour.  Its meeting at conference, over 300 people attended to listen to Avi Shlaim and Sir Stephen Sedley.  The meeting was a great success and it made a great impact.  But one meeting does not an organisation make.  The question is what it does with that impact.  As I’ve already said, JVL faces a choice – Jewish anti-Zionism or Jewish Identity Politics.  JVL can become an organisation that actively campaigns against Labour Zionism in the Labour Party or it can engage in Jewish identity politics.  What it can’t do is fudge the issue.
Rob Abrams is JVL's resident bigot but he is allowed to be by the Moderators

When I was first approached to sign their founding statement I said that their formation as a Jewish only group was a mistake.  Their role is a political not an ethnic one.  There is a role for Jewish only groups in e.g. BDS, but in the Labour Party there is no point.  Apart from anything else it restricts your membership.  There was the absurd position whereby the JVL was criticising the JLM for having non-Jewish members.  

JVL is in the worst possible world of having non-Jews as  associate members and Jewish members as full members with voting rights.  An apartheid model of organisation is not a healthy one.  Rather than face my criticism openly and honestly, the moderators of the Facebook group, led by the Jewish Socialist Group’s Ian Saville and Julia Bard chose to exclude me from the group.


The result was predictable.  A few weeks ago their Facebook group exploded.  What had once had over 200 members was purged.  People were forced to reapply with the result that current membership is around half the original number.  Because of their paranoia and despite me arguing to the contrary, they turned the FB group from a closed group into a secret group, meaning no one can find them anymore!  Hardly the way to build a mass organisation.

Below I have included some screenshots of the ‘debate’ that occurred between Jewish chauvinists, mainly soft Zionists like Rob Abrams, Miri Franklin, Joseph Finlay and others and non-Jewish members which led to the exit of most non-Jews and a few Jewish members too.  Some of the comments border on racism.  At one point some of the Zionist members decided to speak in Hebrew in order that non-Jews couldn't understand them.

The founders of the JVL excluded both the International Anti-Zionist Network and myself from their founding meeting because of these disagreements.  What they have to do if they want to retain democratic credibility is hold an open conference where these things can be discussed.  It is right that it shouldn’t be a hardline anti-Zionist group, however it is wrong that it should say absolutely nothing about for example the Palestinian Right of Return or the Apartheid nature of the Israeli state.  Given that Israel is a Jewish state, it is incumbent upon Jews to take a clear stance on Israel and Zionism.

Instead JVL chose, in its founding principles, to hide behind the anodyne phrase:
‘We stand for rights and justice for Jewish people everywhere and against wrongs and injustice to Palestinians and other oppressed people anywhere.’
Some of JVL's bigots just love the term 'goysplaining' (from 'Goy' or non-Jews) which basically translated means that Jews don't want to hear the opinion of non-Jews when it comes to being Jewish
Joe Grabiner is another Zionist bigot whose found a home in JVL
I suspect that the Jewish Labour Movement could also sign up to this statement.  It is meaningless.  Is it opposed to segregation in Israel?  Does it support the Jewish nature of the Israeli state, that is Jewish supremacy?  Does it support the Right of 'Return' of Jews?  Nothing is to be gained by appeasing its soft Zionist fringe. 

If it is seriously trying to supplant the JLM then it should be honest and open and say that it stands for their disaffiliation because the latter group represents only Zionist Jews (& their non-Jewish supporters).

The JLM has to decide what its role is.  Is it there to confront the Zionist presence in the Labour Party, which is involves opposition to the alliance with the United States or is it simply a place where liberal leftish Jews can get together to exchange their experiences in some kind of consciousness raising group, in the mistaken belief that Jews in Britain are oppressed as Jews?

Tony Greenstein
What is laughable is that Jewish chauvinist Rob Abrams sees himself as some kind of Bundist

MPs who support Labour Friends of Israel  & Labour Friends of Palestine  
1.       Sharon Hodgson MP, 
           Rt. Hon Liam Byrne MP
          Vernon Coaker MP
         Angela Eagle MP
          Jim Fitzpatrick MP
          Mike Gapes MP
         Mary Glindon MP
          Lilian Greenwood MP
           Nia Griffith MP
         Carolyn Harris MP
         Rt. Hon George Howarth MP
         Rupa Huq MP
         Diana Johnson MP
         Ian Lucas MP
         Chris Matheson MP
         Conor McGinn MP
         Melanie Onn MP
         Toby Perkins MP
         Jess Phillips MP
         Bridget Phillipson MP
         Tulip Siddiq MP
         Virendra Sharma MP
          Barry Sheerman MP
          Owen Smith MP
           Wes Streeting MP
          Graham Stringer MP
          Karl Turner MP
          Emily Thornberry MP
          Derek Twigg MP
          Stephen Twigg MP
          Chuka Umunna MP
          Rt. Hon Keith Vaz MP
          Tom Watson MP
          Catherine West MP
          Phil Wilson MP
          Rt. Hon Rosie Winterton MP
Rob Abrams and a few other Jewish chauvinists have come up with the derogatory term 'goysplaining'
One of the things that Jewish members of JVL don't understand is that Jews in Britain are White i.e. not oppressed therefore there is no comparison between their situation and that of Black or Muslim people

Magnificent Victory – Moshe Machover’s Expulsion Rescinded

$
0
0

Ken Livingstone must now have his suspension removed

Moshe Machover and Tony Greenstein speaking at the fateful Communist University 2016 - now it appears kosher to appear on CPGB platforms

It’s hard not to feel sorry for Jeremy Newmark, Chairperson of the Jewish Labour Movement’s though I’m going to have a good try!  

The JLM and Labour Friends of Israel had a torrid time at Labour Party conference  Jewish anti-Zionists who denied that there was anti-Semitism in the party got standing ovations for calling out the false anti-Semitism witch hunt, Jeremy Corbyn got rapturous applause for mentioning the Palestinians, the Jewish Voice for Labour and Free Speech on Israel meetings were packed out and to cap it all Corbyn decided that a Daily Mirror booze up was preferable to going to the LFI fringe meeting. 
The article that caused all the fuss!
This is leaving aside the fact that condemnation of the settlements, the Gaza siege and the occupation were also reinstated as Labour policy.  And this week Corbyn has made it clear that he’s not going to celebrate the Balfour Declaration which led to ethnic cleansing and mass murder of Palestinians.


What made it even worse was that a fringe group that no one had ever heard of before the conference, Labour Party Marxists, had distributed a free sheet entitled Anti-Zionism is not Anti-Semitism.  In it was an article by Professor Moshe Machover the founder of the Israeli anti-Zionist group Matzpen.  Moshe’s name may be unknown to Labour Party apparatchik Sam Matthews and Labour’s éminence grise Iain McNicol but he is certainly known to Newmark and the Zionists. 

Matzpen was always the Zionists worst nightmare – it was a joint Jewish-Arab group that was founded in 1962.  It was the first group to oppose the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.  It was the only group to support Jewish-Arab equality as opposed to segregation and Jewish privilege that Zionist groups stand for.  It stood for equality between Jew and Arab whereas Zionism stands for Jewish Supremacy, which is why Richard Spencer, the founder of America’s Alt Right calls himself a White Zionist.
The Zionist press looks forward to the expulsions of 3 more people - Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and Tony Greenstein - two of them are Black and two of them are Jewish - this is the Zionist idea of an anti-racist campaign

Telling the truth about Nazi-Zionist collaboration is no longer a disciplinary offence

Machover was a co-founder of the group until he was driven from his academic post at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem in 1968 and forced to come to England where he lives with his family.  He is exactly the type of anti-racist anti-Zionist Jewish activist that Labour should welcome but to the racists and misanthropes who inhabit Southside and groups like Progress, Machover was someone to be feared and removed.

Of course McNicol’s minions and Sam Matthews in particular would have known nothing of Moshe Machover’s distinguished academic record or his political activities.  He was one more troublesome lefty whom they were anxious to be rid of.  Hence their surprise at the reaction to Machover’s expulsion, an ‘auto exclusion’ meaning there was no right to a fair hearing and the transparency we were promised in the Chakrabarti Report.

Matthews first letter of 3 October made it clear that  Machover’s expulsion related to an ‘apparently anti-Semitic article’ published by LPM which ‘appears to meet the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism’.  Matthews informed Machover that ‘anti-Semitism of any form... which may cause offence to Jewish people.... will not be tolerated in the Labour Party.’

Now if you weren’t living in McNicol’s version of Alice in Wonderland you might indeed wonder whether it is anti-Semitic for someone who is not Jewish, like Matthews, to explain to someone who is Jewish what anti-Semitism means.  Some people may call that anti-Semitic!

It’s little wonder that Alexi Sayle in an interview on Sky last week [Alexei Sayle’s shocking denial of Labour antisemitism, Jewish Chronicle 27 October 2017 notes that one of the remarkable things about Labour’s anti-Semitism witch-hunt is that most of those being expelled or suspended are Jewish!
Germany's Zionist paper welcomed the Nuremburg Laws of 1935 whilst world and Germany Jewry were horrified
However the reason given by Matthews for Moshe’s expulsion was writing for and speaking on the platforms of the Communist Party of Great Britain and LPM.  Classic Uncle Joe stuff.  Moshe was told in the latest letter from Matthews of 30 October that he had written no less than 44 articles for Weekly Worker!  Well I haven’t counted how many I’ve written but I suspect it’s not many fewer. Indeed I suspect it may be even more.  And although Moshe’s appearance at the Communist University formed part of the ‘evidence’ of Moshe’s belonging to the CPGB then I should also have been expelled on that basis since I spoke alongside Moshe at both the 2016 and 2017 Communist Universities, although Sam Matthews seems unaware of the latest one!

The reaction to Machover’s expulsion took Labour’s bureaucrats by surprise.  It wasn’t one or two but dozens of Labour branches and CLPs which flooded Labour HQ with motions.  After conference the membership wasn’t having any more of the witch hunt.
It is noticeable during Machover’s expulsion that no one from Momentum, not Jon Lansman not the National Coordinating Group and not one of the left-wing members of the National Executive Committee spoke out against the expulsion of Machover.  Pete Willsman, Darren Williams, Rhea Wolfson, Christine Shawcroft – all of them remained silent.  It was ordinary members up and down the country who made their voice heard.
In his second  subsequent letters Sam Matthews was at pains to stress that it wasn’t what Machover wrote that was the reason for his expulsion.  In his second letter of 6 October, just 3 days after the first, Matthews wrote that ‘for the avoidance of any doubt’ the expulsion wasn’t on account of what he had written.  Which of course begs the question why it was mentioned in his first letter at all.
Equally novel, in the letter of 6 October Matthews invited Moshe to submit an appeal, just in case he’d got it wrong! This too isn’t normal practice.

In his third letter poor Matthews was even more contrite!  ‘I would like to make absolutely clear that the Party has come to no decision about the contents of the article.’  He even apologises if the letter of 3 October ‘was unclear to you.’  But it wasn’t in the slightest unclear.  Under the bogus IHRA definition which deliberately seeks to conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism any reference to the dealings of the Zionist movement with the Nazis is de facto anti-Semitic.  The Zionists don’t like to be reminded of the time when they were the darlings of the Nazi state and if you insist on speaking the truth you are anti-Semitic!  It is extremely embarrassing that a monster like Reinhardt Heydrich, a man who the historian Gerald Reitlinger described as the ‘engineer’ of the Final Solution wrote in such glowing terms about the Zionists, stating that the Nazi movement
'is in agreement with the great spiritul movement within Jewry itself, Zionism, whose position is based on the recognistion of the unity of Jewry throughout the world, and the rejection of all ideas of mixing in.
Not a happy man Iain McNicol as everything seems to come apart in his hand these days
What is clear is that IHRA definition of anti-Semitism is actually unusable because it is so clearly intended as a weapon against Zionism’s critics.  It does nothing to help in the fight against anti-Semitism, which is an extremely simple thing to understand.  The IHRA definition is some 450 words.  The definition by Professor Brian Klug, who isn’t a Zionist is 21 words, viz:

antisemitism is a form of hostility to Jews as Jews, where Jews are perceived as
something other than what they are.

If you want to conflate hostility to Israel with hostility to Jews then of course you need lots of words and examples!  What Matthews letter also clouds is that Jeremy Corbyn accepted only the short introduction to the IHRA definition not the 11 examples, 7 of which relate to Israel.  Matthews has clearly decided that the whole 450 word definition plus examples are what should be used.

However now that it is accepted that what Moshe wrote about Nazi support and admiration even for Zionism is not anti-Semitic, then there is no case to answer for Ken Livingstone whose comment that Hitler supported Zionism is exactly along the same lines.

We should savour this victory, but we shouldn’t rest on our laurels.  As the Jewish Chronicle today states:

‘Three forthcoming NCC meetings will involve Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and Tony Greenstein – all of whom face charges of anti-Semitism.’

We have won a battle but not the war!
Matthews is so taken aback by the reaction to Moshe's expulsion that he sends another letter 3 days later
Matthews letter of 26 October

After his humiliation over the failed expulsion of Moshe Machover Iain McNicol is desperate to restart the witchhunt

$
0
0
Suspended for one and a half years from Labour - I am invited to my Expulsion Hearing with 5 weeks notice



Nearly 20 months ago I was suspended for comments I was alleged to have made.  Of course I was given no indication of what those comments were and it would appear that all the things they are charging me with now occurred after the date of my suspension.
With 5 weeks notice I have now been told the date of my hearing before the National Constitutional Committee, December 11th.  I have to have my response in by December 1st
this is the real abuse that anti-Zionists receive but of course it goes unmentioned by the media

This is of course the kind of justice you expect from Crooked McNicol and his apparatchiks.  My investigative hearing was on May 30th2016, a mere 17+ months away.  They have spent all this time assembling a case against me and now they expect me to have a response ready in under a month.

both the Telegraph and Times withdrew insinuations of anti-semitism
Letter from the Witch-hunters
This article and a similar one appeared in The Telegraph after the Compliance Unit denied me all details of what the allegations against me were


Letter in response to witch hunters



The fact that I have just come out of hospital after surgery or that I have child care responsibilities matters not a jot to these dessicated automatons.  McNicol and his minions are determined to prove to the Zionist lobby and the Israeli State's representatives inside the Labour Party that they are looking after their interests.  After the fuck up over Moshe Machover, McNicol is determined not to be thwarted a second time.
 'most of the people who have been suspended from the Labour Party for anti-Semitism seem to have been Jewish'  Alexei Sayle 
My response in The Telegraph to the suggestion that comparisons between the Nazis and Zionists were anti-Semitic

I guess it is flattering that it has taken 20 months in order to try and fit me up on bogus charges of anti-Semitism.  As Alexei Sayle said on Sky TV last week, ‘most of the people who have been suspended from the Labour Party for anti-Semitism seem to have been Jewish.'

Of course this is not surprising since Jewish anti-Zionists are particularly detested by racist scum like Jeremy Newmark of the Jewish Labour Movement.  Zionists hate anti-Zionist Jews much like the Nazis hated anti-fascist Germans.  Why they even use the same insult ‘self-haters’against us.  The real meaning of which is that you hate your race and nation and therefore yourself.

Jewish anti-Zionists stand in the same relationship to the Palestinian struggle that White Anti-Apartheid activists bore in relation to the Black Liberation struggle in South Africa

I have written to McNicol’s errand girl, Jane Fisher, explaining to her that I shall not be attending on December 11th and that I require far more time in order to prepare a case.  Given the amount of time they have allowed themselves there can be no bona fide objections.
once again the Compliance Unit and its NCC lackeys have leaked material to the press
It would also appear that the press has once again been informed in advance of my being notified.  Although the Compliance Unit refused to divulge exactly what I had said when I was suspended two weeks later, on April 2nd the Times and Telegraph both ran with detailed versions of what the evidence against me.  The Telegraph stated that they had seen material from the Compliance Unit.  This time the Jewish Chronicle has been tipped off in advance.

Below are some of the posts that I have carried on my suspension, including a transcriptof my investigation hearing.

Tony Greenstein suspended from Labour Party - Labour Party machine gets its revenge on Corbyn’s activists as expulsions mount


Labour’s Disciplinary Procedures would put the Star Chamber to Shame


Labour Party Witch-hunters Employ the   Daily Torygraph to Pursue Bogus Allegations of Anti-Semitism


The Paper of Record Joins in the 'anti-semitism' Witch-hunt


Labour’s Inquisition – from the banal to the mundane


Calling for the reselection of Labour MP Peter Kyle is a disciplinary offence

The Times 'clarified' its Compliance Unit fed article

Below is the letter I have sent to Jane Fisher in response to an email from her:


It is now important that Momentum, which said nothing over Moshe Machover, begins to take the witch hunt seriously.  When Israel’s lobby in the Labour Party seeks to be rid of people like Ken Livingstone, Jackie Walker or myself it does this in order to make Labour safe for a pro-American foreign policy and Netanyahu's military occupation. 

The Left on the National Executive Committee also needs to begin growing a backbone.  To date is has said nothing and done nothing.

The NEC Left needs to start opposing on principle the idea of witch hunting socialists whilst all manner of reactionaries and Blairites are allowed to run Labour’s civil service.  But for McNicol’s refusal to allow resources to be used in Tory marginals at the last election, because he was too taken up defending Progress MPs, Labour could have won the General Election.

Tony Greenstein


Louise Ellman MP for Liverpool Riverside and Tel Aviv South is a Racist Supporter of the Child Abuse of Palestinian Children

$
0
0

For telling the truth about Louise Ellman, I face expulsion from the Labour Party


On 6th January 2016 there was a debate in the House of Commons on Child Prisoners and Detainees: Occupied Palestinian Territories introduced by Sarah Champion, Labour MP for Rotherham.  In her introduction to the debate Ms Champion described how, in June 2012, a delegation of British lawyers published a report on children held in Israeli military custody.  It barely needs stating that it referred to non-Jewish Palestinian children.  The Report was facilitated and funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. 
It found that Israel was in breach of six of its legal obligations under the UN convention on the rights of the child and two obligations under the fourth Geneva convention. The report also concluded that if allegations of abuse referred to the delegation were true, Israel would also be in breach of the absolute prohibition against cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
What we are talking about here is torture against children, a war crime.
Ms Champion explained that 8 months after the UK report was published, UNICEF released its own assessment of the military detention system for children. After reviewing over 400 sworn affidavits from children detained in a system that allows the prosecution of 12-year-olds in military courts, UNICEF concluded that:
“the ill-treatment of children who come in contact with the military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized throughout the process, from the moment of arrest until the child’s prosecution and eventual conviction and sentencing”.
In February 2015 UNICEF issued an update to its original report and noted that allegations of ‘ill-treatment of children during arrest, transfer, interrogation and detention have not significantly decreased in 2013 and 2014”.
Paula Sherriff MP for Dewsbury, intervened to explain how she had visited the West Bank with Ms Champion in September 2015 and was briefed by Military Court Watch. She asked a most relevant question:
Does my hon. Friend share my concern at the significant disparity between treatment of Palestinian and Israeli young people, including lack of legal representation and parental support, allegations of widespread abuse and having to sign confessions in Hebrew, among many others?
Or to put it bluntly, why is it that Israeli Jewish children and Palestinian children are treated differently?  Why do Jewish children from the settlements have a parent or legal advisor with them at all times?  Why are they rarely if ever incarcerated in detention?  Why was the age of criminal responsibility for Israeli children 14 until recently (they changed it in order to imprison a Palestinian child living in Jerusalem).  Why are Palestinian children forced to sign confessions in a language that they don’t understand?

The late Jo Cox MP, who was murdered by Thomas Mair, a fascist supporter of Britain First  also contributedto the debate:

‘I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. She will be aware that evidence from Military Court Watch suggests that 65% of children continue to report being arrested at night in what are described as terrifying raids by the military. Will she comment on that worrying fact?’
Louise Ellman, Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside and a Zionist made 3 contributions on behalf of the Israeli military and the Jewish Labour Movement, of which she is Vice-President:
My hon. Friend makes an important point, but does she accept that the context in which these situations occur is an organised campaign conducted by the Palestinian authorities of incitement, to try to provoke young Palestinians to carry out acts of violence towards other civilians, some of which result in death, including the death of young children?’
In fact this is a total lie.  The Palestinian Authority is considered by most Palestinians as a Quisling authority which works openly in coordination with the Israeli security.  It has been compared by for example Electronic Intifada to Marshall Petain’s regime in France during the second world war. All Ellman is doing is repeating the talking points of the Israeli far-Right. 
What she is really saying is that Palestinians, children and adults, would be perfectly happy with their lot and no doubt greet their occupiers profusely but for the ‘incitement’ of the Palestinian Authority and others.  Anyone at all acquainted with Israel’s military occupation knows this for the fiction it is.  It is like saying that the Nazi occupiers of France would have been welcomed by the French but for the Resistance. 
Yet this racist nonsense is accepted, without a quibble, by the witch-hunters of Labour’s Compliance Unit who believe that calling Ellman what she is, a disgusting racist apologist for Israel’s war crimes is a disciplinary offence.  They even produce ‘evidence’ from opinion polls by the far-Right Zionist organisation, the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism in order to ‘prove’ my guilt. 
The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism which Labour's 'Investigators' Cite as a Neutral Source is a Far-Right source which has submitted a complaint of 'anti-Semitism' against Jeremy Corbyn.  Iain McNicol considers the CAA a useful source of information
The CAA, like Labour’s witchhunters is an anti-Corbyn group.  It has no less than 112 references at the latest count to him, none of them flattering.  One of them consists of a complaint made about Corbyn’s ‘anti-Semitism’.  No doubt if Crooked McNicol, Stolliday and the rest of them had their way, Jeremy Corbyn would also be suspended!  This however is the organisation that my witch-hunters have used in ‘evidence’ against me.
The CAA, a bogus charity that is currently the recipient of a complaint to the Charity Commission, consistently calls Labour ‘racist Labour’.  Doing a search on their web site I came up with no less than 60 references to ‘racist Labour.’ 
Ellman made two further contributions to the debate on Israel’s abuse and torture of Palestinian children.  At no point did this apologist for Israel’s military rule condemn or even criticize Israel’s behaviour.
‘Does my hon. Friend really believe that the solution to this horrendous conflict between two peoples—the Israeli and the Palestinian people—can be found by encouraging individual child Palestinians to commit acts of violence against other human beings?’
In other words the blame for violence is put on the children not on those who raid their homes at night.  Ellman knows that the Israeli soldiers are innocent because, being a racist, she automatically assumes that being Jewish, the Israeli military is above criticism.  The idea that in a regime of ongoing martial law and occupation that violence is part and parcel of the system of military rule doesn’t once enter her vacuous head.  Not content with this fatuous comment, Ellman made another contribution:
‘I note my hon. Friend’s comments that a child should not be detained, and I assume that she means in any circumstances. Suppose a child was involved in an act of violence that resulted in the deaths of other human beings. That is what has happened with young Palestinians throwing stones—people have been killed. In those circumstances, surely she thinks that there should be detention?’
Ms Ellman didn’t of course provide any evidence that the Palestinian children detained have killed anyone with stones.  It would be very surprising to learn that hundreds of people have been killed with stones.  Perhaps there are one or two incidents of people being killed by Palestinian stone throwers.  After all in the biblical tale of David and Goliath, David killed Goliath and is today a Jewish hero.  But assuming this has happened, is that an excuse for the policy of raiding hundreds of family homes at night with the express purpose of causing terror?  I should add that an occupied people have an international law right to resist the violence of an occupation.  What is remarkable is that there is so little Palestinian violence compared to the hundreds of Palestinians killed each year by the Israeli military. 
Amazingly because I have accused Louise Ellman (and to be fair I should also have included Labour MP Ian Austin in my strictures) of supporting Israeli child abuse and war crimes, I am being hauled up before Labour’s Star Chamber (otherwise known as the National Constitutional committee) for my ‘crimes’:
One of the 3 heinous offences for which I have been charged is calling the racist Labour MP Louise Ellman a racist
Having failedto expel Moshe Machover, Iain McNicol’s witch-hunters have now decided that they will turn their attention to me. The second of my three charges is that:
On various occasions since May 2016, Mr Greenstein has authored and posted articles on a blog at azvsas.blogspot.co.uk which include comments that are offensive and derisory including but not limited to: accusing Louise Ellman MP of being a “supporter of Israeli child abuse”.
It is absolutely true.  I have accused Louise Ellman of supporting Israeli child abuse.  Indeed that was too mild.  She has consistently supported Israeli war crimes against the Palestinians.  But rather than discipline her I am being hauled before Labour’s kangaroo court (the National Constitutional Committee) to face charges of ‘anti-Semitism’.
Below is a statement and report by B’tselem, the Israeli human rights organisation, on the systematic abuse of Palestinian teenagers in Jerusalem.  B’tselem is not an anti-Zionist group.  It is a liberal human rights group which has come under systematic attack by all Zionist parties including the Israeli Labour Party.
When B’tselem’s Director, Hagai el-Ad, gave evidence to the UN Security Council about Israel’s policies in the West Bank Benjamin Netanyahu threatened measures against them such as proposals to prevent them and other human rights NGOs receiving foreign funding.  These are now in the legislative pipeline. 
According to the Times of Israel US ‘troubled’ by attacks on Israeli rights group B’TselemZionist Union MK Itzik Shmuli [the Israeli Labour Party is part of the Zionist Union] said the group was helping to advance “the libel and demonization of Israel.” It even reported that ‘A Labor party activist even lodged a police complaint for alleged treason by the organization.’ 
The Jewish Labour Movement describes itself as the ‘sister’ party of the Zionist Union and Louise Ellman is its Vice President.  So the reality is that the representatives of the ugliest forms of Israeli racism have a privileged place inside the British Labour Party.  The Times of Israel reported that it was a US State Department official who ‘defended Israeli human rights group B’Tselem as the organization came under fierce criticism in Israel, saying Washington valued the information it provided about the situation in the West Bank and that free speech must be protected…’  
I guess we should be grateful that B’tselem wasn’t defended by McNicol’s minions otherwise they might have been charged with ‘anti-Semitism’.  The JLM does not and never has defended Israeli human rights organisations. It is totally uncritical of Israeli policies towards the Palestinian.  Its sole role is to defend Israeli human rights abuses and accuse Israel’s critics of ‘anti-Semitism’.

Israeli Child Abuse - the Routine Practices of Israel's Military Regime

Picture this: It’s the middle of the night and everyone is fast asleep. You’re jolted awake by pounding at the front door. You open up to find police officers, some of them masked, at your doorstep. They’ve come for your fifteen-year-old son. They are determined to take him in right now. Your plea to bring him in to the police station in the morning is brusquely brushed aside. Your son emerges bleary-eyed from his bedroom. The officers tell him to throw on some clothes and to be quick about it. Then they slap him in handcuffs and disappear with him in tow.
Your son is blindfolded and put in a jeep that takes him to the Russian Compound police station in West Jerusalem. There, he is told to wait. He is still blindfolded and in handcuffs. He doesn’t know how long he’ll have to wait there this way. At some point, a police officer comes to get him and he is conducted into an interrogation room. He sits there on his own, without you or a lawyer present, when the allegations start flying. Sometimes the interrogator also swears at him or beats him. But more often than not, the interrogator “only” demands your son sign a statement of confession. The statement is written in Hebrew, a language your son cannot read.
When the interrogation session is over, he is put in a holding cell. He may be given a towel and a toothbrush, but not necessarily. He will certainly not be given a change of clothes. He has not been given any indication of what to expect. Later, he is taken to court. The judge will remand him to custody without even speaking to him. You may catch a glimpse of him in the courtroom, from afar. He is taken to court several times to extend his remand, traveling back and forth from the holding facility. Eventually, he may be indicted. Or else he may be released – with or without conditions.
This is no imaginary scenario. A new report by B’Tselem and HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual reveals that this is the reality: every year hundreds of Palestinian teenagers go through this, all alone, their parents excluded from the proceedings. We are not talking about a rogue police officer or interrogator who flouts regulation. When it comes to the arrest and detention of Palestinian teenagers in East Jerusalem, this is the policy of the Israeli authorities – including the Israel Police, the Israel Prison Service and the courts.
This reality cannot be rectified through superficial remedies. Believe us – we at B’Tselem have tried that for years. There is no point in trying to improve a system that is inherently part of Israel’s oppressive regime of control over Palestinians. The treatment of these detained teens is merely one aspect of Israel’s longstanding policy in East Jerusalem, which views Palestinians as unwanted residents. Real change can only come about if reality in Jerusalem changes fundamentally, so that all residents are viewed as equal.
Sincerely yours,

Yael Stein
Research Director
B'Tselem
Joint report by HaMoked and B'Tselem, Summary, October 2017
Palestinian teenagers from East Jerusalem are pulled out of bed in the middle of the night, unnecessarily handcuffed and then made to spend a long time waiting for their interrogation to begin. Only then, when they are tired and broken, are they taken in for lengthy interrogation sessions, without being given the opportunity to speak to a lawyer or their parents before the questioning begins and without understanding that they have the right to remain silent. They are then held in the detention facility under harsh conditions, for days and weeks, even once the interrogation has, in fact, ended. In some cases, all this is attended by threats, verbal and physical abuse – before or during the interrogation.

Once the boys are officially placed under arrest, their parents are excluded from the proceedings altogether. At no point in time do the law enforcement authorities consider them relevant to the process or as persons entitled to protect their children. They are given no more than the very barest minimum of information about what is happening with their son or what rights he has. Only very rarely are they even allowed to meet with their child. This leaves the parents powerless, unable to help their own child.  

Without the protection of their parents or any other adult they can trust, and in complete disregard of their youth, the boys have to endure this entire process alone, far from their families, away from their normal daily routine and anything familiar. The boys find themselves in a threatening and bewildering situation, with none of the adults around them taking the trouble to tell them what is going on. No one explains to them where they are being taken, what they are suspected of, what their rights are, who they may confer with, how long the process will take and when they will return to their families and homes. Worse still, the accounts given by the boys indicate that the adults around them – police officers, agents of the ISA (Israel Security Agency), prison guards and judges – treat them as though they are not entitled to anything at all. Whenever the boys make requests that are granted – be it for food and drink, a towel, access to the toilet or speaking to their parents – it is seen as a gesture of good will, completely at the discretion of whoever is in charge. 

These practices leave law enforcement agencies free to use pressure to force them to confess. And indeed, many of the detained minors sign involuntary confessions (sometimes the confessions are false and sometimes written in a language they do not understand), which are then used as the basis for the indictments against them.

This reality is reflected in 60 affidavits B’Tselem and HaMoked collected from East Jerusalem teenaged boys who had been arrested and interrogated over the space of a year and a half, from May 2015 to October 2016. Some of the boys were released after the interrogation, while others were indicted. The findings that emerge from these affidavits, in conjunction with the great deal of information amassed by HaMoked, B’Tselem and other human rights organizations, demonstrate that the situation as described in this report is the primary mode of conduct adopted by the State of Israel for dealing with boys who are suspected of stonethrowing. What we are dealing with is not a few individual rogue interrogators or prison guards who defy regulations. Rather it is a case of a plain and clear policy followed by the various authorities: the police who carry out the arrests; the IPS (Israel Prison Service) which keeps the boys incarcerated in harsh conditions; and finally, the courts, where judges virtually automatically extend the boys’ custodial remand, even in cases when the arrest was unwarranted to begin with, even when the interrogation is already over, and even in cases of boys complaining of being subjected to physical abuse.

The authorities make sure this policy remains, technically, nominally, within legal provisions: it issues arrest warrants (at least sometimes); interrogation sessions are (usually) conducted in the hours permitted by law; the courts extend remand for the periods of time stipulated by the law; and the boys sign written confessions. In addition, the system includes an oversight mechanism that has the authority to review complaints made by minors regarding the conduct of police officers, prison guards or interrogators.

But none of this does any more than create a semblance of legal conduct, with a view to granting legitimacy to these proceedings. In practice, the conduct itself is based on a literal, technical interpretation of the protections afforded to minors by law and reliance on the exceptions it provides. When it comes to Palestinian minors from East Jerusalem, the safeguards set out in the Youth Law are routinely rendered hollow and meaningless by police officers, prison guards and judges who consider their nominal, technical observance of the provisions puts them in the right.
Below are some striking examples:
  • The arrest: Under Israeli law, minors may be arrested only in rare exceptions, and even then, for as short a time as possible. However, the affidavits collected for the present research show that arrest is in fact the police’s preferred course of action. Only in 13% of the cases did police refrain from arresting the boys, instead summoning them to come in for questioning. In all other instances, the boys were apprehended either in their homes or on the street and brought in for interrogation. Arrest warrants were issued in advance in some of the cases, but all arrests were retroactively approved by the courts, which also repeatedly sanctioned the minors’ custodial remand after the initial (unjustified) arrest, including after the interrogation had ended.  
  • Physical restraints: Restraints may be used on minors only in exceptional cases and for the as short a time as possible. The affidavits collected for the present research show that placing minors in restraints is the rule rather than the exception: In 81% of the cases, the boys were handcuffed before being taken into the vehicle that transported them to the interrogation. Seventy percent of the boys were kept in restraints during the interrogation sessions, sometimes kept in both handcuffs and leg restraints.
  • Night interrogation: Israeli law prohibits interrogating minors at night, subject to certain specific exceptions. Nevertheless, a quarter of the boys said they were interrogated at night. Moreover, 91% of boys who were arrested at home were arrested at night, when most were already asleep in bed. Even if at least in some of the cases, interrogators waited until morning to begin the interrogation, the boys arrived at the interrogation tired and scared after a sleepless night.  
  • Violation of rights: The rights afforded to minors were enshrined in law to help them protect themselves and to mitigate the immense power imbalance between them and the interrogators. These rights are upheld in a technical manner that renders them meaningless:
  • The right to remain silent: Interrogators informed the boys of their right to remain silent in only 71% of the cases, but in 70% of these, the boys did not understand what the right meant and were afraid that they would be harmed if they did in fact remain silent.
  • The right to counsel: In 70% of the cases, interrogators allowed the boys to speak to a lawyer prior to the interrogation, but these conversations were inadequate and failed to help the minors understand their rights and what they were up against – especially in the cases in which interrogators contacted lawyers on their own phones, so that the boys spoke to a lawyer on an interrogator’s phone.
  • The right to have a parent present during the interrogation: The law grants this right to minors suspected of an offense, subject to exceptions.  However, once placed under arrest, parental presence is no longer a right, although the police does have discretion to allow it. In 95% of the cases, the boys were in the interrogation room on their own, without parents or other relatives.
  • In the interrogation room: The lack of protection for the minors’ rights, and the fact that they find themselves alone in the interrogation room mean the interrogators are able to harm them physically and emotionally, taking advantage of the loopholes in Israeli law that allow using violence during interrogation and the fact that the mechanisms in place for investigating complaints regarding ill-treatment and torture are ineffective and non-deterrent as most complaints are closed with no measures taken. Secure in the knowledge that their superiors do not consider anything in their conduct prohibited, that they in fact support them and that no action will be taken against them, police officers, prison guards and interrogators can freely continue harming the minors. Interrogators take advantage of this state of affairs. Seventy percent of the boys were only interrogated once or twice; 25% of the boys who gave affidavits for this report said interrogators employed some degree of violence against them; 55% reported shouting, threats and verbal abuse from the interrogators; 23% said they were denied access to the toilet, and 26% said their requests for food or drink were denied. Forty-three percent of the boys received their first meal more than ten hours after being taken into custody. This method of interrogation is partly what led to 83% of the boys signing confessions, 80% of which were in Hebrew so they did not understand the statements they were signing. 
  • Holding conditions: The law stipulates that minors be held in age-appropriate conditions which include adequate food, health services, access to education, visits by social workers and family members and access to telephone calls with their families. In this area too, there are exceptions that allow withholding some of these rights.  Holding conditions at the Russian Compound police station in Jerusalem, where most of the teenagers who gave affidavits for this report were taken, are light years away from these provisions, and do not allow the detainees to maintain their dignity. The supply of toiletries was incomplete and irregular. None of the boys received a change of clothes.  In addition, during their detention at the Russian Compound, none of the boys were given any opportunity for meaningful activities and most remained locked in their cells for most hours of the day and night. The information given by the boys indicates they were allowed to contact their families in rare cases only. 
  • This conduct exposes Israel’s policy which aims to allows authorities to continue this maltreatment of Palestinian minors while shrouding in a cloak of legality an extensive, systematic and well-documented abuse of the fundamental human rights of hundreds of minors, every year, for decades. 
It stands to reason that the law enforcement system would treat these teenagers in an age-appropriate manner that takes their physical and mental maturity into account, recognizing that every action could have long-term repercussions for the boys themselves as well as for their families. It stands to reason that the system would treat the boys humanely and fairly and provide them with basic protections. But that is not the case. Instead, Israel’s law enforcement system treats them as members of a hostile population all of whom, minors and adults alike, are presumed guilty until proven innocent, and employs against them extreme measures that it would never venture to use against other segments of the population. Israel’s justice system is, by definition, on one side of the fence, with Palestinians on the other: The police officers, the prison guards, the prosecutors and the judges are always Israeli citizens who arrest, interrogate, judge and lock up Palestinian teenagers who are seen as enemies out to harm the interests of Israeli society.

This aspect of life in East Jerusalem cannot be separated from Israel’s overall policy in the city. In 1967 Israel unlawfully annexed approximately 7,000 hectares of land – namely, some 600 hectares that constituted the Jordanian portion of Jerusalem, along with some or all of the land belonging to 28 nearby villages and towns. Yet, it has always treated the people living on that land as unwanted and state authorities and their agents have never viewed them as having equal rights. 

All Israeli authorities operating in East Jerusalem follow a policy aimed at encouraging Palestinian residents to leave the city. This is why strict bans are in place on residential construction and East Jerusalem residents must live in overcrowded conditions or – in the absence of any other alternative – risk building without a permit and then live in fear of demolition. This is why strict policies are in place with regards to family reunification, effectively forbidding East Jerusalem residents who married residents from elsewhere in the West Bank or from the Gaza Strip to live with their spouses in the city. This is why institutional, systemic discrimination is practiced in municipal and state budgeting, as a result of which East Jerusalem residents suffer from substandard infrastructure and a chronic shortage of public services.

There is no possible justification for the extreme measures the law enforcement system uses against East Jerusalem minors. The reality described in this report is part of the underpinnings of Israeli control over the Palestinian population of East Jerusalem. So long as this control continues, Israeli authorities will in all probability continue to treat Palestinians in East Jerusalem as unwanted, less equal people, with all that implies. Real change will come only if the reality in Jerusalem is completely overhauled. 

This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of B’Tselem and HaMoked and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.
Ibrahim Abu Marya and two of his children. Alex Levac


There's never a dull night in the village of Beit Ummar, where the Israeli army is a regular visitor
Gideon Levy and Alex Levac Nov 02, 2017 5:28 PM

It’s the last street at the southern edge of the West Bank town of Beit Ummar, between Bethlehem and Hebron. The settlement of Karmei Tzur looms on the hill across the way. A street like any other: one- and two-story homes, potholes, no sidewalk. On this long road, which doesn’t even have a name and where grace does not abound, hardly a night goes by without a raid by the Israel Defense Forces. The troops swoop in four or five times a week, usually in the dead of night.

Here’s what they’ve done in the past few weeks: They caught a boy who was suspected of throwing stones, dragged him across rock-strewn ground for hundreds of meters, thrust him into a room and forced him to stay there for six hours, blindfolded and hands bound; they confiscated money and jewelry from a number of homes; wrested a few young people from their beds; and handcuffed members of an entire family, including the women, leaving them bound that way after they left.
This is how the occupation looks in Beit Ummar.
Khaled Bahar, a small, lean, smiling boy of 13 with a chirpy voice and who looks younger than his age, is well groomed and sports a trendy haircut. He relates what happened to him one night two weeks ago just like an adult; children here grow up fast. This week, when we visited his home in Beit Ummar, located at the far end of the street of troubles, he was sitting on the living room sofa in the company of his family. Logs were burning in the fireplace: Winter, too, has descended on the village, early.

Khaled’s father works in the local branch of a Jordanian bank. In addition to the nighttime raids, Israeli soldiers also appear on his street daily at the same time, around dusk, from Karmei Tzur. About 400 meters [1,310 feet] separate the settlement’s iron gate and the street. Like a ritual, the children wait for the soldiers, follow them and occasionally throw stones at them from afar. They also talk to them, says Khaled.

On October 16, too, soldiers entered the town and took up positions in the structure of an unfinished house on the street. Khaled and his friends stood below the house, leaning on a stone wall. According to Khaled, the rocks his friends threw didn’t even get close to the four or five soldiers. He himself did not throw any, he adds.

After watching the 10 or so children for a time, the soldiers came down to the street, splitting into two units. One unit got to Khaled, who describes the event as though it were some sort of strategic offensive. Two of the soldiers grabbed him, one by the neck, the other by an arm. You have to see how small Khaled is to appreciate the absurdity of this situation. They dragged him forcibly in the direction of the settlement. He says he stumbled a few times along the way and was scratched by thorns. He was very frightened but didn’t cry, and when he tried to ask them where they were taking him, they told him to shut up.
Khaled Bahar, right, with his cousin Abded Kader Bahar, in Khaled’s home in Beit Ummar this week. Alex Levac
Khaled’s cousin, Abded Kader Bahar, ran after them. He’s the same age as Khaled but even leaner, and has an even fancier hairdo. He shouted at the soldiers, then tried to kick them. One of the soldiers thrust his rifle butt into Abded’s back and tried to shoo him away. Khaled called out to his cousin to run. Other members of Khaled’s family, among them his mother and an uncle, arrived and tried to pry Khaled loose from the soldiers’ grip.

“Mom, don’t be afraid, I’m alright,” Khaled cried out to his frightened mother. His uncle, Moussa, urged the soldiers to hand over his nephew. “I will educate him,” he told them. “All these years, none of you have educated him,” the soldier-pedagogue replied, vanishing with Khaled behind the settlement’s gate.

Khaled was taken to a room, handcuffed and blindfolded, and made to sit on a chair, where he remained for the next six hours ­– scared, tired, bound. He remembers that he was given water and offered food, but declined it because he didn’t trust the soldiers. He wanted to go to sleep, but just as his head drooped, he suddenly heard the barking of a dog next to him. Scared, he thought they were siccing a dog on him to prevent him from sleeping, but through a slit in the blindfold, he saw someone’s fingers scratching his legs. It turned out to be a practical joke: A soldier was on his knees and barking like a dog in order to scare the boy. War games.

Khaled was cold and asked for a blanket; after a time, someone brought him one. The chair was uncomfortable, but the soldiers refused to move him. Khaled thought about his mother, he says. Just as he was drifting off again, he heard a soldier calling him: “Yallah, yallah, get up.” They told him they were taking him somewhere. He asked where, and one of the soldiers replied, “First to Kiryat Arba, then to Etzion [a security forces facility] and then to Ben Gurion Airport.” Hearing “airport” unnerved the boy. He was placed in a military vehicle and taken to the police station in Kiryat Arba, adjacent to Hebron. By now it was late at night.

At the station, he was taken to an interrogation room and the blindfold was removed. When he asked to go to the restroom, the handcuffs were taken off.

“Why did you throw stones?” the interrogator demanded.

“I didn’t,” Khaled insisted.

The policeman showed him a photo on a cell phone and asked, “Who is this?” Khaled said he didn’t know. “But he’s wearing the same shirt you have on,” the officer said. As usual in the territories, no lawyer and no parents were present – as stipulated by law in Israel for minors.

“If you throw stones again, we’ll kill you,” the policeman said.

Khaled was released following a brief interrogation. It was 2 A.M. Palestinian security liaison personnel took him to the gas station at the entrance to Beit Ummar, where his father was waiting for him. Back home, he didn’t want to eat or drink, only to sleep. He didn’t go to school the next day. Nor did little Abded Kader Bahar, as a token of solidarity. Khaled’s sister says that the next night, Khaled cried out in his sleep, “Don’t pull me, it wasn’t me! I didn’t throw anything!”

Khaled doesn’t remember a thing.

‘They’re choking me’

Ibrahim Abu Marya, a 50-year-old electrician from Beit Ummar, lives up the street from Khaled’s family. On October 25, soldiers invaded his home at about 2:30 A.M. After so many times, he’s used to it by now.

There was an explosion near the front door and around 30 soldiers entered, along with a K-9 dog. Mahdi, his 14-year-old son, was bound by the troops and a soldier gripped him by the neck. “They’re choking me,” Mahdi shouted to his father. Ibrahim was pushed away; seven soldiers encircled him, he says. Bara, his daughter, who’s 17, tried to come to the aid of her brother, but the soldiers bound her hands with plastic handcuffs. She’s a pretty girl with a ponytail, now wearing a sweatshirt that says “I love you,” and slippers with rabbit ears. There were no female soldiers among the Israeli force. The older sister, Ala, 23, was also handcuffed when she tried to help Mahdi.

Ibrahim asked the soldiers why they were being so violent, but got no reply. From the kitchen, he heard the shouts of his other son, Mohammed, 22, whom the soldiers had come to arrest. The mother, Faduah, 50, was locked in her room and not allowed to leave.

The soldiers took Mohammed outside and as they were about to leave, Ibrahim asked one of them to release him and the others from their handcuffs. “It’s not my business,” the soldier told him. The soldiers spent about an hour in the home, before leaving with Mohammed. He is now being detained in Ashkelon prison. A neighbor arrived to remove the handcuffs.

Soldiers have raided the Abu Marya home about 20 times in the past few years. It’s routine. The previous visit was less routine, though.

On October 4, soldiers arrived at dusk and went up to the roof. They left after a while and returned at night to conduct a search. Ibrahim told Faduah to bring the cash they had in the house – 20,000 shekels ($5,680), which he’d borrowed from his brother-in-law to help pay for a heart operation for his father, Abdel Hamid, who is 83. He shows us the documents stating that his father was in Al-Ahli Hospital in Hebron at the time.

A female soldier took the bag containing the cash and counted the money, taking 10,500 shekels and giving Ibrahim 9,500 shekels. The authorization form, signed by Inbal Gozlan, describes the cash as “Hamas money”: 52 200-shekel bills and one of 100. The form, a “Seizure Order in Arabic,” is rife with clauses and sub-clauses citing security and emergency regulations, according to which the money was impounded.

Ibrahim tells us he has no ties with Hamas or any other organization: “My ‘party’ is the municipality and the electrician’s profession,” he says.

How did the soldier determine that about half the money was Hamas funds and the rest was not? It’s hard to know. The authorization form contains a phone number for appeals, but Ibrahim says he was told that hiring a lawyer will cost him more than the money taken. He has written off the money.

According to Musa Abu Hashhash, a field researcher for the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem, IDF soldiers have lately been confiscating money with great frequency in the Hebron area. That same night, troops raided three other homes in Beit Ummar, confiscating money and property. Soldiers removed all the jewelry that Amal Sabarna – whose husband, Nadim, is in administrative detention (imprisoned without trial) – was wearing around her neck and hands, and impounded it. She received the items as a gift, she says. The soldiers also removed a gold earring from an earlobe of her daughter.

The IDF Spokesperson’s Unit stated in response: “With respect to the first incident mentioned in the article, the suspect was arrested after he was caught throwing stones at the gate of the settlement of Karmei Tzur, held for interrogation and released thereafter without being taken to the police station.

“As to the second incident, during a nighttime operation, terror activist Mohammed Abu Marya was arrested. Participating in the activity were female soldiers who checked the women in the house. It must be stressed that members of the family were not bound at any stage during the operation.

“As to the third incident, authorization was given for impounding the 10,500 shekels, which were received from a terror organization.

“As for the last incident, it should be emphasized that no jewelry was removed from [the person of] any of the individuals in the house. Rather, jewelry was confiscated in the presence of representatives of the police, of a value that had been approved in advance.

“In spite of the above, following the incident the protocol was clarified and it was decided that confiscation of jewelry instead of terror funds will take place only in the event that specific approval has been given for doing so.”


Soldiers returned to Beit Ummar this past week, too, of course. On Sunday night, they entered the home of Ibrahim Abu Marya’s brother, who lives nearby, and ordered his 16-year-old son, Muhand, to show them where another resident, Ahmed Abu Hashem lives. The boy refused. When the soldiers finally got to the Abu Hashem house, they arrested Ahmed’s son, Kusai, who’s also 16.

The Framing of Kelvin Hopkins MP

$
0
0

First it was ‘anti-Semitism’ now the Labour Right (& the BBC's Tory Kuesnberg) are weaponising Sexual Harassment



Sexual harassment is much like anti-Semitism.  No one wants to be accused of it and the immediate thought when faced with the accusations made against Kelvin Hopkins is that there is no smoke without fire.  
Kelvin Hopkins
The use by a man of pressure, by virtue of an economic or other relationship of dependancy, because it is nearly always a man, on a women to gain sexual favours is by definition despicable.  That was why George Bernard Shaw described marriage as a legalised form of prostitution.

I know this because in my Momentum group in Brighton for the first few months a number of people thought that I must be guilty if I was suspended for ‘anti-Semitism’.  It was only after people like Jackie Walker and others began to be accused of the same crime that it dawned on people that this was a cynical ploy by the Right to divide the Left.  And because the Left has a conscience, because socialists as opposed to the neo-liberals of the Right don’t act like cynical automatons, people do take these things seriously.  The same is true of sexual harassment.

Perhaps more so with sexual harassment because all men are, to a greater or lesser degree, guilty of possessing power in relationships and using that power.  I doubt if there is any man who can honestly say they haven’t, at some point in their life been guilty of some form of sexual harassment or coercion or pressure.  You live in this world and are part of it, a world framed by patriarchal relations.  You can’t live outside the social relations that you are a part of. 
Ava dressed up as a schoolgirl by her Telegraph minders for her interview
That is why just like anti-Semitism has been weaponised, so sexual harassment can be and it would appear is being weaponised at this moment.  It is clear that the Tories epitomised by the monstrous lech Michael Fallon are clearly guilty of gross acts of abuse and worse.  However there is a determined effort by the BBC and the Tory press to turn the attention on Labour.  The Right are doing all they can to encourage this and the Left should stand up and ask where the proof is, because apart from Ivan Lewis MP there seems none.

It is almost certain that Kelvin Hopkins is innocent of the charges against him. I must confess that when I first saw Etemadzadeh I rubbed my eyes. Why is she dressed up as a schoolgirl? Is this to try and suggest she is young, virginal and innocent? She must be at least 23-24, what is this school girl image for?  And the poppy?  No socialist activist would be seen dead wearing a symbol to British military imperialism.
A very different Ava E in her Linkedin profile
I confess on Friday night, after just coming out of hospital, I had BBC News 24 on and the news goes round in cycles and Etemadzadeh seemed to be on interminably as I half listened, and got on with writing and posting a blog.  Perhaps because I listened to her more than once it gradually occurred to me that she had been very carefully coached – her interview seemed incredibly staged and even forced.  At the end she described an alleged conversation where Kelvin said that if he were young, he would have been proud to have her as her lover and then she said ‘and if he was young he would be happy to have her as a lover’ and then the killer punch ‘but he’s not’ made me feel that this was not spontaneous.  It now appears that it was a put up job with John Pina.

More details have come about concerning Ava.  She is a member of Progress and she has been working with the Telegraph, hardly a Labour paper.  She seems to have been put up to it by a Progress MP (Wes Streeting?) just as the Jewish Labour Movement have constantly run to the Times and Mail when they wanted an anti-Labour story printed.

Too much of this story doesn't hang together. The one conflict of evidence is where Etemadzadeh says that Hopkins rubbed his crotch against her when saying goodbye at Essex.  If that is the case, then why the hell did she go out of her way to make further contact with him?  It’s not as if she had to.  There was no financial or contractual or employer-employee relationship between them. 
There were 3 separate messages sent by Etemadzadeh to Kelvin Hopkins, none of which square with his alleged behaviour.  And why wait 3 years if indeed all this transpired?  It may well be the case that Hopkins told her that if he was young he would happily fall in love with her.  That is no more than saying that he found her a nice woman.  Certainly you can question his appalling sense of judgement but it hardly constitutes sexual harassment.  She doesn’t allege that there was any further alleged physical or sexual contact.

She was also an intern with Michael Dugher, who was special adviser to the most right-wing of all Labour MPs, John Spellar, an old associate of the Electrical Trades Union and its anti-communist leadership.  Dugher was also a special adviser to Geoff Hoon, Blair's Defence Minister and latterly he worked as a corporate lobbyist for American multinational Electronic Data Systems (EDS), one of the government's largest IT contractors.
Left-wing men of course feel very queasy about standing up to this and that is precisely the problem.  The Labour Right, both men and especially women, are unscrupulous in using peoples’ abhorrence of sexual harassment or racism for their own devious political purposes.  Taking out left-wing men is a game to these people. 

I am referring to people like Jess Phillips who is quite happy to say she’d stab Jeremy Corbyn in the front rather than the back or who tells Dianne Abbot, who unlike her has a record of standing up to oppression racist bullying, to ‘fuck off’, without of course meriting any punishment from Labour Party HQ. 

Phillips is the archetypal right-wing feminist, a woman who attacks left-wing men as the ‘enemy’ but seems more than happy to be friends with the backwoodsman Tory Jacob Rees-Mogg, a man who believes that a woman who is raped should be denied an abortion.  His chivalry apparently bowls the simpleton over. 

No self-respecting woman could count a misogynist like Rees-Mogg, the man who never changed a nappy, as a friend.  Phillips is a fraud and a fake as are most right-wing feminists, precisely because they see their liberation as taking place at the expense of the most oppressed women.  That is why some of the vilest Zionists happen to be women on the Labour Right.  We have a good example of that in Brighton Labour Party where the execrable racist Progress Councillor, the mad and bad ‘Poison’ Penn, willingly use scurrilous allegations against socialist men, in order to pursue a far-Right Zionist and racist politics.

I include Hattie Harman in this, a woman whose feminism didn’t prevent her cutting benefits for single parents as soon as she became a Cabinet Minister in 1997.

People have to get use to the fact that the Right in the Labour Party are wholly unscrupulous.  This is because they are in bed with US imperialism.  They are the old Atlanticists to whom the ‘special relationship’ even if it is with Trump is more important than anything else.  That is why Israel is such an important issue for the Right.  Israel symbolises the American relationship hence why someone like Louise Ellman is happy to justify Zionist war crimes, even against children.

It is a great pity that once again Corbyn takes what he sees as the easy way out by accepting at face value the allegations against Kelvin Hopkins.  My suggestion is that, unlike the fake ‘anti-Semitism’ allegations he starts to probe a little deeper, not least into Miss Goody Two Shoes Etemadzadeh, who isn’t quite sugar and spice and all things nice that young girls are supposed to be made of!

There are a number of interesting things one can gauge from reading the Linked in pagefor Etemadzadeh.  She worked as an intern with people like Gavin Shuker and former MP and JLM officer Michael Dugher.  She also campaigned for Wes Streeting, Daniel Zeichner, Gareth Thomas etc, She stood on a platform with Richard Angell of Progress and campaigned for Blairite Jasmin Beckett for NEC. She moved easily in right-wing circles but not with anyone on the left of the party. She also seemed to admire Blair.

I also suggest that people read very carefully Kelvin Hopkin's statement before reaching a judgement on this 'girl'.


1. My first recollection of ever meeting Ava was at the Labour Party Conference in Manchester in September 2014. She was one of approximately 10 party activists who had been present at a fringe reception and who accompanied me and my daughter to an evening meal in Manchester for activists and supporters. She introduced herself as the Chair of Labour Students at Essex University and she joined in the general conversation around the dining table. As I usually do, I let her have my contact details.

2. I next came across Ava when I was canvassing in support of the Labour candidate in the Clacton-on Sea by-election on 9 October 2014. She was one of a number of Labour Party activists who joined me in leafleting and door knocking. I had no prior knowledge at all that Ava would be in Clacton for the by-election. I had a general chat with her about the by-election in the company of the other campaigners.

3. On 11 October 2014 Ava sent me a text message:
“Hi Kelvin, how are you? I was wondering if you would like to come to University of Essex to speak in one of our Labour society socials this term? x Ava”.

4. I then arranged, through the secretary of the student Labour society at Essex University, to speak at Essex on 12 November 2014. I arrived at Colchester mid-afternoon as the social event was due to start at 4.15 pm. I gave my speech to the students. It was a well received talk and involved a lively questions and answers debate with those who were there. After the event, Ava walked me to my car in the car park at the university. There were many people in the general area.

5. The allegation has been made and reported in the press that I “hugged her [Ava] inappropriately” (eg Telegraph newspaper 3 November 2017). Ava is reported to have said, “He hugged me to say goodbye, held me too tight and rubbed his crotch on me, which I found revolting”.

6. I absolutely and categorically deny that I in any way engaged in any such inappropriate conduct. I simply put an arm around her shoulder to give her a brief slight hug just before getting in to my car. I did not hold her tight. I did not rub any part of my body, let alone my crotch, against Ava. She waved me off as I drove away and did not say anything whatsoever to suggest that anything had occurred that upset her let alone revolted her. In fact after I left the University, Ava sent me a text message during the same evening of 12 November timed at 9 pm saying:

“Thank you so much Kelvin for coming tonight!! We had a fantastic time. My members loved you!  You’re a star! x Ava”

7. On 15 December 2014 Ava sent me a text message:
“Hi Kelvin, how are you? Could you please send me your post address? I’d like to send you a Christmas card. x Ava”.

8. I gave her my address as House of Commons, Westminster London SW1A 0AA. Her card arrived on 17 December.

9. When I had visited Essex University I had made an invite to the students to visit the House of Commons. I often take groups and individuals on tours of the Palace of Westminster and often dine with my guests in the House. Arrangements were made for a group of about 8 students to come to Westminster early in 2015. I believe the group trip was cancelled but Ava still wanted to visit and came to Westminster on 2 February 2015. It is reported in the press that at that meeting I asked questions about her personal life and that I made her uncomfortable with a suggestion that I would have liked to take her to my office if it were empty. I have no recollection whatsoever of such conversations. I recall the meeting lasting about 2 hours including dining in the Strangers Dining Room which was buzzing with very many other parliamentarians and their guests also having lunch. Shortly after leaving Westminster Ava sent me the following text message on 2 February at 14:50:
“Thank you, Kelvin for today. It was lovely meeting you!  xx”

10. On 16 February 2015 I did send a text message to Ava which included the reported words saying Ava was “charming and sweet natured” and that “a nice young man would be lucky to have you as a girlfriend and lover…Were I to be young…but I am not…”. She in fact replied to my text on the same day:

“Oh thank you Kelvin for such kind words. I was ill last week for a couple of days and also I had run for NUS delegate – they announced the results and I got elected with the highest number of votes!! So sorry if I couldn’t speak to you last week x”

11. My only contact with Ava since then was about a year ago when she made contact with me to discuss working in Westminster. She told me that she had applied for a job with a Labour MP and that although she had been shortlisted to the final 2 for the job she nevertheless did not get it. She wanted my advice on how she could possibly have done better. I called her from parliament and advised her that jobs with MPs are difficult to get and I told her for example that my office had no vacancies. I advised her that she should also think about working as a member of staff of the House of Commons and should think about the civil service. I also suggested that as she is bi-lingual (Ava is fluent in Farsi) she could also think about working with the Foreign Office. Our conversation was friendly.

12. I have had no contact with Ava since then and was shocked when I saw the allegations appear online last night and in the papers today. I have always wished and still do wish, Ava the very best of luck in pursuing the career in politics that she wants to follow. I am happy to fully cooperate with the Labour Party to bring to a swift conclusion the investigation that is now being carried out into my conduct.

Press Enquiries:
Martin Howe (Senior Partner) partners@howe.co.uk 

Israel’s Toleration of the Arson at Mosques and Churches

$
0
0

Israeli Government Refused to Arrest Lehava Leader Benzi Gopstein for his call for burning Churches and Mosques


One of the many myths about the ‘only democracy in the Middle East’ is that there is, unlike anywhere else in the region, complete freedom of worship.  This belief is particularly common amongst the more stupid fundamentalist Christians of the USA’s Bible Belt .

In fact Jewish Orthodoxy holds Christianity in even greater contempt than it does Islam.  Zionism today, for purely pragmatic reasons, viz. the support it gets from the United States, keeps this quiet.  If medieval Christianity was anti-Semitic then Judaism was anti-Christian. 

In 2012 Michael Ben Ari, a far-Right member of the Knesset and Jewish Union gave vent to his hatred when he tore upa copy of the New Testament and threw it in a dustbin.
The results of the destruction of a Church
Contrary to the myth of the Judeo-Christian heritage (a modern invention with no basis in history) Maimonedes, the ‘Rambam’ held that Christianity was far worse than Islam.  The Talmud is full of invective against Jesus, the son of god, a blasphemous concept in itself.  A Jew can pray in a mosque (for example the Hebron settlers pray in Hebron’s Ibrahimi Mosque which they fool themselves is the Cave of the Patriarchs) but they are forbidden to pray in a church.  See also Pray in mosque, rabbi rules

Today in Israel both religions are hated with about equal venom.  Apart from specific legislation such as the recent Muezzin Law [Israeli ministers to ban use of speakers for Muslim call to prayer due to 'noise pollution'] or the banning of the Northern Muslim League, there is an atmosphere of hate and distrust of anything other than the Orthodox Jewish religion.  Reform and liberal Jewry is tolerated, although Reform Jewry with its equality for women is not considered properly Jewish.

This why there has been a wave of arson attacks against churches and mosques.  It is also why Benzi Gopstein, leader of the Kahanist fascist group Lehava, can get away with a call for the burningdown of churches and mosques.  When you consider that Israel has gaoled and held under house arrest for the past 18 months an Israeli Palestinian poet, Dareen Tatour, for talking about resistance in poems put on Facebook you can imagine what would have happened if a Palestinian had called for the burning down of synagogues.  They would have been gaoled and the key would have been thrown away.  You would have the Luke Akehursts and other Zionist propagandists talking about Arab hatred etc.
Far-right Kahanist MK Ben Ari rips up a copy of the Christian Bible - no action was taken against him by the Knesset (unlike the suspensions of Palestinian MKs)

Yet Gopstein has never been prosecuted.  The Vatican has called for him to be arrested and charged but in Israel, a call for racial discrimination on the grounds of religion is not a crime (unless committed by a Palestinian in which case it is ‘terrorism’).  Rome - Vatican Calls On A-G To Indict Extremist Jewish Leader Following Endorsement Of Burning Churches

The article below shows how there has been a complete disinterest on the part of the Israeli Police who have refused to treat the wave of attacks on Christian and Islamic religious buildings seriously.  No attempt has been made to try and tackle those behind the wave of attacks on churches and mosques.  Below that is an article from Ha’aretz on what happened when an Israeli fascist calls for arson of other than Jewish religious buildings – nothing.

Tony Greenstein

Israel doing nothing to stop attacks on churches and mosques



Stained glass and a statue of the Virgin Mary were among the items destroyed in the latest attack on St. Stephen’s church at Beit Jamal, west of Jerusalem. (Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem)
Since 2009, at least 53 churches and mosques have been vandalized in present-day Israel and the occupied West Bank.
The vast majority of those cases – 45 – have been closed without any charges against perpetrators.
In all, there have been just nine indictments and seven convictions, according to Israeli government data reported by the newspaper Haaretz. Only eight of the cases remain under investigation.
MK Ben Ari hard at work
They were usually dismissed on the grounds of unknown perpetrators.
A lawmaker raised the matter in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, at the request of Tag Meir, an organization that monitors racially motivated crimes.
According to Haaretz, public security minister Gilad Erdan wrote to the lawmaker that the attacks “were perpetrated from various motives, ranging from negligence through mental illness and, in extreme cases, incidents of arson that appear deliberate.”
The newspaper noted that Erdan’s assertion “seems to contradict the fact that most of the cases were closed on the grounds of ‘perpetrator unknown.’
Moreover, according to Haaretz, all the cases involved arson.
The name of the organization Tag Meir is a play on the Hebrew words tag mehir – or price tag – the term Israeli settlers and extremists have adopted to describe their sometimes lethal attacks on non-Jews and their property, especially Palestinians.

Third attack

In the most recent attack, on 20 September, vandals shattered a statue of the Virgin Mary, broke stained glass and destroyed a cross in St. Stephen’s Church in the Beit Jamal Salesian Monastery west of Jerusalem.
“I was shocked,”the church’s caretaker Father Antonio Scudu told the Catholic News Service. “I didn’t expect to see something like this. The church is always open. If you see what happened, you feel they did it with hate. They smashed everything.
Bishop Giacinto-Boulos Marcuzzo, the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem’s senior cleric in Palestine, said, “this is not only an act of vandalism but an action against the sacredness of the holy places and the faith of people.”
This was the third attack on Beit Jamal in the past four years, but no arrests have ever been made.
Wadie Abunassar, adviser to the Assembly of Catholic Ordinaries of the Holy Land, condemned the desecration in a post on Facebook .
We are fed up with repeated attacks on holy places,” Abunassar stated, adding that “anger is not only directed at the aggressors,” but at Israeli authorities which have failed to deal with the phenomenon.
Abunassar told The Electronic Intifada that there was growing public frustration at how the police deal with the incidents, given the small number of cases that have been resolved.

Unchecked incitement

Israeli police spokesperson Micky Rosenfeld has claimed that the incidents are unconnected.
“There have been arrests in previous cases,” he said. “We are looking into this case to see if it was an individual or a group. These are all separate cases.”
While Abunassar does not know if the incidents are done by individuals connected to each other, he points to constant incitement by extremist rabbis inspiring such actions.
He added that these right-wing preachers are not “sufficiently deterred by Israeli law enforcement authorities.”
He recalled one of the more notorious cases, Torat Hamelech or The King’s Torah, a 2009 book by Rabbis Yitzhak Shapira and Yosef Elitzur.
The book argues that it is permissible in certain circumstances to kill the non-Jewish children and babies of Israel’s enemies since “it is clear that they will grow to harm us.
As a result, the UK banned the entry of Elitzur.
Israeli authorities investigated the pair for incitement, but eventually decided not to charge them.
Amongst other figures who encourage these attacks is Bentzi Gopstein, the head of Lehava, a vigilante group that opposes miscegenation between Jews and Arabs.
In August 2015, Gopstein publicly called for the burning of churches and mosques.
The Vatican urged Israel to charge Gopstein with incitement to violence and terrorism.
Months later, Gopstein wrote an article branding Christians “blood-sucking vampires” and urging their expulsion from the country.
Although bishops have asked to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss these hate crimes, their request has been ignored. 

Lehava’s Benzi Gopstein tells yeshiva panel that the Rambam’s ruling for destruction of idol worship is still valid.

Chaim Levinson Aug 06, 2015 2:03 AM
No grounds for outlawing racist group, concludes Israeli security agency
Bentzi Gopstein, head of the anti-gentile group Lehava, in court, December 16, 2014. Emil Salman
The leader of the extremist anti-assimilation group Lehava allegedly called for churches to be torched, at a panel held this week for yeshiva students. Benzi Gopstein said he is prepared to spend 50 years in jail for doing so, according to a report by the Haredi website Kikar Shabbat.

During the yeshiva intercession, known as bein hazmanim, many yeshivas hold summer camps for their students. These combine Torah study with other activities, like trips and panels to discuss current events. Kikar Shabbat obtained and posted a recording of such a panel at the Wolfson Yeshiva camp, at which Gopstein appeared along with Rabbi Moshe Klein, the rabbi of the Hadassah Medical Centers; Elad Deputy Mayor Tzuriel Krispal; and Yated Ne’eman journalist Benny Rabinovich.
The panel was debating whether Jews are commanded to eliminate idol worship, as the Rambam (Maimonides) states. After Gopstein responded affirmatively, Klein hastened to interject, “It is a mitzvah according to the Rambam, but in our times the answer is no.”

The issue generated an argument on the panel, with Gopstein defending his position that churches should be burned. In response to a question by Rabinovich as to whether he “is in favor of burning churches in the Land of Israel,” Gopstein answered, “Did the Rambam rule to destroy [idol worship] or not? Idol worship must be destroyed. It’s simply yes – what’s the question?”

Rabinovich pressed the issue, saying,“Benzi, I must say I’m really shocked by what you’re saying here. You are essentially saying we must go out and burn down churches. You’re saying something insane here.”

Gopstein replied, “What’s the question? Do you doubt it?”

When Klein warned him the panel was being filmed, and that if the recording should get to the police he would be arrested, Gopstein replied, “That’s the last thing that concerns me. If this is truth, I’m prepared to sit in jail 50 years for it.”

As the panel discussion unfolded, Rabinovich tweeted a message on his Twitter account: “I’m shocked to the core. I’m sitting at a panel right now with Benzi Gopstein, who says outright it’s a mitzvah to burn churches, and he is prepared to sit in jail 50 years for this.” Some of the yeshiva students who saw his tweet called him a “moser” (informer).

In response to the release of the recording, Gopstein said, “At a closed panel of the Wolfson Yeshiva, there was a halakhic debate about the Rambam’s approach to Christianity. During the debate I said that, according to the Rambam, idol worship must be destroyed. I stressed several times I was not calling to take operative steps, but that this is the Rambam’s approach and that it’s the responsibility of the government, not of individuals.'

“I understand there’s a campaign against right-wingers and they are trying to catch us on every word. But I would recommend that they first investigate the preachers in the mosques or [MK Ahmad] Tibi and [MK Haneen] Zoabi. Then let them come to me,” Gopstein added.

The Israel Religious Action Center, the legal advocacy arm of the Reform Movement, petitioned the High Court of Justice last October against Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein for not prosecuting Gopstein over previous inflammatory remarks and actions. It has been waiting for a response since January.

“For many months, we have waited for a decision by the attorney general regarding complaints against Gopstein for incitement to racism,” said Rabbi Gilad Kariv, director of the Reform Movement. “If even these remarks don’t lead to a quick decision to prosecute him, we can publicly declare that Israeli law allows incitement to racism and violence. What else has to happen for the State of Israel to seriously fight those who have decided to ignite the fire of hatred and fanaticism?”


Yair Ettinger contributed to this report.

Gary Younge Interviews & Destroys Richard Spencer the founder of America’s Alt-Right

$
0
0

Why do Jews need a safe space’ asks the self-proclaimed ‘White Zionist’ & neo-Nazi


I first saw Gary Younge speak last May at the Brighton Festival.  He is the one decent journalist that The Guardian has left.  It is not surprising that this interview took less than 3 minutes in the course.   Gary Younge had had enough of this imbecile




 ‘Why do Jews need a safe space’ asked Spencer when defending the idea that America should be an all-white state in order that Whites can have a safe space.  Spencer is on record as defining himself as a White Zionist.  Just as Israel is a Jewish state that worries about the ‘demographic question’ i.e. are there too many Arabs, so Spencer is also worried about American demographics.  It is the Blacks who are trying to take over.


Younge demolishes this absurd ‘intellect’ of the Alt-Right who maintains that slavery was of benefit to Black people, despite killing 14 million of them in the process.  White Supremacy according to Spencer was also beneficial to Black people.  Naturally he doesn’t understand how someone like Gary, whose origin was in Africa, can define himself as English.  If you think in terms of a racial or ethnic definition of a nation, then of course he is right.  But that is the point.  A nation state encompasses all who live there, regardless of their colour, race or creed.

This is a must watch but remember.  Everything that Spencer says is practiced by Israel.  Those who defend Zionism must also defend Spencer’s notion of a White American ethno-nationalist state.
Tony Greenstein


My travels in white America – a land of anxiety, division and pockets of pain

This summer,  took a trip from Maine to Mississippi to find out what has brought the US to this point. From the forgotten poor to desperate addicts, their whiteness is all some of them have left – and that makes fertile ground for the far right

Jeff Baxter’s enduring memory, from childhood, is the glow. Coming down over the hill overlooking the coke plant in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, the molten iron would make itself known – both as a vision and an aspiration. “It’s like the sun landed there,” says Baxter, a burly, bearded retiree, who achieved his boyhood dream of becoming a steelworker.
Today, the plant, like the one Baxter worked in for 30 years, stands derelict – a shell that represents a hollowing out not just of the local economy but of culture and hope – as though someone extinguished Baxter’s sun and left the place in darkness. Buildings in the centre of town that were once testament to the industrial wealth produced here stand abandoned. More than 40% of the population now live below the poverty line; 9.1% are unemployed.
Cambria County, where Johnstown sits, was once a swing county. Al Gore won it in 2000; George W Bush took it in 2004; it went to Barack Obama in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012 – each time by fairly narrow margins. Last year, Donald Trump won it in a landslide.


Play Video
2:59
 Gary Younge interviews Richard Spencer: 'Africans have benefited from white supremacy'

Baxter, who once backed Obama, voted for Trump, the first time he had ever voted Republican. “I liked [Obama’s] message of hope, but he didn’t bring any jobs in … Trump said he was going to make America great. And I figured: ‘That’s what we need. We need somebody like that to change it.’”
Over at the century-old Coney Island Lunch, this once-bustling institution famous for its chilli dogs and sundowners is virtually empty. “A lot of people have left town,” explains Peggy, who has been serving at the diner for nine years. “There are no jobs. If you’re going to have a life or a steady income, you know, you need to get out of here, because there’s nothing here. I expect a lot of towns go this way. You know, when the steel mills died and the coal died. It’s sad, it’s very sad.”

‘There’s not many white Americans left. They’re a dying breed …’ a confederate flag on a  Trump poster in North Carolina.
Pinterest
 ‘There’s not many white Americans left. They’re a dying breed …’ a confederate flag on a Trump poster in North Carolina. Photograph: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters

Across from the counter, Ted sits in a T-shirt emblazoned with a Native American in full headdress. He thinks white America is getting a rough deal and will soon be extinct. “There’s not many white Americans left. They’re a dying breed. It’s going to be yellow-white Americans, African-American white Americans, you know what I’m saying? The cultures are coming together,” he says, with more than a hint of melancholy. “Blending and blending, and pretty soon we’ll just be one colour.”
Advertisement
Ted also voted for Trump. “I liked him on TV. I voted for him, alright, but it was because he was supposedly going to make America great, and what’s he done so far? He hasn’t done anything.”
Two days after I spoke to Ted and Peggy, Coney Island Lunch closed down.
In the 12 years I reported from the US I saw no end of white journalists opine on black America. This summer, I took a trip through white America, driving from Maine (the whitest state) to Mississippi (the blackest), to flip the script. Talking only to white people, I attended a white supremacist conference, accompanied an emergency health worker who sought to revive people who had overdosed, and went to a comedy club in the French Quarter of New Orleans to see the “Liberal Redneck” perform. I was told the Ku Klux Klan were liberals (they weren’t), that Confederate general Robert E Lee didn’t own slaves (he did) and that I could not be British because I’m black (I am).
It was a few weeks before the disturbances in Charlottesville, when a mob of white supremacists, including neo-Nazis and Klansmen, converged on a college town in Virginia, terrorising protesters and leaving one dead and many injured. Just seven months after the US had bid farewell to its first black president, his successor said there were “some very fine people” marching with the neo-Nazis who chanted: “Jews will not replace us.” A poll shortly afterwards showed that almost half of white Americans thought they were “under attack” and one in three thought the country needs to do more to preserve its white European heritage.
Any reckoning with how the US got to this point, politically, demands some interrogation of how white America got to this place economically and culturally; that takes into account both their relative privilege and their huge pockets of pain.
White Americans make up a majority of the country. Compared with other races, they may enjoy an immense concentration of wealth and power. But these privileges are nonetheless underpinned by considerable anxiety. Their health is failing (white people’s life expectancy has stalled or dipped in recent years), their wages are stagnating (adjusting for inflation, they are just 10% higher now than they were 44 years ago) and class fluidity is drying up (the prospects of poor white Americans breaking through class barriers is worse now than it has been for a long time). Out-traded by China (in 2016 the trade deficit with the country was $347bn); soon to be outnumbered at home (within a generation white people will be a minority); and outmanoeuvred on the battlefields of the Arab world and beyond (neither of the wars launched in response to 9/11 have ended in victory), these vulnerabilities are felt at home and abroad. Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter protesters are in the streets over police brutality, football players are taking a knee and the movement to bring legal status to large numbers of undocumented people grows. White Americans feel more pessimistic about their future than any other group. Almost two-thirds of white working-class people think the country has changed for the worse since the 50s.
I covered the last presidential election from Muncie, Indiana, once seen as the archetypal US town thanks to the Middletown project, a sociological study first published in the 20s. Many of the white working-class areas on the south side of Muncie were similar to Johnstown. The head of Middletown Studies at the city’s Ball State University, James Connolly, told me this was the area he had found most difficult when it came to finding contacts. Whereas African Americans in the north-east of the city had strong churches and campaigning organisations, he explained, the poorer white areas had few champions.


“Nobody speaks up for the poor,” said Jamie Walsh, a white working-class woman who grew up in Muncie, explaining Trump’s appeal to those she grew up with on Muncie’s Southside. “There is systemic racism, but black people have advocates. Poor white people don’t. They’re afraid. They’re afraid that they’re stupid. They don’t feel racist, they don’t feel sexist, they don’t want to offend people or say the wrong thing. But white privilege is like a blessing and a curse if you’re poor. The whole idea pisses poor white people off because they’ve never experienced it on a level that they understand.
“You hear privilege, and you think ‘money and opportunity’, and they don’t have it. I understand how it works but I don’t think most people do. So when Trump says stuff, they can understand what he’s saying and he speaks to them in a way other people don’t. And then you’ve got people calling them stupid and deplorable. Well, how long do you think you can call people stupid and deplorable before they get mad?”

Andrew Kieszulus … ‘If you are white and middle class, it’s much easier to remove the negative consequences of a use disorder.’
 Andrew Kieszulus … ‘If you are white and middle class, it’s much easier to remove the negative consequences of a use disorder.’ Photograph: Sugar Films Ltd

Increasingly, for many white Americans, their racial privilege resides not in positive benefits of work and security but in the sole fact that it could be worse – they could be black or Latino. In other words, their whiteness is all they have left. In few areas is this clearer than the opioid epidemic, which is disproportionately affecting white America. Wander down Oxford Street, home to one of the main shelters in Portland, Maine, and you can see people, distraught, disoriented and desperate, openly struggling with their addiction long into the night.
Advertisement
“In the past, we might go months and not have an overdose call,” said paramedic Andrea Calvo, as we drove around Portland, Maine. “And we had a day, not too long ago, when I think we did 14 overdoses … the majority of people, certainly in this area in this state, probably in the country, are somehow affected by addiction issues.” A member of her family struggles with addiction. She constantly worried that one day she would be called to assist her.
Andrew Kieszulas was a 22-year-old sports star from a middle-class family when his doctor first prescribed opioids for a back injury. With his thick neck perched on top of mountainous shoulders, he had the air of an all-American boy from an all-American family. But, behind the facade, things had started to go wrong. “Very quickly, the prescription drugs were removed and I was left with an emotional addiction, a mental addiction and a very physical addiction to the opiates – and, very quickly, I transitioned over to street drugs,” he explained.
Kieszulas has had to struggle hard to remain sober these last five years. His achievements are his own. But he would be the first to tell you that being white helped. When black America was blighted by the crack epidemic, it was understood as a crisis of culture and treated as a problem of crime. African Americans were locked up in unprecedented numbers, leaving more Americans in prison than had been incarcerated in the Soviet gulags at its height and more African Americans in prison than had been enslaved in 1850.
“If you are white and middle class, it’s much easier to remove the negative consequences of a use disorder,” Kieszulas explained. “You’re less likely to go to jail, less likely to have any kind of negative criminal consequence. I myself don’t have a criminal record. I did some very interesting things to support my habit and to find relief. And transitioning out of that without a criminal record at all? I think it speaks for itself.”
Thanks to contamination through needle sharing, the opioid epidemic is also turning into an HIV crisis, which is particularly acute in rural white areas. Of the most vulnerable 5% of counties at risk of an HIV outbreak, almost all voted for Trump.
In late October, Trump called it a “public health emergency”, while offering little in the way of new funding. When your privilege amounts to this amount of pain, no wonder you can’t see it. But just because you can’t see it, doesn’t mean it’s not there.

Muncie, Indiana. ‘Nobody speaks for the poor,’ says one resident.
 Muncie, Indiana. ‘Nobody speaks for the poor,’ says one resident. Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

If there’s one thing that 200 years of slavery and 100 years of segregation did for African Americans, it was to temper their investment in the myth that the US is a meritocracy. The notion that if you worked hard and kept your nose clean, you would get on was always stymied by the grim realities of racial barriers. “America was never America to me,” wrote the Harlem renaissance poet Langston Hughes in 1935’s Let America Be America Again. “There’s never been equality for me / Nor freedom in this ‘homeland of the free’.”
Advertisement
But, for many white Americans, the expectation that each year would be better than the next and each generation healthier and wealthier provided the core for optimism. However, with those assumptions being eroded, the mood is now more reminiscent of a post-colonial country. People are looking back for a sense of hope. Ask Trump voters when they would like to go back to if they wanted to make America great again and they will give you a date. Jeff Baxter wants to go back to the glow of the 60s, Ted to the 80s, others to the 50s and beyond.
There are, of course, many white Americans looking forward, fighting for their place in a more equal and just, multiracial future. Heather Heyer, a 32-year-old paralegal, was killed while protesting against the neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville when a car, allegedly driven by a neo-Nazi sympathiser, ploughed into the crowd. “She wanted equality,” her father, Mark Heyer, said. “And in this issue of the day of her passing, she wanted to put down hate.”
Her mother, Susan Bro, refused to take the president’s condolence call. “I’ve heard it said that the murder of my daughter was part of making America great,” Bro added. “The blood on the streets … is that what made America great? Attacking innocent people with a vehicle … is that what made America great?”
When American Renaissance, a white supremacist group straining to put a veneer of intellectualism and respectability on its bigotry, came to Montgomery Bell state park near Nashville in the summer, they were met by a crowd of mostly white protesters, chanting: “No Klan, no hate, no racists in our state.”
One told me that Trump’s election had shaken some white people out of their complacency. “We were asleep at the wheel,” she said. “We can no longer find comfort in silence. We have to dig up all the courage we have, to take a stand for what’s morally right.” On the journey back to Nashville I stopped at a secondhand shop on the roadside, selling Confederate paraphernalia, owned by Nikki who had a complicated relationship to the stars and bars. “I’m a proud southerner,” she said. “But you and I both know the [American] civil war’s basically about slavery,” she told me. “Thank God we lost, thank God … but it doesn’t mean that we still don’t wanna honour our dead.”
Trump did not create this anxiety nor this division. References to the civil war and the Klan illustrate for just how long white America has been riven by its sense of moral purpose and material privilege. What is new is that Trump has emboldened the bigots and channelled their thinking in a fashion not seen in modern times. A president who draws a moral equivalent between neo-Nazis and anti-fascist protesters, who baits black athletes and black journalists, brands Mexicans rapists and Muslims terrorists.
One of those to whom he has given confidence is Richard Spencer, the intellectually unimpressive, historically illiterate huckster who rallied the far right in Charlottesville. Spencer, who wants to create an “ethno-state” for white people, claims to have coined the term “alt-right” – a sanitised word for the extreme right. In July last year, Trump’s former chief strategist, Steve Bannon, boasted that his website Breitbart News was a “platform for the alt-right”.
When I encountered Spencer at Montgomery Bell park, he emerged carrying a glass of what smelled like bourbon and an entourage of adoring bigots soon surrounded me in the car park. More odious troll than eloquent polemicist, he claimed, among other things, that Africans had benefited from white supremacy and that, despite having been banned from 26 European countries, Europe would always be more his home than mine. “If Africans had never existed, world history would be almost exactly the same as it is today,” he claimed. “Because we are the genius that drives it.” Like a vulture preying on the anxiety, and with few alternatives on offer – as much as people cited Trump as the problem, few offered Democrats as the solution – he felt confident.
“People are now aware of the term ‘alt-right’ … I don’t think Trump shares the ideal of the ethno-state … But he wouldn’t have run the campaign that he ran if he didn’t feel some sense of loss, that America has lost something,” he said.
He felt he was gaining influence. This was one of the few accurate things he actually said. And by far the most chilling.
Angry, White and American is on Channel 4 at 10pm on Thursday 9 November

Rats in Sheep Clothing

$
0
0

The Vectors of neo-Fascism

November 2, 2017


Guest Post by Yoav Litvin
Rats are opportunistic social mammals that can adapt to – and survive in – a plethora of environments. They are skilled diggers, climbers and swimmers, have highly developed olfaction and hearing and communicate by leaving scent markings and emitting ultrasonic vocalizations.

Rats can serve as vectors for a variety of diseases. For example,  the “Black death” pandemic(aka “plague” and “Bubonic plague”) of the 14th century that killed up to a third of Europe’s population was caused by the Yersinia pestisbacteria, which was transmitted to humans by the bites of the Oriental rat flea. The infected fleas were transported to Europe from China through trade routes in Central Asia most likely on the backs of Black rats (Rattus rattus), which typically served as vehicles in a rodent-flea-rodent enzootic cycle, but were sometimes the fleas’ initial victims. Humans entered the plague’s cycle only accidentally due to a convergence of conditions that enabled its propagation.
Rats are nocturnal animals that tend to live in damp, tight and dark places such as gutters and burrows and avoid interaction with humans. As a result, rat sightings during daylight are (correctly or not) associated with major infestations. However, repeated daytime rat sightings may better indicate a diseased population rather than infestation.

Throughout the spread of plague many infected rats likely surfaced during daylight as a result of their disoriented diseased state. Dying and injured rats tend to exhibit abnormal defensive behaviors. Thus, it is likely that sick, Oriental flea-infested rats occasionally attacked humans, and were blamed for directly transmitting the plague via bites or scratches, even though the real culprits were their resident fleas.

Nonetheless, rats served a critical function in the spread of plague and have been vilified for centuries as purveyors of death and disease.

The Black Death of the 20th century

In a similarly ruthless fashion to the plague of the 14thcentury, the Black Death of the 20th century – Nazism/fascism– destroyed much of Europe.

But Nazism did not easily infect the German public and by extension everything the Nazi war machine touched. Nazism was able to proliferate due to a convergence of conditions in Europe in general and in Germany in particular and was normalized by its own version of rat vectors who bridged the gap between the plague of Nazism and the German public.

Nazism’s rats, Goebbels and other propagandists, had the essential role of normalizing Hitler and Nazism, a process known as Gleichschaltung, or Nazification, i.e. infection of German society with fascistic thought. This process relied on systematic smoke and mirrors that involved lying, diversion and scapegoating as a means of enabling Hitler and his Nazi party to dominate past the point of no return.

One such example of scapegoating was the Nazis’ portrayal, vilification and targeting of Jews. In an astounding case of psychological projection, Nazi propaganda created images and even a motion picture – Der Ewige Jude (“The Eternal Jew”) – which depicted Jews as invasive species that infested and plagued Europe while devouring its precious resources.

And just like the Bubonic plague, Nazism had its own enzootic cycle, maintaining a healthy population of rat carriers, while infecting and killing a minority; Hitler infamously used people to propagate his ideas, only to kill them once they served their purpose and/or became a threat. The case of Gregor Strasser who was murdered on Hitler’s orders on the purge of the “Night of long knives” in 1934 was emblematic of this phenomenon.

Today’s neo-fascism
Fascism, the plague of 20th century Europe, had to be forcefully crushed in order to stop its global spread. All attempts to defeat it through diplomacy or attrition failed.

Since its defeat, the plague of fascism has been lying relatively dormant, restricted to local and very limited outbreaks. As such, fascism’s vectors have also been contained to their dark and hidden burrows, away from the general public, confined to esoteric publications and the dark corners of the internet.

But the years 2016-2017 have signified a rise to power of a mutated yet distinctly related form of fascism – a 21st century neo-fascism, propelled by a unique set of variables, which have enabled its outbreak.

Though dissimilarto the 20th century version in some ways, 21st century neo-fascism has many of the attributes of its ancestor. In line with Umberto Eco’s simple and useful characterization of 20th century fascism, Trump’s contemporary version has, among others, the following symptomatically fascistic attributes: (i) traditionalism (e.g. Make America Great Again!); (ii) a distrust of the intellectual world (e.g. climate change denial, unfounded conspiracies); (iii) fear of difference (e.g. Muslim ban, the US-Mexico wall); (iv) appeal to a frustrated middle class (see here, here and here); (v) militaristic elitism and contempt for the weak; (vi) machismoand; (vii) newspeak.

Donald Trump echoes a form of demagoguery reminiscent of Hitler’s in many ways. Trump’s pathological lying, his buffoonery and his anti-Semitic, misogynist and xenophobic appeal to the masses have kept people off balance and enabled his fascist creep into power.

Trump is skillfully using trial balloons to test public resistance before creating precedents that would serve to shatter acceptable taboos as a prelude to authoritarianism.

Though still incapable of fully consolidating power, Trump has been able to manipulate a corrupt and often times subservient media to serve his purposes of distraction and scapegoating, which mask his ongoing looting of the American democracy and public sphere.

What’s more, the surge of the plague of neo-fascism has stimulated an accompanying emergence of its rat vectors from their hideouts. For example, Breitbart news, a fringe, conspiracy-riddenand White supremacist haven, has been virtually normalized and mainstreamed, tragically also by figuresassociated with the Left.

Rats in sheep clothing
Infiltration of Left-wing spaces is a common and insidious form of normalization of fascistic ideology, politicians and policies. Such vectors of the fascist plague – rats in sheep clothing – seek to promote “red-brown” alliances, and squash any meaningful threat from a mobilized anti-fascist Left.
Rats in sheep clothing are easier to spot if one knows what to look for. In essence, these propagandists perpetuate a con job by using pseudo-intellectual, ahistorical analyses, and ambiguous, manipulative and convoluted language to mask their underlying motivations.

Rats in sheep clothing provide the smoke and mirrors necessary for the fortification and domination of the reactionary, White supremacist, anti-Semitic, counter-revolutionary forces they champion, and will attack and ridicule their sworn enemies – anti-fascists and anarchists, from a so-called Leftist perspective.

Rats in sheep clothing will deny the very existence of fascism, scapegoat Jews and other “out” groups such as immigrants (also groups that are more sensitive to growing bigotry), convey opinions as facts, and heavily rely on a contrived “unity” to deflect challenges to their writings and actions (see here).
Finally, due to their syncretistic and often contradictory set of belief systems, rats in sheep clothing will continue the fascist tradition of psychological projection and scapegoating, accusing their enemies of their own inadequacies.

A case study
The recent articles by the writer Diana Johnstone: “Antifa in theory and in practice” and “The harmful effects of Antifa” both published on CounterPunch, are examples of this phenomenon.
The first article begins with a quote by Ennio Flaiano, which equates fascists with anti-fascists. This sort of immoral equivalency was unsurprisingly echoed by Donald Trump himself after the tragic events at Charlottesville.

Johnstone continues by denying the very existence of fascism, a word she often places in double quotes, mocking antifascists as “more inspired by Batman than by Marx or even by Bakunin”, and attributes the alarm over the American and global trend to the “ancestral fear in the Jewish community”:

“The scarcity of fascists has been compensated by identifying criticism of immigration as fascism.  This identification, in connection with rejection of national borders, derives much of its emotional force above all from the ancestral fear in the Jewish community of being excluded from the nations in which they find themselves.”
– Diana Johnstone; “Antifa in theory and in practice”

This ahistorical assessment (one of many in her piece, see here), which depicts national borders only from an exclusionary and limited uniformity perspective and not as borders of oppressive/racist/fascist regimes beyond which is refuge, contradicts the aforementioned symptoms evident in Donald Trump and his administration, blaming them on a sort of Jewish hysteria. What’s more, it denies the indisputable trend in Europe, which has plagued Germany, Austria, and Greece, among other countries.

It is unsurprising that Johnstone would protest against “criticism of immigration”, as she whitewashed the racism and nativism of the far-right French candidate Marine Le Pen before the elections in France, and even went so far as to claim that Le Pen was on the Left of the French political map (for more see here).

The reference to Jews’ “ancestral fear… of being excluded” is a regurgitation of an anachronistic, factually false and anti-Semitic trope. Nowadays, many Jews continue to be in line with the Zionist notion of nation-states and global apartheid rather than “rejection of national borders”. In fact, it is Zionist ideology itself that manipulates Jewish fear to justify its exclusivist national borders, not their rejection.

Palestine solidarity movements, including but not limited to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) one, have been plagued by infiltration of Johnstone’s brand of propaganda, which masks itself as “anti-Zionist”, but is quite harmful to the Palestinian fight for justice. Notably, the BDS movement has explicitly come out against racism and bigotry of all kinds, including anti-Semitism.

Tellingly, in an email exchange Johnstone could not provide a reference for the above quote, claiming it was a conclusion that she arrived at after “a long lifetime of observation”. When probed further she referred to the activities of “influential Jews as George Soros, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, and Bernard-Henri Lévy”, and sent a reference from a “totally Jewish source”.

Finally, Johnstone’s writing continues a tradition of psychological projection when she refers to Antifa as “storm troopers of the neoliberal war party” (in “Antifa in theory and practice”). Her brand of writing serves as a vector for the epidemic of neo-fascism, which only expands on and continues the neoliberal establishment policies of its predecessors, and is now at the helm of the American empire.

Lessons from history
The Left must learn the lessons of 20th century fascism and apply them to the rising tide of 21st century neo-fascism.

The spread of neo-fascism and the neutralization of its opposition depends on propagandists who normalize fascist ideology and enable it to dominate. In order for the Left to protect itself against infiltration of rats in sheep clothing, it must learn to detect their modus operandi, refuse to coddle them or participate in propagating their ideas. Lefty anti establishment outlets should preserve their integrity and learn from the example of the Munich Post, which relentlessly and fearlessly documented the Nazi party’s atrocities and Hitler’s dubious and duplicitous political maneuvers, up until the outlet was forced to close.

Only by keeping to principles of truth, justice and equality, and chasing the rats/propagandists back to their natural dwellings – the gutters and burrows of the media world – will humanity have a chance to survive the looming neo-fascist plague.

Art by Banksy; Photo by Yoav Litvin

Emily Thornberry – Labour’s Racist Foreign Secretary in Waiting

$
0
0

Thornberry’s support for 2 States equals support for continuing Apartheid

Imperialism in the Guise of Peaceful Progress was always the basis of Labour Support for Empire

Emily Thornberry has, quite undeservedly, a reputation, as being on the Left, albeit the soft-Left. This is because she was one of the few who didn’t resign in the ‘chicken coup’ engineered by Hilary Benn in the summer of 2016.  It was because stayed loyal to Jeremy Corbyn that  she has gained her present influence and reputation.  There can however be no doubt from what Emily Thornberry has been saying and doing recently that she is a die-hard albeit sophisticated Zionist.  Thornberry is not a headbanger like Jeremy Newmark, Louise Ellman  and Ian Austin.  That is what makes her so dangerous

Thornberry is also an opportunist.  She is one of 36 of Labour Friends of Israel’s sponsors who are also supporters of Labour Friends of Palestine.  She not only supports the Palestinians but she also supports their oppressors!  That’s what’s called even-handedness. 
Peter Edwards, Blairite Editor of Labour List refused to allow a response to the piece on Emily Thornberry because 'it will cause huge offence to our readers'- Edwards doesn't mind 'hugely offending' his readership every time he carries an article by the execrable arms salesman Luke Akehurst - that is 'free speech'
In an articlefor the paint strippingly boring Labour List, the official Labour site which is run by Blairite Peter Edwards, Thornberry stated that ‘People who believe Israel does not have the right to exist should be drummed out of the Labour Party.’  What she means by Israel is not the right of Israelis to live there just like White South Africans were welcomed to stay, but the right of a racist ethno-religious state of Jewish supremacy.
A reminder that Thornberry is currently touring Israel and flattering the Zionist
The Balfour Declaration

Thornberry used a speech commemorating the centenary of the Balfour Declaration ‘to condemn the “scourge” of anti-Semitism.’  Admittedly this is indeed a good time to condemn, not merely the scourge of anti-Semitism but the scourge of all racism and who better to use as an example of this anti-Semitism and racism than Balfour himself.

Arthur James Balfour was nothing if not a racist and imperialist.  As Chief Secretary to Ireland he was known as ‘bloody Balfour’ for having ordered the troops to  open fire killing 3 Irishmen who were demonstrating in Mitchelstown, County Cork.  In 1893, he spoke in parliament describing how Cecil Rhodes, the godfather of white supremacy, was “extending the blessings of civilization.”  Two years later – then in opposition – he described Black people as “less intellectually and morally capable” than whites. [The racist worldview of Arthur Balfour, David Cronin]
This is the reality of today's Israel - Democracy Index Report 2017
In 1906, the British House of Commons was engaged in a debate about the native blacks in South Africa. Nearly all members of Parliament agreed that the disenfranchisement of the blacks was evil. Not so Balfour, who – almost alone — argued against it.

“We have to face the facts,” Balfour said. “Men are not born equal, the white and black races are not born with equal capacities: they are born with different capacities which education cannot and will not change.”  [see Yousef Munayyer, Jewish Forward, It’s time to admit that Arthur Balfour was a white supremacist — and an anti-Semite, too

Balfour was one of the most racist and reactionary politicians of the imperialist age.  He was a white supremacist.  It is no accident that whilst he fought bitterly against the idea of admitting Jewish refugees to Britain from Czarist Russia’s pogroms he also welcomed Zionism.  Zionism was seen as an ‘antidote to socialism’ in the words of Count von Plehve, the Czarist Minister of the Interior and author of the Kishinev pogrom. 
Thornberry is seen here doing her best to boost the Jewish Labour Movement - which is the 'sister party' of the overtly racist rednecks of the Israeli Labour Party
Balfour also didn’t like Jews very much.  He told Chaim Weizmann, the President of the Zionist Organisation and later Israel’s first President, that ‘he agreed with some of Cosima Wagner’s ‘anti-Semitic postulates’. These postulates were that Germany’s Jews had “captured the German stage, press, commerce and universities and were putting into their pockets, only a hundred years after emancipation, everything the Germans had built up in centuries”. [Chaim Weizmann, Trial and Error, p. 153].

As Leonard Stein noted, if Balfour was an ardent Zionist, “it was not out of a sentimental tenderness for Jews”. When the anti-Zionist leader of British Jewry, Lucien Wolf, appealed to him to intercede with the Russian government to end Jewish persecution, Balfour “admitted that the treatment of the Jews was abominable beyond all measure”, but also went on to remind Wolf that “the persecutors had a case of their own”.  See Tony Greenstein, Centrepiece of imperial strategy, Weekly Worker, 3 November 2017]

Indeed it is quite natural that Zionists, in and out of the Labour Party, should wish to pay their respects to Arthur James Balfour.  When they declare that this representative of British imperialism is their hero we should acknowledge that they are indeed both cut from the same cloth.  What though is an utter disgrace is that Labour’s Shadow Foreign Secretary, Emily Thornberry, should be representing an anti-racist Party in paying homage to both an anti-Semite and a white supremacist.  For anyone else it would be an expulsion offence.
Despite praising the racist Lord Balfour Thornberry is happy to give support to the false anti-Semitism narrative
One would expect nothing else than for the Jewish Labour Movement (formerly Poale Zion) to honour the memory of Arthur James Balfour.  If you want to understand why Poale Zion, which supported a Jewish colour bar in Palestine, whereby Jewish employers who employed Arabs were picketed out by the Zionist trade union Histadrut, was allowed to affiliate to the Labour Party in 1921, you have to understand Labour support for the British Empire.  Whereas the Tories never hid their desire to exploit the Empire for imperial gain, Labour disguised their support for Empire under comforting words such as ‘Trusteeship’ – we were holding the colonies in trust for when the ‘backward peoples’ that inhabited it would become civilised.
When Labour finally achieved a majority government in 1945 under Clement Attlee, Labour became the most vicious of all imperialist governments.  We super-exploited colonies such as Ghana for cocoa and Malaya for tin and rubber.  It was under a Labour government that a murderous counter-insurgency war was begun against a guerrilla insurgency in Malaya from 1948  to 1960.

It was only a minority of Labour members under people like Fenner Brockway who supported the Movement for Colonial Freedom (renamed Liberation) from 1947 onwards.  The Attlee government built the welfare state on the backs of Black and South Asian people, something which is forgotten today.
But it was amongst the Left that support for Israel was greatest in the 1940’s onwards.  Tribune was a bastion of support for the Israeli state as was the New Statesman.  Israel was seen as recompense for the Holocaust.  The idea that the Palestinians should pay for Europe’s genocide of the Jews came naturally to those imbued with the ideas of imperialism.  People like Ian Mikardo, Harold Wilson, Jo Richardson, Tom Driberg and most infamous of all, the nakedly racist Richard Crossman were the most pro-Zionist of all.  Indeed in those days it was the Right of the Labour Party – from Ernest Bevin to Christopher Mayhew and David Watkins – who were supporters of the Arabs.

The Israeli Kibbutz was seen as an oasis of socialism where there were no private property relations and, in theory, everything was shared in common.  The fact that no Arab or non-Jew could be a member of the Kibbutz was ignored.  The natives rarely featured in social democracy’s vision of the world.  Today the Kibbutzim are no longer spoken of.  Today they are examples of collective managerial capitalism, employing cheap Arab or Jewish labour and heavily involved in the production of arms.
Thornberry supports 'both sides' the racists and the victims of racism
Thornberry is one of the sponsors of the Israeli States front organisation, Labour Friends of Israel
It was only the Lebanon War of 1982 that led to a political realignment.  Tony Benn, Eric Heffer and others on the Left resigned from Labour Friends of Israel after the latter’s support for the  Lebanon War.  Increasingly it was the Right who took up the cudgels of Zionism.  In essence this was because of the increasingly open support for the Israeli state from America.  The Right of the Labour Party, as symbolised by Blair’s support for Bush’s war in Iraq, has always seen support for US foreign policy as axiomatic.

There is no place in Labour for Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’

Thornberry made two statements that need to be challenged.  If you challenge the Israeli state’s ‘right to exist’ then you should not be in the Labour Party.  Well we should challenge every racist and ethno-nationalist state’s ‘right to exist’.  No state has a ‘right to exist’ least of all racist states.  Only human beings have the right to exist.  State’s are the creations of humanity and unlike humans have no rights. 

The Israeli state however is a special type of state, much like its South Africa cousin 25 years ago.  It is a self-declared ‘Jewish state’ – which means it is a State of all Jews, not merely Jews in Israel but throughout the world.  Even when they don’t wish to be represented by Israel.  Israel is not however a state of its own citizens.  That is the basis of the apartheid nature of the Israeli state, a  state which has over 50 laws on its statute books which directly discriminate against Israel’s own Palestinians.  In the Report brought out last year by the Pew Research Centre Israel’s Religiously Divided Societywe learnt that a plurality of Israeli Jews, some 48% supported the physical expulsion of Israel’s own Arab citizens as compared to 46% who were opposed.

The Israeli state is the most racist state in the world. The Israeli Democracy Institute’s 2017 Report Jews and Arabs:  Conditional Partnership’ found that 2/3 Israeli Jews are opposed to Arabs buying land anywhere but in Arab areas (3% of Israel’s total land) and 25% oppose them buying any land!  This is the state that Emily Thornberry defends up to the point of expelling socialists from Labour.  My reply is that it is the Emily Thornberries and other racists of her ilk who should be expelled if they refuse to reform their racist ways.

A Palestinian State

The final sop of Thornberry is that a Palestinian state should exist side by side with Israel.  In other words partition, segregation and ethnic cleansing.  Such a state wouldn’t even be a Bantustan.  In South Africa the Bantustans or Homelands into which the majority of Black South Africans were supposed to go, had greater powers than the mini-enclave envisaged for the Palestinians.

After 50 years of military dictatorship in the West Bank and Gaza (as well as the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem) there is no prospect of any Palestinian state emerging.  The newly elected right-wing leader of the Israeli Labour Party, Avi Gabbay made his position quite clear on October 16th in an interview with Israel’s Channel 2
“I won’t evacuate settlements in the framework of a peace deal, If you are making peace, why do you need to evacuate?  If you are making peace, why do you need to evacuate?”
Without dismantling the settlements there can never be a two state solution.  Gabbay is right.  No Israeli government could possibly withdraw over ½ million settlers without a civil war.  There is no political force in Israel that genuinely wants a 2 state solution.  Zionism has always claimed the whole of the Land of Israel, not half or even two thirds.  God gave all of it!

Thornberry is perfectly aware of this.  She knows that the settlements are here to say. She also knows that Israel cannot give the vote or accord any basic democratic political or civil rights to the Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza, who are estimated to number over 5 million, without the end of the Jewish state.

As the Jewish National Fund, one of the main instruments of Israeli land apartheid made clear when challenged over its policy of only allocating land to Jews,

A survey commissioned by KKL-JNF reveals that over 70% of the Jewish population in Israel opposes allocating KKL-JNF land to non-Jews, while over 80% prefer the definition of Israel as a Jewish state, rather than as the state of all its citizens.’

In other words the situation in the West Bank and Gaza will continue indefinitely because Israel is not prepared to become a democratic state at the expense of being a Jewish state.  It is a fiction even to talk of the Occupied Territories. There is no border except in the heads of racist hypocrites like Thornberry, between Israel and the West Bank. The Green Line has gone. It does not appear on Israeli maps.  In its place is an Apartheid state from the Mediterranean to the Jordan in which half the population has no rights whatsoever and a small proportion of the Palestinian, some 1.5 Israeli citizens are seen as a fifth column in Israel’s midst, awaiting a future move to ‘transfer’ them.
Those who talk of a non-existent Peace Process (Israelis call it the ‘Piss Process’) are deliberately drawing a shroud over the real issue, democratic rights for all Israelis and Palestinians.

Zionists often point to the assassinated war criminal and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who presided over the implementation of the Oslo Accords of 1993. It is often believed that they would have led to an independent Palestinian state.  This is a serious mistake.  Rabin was quite clear as to what he wanted. 

In the Knesset debate on the Oslo Accords of 5th October 1995, Rabin made his views explicitly clear:

As Amira Hass noted in Ha’aretz of 6 November 2017, in Setting the Record Straight on Yitzhak Rabin, contrary to the right-wing propaganda, the government headed by Labor had no intention of cutting the umbilical cord by which it was connected to its colonialist methods and goals. The argument with opponents in Likud was never about the principles, but only about the number and size of Bantustans to be allocated to the Palestinians.’ Rabin was quite clear:

We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority. The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.

Far from supporting Israel’s Right to Exist, I actively oppose any such right.  The right of the Israeli state (not its residents or citizens of course) to exist is akin to the right of the Apartheid or the Nazi state to exist.  Racist states have no rights.  The people in them have the right to live as one in a democratic, secular and unitary state.

Those who oppose the idea that Israeli Jews and Palestinians can live together are racists.  They are no different from those who argued 25 years ago that Blacks and Whites could never live together in South Africa.  Socialists did not accept it then and we should not accept it now.

If Emily Thornberry can’t understand that human beings should not be divided on grounds of ethnicity she should make way for a socialist and anti-racist.

Tony Greenstein

Peter Edwards
People who believe Israel does not have the right to exist should be drummed out of the Labour Party, Emily Thornberry said today.

The shadow foreign secretary also used a speech to mark the centenary of the Balfour Declaration – which enshrined Britain’s support for a Jewish national homeland – to condemn the “scourge” of anti-Semitism.

Thornberry, one of Jeremy Corbyn’s closest allies, was clear to repeat Labour’s longstanding call for international recognition for a Palestinian state living alongside an Israel in “peace and security”.
She was speaking after Theresa May met Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, before a dinner timed to recognise the Balfour anniversary tonight.

Corbyn is not attending the dinner and asked Thornberry to attend in his place.

“As we look back over these past 100 years, we must also salute the resilience and strength of the Israeli State and the Israeli people against all those who have sought to harm and destroy them: a resilience that has had constantly to adapt as the threats over the years have changed from the conventional warfare of 50 years ago to the ever-shifting tactics of terrorists today,” Thornberry said today.

“But while the threats have changed, the underlying theme has not: it is the denial of Israel’s right to exist, and there should be no place in modern society, and – let me stress – no place in the Labour Party for anyone who holds that kind of abhorrent view.”

Public debate over the declaration has renewed in many nations in recent weeks in the run-up to the anniversary.

Palestinians regard the document as an injustice and protests were held in the West Bank today. Israelis and Jews living around the world see it as an historic achievement because it paved the way for the creation of the state of Israel.

Today Thornberry delivered a cautious judgement on the legacy of Lord Balfour’s work.
“Consider also Balfour’s promise that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine’. That too remains at best a work in progress,” she said.

“So, while marking this centenary, we must also be honest and say that – until Jewish communities all over the world are free from the threat of terror, and the scourge of anti-Semitism, until the rights of the Palestinian people are secure and we have a viable, secure, internationally-recognised Palestinian State, living side-by-side, in peace and security, with the State of Israel, then the work that Balfour started cannot be considered complete.”

The Death of Carl Sargeant was a direct consequence of how Labour treats those accused of disciplinary offences

$
0
0

Sam Matthews of Disputes Committee and Iain McNicol should be immediately suspended pending investigation 




I do not know, nor should I know, the details of the allegations made against Carl Sargeant, the former Welsh Cabinet Secretary.  What I do know is that when Carl took his own life, he also didn’t know the details.  According to the family, Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones gave more details to the BBC in an interview than he did to Carl Sargeant.

In the past two years Labour’s disciplinary process has been marked by a complete absence of fairness and transparency.  The rights of the accused have been trampled upon.  Jeremy Corbyn has now talked about pastoral care but this is two years too late.  When Iain McNicol, John Stolliday and their apparatchiks were busy trawling through thousands of social media posts in order to disenfranchise supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, the feelings of those suspended were completely and totally disregarded.
Chakrabarti's recommendations have been ignored by Disputes Committee and Compliance Unit
I have communicated with a number of people who were victims of McNicol’s purge who were extremely depressed.  People who had had decades of loyal membership disregarded in the effort by these crooks to find any scintilla of evidence to disqualify them.  We all know of the suspension of a fan of the Foo Fighters and Ronnie Draper of the Bakers Union.  The Compliance Unit has been a law unto itself. 

My own experience was of been suspended for remarks I was alleged to have made and being met with a blank refusal to even acknowledge correspondence when I wrote asking for details of these remarks.  It was only when I picked up The Telegraph and Times two weeks later that I learnt that I had been the target of the Israeli Embassy and its instruments in the Labour Party, the Jewish Labour Movement and Labour Friends of Israel.
Jeremy Newmark  and Israeli state asset has fronted the 'anti-Semitism' witch hunt

The Chakrabarti Report of June 2016 recommended under Complaints Procedures that

It is also important that the procedures explain that those in respect of whom allegations have been made are clearly informed of the allegation(s) made against them, their factual basis and the identity of the complainant – unless there are good reasons not to do so  

The National Executive Committee of the Labour Party has accepted the Chakrabarti Report yet the Compliance Unit of John Stolliday and the Disputes Committee under Anne Black and Sam Matthews have consistently picked and chosen those bits of Chakrabarti  they liked and disregarded those parts which they disliked.

All the safeguards for the accused have been disregarded.

I am facing a hearing of the National Constitutional Committee and have been given 5 weeks notice after having been suspended for 20 weeks and 17 weeks after my Investigation Hearing. 

I have not been told the identity of any of my complainants even though the paw prints of Labour Friends of Israel and the Jewish Labour Movement are all over them.

Regardless of what the allegations were, Carl Sargeant had a right to know the details of what he was being accused of and those who had made the complaints.  He should have been given a chance to assess what the case was against him.  This is the right of every person who faces a trial in a court of law.  

Why is it that the Labour Party procedures are so grossly unfair compared to bourgeois justice?

It is unacceptable that the Disputes Committee and the Compliance Unit have driven a coach and horses through the Chakrabarti Report's recommendations.  The disregard of the rights of the accused have led directly to Carl Sargeant taking his life.  That, if nothing else, should emphasise their seriousness.

In the circumstances Sam Matthews who was dealing with the case should be immediately suspended as should his boss, Iain McNicol who approved his actions.  NEC member Anne Black, who for some reason is still on the Grassroots Left slate, should also be immediately suspended pending an investigation into her complete disregard of a fair and transparent procedure.

Justice demands nothing else.


And next year Ann Black, who was responsible for the suspension of the Brighton & Hove and Wallasey Labour Parties should seek the approval of Labour First and Progress.  There is no way she is on the Left.

Tony Greenstein 

On Both Sides of the Witch-hunt – The Alliance for Workers Liberty's Political Schizophrenia

$
0
0

It is not anti-Semitic to quote the mutual praise of Nazis and Zionists – just truthful


A member of the Hitler youth expressing his joy at the attacks on Jews and in Israel a small girl writing a message on a missile destined for the people of Gaza
If there is one thing that the Zionist movement hates it is being reminded of the time, 80 years ago when leading Nazis not only praised the German Zionist movement but also favoured it in preference to their ‘assimilationist’ opponents.

Whey then do I mention it?  Is it calculated cruelty? Have the Zionists changed their spots?  No the Zionist movement today is still willing to collaborate with fascists, Nazis and assorted anti-Semites. Whether it is the Zionist Organisation of America inviting Steve Bannon, the editor of Breitbart News, house magazine of the Alt-Right to their annual gala or the visit in July by Netanyahu to see his good friend the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban.  
The AWL's article attacking Moshe Machover
Orban is the most racist leader in Europe and the competition is quite strong.  I wrote that Far from Netanyahu criticising him [Orban] for his anti-Semitism, quite the opposite took place and Israel’s Ambassador in Hungary Yossi Amrani was forced to withdraw his mild criticisms.’ 

Shortly before Netanyahu landed in Hungary Orban had launched a nasty anti-Semitic campaign against George Soros, a survivor of the Nazi occupation of Hungary who Netanyahu also hates, because he finances Israeli human rights groups.   I wrote of Orban:
Admiral Horthy, who Netanyahu's friend Viktor Orban is seeking to rehabilitate
‘His real crime has been the campaign by Orban and his Fidesz party to rehabilitateAdmiral Horthy, Hungary’s ruler between 1920 and 1944 and the author of Hungary’s war-time alliance with Nazi Germany.’  
Horthy presided over the deportation of nearly ½ million Jews to Auschwitz but that little fact didn’t get in the way of Netanyahu’s love-in with him.  

According to the misnamed Alliance for Workers Liberty [Quoting Nazis to damn “the Zionists”] we are ‘left anti-Semites’ for raising such matters.  On the contrary, it is the AWL who are demonstrating that they are a bunch of social chauvinists and apologists for the racist crimes of imperialism and Zionism. 
Edwin Black, a devoted Zionist has written the most comprehensive book on the Nazi-Zionist trade agreement [Ha'avara] that helped destroy the Jewish and international boycott of Nazi Germany. [The Transfer Agreement, 1999, Brookline Books, London] Black describes how on March 25th1933 Goering, panicked by the success of the Boycott summoned the leaders of German Jewry to his offices. At the last moment the Zionists secured an invitation. The 3 non-Zionist Jewish leaders denied that they had any influence over the Boycott campaign in America because, although they couldn’t say it, they welcomed the pressure on the Nazis.  It was this which had kept Nazi violence against Germany’s Jews in check.  Black describes what happened next:
‘‘Blumenfeld [Secretary of the German Zionist Federation] stepped forward on behalf of the Zionists, declaring that the German Zionist Federation was uniquely capable of conferring with Jewish leaders in other countries… Once uttered, the words forever changed the relationship between the Nazis and the Zionists.’ [Black p.36]
The Zionists, unlike the non-Zionists, were prepared to do their best to help the Nazis defeat the Boycott if in turn the Nazis would help them build a Jewish state in Palestine. 
The Zionist   paper which welcomed the Nuremberg Laws
Why is this relevant?  Because today, as fascist groups and racism (including anti-Semitism) grow in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, the Israeli state and its leaders have the friendliest of relations with not only Orban other racist and anti-Semitic regimes for example the Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydło of the far-Right Law and Justice party.

Only today we hear news of a march of an estimated 60,000 fascists in Warsaw celebrating a pogrom against the Jews in Warsaw in 1936.  Polish Nationalist Youth March Draws Thousands in Capital - Crowd of mostly young people carries banners that read ‘Europe Will Be White’ and ‘Clean Blood’  Their slogan is ‘Pray for Islamic Holocaust’.  Presumably there is no point in praying for another Jewish one since most Poland Jews either died in the Holocaust or departed after the war.  We can assume that Israel will not be making any representations about this march.

Today the primary victims of fascist violence in Europe are Muslims and this is not unwelcome to Israel and the Zionist movement.  The far-Right in Europe and America openly admire Israel for its hostility to Muslims. The neo-Nazi leader of America’s alt-Right, Richard Spencer declares that he is a White Zionist.  Is there a difference between the march in Warsaw and the thousands of settlers who chant ‘Death to the Arabs’ in Jerusalem?
The Labour Party Marxists publication which the Zionists took exception to
The AWL is nothing if not stupid. You might have thought that their experience of being denounced as ‘anti-Semitic’ by Owen Smith in the leadership contest with Jeremy Corbyn would have taught them a lesson.  At least two AWL members – Pete Radcliffe and Daniel Randall were expelled from the Labour Party for ‘left anti-Semitism’.

The AWL is unique on the British Left. They are Trotskyist Zionists (though Trotsky would have run a mile from them!). Whereas most supporters of a 2 State solution in Palestine reluctantly accept the continuance of a racist Jewish Supremacist state, AWL endorse the Apartheid Jewish state enthusiastically.  Those who don’t share their enthusiasm are guilty of ‘left anti-Semitism’. 

Absurdly they are argue that ‘left anti-Semitism’ is not racist! As I pointed out at a debatewith Daniel Randall on the 15th September 2016, if it’s not racist it’s not anti-Semitic either!  They should find another word, like anti-Zionist!
When the head of the Gestapo's Jewish desk Baron von Mildenstein went with Kurt Tuchler and their wives for a 6 month visit to Palestine in 1933, as guest of the Labour Zionist movement, they struck a medal on their return with the Swastika on one side and the Zionist Star of David on the other
During our debateI embarrassed Randall by noting that he had been expelled from the Labour Party for ‘left anti-Semitism’.  His response was:  ‘I do want to say from the outset that it is undeniably the case that the issue of anti-Semitism has been instrumentalised and manipulated by some on the Labour Right and their supporters in the press in order to undermine Corbyn and the Left.’ [see transcript]

Never before, or since have the AWL admitted that ‘left anti-Semitism’ is a weapon used by the Right against the Left.  It took the experience of the Summer of 2016 for the AWL to realise that for the Labour Right – ‘anti-Semitism’ and being on the Left were synonymous.  In Scotland, Rhea Wolfson, the left’s candidate for the National Executive Committee and herself a member of the Jewish Labour Movement had her nomination rejected by her Glasgow constituency, after Jim Murphy, Blair’s Scottish leftover, accused Momentum of ‘anti-Semitism’.

What has angered the AWL is that Moshe Machover has been exonerated and readmitted to the Labour Party despite writing an ‘apparently anti-Semitic’, article describing the warm relations between leading Nazis and the Zionist movement in Germany.  Indeed Sam Matthews of the Disputes Committee backed away from his initial description of the article that Moshe had written and which Labour Party Marxists had reprinted. 
Heydrich - in charge of the combined police (RSHA) and the 'engineer' of the Final Solution
In the article Moshe quoted an article Heydrich had written in the SS paper Das Schwarze Korps on September 26 1935:

‘National socialism has no intention of attacking the Jewish people in any way. On the contrary, the recognition of Jewry as a racial community based on blood, and not as a religious one, leads the German government to guarantee the racial separateness of this community without any limitations. The government finds itself in complete agreement with the great spiritual movement within Jewry itself, so-called Zionism, with its recognition of the solidarity of Jewry throughout the world and the rejection of all assimilationist ideas.’ 5

The full quotation can be found in ‘The Third Reich and the Palestine Question’ [I.B. Tauris, 1985, London, p.57 and a shortened version in Zionism and Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, CUP, 2008] by Francis Nicosia, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Vermont University.

Of course by itself, this quotation simply proves that the Nazis looked on the Zionist rejection of assimilation favourably.  Obviously Heydrich, who is described by Gerald Reitlinger as the ‘engineer’ of the Final Solution [The Final Solution, Valentine Mitchell, London, 1968. p.13] was lying when he said that the Nazis had no intention of attacking the Jewish people. 

Relations between the Zionists and the Nazis went much deeper.  Lucy Dawidowicz described how in January 1935 Heydrich had issued an instruction to the Gestapo in Bavaria that Zionist youth groups ‘are not to be treated with that strictness that it is necessary to apply to the members of the so-called German-Jewish organizations (assimilationists)’. [‘War Against the Jews 1933-45, Penguin 1987’ pp.118, citing Mommsen 'Der Nationalsozialistische Polizeistaat pp.78/9and Nicosia, ZANG, p.119]

The question is whether this was just one-way traffic.  Did the Zionists reciprocate in any way and the answer is yes, very much so.  On 21st June 1933 the German Zionist Federation wrote a memo to Hitler explaining the ideological similarity between the Zionists and the Nazis.

‘On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we wish so to fit in our community [so that] fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible. Our acknowledgement of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities. Precisely because we don’t wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we too are against mixed marriages and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group… The realisation of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against the German development. Boycott propaganda… is in essence fundamentally unZionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle but to convince and to build.’ [Lucy Dawidowicz, A Holocaust Reader, p.150-153.]

The Zionists set their face against any campaign against the Nazis. They opposed a Boycott because they realized that Jewish Palestine could prosper by trading with Nazi Germany.  When faced with a choice between building a Jewish state and the needs of the Jewish diaspora they unhesitatingly chose the former.  At the World Zionist Congress in Prague in 1933 they failed even to condemn the Nazi regime. 

In August 1933 the Zionist leaders agreed a trade agreement, Ha’avara, with the Nazis which effectively destroyed the International Jewish Boycott of Nazi Germany. A Boycott which had the potential to destroy the Nazi government in its infancy. Instead the Zionist movement hitched its wagon to the success of the Nazi state.   The result was that the pressure was off Hitler and the regime in subsequently years could consolidate. 

As Black noted

Ha’avara meant that whilst most Jews were doing their best to undermine the German economy and effect the removal of Hitler, the Zionists’ interest was in stabilizing and safeguarding the German economy: ‘the Nazi party and the Zionist Organization shared a common stake in the recovery of Germany. If the Hitler economy fell, both sides would be ruined.’ [Black p. 253]

Even as ardent a Zionist as Elie Wiesel admitted that the

‘Jewish leaders of Palestine never made the rescue of European Jews into an overwhelming national priority. We know that Zionist leader Itzhak Gruenbaum... considered creating new settlements more urgent than saving Jews from being sent to Treblinka and Birkenau.

Wiesel cited approvingly Tom Segev’s conclusion that ‘Only a few survivors owed their lives to the efforts of the Zionist movement’. [The Land That Broke Its Promise : THE SEVENTH MILLION: The Israelis and the Holocaust, http://articles.latimes.com/1993-05-23/books/bk-38582_1_tom-segev/]

Yet the AWL would have you believe that to mention this naked collaboration is ‘anti-Semitic’. The AWL identify with the most right-wing, racist movement amongst Jewry.  This is the mark of their appeasement and concession to imperialism today.

It is argued that the Zionist movement at this time could not be certain that the professions of Heydrich and others, that they intended no harm to the Jews but merely sought racial separation, were false. The physical attacks on Jews in Germany and the vile anti-Semitic propaganda of Der Sturmer should have told them that the Nazi regime was no ‘ordinary’ anti-Semitic regime. Ordinary Jews knew this which was why they packed out Madison Square Gardens in New York as part of the movement to Boycott Nazi Germany. Unlike most Jews, the Zionists chose to believe the Nazis, which is why they alone of the Jews welcomed the 1935 Nuremburg Laws, which were described by Reitlinger as ‘the most murderous legislative instrument known to European history’.  The Introduction to the Nuremburg Laws read: 

‘If the Jews had a state of their own in which the bulk of their people were at home, the Jewish question could already be considered solved today…The ardent Zionists of all people have objected least of all to the basic ideas of the Nuremberg Laws, because they know that these laws are the only correct solution for the Jewish people too…’ [Moshe Machover and Mario Offenberg, Zionism and its scarecrows’ p. 38., Khamsin 6, Pluto Press, 1978, citing Die Nurnberger Gesetze, 5. Auflage, Berlin 1939 p.13/14]. 

On the 17th September, just 2 days after the promulgation of the Nuremburg Laws, Judische Rundschau, paper of the German Zionist movement welcomed them declaring that:

Germany is meeting the demands of the International Zionist Congress when it declares the Jews now living in Germany to be a national minority. Once the Jews have been stamped a national minority it is again possible to establish normal relations between the German Nation and Jewry.’ [http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/german-news-agency-on-the-nuremberg-laws]

Moshe also cited the welcome for the Nazi regime by Rabbi Joachim Prinz, one of the leaders of the German Zionist Federation.  In his 1934 book ‘Wir Juden’ (We Jews) he stated that:

‘‘(The Jews) have been drawn out of the last recesses of christening and mixed marriages. We are not unhappy about it... The theory of assimilation has collapsed. … We want to replace assimilation by something new: the declaration of belonging to the Jewish nation and the Jewish race. A state, built according to the principles of purity of the nation and race can only be honoured and respected by a Jew who declares his belonging to his own kind.’

The AWL in their articlecriticise Machover for the ‘trope of Nazi-Zionist collaboration’ (‘trope’ is a favoured word for Zionist dopes!). The article quotes at length Heydrich to prove that he was a vicious anti-Semite.  No one however disputes or his role in the Holocaust. Yet despite this Heydrich spoke favourably of the Zionists and they in turn saw in the rise of the Nazis ‘proof’ that the Jews did not belong amongst the German nation.  The article goes on to quote Hitler in Mein Kampf as saying that a Jewish state would be “a central organisation for their (Jews’) world swindling … a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.”

What else was Hitler expected to say?  That he saw a Jewish State as leading to the reforming of the Jewish character?  In fact many Nazis did believe this, including Eichmann who described himself as an ‘ardent Zionist’ but in 1922, Hitler, saw everything that was Jewish as being evil, including Zionism, which he knew little about.  However Hitler was willing to adapt to circumstances when in power.  In 1933 the same Hitler approved the trade agreement with the Zionists and in 1937-8 when others in the Nazi government wanted to end it, it was Hitler who was decisive in ensuring the Ha'avara continued up till the beginning of the war.

What Moshe Machover said in his article was merely a basic recitation of the facts of the early Zionist relationship with the Nazis.  Of course the Nazis’ flattering of the Zionist movement in Germany did not mean that they changed their attitude to the Jews.  They still sought either to expel them or exterminate them. The tragedy is that instead of unremitting opposition to Nazism, the Zionists became the Nazis useful fools. The Nazis played the Zionists like a violin. In 1941 with the beginning of the Holocaust and the deportation of the Jews of Germany, the Nazis made no distinction between Zionist and non-Zionists.  All Jews were destined for the gas chambers or the pits of Ponary. The Zionist movement even betrayed its own supporters in Europe.

Ha’avara led to 100m RM of trade between Germany and Palestine and accounted for 60% of total capital investment in the Zionist economy in Palestine. [David Rosenthall, Chaim Arlosoroff65 Years After his Assassination, Jewish Frontier, May-June 1998, p. 28, New York]
In response to the Kindertransport when Britain agreed to admit 10,000 Jewish children from Germany, Ben Gurion declared that he would prefer to save half Germany's children if they went to Palestine than all of them in England - from his official biography, The Burning Ground 
Berl Katznelson, who was a founder of Mapai, the Israeli Labour Party, and editor of the Histadrut paper Davar saw the rise of Hitler as “an opportunity to build and flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have”.[Nicosia, ZANG, p.91. Tom Segev, The Seventh Million, p.18]. Ben Gurion “hoped the Nazis' victory would become a 'fertile force' for Zionism” 

The Zionist movement functioned as a Jewish Quisling movement.  The Jews of Europe were completely written off by the Palestinian Zionist movement and the Jewish Agency. 

In the course of their article the AWL also imply that Jackie Walker was anti-Semitic for saying that the Black Holocaust of slavery isn’t commemorated on Holocaust Memorial Day. As this is a fact then presumably AWL are happy with this exclusion.

Former NUS President Malia Bouatthia is also attacked as anti-Semitic for stating that Birmingham University was “something of a Zionist outpost  Ken Livingstone’s anti-Semitism is simply taken for granted.

The AWL represent an extreme version of a historic tendency of the British Left to accept what Lenin described as the crumbs off the table of imperialism. Lenin had been seeking to explain the conservatism of the British working class in terms of its identification with the British Empire.  The AWL have a long history of support for Western imperialism from refusing to call for the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq or Afghanistan to supporting the CIA backed Islamic Mojahadeen in Afghanistan to opposition to the Republican movement in Ireland.

In Palestine the AWL treat Zionism not as an ethno-nationalist settler colonial movement but as a legitimate form of nationalism. This is despite the fact that Zionism claims that Jews world wide form a nation despite the fact that diaspora Jews do not speak the same languge, occupy the same territory or have the same culture.  It is a racial view of Jewry.  The AWL having long abandoned any concept of imperialism refuse to see Israel as a client regime of US imperialism.  The AWL also have nothing to say about the virulent racism which is inherent in a Jewish settler colonial state.

Within the trade union movement the AWL have consistently opposed any attempts at solidarity with the Palestinians.  When I spoke to UNISON conference in 2007 and 2008 in support of BDS, one of those speaking against us was from the AWL.  However the AWL’s racist support for Israel had negligible support and the motions were passed overwhelmingly.

The AWL found themselves in a dilemma when the Labour Right and Zionist Jewish Labour Movement sought to expel Professor Moshe Machover, an Israeli anti-Zionist and socialist. After all  Machover had been expelled not only for his relationship with the CPGB and Labour Party Marxists but originally for his ‘apparently anti-Semitic’ article Anti-Zionism is not Anti-Semitism’. The AWL supported the basis on which the expulsion was proposed but not the expulsion itself without losing all credibility on the Left.  In their articlethe AWL have sought to try to reconcile these contradictions – how to oppose the witch hunt of which they are themselves a victim whilst retaining their ideological purity.  The result, is as one might expect, a complete ideological mish-mash.

Author: Dale Street

Had it not been distributed as a leaflet at this year’s Labour Party conference, Moshe Machover’s article “‘Anti-Zionism does not equal anti-Semitism’” would have been just another turgid and distasteful article which had found a natural home for itself in the pages of the Weekly Worker.

A longer version of the same article – entitled “Don’t Apologise – Attack” – had been published in Weekly Worker four months earlier. According to that article:

• Anyone who thought that a retweet by Naz Shah MP – which had suggested that Israel (and, presumably, its population) should be relocated to the USA – “was anything but a piece of satire should have their head examined.”

• Jackie Walker “has been suspended for saying that there was not only a Jewish holocaust but also a black African one too.” (Wrong: that was not the reason for her suspension.)

• There was nothing antisemitic about NUS President Malia Bouattia describing Birmingham University as “something of a Zionist outpost”.

• Ken Livingstone was “certainly inaccurate” in having said that Hitler supported Zionism until he went mad. At the same time, “the point he was making was basically correct”.
The inclusion of a shorter version of the article in a “Labour Party Marxists” bulletin distributed at Labour Party conference rescued it from obscurity.

Overnight, Machover’s article became a cause célèbre for left antisemites (and antisemites in general).

Zionism is essentialised. Machover unceasingly refers to “the Zionists … the Zionists … the Zionists.” Unlike any other nationalism, Zionism is portrayed as a uniformly negative monolith.

Legitimate complaints about antisemitic arguments and ways of thinking are dismissed as a Zionist concoction: “And so the Zionists and their allies decided to launch the ‘Anti-Zionism equals Anti-Semitism’ campaign.”

This “campaign” is an international (cosmopolitan) one: “The whole campaign of equating opposition to Zionism with antisemitism has been carefully orchestrated with the help of the Israeli government and the far right in the United States.”

Antisemitism is defined in such a way that its existence in the labour movement can simply be denied as being of no account:

“The handful of people of the left who propagate a version of the ‘Protocols of Zion’ carry no weight and are without any intellectual foundation.”

Unlike others who share his current politics, Machover does not define Zionism as a form of antisemitism. But he does portray collusion with antisemitism as inherent in Zionism:“You can also attack Zionism because of its collusion and collaboration with antisemitism, including up to a point with Nazi Germany.”

This brings Machover round to the trope of Zionist-Nazi collaboration: “Let us now turn to the Zionist-Nazi connection. … The Zionists made overtures to the Nazi regime, so how did the Nazis respond? … In other words, a friendly mention of Zionism, indicating an area of basic agreement it shared with Nazism.”

The “friendly mention of Zionism” cited by Machover is a quote from an article written in 1935 by Reinhard Heydrich, published in the Das Schwarze Korps, the in-house magazine of the Nazi SS:
“National socialism has no intention of attacking the Jewish people in any way. The government finds itself in complete agreement with the great spiritual movement within Jewry itself, so-called Zionism.”

Heydrich was a hardened antisemite from the early 1930s onwards. He was one of the architects of the Final Solution. Only a few months earlier he had made clear his attitude towards Jews in another article in Das Schwarze Korps:

“In order to preserve our people, we must be harsh in the face of our enemy, even at the cost of hurting an individual or being condemned as rabble-rousers by some probably well-meaning people. …

“If someone is our enemy, he is to be vanquished subjectively and without exception. If, for example, out of false compassion, every German should make an exception for ‘only one decent’ Jew or Freemason whom he knows, we would end up with 60 million such exceptions.”

Ten years before Heydrich’s article Hitler had already dismissed a Jewish state as “a central organisation for their (Jews’) world swindling… a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.”

Thus, to illustrate the “basic agreement” which Zionism supposedly shared with the Nazis, Machover quotes an architect of the Holocaust, from an article in the magazine of the organisation which played a leading role in carrying out the Holocaust.

It is not about supporting the Palestinians. Machover says explicitly: that’s not enough. You must also demonise “the Zionists” as an evil essence running through history to link Jews today back to the taint of the Nazis.

As the Witch-hunt gathers momentum, Jon Lansman’s Momentum does nothing

$
0
0

Mike Paling and David Watson are just two of the casualties of McNicol’s war on free speech

 

Mike Paling's Expulsion letter

Draft Resolution on the Witch-hunt
This Branch/CLP

i.                Welcomes the reinstatement of Professor Emeritus Moshe Machover, who was expelled (‘auto excluded’) from the Labour Party on 3 October 2017. Professor Machover is Jewish, born in Tel Aviv in 1936,  and is the co-founder of Matzpen, the socialist organisation which from the 60s to the 80s brought together Arab and Jewish opposition to the illegal occupation of Palestine (see http://www.matzpen.org/arabic/ );

ii.             Notes that the Head of Disputes, Sam Matthews, accused Prof Machover of writing an “apparently antisemitic article” according to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism, and further accused him of “membership or support for another political party, or a political organisation with incompatible aims to the Labour Party’ on the basis of having written articles for them and having spoken on their platforms.

iii.           By this criteria Jeremy Corbyn, who was a columnist for the Morning Star for 10 years should also be ‘auto-excluded’.

iv.           The witch-hunt that the Compliance Unit and the Disputes Committee are conducting is unacceptable.  It is an attack on supporters of Jeremy Corbyn under the guise of opposing anti-Semitism.  It is used almost exclusively against those on the Left, supporters of the Palestinians and opponents of Zionism.

v.             We note the comment of Jewish comedian, Alexei Sayle in a Sky TV interview in October 2017 that:  ‘most of the people who have been suspended from the Labour Party for anti-Semitism seem to have been Jewish.’

vi.           It is noticeable that anti-Muslim or anti-Roma racism doesn’t merit the same concern by the Party apparatus.

We demand:

vii.       No auto-exclusions or expulsions. Everyone has the right to a fair hearing.  All those who have been auto-excluded must be reinstated.

viii.      That the proposed expulsions of Tony Greenstein, Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and Ken Livingstone should be halted.  It is noticeable that two of the above are Jewish and two are Black anti-racist activists.

ix.        We reject the 450 word IHRA definition of anti-Semitism whose sole purpose is to conflate criticism of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism.  We note the Opinion of Hugh Tomlinson QC that ‘It does not have the clarity which would be required from such a definition.’http://freespeechonisrael.org.uk/ihra-opinion/#sthash.xHhUS24q.dpbs

x.         We prefer the simple 21 word definition of Professor Brian Klug of Oxford University:
‘antisemitism is a form of hostility to Jews as Jews, where Jews are perceived as something other than what they are.’

xi.        The Compliance Unit should be abolished. All disciplinary action against members should be undertaken by elected bodies not full time staff.

As the the case of Mike Paling below demonstrates, the Right is attempting to reverse the victories of the Left at Party conference by stepping up the witch hunt and ‘auto-excluding’ and suspending anyone who speaks out on Palestine or is associated with a left group they disagree with.
Labour Against the Witchhunt
Next Meeting
Calthorpe Arms, Grays Inn Road, Kings Cross
Saturday December 2nd12.00-3.00 p.m.
On the very same day that Moshe Machover was expelled so was Michael Paling.  As his email to Moshe explains, his ‘offence’ was sharing posts which included articles from Weekly Worker.  His timeline is full of posts he has shared, most of them have nothing to do with the CPGB or LPM.  He was obviously targeted as an active trade unionist.  They were amongst many such posts that he shared on Facebook.  We need to put an end to this McCarthyism.  

Why the hell are Labour Party staff, paid by us, spending their time poring over social media posts of people in the party and seeing what they are sharing?

David Watson, the Fundraising Officer in Walthamstow CLP has also been suspended for 18 months now.  Stella Creasy, his local MP, takes exception to anyone speaking out on Palestine in her constituency.  The constituency is by all accounts run by her family like a mafia town.
Labour General Secretary Iain McNicol - it is almost certain that he is working with Britain's secret state to help destabilise the Labour Party
Meanwhile Jon Lansman and Momentum’s leadership are like the 3 monkeys – they neither see, say or hear anything.  It is outrageous that Momentum have done absolutely nothing about the expulsions or suspensions even though they must know that their purpose has nothing to do with anti-Semitism and everything to do with weakening the Left.  The only point of these witch-hunts is to weaken the pro-Corbyn left.

Mike Paling has been expelled under Chapter 2.I.4.B of the Labour Party's rules which states:
“A member of the party who joins and/or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour Group or unit of the Party or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a party member, subject to the provisions of part 6.I.2 of the disciplinary rules”.

These posts were the 'evidence' Mike Paling was supplied with
This rule has to go.  As it stands it could be interpreted to debar any member or supporter of Progress or Labour or indeed any organisation deemed political but of course it is only being used to debar members of left-wing groups.   An anti-fracking or an anti-racist group could equally be deemed political.  The proscribed list of organisations, such as Militant, has been scrapped.  Now any member of the Compliance Group can take exception to any group they define as political and then auto-exclude someone, without them having any right of appeal, from the Labour Party.  This rule is  witch hunter’s charter.

It could of course and maybe in the future it will be used against members of Momentum.  However today it is being used solely against people on the Left.  Although I detest the Zionist politics of the Alliance for Workers Liberty for the reasons I gave in my post yesterday, they have a right to function and operate in the Labour Party like any other group.
Letter from Mike Paling to Moshe Machover
Dear Moshe,

                    No one was happier than myself when your expulsion was rescinded after the fantastic campaigning by members. Sadly the same cannot be said for myself regarding my expulsion at the same time, my crime was the sharing of 8 items from Labour Party Marxist and the weekly worker, (CPGB).

                     I would just like to make it clear from the off, I have never attended a LPM or CPGB meeting  let alone joined either of these organisations.

                     I regularly share political articles on Facebook, including some by your good self, but I've shown no bias towards LPM or WW. I've checked my Facebook timeline and counted 12 occasions when I've shared LPM and WW pieces during September, the month cited by Sam Matthews. However, there were over 200 political articles shared from other sources, such as Labour MPs, Unite the Union, the TUC, New Statesman, national newspapers, etc, during the same period. Of course, I will dispute the premise that LPM support is incompatible with membership, but even if that is accepted, there is no evidence that I've given any such support. Like yourself, I was offered no right of appeal but given 14 days to challenge the validity of the so called evidence attached to the expulsion letter, unlike you, however Sam Matthews has not seen fit to reply to, or even acknowledge, my communication.

                    During my time as a Labour Party activist I've participated in election campaigns Party actions regularly attending CLP, branch and Momentum meetings and supporting Labour  movement, antifascist and Palestinian solidarity actions. No doubt the latter has made me more susceptible to the attention of purge minded bureaucrats. 

Kind regards, M Paling.

Please sign this petition in support of David Watson, who has been suspended for 18 months by the Labour Party
David Watson and Jeremy Corbyn

Walthamstow Labour Party fundraiser suspended – who had it in for David Watson?

EXCLUSIVE:
David Watson, Labour Party fundraising coordinator for the Walthamstow constituency in northeast London, was suspended last week for unspecified “breaches of party rules.” The Jewish Chronicle – a Zionist weekly newspaper which has been a main cheerleader for the campaign branding Labour a hotbed of Jew-hatred – gave an “Exclusive” tag to its May 6 reportalleging that Watson had been suspended because of antisemitic Facebook posts.
Both the JC and the local Waltham Forest Guardian newspaper quoted Labour MP Stella Creasy saying that “bigotry” is inconsistent with membership of “a party campaigning for social justice,” implying that this was relevant to Watson’s case.
Word in local Labour circles says it was the MP’s father Philip Creasy, Constituency Party secretary, who notified Watson of his suspension on May 9, three days after he was asked about it by a journalist from the Jewish Chronicle. How did they know?
Who has an interest in pillorying a secondary school teacher of modern languages with a long history of working with Greenpeace and the Campaign Against Arms Trade? David Watson is a man who prides himself on combating antisemitism among kids he teaches, getting them involved in projects run by organisations such as the Anne Frank Trust and Amnesty International. Might his friendship with Jewish anti-Zionists have played a role? Or his past visits to Israel and Palestine and association with Israeli and Palestinian anti-Occupation activists? Or was it merely the fact that when he was elected Walthamstow party fundraiser, he replaced Stella Creasy’s mother in the role? Witnesses present at the relevant Annual General Meeting say that the honourable member made no attempt to hide her displeasure at Watson’s election.
Some suspect the Conservatives may have had a hand in his victimisation, since pictures of Watson with Sadiq Khan, at that time vying with Tory Zac Goldsmith for election as London’s mayor, featured in the JC and alongside charges of antisemitism posted by the so-called Campaign Against Antisemitism on May 3.  Allegations had also appeared on the notorious Zionist blog, Harry’s Place.
Let’s have a look at Stella Creasy’s idea of what constitutes bigotry, remembering that this is taking place against the background of an ongoing witch hunt in the Labour Party – gleefully stoked by Conservatives joining hands with Labour opponents of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership making allegations of antisemitism, mostly distorted or even fabricated, against opponents of Israel’s colonial settlement of Palestine.
The CAA alleged that Watson believed “Israel is secretly behind ISIS.”
Reality: He had posted a picture of Israeli shells allegedly found in an ISIS camp and written over it “Mmmm”
He was charged with suggesting links between Israel and the Nazis.
Reality: He had posted a link to a Daily Mirror report, which was also carried in many other newspapers, about an SS officer who had been employed by the Israeli secret service to kill former Nazis working in Arab countries after the war. Watson wrote: “A moral army with a fine moral foundation.”
Other alleged crimes include calling Zionism a racist ideology and expressing sympathy for Palestinian “guerrillas”.
There is no hint of animosity towards Jews in any of these posts. Many Jews would agree that Zionism is a racist ideology, discriminating again Palestinians and stereotyping Jews as congenitally incapable of living alongside non-Jews in diverse societies. Many – including former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak – also empathise with Palestinians resisting the  occupation of their land.
These are subjects which we should be free to debate without being hounded out of any democratic political organisation – above all one that claims, as Stella Creasy says, to be “campaigning for social justice.

Why is Israel's Proposed Demolition of Palestinian Homes and Villages Any Different from the Apartheid State of South Africa?

$
0
0

Palestinian children in the northern Jordan Valley, November 10, 2017. Gil Eliahu
This is an urgent appeal for people to contact their MPs to ask them to contact the Foreign Office to urge them to put pressure on their Israeli counterparts to halt this illegal and inhumane action.   Below is an articleby Amira Hass in Ha’aretz on the situation.

The demolition of homes and villages that Palestinians have been living in for decades in order to make way for Jewish settlements is no different to what happened in South Africa under Apartheid.  In this case it is a ‘Jewish’ State that is carrying out these war crimes, without any protest or opposition by our own government.  When people then support BDS as a means of punishing the aggressor then our political leaders throw up their hands in horror at this ‘anti-Semitism’.

Tony Greenstein

This is the first time the army is using an eviction order against Palestinians based on a military order meant to enable the evacuation of unauthorized settlement outposts
Nov 13, 2017 11:28 AM

The army has ordered some 300 Palestinians who have lived for decades in the northern Jordan Valley to remove all their property from the area — which they’re interpreting as an evacuation and house-demolition order.

But judging from the army’s response to Haaretz, it has modified its position following an objection filed by the residents’ lawyer.

This is the first time the army is using an eviction order against Palestinians based on a military order meant to enable the evacuation of unauthorized settlement outposts. The order in question is known as the “order regarding unauthorized buildings.”

The order was not handed to any of the affected Palestinians. Instead, on Thursday morning soldiers simply left it on the road near their houses, which are located near the village of Al-Maleh.

The notice, dated November 1, was signed by the commander of the Israel Defense Forces in the West Bank, Maj. Gen. Roni Numa. Officially known as a “declaration of delimited land,” it bars anyone from entering the specified area for purposes of construction and mandates the removal of all property from that area within eight days of the day the notice was posted.

Ein al-Hilweh, in the northern Jordan Valley, November 10, 2017. Gil Eliahu
The order does not specify how many people will be evicted or give their names. But judging by the accompanying map, it applies to an area of about 550 dunams (136 acres) in which some 300 Palestinians live in two herding communities, Ein al-Hilweh and Umm Jamal. Both villages are within the jurisdiction of the Al-Maleh rural council.

The herders are raising some 4,000 sheep, 200 camels and 600 cows. All the land in question is either privately owned by Palestinians or owned by the Catholic Church.

The “order regarding unauthorized buildings,” on which the eviction notice is based, states in paragraph 6(b) that it does not apply to “anyone registered in the area’s population registry,” meaning Palestinian residents of the West Bank.
Therefore, attorney Tawfique Jabareen of Umm al-Fahm, who is representing the residents, argues that the eviction notice has no legal validity and is null and void. That is the essence of the objection he submitted to the military commander via the latter’s legal adviser Saturday morning.
Demolition of a Palestinian house
 Jabareen also said the order had not been delivered to the affected residents, but was simply left in the area eight days after it was signed. “Prima facie, this was an action in bad faith, behind which lies an intent to deny the Palestinian residents their right to a hearing or to submit objections against either the order or the declaration,” he wrote.

As Jabareen put it, “This is a mass expulsion order against the Palestinian population that violates international law.”

For its part, Israel’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories said:

“On November 9, 2017, the orders were sent as part of enforcement efforts against illegal construction at the site. The orders were served according to protocol, including physically serving it at the location the order pertains to. The new order addresses illegally built structures, not a presence at the location.”

COGAT, however, did not state where the people who live at the site would go if the structures were demolished. It also did not answer Haaretz’s question on how many people the orders would affect.

Residents of Ein al-Hilweh said Friday that about two weeks ago, soldiers came to their huts and demanded to see their ID cards, without offering any explanation.
The soldiers also used a drone to take aerial photographs of their communities. Making lists of ID cards and taking photographs are steps that often precede evictions and demolitions by the IDF and its Civil Administration in the West Bank, though residents said they did not see any Civil Administration staffers this time.

Nabil Daragmeh told Haaretz that last Thursday he saw soldiers putting something under a rock on the road in front of the hill where he lives. He also saw them photographing whatever it was they had left by the road. After they had gone, he went to see what it was.

He found one Hebrew-language order that was signed and dated, another Hebrew-language order that was neither signed nor dated, and a third order in Arabic that was also neither signed nor dated. He immediately told the other residents, who were frightened and confused.

These herding communities have been in the area for decades, but Israel does not allow them to connect to infrastructure or add new homes and public buildings to keep up with their growing population and changing needs.

Israel has also used its control over the Palestinian population registry to prevent the Palestinian Authority from listing the herders’ villages in the residence line of their IDF cards. Instead, it insists that their hometown be listed as Bardala, Ein al-Beida or some other village.

Eviction, demolition and property-seizure orders have been issued against the residents for years, but never against all of them at once, and never based on the “order regarding unauthorized buildings.”

In 2008, in an effort to alleviate the residents’ housing shortage, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization built metal shelters for them, paid for by Japan. In his letter to the military commander, Jabareen wrote that Japan and the United Nations would not have built those shelters without the Civil Administration’s permission, and such permission was indeed granted. But later he said the administration retracted its consent.

“In recent years, a number of families have repeatedly built illegally in the area. Any person who feels he is a victim of the order can turn to the authorities within an eight-day time frame,”COGAT added.

“Regarding some of the structures, the authorities are examining claims by [the owners]. Regarding these structures, no enforcement will be implemented until these examinations are complete.”

On a hill to the east of the area slated for eviction sits the settlement of Maskiot. In 2005, it received an influx of settlers who had been evicted from the Gaza Strip.
Over the last two years, two settlement outposts have also sprung up, one north and the other south of Ein al-Hilweh. The Civil Administration has issued stop-work orders against the outposts, but they still continue to expand. One of the outposts is an offshoot of another illegal outpost in the process of being legalized – Givat Salit. The second is located in the Umm Zuka nature reserve.

Both outposts raise sheep and cows, and according to local Palestinians and activists from the Ta’ayush and MachsomWatch organizations, herders from the outposts often prevent the Palestinians from grazing their flocks. In 2011, one resident of Ein al-Hilweh was forced to move his tent because of repeated harassment by the settlers.

Ein al-Hilweh and Umm Jamal aren’t unique. Over the past few months, the IDF and the Civil Administration have also taken steps toward evicting three other Palestinian communities in the northern Jordan Valley – Khalat Makhoul, Al-Farisiya (which is home to about 150 people) and Khumsa.

Snoopers, Serpents and Mosers – McNicol’s Secret Police are hard at work

$
0
0
McNicol's Inspector Clouseau refused to believe I'd been in hospital - I was on a demonstration!

Calling the fragrant Ella Rose, the Jewish Labour Movement's violent Director a 'village idiot' is a disciplinary offence unlike her threatening to 'take out' Jackie Walker

caught bang to rights going to an anti-semitic demonstration
 On November 2nd, whilst still recovering from surgery at Kings College Hospital, I received an email from Jane Shaw, one of McNicol’s apparatchiks. It was to serve notice that my Expulsion Hearing was due on December 11th.

After having been suspended for 20 months and over 17 months after my Investigation Hearing, they had finally cobbled together a bundle of some 189 pages of dross and tittle tattle.

I was being given 5 weeks notice of a hearing and less than 4 weeks to prepare a case and respond in depth to every absurdity.

In my responseI made it clear that the 11th December date was unacceptable.  Apart from my own physical condition, 5 week’s notice was unreasonable.  Although the concept of natural justice has not penetrated the thick skulls of Labour’s witch-hunters I insisted on it.  It was also less than the ‘about 6 weeks’notice that is stipulated in the Party’s own rules.
Alexei Sayle's accurate description of Labour's 'antisemitism witch hunt
So what did Ms Shaw’s handlers do?  Did they accept the fact that I had just undergone surgery and might not want to immediately turn my attention to their overlong bundle of rubbish? No, having nothing else better to do, these pitiful creatures decided to turn to the Internet and see if they could prove that I was faking it.  And sure enough they came up trumps.

Ms Shaw wrote triumphantly to me today that:  
I have to advise you that the it has been brought to the attention of the NCC that although in hospital recovering from surgery when you received the emailed notice of the charges and hearing on 2 November, on Saturday 4 November you travelled to London to attend a PSC march and rally and that that your photograph taken at Brighton station, was posted on Twitter; https://twitter.com/BrightonPSC/status/926761392203497472 
Leaving aside the grammatical errors, which are a feature of these bureaucrats, the implication was that I was never in hospital.  Or perhaps if I was fit enough to go on a demonstration then I was capable of dealing with their nonsense in the short time span allowed. 

You can see how the mentality of the Social Security snooper has crept into Southside. Always distrust the membership and their motives. In fact I was discharged from hospital on 3rd November and although I had considered not going on the demonstration because of my physical condition I considered it my duty to protest at the celebration of the Balfour Declaration. 

I have therefore sent these Labour Party scum a redacted copy of my hospital discharge notice proving that I was indeed in hospital.
The definition of a Moser, Hebrew for informer

Informers (Mosers)

I also took the opportunity to give Jane Shaw a lesson in the history of the Jews since she and her ilk have clearly taken to heart the Zionist version of Jewish history. Whoever searched for a photograph of me attending the march was in the best traditions of what is called a ‘moser’ in Hebrew – an informer.

Indeed I had this conversation 25 years ago with Baroness Joyce Gould, who styled herself the Witchfinder General (yes Labour Party hacks really do model themselves on Matthew Hopkins and those who hanged and burnt women as witches!).  It was when Brighton and Hove Labour Party was last suspended under the Kinnock witch hunt.  Joyce Gould came down to interview various members of the Party including myself.  The first question she asked me was where I had obtained a copy of her secret Report on Brighton Labour Party.

I told her that being Jewish she would understand why I had no intention of being an informer.  I think I won’t disclose too many secrets if I say now that we were kept informed of every aspect of the witch-hunt process by the Left members of the National Executive Committee.
It is puzzling what is anti-semitic about my comments, but perhaps since they quote the Zionist fake charity the Campaign Against Antisemitism prolifically they accept that Sir Gerald Kaufman was anti-semitic

In contrast to the Left on the NEC now, people like Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner, Joan Maynard, Norman Atkinson and Eric Heffer were happy to pass on the necessary documents and keep us informed of developments.  One of Blair’s reforms was to stop MPs standing for the NEC with the result that you now get people who have no backbone when it comes to standing up to the witch-hunt.  Indeed some, like Anne Black (why is she on the Grassroots Left slate?) and Rhea Wolfson are complicit in the witch hunt.

Informers are historically considered by Jews to be the lowest of the low and with good reason. During the War, the main fear of Jews in hiding was that someone, often Jewish, would betray their hiding place in return for a reward. Anne Frank, who was the symbol of diaspora rejection of Zionism, was betrayed in her last months of captivity by a moser. The penalty for informing in the Talmud is death.  However I would not suggest that McNicol and his pathetic snoops be put to death – sacking them without compensation would be fine!

Being a reasonable person, I even copied the sectionon the moserfrom the Encycopedia Judaica for the benefit of Ms Shaw, as even Labour Party staff are not beyond redemption:
An informer, denunciator, or delator; synonyms are... Nothing was more severely punished by the Jews than talebearing; and no one was held in greater contempt than the informer. On account of the fact that his deeds frequently caused mischief and even entailed death and destruction, the sages of the Talmud compared the "moser" to a serpent.

I don’t know who the name of the particular serpent who decided to trawl Twitter and social media to find proof I was lying. Clearly the Chief serpent is McNicol and John Stolliday is his Deputy.  There are unfortunately many serpents at Southside.

I can understand that the organ grinder McNicol and his monkeys want to expedite my expulsion.  My expulsion Bundle demonstrates that the opponents of socialism that Blair appointed to positions at Labour Party HQ are still there. Those who wore black when Corbyn was first elected are still there. It is Corbyn’s primary failure to have not replaced the reptiles that Mandelson and Blair installed. 

These mini Torquemadas live in a different universe from most socialists and people. To these racists Israel really is Reagan’s City on the Hill.  It is an oasis of democracy in the Middle East even as it maintains a 50 year old military occupation of Palestine in order to prevent 5 million Palestinians from having even basic or cursory democratic rights.  To even call Israel an Apartheid state is a disciplinary offence, as is made clear in my Bundle.  Even as Israel steps up the rate at which it demolishes Palestinian homes and entire villages in search of Jewish racial purity, so McNicol and his chums see Israel as a beacon of light and goodness.



It is an Offence to Describe Israel as a Racist Settler Colonial State
The offending post
The  charge
For example these hacks copied on pages 99-103, four pages from my blog on the destruction of the Bedouin village of Umm al Hiran in Israel’s Negev.  Umm al-Hiran is not in the West Bank but in Israel pre-1967. Umm al Hiran has been there since 1956, when it was moved from its previous location when Israel invaded the Sinai desert during the Suez War.  To this day it has always been ‘unrecognised’ i.e. it has no running water, electricity or sewerage.  In January of this year it was demolished and a school teacher was murdered driving his car.  Why?  To make way for a Jewish village (i.e. no Arabs can live there) called Hiran. It is part of the Prawer plan which is a programme of ethnic cleansing of the Negev. The Negev is a desert which is 98% empty. The Jewish town could have been built adjacent to the Bedouin village but that would have defeated the whole object which is to Judaify the Negev and drive its Arabs into townships and squatter camps much as happened in South Africa. 

The demolition of Umm al Hiran is a prime example of Zionism’s gross and vile racism. Yet the racist apparatchiks who comprise the Compliance Unit have instead highlighted my headline ‘Israel is a racist, settler colonial state as one of my charges.   I shall look with interest to the explanation of these creatures as to why the demolition of Umm al-Hiran is not racist.

Ella Rose
Ella Rose admitting that she worked with Israel's freelance agent Shai Masot
Sweet Ella Rose has a way with words
For those with short memories a reminder.  Ella Rose was a free transfer from the Israeli Embassy to the position of Director of the Jewish Labour Movement.  She tried to keep this hidden, as it was potentially embarrassing as it tended to show that the JLM is just an extension of the Israeli Embassy. Asa Winstanley of Electronic Intifada outed her. Al Jazeera’s The Lobby records her reactions – ‘fuck you, fuck you, fucking anti-Semites the lot of them’.  Presumably Asa Winstanley was anti-Semitic for outing her little lies.
Calling the spoilt brat an idiot is also an offence - and suggesting that any boyfriend best beware an accusation of anti-Semitism is a hanging offence
I therefore made a joke saying that if Ella Rose had a boyfriend he’s better watch out because if he jilted her he might be accused of anti-Semitism.  Given the proclivity of Zionists to accuse anyone they fall out with or disagree with of anti-Semitism, it was fair comment.  I also commented, after her foul mouthed tirade against Jackie Walker that when she got a job with the JLM some village lost its idiot!  Apparently this is a disciplinary offence too!
calling Crooked McNicol by his name is also an offence!

The delightful Ella Rose went on to tell us of Asa Winstanley’s revelations that ‘it was all anti-Semitic to be honest’ and then this loud mouthed spoilt brat went on to threaten violence (because all these Zionists are such pacifists underneath):  ‘I saw Jackie Walker on Saturday and thought you know what I could take her, she’s like 5’2” and tiny.’  Complaints were made to Crooked McNicol, Labour’s General Secretary but of course an allowance was made for this foul mouthed woman because she was one of them.  If it had been a Momentum member making this threat they would have been ‘auto excluded.’ 
I said the invitation was 'tempting' McNicol's minions were not amused
Saying that I was tempted to take up Ella's kind offer to shoot her doesn't amuse the humourless bastards at Southside
And then there was the climax, to our heroine’s outburst:  ‘I’m a Zionist shoot me.’  So what did I put on my blog?  Well I said that I was very tempted to take up Ella’s offer, however in the circumstances I would have to decline or words to that effect.  Any normal person would understand that my comments were meant as seriously as Ms Rose’s original remarks but my joke is also now a disciplinary offence!  One thing that comes over loud and clear is that McNicol and his merry band of McCarthyites have absolutely no sense of humour. 
Yes dear, everything you don't like is anti-Semitic - I suspect you accuse your breakfast of being anti-semitic sometimes
I sent him a satirical email, purporting to come from a Zionist.  In it I suggested that maybe the Labour Party should submit all membership applications to the Israeli Embassy just to be on the safe side.  It would appear that the humourless apparatchiks at Southside took it literally. Because in the witness statement for the Labour Party in my attempt to obtain unredacted documents from them, the verdict for which still hasn’t come through, their solicitor states (Para 20(b)(ii) that:
The Claimant also openly regards Muslims as "the route [sic] cause of our [the Party's] problems" [315] and talks with his followers about how it is "tempting" to shoot a Jewish Labour Movement staff member for being a Zionist.’ [332 - 333].’
from one Israeli state funded project to another
Clearly irony is lost on these humourless bastards.  This forms Charges 19-20 on the List of charges.  They provide a transcript of sorts, but it is highly inaccurate.  If people want to go to the source of what transpired at my investigation then they should go to my article Labour’s Inquisition – from the banal to the mundane as Harry Gregson’s notes are inaccurate.

You can see in Charge No. 17 that what is involved has nothing to do with anti-Semitism but pure suppression of political debate:  It is apparently an offence to have called Jeremy Newmark and his organisation, the Jewish Labour Movement, racist.  Well they are affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation which is involved in theft of Palestinian land and the building of settlements and it is the sister party, by its own admission, of the Israeli Labour Party which is indisputably racist.  It is the original party of ethnic cleansing and today openly calls for segregation and separation from Arabs.  Telling the truth in McNicol’s world renders you guilty of a disciplinary offence.  You must not speak the truth.

Below is my latest correspondence with Ms Shaw:

Tony Greenstein


 Monday, 13 November 2017

Jane Shaw
The Labour Party
Southside,
105 Victoria Street
London  SW1E 6QT

Dear Ms Shaw,

Yes I obtained a copy of the Rule Book, however it was not from you.  In your letter of 8th November you stated that ‘the timetable stated in my letter is as stated in the procedure for NCC hearings set out in appendix 6 of the Rule Book, a copy of which has been provided to you.’  The fact is that a copy of the Rule Book had not been provided to me up to that point and was only subsequently sent by you, by which time I had already received it.

I find it outrageous that you are monitoring social media and other outlets, like some poor man's version of the Political Police, in order to try and negate and undermine what I have told you about being in hospital.  You are no different to the snoops and informers from the DWP who try to catch people out in order that they can reduce their benefit. 

My attendance at the Palestinian march on November 4th is in no way contradictory to what I have told you so can you stop inferring that I was doing what you and your associates do as a matter of course, which is to lie and dissemble.  I did not invent a stay in hospital nor was that the main thrust of my argument as to why I will not be attending on December 11th.

Your behaviour and that of your associates is despicable.  You seem to see your job as spying on members of the Labour Party and fitting them up for expulsion.  The question that comes to mind is who do you actually work for?  Instead of working to get Jeremy Corbyn and Labour elected as the next government you see your job as policing the Labour Party and weeding out socialists with whatever pretext comes to mind.  You have the mentality of the Stasi.

My primary reason for seeking a more reasonable time table is, once again:
i.                                I have been given five not ‘about six’ weeks notice as per the Rule book
ii.                              The time laid down in the Rule book is a minimum not a maximum. There is no reason, other than a desire to prevent me from mounting an effective defence to try and expedite the matter.  Your failure to agree to a more reasonable period of notice within which to prepare a defence suggests that the intended NCC hearing is little more than a rubber stamp affair.  What you are organising is a Kangaroo Court.
iii.                            The Bundle of papers that your snoopers and trolls have prepared comes to 189 pages.  In order to prepare a response to this I need far more time than 5 weeks.
iv.                            You took 17 months after my Investigation hearing or 20 months after my original suspension to prepare this bundle.  Equity demands that you accord me a reasonable time to prepare a defence to the charges.

As regards the matter that you and your fellow snoops and mosers (that is a Hebrew word for informer)believe they caught me out on my response is as follows:

I was admitted to Kings College Hospital on 1st November and discharged on 3rd November.  Yes I attended the demonstration on 4th November but I did not march the whole route precisely because of my physical condition.  However I am under instructions to walk as much as possible because it is necessary for my medical condition that I should get as much exercise as possible. 

I enclose the Discharge Notification from Kings College which I trust your moserswill verify from their own sources.

In the Jewish Encyclopedia there is a section on the moser. 

An informer, denunciator, or delator; synonyms are... Nothing was more severely punished by the Jews than talebearing; and no one was held in greater contempt than the informer. On account of the fact that his deeds frequently caused mischief and even entailed death and destruction, the sages of the Talmud compared the "moser" to a serpent.

Informers were particularly detested by Jewish people because their activities led to peoples’ death.  Jews hiding out under Nazi occupation feared the informers most of all.  It was one such creature who was responsible for the death of Anne Frank.  It seems that you and your associates take some pride and pleasure in your activities. This is the tradition that you and Iain McNicol stand in.  The quotation above describes the activities of McNicol’s informers as that of a serpent.  I can’t think of a better adjective.

Having now provided you with the medical information (& I have redacted the discharge form for 3rd party and confidential medical and personal information) I now expect you to accede to my request.

As regards the composition of the NCC you say you refuse to provide any information as to the identity of those who are hearing the case.  This too is outrageous.  Not only am I not informed of the identity of my accusers I am now denied all knowledge of who is to judge me.  Franz Kafka eat your heart out.

I therefore wish to lodge the strongest objection to any member of the Jewish Labour Movement, one of whom I believe is a member of the NCC, from being part of the panel.  The Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement Jeremy Newmark has expressed, on more than one occasion, his view that I should be expelled.  The JLM has, despite your attempts at redaction, clearly submitted a complaint against me.

I am also requesting that you strip out of the Bundle all social media posts that allegedly come from me.  They are my personal data and I do notgive you permission to copy them or use them in any manner whatsoever.  The Labour Party has already been informed by the Information Commissioner that such material is the personal data of members and as such you have to obtain their permission to use it.

Yours sincerely,

Tony Greenstein


Dear Mr Greenstein,

It was unfortunate that your first email to me went into my junk folder, but I’m not sure what further communication problems that you experienced.  After receiving my email sent 8 November at 1134, you emailed me the same day at 13.56 and I responded less than two hours later at 15.25 and attached a copy of the rule book, which you now say in your latest email, copied below, that you have read. 

As regards your request for a postponement of the hearing set for 11 December and for additional time in which to submit your answer to the NEC’s charges, I have to advise you that the it has been brought to the attention of the NCC that although in hospital recovering from surgery when you received the emailed notice of the charges and hearing on 2 November, on Saturday 4 November you travelled to London to attend a PSC march and rally and that that your photograph taken at Brighton station, was posted on Twitter; https://twitter.com/BrightonPSC/status/926761392203497472
“We're on our way #MakeItRightForPalestine #Balfour100”

I am therefore instructed to ask you to provide medical evidence regarding the matters that you wish the NCC to make adjustments to the usual timetable for.

Finally, I must advise you that no members of the NEC are members of the NCC and that the NCC never discloses to a party to charges presented to it the identities of the panel of the NCC which will hear those charges.

Regards
Jane

Jane Shaw
Governance and Legal Unit
The Labour Party


Why it is unfair to Kangaroos to describe Labour’s National Constitutional Committee as a Kangaroo Court?

$
0
0

Expulsion Update

A Riddle: McNicol’s Justice says that I'm not allowed to know the names of my accusers
How then can I cross-examine them?

It would seem that Michael Foot's semi-house trained polecat and crooked McNicol share a lot in common

Solicitor's letter to McNicol asking who is instructing him and who's told him not to reveal legal advice to the NEC
Labour Party justice ala crooked McNicol, its much loved General Secretary, is a wondrous thing.  I am charged with various offences on the basis of complaints made by unknown people.  Their complaint letters are heavily redacted (blacked out) so how do I cross-examine my accusers when I don’t even know their name.  Whilst you are working out that one I had a pang of conscience.  Is it fair to refer to McNicol’s Court (the NCC is its official title) as a Kangaroo Court.

On reflection I’ve decided it is highly unfair for people to compare Labour’s NCC to a Kangaroo court.   The Kangaroo is a lovable and affectionate animal, a national symbol of Australia (though one can’t blame it for the character of the settlers who came to occupy that land).
It is grossly defamatory to the character of the Kangaroo to compare the Crooked McNicol, Labour’s General Secretary with a Kangaroo.  This left me with a dilemma.  I was hunting around for a suitable metaphor and then I remembered Michael Foot.  Foot you remember was the leader of the Labour Party from 1980-1983 who was traduced by the media.

One of his best known lines was when he called Norman Tebbit a ‘semi-house trained polecat’.  The pole cat is a cousin of the ferret.  I’m not sure that calling the NCC a Polecat Court necessarily has the same ring to it but I’ll give it a go!

Some people may wonder why I call Iain McNicol 'crooked'.  The reason is eloquently put in these extracts from a letter to McNicol from solicitor, Martin Howe, whom a Unite member of the NEC, Jim Kennedy engaged. 
The Kangaroo - a much abused animal after whom a corrupt tribunal or court is named

I sent a further email or two to Ms Jane Shaw who is the Secretary to the Polecat Court aka NCC.

14th November 2017

Dear Ms Shaw,

Further to my questions below I have a few further ones.

My application for a postponement was for a variety of factors including not only my own health  but the fact that I have part time care for my son Daniel who is autistic.  Are your despicable mosers (snoopers) going to be congregating around my house with a tele photo camera in order to time when Daniel is at my flat and when he is at his mothers?  Can we assume that McNicol will be prepared to pay for this or is he subcontracting to Special Branch locally?

I have been told to give you a list of witnesses I wish to interview.  Well  want to cross examine my accusers or some of them but that is somewhat difficult given you haven't given me their name.  Perhaps you could ask your handlers how this litte difficulty might be overcome.  I know in national security cases such witnesses appear behind a curtain, are you thinking of employing a similar device at the hearing.

Yours as ever

Tony Greenstein
Crooked McNicol has no sense of irony as he speaks from a rostrum labelled 'Straight talking Honest Politics' - when trying to stop Jeremy Corbyn standing honest politics wasn't the accusation against him
In my legal case under the DPA, documents previously unearthed 'disappeared'
14th November 2017

Dear Ms Shaw

I have few questions of my own to ask.

Who was it who undertook to search the Internet to locate my presence at a demonstration?  The photograph you produced barely shows my face as it is turned sideways.  This suggests that someone else was there physically to identify people and used that photo as mere confirmation.  In case you don't get the gist what I am saying is that I suspect collusion with t he Intelligence Services, either MI5 or Special Branch.  I do not believe anyone amongst the snoopers you employ could recognise me from that photo.

Of course some of us have suspected for some time that the Compliance Unit and Labour's Dirty Tricks Unit wasn't operating on their own but I do not believe that any of your mosers would have been able to identify me from that photograph.  Even some of my friends would have had difficulty recognising me since my face is all but hidden.
Leaking to the Press was a feature of my case - here it is referring to leaking against Corbyn
I don't expect the truth from you as I perfectly understand that some Labour staff would rather drink poison than be honest, however it suggests to me that this programme of expulsions is being driven by the deep State and that McNicol Stolliday and others are liasing with those parts of the state that see it as their business to keep tabs on the Left.

You might also pass on this question.  How am I able to cross examine those who complain against me, which would be the normal procedure in any court of law, if I don't know their identities?    The whole procedure seems designed to convict once a prosecution has been brought.

And just as a matter of pure interest, over the past two years how many cases has the National Constitutional Committee heard and in how many has the person accused been acquitted?  It's just I have a feeling that the NCC's record might possibly match the acquittal rate of Israel's military courts in the West Bank, which are 0.03%.  As we all know of course Israel is a democracy and it would be anti-Semitic to draw any adverse conclusions from these statistics.

Yours as ever

Tony Greenstein

Warren Morgan – Brighton and Hove Labour Party Rejects his false accusations of anti-Semitism and tells him to go

$
0
0

Tonight Rottingdean & Coastal Ward told Warren Morgan to Resign

Warren Morgan, the leader of Brighton and Hove Council, has been in the forefront of making false accusations of anti-Semitism.  People may remember that Morgan attacked the Labour Party as ‘anti-Semitic’ on the basis of 3 complaints from other Progress supporters.  Morgan has demonstrated through his leadership of the Labour Party his hostility to Jeremy Corbyn.   












After an Israeli Jewish speaker at the Free Speech on Israel meeting at Conference, Miko Peled, said that people should be free to debate anything, even Holocaust denial Warren Morgan went and spoke to the Tory press accusing the whole conference of ‘anti-Semitism’. It was a direct attack on Labour at the very time when Theresa May was on the ropes.  Theresa May was very grateful and used Morgan’s attacks on the Labour Party at the following Question Time.
Morgan provided the Tory press with helpful anti-Labour headlines
Morgan gained lots of Tory press headlines with his threats that the conference wouldn’t be invited back to Brighton again.  The right-wing press had spun Miko’s words as saying that Holocaust denial is a legitimate form of debate and even that he himself supported Holocaust denial.  Warren Morgan took advantage of these lies and went on record as saying that because I was in the same room as Miko, I should be expelled!
Last year Morgan told deliberate lies to get the results of an election annulled
Well tonight Rottingdean & Coastal Ward was one more Ward to condemn him.  It passed a resolution calling on Morgan to apologise and retract his allegations and an amendment calling for him to resign was also passed.  This follows on Queens Park Ward which also called on him to resign and even his own ward, East Brighton which called on him to apologise.  Pavilion Labour Party has dissociated itself from his call and said that the Labour Party Conference will always be welcome in Brighton.
Warren Morgan's helping hand to Theresa May
There was no antisemitism to fix
Warren Morgan is a detested figure in Brighton and Hove Labour Party.  If he had any dignity he wouldn’t wait to be pushed.  He would go of his own accord given his past record of lies. However Morgan is someone who is completely oblivious to what others think of him and survival not dignity is what is on his mind.

Tony Greenstein
Warren Morgan encourages former Labour councillor Craig Turton to engage in abuse


Viewing all 2417 articles
Browse latest View live