Chief Witch-Hunter Jeremy Newmark resigns as Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement

February 9, 2018, 3:41 pm

≫ Next: More Fake News – The Myth of Increasing Anti-semitism

≪ Previous: Jeremy Newmark accused of Theft and Embezzlement - Is this just more anti-Semitism?

Jewish ChronicleRevelations of Fraud, Larceny and Deception by Labour Zionist witch-hunter are ignored by Mass Media

Sign Letter to Iain McNicol Demanding Newmark's Suspension from Labour Party

It is quite remarkable. To its credit, the Jewish Chronicle has led the way with possibly the biggest expose in its history. Revealed: JLC audit reports Jeremy Newmark deceived it out of thousands of pounds

Jeremy Newmark, who was rarely out of the headlines, is exposed as a serial fraudster and someone who was forced out of his previous job as Chief Executive Officer for the Jewish Leadership Council. For five whole years the reasons why he left the JLC were a closely kept secret. Apparently he resigned because of ill-health but in fact he left because he was corrupt.

To date not one national newspaper has touched this story. Not the Guardian nor the so-called Independent to say nothing of the tabloid press. Of course the BBC and Sky have remained aloof. It is as if this story is too embarrassing to get in the way of the false anti-Semitism campaign.

First page of audit report in 2013

Jeremy Newmark began his career in 2007 with the Jewish Leadership Council, which was then a collection of the biggest capitalists in the Jewish community - Gerald Ronson, Stanley Kalms and Sir Mickey Davies, who is now the Chief Executive of the Conservative Party but who was then boss of the big mining company Xtrata.

It is a tale of fraud and deception on an almost unbelievable scale involving thousands of pounds of money stolen from the JLC, which for some reason was a charity despite its overt support for Zionism and Israel. An internal audit found clear evidenceof larceny and theft on a grand scale by Newmark, yet it decided to engage in a wholesale cover up.

The Charity Commission has said that the allegations and the subsequently cover up raise “serious potential regulatory concerns”. The JLC audit in 2013 itself stated that it “appears to be standard practice in the JLC to falsify information relating to finances”. See Jewish Leadership Council will co-operate with Charity Commission over Newmark allegations. The reaction of the trustees of the JLC was to keep the audit report hidden too!

Just 3 weeks ago Newmark was leading the call to expel anti-racists from the Labour Party

Jeremy Newmark led the attack by the Jewish Labour Movement, the British branch of the Israeli Labour Party on the Left in the Labour Party. He demanded the scalps of Ken Livingstone, Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and myself amongst others. Thousands of people have been suspended by the Labour Party, many as a result of false accusations of anti-Semitism, on the flimsiest evidence possible, yet quite amazingly Labour’s General Secretary Iain McNicol has ignored calls to suspend Newmark despite the copious evidence.

A copy of the internal audit which details the alleged misappropriation of thousands of pounds of money can be seen here.

I am therefore proposing a letter signed by Labour Party members which we will send to Iain McNicol and members of Labour’s National Executive Committee demanding that Newmark be suspended pending a full investigation of his alleged crimes.

If you wish to sign the letter below and you are a member of the Labour Party please send your name, and which Constituency Labour Party you are a member of to me at:

trust4unpopularcauses@gmail.com

Tony Greenstein

Open Letter to Iain McNicol, General Secretary of the Labour Party Demanding the Suspension of Jeremy Newmark

trust4unpopularcauses@gmail.com

PO Box 173

Brighton BN51 9EZ

Friday, 09 February 2018

iain_mcnicol@labour.org.uk

General Secretary

The Labour Party

105 Victoria St,

London SW1E 6QT

Dear Mr McNicol,

We, the undersigned, are writing to you in respect of the serious allegations of fraud and theft which have been made against Jeremy Newmark in this week’s Jewish Chronicle. [Revealed: JLC audit reports Jeremy Newmark deceived it out of thousands of pounds] [1]

Mr Newmark, who until today was Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement was Labour’s PPC at the recent General Election for Finchley and Golders Green constituency and he is currently Leader of the Labour Group on Hertsmere Council. These allegations have been backed up by a comprehensive internal audit [2] by the organisation for which Mr Newmark was Chief Executive Officer, the Jewish Leadership Council.

We are extremely surprised that you haven’t moved quickly to protect the reputation of the Labour Party by suspending Mr Newmark under Rule 2.1.8 pending an investigation.

Unlike the thousands of people who have been suspended in the past two years, often for nothing more than an innocent tweet or remark taken out of context, Mr Newmark is alleged to have stolen or misappropriated thousands of pounds of charitable monies. The cover up of this alleged theft is now the subject of a Charity Commission investigation.[3][Jewish Leadership Council will co-operate with Charity Commission over Newmark allegations]

Mr Newmark, in his role as Chair of the JLM, has been the driving force in the suspension or expulsion of people on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Barely three weeks ago Jeremy Newmark was publicly criticising the Labour Party for failing to expel Jackie Walker, Ken Livingstone and other members on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Jewish Labour group accuses party of failing to act on antisemitism complaints

Given the high public profile of Mr Newmark and his propensity for demanding disciplinary action against other members of the Labour Party we feel that it is only fair that Mr Newmark should be treated in the same way as his many victims. We are therefore making a formal complaint against Mr Newmark for having brought the party into disrepute and we expect you to suspend him immediately from membership in order that we can avoid further damaging headlines.

Yours sincerely,

[1] https://tinyurl.com/yctw83bo

[2] https://drive.google.com/file/d/12UqRyqsBKHaq4OZeePhpAjsc0tpdPTXq/view?usp=sharing

[3] https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/jewish-leadership-council-will-co-operate-with-charity-commission-over-newmark-allegations-1.458455

↧

More Fake News – The Myth of Increasing Anti-semitism

February 11, 2018, 3:45 pm

≫ Next: BREAKING NEWS - Iain McNicol Refuses to Suspend Jeremy Newmark over Serious Corruption Allegations - It's a 'Private Matter'

≪ Previous: Chief Witch-Hunter Jeremy Newmark resigns as Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement

All the evidence is that anti-Semitism is at a historic low in Britain

The Pew Research Centre's survey of racism in Europe - anti-semitism is low down on the list

Every year, in fact twice a year, the Community Security Trust, a Zionist charity, publishes a Report on Anti-Semitic Incidents. Every year, regardless of the figures, there is one clear message. Anti-Semitism is on the increase. What is more important than the actual statistics is the spin put on them. Unsurprisingly the CST has produced a 2017 Anti-Semitic Incidents Report with the same massaged figures and statistics.

The political methodology of the CST is clear from the above montage - it conflates all sorts of opposites into one melange - a pot pourri of sensationalist headlines meaning nothing at all other than that the CST has no analysis of what it is supposed to be analysing

The reason for this politically convenient narrative and it is why the government funds the CST so generously, is that the ‘anti-Semitism’ narrative is tied to opposition to Israel and support for the Palestinians. It is a constant theme that ‘anti-Semitism’ is derived from opposition to the Israeli state, which in practice means opposition to a central plank of British Foreign Policy. Support for Israel is support for our ‘special relationship’ with the United States. Opposition to the alignment with the United State is thereby deemed ‘anti-Semitism’ and ‘extremism’.

If you repeat a lie long enough some people may come to believe it

Riding on the back of the CST’s Report are propaganda papers like Huff Postwhich was co-founded by the far-Right Jewish racist Andrew Breitbart of Steve Bannon fame. In it Euan Philipps, of the non-existent Labour Against Anti-Semitism, which is no more than a group of Internet Trolls [Jessica Jacobs-Schiff, Saul Freeman, Euan Philipps. Emma Feltham, Denny Taylor] asserts that Labour Has A Massive Antisemitism Problem, It Isn't Going Away, And Only Action Will Tackle It.

If you repeat a lie often enough and big enough, as Goebbels observed, then people may believe you. In fact very few people in the Labour Party believe this lie. Philipps talks of a failure to win 3 London seats in what he called London’s ‘bagel belt’, surely an anti-Semitic trope if ever there was one! Perhaps we should ask how many seats Labour could lose by becoming Islamophobic? The whole talk of a Jewish vote, which has been pursued by racists such as Philipps is itself anti-Semitic.

Notice the contrast between the tabloids' opposition to 'antisemitism' and their racism towards asylum seekers

Other than the usual witch hunting nonsense, singling out people like Luke Cresswell or myself, Phillips has nothing to say apart from describing the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism’ as the ‘bedrock’ of Labours’ disciplinary processes. Since the only purpose of the IHRA is to conflate anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism it is clear where Philipps and his trolls are coming from.

We have the irony that the most anti-Semitic groups in Britain and in Europe, the people who deny the Holocaust and believe in Jewish conspiracy theories are also the most pro-Zionist and pro-Israel. Groups like the EDL, BNP and Britain First in Britain and Le Pen, Geert Wilder’s Freedom Party, Herr Strache’s far-Right Freedom Party and the neo-Nazi AfD Alternative for Germany love Zionism and Israel but don’t particularly like Jews.

We see this in the support of the mass media for the fiction that the Labour Party is overrun by ‘anti-Semitism’. What was interesting last week was that on the same day The Telegraph, Mail and Sun all led with anti-Semitic attacks against George Soros who, in the words of the Sun’s Hugo Gye was the ‘puppet master’. This is the same Hugo Gye who asks why Labour’s hard left ‘has a problem with Jews.’ The idea of rich powerful Jews as ‘puppet masters’ has a direct lineage to Nazi stereotypes.

Yair Netanyahu's anti-Semitic cartoon welcomed by neo-Nazis

The attacks on George Soros by Europe’s far-right, including Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban are reciprocated by Israel and Netanyahu who hates Soros for funding Israeli human rights groups. Last year Netanyahu’s son posted an anti-Semitic cartoon of Soros as the puppet master which received acclaim from the neo-Nazi editor of the Daily Stormer, Andrew Anglin and David Duke, the Holocaust denying former KKK Grand Wizard.

In the year 2016/17 the CST received£13.4 million from the Home Office in grants. This grant has been renewed for 2017/18. It is meant for ‘UK Jewish community security measures’ but there is no reason to believe that British Jews are under any threat. This grant and the expansion of the CST is about hyping up a non-existent threat. It is about creating fear and tension, not least inside the Jewish community, a fear which is then linked to Palestinian supporters and the Left in the Labour Party. Such is the seamless narrative of our rulers and their prostitute media.

This grant is about 4 times the equivalent given to the Muslim community despite the latter being about 8 times as large as the Jewish community. Whereas anti-semitism in Britain is virtually non-existent although hyped up by groups like the CST, Islamaphobia and anti-Black racism is a real problem.

There are no examples of vehicles mounting the pavements to run over Jewish worshippers. There are no examples of firebomb attacks on synagogues, unlike mosques. Yet 'anti-Semitism' is prioritised and Islamaphobia is ignored for reasons of political convenience and policy considerations.

For the financial y/e 31.3.17 the CST made a net profit of over £3m. The income for a 15 month period (the end of year date has changed) was £30m compared to £15m for the previous financial year. As their Report states ‘fundraising during the period exceeded the target set by the Trustees.’ The CST is awash with money and it has a vested financial interest and lots of employees to pay to ensure that in future years too the level of ‘anti-Semitism’ is seen to increase in order that it can make a case for yet more cash. It now has £16¾m in reserves.

Despite an alleged increase of 34% in violent anti-semitic incidents there wasn't one injury - which raises questions to what constitutes a violent incident

The CST’s 2017 Anti-Semitic Incidents Report recorded a total of 1,382 incidents, an increase of 3%, itself statistically meaningless. The CST reported 1382 incidents for 2017 which is only 3% up on their revised 2016 figure of 1346 (despite a much publicised 30% increase for first 6 months of 2017). It did though record a 34% increase in assaults, which on the surface should be worrying. But here is the strange thing. Not one of these incidents was what they called ‘extreme violence’ i.e. at least Actual Bodily Harm. In fact there were four incidents of extreme violence in 2015 and one in 2014.

For 2 successive years there were no serious anti-Semitic physical attacks on Jews causing injury.

What is even more strange is that assaults or violence in general were, on average, 33% of all hate crimes, so around 26 500 assaults in total and 20 500 related to race to end March 2017. One quarter of these resulted in injury. Yet the number of assaults in the CST figures and this is allowing for the most trivial of assaults is 145 or 10.5%. This is a massive disparity suggesting that the number of anti-Semitic ‘incidents’ is either vastly overinflated or what is termed an ‘anti-Semitic incident’ differs dramatically from other incidents of hate crime.

Even more startling is that whereas some 8% of all hate crimes result in an injury, this is not the case with violent anti-Semitic incidents where there were zero examples of injury.

By its own admission, ‘there is a wide spectrum of what is classed as an Assault by CST.’ One suspects much of this is extremely trivial and minor even if an anti-Semitic motivation can be shown.

In fact, as the CST Report shows, there has throughout the year been a decline in anti-Semitic incidents, with December recording half (78) of the January figures.

On page 5 of the Report there is what one can only call tendentious and mischievious political commentary. Scrabbling around for an explanation of the increase in anti-Semitic incidents, the CST puts forward the hypothesis that

Speculation and an underlying political bias runs through the Report

‘there was unprecedented publicity regarding controversies about alleged and actual antisemitism in the Labour Party. As would be the case for any form of hate crime, both issues are likely to have emboldened offenders, whilst also causing victims to be more aware of the need to report incidents.’

If this is to be believed then the false anti-Semitism campaign of the Jewish Labour Movement and other groups has engendered actual anti-Semitism! If that is true then it is a damning indictment of the Zionist organisations whose activity has resulted in self-fulfilling prophecies.

In London, where most British Jews live, there was a 7% decrease in anti-Semitic incidents from 835 to 773 in 2017, whereas the in Manchester there was a 27% increase from 206 to 261.

The bulk of the anti-Semitic incidents consisted of 1038 incidents of ‘abusive behaviour’ ranging from social media to hate mail and verbal abuse. None of this is particularly serious.

18% of the anti-Semitic incidents (247) occurred on social media. Since one person can post a million tweets this is statistically absurd. Social media should be stripped out of any such report. No one has died from an anti-Semitic Facebook post or a Tweet. This is just trivia.

An indication of the bias of the CST is that in reaction to Trump’s Jerusalem announcement the CST sought fit to talk about

‘street protests in major cities across the UK including Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, London, Manchester, Nottingham and Sheffield. Whilst protesting against Israel is not automatically anti-Semitic and is not recorded as an antisemitic incident by CST, some of the rhetoric involved in these protests was targeted towards Jewish people. Specifically, on Friday 8th December, during a protest outside the United States Embassy in London, some of the protesters chanted,“Jews, remember the Khaybar, the army of Muhammad is returning.” This references the battle of Khaybar in the year 628, in which Jews were killed and expelled from a town of the same name.’

What is noticeable about this is that the clear inference is that although not automatically anti-Semitic protests against Israel are usually anti-Semitic. In fact all it could do to muster up some proof is the reference to a long forgotten battle some 1,500 years ago! Given that Israel calls itself a Jewish state it is surprising that this is all the CST could find!

Of course some of the 145 incidents of assault are extremely unpleasant. One example given is that where a group of Jewish school children were trapped on a bus and attacked and chased but there are no reports of any injuries and all the perpetrators were caught and punished. Other incidents include stones being thrown. Again not very nice.

But compare this with what the Communal organisations of the Jewish community, the Board of Deputies and other Zionist organisations support in Israel and Palestine. If Jews in this country were treated like Israel, the Jewish state, treats its non-Jewish citizens then there would be good cause for complaint.

Today Ha’aretz reported Settlers Caught on Film Throwing Stones at Left-wing Activists in West Bank.

Ha’aretz reports about how ‘10 Israelis, members of the left-wing anti-occupation group Ta’ayush, along with international activists, were touring the area when they were assaulted’ and quote one activist Guy Batavia as saying that “The area there is very violent. In recent months there have been a number of assaults on activists and on [Palestinian] farmers and shepherds. Yesterday there were two more assaults. We had gone to one of the villages where [settlers] had gone in during the week and made a mess – and a few teens came out toward us, three of them masked, and threw really big stones at us. It was really dangerous.” The activists did not file a police complaint, saying the police “don’t really want to do anything.”

It’s a good job that the Jewish schoolchildren in Britain didn’t face the British equivalent of the Israeli police – who protect the racists and ignore the victims. The article goes on to explain that ‘Last year a Haaretz investigative report revealed that although the police were aware of at least nine instances of assault by settlers against Palestinians, left-wing activists and soldiers over a period of two and a half months, all of which were filmed or witnessed by soldiers, no one was indicted, even though the unmasked faces could clearly be seen. In other cases, soldiers were very close to the stone-throwers, but did nothing to stop them.’

Unfortunately bogus and inflated accounts of ‘anti-Semitism’ in Britain, not least by the CST and the far-Right Campaign Against Anti-Semitism are used in order to prevent solidarity in Britain with the Palestinian victims of genuine violence in Israel/Palestine. That is what the false anti-Semitism campaign in the Labour Party is about. Preventing solidarity.

If Jews in Britain faced even a fraction of the racism, violence and discrimination that Palestinians face in Israel then they would have real grounds for complaint about anti-Semitism.

Below are some comments on Home Office and Police statistics of hate crimes in general. I must thank Dr Alan Maddison with help in compiling this.

Number and share of Hate Crimes

Note the growth of 29% overall and for individual threads, the police say this growth was both real and combined with improved reporting, (around only one in three are reported on average).

The Home Office do not usually provide the data for a breakdown of religious or racial hate crimes, but a freedom of information” request gave the number of anti-Semitic hate crimes reported to police in 2016 as 1078. This is lower than the CST incidents figure of 1309 given in their 2016 report; now in their recent report CST say this 2016 figure is 1346.

The distribution of hate crimes reported to police is shown in the pie chart below using the 1078 antisemitic hate crime figure.

Hate Crime Assaults

When you look at police data for assaults for each category below, you’ll see it varies from around 30% for Race and Religion and up to 45% for Disability. And the Grey section of “Violence with injury” (one quarter of assaults on average) is highest for Sexual Orientation.

The violence with injury for the Religion group looks to only about 17% of violent incidents . But of the 5949 religious hate crimes we know the 1078 for antisemitism may have pulled this down. The biggest group here are Muslims, and they are the most hated. There is no reason why their injuries should be less than the average.

The CST reports of 107 assaults for 2016, if we assume they were all passed on to the police then that gives only 10 % (107/ 1078). No comment is made by the CST on injury, except to say no serious injury occurred and no GBH.

The shares of the hate crime assaults are given below, (for anti-Semitism, 107 over 26 500 = 0.4%)

The New CST Data

The CST now report 145 assaults for 2017 (again no serious injuries) but a growth of 34%. We can’t give the new share, but my guess is that total hate crime assaults will increase at around the same rate as shown below, and that the 0.4% share for antisemitic assaults will not change much.

We don’t have police data for either anti-Semitism or other hate crimes to end 2017, but projecting the 29% increase to March 2017, including assaults, then I guess the antisemitism assault share of all hate crime assaults will not change much from the previous 0.4%.

Just to give a context, whilst there were145 antisemitic assaults reported to the CST in 2017, an increase of 40events, we anticipate racist hate crime assaults alone will rise to 22 500, an increase of 3500 events.

To take account of the small Jewish population the pro rata risks for assault are estimated below for 2016.

The recent 34% increase in anti-Semitic assaults reported by the CST, may be higher than that anticipated for other hate crimes ( we don’t know yet) which may probably increase between 20 and 30%. This would not lead to much of a change in the relative risk as depicted in the illustration.

Given this new CST data it will still be true that a Jewish person will be around 40 times more likely to be a victim to a general assault ( if carrying the same risk as the rest of us) than one motivated by anti-Semitism.

↧

BREAKING NEWS - Iain McNicol Refuses to Suspend Jeremy Newmark over Serious Corruption Allegations - It's a 'Private Matter'

February 12, 2018, 9:07 am

≫ Next: Letter from 210 Members to Labour's National Executive Committee - Suspend McNicol NOW

≪ Previous: More Fake News – The Myth of Increasing Anti-semitism

190 Members of the Labour Party Call for an End to McNicol’s Double Standards

Justice Demands that Jeremy Newmark of the JLM is Suspended NOW

190 members of the Labour Party have written to Iain McNicol, General Secretary of the Labour Party, demanding that Jeremy Newmark, former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement is suspended. No one has played a more important role in driving the current witch-hunt of socialists forward than Jeremy Newmark. Only 3 weeks ago he was meeting Jeremy Corbyn to demand that the ‘anti-Semitism’ witch-hunt be restarted.

Newmark and his Zionist friends were taken aback by the scale of the left victory in the NEC elections and by the replacement of Anne Black, Chair of the Disputes Committee, by Christine Shawcroft. They demanded reassurance that the expulsion of those they had targeted go ahead as planned. Newmark was contemptuous of the idea of a fair hearing and such niceties as innocent until proven guilty. When Ken Livingstone was found not guilty of anti-Semitism he and his minions demanded he be retried!! Newmark demanded expulsions and Corbyn's office (blame Seamus Milne) granted him an audience.

Last year's demonstration outside Labour Party conference - Resign McNicol

It is, therefore, a rich irony that the real reasons for Newmark’s departure from his previous role as CEO of the Jewish Leadership Council should have come to light. The Jewish Chronicle, which is normally little more than a Zionist propaganda sheet, broke an explosive story in this week’s edition. Revealed: JLC audit reports Jeremy Newmark deceived it out of thousands of pounds

McNicol is refusing to suspend his corrupt friend Jeremy Newmark

Far from being a resignation on the grounds of ill-health, as had been claimed, Newmark had been forced to resign from his previous employer, the JLC, after being confronted with an internal audit in 2013 which made it abundantly clear that he had defrauded them to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds.

Last year an inkling of what had happened occurred when the Jewish Chronicle broke a story on how Newmark had avoided paying an Israeli taxi driver some £3,000.

On Friday Newmark was forced to resign as Chair of the JLM. Now he must also be suspended from the Labour Party. Thousands of innocent members of the Labour Party have been suspended for a tweet or even a poem yet this crook remains untouched.

Letter from Iain McNicol to me today refusing to suspend Newmark - other signatories also got the same letter

Letter of Response to McNicol's refusal to suspend the corrupt Newmark

It is outrageous that McNicol has refused to suspend Newmark on the grounds that he 'strongly denies' the allegations! So does every crook. That is the purpose of an investigation. To find out! How can anyone possibly say that a tweet or social media post brings the Labour Party into disrepute, the standard pretext for suspension, and yet allegations of fraud on a massive scale against a charity, do not? Even by McNicol's double standards this decision is shocking.

We call on Labour's NEC to take the matter out of the hands of McNicol and suspend Newmark forthwith.

This letter is a rolling letter and will continue until our demands are met. If you want to add your name simply send an email to:

trust4unpopularcauses@gmail.com

Thank you,

Tony Greenstein

Open Letter to Iain McNicol - We Demand the Suspension of Jeremy Newmark Immediately

Monday 12 February 2018

iain_mcnicol@labour.org.uk

General Secretary

The Labour Party

105 Victoria St,

London SW1E 6QT

Dear Mr McNicol,

You are undoubtedly aware by now of the serious allegations of fraud and theft which have been made against Jeremy Newmark in the Jewish Chronicle. [Revealed: JLC audit reports Jeremy Newmark deceived it out of thousands of pounds] [1]Mr Newmark, who until recently was Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement was Labour’s PPC at the last General Election for Finchley and Golders Green constituency and is currently Leader of the Labour Group on Hertsmere Council.

These allegations have been backed up by a comprehensive internal audit [2] by the organisation for which Mr Newmark was Chief Executive Officer, the Jewish Leadership Council.

We are extremely surprised that you haven’t moved quickly to protect the reputation of the Labour Party by suspending Mr Newmark under Rule 2.1.8 pending an investigation.

Mr Newmark, in his role as Chair of the JLM, has been the driving force in the suspension or expulsion of people on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Barely three weeks ago Jeremy Newmark was publicly criticising the Labour Party for failing to expel Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth, Tony Greenstein, Ken Livingstone and other members on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Jewish Labour group accuses party of failing to act on antisemitism complaints

Given the high public profile of Mr Newmark and his propensity for demanding disciplinary action against other members of the Labour Party we feel that it is only fair that Mr Newmark should be treated in the same way as his many victims. We are therefore making a formal complaint against Mr Newmark for having brought the party into disrepute and we expect that you will suspend him immediately from membership in order that we can avoid further damaging headlines.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Tobias Abse Chelsea and Fulham CLP

Kate Adams Canterbury CLP

Julie Adshead Rossendale & Darwen CLP

Grant Aitken Clackmannanshire

Dr Ben Alofs Gwynedd CLP

Marie Ange-King Holborn & St Pancras

Ruth Appleton Holborn St Pancras CLP

Cathy Augustine Wantage CLP

Claude Baesens Warwick and Leamington CLP

Rebekah Ball Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Steve Ballard Hornsey and Woodgreen

Dave Bangs Kemptown CLP

Graham Bash South Thanet CLP

Mary Beaman Wimbledon CLP

Jonathan Bellos Brighton Kemptown CLP

Joseph Black Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Sian Bloor Stretford and Urmston CLP

Kay Boardman Calder Valley CLP

Patrick Bonner Brent North CLP

David Boyden Halton CLP

Jane Bramley

Lynda Brennan Enfield Southgate CLP

Professor Haim Bresheeth Hornsey and Wood Green CLP

Tarin Brokenshire Cambridge CLP

Pam Bromley Rossendale and Darwen CLP

Barbara Brookes Ealing South CLP

Mick Brookes Ealing South CLP

Alan Broughton Hampstead CLP

Sarida BrownLeamington and Warwick CLP

Michelle Burke Hendon CLP

Mr Neil Cameron Sheffield Central

Lisbeth Campos Richmond Park CLP

Avis Carter Brighton Pavilion CLP

Cyril Chilson Oxford West & Abingdon CLP

Dr Tali M. Chilson Oxford West and Abingdon CLP

Brian Chinnery Enfield Southgate CLP

Ruth Clarke Islington North

Terry Clarke Liverpool Riverside CLP

Sally Colaran Hampstead CLP

Ruth Conlock Manchester Withington CLP

M J Conway IIslington North

Steve Cooke Stockton North CLP

Ted Crawford Ealing Southall CLP

Luke Cresswell South Suffolk CLP

Kevin B Curran Lewisham West and Penge CLP

Clive Darling Warwick & Leamington CLP

Deborah Darnes Congleton CLP

Yvonne Davies Chester CLP

Susan Dellet Southwark & Old Bermondsey CLP

Tony Dines Worthing West CLP

Marylin DixonWarwick and Leamington CLP

Colm Doherty Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Cameron Dougherty North Thanet CLP

Clare Dove South Thanet Labour Party

Ian Drummond Edinburgh East

Ian Dudley. Croydon North CLP

Dereen Duley Exeter CLP

Bridget Dunne Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Jonathan Edwards Oxford East CLP

Harriet Evans Holborn & St Pancras

Ian Ferrie Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Arye Finkle Chipping Barnet CLP

Pete Firmin Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Michael Fisher Barnet CLP

Jean Fitzpatrick EALING SOUTHALL CLP

Jenny Flintoft Meon Valley CLP

Gerry Flintoft Meon Valley CLP

Philip Foxe Enfield Southgate CLP

Jane Foxworthy Leicester East CLP

Ed Fredenburgh Islington South & Finsbury CLP

Glynis Freeman Portslade CLP

Terry Gallogly York Central CLP

Rob Gardiner Huntingdon CLP

John Garrett Coventry South CLP

Daphne Gilbert Hexham CLP

David Graham Brentford and Isleworth CLP

Val Graham Chesterfield CLP

Susan Grant Exeter CLP

Kay Green Hastings and Rye CLP

Marc Green Mole Valley CLP

Elleanne Green Cities of London and Westminster CLP

Tony Greenstein Brighton Kemptown CLP

Shaun Hague Preseli Pembrokeshire CLP

G. Halfpenny Canterbury CLP

James Hall South Cambridgeshire CLP

Cathie Hammond Hampstead and Kilburn

Jenny Hardacre South Cambridgeshire CLP

Mr S Harris Torfaen CLP

Nev Hawkins Ealing Central & Acton CLP

Fran Heron Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Simon Hinds Islington North

Kate Hodgson Islington South & Finsbury

Doug Holton Hackney North CLP

Alan Horton Falmouth/Camborne CLP

Diana Isserlis

Steve Jansky - Nottingham East CLP

Riva Joffe Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Kaveh Kazemi Kingston & Surbiton CLP

Stan Keable Hammersmith CLP

Sean Kelleher Hendon CLP

Chris Khamis Perry Barr CLP

Eleanor Kilroy Winchester CLP

Steve Kinneavy Sheffield Hallam CLP

Chris Knight Dulwich & West Norwood CLP

Agnes Kory Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Barbara Kay Lawrence Torfaen CLP

Rebekah Lawrence Hove & Portslade CLP

Geoff Lee Holborn & St. Pancis CLP

Margot Lindsay Southwark CLP

Marie Lynam Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Ian MacDonald Edinburgh Southern CLP

Professor Moshé Machover Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Bill MacKeith Oxford West and Abingdon CLP,

Dr Alan Maddison Houghton and Sunderland South CLP

Glenn Martin Walsall South CLP

Rebecca Massey Hove and Portslade

Barbara May Moore Blackley and Broughton CLP

Jonathan Maytham Kingswood CLP

Kathy McCubbing Reading East CLP

Rebecca McDonald Hampstead and Kilburn

Michael McEvoy Twickenham CLP

Bernard Miller Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Jay Millington Bury CLP

Shosh Morris Islington South & Finsbury CLP

Patricia Morrison York Central CLP

Gareth Murphy Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Matt Nathan Islington S & Finsbury CLP

Paul Neill Calder Valley CLP

Catherine Newall Manchester Central CLP

Graham Noble Havant CLP

Safiya O'Donnell Nottingham East CLP

Caroline O’Reilly Brighton Kemptown CLP

Tim Oxton Colchester CLP

Pam Page Brighton Pavilion CLP

Averil Parkinson Cambridge CLP

Allan Pearson South Ribble CLP

Richard Peirce Portsmouth South CLP

Anne Pickard Bristol North West CLP

Ian Pope Rochford and Southend East CLP

Phil Pope Bristol West CLP

Anna Pollert Warwick and Leamington CLP

Nicola Pratt Coventry South CLP

Bernard Price International Branch

Dipak Rajgor HARBOROUGH CLP

Anandi Ramamurthy Gorton CLP

Reuben Ramsay Hastings and Rye CLP

Roland Rance Walthamstow CLP

Gwynne Reddick Wantage

Daniel Rehahn Hove and Portslade CLP

Jim Ring Westmorland & Lonsdale CLP

Pete Robbins Camden CLP

Steven Rose Islington South

Jonathan Rosenhead Hackney South & Shoreditch CLP

Kal Ross Liverpool Riverside CLP

Jo Rostron Holborn and St PancrasCLP

Luca Salice Holborn and St PancrasCLP

Luay Salman High Peak CLP

Jenny Sanderson Derbyshire Dales CLP

John Sanderson Derbyshire Dales CLP

Linda Sayle Holborn & St Pancras CLP

David Selzer City Of Chester CLP

George Shaw Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Patricia Sheerin Putney CLP

John Spencer-Davis NE Hants CLP

Laura Stuart Hendon CLP

Joe Sucksmith Cheltenham CLP

Walter Tavener Havant CLP

Wendy Taylor Ilford South CLP

Ruth Tenne Hampstead and Kilburn

Jack Thomas, Sefton Central CLP

Julian Townsend Camberwell and Peckham CLP

David Travis Angus North

Ben Treuhaft Edinburgh North and Leith CLP

Dr J. Urpeth Eltham CLP

Paul Valentine Hayling Island CLP

Marc Wadsworth Croydon North CLP

Tirza Waisel Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Jacqueline Walker South Thanet CLP

Karen Walker Newquay and St Austell CLP

Robert Walker Bexhill and Battle CLP

Hugh Wallis Dulwich and West Norwood CLP

Dave Walters Riverside CLP

Philip Ward - Sheffield central CLP

Carol Wilcox Christchurch CLP

Roy Wilkes Bury South CLP

Avril Wooster West Devon CLP

Dr Benedict Young Newcastle-upon-Tyne CLP

Charles Young Ceredigion CLP

Sue Young Ceredigion CLP

Zoe Zero Beckenham CLP

[1] https://tinyurl.com/yctw83bo

[2] https://drive.google.com/file/d/12UqRyqsBKHaq4OZeePhpAjsc0tpdPTXq/view?usp=sharing

[3] https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/jewish-leadership-council-will-co-operate-with-charity-commission-over-newmark-allegations-1.458455

↧

Letter from 210 Members to Labour's National Executive Committee - Suspend McNicol NOW

February 12, 2018, 9:31 pm

≫ Next: The Lie of Liberal Zionism and Israel’s African Refugees

≪ Previous: BREAKING NEWS - Iain McNicol Refuses to Suspend Jeremy Newmark over Serious Corruption Allegations - It's a 'Private Matter'

There is nothing 'historic' or 'private' about the allegations against Jeremy Newmark

Below is my letter to members of Labour's NEC

Over 200 Members of the Labour Party Call for an End to McNicol’s Double Standards

179 members of the Labour Party have written to Iain McNicol, General Secretary of the Labour Party, demanding that Jeremy Newmark, former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement is suspended. No one has played a more important role in driving the current witch-hunt of socialists forward than Jeremy Newmark. Only 3 weeks ago he was meeting Jeremy Corbyn to demand that the ‘anti-Semitism’ witch-hunt be restarted.

Newmark and his Zionist friends were taken aback by the scale of the left victory in the NEC elections and by the replacement of Anne Black as Chair of the Disputes Committee in particular.

It is, therefore, a rich irony that the real reasons for Newmark’s departure from his previous role as CEO of the Jewish Leadership Council should have come out just now. The Jewish Chronicle, which is normally little more than a Zionist propaganda sheet, broke an explosive story in this week’s edition.

Far from being a resignation on the grounds of ill-health, as had been claimed, Newmark had been left with no alternative but to resign from the JLC after being confronted with the results of an internal audit into its finances which made it abundantly evident that Newmark had defrauded them to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds.

Last year an inkling of what had happened occurred when the Jewish Chronicle broke a story on how Newmark had avoided paying an Israeli taxi driver some £3,000.

On Friday Newmark reluctantly resigned from the JLM. Today he must also be suspended from the Labour Party as have thousands of other, innocent members.

We know how Iain McNicol, that bulwark of the Right in the Labour Party, has always been reluctant to suspend supporters of the Right and conversely eager to suspend or auto-exclude those who are Corbyn supporters.

However we demand that these double standards end instantly,

Tony Greenstein

Monday 12 February 2018

iain_mcnicol@labour.org.uk

General Secretary

The Labour Party

105 Victoria St,

London SW1E 6QT

Dear Mr McNicol,

You are undoubtedly aware by now of the serious allegations of fraud and theft which have been made against Jeremy Newmark in the Jewish Chronicle. [Revealed: JLC audit reports Jeremy Newmark deceived it out of thousands of pounds] [1] Mr Newmark, who until recently was Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement was Labour’s PPC at the last General Election for Finchley and Golders Green constituency and is currently Leader of the Labour Group on Hertsmere Council.

These allegations have been backed up by a comprehensive internal audit [2] by the organisation for which Mr Newmark was Chief Executive Officer, the Jewish Leadership Council.

We are extremely surprised that you haven’t moved quickly to protect the reputation of the Labour Party by suspending Mr Newmark under Rule 2.1.8 pending an investigation.

Unlike the thousands of people who have been suspended in the past two years, often for nothing more than an innocent tweet or remark taken out of context, Mr Newmark is alleged to have stolen or misappropriated thousands of pounds of charitable monies. The cover up of this alleged theft is now the subject of a Charity Commission investigation.[3] [Jewish Leadership Council will co-operate with Charity Commission over Newmark allegations]

Mr Newmark, in his role as Chair of the JLM, has been the driving force in the suspension or expulsion of people on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Barely three weeks ago Jeremy Newmark was publicly criticising the Labour Party for failing to expel Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth, Tony Greenstein, Ken Livingstone and other members on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Jewish Labour group accuses party of failing to act on antisemitism complaints

Given the high public profile of Mr Newmark and his propensity for demanding disciplinary action against other members of the Labour Party we feel that it is only fair that Mr Newmark should be treated in the same way as his many victims. We are therefore making a formal complaint against Mr Newmark for having brought the party into disrepute and we expect that you will suspend him immediately from membership in order that we can avoid further damaging headlines.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Tobias Abse Chelsea and Fulham CLP

Kate Adams Canterbury CLP

Julie Adshead Rossendale & Darwen CLP

Grant Aitken Clackmannanshire

Dr Ben Alofs Gwynedd CLP

Marie Ange-King Holborn & St Pancras

Ruth Appleton Holborn St Pancras CLP

Cathy Augustine Wantage CLP

Claude Baesens Warwick and Leamington CLP

Rebekah Ball Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Steve Ballard Hornsey and Woodgreen

Dave Bangs Kemptown CLP

Graham Bash South Thanet CLP

Mary Beaman Wimbledon CLP

Jonathan Bellos Brighton Kemptown CLP

Karen Bett Eastwood CLP

Joseph Black Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Sian Bloor Stretford and Urmston CLP

Kay Boardman Calder Valley CLP

Patrick Bonner Brent North CLP

David Boyden Halton CLP

Jane Bramley Nottingham East CLP

Lynda Brennan Enfield Southgate CLP

Professor Haim Bresheeth Hornsey and Wood Green CLP

Tarin Brokenshire Cambridge CLP

Pam Bromley Rossendale and Darwen CLP

Barbara Brookes Ealing South CLP

Mick Brookes Ealing South CLP

Alan Broughton Hampstead CLP

Sarida Brown Leamington and Warwick CLP

Michelle Burke Hendon CLP

Mr Neil Cameron Sheffield Central

Lisbeth Campos Richmond Park CLP

Avis Carter Brighton Pavilion CLP

Cyril Chilson Oxford West & Abingdon CLP

Dr Tali M. Chilson Oxford West and Abingdon CLP

Brian Chinnery Enfield Southgate CLP

Ruth Clarke Islington North

Terry Clarke Liverpool Riverside CLP

Roger Coates International Branch

Sally Colaran Hampstead CLP

Ruth Conlock Manchester Withington CLP

M J Conway IIslington North

Steve Cooke Stockton North CLP

Katherine Coutanche Aberconwy CLP

Ted Crawford Ealing Southall CLP

Luke Cresswell South Suffolk CLP

Kevin B Curran Lewisham West and Penge CLP

Clive Darling Warwick & Leamington CLP

Deborah Darnes Congleton CLP

Yvonne Davies Chester CLP

Susan Dellet Southwark & Old Bermondsey CLP

Helen Dickson-Liverpool Wavertree CLP

Tony Dines Worthing West CLP

Marylin Dixon Warwick and Leamington CLP

Colm Doherty Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Cameron Dougherty North Thanet CLP

Clare Dove South Thanet Labour Party

Ian Drummond Edinburgh East

Ian Dudley. Croydon North CLP

Dereen Duley Exeter CLP

Bridget Dunne Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Jonathan Edwards Oxford East CLP

Harriet Evans Holborn & St Pancras

Ian Ferrie Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Arye Finkle Chipping Barnet CLP

Pete Firmin Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Michael Fisher Barnet CLP

Jean Fitzpatrick EALING SOUTHALL CLP

Jenny Flintoft Meon Valley CLP

Gerry Flintoft Meon Valley CLP

Philip Foxe Enfield Southgate CLP

Jane Foxworthy Leicester East CLP

Ed Fredenburgh Islington South & Finsbury CLP

Glynis Freeman Portslade CLP

Kenny Fryde Cambridge CLP

Terry Gallogly York Central CLP

Rob Gardiner Huntingdon CLP

John Garrett Coventry South CLP

Daphne Gilbert Hexham CLP

David Graham Brentford and Isleworth CLP

Val Graham Chesterfield CLP

Susan Grant Exeter CLP

Kay Green Hastings and Rye CLP

Marc Green Mole Valley CLP

Elleanne Green Cities of London and Westminster CLP

Tony Greenstein Brighton Kemptown CLP

Shaun Hague Preseli Pembrokeshire CLP

G. Halfpenny Canterbury CLP

James Hall South Cambridgeshire CLP

Cathie Hammond Hampstead and Kilburn

Jenny Hardacre South Cambridgeshire CLP

Mr S Harris Torfaen CLP

Nev Hawkins Ealing Central & Acton CLP

Fran Heron Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Simon Hinds Islington North

Kate Hodgson Islington South & Finsbury

Doug Holton Hackney North CLP

Alan Horton Falmouth/Camborne CLP

Patrick Hunter Hendon CLP

Diana Isserlis Thornbury and Yate CLP

Steve Jansky - Nottingham East CLP

Dr Emrys Jenkins Swansea West CLP

Riva Joffe Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Bill Kaye Warwick and Leamington CLP billkaye83@gmail.com

Kaveh Kazemi Kingston & Surbiton CLP

Stan Keable Hammersmith CLP

Sean Kelleher Hendon CLP

Martin Kemp Lewisham West and Penge CLP

Chris Khamis Perry Barr CLP

Eleanor Kilroy Winchester CLP

Steve Kinneavy Sheffield Hallam CLP

Chris Knight Dulwich & West Norwood CLP

Agnes Kory Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Sushma lalCeredigion CLP

Barbara Kay Lawrence Torfaen CLP

Rebekah Lawrence Hove & Portslade CLP

Geoff Lee Holborn & St. Pancis CLP

Margot Lindsay Southwark CLP

Marie Lynam Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Ian MacDonald Edinburgh Southern CLP

Professor Moshé Machover Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Bill MacKeith Oxford West and Abingdon CLP,

Dr Alan Maddison Houghton and Sunderland South CLP

Glenn Martin Walsall South CLP

Rebecca Massey Hove and Portslade

Barbara May Moore Blackley and Broughton CLP

Jonathan Maytham Kingswood CLP

Kathy McCubbing Reading East CLP

Rebecca McDonald Hampstead and Kilburn

Michael McEvoy Twickenham CLP

Paul Meaney Gedling CLP

Timothy Meredith Hartlepool CLP

Bernard Miller Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Jay Millington Bury CLP

Elizabeth Morley Ceredigion CLP

Shosh Morris Islington South & Finsbury CLP

Patricia Morrison York Central CLP

Gareth Murphy Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Matt Nathan Islington S & Finsbury CLP

Mica Nava Islington North

Paul Neill Calder Valley CLP

Catherine Newall Manchester Central CLP

Graham Noble Havant CLP

Safiya O'Donnell Nottingham East CLP

Caroline O’Reilly Brighton Kemptown CLP

Tim Oxton Colchester CLP

Pam Page Brighton Pavilion CLP

Averil Parkinson Cambridge CLP

Allan Pearson South Ribble CLP

Richard Peirce Portsmouth South CLP

Anne Pickard Bristol North West CLP

Ian Pope Rochford and Southend East CLP

Phil Pope Bristol West CLP

Anna Pollert Warwick and Leamington CLP

Nicola Pratt Coventry South CLP

Bernard Price International Branch

Dipak Rajgor HARBOROUGH CLP

Anandi Ramamurthy Gorton CLP

Reuben Ramsay Hastings and Rye CLP

Roland Rance Walthamstow CLP

Gwynne Reddick Wantage

Daniel Rehahn Hove and Portslade CLP

Jim Ring Westmorland & Lonsdale CLP

Pete Robbins Camden CLP

Steven Rose Islington South

Jonathan Rosenhead Hackney South & Shoreditch CLP

Kal Ross Liverpool Riverside CLP

Jo Rostron Holborn and St PancrasCLP

Luca Salice Holborn and St PancrasCLP

Luay Salman High Peak CLP

Jenny Sanderson Derbyshire Dales CLP

John Sanderson Derbyshire Dales CLP

Linda Sayle Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Paul Scott Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

David Selzer City Of Chester CLP

George Shaw Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Patrick Sheehan Withington CLP

Patricia Sheerin Putney CLP

John Spencer-Davis NE Hants CLP

Laura Stuart Hendon CLP

Joe Sucksmith Cheltenham CLP

Walter Tavener Havant CLP

Wendy Taylor Ilford South CLP

Ruth Tenne Hampstead and Kilburn

Jack Thomas, Sefton Central CLP

Andy Thompson Ladywood CLP

Julian Townsend Camberwell and Peckham CLP

David Travis Angus North

Ben Treuhaft Edinburgh North and Leith CLP

Dr J. Urpeth Eltham CLP

Paul Valentine Hayling Island CLP

Marc Wadsworth Croydon North CLP

Tirza Waisel Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Jacqueline Walker South Thanet CLP

Karen Walker Newquay and St Austell CLP

Robert Walker Bexhill and Battle CLP

Hugh Wallis Dulwich and West Norwood CLP

Dave Walters Riverside CLP

Philip Ward - Sheffield central CLP

David Watson Walthamstow CLP

Jane White Lincoln CLP

Carol Wilcox Christchurch CLP

Roy Wilkes Bury South CLP

Avril Wooster West Devon CLP

Norman Wright Hove and Portslade CLP norman.wright233@ntlworld.com

Dr Benedict Young Newcastle-upon-Tyne CLP

Charles Young Ceredigion CLP

Sue Young Ceredigion CLP

Zoe Zero Beckenham CLP

↧

The Lie of Liberal Zionism and Israel’s African Refugees

February 13, 2018, 5:05 pm

≫ Next: Jonathan Hoffman’s Gang of Zionist Fascists Blame Anyone but themselves for the Suicide of their friend Jason Silver

≪ Previous: Letter from 210 Members to Labour's National Executive Committee - Suspend McNicol NOW

Jonathan Freedland Turns a Blind Eye to the ‘Jewish’ State’s Inherent Racism

The proposed expulsion of Israel’s Black African refugees is highly embarrassing for Israel’s ‘liberal’ defenders. It is demonstrating that the Zionist ideology that underpins the ‘Jewish’ State of Israel in inherently racist in a way little else has done. It is impossible to argue that the refugees are a ‘security threat’ as their only crime has been to flee persecution. The only reason that Israel refuses to grant them citizenship is because they are not Jewish and are Black. If that isn’t racist what is?

As Netanyahu freely admits, the reason for their expulsion is because ‘threaten’ Israel’s Jewish identity in the way that Jews once threatened Aryan or Magyar identity. It is racist to the core. It clearly demonstrates what ethno nationalism means in practice – the expulsion or removal of the other. What makes it worse is that it isn’t simply the fact of the refugees not being Jewish. One-third of the million Russian immigrants who came in the 1980’s weren’t Jewish either but, unlike these refugees they were White.

Jonathan Freedland is Britain’s most prominent liberal Zionist. As such he is adept at walking the tightrope between defending Israel and Zionism and distancing himself from what he sees as its excesses. As a senior editor at the Guardian as well as a columnist for the Jewish Chronicle Freedland tries to square support for Israel and opposition to overt racism. It is a difficult juggling act, even for as keen an apologist for Israel as Freedland.

Freeland was also one of the key figures behind the false anti-Semitism allegations in the Labour Party. See for example Labour and the left have an antisemitism problem Freedland has made it a mission to demonstrate that opposition to Israel and Zionism is, by definition, anti-Semitic. His argument was that ‘93% of British Jews said Israel formed some part of their identity.’ In fact the most authoritative study The Attitudes of British Jews Towards Israel in 2015 found that just 59% of British Jews identify as Zionists, down 12% in five years and 31% did not identify as Zionists.

But even were Freedland correct, it is both a dishonest and an intellectually sloppy argument. Opposition to an identity is never the same as racism. If a majority of an African country were to identify with FGM would it be racist to oppose FGM? Or if a majority of Afghans were to identify the Burka as integral to Islam is it racist to oppose the Burka? It is indicative of the intellectual slippage of Zionists.

Asylum seekers outside Holot internment camp in the Negev Desert

In an article for the Jewish Chronicle Benjamin Netanyahu’s appalling betrayal of Jewish values, Freedland had to admit that

‘the desire to be rid of these African newcomers has been mired in plain racism from the start. Recall that, in 2012, Likud’s Miri Regev, now the culture minister, referred to them as a “cancer.” She eventually apologised for the comparison — to people living with cancer.’

Freedland quoted the testimony of Emanuel Yemani, an Eritrean refugee who described his conversation with an Israeli immigration official.

“soon we’ll deport all of you, and you’ll sit under a tree, open your mouth and wait for a banana to fall, like a monkey.”

“But I’m a human being, not a monkey,” Yemani answered.

“Don’t you see yourselves, that you look like monkeys?” the official replied.

This is the visceral racism that drives the expulsion of Israel’s African refugees but Freedland refuses to draw the conclusions and ask where this racism comes from.

Whereas sentiments such as this are confined to the political margins of society in the West, in Israel they are centre stage. In Britain even UKIP would distance themselves from such atavistic racism. Not so in Israel. Deputy Defence Minister Eli Dayan declaredin a radio interview in 2013 regarding Arabs that ‘To me, they are like animals, they aren’t human.” In most countries he would be out of the government and out of Parliament. In Israel he still remains Israel’s cabinet and why shouldn’t he when his Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu declaredthat Israel needs a fence in order to keep out the ‘wild beasts’ in the surrounding countries?

Netanyahu himself was explicitthat the Black African refugees pose a threat to Jewish identity. In May 2012 he toldIsrael’s cabinet meeting that: "If we don't stop their entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state. This phenomenon is very grave and threatens the social fabric of society, our national security and our national identity."

And by his logic, Netanyahu is correct. Because what is a Jewish state other than a state with a Jewish demographic majority? That is Freedland’s dilemma. A Jewish state is nothing if it is not a Jewish majority state.

Freeland understands how terrible it looks for Israel to be deporting thousands of Black African refugees solely because they are not Jewish (he doesn’t mention the question of their colour). This is something that worries even Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, who warnedNetanyahu of the damage to Israel’s reputation internationally.

Freedland instead of asking why it is that Israel is so desperate to get rid of little more than one half of one percent of its population, tries to avoid facing up to what Israel as a Jewish state really means.

Instead he asks ‘What do we mean when we refer to Israel as a Jewish state?’. Is it solely about demographics, a Jewish majority or does it have something to do with its ‘Jewish character.’ Does it ‘embody Jewish values’?

And here you see the dishonesty of Zionism’s liberal defenders writ large as they attempt to reconcile the inherently racist character of Zionism with the idea that Israel embodies an ahistorical set of ‘Jewish values’ preserved in aspic since Moses came down from Mount Sinai.

African refugee in chains

Freedland argues that it isn’t the refugees that threaten the Jewish character of the Israeli state but the expulsions that threaten its ‘Jewish values’. This is of course nonsense. Israel was not born in the spirit of the prophets but with the sword of Joshua. It was, to use a biblical metaphor founded in original sin amidst the terrorism of the Zionist militias, the massacres and the expulsions. The aim of the Zionist movement was not the creation of heaven on earth or a light unto the nations so much as a Jewish racial state. Hence Israel’s obsession with demography.

This tension runs throughout the discourse of Zionism’s defenders as they pretend that Israel is a ‘Jewish democratic’ state. Freedland is fully signed up to this oxymoron of an idea which conveniently forgets that a Jewish majority could only be obtained by driving out ¾ million Arabs in 1948. Israel’s democracy is conditional on Jews being in a large majority. If this is ever threatened then either the majority excludes or expels the existing Arab population or it admits that Israel is no longer a democracy but an ethnocracy i.e. an Apartheid state. That is the dilemma in the West Bank, where 4 million Palestinians live. Israel can’t remain a Jewish majority state and annex the West Bank including its people. This is where the fiction of a ‘peace process’ originates. As long as there is a pretence of ‘negotiations’ then the final status of the West Bank can be put off indefinitely.

Freedland like the liberal defenders of Apartheid in South Africa has to resort to euphemisms and circumlocutions, as he tries to evade the meaning of words and concepts. Freedland refers to the description of the African refugees as ‘infiltrators’but is coy about what that term actually means. His reticence is understandable.

Infiltrators is the term that was applied to the Palestinian refugees in the early years of the Israeli state. Having been expelled from their lands, they attempted to come back in the quiet of the night. They, the indigenous population of the land, were shot on sight because they were deemed by Freedland’s Labour Zionist friends as ‘infiltrators’, literally infiltrating and therefore undermining the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. It is a term that encapsulates the racist mindset of the settler colonial state of Israel.

A good example of what a Jewish state means in practice is the Jewish National Fund’s response to the decision of the Supreme Court in the Kadan case in 2000, which ruled that Arabs could not be barred from renting or buying ‘Jewish’ land. The JNF declaredthat:

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.

Despite the pretence that a Jewish and a Democratic state were compatible, Israel has always found in practice that the Jewish and the democratic were in opposition to each other. After all if a state is truly democratic then its Arab component must have the right to become a majority. Whereas if the Jewish part is most important then preventing that scenario is the most important of the state’s tasks.

Israel was not founded in order to protect and defend Freedland’s ‘Jewish values’ but as a state based on a Jewish racial majority. Zionism consciously set out to transform being Jewish from a religion to a nation/race. Zionism was a volkish movement that believed in a blood and soil version of nationalism, the idea that putting Hebrew land under the feet of Jewish immigrants would transform them from their diaspora mentality.

That is why the appeal to an eternal and mythical concept of ‘Jewish values’ is absurd. Jewish identity has changed many times over the centuries. From traders to money lenders to militant workers and revolutionaries to settler colonials. Today the majority Jewish identity is Zionist, but it is not the only Jewish identity. Indeed today what one means by Jewish values depends on where you are. The values of the Jewish community in America, which are generally liberal, differ vastly from the overwhelming racism of the Israeli settler state.

Freedland is, of course, quite right to point to the Biblical injunctions to protect and safeguard and not to turn away the stranger but it is not these passages that Zionism looks to. Zionism looks to the most bloody and racist passages of the Bible. It is the god that smote and wiped out the heathen that Zionism takes sustenance from. The example of Phineas, the grandson of Moses’ brother Aaron, who killed a Jewish man and his Moabite wife, is cited by those opposed to miscegenation, sexual relationships between Jews and Arabs. Opposition to mixed marriages on racial grounds is a majority opinion in Israel. Some 3 out of every 4 Israeli Jews sees marriage to a non-Jew as 'national treason' - their opposition is not on religious but racial/national grounds.

So although Freeland understands very well where the racism that manifests itself in the expulsion of African refugees comes from, he is not prepared to draw the conclusion that it is Zionism, the belief in a Jewish majority state, based on a Jewish race, that has led to this situation. Thus it is that the liberal Zionist is forever living a lie. That is the price that Freedland pays for maintaining the pretence that a ‘Jewish’ Israel is compatible with the liberal values that he takes for granted in Britain.

One suspects that if Jews were treated in the same ways as Palestinians in Israel then Freedland would be the first to cry ‘anti-Semitism’.

Tony Greenstein

Benjamin Netanyahu’s appalling betrayal of Jewish values

The desire to be rid of these African newcomers has been mired in plain racism from the start, writes Jonathan Freedland.

African asylum seekers and human rights activists protest against deportation outside the Rwandan embassy in Herzliya (Flash90)

What do we mean when we refer to Israel as a Jewish state? Do we simply mean a state with a majority of Jews — or a state that somehow has a Jewish character, one that at least aims to embody Jewish values?

There is nothing abstract about this inquiry. On the contrary, this week it acquired moral urgency. On Sunday, the Israeli immigration authorities issued deportation notices to an estimated 20,000 asylum seekers from Africa. For now, women, children and fathers are exempt. The focus in this first round is on men without children, men who had fled mainly from Eritrea and Sudan while those countries were shaken by brutal political violence and war. The refugees have 60 days to leave Israel — or else be jailed indefinitely.

When this plan was first agreed by the Israeli cabinet back in November, officials said it was necessary to expel these “infiltrators” — the word favoured by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — in order “to protect the Jewish and democratic character of Israel.”

The intended meaning was, presumably, that the presence of 60,000 Africans in Israel threatened to alter the country’s demographic make-up: expanding the non-Jewish minority and thereby making the country numerically less Jewish. But, in fact, the threat is the exact other way around. It is not the refugees but these expulsions that threaten the Jewish character of Israel, for they violate every value Jews are meant to hold dear.

For what injunction burns through our most sacred texts? “Do not ill-treat a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt”. I recall what the former Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, once told me in the context of Israel’s relationship with the Palestinians: “You cannot ignore a command that is repeated 36 times in the Mosaic books: ‘You were exiled in order to know what it feels like to be an exile.’” Sacks said he regarded that as “one of the core projects of a state that is true to Judaic principle.”

Yet Israel is now abandoning that core project and trampling all over that Judaic principle. A people who spent two millennia as intermittent refugees is turning a hard heart towards those who find themselves as strangers in a strange land. Indeed, Israeli officialdom refuses to recognise their plight at all.

In recent years, tens of thousands of Eritreans and Sudanese fled their ravaged homelands, making the perilous trek, often on foot, through Sinai: the very route taken by the Children of Israel as they fled slavery under Pharaoh.

Of those who made it to Israel, evading the brutal grasp of both Egyptian security forces and people traffickers, the total number to be granted refugee status is ten. You read that right. Ten.

This violates not only the teachings of Judaism, but of Jewish history. Our experience as a people over many centuries was one of expulsion, exile and the desperate search for shelter. Yet now Israel says it does not believe that these Africans were fleeing bloodshed, insisting that most are mere economic migrants. As if the same was not said of our forebears when they washed up on England’s shores more than a century ago. Netanyahu’s rejection of refugees even departs from recent Israeli history. His predecessor as a Likud prime minister, Menachem Begin, managed to find room for several hundred Vietnamese “boat people” four decades ago. But now, when Israel is so much richer and more capable of generosity, there is no room for those who look different.

And make no mistake, that’s what this is about. The desire to be rid of these African newcomers has been mired in plain racism from the start. Recall that, in 2012, Likud’s Miri Regev, now the culture minister, referred to them as a “cancer.” She eventually apologised for the comparison — to people living with cancer.

If you doubt the unvarnished bigotry at play here, listen to the testimony of Emanuel Yemani, an Eritrean refugee who, in now-fluent Hebrew, described an encounter with an Israeli immigration official. He was told that the documents he’d brought as requested were no longer needed, because,

“soon we’ll deport all of you, and you’ll sit under a tree, open your mouth and wait for a banana to fall, like a monkey.”

“But I’m a human being, not a monkey,” Yemani answered.

“Don’t you see yourselves, that you look like monkeys?” the official replied.

The good news is that the opposition to this move has been fierce, from Israeli Holocaust survivors pleading for the refugees to be allowed to stay, to El Al pilots refusing to fly the planes that would deport them. In a significant shift, Jewish groups and religious leaders in the US and Canada have been petitioning Israeli embassies, urging a change of heart. Some have done that here, too, but more of us need to join that effort. There is nothing anti-Israel in denouncing this immoral policy. To fight it is not to oppose the Jewish state – it is to urge it to be worthy of that name. 

Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist

↧

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

February 14, 2018, 9:55 pm

≫ Next: This Sunday I face Labour’s Star Chamber – my crime is supporting Palestine and opposing Zionist Apartheid

≪ Previous: The Lie of Liberal Zionism and Israel’s African Refugees

Hoffman, Mandy Blumenthall, Andrew Gatward & Ambrosine Shitrit Are Proof that Zios Have the Ethics of a Rattlesnake as They Try to Exploit the Death of a Friend for Political Purposes

For some time a group of Zionist fascists, led by one Jonathan Hoffman, have gone around London deliberately trying to disrupt Palestine solidarity meetings, obstruct demonstrations and on occasion physically attack people.

They are an assorted group of racists and fascists including people like Paul Besser, former ‘Intelligence’ Office for the neo-Nazi Britain First, a Holocaust denying outfit, a sympathiser of which murdered Labour MP Jo Cox in 2016. Others include Andrew Gatward, ex-BNP, Gemma Sheridan and Roberta Moore of the neo-Nazi Jewish Defence League. All of them have far-Right politics and hang around people like Tommy Robinson, founder of the EDL and currently with British Pegida.

So you can imagine their anguish when I printed an Exclusive last December: We Name the Gang of 31 Zionists Whose Purpose is to Disrupt Palestinian Events in London which was subtitled ‘The Thugs and Misfits of the neo-Nazi Jewish Defence League & Assorted Fascists Intent on Destroying Free Speech on Israel and Palestine’

One of these fascists and racists was one Jason Silver. Clearly suffering from mental health problems he took his own life recently. The reason for this seems to have been that he was led to believe that he could use the fake IHRA definition of anti-Semitism to have last July’s Palestine Expo banned and then on the day to have the Police close it down.

Silver went on to write to Amber Rudd and the Metropolitan Police Comissioner to try and stop PALEXPO going ahead and he even threatened to attend and find evidence of antisemitism for the Police. He went and then instituted complaints of antisemtism against the Police because they refused to close down the event on his say-so on the day - he believed he had the right under the IHRA definition to insist on this. He set up a false FB account under the name JANET LITTLEFINGER to harass the Met. He even published the name of the young policewoman dealing with his case so people could email and bully her.

Jason Silver opposing 'anti-semitism' with the defrocked priest and Hitler supporter Neil Horan in green

Just some of the abusive messages accusing Sally Eason and myself of murdering Jason Silver

The original post - a factual description that Silver never expressed any objection to

Silver says he is fuming - with the Police for banning the EDL

The lies these fascists tell - there was no communication - ever with Jason Silver

The ability to manufacture fake evidence is impressive - however this advocate of 'interfaith unity' was calling all Muslims paedophiles and terrorists in the video

Jason Silver's wife tries to calm him down whilst others encourage his delusions

Hoffman makes a direct accusation of murder - on the basis of no evidence

His vile racist abuse of the annual Al Quds demonstration can be seen here:

Silver later took this video down because he feared it might incriminate him.

The Islamic Human Rights Commission report of the racist attacks on the march are here. The tenor of Silver’s remarks was evidenced by nonsense such as ‘Stop the Palestinian occupation of Israel.’

There is no doubt that Silver was encouraged in these lunatic views by the fascists he had surrounded himself with. It is equally clear that he was encouraged by them in his delusional belief that he was being victimised by the Police. Of course every death is a tragedy and when I became aware of what had happened I removed the section of the blog that related to Silver whilst keeping the rest of it online. There was no reason to keep up something which clearly had no more relevance. To Jonathan Hoffman simple basic decency towards someone who has died was an attempt to hide the evidence.

Paul Besser on right back row with Paul Golding (with cross) of Britain First

There are very few people in this world of whom it can be said that they are without even one redeeming feature. Hoffman however is just such a creature. His life is dedicated to increasing the sum total of human misery, all in the name of combating ‘anti-Semitism’.

It is clear that Silver was obsessed with his complaints to the Police

Yet strangely enough, when Kevin Myers of the Irish Sunday Times gave vent to overtly anti-Semitic remarks, Hoffman defended him! Myers had said:

The fascist blame us for Silver's death when it is they who filled his head with hate

“I note that two of the best paid women presenters in the BBC – Claudia Winkleman and Vanessa Feltz, with whose, no doubt, sterling work I am tragically unacquainted – are Jewish. Good for them.

“Jews are not general noted for their insistence on selling their talent for the lowest possible price, which is the most useful measure there is of inveterate, lost-with-all-hands stupidity.”

Only Hoffman could find that this was not anti-Semitic! On what basis did he come to this conclusion? How did someone who sees anti-Semitism in virtually everything that moves fail to see it in the above statement? Myers is a racist bigot who has previously disparaged Africans and single mothers [see The warped logic of pro-Israel bully Jonathan Hoffman]

Gatward pretends he is infiltrating the BNP

The only answer to this puzzle is the age-old Zionist attitude to anti-Semitism. Zionism historically has, in Herzl’s words ‘pardoned’ anti-Semitism. It is only when anti-Semites dislike Israel that Zionism opposes anti-Semitism. In practice Zionist leaders and the State of Israel are happy to work with neo-Nazis and fascists provided that they support Israel.

It is fortunate that unlike Hitler, Netanyahu, Pol Pot et al. Hoffman has no power. He is a racist who will justify any abomination that is committed against the Palestinians. As far as Hoffman is concerned anything goes in defence of his beloved apartheid State of Israel.

Silver's letter to the Home Secretary

The death of Jason Silver was the cue for Hoffman, Shitrit and the above scoundrels to assert that I had been responsible for his death. There seems no limits to the bottomless pit to which these skunks will sink. I refer to @JHoffman1, @JuliaRoberts649@RichMillett@AmbrosineShitr1@campaign4T et al.

In fact there has never been, to my knowledge, any interchange whatsoever between me and Jason Silver. Nor did Silver express any resentment of my article, unlike other people.

Silver masqueraded as Janet Littlefinger

Anything but a nice Jewish girl

Silver sets up a fake twitter account

Sure these fascists didn’t like my exposure of them, and there’s more to come, but the idea that there was any connection between what I printed and Jason Silver’s death is entirely fanciful. Silver doesn’t appear to have even mentioned my blog, unlike a number of others who appeared in it who wrote to me or posted comments underneath the story. I usually allowed the comments as long as they were not abusive and I had a long dialogue with for example Thor Halland, both in the comments and by email. But from Silver? Nothing.

It is clear that Silver was obsessed with his complaints to the Police

Jason Silver is not the only vulnerable person these fascists have exploited. Another is Janine Greyman, the mother of 2 teenage boys both of whom appear to have ADHD. She is a close associate of Sheridan, Hoffman, Klaff, Shitrit, Besser and English. English has made it his business to go around physically threatening to beat up fellow Zionists who he has fallen out with such as Joseph Cohen of the Israel Advocacy Movement.

Greyman brings her children to demonstrations, attracting the notice of the Metropolitan Police. The children, who go by the name of Isaacs, have a father now living in Australia. One of the children Myles Isaacs together with Paul Besser of Britain First ran into the Al Quds demonstration. Greyman complained to the Met that Myles had been assaulted and the response of the Police was to report the mother to Social Services.

http://www.ihrc.org.uk/activities/campaigns/12012-letter-to-metropolitan-police-commissioner-regarding-al-quds-day-2017

Murder by Proxy no less! and the evidence? zilch

The fantasies are impressive

Completely Illiterate and Nonsensical

↧

This Sunday I face Labour’s Star Chamber – my crime is supporting Palestine and opposing Zionist Apartheid

February 15, 2018, 1:35 pm

≫ Next: Justice Demands that Jeremy Newmark of the JLM is Suspended from the Labour Party Forthwith Pending an Investigation - Sign the Petition

≪ Previous: Jonathan Hoffman’s Gang of Zionist Fascists Blame Anyone but themselves for the Suicide of their friend Jason Silver

J’Accuse - My response to those who make false accusations of witchcraft or ‘anti-Semitism’

This Sunday the long delayed hearing will take place into the accusations against me before Labour’s National Constitutional Committee. The witch-hunters tried to rush it through quickly on December 11^th, giving me just 4 weeks to prepare after a suspension lasting 20 months.

There will be a picket outside the hearing at the Metropole Hotel in Brighton at 9.45 a.m. All welcome!

I was forced on 7^thDecember to go to the High Court in order to obtain an Injunction preventing this travesty of justice. The Judge, Sir Stephen Phillips, agreed with me that the actions of the Labour Party were indefensible, However it is the same Panel that refused to grant me an extension of time that will be hearing my case. It would be expecting too much that this same Panel will be prepared to put out of their minds the prejudice and bias that led them into their earlier error of judgment.

I have been refused the names of the Panel and indeed the names of my accusers. However one of them is clearly the Jewish Labour Movement, the British wing of the racist Israeli Labour Party. It is somewhat ironic that I am suspended at the behest of Jeremy Newmark, the then Chair of the JLM, who has been accused of stealing thousands of pounds from a Jewish charity. In a letter to me last week Iain McNicol, the crooked General Secretary of the Labour Party refusedto suspend Newmark. It was a ‘private matter’ and anyway he ‘strongly denied’ the charges despite an internal audit which Newmark never challenged saying otherwise.

Below is the second part of my Defence. The first part was Anti-Semitism? It’s Israel Stupid!

The ONLY people who benefit from false accusations of anti-Semitism are GENUINE anti-Semites

On 13^th January 1898 Emile Zola, the French journalist, novelist and playwright, wrote a famous article J'Accuse. It was addressed to the President of France, Félix Faure. It accused the War Office and the Army, who had framed and imprisoned the Jewish officer, Captain Alfred Dreyfus, of anti-Semitism, forgery and perverting the course of justice. That is my response, in no particular order, to the false accusations of anti-Semitism made by McNicol’s pathetic Torquemadas.

This paper is not written because I hope to convince Labour’s National Kangaroo Committee (NKC) of my innocence. There is a higher likelihood of snow falling in the middle of the Saharan summer than my being acquitted.

I am perhaps lucky that the malevolent and pliant instruments of Iain McNicol, Labour’s crooked General Secretary, do not have the power of physical coercion and that I do not have to flee abroad as Zola was forced to do after publishing J’Accuse.

So far this affair has been conducted in secret. Not only are the names of those who conducted the investigation secret, but so are the members of the panel which will hear me. My accusers too have also been granted the right of anonymity. Even in Hitler’s People’s Court, the name of the Presiding Judge Roland Freisler was public knowledge. Transparency is not a feature of McNicol’s NKC.

There is as much truth in the false charge of ‘anti-Semitism’ against me as there was in the accusation of treason against Dreyfus. My purpose in writing this submission is the same as that of Zola. To quote the final paragraphof J’Accuse.:

I have but one passion: to enlighten those who have been kept in the dark.... let the enquiry take place in broad daylight! I am waiting.’

I am not accused of ‘anti-Semitism’ because anyone seriously believes I hate Jews as Jews, which is the only definition that matters. After all I have spent a lifetime fighting real anti-Semites and fascists, whereas the only thing my accusers have fought for is a good seat in a restaurant or a higher place in the pecking order

I am accused of ‘anti-Semitism for the same reason as thousands of people, including Jeremy Corbyn, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, Gerald Kaufman and Hannah Arendt have been so accused. Most of the targets of these accusations are themselves Jewish. This is an accusation made by Jewish racists (Zionists) against their anti-racist Jewish opponents.

My only crime is that I oppose Zionism and the Apartheid State of Israel. In the twisted minds of McNicol’s protégés, opposition to racism is a form of anti-Semitism. ‘Anti-Semitism’ for McNicol is anti-racism for most people.

Even Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian, someone who has been one of the main proponents of the false allegations of anti-Semitism, including against Jeremy Corbyn, wrote to me in a private email that:

‘I have always had respect for the integrity of your position. I remember your admirable stance on Gilad Atzmon for example.’ Gilad Atzmon is a notorious anti-Semite, an ex-Israeli and world famous jazz musician. Freedland was referring to the article I wrote for the GuardianThe Seamy Side of Solidarity in which I explained why Atzmon was anti-semitic for those many people who, at that time, refused to believe it. Some still do.

Likewise Jamie Slavin of the Board of Deputies of British Jews wrote that:

It’s not often that I’m lost for words. Today was an exception. I stumbled across Tony Greenstein’s blog this morning. Tony is an anti-Zionist Jewish member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC). Whilst his views on the situation in the Middle East are a complete anathema to me, to his credit, he has led the opposition within the PSC to the rising levels of anti-Semitism.

Why did many people refuse to believe that Gilad Atzmon was an anti-Semite? There are two reasons:

i. Because Atzmon, as a former Israeli disenchanted with Israel’s human rights crimes, posed as an anti-Zionist.

ii. Because people are so used to false allegations of ‘anti-Semitism’ against critics of Israel, that when someone comes along who actually is an anti-Semite, they tend to be sceptical. After all they have heard this many times before.

The effectof false accusations of anti-Semitism is to render people immune to genuine anti-Semites. It is the ‘boy cried wolf’ syndrome. Zionism has never had any problems with anti-Semitism since without anti-Semitism there would be no Zionism. There has always been a coincidence of interest between anti-Semitism and Zionism hence the collaboration between the Nazi state and the Zionist movement from 1933-39.

Above – Tony Greenstein is the target of 2 Separate Articles attacking him on the neo-Nazi Redwatch Site which targets anti- fascists and anti-racists

Even members of this Panel must be dimly aware that the most anti-Semitic members of Trump’s administration and the alt-Right, figures like Steve Bannon or Richard Spencer, are also the most pro-Israel. I defy members of the Panel to name any far-Right or fascist groups in Europe that doesn’t support Israel. I can think of two, can you? (Jobbik, Golden Dawn)

False accusations of anti-Semitism help genuine anti-Semites escape detection and confuse ordinary people because they assume that it is another false accusation. When the intellectual pygmies and moral cowards of McNicol’s circus accuse people like me, Marc Wadsworth or Jackie Walker of ‘anti-Semitism’ what they are really doing is giving a helping hand to people like Nick Griffin of the BNP or Paul Golding of Britain First (both pro-Zionist).

Of course the pip squeaks and pen pushers of Southside, who so carefully compile their dodgy dossiers as if they were an accountant’s ledger, know nothing of who I am or my political record. People whose only understanding of racism is gained from an equal opportunities policy and who have never taken any part in anti-racist work have the audacity to accuse anti-racist activists like us of ‘anti-Semitism’ when their real purpose is defending the world’s most racist state.

McNicol and his witchhunters are helping genuine anti-Semites

Well known anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon uses the false allegations of anti-Semitism from McNicol's apparatchiks to excuse his own, indeed to hide his own anti-semitism

I have already explained why false accusations of anti-Semitism against people who are anti-racist can only confuse people as to who the genuine anti-Semites are allowing the latter to hide behind claims of supporting Palestine. However it also has another, equally serious effect.

Increasingly in recent weeks fascists and anti-Semites are using these false accusations of anti-Semitism as a means of warding off my own criticism of them. In other words McNicol and his wretches are doing the dirty work of fascists. This has happened twice in the past few weeks.

On the first occasion Paul Besser, the former Intelligence Officer of Britain First, whose videos Trump recently retweeted, was the subject of an exposeby me when he was caught demonstrating against ‘anti-Semitism’ alongside Zionists at the Palestine Expo 2017 festival. Besser retaliated by quotingthe Compliance Unit’s accusations of anti-Semitism against me! Unbelievable. Not only helping Zionist racists but now Fascist ones as well.

The other notorious anti-Semite that McNicol’s scumbags have aided is Gilad Atzmon. I have been active in helping drive Atzmon out of the Palestine solidarity movement. Now he is taking to quoting McNicol’s wretches to attack me – for anti-Semitism! I received this copy of a Facebook posting today from Laura MacDonald, who is one of his fans and herself deeply anti-Semitic.

In Israel - inter-marriage between a Jew and an Arab isn't a religious but a national prohibition - 'treason' no less

The Israel that the Compliance Unit defends, to the applause of assorted fascists, is a state where, according to a survey in Israel’s largest paper Yediot Aharanot, 75% of Jews refuse to share an apartment block with an Arab and half believe marriage to an Arab is ‘national treason’ (not a religious sin). A plurality(48%) of Israelis believe in physically deporting Israeli Arab citizens.

Correcting a few of the lies of the Jewish Chronicle's poisonous Political Editor Marcus Dysch

Despite the aversion of McNicol’s lackeys to daylight, they had no compunction in broadcasting my name across the pages of The Telegraph and Times (2.4.16.). Just 3 days before charges were proffered further leaks were made to the Jewish Chronicle (31.10.17.) which predicted that charges were imminent. If that weren’t enough yet another leak to the JC (7.12.17.) explained that it was my criticism of Louise Ellman MP, for her support for the Israeli army’s child abuse which was the ‘tipping point’ in the laying of charges against me.

High Court Injunction

When I was informed, on November 2^nd that my hearing was to take place on December 11^th I was in hospital, recovering from surgery. I immediately responded asking that the hearing be postponed till after the New Year. Any reasonable or fair minded person would have granted this immediately, bearing in mind that I had been suspended for 20 months.

However the Chair of the NCC and whoever else was implicated in that decision, are anything but fair minded. Their remit was to be rid of me as soon as practicably possible. It was clear, from the evidence that I produced at the court that I was being treated differently, even from other accused persons.

The Secretary to the NCC, Jane Shaw, was immensely pleased when she informed me that a photograph had been obtained showing me at Brighton railway station on November 4^th waiting for a train to London in order to go on a Palestine demonstration. Apparently this was conclusive proof that I was able to reply in time to the charges laid against me.

I was therefore left with no other option but to apply to the High Court for an Injunction preventing a hearing on December 11^th. Suffice to say the High Court was not impressed with the Labour Party’s reasoning. Counsel for the Labour Party didn’t even mention this photograph. Nor was Natalie Connor able to explain away the rush to judgement in the light of the 20 months suspension.

Sir Stephen Phillips found that ‘the Labour Party had dealt brusquely and without any real reasons’ with my application for an extension of time. At a cost to Labour Party members of some £10,000, Justice Phillips granted me an injunction preventing the holding a hearing until 8^th January 2018.

The NCC Guidelines (Appendix 6) stipulate that no regard should be paid to any injustices prior to the notification of a hearing date. The Chair insisted on interpreting the Guidelines as narrowly as possible, regardless of the prejudice to me. Chapter 6(D)(i) of the Rules states that ‘the NCC is entitledto (and will) act on the basis that the charges are properly brought.’ There is however a caveat: ‘unless it [a complaint] is material or relevant to the consideration of the evidence...’

Clearly not having enough time to respond to the charges against me was relevant to the evidence. In any event Chapter 6(2) states that the Guidelines ‘do not form part of the Party’s rules.’ and s.3 stipulates that ‘Inevitably a degree of flexibility is required to deal with unforeseen circumstances or unusual cases.’ Chapter 1 Clause IX stipulates that the NCC ‘shall have the power... to modify its procedures in order to meet the circumstances of any particular case to ensure fairness to both the individual and the Party.’

It is clear that the Chair of the NCC in wilfully disregarding my representations displayed bias and prejudice and disregarded any notion of fairness. I would therefore request that the Chair recuse themselves and plays no further part in proceedings.

It speaks volumes that capitalist justice, the High Court, set aside the Chair’s shoddy reasoning. No doubt the Chair first sought ‘advice’ from those conducting the investigation. If the person who made the initial ruling has any integrity they will withdraw of their own accord. However I realise that integrity is not at a premium amongst Labour’s apparatchiks.

This submission should be read in conjunction with the submission which I have already tendered as well of course as the expert witness reports.

Accusations Based on a Dishonest Rendition of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Definition of Anti-Semitism

McNicol confirms that the IHRA defintion encompasses 39 words not the 'illustrative' 11 examples - but the liars who have brought the prosecution against me pretend otherwise

The IHRA Secretariat confirm that the IHRA definition of antisemitism does not encompass the 11 illustrative examples

I have already referred in my previous submission to the IHRA. On page 2 of thebundlethere is a footnote reference ‘See IHRA definition of Antisemitism (Tab 9, page 179)’. In fact the definition is spread out over 2 pages, 178 and 179. This rendition of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism comes from a press release from the Romanian Chair of the IHRA Conference in 2016. It has always struck me as strange that the only source documentation for the IHRA definition is a scrappy press release.

After much prodding the IHRA Permanent Office in Berlin confirmed in a letterof 12 September 2017 that ‘Nothing apart from this brief definition of antisemitism was formally adopted by the IHRA member states at their Bucharest meeting in 2016.’

[...] The Plenary of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) adopted the working definition of antisemitism under the Romanian Chairmanship on 26 May 2016. The working definition, like all IHRA decision, is non-legally binding. The working definition is the text in the box...’

Not only has the IHRA not adopted the 11 illustrative examples but neither has the Labour Party. It is therefore totally dishonest of McNicol’s monkeys to have asserted that the IHRA definition included the 11 examples when they haven’t.

Charges 1 – Social Media Posts

Would it be too much to expect that the useless bureaucrat who compiled dozens of my social media posts to have used page numbers rather than tabs? Tabs cover 30 or more pages. Don’t Labour’s indolent apparatchiks have at least some skill sets such as the ability to undertake basic referencing? Or are Labour’s witch hunters totally without any discernible talents?

The allegations under the heading Charge 1 are a mixture of the inane, the superficial, the tedious, the mendacious and trivial. Apart from being based on a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998, as social media posts are my own property, they are irrelevant. The social media posts which have been copied cannot be sourced and have not been sourced and therefore the context cannot be determined.

Twitter is the medium of quite bitter exchanges at times and heated confrontations. In only displaying one side of these confrontations McNicol’s apparatchiks have displayed their usual fair mindedness.

There is also deliberate policy of ignoring abuse by anti-Corbyn/rightwing Labour members on social media when it is directed at the Left and immediately picking up on any response when it is by the Left. That is why it is absurd to even try to go through what is half the picture. Below I give one important example:

Councillor Warren Morgan – Leader of Brighton and Hove Council

Warren Morgan's Open Letter - Unredacted

Councillor Morgan is a committed supporter of Progress. He is someone for whom truth and lies have little or no meaning. They are mere expedients. On July 9^th 2016 Brighton District Labour Party held its AGM. Because so many people, over 600 turned up and the hall that was booked was too small, there had to be three sittings. Momentum supported candidates won by over 2-1. Immediately allegations of foul play, in particular spitting, were made. They were made primarilyby Warren Morgan. Yet they were untrue. A dossier compiled by Greg Hadfield proved this beyond any doubt. Greg was subsequently suspended because he insisted on the truth coming out. Videofootage was subsequently obtained proving that there was no spitting. Katherine Buckingham, who was appointed by the Disputes Committee to produce an Inquiry Report refused to even look at the video when she realised that it would contradict Morgan’s lies. This is democracy and fairness in the Court of McNicol.

Warren Morgan's open letter to Iain McNicol redacted to remove references to me

Last September Morgan was up to his old tricks again. This time it was an allegation that the Labour Party was overrun by ‘anti-Semitism’. He made the headlines with threats that the Labour conference would not be welcome in Brighton. All Labour Party Branches which have discussed it have either called on him to resign or apologise or both. Brighton Kemptown CLP has now endorsed these calls. Morgan’s comments were taken up by Theresa May in Question Time and thus used against the Labour Party. A clear case of bringing the Party into disrepute. Morgan stated in his Open Letter to Iain McNicol that:

‘We have the prominent activist and suspended Labour Party member Tony Greenstein here, who indeed was present at the fringe meeting where it was suggested that Holocaust denial should be allowed. His expulsion, in my view, is long overdue.’

Morgan was referring to a comment made by a speaker at a Free Speech on Israel meeting that all subjects should be discussed, including whether the Holocaust occurred. It is a standard free speech argument, it didn’t indicate any agreement with Holocaust denial.

Morgan’s attack on me for simply being at the meeting were a classic case of guilt by association. I therefore made a complaint, not once but three times, (12^th October, 16^th and 24^th November) to McNicol. McNicol has refused to even acknowledge my complaint.

Realising that making a complaint to crooked McNicol was useless, since Labour’s complaints system is only designed for use by the Right, I decided to make a complaint to Brighton and Hove Council’s Standards Board. Whilst I am unable to provide full details of the outcome at the present time, I am pleased to say that Warren Morgan has been forced to amend his post above and has now deleted all references to me. He has in addition offered, via the relevant Standards Board officer, an apology.

However this was obtained through a statutory process. It would have been impossible to achieve any measure of recompense through the Labour Party’s Complaints System because it is a factional instrument of the Right. It does not contain any element of fairness which is why I had go to the High Court to rectify the bias of the Chair of this Panel and what Steve Bell called the National Kangaroo Court.

This submission has therefore been compiled for the record not in the hope that the leopard will change its spots or that you will overcome the habits of a lifetime and reach a decision on the weight of the evidence rather than your ingrained biases.

Abusive social media posts on Warren Morgan’s Facebook page

Labour’s Compliance Unit have gone to great length to try to gather samples of abusive posts by me. Such things as ‘Gay Zios make me puke’ which is no more than an expression of belief about gays who use their own oppression to justify the oppression of others or references to ‘Zio scum’ seem to disturb them no end. All of the above posts lack any context. The latter comment is in response to abuse from a Zionist and was entirely justified.

In fact, as the 6 pages of abusive tweets I have already submitted demonstrate, far from me abusing others I have been the victim of abusive social media posts. The use of the word ‘scum’ is perfectly justified for racists or fascists. I realise that members of the Panel are likely have no experience or involvement in anti-fascist activity and those who compiled the dodgy dossier are even less likely, but if they had then they would know that one of the key slogans shouted on anti-fascist demonstrations was ‘Nazi scum off the streets’. In Brighton we had a variant on this ‘Thick and dumb, Nazi scum’. No doubt McNicol’s poisonous scribes would have declared we were being oppressive to the local fascists!

The exchange on Warren Morgan’s Facebook page was between a former Labour councillor Craig Turton and Warren Morgan. In response to Craig Turton’s statement that ‘Greenstein is a poisonous piece of shit – the sooner he’s kicked out of the party the better’ Morgan responds ‘Thanks Craig, appreciate that. Hope you are well.’

If I had posted this truly abusive post to or about another member of the Labour Party then the Compliance Unit would have been down on it like a ton of bricks. My posts have been robust but not abusive. They have primarily been political not personal.

I therefore made a complaint about Warren Morgan’s posts to McNicol. What was the response? Not a dicky bird. Crooked McNicol’s only concern is abuse by the Left not abuse against the Left.

No doubt there will be some tendentious excuse by Panel members as to why selective indignation by McNicol’s apparatchiks is irrelevant. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. I expect the panel will follow the example of the 3 wise monkeys and see, say and hear nothing. However it is important to put these things down for the record.

In Charge 13 exception is taken to my description of John Mann MP as someone ‘addicted to murder and racism.’ This is my assessment of the rent-a-mouth who accused Ken Livingstone of being a supporter of Hitler! Mann has gone out of his way to accuse opponents of Israel of ‘anti-Semitism’.Itwas his Committee that was behind the introduction of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance which conflates anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. Mann also penned an open letter (27.7.15) to Jeremy Corbyn accusing him, during the first leadership election, of having turned a blind eye to child abuse. This disgusting man used the suffering of children in order to mount a political vendetta against the soon to be leader of the Labour Party. It is about time that Mann was made accountable. I regret nothing.

just one of the many abusive tweets I have been sent

Mann is the man who alleged that an open letter to him by a 90 year old Jewish Dr Sam Glatt, a Labour Party member, telling him to stop undermining Jeremy Corbyn was a forgery. It was only when I obtained a signed copy of a letter denying Mann’s spurious allegations that Mann’s defamatory Facebook post was taken down.

As someone who has deliberately targeted supporters of the Palestinians as ‘anti-Semitic’ my accusations against him are well founded. It is suggested further that my comments are ‘potentially defamatory’ . Fine. Let him sue, bearing in mind that the comments are not only true but fair comment – a defence in all defamation cases.

I do not intend, in view of the clear and demonstrable hypocrisy of my accusers to waste any more time on social media posts unless there is a wider political that needs making

Gay Zionists Make Me Puke

Allegation No: 11 - The idiot who compiled the 189 page bundle makes repeated reference to the above phrase but fails to point out that it can be found on p.39. He pompously states that ‘the singling out of Gay Zionists has caused offence’. I singled out no one. In any event it is no business of the snoop in compliance. He should not be monitoring my social media posts and then s/he would not take offence.

Political debate often causes offence. Only those who wanted to be offended would have read what was an exchange between Independent journalist, herself an Israeli Mira bar Hillel and myself. Mira pointed out that Elton John had dedicated his Your Song to Israel. She might also have pointed out that Elton John is a despicable racist who broke the boycott of South Africa when he played in Sun City. But maybe the idiot who compiled this thinks that that Boycott too was racist?

Allegation No:s 21 & 22 The waste of space who collected the two tweets referred to here allege they are in Tab 5. They are not. If the idiot had bothered to put in page numbers then they might have been found by me rather than wasting my time.

The first allegation refers to my alleged comment ‘racist whore’ I don’t know what the context of this tweet was, assuming I said it. However if it was in reaction to the racist rubbish that I regularly receive, which the idiot who collected these tweets deliberately ignored, then it is understandable.

The second allegation that I referred to another member of the party as ‘a Janus faced whore who bears the impression of the last person who sat on him’ is not to my knowledge a saying of mine. I’m not a student of the classics! It might however refer to my applausefor a similar comment by a Terry Kelly about Owen Jones. Seems most appropriate! I did think it had originated with George Galloway but I might be mistaken. If the person who collected this had bothered to reference it then the context might have been obvious. I do not have the time to source all these given that over 17 months Labour’s useless bureaucrats were unable to reference their findings.

If we want to talk about anti-Semitic and racist tweets here are few that McNicol’s minions didn’t locate

On my blog one day I got 2 posts – one from a Zio and another from a Neo-Nazi. I found the post from the Zio more disturbing than the holocaust denier. Strange that. Why do you think that was?

McNicol’s monkeys spent a lot of time monitoring my blog, my social media posts and much else. First they suspended me, then they went digging. However they did not unearth anything that is remotely racist. Political yes. Socialist too. However what is more interesting is what they ignored. They certainly learnt nothing.

On page 9 of the Bundle, accompanying Complaint No. 2 from the JLM, presumably from Jeremy Newmark, there is a tweet by me saying that if you have the racist JLM taking a training course on anti-Semitism you may as well invite Nick Griffin of the BNP. I stand by this remark. Asking racists to take a course on opposing racism beggars belief. I also made the joke that it’s like asking the late Dr Harold Shipman to take a course on medical ethics. Clearly, apart from all his other deficiencies, Newmark doesn’t possess a sense of humour either.

The Obsessions of McNicol’s Monkeys

There seem to be a host of pages in the 189 page bundle that do not seem to be attached to any charges. Pages 127-137, 158-162 focus on blog posts criticising the Jewish Socialists Group over their lack of support for Jackie Walker. All very interesting but what relevance is it to the charges against me? Or is just general surveillance and a means of creating jobs at Southside to have semi-permanent monitoring of my blog?

Death of Sir Gerald Kaufman MP

It is now nearly a year since Gerald Kaufman, the then father of the House of Commons died. When I first met him he was a died-in-the-wool Zionist. However the actions and behaviour of Israel over the years had taken its toll of the man who coined the ‘longest suicide note in history’ pun to describe Labour’s 1983 Manifesto. Sir Gerald, although on the Right of the Labour Party,, was a dedicated humanitarian and he had spoken out about Israel’s war crimes, especially in regard to Gaza. That was why the Zionist movement loathed him. No less than 10% of the bundle is devoted to my blog posts on Sir Gerald. Why?

On page 138 in my appreciation on Sir Gerald’s death I reprint the famous speech he gave in 2009 at the time of Operation Cast Lead when Israel killed 1,400 people in Gaza. Sir Gerald denounced this in no uncertain terms comparing the actions of Israel in killing Palestinian grandmothers to the actions of Nazi soldiers who killed his grandmother in a Polish ghetto. Perhaps the cretins of the Compliance Unit want to have a posthumous denunciation of Sir Gerald for offending against the even more cretinous IHRA definition of anti-Semitism?

On page 139 we have the obnoxious John Mann being reported as saying that ‘Kaufman is a disgrace to Parliament and the Labour Party.’

On pages 142-146 there is a blog post ‘Sussex Friends of Israel – Our Code of Conduct is based on the principles of Respect, Responsibility and Integrity’and I then proceed to describe how this far Right Zionist group greeted news of Sir Gerald’s death. It is truly a lesson in Zionist hypocrisies to contrast their noble statement of principles with the Facebook comments.

The nicest comment from Peter Stockton was ‘On the basis that you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead I’ll say nothing.’ Page 143

Since McNicol’s poisonous pigmies have seen fit to reproduce pages of my blog on Sir Gerald I will post some of these Zionist comments. Perhaps the Compliance Unit was thinking of inquiring if these scumbags were members of the Labour Party? Comments include:

Melvyn Wineglass: Good riddance to this evil man who calls himself Jewish. (143)

Eddie Goldberg: Looked like ET, behaved like a Nazi. Glad he lived to see the Donald in power before he died.

Lizbeth Ruffman informs us ‘Nothing worse than an anti-Semitic Jew. He will not rest in peace. (144)

Ros Ellis was quite witty ‘some days are better than others’

Reuven Magnes was fulsome in his tribute ‘And what a repulsive man he was’

Sylvia Goodman was effusive ‘Good riddance to bad rubbish’ (145)

Julian Kruger likewise ‘I’m sorry good riddance. These Jews are the worst.’

Alex Ian was brevity itself ‘every dog has its day’

Landman again could only find one word ‘Traitor’ though to whom or what she didn’t say

Barry Ziderman was clearly the intellectual of SFI – ‘Good Labour politician – Lousy Jew.’

These are only a selection of the obnoxious and racist posts. The question is why this blog post was included. One can only assume that my posting these vile comments was seen as anti-Semitic and that McNicol’s monkey sympathised with the comments.

I am fortified in this belief by another post on Sir Gerald Kaufman’s death headed ‘Have they no shame? Whilst his body is still warm Fake ‘Anti-Semitism’ Charity Continues to Defame Gerald Kaufman’s Memory. Pages 150-155

The fake Zionist charity Campaign Against Anti-Semitismalso paid tribute to Sir Gerald. ‘Sir Gerald Kaufman MP’s words have left a rotting stain on our institutions.’ So the question is why did McNicol’s poisonous dwarves think that these pages were worth including in the bundle?

McNicol's monkeys aren't quite as sharp as Steve Bell's

It will be borne in mind that the falsified and worthless surveys of this far-Right Zionist ‘charity’ are cited in the Bundle by the monkeys.

Charge 17 - The Jewish Labour Movement is deeply racist

The corrupt former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement - Jeremy Newmark

One of the most outrageous charges against me is that ‘Mr Greenstein publicly accused the Director of the Jewish Labour Movement and the Jewish Labour Movement itself of being “racist”.’

It is outrageous because of the assumption that there are certain beliefs which are outside an unwritten Labour Party catechism. The narrow minded haters of free speech in the Compliance Unit not doubt believe that the racist Israeli state is a flourishing, western style democracy that just happens to be based in the Middle East. After all it even participates in the Eurovision contest.

Liar Newmark is found out by Employment Tribunal in its judgment.

Yes the Jewish Labour Movement, the British wing or as it terms the ‘sister party’ of the Israeli Labour Party is without doubt racist. Since when is it illegal to have a dissenting opinion in the Labour Party? McNicol’s henchmen are waging a war on free speech and debate via the misuse of the disciplinary process.

It would appear that the mere holding and expressing of a political opinion is, in itself, a disciplinary offence if it strays into criticism of Israel beyond the normal platitudes. This is a police state mentality. I don’t know the name of the narrow minded bigot drew up this charge but this is a complete waste of staff resources. What kind of disciplinary process is it which penalises a political opinion? This is McCarthyism or maybe McNicolism gone mad.

It is a statement of fact that the JLM and Newmark have no hesitation in accusing other people, such as Ken Livingstone, of ‘anti-Semitism’. I am not aware that Newmark has ever faced disciplinary action for such allegations but accusing the JLM of racism is apparently a disciplinary offence. #

Why the hell should the Israeli Labour Party’s racist British wing be rendered immune to criticism? Why the hell should the Israeli Labour Party have any representation inside our party?

Newmark is not only a racist liar but he is a perjurer. The Employment Tribunal in Fraser v University College Union was quite explicit. They did not believe a word of the evidence he gave when trying to frame UCU for racial discrimination because it passed pro BDS policy.

Allegation 34 consists of my posting an article stating that ‘The JLM are the British wing of the Israeli Labour Party and affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation. Their role is to prettify Israeli racism and repression.’ Err yes. What is the point of this idiotic allegation? It is a fact married to an opinion.

The Israeli Labour Party was the party of government in Israel from 1948-1977 and again from 1992-96 and from 1999-2003. It is unlikely to form a government again in Israel. The JLM is a creature of this racist party and it is reasonable therefore to say that the JLM is racist. The reasons why the Israeli Labour Party are racist include:

i. The ILP was responsible for the ethnic cleansing of ¾ million Palestinians in 1948 and for imposing military rule over those Arabs who continued to live in Israel until 1966.

ii. The ILP has supported every war against both Arab countries and the Palestinians.

iii. The ILP began the settlement of the Occupied Territories and its policy is to opposethe dismantling of any settlement.

iv. The ILP erected the architecture of Israeli Apartheid such as the special place of the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund. These are parastate organisations whose existence is predicated on promoting and favouring the interests of Jewish as opposed to non-Jewish citizens. For example 93% of Israeli land is reserved for the benefit of Jews only and despite an adverse decision in Kadun v Israeli Land Administrationthe State of Israel has continued to discriminate in land allocation passing for example the Reception Committee Law in 2009.

v. It was the ILP which during the 1920s and 1930s when it dominated the Zionist movement campaigned on the policies of Jewish Land and Jewish Produce. These policies were best described by David Ha'Cohen, former Managing Director of Solel Boneh, the Histadrut (Zionist Union) Building Company.

I had to fight my friends on the issue of Jewish socialism, to defend the fact that I would not accept Arabs into my trade union, the Histadrut; to defend preaching to housewives that they not buy at Arab stores; to defend the fact that we stood guard at orchards to prevent Arab workers from getting jobs there… To pour kerosene on Arab tomatoes; to attack Jewish housewives in the markets and smash the Arab eggs they had bought; to praise to the skies to Keren Kayemet [Jewish National Fund] that sent [Zionist Organisation agent Yehoshua] Hankin to Beirut to buy land from absentee effendis [landowners] and to throw the fellahin off the land… to do all that was not easy.” (David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East, Nation Books, third edition 2003, p. 185.)

From its inception the Israeli Labour Party was a party of first economic and then political apartheid.

vi. The ILP was not unique. Similar Labour Parties were set up amongst the white settlers in South Africa, Canada, Australia and Rhodesia. Almost without exception these parties were advocates of a colour bar. In Australia for example the Labour Party and Trade Union Movement were the foremost proponents of a White Australian Policy. In no case were any of these parties represented inside the British Labour Party. For historical reasons, primarily the necessity to win over the Labour Party to support the Balfour Declaration, the ILP (then Mapai) was represented by Poale Zion as an affiliated socialist society. This is a historical anachronism, a relic of the British Empire.

vii. It is a disgrace that the ILP is, via the JLM, an affiliated socialist society. If there is a need for a separate Jewish affiliate then it should not be affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation as the JLM is or have any connection with the ILP.

viii. The WZO acts specifically to support one section of the Israeli population, its Jewish citizens. It funds and supports the illegal Jewish settlements on the West Bank. The JLM is affiliated to the WZO. In November Ha’aretz, published an editorial calling for the closure of the WZO’s ‘land theft division.’

ix. It is, thus, an outrage, that a racist and apartheid supporting society, the JLM should be affiliated to the Labour Party. In describing them as ‘racist’ I was merely telling the truth.

x. Whereas in the former White Dominions the old Labour Parties have either disappeared (South Africa/Zimbabwe/Canada) or changed (Australia/New Zealand) in Israel the ILP is as racist as it always was. If the ILP had changed its spots and de-Zionised in the same way as the Australian Labour Party had decolonised, then there might be some reason why the JLM should remain an affiliate. However the JLM has not shake off its past. On the contrary it is one of the main organisations behind the false anti-Semitism campaign.

xi. The ILP today is as racist as it was when it was in government. It is moving further to the racist Right in order to catch Netanyahu up:

Former Israeli Labour Leader Yitzhak Herzog's nightmare was a Palestinian Prime Minister

a. Its previous leader Isaac Herzog declared that his nightmare was waking up to find that Israel had a Palestinian Prime Minister and 61 Palestinian Members of Israel’s Knesset (Parliament). Who needs the Right when we have Isaac Herzog? If someone were to say that they didn’t want a Jewish Prime Minister. Would that be racist?

b. Herzog also recently declared that he wanted to dispel the false impression that the ILP were ‘Arab Lovers’

c. Herzog has now been succeeded by Avi Gabbay, who is even more right-wing. One of his first acts was to declare that none of the major settlement blocs on the West Bank will be demolished.

d. Gabbay followed this up with full support for Netanyahu’s intention to physically deport Black African refugees from Sudan and Eritrea. The reason? Because they threaten, in Netanyahu’s words, the Jewish identity of Israel. Racist? Perish the thought.

e. None of this should be of any surprise. As another former leader, Shelly Yacimovich stated, Labour is not a Left Wing Party. Indeed in a British context, this redneck party of settlers would be between the Tory Party and UKIP. It is noticeable that the JLM does not have links with the only leftist Zionist party, Meretz.

Allegation 37 takes exception to my blog in which I say ‘It is time for Labour to say goodbye to Labour Friends of Israel.’Is this also anti-Semitic? Why? Are you confusing Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism? If you look at your IHRA definition of anti-Semitism doesn’t it say something about blaming Jews for what Israel does and here you re saying that Jews and Israel are synonymous. The Compliance Unit are total fucking idiots.

Support for South Africa in the Day of Apartheid

I first became politically active in 1970 with the demonstrations against the South Africa Springboks Rugby Tour. It was through organising the opposition to it that the Chair of the Young Liberals Peter Hain first came into public prominence. At that time prominent Labour right-wingers like Ray Gunter, Minister of Labour, supported the arms trade with South Africa.

The State of Israel under the ILP was the closest ally of South Africa during the Apartheid years. Israel not only helped South Africa develop a nuclear device it established an arms production company, Iskandor in South Africa. And who can forget the visit of South Africa Premier John Vorster to Israel. Despite having been interned during the war for Nazi sympathies Vorster made the obligatory visit to Yad Vashem the Holocaust propaganda museum. Thus the victims of the Holocaust were used in the sanitisation of a white supremacist. Yad Vashem does this regularly having been the host for visits of Herr Strache, the neo-Nazi leader of Austria’s Freedom Party, Michal Kaminski et al.

I will not waste any more time on this disgusting racist party other than to say that I fully defend my remarks that the JLM and Newmark are racists and that is why they are thick as thieves with the Israeli Labour Party. If the JLM and Newmark were anti-racist then they would protest to the ILP about their stance on refugees for example but you would look in vain for anycriticism of the ILP by the JLM just as you would look in vainfor any criticism of the World Zionist Organisation by the JLM. The purpose of the JLM and LFI is to represent the interests of the Israeli state inside the Labour Party not to represent our views to them.

Other Idiotic Allegations and Misdemeanours

Allegation No. 40 is that I posted a blog entitled ‘Crooked Iain McNicol... rides again’. What is the objection? McNicol presided over a regime where thousands of Labour Party members were suspended on the basis that they were voting for Jeremy Corbyn. That seems to me to be crooked but if McNicol disagrees he can always sue for libel!

Allegation No. 41 seems to take exception to my remarks made after the death of the late Sir Gerald Kaufman. Although still a Zionist, at least nominally, Sir Gerald was a rare species who actually believed in some of the rhetoric they engage in. I said that his famous speech in Parliament at the time of Operation Cast Lead ‘was unforgivable because we must not compare Israel to Nazi Germany. Only Zionists may use the Holocaust to defend their bastard state of racial supremacy.’ What is the objection to this passage. It is a fact that the Zionist movement shamelessly exploits the Holocaust for political purposes. But it is held to be unforgivable when others make comparisons, as Sir Gerald did, between Israel’s actions and those of Nazi Germany. I disagree.

Allegation No. 44 – Says I posted a blog ‘The abuse of anti-Semitism to silence free speech on Israel.’ Yes. What is the objection? False allegations of anti-Semitism are always used to silence support for the Palestinians. It is a trite point.

Allegation No. 45 is that Labour NEC member Rhea Wolfson stabbed Jackie Walker in the back. Is the objection that I should have paraphrased Jess Philips comment on Jeremy Corbyn that she would rather stab him in the front? Rhea Wolfson broke down in tears on the NEC when she thought Darren Williams wouldn’t vote to refer Jackie to the NCC. It’s called fair comment although I doubt the fool who wrote these sentences understands why.

Opinion Polls and Compliance Fools

From pages 168-177 the bundle covers opinion poll reactions to the false anti-Semitism campaign in the Labour Party. This is of course to be expected from Progress’s lackeys. The technique is one that Goebbels himself was adept at. Keep bombarding people with the lie that the Labour Party is overrun with anti-Semitism and some people will believe it. Then taken an Opinion Poll and guess what, you find that ‘Anti-Semitism is tolerated in Labour, say 8 in 10 Jews.’ pp. 168-171.

Let us subject this nonsense to analysis. People will remember the polls that told us, when a General Election was called back in April 2017, that Theresa May would win by a mile. She was a most popular politician. Why the Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, Joan Ryan MP even told her constituents that she understood why they preferred May to Corbyn. Labour candidate defending London seat admits people have more confidence in Theresa May than Jeremy Corbyn. A sentiment McNicol and those who compiled this dodgy dossier would no doubt agree with. After all that is why this useless Labour General Secretary starved of resources and help any Tory held marginals since he believed Labour was going to lose seats.

Two of my blog posts that haven’t been included in the dodgy dossier are those of April 20th when I predicted that there would be either a hung Parliament or Labour could even win Labour Can Win if Corbyn is Bold and on June 3rd General Election - Is Labour on the threshold of victory? No one has been more disappointed with the success of Labour’s campaign than the Labour Right and Zionist Jewish Labour Movement

This cretinous Blairite idea that Labour must be in thrall to Opinion Polls and follow what is a reflection of the Conservative press is what lies at the root of Labour’s electoral weakness. It stands for nothing but received opinion. It was to Corbyn’s credit that he went out and campaigned on a radical manifesto but that would never have happened if the logic displayed in this dodgy dossier had applied.

No doubt 80% of Jews have been convinced that Labour is too tolerant of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Especially since there has been no pushback by Labour. But if you were to ask what exactly Labour is tolerant of and what this anti-Semitism is then they would be stumped. It just goes to show you can fool most of the people all of the time. It is the job of the Labour Party to rebut this idea not sustain it.

The idiots who pursue this nonsense may believe that by expelling a few Jewish and Black anti-racists that they will mollify the Jewish Chronicle and The Times and Mail. That the headlines will disappear. Appeasement never works as a strategy. That is the lesson of Corbynism. It is by standing up to this narrative that it will be defeated. It is the cowardice of McNicol and the Compliance Unit sustains the idea that Labour is an anti-Semitic party.

Michal Kaminski MEP of the Polish Law & Justice Party visits Yad Vashem, Israel's holocaust propaganda museum

Even Eric Pickles, former Tory Chairman and former Chair of the Conservative Friends of Israel is quoted (p.171) to say that ‘modern anti-Semitism has been allowed to ‘flourish in the left of British politics, unchallenged by the Labour leadership.’ There are no depths that McNicol’s monkey’s won’t sink to.

Instead of repeating what Tory Zionists say perhaps Labour could take a leaf out of David Miliband’s book circa 2009. The Tories were in alliance in the European Parliament with the European Conservative and Reform group. Members of this group included the Polish Law and Justice Party and the Latvian LNNK. The sole member of the LNNK was Robert Zile. Zile spends one Saturday every March marching with veterans of the Latvian SS. The Chair of the ECR group in 2009 was Law & Justice Party MEP Michal Kaminski, whose constituency when a member of the Polish Sejm included a village in Polish, Jedwabne

Now I know that the sycophants and incompetents who drew up this dossier will not have heard of Michal Kaminski or Jedwabne so let me educate you. Jedwabne was a village in Eastern Poland in 1941 where there was a large Jewish community. When the Russians left in June 1941 the Nazis moved in. But it wasn’t the Nazis who murdered the Jews of Jedwabne but some of their fellow Polish citizens. Up to 1600 Jews were rounded up and herded into a barn which was then set alight. The Jews of Jedwabne died at the hands of their fellow Poles.

Shocking you might think. There have been 2 books which have reconstructed the history of what happened. Neighbours by Thomas Andrew Grosz and The Crime and the Silence by Anna Bikont. I wouldn’t expect you to know much about this because unlike me, you know little or nothing about the Holocaust.

Kaminski gave his support to the Committee to Defend the Good Name of Jedwabne, formed by the local Catholic priest, Father Orlowski. Its main function was to deny that Polish hands had set fire to the barn and to blame it on the Nazis. There is however no doubt, as Bikont and Grosz demonstrate, that it was Polish fascists of the Nationalist Endek Party that were responsible. Kaminski led the protests against the national apology given by the then Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski on 10 July 2001 to mark the 60^th anniversary of the massacre when a memorial was built to the victims in Jedwabne.

Kaminski has travelled to Israel and paid homage at Yad Vashem. He has spoken at Israel’s prestigious security conference in Herzliya. Like many if not most anti-Semites, he is an ardent Zionist. He doesn’t much like Jews in Poland but he is happy for them to go to Israel. The Law & Justice Party which is now in government in Poland is a far-Right anti-Semitic party. For example its Education Minister Anna Zalewska insinuated that the Jedwabne massacre of 1941 was a matter of “opinion.” in an interview in July on the Polish public broadcaster TVN.

As Jonathan Freedland remarked in an article Once no self-respecting politician would have gone near people such as Kaminski

The party chairman, Eric Pickles, offered an appalling defence, telling the BBC last month that the Latvian Waffen-SS were only conscripts fighting for their country, and to say otherwise was a Soviet smear. Again, this misses the fact that a substantial minority of the Latvian Waffen-SS were eager volunteers, including veterans of pro-Nazi death squads who had already taken part in the first phase of the Holocaust – and that should be enough to decide that those who march in celebration of men who fought with Hitler, and against Britain and its allies, are beyond the pale.

The Tory response consisted of pointing to ‘the embrace extended to Kaminski by first, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, and second, the Conservative Friends of Israel, which astonishingly welcomed Kaminski yesterday.’ How surprising. The very Jewish Chronicle and its far-Right editor Stephen Pollard, who have pushed the Labour Party anti-Semitism campaign have defended Kaminski. In an article in the Guardian Poland's Kaminski is not an antisemite: he's a friend to JewsPollard defended Kaminski on the grounds that he was pro-Israel, which covers most anti-Semites.

In other words if the Labour Party hadn’t adopted the cowardly defence that McNicol’s monkeys and witch hunters had done then Labour could have rebutted the false anti-Semitism allegations very easily by pointing the finger at those who are happy to work with genuineanti-Semites.

On page 175 McNicol’s reactionary ciphers quote the far-Right CAA which I’ve already dealt with.

The moral to be drawn from this is that whenever you concede to your opponents’ narrative you don’t rebut it but you reinforce it. It’s a simple matter of politics. The reality is that Labour’s civil service, its staff and administration are full to the brim of people who were appointed under Blair’s regime and who subscribe to the idea that Labour should be a party of imperialism and war and differ only from the Tories in the quality of our soundbites and focus groups.

The 189 page bundle is truly pathetic. It is the political equivalent of a gossip column and says more about those who compiled it than about me. It is symptomatic of the poverty of intellect and ideas that infests Labour’s permanent bureaucracy. It is not myself or other anti-racists or anti-Zionists who should be expelled. It is McNicol, Stolliday and the rest of the rats who should be shown the door.

Tony Greenstein 8 January 2018

↧

Justice Demands that Jeremy Newmark of the JLM is Suspended from the Labour Party Forthwith Pending an Investigation - Sign the Petition

February 16, 2018, 7:17 pm

≫ Next: EXPULSION LATEST – McNicol’s Monkeys Change Course as they Attempt to Smuggle in New Documents

≪ Previous: This Sunday I face Labour’s Star Chamber – my crime is supporting Palestine and opposing Zionist Apartheid

Sign the Petitionto Labour’s National Executive Committee and Iain McNicol

Over 200 members of the Labour Party have signed a letterto the NEC and Iain McNicol, General Secretary of the Labour Party, demanding that Jeremy Newmark, former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement, is suspended.

Serious allegations of fraud and theft have been made against Newmark, the former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement. Revealed: JLC audit reports Jeremy Newmark deceived it out of thousands of pounds

Iain McNicol - the crooked General Secretary of the Labour Party who has been responsible for the suspension of thousands of socialists but who considers fraud a 'private' matter

It appears that the real reasons for Newmark’s departure in 2013 as Chief Executive of the Jewish Leadership Council were not ill-health but fraud. Newmark was forced to resign after being confronted with the results of an internal audit into the JLC’s finances which alleged that he had defrauded them to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds. The Jewish Chronicle alleges that the JLC trustees covered up the real reasons for Newmark’s departure. An internal audit allegedthat“it appears to be standard practice in the JLC to falsify information relating to finance”. The Jewish Leadership Council has more questions to answer

These allegations, if true, cannot help but damage the reputation of the Labour Party. We cannot accept the reasons given by McNicol for refusingto suspend Newmark, namely that this is a ‘private’matter and that Newmark ‘strongly denies’the allegations. If the allegations of fraud against a charity are true then they are anything but private. BREAKING NEWS - Iain McNicol Refuses to Suspend Jeremy Newmark over Serious Corruption Allegations - It's a 'Private Matter'

The Tel Aviv Hilton where it is alleged that Jeremy Newmark put his family on the JLC account

Of course Mr Newmark denies the allegations. We wouldn’t expect anything else. That is why he should be suspended, like thousands of other Labour Party members, pending an investigation.

No one has played a more important role in the witch-hunt of socialists in the Labour Party than Newmark. Newmark and his Zionist friends reacted to the left victory in the recent NEC elections and the replacement of Anne Black as Chair of the Disputes Committee by demandingthat the expulsion of socialists be stepped up. Jewish Labour group accuses party of failing to act on antisemitism complaints

Demonstration outside Labour Party conference calling on McNicol to resign

Last year there was an inkling of what had previously occurred when the Jewish Chronicle broke a story on how Newmark had avoided paying an Israeli taxi driver some £3,000.

Jeremy Newmark in row over £3,000 taxi fares

Last Friday Newmark reluctantly resigned as Chair of the JLM. Now he must also be suspended from the Labour Party as have thousands of other, innocent members. There cannot be one rule for most people and another for friends of McNicol. We know that McNicol has always been reluctant to suspend opponents of Jeremy Corbyn and conversely eager to suspend or auto-exclude those who are his supporters.

In happier times - McNicol at Downing Street with David Cameron

We demand an end to these double standards.

Sign the Petition to Suspend Jeremy Newmark

Letter Sent to National Executive Committee of the Labour Party and Iain McNicol

Monday 12 February 2018

iain_mcnicol@labour.org.uk

General Secretary

The Labour Party

105 Victoria St,

London SW1E 6QT

Dear Mr McNicol,

These allegations have been backed up by a comprehensive internal audit [2] by the organisation for which Mr Newmark was Chief Executive Officer, the Jewish Leadership Council.

We are extremely surprised that you haven’t moved quickly to protect the reputation of the Labour Party by suspending Mr Newmark under Rule 2.1.8 pending an investigation.

Mr Newmark, in his role as Chair of the JLM, has been the driving force in the suspension or expulsion of people on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Barely three weeks ago Jeremy Newmark was publicly criticising the Labour Party for failing to expel Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth, Tony Greenstein, Ken Livingstone and other members on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’. Jewish Labour group accuses party of failing to act on antisemitism complaints

Given the high public profile of Mr Newmark and his propensity for demanding disciplinary action against other members of the Labour Party we feel that it is only fair that Mr Newmark should be treated in the same way as his many victims. We are therefore making a formal complaint against Mr Newmark for having brought the party into disrepute and we expect that you will suspend him immediately from membership in order that we can avoid further damaging headlines.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Tobias Abse Chelsea and Fulham CLP

Kate Adams Canterbury CLP

Julie Adshead Rossendale & Darwen CLP

Grant Aitken Clackmannanshire

Dr Ben Alofs Gwynedd CLP

Marie Ange-King Holborn & St Pancras

Ruth Appleton Holborn St Pancras CLP

Cathy Augustine Wantage CLP

Claude Baesens Warwick and Leamington CLP

Rebekah Ball Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Steve Ballard Hornsey and Woodgreen

Dave Bangs Kemptown CLP

Graham Bash South Thanet CLP

Mary Beaman Wimbledon CLP

Jonathan Bellos Brighton Kemptown CLP

Karen Bett Eastwood CLP

Joseph Black Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Sian Bloor Stretford and Urmston CLP

Kay Boardman Calder Valley CLP

Patrick Bonner Brent North CLP

David Boyden Halton CLP

Jane Bramley Nottingham East CLP

Lynda Brennan Enfield Southgate CLP

Professor Haim Bresheeth Hornsey and Wood Green CLP

Tarin Brokenshire Cambridge CLP

Pam Bromley Rossendale and Darwen CLP

Barbara Brookes Ealing South CLP

Mick Brookes Ealing South CLP

Alan Broughton Hampstead CLP

Sarida Brown Leamington and Warwick CLP

Michelle Burke Hendon CLP

Mr Neil Cameron Sheffield Central

Lisbeth Campos Richmond Park CLP

Avis Carter Brighton Pavilion CLP

Cyril Chilson Oxford West & Abingdon CLP

Dr Tali M. Chilson Oxford West and Abingdon CLP

Brian Chinnery Enfield Southgate CLP

Ruth Clarke Islington North

Terry Clarke Liverpool Riverside CLP

Roger Coates International Branch

Sally Colaran Hampstead CLP

Ruth Conlock Manchester Withington CLP

M J Conway IIslington North

Steve Cooke Stockton North CLP

Katherine Coutanche Aberconwy CLP

Ted Crawford Ealing Southall CLP

Luke Cresswell South Suffolk CLP

Kevin B Curran Lewisham West and Penge CLP

Clive Darling Warwick & Leamington CLP

Deborah Darnes Congleton CLP

Yvonne Davies Chester CLP

Susan Dellet Southwark & Old Bermondsey CLP

Helen Dickson-Liverpool Wavertree CLP

Tony Dines Worthing West CLP

Marylin Dixon Warwick and Leamington CLP

Colm Doherty Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Cameron Dougherty North Thanet CLP

Clare Dove South Thanet Labour Party

Ian Drummond Edinburgh East

Ian Dudley. Croydon North CLP

Dereen Duley Exeter CLP

Dr Andrew P Duncan

Bridget Dunne Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Jonathan Edwards Oxford East CLP

Harriet Evans Holborn & St Pancras

Ian Ferrie Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Arye Finkle Chipping Barnet CLP

Pete Firmin Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Michael Fisher Barnet CLP

Jean Fitzpatrick EALING SOUTHALL CLP

Jenny Flintoft Meon Valley CLP

Gerry Flintoft Meon Valley CLP

Philip Foxe Enfield Southgate CLP

Jane Foxworthy Leicester East CLP

Ed Fredenburgh Islington South & Finsbury CLP

Cllr. Beryl Francis Havant CLP

Glynis Freeman Portslade CLP

Kenny Fryde Cambridge CLP

Terry Gallogly York Central CLP

Rob Gardiner Huntingdon CLP

John Garrett Coventry South CLP

Daphne Gilbert Hexham CLP

David Graham Brentford and Isleworth CLP

Val Graham Chesterfield CLP

Susan Grant Exeter CLP

Kay Green Hastings and Rye CLP

Marc Green Mole Valley CLP

Elleanne Green Cities of London and Westminster CLP

Tony Greenstein Brighton Kemptown CLP

Shaun Hague Preseli Pembrokeshire CLP

G. Halfpenny Canterbury CLP

James Hall South Cambridgeshire CLP

Cathie Hammond Hampstead and Kilburn

Frances Hanlon

Jenny Hardacre South Cambridgeshire CLP

Mr S Harris Torfaen CLP

Emmet Haverty-Stacke Tottenham CLP

Nev Hawkins Ealing Central & Acton CLP

Fran Heron Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Simon Hinds Islington North

Kate Hodgson Islington South & Finsbury

Doug Holton Hackney North CLP

Alan Horton Falmouth/Camborne CLP

Patrick Hunter Hendon CLP

Diana Isserlis Thornbury and Yate CLP

Steve Jansky - Nottingham East CLP

Dr Emrys Jenkins Swansea West CLP

Riva Joffe Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Bill Kaye Warwick and Leamington CLP

Kaveh Kazemi Kingston & Surbiton CLP

Stan Keable Hammersmith CLP

Sean Kelleher Hendon CLP

Martin Kemp Lewisham West and Penge CLP

Chris Khamis Perry Barr CLP

Eleanor Kilroy Winchester CLP

Steve Kinneavy Sheffield Hallam CLP

Chris Knight Dulwich & West Norwood CLP

Agnes Kory Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Sushma lal Ceredigion CLP

Barbara Kay Lawrence Torfaen CLP

Rebekah Lawrence Hove & Portslade CLP

Mark Layden Lincoln CLP

Geoff Lee Holborn & St. Pancis CLP

Margot Lindsay Southwark CLP

Marie Lynam Hampstead and Kilburn CLP

Ian MacDonald Edinburgh Southern CLP

Professor Moshé Machover Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Bill MacKeith Oxford West and Abingdon CLP,

Dr Alan Maddison Houghton and Sunderland South CLP

Glenn Martin Walsall South CLP

Rebecca Massey Hove and Portslade

Barbara May Moore Blackley and Broughton CLP

Jonathan Maytham Kingswood CLP

Kathy McCubbing Reading East CLP

Rebecca McDonald Hampstead and Kilburn

Michael McEvoy Twickenham CLP

Paul Meaney Gedling CLP

Timothy Meredith Hartlepool CLP

Bernard Miller Holborn and St Pancras CLP

Jay Millington Bury CLP

Elizabeth Morley Ceredigion CLP

Shosh Morris Islington South & Finsbury CLP

Patricia Morrison York Central CLP

Gareth Murphy Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Matt Nathan Islington S & Finsbury CLP

Mica Nava Islington North

Paul Neill Calder Valley CLP

Catherine Newall Manchester Central CLP

Graham Noble Havant CLP

Safiya O'Donnell Nottingham East CLP

Caroline O’Reilly Brighton Kemptown CLP

Tim Oxton Colchester CLP

Pam Page Brighton Pavilion CLP

Averil Parkinson Cambridge CLP

Allan Pearson South Ribble CLP

Richard Peirce Portsmouth South CLP

Anne Pickard Bristol North West CLP

Ian Pope Rochford and Southend East CLP

Phil Pope Bristol West CLP

Anna Pollert Warwick and Leamington CLP

Nicola Pratt Coventry South CLP

Bernard Price International Branch

Dipak Rajgor HARBOROUGH CLP

Anandi Ramamurthy Gorton CLP

Reuben Ramsay Hastings and Rye CLP

Roland Rance Walthamstow CLP

Gwynne Reddick Wantage

Daniel Rehahn Hove and Portslade CLP

Jim Ring Westmorland & Lonsdale CLP

Pete Robbins Camden CLP

Steven Rose Islington South

Jonathan Rosenhead Hackney South & Shoreditch CLP

Kal Ross Liverpool Riverside CLP

Jo Rostron Holborn and St PancrasCLP

Luca Salice Holborn and St PancrasCLP

Luay Salman High Peak CLP

Jenny Sanderson Derbyshire Dales CLP

John Sanderson Derbyshire Dales CLP

Linda Sayle Holborn & St Pancras CLP

Paul Scott Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

David Selzer City Of Chester CLP

George Shaw Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Patrick Sheehan Withington CLP

Patricia Sheerin Putney CLP

John Spencer-Davis NE Hants CLP

Laura Stuart Hendon CLP

Joe Sucksmith Cheltenham CLP

Walter Tavener Havant CLP

Wendy Taylor Ilford South CLP

Ruth Tenne Hampstead and Kilburn

Jack Thomas, Sefton Central CLP

Andy Thompson Ladywood CLP

Julian Townsend Camberwell and Peckham CLP

David Travis Angus North

Ben Treuhaft Edinburgh North and Leith CLP

Dr J. Urpeth Eltham CLP

Mark Utting Doncaster Central CLP

Paul Valentine Hayling Island CLP

Marc Wadsworth Croydon North CLP

Tirza Waisel Finchley & Golders Green CLP

Jacqueline Walker South Thanet CLP

Karen Walker Newquay and St Austell CLP

Robert Walker Bexhill and Battle CLP

Hugh Wallis Dulwich and West Norwood CLP

Dave Walters Riverside CLP

Philip Ward - Sheffield central CLP

David Watson Walthamstow CLP

Jane White Lincoln CLP

Carol Wilcox Christchurch CLP

Roy Wilkes Bury South CLP

Avril Wooster West Devon CLP

Norman Wright Hove and Portslade CLP

Dr Benedict Young Newcastle-upon-Tyne CLP

Charles Young Ceredigion CLP

Sue Young Ceredigion CLP

Zoe Zero Beckenham CLP

[1] https://tinyurl.com/yctw83bo

[2] https://drive.google.com/file/d/12UqRyqsBKHaq4OZeePhpAjsc0tpdPTXq/view?usp=sharing

[3] https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/jewish-leadership-council-will-co-operate-with-charity-commission-over-newmark-allegations-1.458455

↧

EXPULSION LATEST – McNicol’s Monkeys Change Course as they Attempt to Smuggle in New Documents

February 17, 2018, 1:55 pm

≫ Next: Tony Greenstein - Expelled for Opposing Zionism and the Israeli State – The Fight Goes On

≪ Previous: Justice Demands that Jeremy Newmark of the JLM is Suspended from the Labour Party Forthwith Pending an Investigation - Sign the Petition

Why Dishonesty and Deceit are Hardwired into Labour’s Disciplinary Procedures

'MrGreenstein's lurid allegations about the torture and beating of children',

Late Friday afternoon, barely 36 hours away from my Expulsion Hearing I got an innocent request from Jane Shaw, Secretary to the National Constitutional Committee. Labour’s National Executive Committee (in reality Crooked McNicol) wanted to introduce 4 new documents at the last minute.

‘You will be familiar with all of the documents’ Jane told me – and indeed I am familiar with them.

The fragrant Ella Rose in attack

Also attached was what is called a Skeleton Argument, which lawyers usually provide before a court hearing in order to summarise their arguments. This Skeleton however was somewhat fat, taking up no less than 22 pages.

Jane, mindful of the fact that I do not have legal representation at the hearing, reassured me that the skeleton argument ‘includes nothing new, but merely sets out the case that the NEC barrister intends to make, which you could find helpful.’ How you might ask could I resist such blandishments. In case I was sceptical, Jane reassured me that I would have a chance to object on Sunday to the introduction of more than 150 pages of new documents.

I am criticised for calling the Director of the Jewish Labour Movement 'pathetic'

What you might ask were these documents? Well the first one was the Chakrabarti Report. Jane must have known I’d find it difficult to resist this particular document. After all it is a guide to how the Labour Party should conduct its disciplinary process on the basis of natural justice, fairness, due process and transparency. Perhaps McNicol has turned over a new leaf and recognises that things must now change for the better?

The next document seemed a bit more suspect. It was the Home Affairs Select Committee Report on Anti-Semitism in the UK, which introduced the fake IHRA definition of anti-Semitism that conflates anti-Zionist and anti-Semitism.

Even more strangely the next document was the Judgmentin the case I brought under the Data Protection Act against the Labour Party to unredact various documents which the Labour Party had sent me. This application failed but it had nothing to do with anti-Semitism. So I was puzzled why McNicol wanted to introduce it.

The fourth document was a blog article of mine on how the Chakrabarti Report was a missed opportunity which balanced support for and criticism of specific aspects of the Report. No harm surely in having yet one more of my own articles?

It is 'offensive' to accuse this woman of supporting Palestinian child abuse despite her steadfast defence of the Israeli military's treatment of Palestinian children

Yet still I suspected a rat by the name of Iain McNicol but since I was at a friends’ graduation ceremony at the Brighton Centre I wasn’t able to look at the skeleton argument at the time. I said it was highly unusual to introduce documents at the last minute when I had been told it was not possible and I particular objected to Document No. 3. I suggested instead that they obtain the transcript of the Injunction Hearing at the High Court as that had quite a lot to say about fairness in Labour Party disciplinary matters!

I therefore sent a short email on my mobile:

‘As DJ Brown stated in her introduction to her judgment (page 2): ‘This Court is not and cannot be concerned with the disciplinary processes of the Party and this Application will not be allowed by this Court to lead it into making any findings as to the substantive matter of the complaints against the Applicant and the handling of those complaints.’

I therefore wrote that ‘I cannot imagine what possible purpose could be served by the introduction of the latter’ I therefore opposed the introduction of this document.

I also suggested that if they wished to introduce these documents then they should adjourn the hearing and also include several articles of my own critical of the Home Affairs Select Committee Report. In particular one by David Plank a former Government Special Advisor to the Social Services Select Committee which was damning of the Home Affairs Committee Report, stating that it was not worth the paper it was written on.

My correspondence with Jane Shaw can be viewed here. The Skeleton Argument can be seen here. It is a model of deception and tautology. Time permits me only a few comments.

1. After all the nonsense about ‘anti-Semitism’ it turns out that apart from the use of the term ‘Zio’ ‘the NEC does not otherwise allege that Mr Greenstein’s conduct was anti-Semitic.’ Strange that, because what then was I suspended for? All that stuff in The Telegraph and Times about comparisons between Israeli marriage laws and the Nuremburg Laws has vanished into thin space. Comments about how Israel is waiting for its Holocaust survivors to die so that it has more money to spend on weaponry? No mention either. Throughout my 22 months suspension the goal posts have been continually changed. The charges are now:

4.1. Offensive comments online, including the word "Zio";

4.2. Offensive posts and comments on Mr Greenstein's blog;

4.3. Email in which he mocked the phrase "final solution".

Lacking all procedure, McNicol wants to slip in a few more documents at the last minute

Most of these for example 4.3 where I sent a satirical post to McNicol are covered in my 2 previous submissions to the Labour Party.

My Response to False Accusations of Anti-Semitism - Anti-Semitism? It’s Israel Stupid!

J’Accuse - My response to those who make false accusations of witchcraft or ‘anti-Semitism’

I responded robustly to abusive posts and I stand by them. What is noticeable is that those on the Right who are abusive have a get out of jail free card, such as Deborah Lowe and Warren Morgan, Leader of Brighton and Hove Council – both nasty Blairites.

Chakrabarti Report & Zios

Contrary to what I expected the Chakrabarti Report (which has still not been discussed or approved of by Labour’s NEC) is not being introduced because of its recommendations of a fair process. Good gracious no. The only reason is because it quotes Chakrabarti’s mistaken view that ‘Zio’ is a racist epithet.

The Labour Party’s barrister, one Thomas Ogg, takes exception to the use of ‘Zio’ as a term of abuse. I freely confess that I use the term ‘Zio’ in a pejorative manner. If I call someone a racist I don’t use it as a term of flattery. Their idiot of a barrister argues that:

‘Mr Greenstein has even used the term in his response to the Opening Submissions of the NEC. Page 49 of the most recent set of submissions (internal page 12 of J’Accuse ') states: "On my blog one day I got 2 posts - one from a Zio and another from a Neo-Nazi. I found the post from the Zio more disturbing than the holocaust denier. Strange that. Why do you think that was?"

Why does Ogg think I abused the Zio? Perhaps because the vile twerp wished that my family and me should have ended our days in Auschwitz. Of course Ogg doesn’t mention that. This is a good example of the dishonesty of the legal profession. Ogg goes on to argue that:

‘Even if Mr Greenstein honestly did not intend to be antisemitic, he knowingly used a term that is both perceived and publicly stated by the Labour Party in the Chakrabarti Report to be antisemitic, and deliberately used the word as a term of abuse. That is Mr Greenstein's offence, which is both prejudicial to the Labour Party and grossly detrimental to it.’

Yes I know it’s difficult to make head or tale of this farrago of nonsense. It seems Ogg is incapable of making a clear and lucid argument in plain English.

If I didn’t intend something to be anti-Semitic then it is unlike to be anti-Semitic. The fact that it is perceived by racists to be anti-Semitic is irrelevant. If the Labour Party thinks it is then it’s wrong. The Labour Party has a legacy of support for Israel and Zionism i.e. racism so its views on the matter are not the final word.

Apparently it is ‘prejudicial to the Labour Party and grossly detrimental to it’. This catch-all McCarthyist nonsense means nothing. How the hell can the term ‘Zio’ be detrimental to the Labour Party yet the theft of thousands of pounds by the former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement from a Jewish charity not be detrimental? These bastards literally make it up.

The idiot, because clear this Ogg is either stupid or dishonest or both, goes on to make the most offensive of comparisons. He argues that

‘Mr Greenstein stands in the same position as someone who is aware that society considers terms such as "Paki" and "Nigger" to be racially offensive, but on the basis of a belief that the words 'in fact' mean something else, nevertheless deliberately use the words "Paki" and "Nigger" as terms of abuse whilst denying their racial connotations.’

I describe him as an idiot because ‘Paki’ ‘Nigger’ etc. are terms that are historically and politically located as terms of abuse. They are widely indeed universally accepted as deeply offensive racist terms. They are based on a person’s ethnicity. Zio, short for Zionist is based on someone’s political allegiance. Zio is not related to someone’s ethnicity.

John Mann

In a discussion about the merits of lazy or racist MPs I tweeted that "at least your MP doesn't do as much damage - better a lazy or corrupt MP than @JohnMannMP addicted 2 murder & racism". Ogg then states ‘Mr Greenstein does not state who John Mann is addicted to murdering, or the kind of racism that is being referred to. It does not matter.’

Actually it does matter. John Mann, the rent a mouth from Bassetlaw has made it his business to run the false anti-Semitism campaign. He has abused for example a 90 year old Jewish Dr Glatt who called him out over his attacks on Jeremy Corbyn. See Open Letter to John Mann MP from a 90 Year Old Jewish Dr Glatt and A Desperate John Mann MP Tries to Undermine 90 year old Jewish Doctor's Letter by Falsely Alleging It was a Forgery

Mann is a deceptive and dishonest MP who during the first Corbyn election campaign wrote him an open letter accusing him of being soft on child abuse. If the Labour Party apparatchiks had any attachment to socialism then Mann would have been suspended if not expelled years ago. But of course Crooked McNicol and his henchmen approved of Mann’s attacks on Corbyn. Unfortunately Corbyn is incapable of realising that appeasement of these people will prove costly in the end.

Owen Jones – A Janus Faced Whore

Now I would have liked to take credit for the comment that Owen Jones is ‘is a Janus faced whore who bears the impression of the last person who sat on him.’ However I can’t. This classical witticism was thought up by someone else. I merely repeated it. However I agree with the sentiments but Ogg pompously declares that ‘It is not appropriate for Mr Greenstein to refer to Owen Jones, a prominent Guardian journalist, as a "whore", Janus faced or otherwise. It is personal abuse and there is no place for it in the Labour Party.’ Why not? It means he is a 2 faced git!

Despite Judge Brown saying earlier in her judgment that ‘This Court is not and cannot be concerned with the disciplinary processes of the Party and this Application will not be allowed by this Court to lead it into making any find ings as to the substantive matter of the complaints against the Applicant and the handling of those complaints.’ She later goes on to contradict herself when she says:

"(the Applicant) is demonstrably intelligent and has engaged in this process in an articulate and detailed way. He is also a highly controversial figure. It is the Court's view from seeing him within the Court process that he is intense and combative being highly emotional about the subjects of Israel and Palestine. He is someone whom the Party rightly or wrongly has suspended, about whom they have received a significant number of complaints and in respect of whom there are ongoing investigations. This background informs the decisions as to reasonableness of disclosure which might with information already known to or ascertainable by the Applicant might identify the third parties. He is within these proceedings prone to a very strong reaction to persons and submissions made. ... The Applicant quickly brands a query as to why a Claim form was not issued as being an allegation of fraud which viewed reasonably it was not. He alleges that only a "fool or a Knave" would interpret one of his comments in the way the Respondent submits which is an emotive comment. Whilst he claims to be viewed out of context he has within document[s] repeatedly used language which is offensive in any context - "racist Zios""facist scum]"] to give just two small examples. I do not underestimate the complexity of the Applicant's views but his views and the strength with which he expresses them is something the Respondent....’

Now one can argue as to the merits of the above but one thing is clear. It is what lawyers term ‘obiter dicta’ in other words it is a Judge’s opinion but forms no part of the Judgment. It is not part of the ratio. So the attempt to introduce the Judgment, which concerns other unrelated matters, is part of the dishonesty and deceptiveness of McNicol’s Barrister Ogg.

Weasel Words

Ogg states that ‘The NEC does not have to prove actual prejudice to the Labour Party. All that is required is that the conduct is "prejudicial", that is, is liable to cause prejudice to the party in the sense of being capable of having that effect.’ So there is no need to prove any damage to the Labour Party Party was caused merely that it was capable of so doing. In other words a wholly subjective test that could be applied to virtually anything. Of course when it comes to Jeremy Newmark having defrauded a charity of thousands of pounds this is a ‘private’ matter not at all prejudicial. But a friend in Hove, Riad, who was convicted years ago of having broken the Oil for Food sanctions to Iraq for humanitarian reasons, because those sanctions were killing thousands of people (US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated that killing half a million children was ‘a price worth paying) was ‘auto excluded’ from the Labour Party. That was not private.

Ogg rejects my argument that social media posts are "here today and gone tomorrow"I stating that ‘that is not the Labour Party's approach to abuse online.’ Except of course that the Labour Party approach to online abuse only applies to the Left notthe Right. I gave the example of where I was called a ‘poisonous piece of shit’by ex-Councillor Craig Turton, which Councillor Warren Morgan, leader of Brighton and Hove Council approved of and 4 times McNicol refused even to accept a complaint. And then Ogg complains that I call him Crooked McNicol!!

Louise Ellman

What is amazing is Ogg’s attempt to defend this execrable MP who justifies and defends Israel’s treatment of child prisoners on grounds of ‘security’. Ogg states that: ‘There are two aspects of Mr Greenstein's blog [77J which are objectionable and offensive.’

56. First, the use of the phrase "child abuse" is deliberate ly provocative. The phrase evokes sexual abuse, and therefore suggests that Louise Ellman MP, a prominent Jewish Labour MP, supports the same. The phrase "child abuse" appears nowhere else in the article, including the passages from the reports by UNICEF. Mr Greenstein's summary of the conduct Mr Greenstein complains of as "child abuse" is an attempt to shame Ms Ellman by the use of emotive language, which is contrary to the Labour Party's Social Media Policy.

57. Second, the passages from Ms Ellman's speech quoted by Mr Greenstein do not support the allegations he makes against Ms Ellman . Mr Greenstein writes: "The torture and beatings by the Israeli army, which refuses to record its interrogations, which refuses access to lawyers or even parents to accompany their children, is acceptable to Ellman". He also writes: "Every excuse for torture, the beating of children ... was made by Ellman". Neither of those allegations is supported by the passages from Ms Ellman's speech which he quotes in his blog. Ms Ellman supports detention, but makes no comment on "torture" and "beatings".

This is the most shameful part of Ogg’s submission. It is true. Ellman doesn’t comment on torture or beatings however others do in the debate. Instead she merely justifies the kidnapping of children in the middle of the night, their shackling and treatment on ‘security’ grounds. Her omitting to comment on the treatment of Palestinian children whilst defending the Israeli military’s behaviour should be the subject of disciplinary action.

This wretched woman should have been thrown out of the Labour Party years ago but of course, like war criminal Tony Blair she is an honoured member. In the debateSara Chamption stated that ‘in February 2015, UNICEF issued an update to its original report and noted that allegations of “alleged ill-treatment of children during arrest, transfer, interrogation and detention have not significantly decreased in 2013 and 2014”.

Jo Cox highlighted the fact 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?’

Sarah Champion went on to state that:

Some 93% of children continue to be restrained with plastic ties, many painfully so, and the standard operating procedures are frequently ignored. Around 80% of children continue to be blindfolded or hooded, a practice that the UK and UNICEF reports said should be absolutely prohibited. Audiovisual recording of interrogations has been mandated only in non-security-related offences, which means that nearly 90% of cases involving children, including those accused of attending a demonstration, continue to take place without this practical safeguard.

Perhaps most disturbing is the fact that the reports of physical abuse—consisting mainly of punching, kicking, position abuse and slapping, but in some cases also including more serious allegations, such as of being mauled by dogs and receiving electric shocks—are now higher in number than they were in 2013.

What was Ellman’s response?

‘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?’

Not only not one word, not one syllable of condemnation or even criticism of Israel. She accepts as given the guilt of the Palestinian children. Not a word about shackling, painful handcuffs, refusal to access lawyers or parents or indeed any of the safeguards that Jewish Israeli children have as of right. If anything my comments on this despicable woman were too mild.

The treatment of Palestinian children is justified because they were being ‘incited’ to violence against the Israeli military. Presumably if it weren’t for that incitement they would come to love living under a military dictatorship. The pathetic submission from Ogg is really nothing more than a defence of the indefensible.

Ogg even talks of ‘Mr Greenstein's lurid allegations about the torture and beating of children, which are not supported by what Ms Ellman actually said, is provocative, inaccurate and offensive.’ Well it might be provocative and offensive, to Ellman, but it’s not inaccurate.

What does that well known anti-Semitic newspaper Ha’aretz have to say? On 22^nd February 2017 under the provocative headline ‘Israel Tortures Palestinian Children, Amnesty Report Says’ it reported that:

‘The report found that among those tortured and detained under administrative orders were also children. Methods of torture included beatings, painful shackling and sleep deprivation. Among 110 Palestinians killed last year by Israeli forces, the report charged, some posed no threat to life and thus were shot unlawfully.’ Lurid?

Ogg takes particular exception to my inference that ‘child abuse’ implies sexual abuse. What does the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel have to say on this subject? According to The Independent of 1.1.14.

‘The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) published a report which claimed children suspected of minor crimes were subjected to “public caging”, threats and acts of sexual violence and military trials without representation.’

One wonders whether Ogg considers ‘acts of sexual violence’as constituting sexual abuse or not or whether his definition is elastic enough to escape that ‘offensive’ description? According to a report on YNet, the online version of Israel’s largest circulation paper Yediot Aharanot:

‘ A CNN investigative report aired Thursday slammed the treatment of Palestinian children by IDF soldiers.

The report included uncorroborated charges of sexual abuse against Palestinian youngsters while in IDF custody.

The CNN report featured an unidentified Palestinian boy claiming that IDF forces attempted to insert an object into his rectum after he was arrested. The unidentified youngster said a dozen officers were standing around and laughing while he was being interrogated, stopping only when their commander stepped into the room.’

One wonders whether the Labour Party’s tame barrister finds that abusive enough to merit the caption ‘sexual abuse’? Mehdi Hassan in the New Statesman asked: ‘Did the Israeli army sexually abuse Palestinian children?

So idiotic does Ogg’s submission become that in paragraph 58 he refers to Ellman as ‘Ms Greenstein’!!

Ogg also takes exception to my comment re Ella Rose that her appointment as Director of the JLM deprived some village of their idiot! One thing these bureaucrats lack is a sense of humour. Ella Rose has previouslydistinguished herself as a little thuglet.

Crooked McNicol & Others

There is a whole section devoted to my favourite Labour Party General Secretary!!

We are told that ‘In this blog post, Mr Greenstein uses the word "crook" or "crooked" to describe

Mr lain McNicol no less than 17 times .’ and that ‘A crook is a dishonest or criminal person.’ Err yes. I would say that McNicol is dishonest. As to whether he is criminal I think the jury is still out.

Apparently by saying that John Mann is a ‘devious little opportunist’I am mocking his height. Actually I’m not. Perhaps I should have said a big opportunist but my meaning was more subtle.

It is also an offence to describe Chuku Ummuna as ‘White politically’ and in para. 77 ‘The NCC will note that in that blog Mr Greenstein goes on at [161J to use racially charged language in respect of "White minorities like Jews".’ What utter rubbish. What utter tosh.

The final charge is that:

‘On 3rd May 2016, Mr Greenstein sent an email to the General Secretary of the Party, lain McNicol, in which he proposed a "rule change" which would require that "all membership applications and nominations for party office or for Labour candidacies should first be submitted for approval to the Israeli embassy." In that email he uses language reflecting the Nazi plan under Adolf Hitler to exterminate Jewish people: "If passed, it would provide a final, I mean complete, solution".

Unfortunately satire and parody completely escape the hacks and paid legal mouthpieces of the Labour Party. As I’ve already dealt with this nonsense already I won’t repeat my defence!

All in all a pretty sad and pathetic tome. Please read it, if only for pure amusement!!

Tony Greenstein

↧

Tony Greenstein - Expelled for Opposing Zionism and the Israeli State – The Fight Goes On

February 18, 2018, 4:54 pm

≫ Next: How to Cure the Labour Party of anti-Semitism – Expel a few Jews!

≪ Previous: EXPULSION LATEST – McNicol’s Monkeys Change Course as they Attempt to Smuggle in New Documents

Racists Celebrate as the Labour Right and the Zionists Gets Their First Victim

The day began brightly enough with a lively picket of the Metropole Hotel in Brighton as Labour’s National Constitutional Committee met to decide whether to expel me for my support of the Palestinians and opposition to Zionism. It is of course appropriate that as someone who is Jewish that I should be one of the major casualties of the false anti-Semitism witchhunt. The allegations of ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party have nothing to do with anti-Semitism and everything to do with opposition to the racist creed of Zionism and support for the Palestinians.

My thanks to Becky, Pam and Anne of Brighton Palestine Solidarity Campaign for getting together the placards and to Debbie Hobson from Grassroots Black Left for being silent witness. Thanks also to March Wadsworth, another of those victimised and suspended by the Labour Party for opposing racism and to those in Brighton and Hove Momentum for turning out.

I was suspended nearly 2 years ago for comments I was alleged to make. The Skeleton argument argument of the NEC’s barrister, one Mr Ogg, admitted that all the charges related to events that took place after I had been suspended. In other words I was originally suspended without just cause yet despite this the NCC saw no problem in continuing. Why? Because as part of its Guidelines, Appendix 6D to the Rules of the Labour Party (which are actually not part of the rules!) stipulates that the NCC must ignore everything that happens prior to the issuing of charges. This is the ‘turning a blind eye’ clause. It states that:

The NCC is entitled to (and will) act on the basis that the charges are properly brought before them and cannot become embroiled in dealing with complaints about the administration of any investigation leading to the charges. Any such complaint will therefore not be entertained by the NCC or panel thereof unless it is material or relevant to the consideration of the evidence to be used by the presenter in support of the charges.

This enables the NCC to ignore any injustice, breach of the rules, leaking to the press etc. that occurs. Of course the NCC is also bound to act fairly under Chapter 1, Clause IX (4) of the Rules, which are part of the Labour Party constitution and also to modify the Guidelines as it sees fit but the NCC chooses to interpret its remit narrowly and against the interests of natural justice. That was why I was forced to obtain an injunction against the Labour Party on December 7^thpreventing them from holding a rushed hearing.

The charges which were brought, as the barrister for the Labour Party was at pains to point out, were not that I was anti-Semitic although of course the Zionists will pretend otherwise. My ‘crime’ in essence was the abuse of racists and Zionists (or Zios) in the Labour Party including that detestable supporter of Palestinian child abuse, Louise Ellman.

Ivor Caplin - war criminal and former Junior Defence Minister

A Mr Ogg, the Labour Party barrister gave a long 2 hour + speech which was the equivalent of watching paint dry. My own speech was much shorter and to the point. I made it clear that I regretted nothing. I was accused of insinuating, when accusing the execrable MP for Liverpool Riverside, Louise Ellman of supporting the abuse of Palestinian children, that she therefore supported sexual abuse of those children. Although this wasn’t directly true I made it clear in my submission that the abuse of Palestinian children was often sexual in nature and that Ellman had never spoken out against this treatment. On the contrary she supported everything Israel did in the name of ‘security’.

The NCC under Maggie Cosins who chaired the hearing has repeatedly ignored the question of fairness, in my case trying to rush a hearing after a 20 month suspension. The other 2 wing members of the NCC included a Gordon (?) Fairbrother of the Community Union. As I pointed out this right-wing union was the only one to affiliate to Trades Union Friends of Israel. So the verdict was no surprise. Unfortunately Emina Ibrahim, who was elected as part of the Left, also supported the Right on the NCC and seems incapable of standing up to the Right by herself.

As I told the Committee when beginning my response, an old time friend, Graham Bash rang me this morning and said that he reckoned I had a 1% of chance of not being expelled to which I responded that the odds probably weren’t that high! Ogg argued that I was not being expelled for my views but for abusing racists and right-wingers online. However the bundle of papers prepared for the hearing demonstrated that this was a lie. Statements such as ‘Israel is a settler colonial state’ were highlighted in an article dealing with the eviction of a Bedouin village Umm al-Hiran in Israel’s Negev. Although dressed up in procedural terms, my expulsion was for my anti-Zionist politics.

That is why the Southern organiser for the Jewish Labour Movement, junior war criminal and former Defence Minister Ivor Caplin welcomed my expulsion. My expulsion and the proposed expulsion of Marc Wadsworth and Jackie Walker are nothing less than an attempt by the Right and the Zionists in the Party to purge the party of socialists and anti-imperialists. The fight will go on for my reinstatement and the acquittal of both Mark and Jackie. It is not we but the Jewish Labour Movement, the apologists for the deportation of African refugees from Israel for the ‘crime of being Black and not Jewish, who deserve to be expelled.

It is ironic that at the same time as I am expelled for anti-Zionism and anti-racism, Labour’s Crooked General Secretary McNicol has declared that the charges against the JLM’s former Chair Jeremy Newmark of having defrauded a Jewish charity of thousands of pounds are a ‘private’ matter.

The right-wing Huff Post, the Jewish Chronicle, Jewish News and no doubt others will be celebrating as Labour’s witch-hunt continues even whilst they keep quiet about the Jeremy Newmark scandal. The Daily Mirror has managed to outdo even Marcus Dysch of the Jewish Chronicle in the number of mistakes it has made.

Tony Greenstein

↧

How to Cure the Labour Party of anti-Semitism – Expel a few Jews!

February 20, 2018, 10:00 pm

≫ Next: Apartheid Adventures Comic Strip

≪ Previous: Tony Greenstein - Expelled for Opposing Zionism and the Israeli State – The Fight Goes On

Reflections on my Expulsion from the Labour Party

The Morning Star 20.2.18. Editorial

After spending a relaxing day in London yesterday before dining with a friend in the evening. I went for lunch with an old friend today before attending a public meeting of Brighton and Hove Momentum in the evening. The meeting at the Friends Meeting House was packed and Chris Williamson, the Derbyshire MP had got out of a sick bed to attend. Greg Hadfield (who had also got out of a sick bed!) and Becky Massey co-chaired the meeting and held it together very well.

George Galloway making the most obvious of points

Chris Williamson MP speaking

The speakers were all excellent from the newly elected councillor, Nancy Platts to Bob from the anti-HDV campaign in Haringey to Paul of Acorn Renters Group. There were a number of speakers from the floor starting with Riad who had been ‘auto excluded’ from the Labour Party quite outrageously owing to a minor criminal conviction. I spoke last of all from the floor about my recent expulsion to thunderous applause. Whatever the right-wing cranks and misfits of the Right may spin, most people understand very well that if there were a real problem of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party then you don’t solve it by expelling Jewish anti-Zionists! That was why last night Kemptown CLP passed overwhelmingly a motion supporting Greg Hadfield against his suspension.

Tonight's packed Brighton & Hove Momentum meeting at which Chris Williamson MP spoke - I was given a rapturous reception by those present

I’m overwhelmed with peoples' kindness whether it is wanting to take me out for meals or just sending good wishes. People seem to feel I deserve some compensation for my expulsion and the Labour Party’s anti-Semitic treatment of me. Most decent people feel anger that the racists and hacks of Labour's officialdom, combined with the Zionists who dominate the hierarchy of the Labour Party have expelled a Jewish anti-fascist and anti-racist. Even worse Jackie Walker, a Black-Jewish anti-racist and Marc Wadsworth, another Black anti-racist and anti-fascist are up for the chop.

Brighton Argus 20.2.18.

People also feel disgust with @EminaIbrahim who is supposed to be on the left who voted with the Right on the NCC to expel me. She seemed to be absorbed by the Right without displaying any independence.

Asking the most obvious of questions - who leaked the expulsion verdict before it had been announced - the answer is Sam Matthews, the scumbag who heads Labour's Disputes Department

It is very kind but I need to get back into a routine! However it was good to take time out after the ordeal of my expulsion meeting, which was tedious in the extreme, not least because it is difficult getting across political concepts to people who seem to take pride in being thick. The amount of support I have received has been extremely gratifying even if sections of the press [Huff Post/Breitbart] have of course distorted what has happened. The Morning Star had an excellent editorial today making the obvious point that it was inevitable that the false ‘anti-Semitism’ witch hunt would begin by expelling a Jew.

Of course there have been the usual malcontents and what John Prescott calls the bitterites on social media - the sinister Euan Philipps and Emma Picken of @labourAgainstAS who take pride in their attacks on anti-racists as 'anti-semites'. LAS has all the hallmarks of a state driven operation intent on political destabilisation. Not leaving out the super narcissist himself Gary Spedding who confesses to having broken down in tears at my expulsion (of joy poor thing). See Greg Hadfield’s excellent article The Labour Party outsources its duty of care to betting billionaires — with help from Capita!

Despite a few racist trolls around @LabourAgainstAS most people recognise that the 'anti-semitism' witch-hunt is a racist witch-hunt

There has been a Twitter blizzard. Fortunately, apart from the few sad cases like @Euan Philipps the non-Jewish head of the troll group Labour Against AntiSemitism, most people have got the message, which is:

1. If you want to oppose anti-Semitism then expelling Jews isn’t a good way to go about it

2. That the false ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign in the Labour Party is about Israel not Jews.

3. That the pretext for my expulsion, abuse of Zios, is a one way street since the activities of Philipps and his trolls and the abuse they regularly engage in never merit the attention of McNicol. Indeed there must be a strong suspicion that McNicol’s henchmen, Sam Matthews in particular, are up to their eyes in Labour’s dirty tricks.

4. The nature of the disciplinary process itself

Zionist trolls thought they'd back up their usual accusations of 'anti-semitism' by forging the 'evidence' by engaging in artistic creativity and photoshopping my name onto an anti-semitic tweet

Zionism, Jews and Anti-Semitism

It is no accident that Jews have been one of the major targets of the ‘anti-Semitism campaign because it is integral to Zionism’s claim to be a national movement that it represents all Jews. Those who don’t are called ‘self-haters’ the same term that the Nazis used against anti-fascist Germans, who literally hated their race and nation.

The irony of course is that it is Zionism, a vicious racial doctrine that had no problem in opposing the rescue of Jews in the War if their destination wasn’t Palestine, that has most in common with anti-Semitism.

How most people see my expulsion

As the Chairman of the Jewish Agency and the first Prime Minister of Israel, David Ben Gurion said just after Krystalnacht when the British Kindertransport program was being arranged and which would eventually save 10,000 German Jewish children:

If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel.’ [Ben Gurion at the Mapai Central Committee 7.12.38]

Zionism starts from the basis that Jews do not belong in the diaspora. That their home is Israel. Although most people are unaware of this Israel claims to be a state, not of its own citizens but of all Jews, its Jewish citizens included. Its non-Jewish citizens are mere guests in someone else’s countries.

This is what Blairite MP Joan Ellman supports - apparently it is an offence to say that Ellman supports child abuse

It is this belief that Jews outside Israel are aliens in other peoples’ lands which is responsible for the alliance between Israel, Zionism and the anti-Semitic Right. In the USA it is the magazine Breitbart, under its former CEO Steve Bannon which has distinguished itself by a mixture of White Supremacy, overt support for Zionism and vicious anti-feminism.

If Breitbart is the magazine of the alt-Right then the founder of this movement is Richard Spencer, an open neo-Nazi who has declared that he wants nothing more than to create in the USA a mirror image of Israel as an ethno nationalist state. Just as Israel is based on one single ethnic group, the Jews, so Spencer wants to do the same in the USA with Whites. Hence why Spencer calls himself a White Zionist.

The love affair in American between the far-Right and the Zionist movement led to Steve Bannon, Trump’s former Strategic Advisor, being a guest of honour at the Zionist Organisation of America’s annual dinner. See Bannon Addresses ZOA, Urges Jews to Join 'Insurgency' Against anti-Trump Republicans. So alarming was this to many Jews that articles such as Naomi Zeveloff’s How Steve Bannon and Breitbart News Can Be Pro-Israel — and Anti-Semitic at the Same Time began appearing. Liberal Zionists who had been fed the nonsense about how it was opponents of Zionism who were anti-Semitic were wide eyed as the scales fell from their eyes.

Admiral Horthy Hungary's pro-Nazi wartime leader who Prime Minister Viktor Orban is now rehabilitating - Netanyahu's closest friend in Europe is the antisemitic leader of Hungary

In Europe Israel’s closes allies are the most anti-Semitic regimes such as Hungary and Poland. A particularly awful example was when Netanyahu instructedthe Israeli Ambassador in Hungary, shortly before his visit last July, to retract mild criticisms of the Prime Minister’s anti-Semitic campaign against George Soros. Netanyahu also didn’t like Soros because he has funded Israeli human rights groups. Orban portrayed Soros as the archetypal Jewish financier. What makes this even worse is that Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban was also in the middle of a campaign to rehabilitateHungary’s pro-Nazi war-time leader Admiral Horthy, who had deported nearly ½m Hungary Jews to Auschwitz.

Yet no one who understands anything about Zionist relations with anti-Semitism should be at all surprised. Historically Zionism has always welcomed anti-Semitism as a method of ‘helping’ Jews to emigrate to Palestine.

As the founder of Political Zionism, Theodor Herzl wrote in his Diaries, at the time of the Dreyfuss Affair:

‘In Paris... I achieved a freer attitude towards anti-Semitism, which I now began to understand historically and to pardon. Above all, I recognise the emptiness and futility of trying to 'combat' anti-Semitism. [Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Gollancz, London 1958 p.6, May 1895]

That is why I have always emphasised that the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign in the Labour Party has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is marginal in the Labour Party. In so far as a few people have made anti-Semitic comments, it is almost entirely a reaction to the claim that Israel’s war crimes are committed in the name of Jewish people.

Why the False ‘Anti-Semitism’ Campaign?

This is probably the easiest question to answer. Why is there such a campaign? Is there really anti-Semitism in the Labour Party? The best answer is by Avi Shlaim, Professor of International Relations at St. Anthony’s College, Oxford:

‘Anti-Semitism is not a real phenomenon within the Labour Party or any of the other major political parties. There are anti-Semitic incidents but they are usually related to Israel’s behaviour, Israeli brutality. So every time there is an Israeli attack on Gaza and there have been 3 in the last 7 years there is a rise in anti-Semitic episodes and incidents in Britain. Fundamentally Israel and the Israeli propaganda machine and Israel’s friends in England and the Israel lobby in Britain deliberately confuse or conflate, and I stress they do it deliberately, anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism. Anti-Semitism is hatred of the Jews as Jews. Anti-Zionism is opposition to Israel as a colonial power and as an exclusive Jewish state.’

As long as Israel perpetrates war crimes against the Palestinians and as long as it claims to do this in the name of all Jewish people, so long will there be, low level anti-Semitism. The irony is that anti-Semitism today, except for the neo-Nazi variety which Zionism has no problem with, as in the USA, is a product of Israel and Zionism. That is the irony. The Jewish state is responsible for most of today’s anti-Semitism.

Personal Abuse

McNicol ignored this abuse by former councillor Craig Turton and the support for Turton by the present head of Brighton Council, Warren Morgan

One of the key charges against me is of personal abuse of Zionists. I pointed out to the Panel that no less than 4 times I had complained to Iain McNicol, Labour’s crooked General Secretary, about a post from the Leader of Brighton and Hove Council, Warren Morgan, in which another, former Labour councillor, Craig Turton, had called me a ‘poisonous piece of shit’ only to be told ‘’Thanks Craig, appreciate that. Hope you are well.’ by Morgan. All my complaints were ignored because only abuse by the Left is an offence in the Labour Party. Abuse by the Right is tolerated if not encouraged and there is good reason to believe that senior Labour Party employees such as Sam Matthews are working hand-in-glove with the trolls of Labour Against Anti-Semitism.

Caroline 'Poison' Penn was waged a vendetta against the elected Secretary of Brighton & District Labour Party, Greg Hadfield, before Penn and Warren Morgan's lies got Greg suspended

Another local councillor who is to the forefront of the anti-Semitic witchhunt in Brighton is one Councillor ‘Poison’ Penn who launched a series of vicious tweets attacking Greg Hadfield, who was elected Secretary of Brighton and Hove District Labour Party. Greg was and has been suspended for about 18 months as a result of the allegations of those like Penn and Morgan whose lies about spitting got the party suspended in the first place. Hadfield's reward for having exposed the lies of the Right was to become suspended

Ms Penn who has close links to the troll group, Labour Against Anti-Semitism, also submitted during my legal battle with the Labour Party over Data Protection a false and dishonest statement suggesting I had harassed her. Twice Penn complained to the Police and twice her complaints were rejected. Her allegations that I had publicised personal information about her is a simple lie but of course impressed the Judge.

Penn's perjured email to the County Court, secured by the Labour Party, in order to provide false evidence that she was at risk if her identity was revealed.

The inherent unfairness of the disciplinary process

There is really no pretence that the disciplinary process in the Labour Party is fair and above board. It is a weapon in the hands of the Right. If anyone was in any doubt then the refusal of Iain McNicol to suspend Jeremy Newmark, the Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement who was alleged to have defrauded a Jewish charity out of tens of thousands of pounds proves this beyond doubt. McNicol’s response was to call this a ‘private’ matter, ‘historic’ even. Nothing about bringing the party into disrepute because that allegation so solely reserved for the Left.

As the Labour Party barrister Ogg accepted in his skeleton argument argument, all the charges related to after my suspension. It therefore follows that my suspension was, in terms of Labour’s own constitution, unlawful. It has no rational basis. I was targeted by the Jewish Labour Movement and other Zionist groups in the Labour Party and suspended for absolutely no reason. Having been targeted they then went about finding evidence. That is why it took them 20 months before they had assembled a case.

Any party that claimed to be a democratic socialist one would have reinstated me automatically. But in the Labour Party the disciplinary process is in the hands of the Right and in particular the Crooked General Secretary Iain McNicol and his equally crooked subaltern Sam Matthews. For them the disciplinary process is nothing but a means with which to ensure that the Right holds on to control of the levers of power. Disciplinary procedures, investigations etc. have been used as a factional instrument.

But that is why the Left should have no truck with the witch hunt. It is a weapon against not for Corbyn. He won’t buy time by playing along with the anti-Semitism witch hunt because its purpose is to be rid of him. That is why the Zionist lobby can never be satisfied. However many victims are served up to them, they will always demand more.

It is in this context that the behaviour of the so-called ‘left’ representative, Emena Ibrahim, who is Vice-Chair of Momentum, on Labour’s National Constitutional Committee needs to be examined. It is outrageous that a senior officer of Momentum has gone along with this racist witch-hunt.

Tony Greenstein

↧

Apartheid Adventures Comic Strip

February 20, 2018, 10:21 pm

≫ Next: Apartheid Adventures

≪ Previous: How to Cure the Labour Party of anti-Semitism – Expel a few Jews!

Bullying Ahed Tamimi

↧

Apartheid Adventures

February 21, 2018, 5:31 am

≫ Next: Anti-Zionism ‘stems from a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual’

≪ Previous: Apartheid Adventures Comic Strip

Bullying Ahed Tamimi

↧

Anti-Zionism ‘stems from a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual’

February 21, 2018, 8:13 pm

≫ Next: “Better a prison in Israel than dying on the way” – Israel’s Shameful War on its African Refugees

≪ Previous: Apartheid Adventures

The Wit and Wisdom of Jonathan Goldberg QC

‘What sets me apart is good judgement and discretion’ says Jonathan Goldberg QC in his promotional video. Goldberg is a staunch and dedicated Zionist who has worked pro-bono (free) for the right-wing Zionist ‘charity’, the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism. It would appear that mention of me made Goldberg lose both his discretion and judgement, to say nothing of his mind.

I must confess that I have developed a thick skin over the years. Given the variety of Zionist insults, most of them dedicated to trying to get under your skin, you have to immunise yourself as if against a political form of rabies.

Anyone active in the Palestine solidarity movement, especially if they are Jewish, has to learnt to ignore all sorts of barbs. Lacking any justification for Israel’s barbarous actions or its racist ideology, Zionism, Zionists resort almost as a matter of course to personal insults.

The Royal Courts of Justice where Jonathan Goldberg QC practices

However you would expect that the more respectable and learned of the Zionist establishment to be above that sort of thing. After all what is the point of an Oxbridge education if, at the end of the day, you end up mouthing the same type of gutterspeak as the common and garden Zionist?

Imagine therefore my surprise when a friend of mine, who converses by email with Jonathan Goldberg, sent me a copy of his latest offering. Having heard about my recent expulsion from the Labour Party Goldberg asked ‘what was the problem with his family.’ Which is the kind of thing you expect the average gutter Zionist activist to ask. Because they work on the assumption that no normal person could possibly be an anti-racist or hate his form of chauvinism. There must be some explanation.

What came next shocked even me. ‘Was he an abused child.’ Presumably if you support the Palestinians or before them the Blacks of South Africa you must have been abused as a child. Perhaps I thought he had mixed me up with another QC, one Lord Greville Janner, against whom there were a battery of accusations of child abuse Janner though managed to escape his accusers through a combination of Alzheimer’s and death.

Although I wouldn’t normally have intruded into a private conversation I felt sufficiently provoked to email Goldberg and ask him ‘What kind of mental sickness is it that attributes child abuse to political differences?’

Goldberg’s initial instinct was to try and brush it off by pretending that he was so high and mighty that corresponding with me would be ‘dignifying you’. An hour later, no doubt aware of how this might look, he came back again. There is a saying that when you are in a hole it’s a good idea to stop digging. Unfortunately Goldberg was too clever, or so he thought, to pay attention to anything like that.

Back he came informing me that sons (not daughters who presumably don’t have a mind of their own anyway) who ‘strive’ to ‘dishonour’ (read disagree) with their parents due it because ‘it often stems from a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual.’

Clearly Goldberg chose the wrong profession. He should have been a child psychologist with his fount of experience and wisdom. No doubt Jonathan would have revolutionised the treatment of autism and bi-polar disorders. One can barely imagine what innovative explanations would have been offered. Perhaps their condition was all due to someone taking their toys away or possibly falling out of bed when young.

I have to confess I kinda lost my cool somewhat accusing him of having the normally ‘diseased mind’ that one expects of Zionist propagandists. At which point Goldberg responded with a couple of witticisms, or so he thought and I responded in kind.

Goldberg informed me that ‘this will be positively my last communication with you’ except that it wasn’t. Clearly I’d got under his skin. Cool logic usually prevails, especially when combined with the promise of a guest appearance on my blog!

Goldberg's profile on the racist Campaign Against Antisemitism site

Now I had a legal warning. Jonathan had taken exception to the conclusion that seemed obvious to me viz. that he as ‘a prominent QC believes that child abuse, antiracism and anti-Zionism are directly linked".

I must confess I don’t know what other conclusion to draw. Goldberg doesn’t’ know me. I doubt we have ever met. Clearly he knows my father was a rabbi but that is widely known in the Jewish community and amongst Zionists especially. The only logical conclusion is that Jonathan Goldberg QC attributes anti-Zionist offspring of Zionist parents to child abuse and sex abuse in particular.

What surprises me is that someone who is clearly intelligent and capable, with a high reputation as a lawyer, can espouse such reactionary rubbish. It is like all those Nazi doctors of philosophy who commanded the Einsatzgruppen killing squads in Poland and Russia. Indeed I made the comparison with Hans Frank, the personal lawyer to Hitler who became Governor-General of the Generalgouvernment (Poland).

It never ceases to amaze me that the most intelligent of people who specialist in one field can adopt in other fields the most stupid of theories. Because Goldberg is a Zionist he cannot comprehend how anyone can be an anti-Zionist other than that they have suffered some kind of a trauma.

What is the explanation for this? That support for Israel being an essentially illogical enterprise. Israel cannot be defended today on its merits but primarily by abuse of its opponents. It is therefore necessary for people like Goldberg to cobble together weird conspiracy theories that explain their opponents actions in terms of a pathology.

It is sad that someone so obviously talented has devote those talents to supporting defence of the racist regime in Tel Aviv and the repression that comes in its wake.

Tony Greenstein

Correspondence between Jonathan Goldberg QC and Tony Greenstein

From: JONATHAN GOLDBERG QC <jongold@btinternet.com>

Sent:20 February 2018 02:23

To:maxillagardens1118@hotmail.co.uk

Subject:

I hear your friend Greenstein got his just deserts.

What was the problem with his family ? Was he an abused child ?

Jonathan Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

20 Feb (2 days ago)

Tony Greenstein

21 Feb (1 day ago)

to Jonathan, Michael

Dear Goldberg,

So with all your erudition and learning you think that anti-Zionism stem from child abuse? Presumably there must have been an epidemic of it before Hitler wiped 6 million of us out. No doubt the Bund, who led the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance and the resistance to the pogroms, were also the product of child abuse?

What a sad and sick little person you must be to fling around such insults. One would have thought a Queens Counsel would be above such gutter insults. Clearly Zionism has a corrosive effect on one's judgement.

Not only are your comments insulting to my dead parents, although I doubt a prat like you would be bothered with insulting two orthodox Jews, including a Rabbi.

What kind of mental sickness is it that attributes child abuse to political differences? Do you Zios seem to lack all personal and human empathy. Your nationalist madness makes you into quite crazed and vituperative individuals despite any pretensions to learning or education.

Maybe you would like to tell me what kind of mental aberration it is that holds that a child of 16, Ahed Tamimi, poses a threat to armed soldiers thus necessitating her indefinite detention whilst armed and thuggish settlers go free? Is it a psychosis or just a pathology born of a political aberration?

I am sure that your vituperative and sick comments would be of interest to a wider audience.

Unless I receive an apology that is exactly what will happen.

Tony Greenstein

JONATHAN GOLDBERG QC

07:29 (19 hours ago)

to me

Dear Greenstein,

I did not ask to correspond with you and shall certainly not do so any further and thus risk dignifying you, save to say that your dead parents must be turning in their graves at your anti Semitic antics, which have finally been recognised for what they are even by the Labour Party.

Yours sincerely,

Jonathan Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

JONATHAN GOLDBERG QC

08:19 (18 hours ago)

to me

I was aware that your father was a rabbi.

And it has indeed been my sad observation after very many years of professional experience that where sons strive so desperately to dishonour their parents and negate everything they stood for publicly, as you have done so prominently, it often stems from a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual.

Tony Greenstein

15:36 (11 hours ago)

to JONATHAN

Dear Goldberg,

You may be a QC but that doesn't prevent you from being a prize idiot and a racist fool.

Indeed you are a bigot for every season. Children don't 'strive to dishonour' their parents you pompous prig they follow their own paths in life which may or may not coincide with what their parents would like. I assume that you have no children or none you are willing to admit to.

I have 4 children and wouldn't dream of expecting them to follow in my footsteps. Your insinuation that my parents were child abusers is a sickening and despicable accusation that comes from the diseased mind of a Zionist liar. It seems in order to explain why I like many Jews oppose the vile racism of your bastard 'Jewish' state you have to pathologise political disagreements. You are no better than the old Soviet psychiatrists.

Rest assured that my corresponding with you grants me no accolades. You are someone with a mind that is little different to that of Hans Frank if you know who he was.

Jonathan Goldberg QC

16:43 (9 hours ago)

to me

Dear dear.

Did we hit a bullseye ?

Jonathan Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

From: Tony Greenstein [mailto:tonygreenstein111@gmail.com]

Sent: 21 February 2018 15:36

To: JONATHAN GOLDBERG QC <jongold@btinternet.com>

Subject: Re: FILTH

22:19 (4 hours ago)

to Jonathan

no I think you shot yourself in the foot, or was it the butt?

tony greenstein

Jonathan Goldberg QC

22:39 (4 hours ago)

to me

Dear Tony,

this will be positively my last communication with you, because I am mindful of the excellent advice of Lord Mountbatten, who said "never get into a pissing match with a skunk"

Sincerely,

Jonathan Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

From: Tony Greenstein [mailto:tonygreenstein111@gmail.com]

Sent: 21 February 2018 22:20

To: Jonathan Goldberg QC <jongold@btinternet.com>

Subject: Re: FILTH

23:23 (3 hours ago)

to Jonathan

Dear Jonathan,

The only problem is that it is you who is the skunk. It would therefore appear as if you have pissed all over yourself.

Anyone who can seriously attribute opposition to Zionism and Israel to child abuse is a pretty sick puppy. Growing numbers of young Jews, in America especially, are distancing themselves from Israel and Zionism because a 'Jewish' state means discrimination against and expelling non-Jews, such as the thousands of Black Africa refugees Israel is currently trying to force out. Your visceral racism and chauvinism, the product of a messianic Jewish nationalism stands in opposition to traditional Jewish values of opposition to racism, ethnic nationalism and chauvinism. Your contempt for universal human values such as solidarity, sheltering the stranger, solidarity etc. mark out you and your kind as the diseased offspring of the ethno-nationalism of Europe in the 1930's.

I am though sure that other people will wish to know that a prominent QC believes that child abuse, anti-racism and anti-Zionism are directly linked, not least because there is always a danger that you might end up as a Judge.

Au revoir

Tony Greenstein

Jonathan Goldberg QC

23:34 (3 hours ago)

to me

Dear Tony,

you do me too much honour to imagine that at the age of 70 my ambitions tend to becoming a judge.

I advise you to be very careful how you implement your threats of publicity.

I understand you are keen on libel actions as a plaintiff, and you may otherwise find yourself a defendant.

Feel free to quote accurately from my emails if you so choose.

But to mischaracterise them as you do below tha

“a prominent QC believes that child abuse, antiracism and anti-Zionism are directly linked"

would of course be a gross and defamatory distortion of an enquiry made very specifically about you personally, and your very special position regarding your Rabbi father.

And that, positively is my final word for now.

Yours sincerely,

Jonat a prominent QC han Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

From: Tony Greenstein [mailto:tonygreenstein111@gmail.com]

Sent: 21 February 2018 23:23

23:51 (2 hours ago)

to Jonathan

Dear Jonathan,

I thought you could not resist the temptation to respond. Mountbatten is not the best person to quote given the mercurial life he led.

No it's not true that I am keen on libel actions but I have had to undertake a few when people insist on telling wicked lies.

Yes of course I will quote you accurately but I will also put my own interpretation on what you wrote.

You do not know me personally, so you cannot make a specific point about me on such a basis. You know nothing about me or my family or my parents, both of whom are deceased. For you to make the grossly offensive comments you did, which strongly implied that they were child abusers is outrageous. Nor was your point an inquiry but an assertion.

You wrote, in case you have forgotten:

' it has indeed been my sad observation after very many years of professional experience that where sons strive so desperately to dishonour their parents and negate everything they stood for publicly, as you have done so prominently, it often stems from a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual.'

It is clear that you attributed my rebellion, my opposition to Zionism and indeed my atheism, which was my first act of rebellion, to 'a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual.'

I think that the inference that I have drawn, that an anti-Zionist rebellion against Zionist parents is a product of child abuse is a reasonable one but either way I am happy to leave such a decision to a jury, unless you wish to withdraw both of your offensive emails.

Tony Greenstein

Jonathan Goldberg QC

23:58 (2 hours ago)

to me

Dear Tony,

I have no intention of withdrawing anything.

The point is that I have written to you, and have not publicised what I wrote.

If you choose to publicise it to the world you must take the consequences if the world thinks the less of you. I am not then liable. You are.

Yours sincerely,

Jonathan Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

From: Tony Greenstein [mailto:tonygreenstein111@gmail.com]

Sent: 21 February 2018 23:52

00:01 (2 hours ago)

to Jonathan

Dear Jonathan

no you haven't publicised what you wrote. I'd be very surprised if you'd want to.

I seriously doubt 'the world' whoever he is will think any the worse of me on account of what you have written. I would not hold you liable on that account.

However they may think less of you given the vile nature of what you wrote.

If you stand by it fine but you do so in the knowledge that it is indefensible by any civilised standards.

Yours sincerely,

Tony Greenstein

Jonathan Goldberg QC

00:04 (2 hours ago)

to me

Goodnight.

Jonathan Goldberg QC

www.GoldbergQC.com

From: Tony Greenstein [mailto:tonygreenstein111@gmail.com]

Sent: 22 February 2018 00:01

↧

“Better a prison in Israel than dying on the way” – Israel’s Shameful War on its African Refugees

February 22, 2018, 4:44 pm

≫ Next: The Holocaust Lies of Gilad Atzmon the anti-Semitic Jazzman

≪ Previous: Anti-Zionism ‘stems from a history of abuse, whether verbal, physical or worst of all sexual’

Even Alan Dershowitz, **Israeli apologist supreme, says that the Deportations have ‘a whiff of racism’ about them**

Testimonies of refugees who left Israel for Rwanda and Uganda and received protection in Europe”

The proposed expulsion of Israel’s Black African refugees is proving highly embarrassing to the Zionists & Israeli apologists. It demonstrates like little else the inherent racism in the ‘Jewish’ state. It is impossible to argue that the refugees are a ‘security threat’ or the other excuses which are applied to the Palestinians.

The only reason for the deportations is, as Netanyahu and the Right freely admit, because they are not Jewish. Added to that they are not White. Whereas one-third of the million Russian immigrants who came in the 1980’s weren’t Jewish they were at least White.

As Jonathan Freedland, the archetypal ‘liberal’ Zionist has been forced to admit, in an article Benjamin Netanyahu’s appalling betrayal of Jewish values,

Of course Freedland is unable to make the connection between this 'plain racism' and the equally plain racism that pervades every aspect of Israeli society and the Zionist ideology that lies behind it.

African migrants protest outside Supreme Court

Freedland quoted the testimony of Emanuel Yemani, an Eritrean refugee who described his conversation with an Israeli immigration official. He was told that

“soon we’ll deport all of you, and you’ll sit under a tree, open your mouth and wait for a banana to fall, like a monkey.”

“But I’m a human being, not a monkey,” Yemani answered.

“Don’t you see yourselves, that you look like monkeys?” the official replied.

This is the sentiment that drives the expulsion of Israel’s African refugees. But whereas such views are confined to the fascist margins of Western society , in Israel they are centre stage.

Netanyahu was quite clear that the refugees pose a threat to Jewish identity. In May 2012 he told Israel’s cabinet meeting that:

"If we don't stop their entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state. This phenomenon is very grave and threatens the social fabric of society, our national security and our national identity."

African refugees in Israel

By his logic, Netanyahu is correct. Because what is a Jewish state other than a state with a Jewish demographic majority? Contrary to nationalist myths, states do not have an ‘identity’ or values. That is why the ‘British values’ that lie behind the Prevent programme are so much hot air.

Below is an article on the economic imperative behind the expulsions. There is a powerful lobby that wishes to replace the labour of the Africans with those of Filipinos who have no rights, either of residence or citizenship and thus provide a pool of constant cheap labour.

I have included a number of articles below, on various aspects of this crisis, which is an important one in the stage of the further degeneration of Israel.

Profiteers for Expulsion: Brokers Want Africans Out, Filipinos in

The brokers who bring 'Filipina' caregivers to Israel- and make them pay a hefty fee- don't want the asylum seekers corrupting their business models. This is hypocrisy at its finest

Nitzan Horowitz

Ha’aretz Feb 05, 2018 1:00 AM

FILE PHOTO: A 'Filipina' caregiver and an elderly Israeli

Opinion

MANILA – Millions of Filipino nationals work outside their country. It’s an important economic sector here; the money they send home constitutes 10 percent of the country’s gross national product. In some countries they work in construction, in others as cooks, while in Israel, as they well know here, “Filipina” generally describes the caregiver taking care of a frail grandparent or disabled child.

This Filipina cooks and cleans, does the shopping and pushes the wheelchair for the daily outing, and also bathes her charge and takes care of bathroom needs. She works all day and is also present at night – the equivalent of at least two full-time jobs. Yet very few Israeli households employ two Filipinas. As a result, their workday almost never ends.

For this work, which few Israelis would be prepared to do, she gets minimum wage (from which hundreds of shekels are deducted). And before the snide remarks about “for them it’s a lot of money,” everyone should ask himself if he would agree to do such work, under these conditions and for such a wage. Stories about Filipinas who became millionaires after five years of changing adult diapers in Holon are ridiculous exaggerations. That Filipina sends a substantial portion of her wages to her family, including children and the elderly, who have remained here. Sometimes it’s the main source of support for numerous people.

She will also have to repay debts. To whom? To the broker and the employment agency that placed her. According to the Kav La’Oved organization, the brokerage fees can reach $10,000 or more, a huge sum in the Philippines. At best it will be a year until the worker pays off her debts and can send money back to her family; at worst it could be three years. According to employees’ testimony, around half of the brokerage fees, which are illegal, end up in Israeli hands. Incidentally, the increasing demand around the world for Filipina nurses has created a serious nursing shortage in the Philippines, as 70 percent of Filipina nursing school graduates end up working abroad.

These employment arrangements through brokers are the force behind the expulsion of the asylum seekers in Israel. After all, their work is needed; there’s hardly a restaurant or a street corner where you won’t find an Eritrean washing dishes or sweeping. Most of us don’t want to do this “dirty work” either. This means that the thousands who will be expelled and left to their fate will undoubtedly be replaced by other foreign workers, but this time they will arrive through employment contractors who will take a fat cut.

These contractors are well-connected to politicians and senior government officials. When I chaired the Knesset Committee on Foreign Workers, I was astounded by the vehement resistance to bringing workers to Israel through direct bilateral agreements. I quickly understood that interested parties wanted workers imported through brokers so they could make a fortune, and the government acceded to this.

Now they are talking about bringing workers from the Philippines to replace the asylum seekers at the restaurants and hotels. But Israel doesn’t have such an agreement with the Philippines. If such workers are brought in, it would contravene the state’s commitment to the High Court of Justice to employ workers only under agreements, and would encourage exploitation.

This is hypocrisy at its peak. This government, which is sowing fear of foreigners, is bringing in the most foreign workers. The more workers are brought in, the greater the number of those who will remain permanently in Israel – a completely natural process. Instead of accelerating the airlift from Manila or Beijing, the African asylum seekers should be given work permits so they can work in an orderly, supervised fashion, in accordance with all the rules. After all, they are already working and their employers are satisfied with them. I know this from conversations with hundreds of employers.

So enough of all this persecution, lies and incitement. These are human beings, they work hard, their work is needed and there’s no reason to bring other foreigners to replace them and enrich brokers with more illegal income.

A study conducted by three migration researchers

Shahar Shoham, Liat Bolzman and Lior Birger – presents a clear picture: promises made by the State of Israel both in court and personally to those leaving “voluntarily” about what awaits them upon reaching Rwanda and Uganda were not kept. Instead of access to official claims of asylum and work permits, upon landing in Rwanda their travel documents were taken from them. None of them could access application possibilities to claim asylum. Thus, deprived of any official documents, they were exposed to robbery, threats and imprisonment. They were forced to proceed on to life-threatening journeys across South Sudan, Sudan and Libya while seeking shelter. On their way they suffered trafficking in person, imprisonment, the threat of being forcibly returned back to Eritrea, harsh conditions of hunger, violence and slave-labor in Libya’s torture camps, as well as a perilous crossing of the Mediterranean Sea from Libya to Europe. They described a perilous journey permeated with an all-encompassing fear of death haunted by imminent death. Many witnessed the death of fellow travelers during the crossing of the Sahara Desert, in the torture camps in Libya and as they drowned in the Mediterranean. Among the dead were others who had those who left Israel “voluntarily.”

[In Rwanda] “Three days after our arrival, this man picked us up from the airport told us, ‘you must leave for Uganda’. I asked where are our documents and why must we leave? – He said that we must.”

(Gabriel, pseudonym, left Israel in October 2015 for Rwanda under the “voluntary leave” procedure of the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority)

[In Uganda] “One man takes out a big knife, and tells us ‘Give us money or we’ll kill you’. They took everything we had, 3,500 dollars, clothes, cellphone, they take everything. […] And we don’t know what to do…”

(Dwight, pseudonym, left Israel for Rwanda under the “voluntary leave” procedure of the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority}

[In Sudan] They took us at night to prison. And I thought to myself: ‘Those who do not pay, we will send them back to Eritrea.’ If I return to Eritrea, what can I tell you? They’ll kill me. I was crying, I was like a crazy person.”

(Samson, pseudonym, left Israel in April 2016 and reached Rwanda under the “voluntary leave” procedure of the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority).

[In Libya]“You’re locked inside. Eat and sleep there. 800 people in a small room. Everything is dirty, everyone is sick, boys, girls. I can’t talk about it. They beat you, threaten you, kill you quietly.”

(Samson, pseudonym, left Israel in 2016 for Rwanda under the “voluntary leave” procedure of the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority. Now lives in Holland, where he was granted refugee status).

[In the Mediterranean Sea] “I saw 400 people inside… the water, they drowned. I saw people got in and all of them died on the boat. Nine boats went into the sea, we were before this ship, many children died, I remember. I don’t have the strength anymore to talk aboutit.”

(Johannes, pseudonym, left Israel in 2015 for Rwanda under the “voluntary leave” procedure of the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority. Now lives in Holland, where he was granted refugee status).

Not only are the promises made to those leaving “voluntarily” not kept – this report concludes that the implementation of deportations to a “a third country” poses a grave threat to the mental wellbeing, safety and lives of men, women and children. To this day, this policy has cost the lives of many who reached Israel in the hope of finding shelter and did not find it there. It is impossible to read the testimonies brought forth in this report otherwise; they are a clear call to stop the looming deportation policy and regularize the status of asylum-seekers residing in Israel.

This report is based on interviews conducted with Eritrean refugees who left Israel under the “Voluntary” Departure program to Rwanda and Uganda. There – in contrast to the promises made to them by the State of Israel – they were not granted protection, forcing them to embark on a dangerous journey ending in Europe. This report focuses on the “Voluntary Departure” policy and how it affected the lives of those who left Israel under it. This policy has been implemented since late 2013 vis-à-vis Eritrean and Sudanese residing in Israel. In January 2018, shortly before the publication of this report, the State of Israel announced an escalation of the measures it implements against this population; one such measure is a plan to forcibly deport asylum-seekers to a third country, i.e., not their homeland.

The report is based on a qualitative research made up of 19 interviews with Eritrean refugees who left Israel between 2014-2016. 11 interviews were conducted in Germany and eight in the Netherlands, the countries of residence of the interviewees, in which the overwhelming majority received refugee status.

This conclusion is in congruence with findings of previous reports published by Israeli and international NGOs that collected testimonies in African countries of those who “voluntarily” departed Israel. These testimonies were recently buttressed by a statement of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) about dozens of similar testimonies the agency collected in Italy. Taken together, several hundreds of testimonies have been collected.

Thus, the report confirms that the alarming patterns documented by previous reports have not changed. In addition, this report, for the first time, details additional stages in the journey of those who departed. Little information was available about these legs of the journey – and especially about what the interviewees experienced in Libya and during their crossing of the Mediterranean Sea– until their arrival in Europe.

The authors are independent researchers with years of experience working with refugee communities residing in Israel under the auspices of several NGOs:

Lior Birger, a PhD candidate for Social Work at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a Fellow at the joint program of the Hebrew University and the Free University of Berlin -“Human Rights Under Pressure”. Shahar Shoham, a PhD candidate for Area and Global Studies at the Institute for Asian and African Studies , Humboldt University in Berlin and a grantee of the Hans-Böckler Foundation in Germany. Liat Bolzman, an M.A. student for Social Work and Human Rights at the Alice Salomon University in Berlin and a grantee of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation in Germany. “The harsh testimonies brought in this report clearly show the brutal ramifications of Israel’s official policy towards refugees,” say Shoham, Bolzman and Birger. “They prove that the promises made by Israel’s government to those leaving regarding what they are about to face in Rwanda and Uganda – are lies.

The people who testified us emphasized that although they have found shelter and protection in Europe, they feel obliged to expose the truth about the perilous journey they were forced to undertake. They said, furthermore, that ‘not another human being should suffer the horrors inflicted on us.’

We join the many voices of protest presently raised, and call upon the Government of Israel to revoke its decision, to truly and fairly examine the claims for asylum and protection, and to stop deporting asylum-seekers to places in which, instead of protection, expose them to violence, torture and the peril of death.”

Everything You Need to Know About Israel's Mass

Deportation of Asylum Seekers

The government plan to send 20,000 back to Africa by 2020 has sparked anger and controversy, raising basic questions about Israel’s duty as a nation founded by refugees

Dina Kraft

Ha’aretz Feb 07, 2018 9:56 AM

A demonstration against deportation by asylum seekers from Sudan and Eritrea, in Tel Aviv, in December. Tomer Appelbaum

In a controversial move that has made the news domestically and abroad, Israel began sending out deportation notices to thousands of African asylum seekers this week. It is giving them a stark choice: leave the country or face going to prison for an indefinite period.

This is the culmination of over a decade of the government trying to get a handle on the issue. It calls the asylum seekers “infiltrators” because they entered the country illegally, and claims most are economic migrants. However, the Africans say they are fleeing persecution in their homelands and are entitled to refugee status.

In a country founded as a refuge for Jews fleeing persecution, the situation has raised a fundamental question: What is the Jewish state’s obligation to others, even if they are not Jewish? The issue is especially pressing today, with the world gripped by its worst refugee crisis since World War II.

Asylum seekers in Israel: A Timeline. Eliyahu Hershkovitz

The deportations are scheduled to start in early April, during the Jewish holiday of Passover, which commemorates the Israelites’ escape from slavery in Egypt.

Here we explain the key issues concerning the African asylum seekers in Israel, and why the matter has become such a hot-button topic both in Israel and for Diaspora Jews.

Who are these asylum seekers?

In the mid-2000s, with the African states of Sudan and Eritrea racked by unrest and violence – and, in the case of the Darfur region of Sudan, even attempted genocide – some citizens chose to flee.

They embarked on a hazardous journey that eventually led them from Egypt’s Sinai Desert into Israel, paying Bedouin smugglers to get them over the border and in some cases arriving with tales of torture and rape that they endured along the way.

The first to arrive, in 2005, were mostly fleeing ethnic violence in Sudan – in particular from Darfur. The fighting there has been described as an effort by the majority-Muslim Arab elite to wipe out ethnic African groups. Witnesses described scenes of torture, killings, rape and mutilation.

Eritrea, for its part, is considered a dictatorship. The United Nations has written of “widespread networks of informants, coerced by the state,” adding that “those suspected of treasonous behavior are subject to arbitrary arrest, forced disappearances, extrajudicial executions and torture.”

Many of the Eritreans in Israel say they were trying to escape the country’s compulsory army service. The UN says they would be in “great danger” if they returned to their native land as deserters.

How many African asylum seekers are there in Israel?

There are about 38,000 adult African asylum seekers currently in the country, according to figures from the Interior Ministry’s Population, Immigration and Border Authority, with a further 4,000 children. The authority says the vast majority of the asylum seekers, 72 percent, are from Eritrea. An additional 20 percent are from Sudan, with another 8 percent from other African states including Nigeria, Ghana, the Ivory Coast and Sierra Leone, or other countries.

The flow of African asylum seekers in Israel reached a peak in 2011, when an estimated 1,300 were crossing the southern border every month. By 2013, there were about 60,000 in the country, but that number has subsequently fallen by about one-third due to deportations, refugee status being granted in other countries (including Canada and Germany), and the fact that some asylum seekers have accepted financial inducements from the state to leave the country.

Their arrival has been stymied in recent years by growing Islamic State-related violence in the northern Sinai peninsula, a route to Europe via Libya and the 242-kilometer-long (150-mile) fence Israel built along its southern border with Egypt and completed in 2014. Last year, the border authority said there were no illegal crossings into Israel via Sinai and the wave of asylum seekers is considered to be over.

What was Israel’s response to the asylum seekers?

As well as erecting the southern border to stem the flow, Israel has attracted criticism from UN refugee agencies and, increasingly, Diaspora Jews for its hard-line approach to the asylum seekers. They say the individuals in question are refugees, since they are fleeing war zones and seeking a safe haven in Israel. Israel, however, says that the majority are economic migrants, not refugees, and that they can therefore be deported.

The majority of the asylum seekers – some 15,000 to 22,000 – live in shared apartments in south Tel Aviv (Eilat and Jerusalem are other hubs), causing tensions in these already poor and overcrowded neighborhoods. Some south Tel Aviv residents have complained that they alone have shouldered the burden of living with the asylum seekers. There have also been accusations that the Africans were responsible for an increased crime rate, claims that have been refuted.

At various points, the government has suggested that the asylum seekers posed either security threats or a demographic threat to Israel’s status as the Jewish state. They have also said that Israel is not equipped to handle resettling them. Last month, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked wrote on her Facebook page: “The State of Israel is too small and has its own problems. It cannot be used as the employment office of the African continent.”

Many nonprofit organizations working with the asylum seekers say the government has employed harsh measures that suggest they are trying to make life difficult for the asylum seekers: They have no social, labor or health rights, and because they are not granted work permits, their job situation is often unstable. They perform mainly menial labor in restaurants and cleaning.

The government built a special facility in the Negev, Saharonim Prison, to house some of the illegal immigrants that it had detained. The prison opened in July 2007, and asylum seekers were sent there under the Prevention of Infiltration Law. Six years later, Israel opened another detention center in the desert, called Holot (“Sands”).

What is Holot and who’s being detained there?

The Holot detention facility was built specifically to hold African asylum seekers, at a cost of 323 million shekels ($94 million). It opened in December 2013 and although it is not a prison per se, detainees must report for a roll call twice a day, meaning they are unable to do anything other than hang around at the remote site. It is expected to close in March. The 900 men currently being detained there, all from Eritrea, have been told they must agree to deportation to their home country or another African state, Rwanda, or be sent to Saharonim Prison indefinitely. Officials have said Holot cost about 240 million shekels to run every year.

African asylum seekers outside the Holot detention facility in southern Israel, this month. It opened in December 2013 and cost of 323 million shekels ($94 million).Meged J. Gozani

How is Israel handling the Africans’ asylum claims?

The Interior Ministry is checking the Africans’ asylum requests, but critics say the pace has been slow and the processing itself has been problematic. Of the asylum seekers currently in Israel, some 15,400 have submitted claims for asylum since they were allowed to do so, the government says.

Activists helping the asylum seekers say the reason so many have not applied is that they do not trust the unit that examines asylum claims, and allege that less than a third of those claims have actually been reviewed. People complain that they spend hours in line (sometimes even waiting overnight in order to be seen in the morning) to apply for asylum, only to be sent away without being able to file their claim.

How many asylum seekers have been granted refugee status in Israel?

Out of the thousands of applications, to date only 11 asylum seekers have been granted refugee status, according to the population authority. Activist groups say the numbers refer to 10 Eritreans and one Sudanese person. That’s less than 1 percent of those who have applied, according to the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society in Israel. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees reported last November that Israel had also granted humanitarian status to 200 Sudanese, most of them from Darfur.

By contrast, Canada has granted refugee status to 97 percent of the Eritreans who arrived there. According to Nancy Chan, a spokeswoman for the nonprofit Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, “Between January and November 2016, 910 Eritrean refugees were resettled to Canada from Israel.” In Germany, meanwhile, government figures said 75 percent of Eritrean applicants were granted full refugee status there in 2016.

The asylum seekers have been in Israel for over 10 years – why are they suddenly big news now?

In December, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced his intention to tackle the problem conclusively. A new plan was unveiled in January, whose first stage is set to be carried out over the next two years. The population authority says during this time some 20,000 asylum seekers will be given the choice of deportation or being jailed for an indefinite period.

The government is offering a $3,500 payment for those who agree to be deported back to Africa.

Asylum seekers started receiving their deportation notices on February 3 and have been given two months to decide which of the two options to take.

For now, deportation notices will not be issued to women, children, fathers of children, anyone recognized as a victim of slavery or human trafficking, and those who had requested asylum by the end of 2017 but haven’t gotten a response. The 350 or so unaccompanied minors who fled to Israel and studied in Israeli schools are expected to be exempt from the first phase.

The first deportations are expected to take place in early April, just as Israel is marking the holiday of Passover.

Israel says some asylum seekers already left voluntarily – what does this mean?

According to the United Nations, about 4,000 asylum seekers left the country between December 2013 and June 2017, under what Israel terms its “voluntary departure program.” However, the choice in these situations was often one between deportation or prison, with Israel also offering a financial inducement to leave the country and a free flight.

As party to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, Israel is unable to return people to their homelands if their lives are deemed at risk. Consequently, it was widely reported in the Israeli media that it made secret deals with “third countries” in Africa last year to accept the asylum seekers. These states have subsequently been identified as Rwanda and Uganda. However, Rwanda’s deputy foreign minister said last month his country would only take in those leaving Israel willingly.

The then-young country of Israel, still reeling from the devastation of the Holocaust, played a key role in crafting the refugee convention – which marked the first time the international community convened to determine the responsibilities countries had to refugees.

Where will the deportees go?

They will be deported to what are called “third party” countries – in this case, believed to be Rwanda. In the past, some have also gone to Uganda. Rwanda’s deputy foreign minister stated recently his country would not accept any deportees leaving Israel against their will, but Israeli Interior Minister Arye Dery countered that it would.

Israeli activist groups have produced testimonials that deportees arriving in Rwanda, and then later as they move on, have suffered difficult experiences. Deportees were regularly robbed of the funds they arrived with, activists said. There have also been reports of rapes, people being sold into human-trafficking rings, and deaths as they tried to reach Europe on dangerous boat trips via Libya.

How does the Israeli government respond to accusations of racism?

The government says anyone who enters Israel illegally is subject to deportation, period. However, one of Israel’s most high-profile supporters in the Diaspora, lawyer Alan Dershowitz, told an Israeli TV channel last month: “The whiff of racism cannot be avoided when you have a situation where you have 40,000 people of color being deported en masse without being individualized and every single case considered on its merits.”

Other Israelis have pointed out that the asylum seekers don’t pose a security threat, their relatively small numbers would not disrupt the religious status quo and they help fill the low-paid jobs many Israelis prefer not to take – such as dishwashers in cafés and restaurants. The race question is also being raised because there are thousands of Eastern Europeans who have also entered the country illegally, but they are not being systematically targeted for deportation in the same way.

What has the reaction been to the deportation plan?

The African asylum seeker issue is a divisive one in Israel, and some politicians in the governing coalition have sought to appease right-wing nationalists with their hard-line approach. However, there has also been a surge of grass-roots activism against the deportations, both in Israel and the Diaspora, with protesters citing Jewish values and the biblical commandment to “Love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Diaspora dissenters also see in the plight of the Africans stories of their own families, who in many cases were refugees fleeing persecution.

There have been dozens of petitions against the mass deportation from rabbis and clergy in Israel and around the world, and in Israel from Holocaust survivors, artists, doctors, lawyers, academics, social workers and even airline pilots who said they would refuse to work on flights that would deport anyone. There have also been street demonstrations and even a campaign – inspired by Anne Frank – to hide asylum seekers from the authorities as a last resort. Hundreds of Israelis have signed up to hide migrants in the “Israeli Asylum” campaign.

And what do the asylum seekers themselves say they want?

In interviews with the media, many say they would like to return to their homelands once it is safe enough to do so. In the meantime, they would like to be given asylum in Israel or another country.

Eritrean finds home in Italy after trauma in Libya

Asmorom is one of around 80 refugees who undertook the dangerous journey to Europe via Libya, after being relocated by Israel.

By Barbara Molinario | 21 February 2018 | Français

ROME, Italy – Asmorom was just 18 when he fled Eritrea in 2007. It would take three years and many violent beatings by people smugglers for him to find a safe place to call home in Israel – only for his world to come crashing down once more.

Granted a temporary visa in Israel for four months, Asmorom was forced to continuously renew it. He also struggled to fit in. Without the right to work, he was vulnerable and exploited, ekeing out a living with odd jobs for meagre pay.

“I had no contact with the community,” he recalls. “I had no Israeli friends and was not given the opportunity to study and learn the language.”

Despite this, Asmorom struggled on in Israel for five years, until one day the authorities told him that his visa would not be renewed. This gave him three options: being placed in a detention facility for an undetermined period of time, being returned to Eritrea or being transferred to Rwanda.

“I was given no information.”

UNHCR recently appealed to Israel to halt its policy of relocating Eritreans and Sudanese to sub-Saharan Africa. This is after around 80 cases were identified in which people relocated by Israel risked their lives by taking dangerous onward journeys to Europe via Libya.

Knowing he would face imprisonment or worse if he was returned to Eritrea, Asmorom had little choice but to accept the transfer to Rwanda.

He was given US$ 3,500 by Israeli authorities as part of the relocation scheme. Then, once in Rwanda, he and the nine other Eritrean refugees he had been travelling with were met by local authorities and transferred to a hotel.

“I was given no information, my Israeli documents were taken from me and I received nothing, no papers, no explanation whatsoever on what was going to happen,” says Asmorom. “I was scared. The word on the street was that we were not safe in the hotel because everyone knew that refugees coming from Israel were carrying large sums of money. We stayed one night, and then the whole group decided to leave and run to Uganda.”

In October 2015, Asmorom was once more in the hands of smugglers, who took him from Uganda to Sudan. In Sudan, he married and stayed for a few months, but knew he could not stay without documents or security. In May 2016, he left his wife behind for her own safety and departed towards Libya.

“In front of me was the Sahara for the second time,” he says. “I knew very well I could die, but I wanted freedom and peace and decided to cross again”.

In the middle of the desert, Asmorom and the group he was traveling with were kidnapped and taken to Kufrah, Libya. He was forced to pay US$ 1,800 to get to Tripoli, and there asked for an additional US$ 5,500. When he could not pay, he was taken to a warehouse where 1,500 refugees and migrants were kept in one large room.

“It is difficult to describe the conditions we were kept in. Try to imagine 1,500 people living, eating, sleeping and defecating in one large room. The food we were given was simply not enough and my friends and I were already debilitated from all these years of trying to survive, from Israel and from the crossing.”

“It is difficult to describe the conditions.”

“We were ill and we were hungry. Two of my friends did not survive, I watched them die in the warehouse. This for me is very difficult to talk about – I still cannot sleep at night because of this”.

In October 2016, Asmorom finally made it to the coast and set sail for Italy. Crossing the Mediterranean Sea in a small wooden boat with 800 people on board almost felt easy compared to the ordeal he had been through for seven years.

The boat was rescued by an NGO and its passengers disembarked in a port near Naples, Italy. “The moment I arrived to Italy I knew I no longer had to live in fear,” says Asmorom. “I had gambled with life and survived.”

See also: Eritrean artist draws hope from evacuation to Europe

In Italy, Asmorom received refugee status and is currently enrolled in language school, determined to find his place in society and hoping to be reunited with his wife. However, he says he will never be able to put what he has been through behind him.

“I would like for my friends names to be written down,” he says. “Ibra and Tesfalem were their names, they would be 28 today. It is only because I survived that their families were able to find out what happened to their sons.”

“So many people are unaccounted for. The families still call me today, as they could not get the bodies back, and for closure they ask me for information – Were they sick? Were they given food? Were they beaten? It is for them that I am telling my story and I would like for as many people as possible to know what has happened.”

The UN Refugee Agency in Geneva released a very important testimonial verifying Israel and Rwanda’s human trafficking system and deportation agreement עכשיו אף אחד כבר לא יוכל להכחיש: ישראל ורואנדה מפרות את החוק הבינלאומי וסוחרות בפליטים

Refugees in Israel - International Solidarity

Rwandan officials recently denied #Refugees4Sale deal with Israel exists. Yesterday, they denied that any deportees from Israel have arrived at Rwanda (other than several individuals coming on their own accord).

The UNHCR's publication yesterday verifies several serious claims against Israel and Rwanda:

1. Israel deports refugees to states of origin or to unsafe third states. This is the first time the UNHCR confirms that Rwanda is the third state. This is also the first time that the UNHCR states that Israel deports refugees to their state of origin, a blatant violation of the non refoulement principle of international law.

2. Israeli and Rwandan authorities collaborate in what the UNHCR calls a 'relocation scheme'

3. Israeli and Rwandan authorities are implicated in human trafficking. See this testimonial endorsed and verified by the UNHCR:

"Once in Rwanda, he and the nine other Eritrean refugees he had been travelling with were met by local authorities and transferred to a hotel.

I was given no information, my Israeli documents were taken from me and I received nothing, no papers, no explanation whatsoever on what was going to happen,” says Asmorom. “I was scared. The word on the street was that we were not safe in the hotel because everyone knew that refugees coming from Israel were carrying large sums of money. We stayed one night, and then the whole group decided to leave and run to Uganda In October 2015, Asmorom was once more in the hands of smugglers, who took him from Uganda to Sudan..”

UNHCR GENEVA IS EXPOSING ISRAEL AND RWANDA'S #Refugees4Sale Please share! Full UNHCR statement

↧

The Holocaust Lies of Gilad Atzmon the anti-Semitic Jazzman

February 23, 2018, 4:19 pm

≫ Next: Rejoice – The Witch is Dead – Crooked McNicol Rides No More

≪ Previous: “Better a prison in Israel than dying on the way” – Israel’s Shameful War on its African Refugees

Why Atzmon plays fast and loose with Truth, History and Integrity

For those who want an acquaintance with Atzmon, you could do worse than consult my (now out of date) Guide to the Sayings of Gilad Atzmon. Atzmon it should be explained was a famous jazz musician, having won the BBC jazz record of the year in 2003 with ‘Exile’.

It was, as lies go, only a little lie. I asserted, on Atzmon’s Facebook page, that he was a Holocaust denier, citing his article Truth, History and Integrity. Quick as a flash Atzmon came back. This was, yet one more false assertion, by me, his Jewish persecutor. Atzmon referred me to a statementhe made at the Babylon, Theatre, Berlin of 14.12.17.

‘Tony Greenstein in case you didn’t know, Truth History and Integrity was integrated into The Wandering Who’ [his book]. Atzmon could not help but boast that ‘it was translated and published in every European language, including German.. If the text above was suggesting H denial the book would ve been banned and i would be arrested.’ As things stand I hold a post in Germany and I visit the country regularly! I am proud of my take on History above and repeated it last month in a massive marxist gathering in Berlin... enjoy yourself.’

Atzmon did not say what kind of post he holds in Germany. I assume it is a wooden post as I cannot believe academic standards have fallen that low.

And at first sight it would appear that the passage below, from his book, is not a holocaust denial narrative, despite the suggestive passage that 'we must be entitled to ask questions'concerning Auschwitz. What questions I wonder?

However it is yet one more Atzmon lie. The book deliberately omits the passage I have bordered below in black from the original article. No doubt it was with things like his visits to Germany in mind that he omitted this passage which makes it crystal clear that he doesn't accept the holocaust 'narrative' as he terms it. In the article, but not the book, he says that the 'Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn't make any historical sense.' He goes on to explain at the end of the omitted passage that 'I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war.' (my emphasis) The only conclusion to draw from the passage is that Auschwitz-Birkenau was not a death factory. In short

the section of the book entitled Truth History and Integrity deliberately omits the section of the original article surrounded by a Black border below

The original Truth History and Integrity - the part surrounded by a Black border was not integrated into the book The Wandering Who?

I have, over the past decade, posted numerous articles about Atzmon, an Israeli born Zionist who masquerades as a supporter of the Palestinians. This blog owes its formation to Atzmon. In June 2005 Atzmon was invited by the Socialist Workers Party to give a talk on Otto Weininger, a German Jewish fascist, at Bookmarx. It was said that Hitler had joked that ‘I only knew one good Jew and he killed himself’! Attending the talk was one Ian Donovan, now of Socialist Fight.

After refusing our request to cancel the talk, Jews Against Zionism organised a successful picket of the meeting. We received the support of Professors Moshe Machover, Hilary and Stephen Rose – all of whom had made regular appearances till then at the SWP’s annual Marxism event.

Paul Eisen writes on the DYR site arguing that historical evidence suggests there was no Holocaust

It was about two years previously that a group of anti-Semites, who professed to support the Palestinians, had gathered in a group called Deir Yassin Remembered [DYR]. DYR had started off as a Palestine solidarity group which was committed to preserving the memory of the notorious massacre of the villagers of Deir Yassin in April 1948 by the Zionist terrorist groups Lehi and Irgun.

What supporter of Palestine didn’t want to support such a group? It held annual concerts and the money helped pay for a scholarship for a Palestinian student. It was or so it seemed, a most worthy cause.

DYR took in a number of otherwise wholly reputable individuals who sympathised with the Palestinians. MPs such as Jeremy Corbyn and Gerald Kaufman attended their concerts. It had the support of a number of anti-Zionist Israeli Jews such as Michel Warshawsky, Jeff Halper, Ilan Pappe and Lea Tsemel. However when the group decided to invite Israel Shamir onto its board people began to resign.

The statement of Jeff Halper explaining why he left the DYR Board, shortly after Shamir joined it, is instructive. In July 2005, shortly after JAZ had picketed the SWP’s meeting with Atzmon, two prominent Israeli anti-Zionists – Michel Warshawski and Lea Tsemel, also resigned. Lea’s name is still on the Board of Advisors to this day

DYR had a solution to these resignations. It simply refused to delete their names from the web site so you will still see some of their names on it over a decade after their resignation. As Gabriel Ash remarked‘The Deir Yassin Remembered board is like Hotel California, you can check in any time you like, but you can never leave.’

Its British representative and Director was Paul Eisen, who later surfaced when false allegations of anti-Semitism were made against Jeremy Corbyn.

Shamir was first called out for his Jew hatred by Abunimah and Hussein Ibish in Serious Concerns About Israel Shamir. The article is no longer on the Internet though Shamir’s replyis. (I have now reposted it)

Shamir has now all but disappeared publicly. You can get a taste of his politics in Who Needs Holocaust? In a dialogue with Atzmon, who at this time was not a holocaust denier, Shamir decries the idea that Auschwitz was an extermination camp. This was merely:

Another go of Zionist propaganda. The camp was perceived as an internment facility, attended by the Red Cross ... If it were bombed, the internees would die – or as a result of the bombing, or due to starvation for the supplies would not arrive. Indeed, would Gilad advise to bomb Guantanamo? This idea of “bombing Auschwitz” makes sense only if one accepts the vision of “industrial extermination factory”, and it was formed only well after the war.

DYR is a classical example of a false flag organisation. Set up for one purpose but fulfilling another. When it was approached in 2014 to support the Boycott of Idan Raichel, a prominent supporter of Zionism and Israel’s military the Deir Yassin Remembered Board labelled the Raichel boycott campaign “gatekeeping”, describing it as ‘a tactic used often by Zionists and by people like Ali Abunimah. Hence we would oppose DYR gatekeeping anyone, including this fellow.‘’ [BDS Attacked by the Deir Yassin Remembered

I first came into contact with Atzmon after he had penned an article ‘The Protocols of the Elders Of London, the name being a take on the famous anti-Semitic forgery the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It attacks all those associated with Jews Against Zionism as ‘undercover Zionist agents’.

In ‘On Anti-Semitism’Atzmon explained concerning the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, which were described by Norman Cohn as a ‘Warrant for Genocide’ that:

‘American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews (in fact Zionists) do control the world.’

In Mein Kampf [174] Hitler wrote that ‘With groans and moan, the Frankfurter Zeitung repeats again and again that these are forgeries. This alone is evidence in favour of their authenticity. ’

To Atzmon it is irrelevant if the Protocols are a forgery, because they are true, whereas for Hitler are ‘authentic’ precisely because they are true! A distinction without a difference.

When I first corresponded with Atzmon after reading ‘The Protocols of the Elders of London’ I took Atzmon to task for his having distributed an article by Paul Eisen, the British Director of DYR, entitled Holocaust Wars. It was a full-fledged defence of Ernst Zundel, a holocaust denier who was later imprisoned for 5 years in Germany for incitement to racial hatred. Atzmon responded to my criticism by saying

‘True I circulated Paul Eisen's paper. I do believe that argumentative texts must be circulated as widely as possible.... Furthermore, Let me assure you that if I ever see a great text written by yourself I ll be the first to circulate it.’ This is a book, one of whose subtitles is ‘The Hitler we loved and why…’ in which Eisen explains that ‘Millions of Germans loved Hitler who for twelve years impacted on them as no German has or probably ever will, and, though they never say so, must, deep down still cherish his memory.’ It is a full throated defence of Holocaust denial (my emphasis)

In the same correspondenceAtzmon told me that ‘I regard Shamir as a unique and advanced thinker.’

According to Atzmon I had falsely accused him of being a holocaust denier in ‘Truth, History and Integrity’ an article incorporated into his book, a book which was translated in German. So I decided to investigate whether what Atzmon said was true and I had been maligning this noble, truthful figure.

I first went to Atzmon’s original essay ‘Truth, History and Integrity’: In the section ‘It doesn’t make sense’, the ‘it’ being the Holocaust, Atzmon wrote:

It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on:

If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich... or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war? I have been concerned with this simple question for more than a while. I eventually launched into an historical research of the topic and happened to learn from Israeli holocaust historian professor Israel Gutman that Jewish prisoners actually joined the march voluntarily. Here is a testimony taken from Gutman’s book

"One of my friends and relatives in the camp came to me on the night of the evacuation and offered a common hiding place somewhere on the way from the camp to the factory. …The intention was to leave the camp with one of the convoys and to escape near the gate, using the darkness we thought to go a little far from the camp. The temptation was very strong. And yet, after I considered it all I then decided to join (the march) with all the other inmates and to share their fate " (Israel Gutman [editor], People and Ashes: Book Auschwitz - Birkenau, Merhavia 1957).

I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?

I think that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start to ask the necessary questions. We should ask for some conclusive historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws. We should strip the holocaust of its Judeo-centric exceptional status and treat it as an historical chapter that belongs to a certain time and place

I then went to my copy of Atzmon’s book ‘The Wandering Who’ and turned to page 175 and what did I discover? The first four paragraphs above had been omitted! If Truth, History and Integrity had been ‘integrated’ into his book Atzmon had taken care not to integrate the very paragraphs in which he cast doubt on the Holocaust! Presumably because, as he says, he didn’t want to get arrested in Germany.

However Ian Donovan of Socialist Fight described ‘Greenstein’s campaign between 2005 and 2010’ as an attempt ‘to witchhunt the Socialist Workers Party for hosting Atzmon’s gigs, and maintaining a fraternal dialogue with him, before they finally capitulated.’

Gilad Atzmon can claim some originality in distinguishing between Marxism and 'Jewish Marxism' given that Marx was Jewish

Donovan and Gerry Downing seriously believe that it is the job of socialists to maintain ‘a fraternal dialogue’ with someone who when not denying the Holocaust justifies it. Someone who states, in Tribal Marxism for Dummies that there is a distinction to be made between Marxism and what he calls ‘Jewish Marxism’which ‘is very different from Marxism or socialism in general. While Marxism is a universal paradigm, its Jewish version is very different.’

Atzmon detests, like Donovan himself, the Jewish Bund. In Swindler’s List he states that ‘Bundists believe that instead of robbing Palestinians we should all get together and rob who is considered to be the rich, the wealthy and the strong in the name of working class revolution.’

In reality Socialist Fight are now acting as little more than ‘left’ apologists for Atzmon. See Why the Steering Committee are proposing that Socialist Fight [SF] should be excluded from Labour Against the Witch-hunt see also

Granting No Quarter: A Call for the Disavowal of the Racism and Antisemitism of Gilad Atzmon and

A Guide to the Sayings of Gilad Atzmon, the anti-Semitic jazzman

↧

Rejoice – The Witch is Dead – Crooked McNicol Rides No More

February 23, 2018, 5:52 pm

≫ Next: ‘Did You Hear the One About the Jewish Man who Got Expelled from the Labour Party for anti-Zionism?’

≪ Previous: The Holocaust Lies of Gilad Atzmon the anti-Semitic Jazzman

McNicol’s Departure is only the beginning of the campaign to democratise the Labour Party

Conference delegates let their voices be heard

Socialists inside and outside the Labour Party will undoubtedly be celebrating. The Witch is Gone and this was a very very wicked witch at that, unlike those he persecuted. The symbol of the decaying carcass of New Labour, with its undemocratic stitch-ups, its lies and manoeuvres and its contempt for ordinary people, has been effectively dismissed. The man who put his hand into the electronic ballot box and fished out thousands of votes and who suspended people because they were suspected of voting for Corbyn, is on his way out. This is the man who tried to prevent legal advice reaching the National Executive Committee and who did his damnedest to prevent Jeremy Corbyn restanding for Party leader.

Detested and loathed, McNicol is now headed for the knackers yard

Fraud was a 'private'matter

Barely a week ago McNicol was refusing to suspend Jeremy Newmark, the former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement for having allegedly stolen tens of thousands of pounds from a Jewish charity. In the last few days we have learnt that the JLM, which had been confident that Newmark hadn't trousered their funds, has now referred matters to the Police. We can only assume that the JLM, which was swimming around in Israeli funds to help it destabilise the Labour Party, has also discovered that Newmark has trousered some of their ill gotten gains. Yet McNicol refused to suspend his Zionist friend.

demonstration outside conference calling on McNicol to

In a statement more revealing for what it didn't say than it did say, the JLM said that 'in order "to ensure full transparency, openness and to protect the integrity of the movement, we have referred certain internal financial matters to the police for investigation".

But to McNicol this was a 'private' matter and it was also 'historic'. Whereas those suspended were accused of 'bringing the party into dispute'for all manner of misdemeanours no such charges were levied against someone who was alleged to have committed a major fraud. Quite extraordinary even for McNicol.

Gormless and corrupt

The man responsible for the suspension and expulsion of, we understand, up to 11,000 members, has finally been told to go. Skwawkbox claimsthat after a range of McNicol’s initiatives, including the premature deactivation of the entry passes to Labour’s Southside HQ of Corbyn and his team on General Election night, that McNicol was finally given his marching orders on Tuesday afternoon. Presumably McNicol, having refused to give any help to Labour candidates in Tory marginals, because he too believed that Corbyn was headed for a devastating defeat, decided to bar Corbyn and his team from Southside in order effectively to stimulate a movement leading to his overthrow and dismissal.

McNicol explains why he refused to suspend Newmark

I shall be demanding my own reinstatement, having been expelled only last Sunday, since my original suspension was clearly unlawful and unconstitutional. For 23 months I was suspended, since March 18^th2016. Yet the skeleton argument of the Labour Party’s barrister, Thomas Ogg conceded that:

All of the charges relate to conduct after Mr Greenstein's suspension from the Labour Party on 18 March 2016. Mr Greenstein does not appear to have moderated his abusive conduct online in any way . The NCC should infer that Mr Greenstein is not a person who will respond to any lesser sanction than expulsion by improving his behaviour. The only question is whether Mr Greenstein, given his past behaviour and his unrepentant stance in respect of that behaviour as regards the future, should be permitted to continue to be a member of the Labour Party or not. (paragraph 102)

However it would be premature to celebrate too soon. In every Labour Party regional office in the country there are ensconced those who did McNicol’s dirty work, suspending socialists and fixing and controlling elections and putting dissident parties into ‘special measures’ - all to ensure that the elected representatives of the Labour Party were from the Right of the party.

Labour apparatchik Karen Buckingham refused to investigate the lies of the Right in Brighton

Labour Party staff have worked overtime in order to ensure that the party remained undemocratic. Wallasey Labour Party was suspended when it made it clear that it wanted to support Jeremy Corbyn over its own imposed MP, Angela Eagle. Brighton and Hove District Labour Party was suspended when we voted the ‘wrong way’ by a 2-1 majority at the AGM on July 9^th 2016. Naked lies of spitting were told by the Council leader Warren Morgan and Cllr. Emma Daniels and the Labour Party inquiry conducted by Katherine Buckingham refused even to look at video evidence of the ‘spitting’. All of this must stop. All those auto-excluded or expelled like myself, must be readmitted to the Labour Party.

We should celebrate but there is much work to be done in clearing out the Red Tories in Labour’s bureaucracy.

Below is a statement from Labour Against the Witchhunt. Now is the time to join LAW and make sure that we consolidate tonight’s achievement and reverse McNicol’s expulsions and suspensions.

Tony Greenstein

Statement
LAW welcomes the resignation of Iain McNicol

Labour Against the Witchhunt welcomes the resignation of Labour Party general secretary Iain McNicol. He was directly in charge of the unelected and discredited compliance unit, which has purged thousands of pro-Corbyn members from the party.

We see his resignation very much as an important symbol and an integral part of our fight to radically transform the Labour Party, which is undergoing a long overdue Democracy Review, to which we have also contributed.

The automatic and instant expulsions and suspensions overseen by McNicol – especially those based on alleged anti-Semitism and those based on members’ alleged “support for other organisations” using rule 2.1.4.B – have brought the party into disrepute: They have prevented and discouraged new members from getting involved in party life, while valuable resources have been wasted in persecuting some of the most energetic and effective campaigners for social change. The purging of pro-Corbyn activists has been a major stumbling block to Labour winning a general election, which requires maximum unity.

We ask the NEC – which now has a strong majority supporting the leader of the party - to implement the following changes urgently:

the recommendations of the Chakrabarti report dealing with the party’s disciplinary procedure based on natural justice and due process should be brought in;
all those summarily expelled or suspended without due process should be immediately reinstated;
an accused member should be given all the evidence submitted against them and be regarded as innocent until proven guilty;
membership rights should not be removed until disciplinary procedures have been completed;
disciplinary procedures should include consultation with the member’s CLP and Branch;
disciplinary procedures should be time limited. Charges not resolved within three months should be automatically dropped;
the first part of Rule 2. 1. 4. B (‘Exclusions’) should be deleted: it currently bars from Labour Party membership anybody who “joins and/or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party”;
the party should reject the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism which, in its list of examples, conflates anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism and support for the rights of the Palestinian people;
the party should immediately abolish the ‘compliance/disputes unit’. Disciplinary decisions should be taken by elected bodies, not paid officials.

Join or affiliate to Labour Against the Witchhunt
Donate:
Make donation or standing order to
LAW, Sort code 309473 Account No 21409868

LAW email newsletter. Share:
https://labouragainstthewitchhunt.us8.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=209ee62bc6b5062ed8c0521ad&id=1d62cdea75

Contact:
info@labouragainstthewitchhunt.org
07817 379568
LAW, BCM Box 8932, LONDON WC1N 3XX.

↧

‘Did You Hear the One About the Jewish Man who Got Expelled from the Labour Party for anti-Zionism?’

February 25, 2018, 1:35 pm

≫ Next: 20,000 Demonstrate in Tel Aviv Against the Deportation of African Asylum Seekers

≪ Previous: Rejoice – The Witch is Dead – Crooked McNicol Rides No More

Tony Greenstein is interviewed by George Galloway

The opening question of George Galloway is, of course, extremely apposite. How is it that the first major expulsion in the anti-Semitism witch-hunt happens to be someone who is Jewish?

George Galloway and I have known each other for over 30 years, ever since Israel’s invasion of the Lebanon in 1982. At that time George was Chairman of the Scottish Labour Party and very prominent on the question of Palestine. He was also a supporter of a 2 State solution. I can remember debating with him at my old alma mater, St. Mary’s College, Strawberry Hill in Twickenham, on one vs two states. As George acknowledges, I was right then and he was wrong.

George was first elected to Parliament in 1987 in a famous victory ousting the then leader of the SDP Roy Jenkins at Glasgow Hillhead. In many ways it spelt the end of the SDP. In 2003 George was expelled from the Labour Party for opposing the war in Iraq. It is a disgrace that this expulsion has not been revoked. If anyone should have been expelled it is Tony Blair, the war criminal who took us into that war.

George played a major role in the anti-war movement, most famously going to Congress in 2005 to challenge the war mongers on their home turf. During the course of his interrogation he displayed a photograph of Donald Rumsfeld paying homage, as an arms supplier, to Saddam Hussein.

Despite over two years of Labour’s false anti-Semitism witch hunt and acres of space in the media devoted to the false and bogus claims of the Zionists there has been virtually no rebuttal of these false claims in the mass media. It is therefore to be welcomed that I had the opportunity of explaining the real reasons for my expulsion on this week’s Sputnik programme. I don’t agree with George on many things, for example abortion and Brexit, but on Palestine our views coincide.

If you haven’t already seen it, enjoy!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1PTeqbSXLM&t=154s

↧

20,000 Demonstrate in Tel Aviv Against the Deportation of African Asylum Seekers

February 25, 2018, 5:33 pm

≫ Next: Why Letter from a Birmingham Gaol is Still Relevant

≪ Previous: ‘Did You Hear the One About the Jewish Man who Got Expelled from the Labour Party for anti-Zionism?’

In the world's most racist state, Two out of every Three Israelis Support the Deportation of Black African Refugees

The anti-deportation protest in Tel Aviv on February 24, 2018. (Courtesy)

In what was an impressive demonstration, 20,000 people – refugees and Israelis – demonstrated on Saturday in Tel Aviv. The equivalent size in Britain for such a demonstration would be about 200,000.

Nonetheless opinion polls in Israel show that about two in every three Israelis, in what is the most racist state in the world, support the attempts by Netanyahu and the government to deport the asylum seekers.

To date just 11 asylum seekers have been granted refugee status. Compare this with some 90% success for Eritrean refugees in Europe. Israel is simply refusing to process asylum applications. Last week a court held that those who had escaped from the Eritrean army were entitled to refugee status.

Meanwhile Israel has begun to gaol refugees who refuse to accept deportation although it seems that the Israeli prison service, which is full with Palestinian prisoners, cannot cope with such a huge influx.

Below is an excellent video from Abby Martin on the anti-Black racism in Israel’s Jewish supremacist state.

It is surprising that the Jewish Labour Movement and Labour Friends of Israel, who are so concerned about non-existent 'anti-semitism' in the Labour Party, have yet to condemn this racist attempt to deport refugees in order to safeguard Israel's Jewish majority and the support of the Israeli Labour Party for Netanyahu by their 'sister' party in Israel.

Tony Greenstein

Empire Files: Anti-Black Racism Reveals Israel’s White Supremacy

15,000 protest deportation of asylum seekers in Tel Aviv

Among the slogans: "Money for the neighborhoods — not for another Holot [Detention Center]" and "No expulsion, no Holot — rebuild the neighborhoods."

By MAARIV ONLINE

February 24, 2018 21:45

Some 15,000 demonstrators protested the expulsion of mostly Eritrean and Sudanese asylum seekers and migrant workers, many of whom were present at the protest, from Israel. The demonstration was organized by Residents of South Tel Aviv Against Deportation and led by Shula Keshet, a resident of the Neve Sha'anan neighborhood in South Tel Aviv.

Among the slogans were "Money for the neighborhoods — not for another Holot [Detention Center]" and "No expulsion, no Holot — rebuild the neighborhoods."

Israeli detention centre

Israel's migrant deportation plays on Jewish 'moral compass' February 6, 2018 (Reuters)

"I stand here shouting a scream that echoed a wound, rage and protest against the constant and longstanding abuse of the residents of South Tel Aviv,"Keshet said. "Of trafficking drugs and trafficking women, into a crowded ghetto by channeling tens of thousands of people, migrant workers and asylum seekers here, into a violent space."

Omar Adam, an asylum seeker from Sudan, had a message for his neighbors in South Tel Aviv.

"I want to say something straight to my neighbors from the Shapira neighborhood who are here today," he said. "I know you do not want to — I know that you do not want me to have a bad thing ... The people of South Tel Aviv who are here today know that what is being said in the media is not reality."

Eric Sumner translated this report.

Three residents of South Tel Aviv attending the anti-deportation protest in Tel Aviv on February 24, 2018. Their headbands read "against the deportation." (Courtesy)

↧

Why Letter from a Birmingham Gaol is Still Relevant

February 26, 2018, 7:04 pm

≫ Next: Petty Apartheid - South African Style - Comes to Israel

≪ Previous: 20,000 Demonstrate in Tel Aviv Against the Deportation of African Asylum Seekers

Ahed Tamimi and Martin Luther King

A simple message that is the slogan of the Black African refugees in Israel today

Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail is one of the most important political statements to have been written. No one who supports the fight of the oppressed against the oppressor can fail to be moved by it or to see its continuing relevance.

It is all the more remarkable because it came from someone who was seen by Black nationalists as compromised by his relationship to the Kennedy’s and the White American Democratic Establishment. MLK was a pacifist whereas Malcolm X believed in responding with violence to violence.

In his Letter MLK responds to the appeal of 8 white clergymen who criticised the resort to non-violent direct action saying ‘I feel that you are men of genuine good will and your criticisms are sincerely set forth’. However King is all the more critical of them because of this. King writes about how ‘You deplore the demonstrations that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstrations into being.’

King goes through a litany of broken promises made by white liberals that they would effect changes such as the taking down of the humiliating racial signs that were still displayed in stores. He went through all the injustices that Black people experienced, the bombings and murder of Black people.

King responds to the charge that the direct action he proposed was untimely, that he should have given the newly elected Administration in Alabama time to act, that he should have had patience. MLK’s response is as valid now as then:

16-year-old Ahed Tamimi in Israeli military court (Photo: Tali Shapiro/Twitter)

I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. History is the long and tragic story of the fact that privileged group s seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups are more immoral than individuals.

This is the response to those who say that we must be wait and be patient and rely on the good will of the powerful to reform themselves. MLK is saying that if we wait for the time when the privileged and powerful reform themselves we will be waiting forever because those who are born with privileges never give them up of their own accord. We have to force them to disgorge their ill gotten gains. That is the argument for BDS.

MLK deals with another argument of the rich and powerful namely that we must obey the law, even if it is wrong. This is the ritual call of the Right to ‘respect’ unjust laws. MLK responds by saying that we must distinguish between the just and unjust law:

"How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: there are just laws, and there are unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "An unjust law is no law at all. Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man - made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.

Martin Luther King

King places this argument in the context of what he calls ‘moral law’ or ‘natural law before elaborating that it is a law that degrades or uplifts a human personality. In simple terms does the law treat all people equally or is it an oppressive law.

Realising that talk of a moral or natural law is subjective, that different people are likely to have different views as to what constitutes morality, MLK makes it more tangible:

Let us turn to a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself. This is difference made legal. On the other hand, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow, and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.

Israel also uses dogs against Palestinian (but never Jewish) demonstrators

MLK uses an analogy from Hitler’s Germany. Today MLK would be termed an anti-Semite for making such comparisons!

‘We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal.’

King explains that his worst enemy is not the racist but the White Liberal who tries to hold him back.

I MUST make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice...’

Here we see a direct comparison with Palestine. The so-called ‘peace process’ doesn’t talk about justice or a ‘positive peace’ but a peace that means the continuing of oppression by other means.

King also gave a message of hope: ‘Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come. This is what has happened to the American Negro.’

King confronted the accusation that many of us face, that he was an extremist. Moderation being closely aligned with the existing order and the status quo. King asks if Jesus too was an extremist. One can generalise from this. All those seeking change are ‘extremists’ – the Suffragettes or the Chartists were also considered ‘extreme’ by those who held power:

But as I continued to think about the matter, I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love?

"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you." Was not Amos an extremist for justice?

"Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Was not Paul an extremist for the gospel of Jesus Christ?

"I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Was not Martin Luther an extremist? –

"Here I stand; I can do no other so help me God." Was not John Bunyan an extremist?

"I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a mockery of my conscience." Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist? "This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist? "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." So the question is not whether we will be extremist, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate, or will we be extremists for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice, or will we be extremists for the cause of justice?

King expresses his disappointment with the White Church:

LET me rush on to mention my other disappointment. I have been disappointed with the white church and its leadership. Of course, there are some notable exceptions. I am not unmindful of the fact that each of you has taken some significant stands on this issue.

King observes how the white clergy have praised the very forces of law and order that set upon the civil rights demonstrators in Birmingham, Alabama with extreme violence. I am reminded of Obama, who rushed to condemn the killing of Police by a Black sniper in response to the deaths of Black people. Obama didn’t however condemn the Police violence that led to the deaths of Michael Brown in Fergusson and Eric Garner in New York.

You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping "order" and "preventing violence." I don't believe you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its angry violent dogs literally biting six unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I don't believe you would so quickly commend the policemen if you would observe their ugly and inhuman treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you would watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you would see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys, if you would observe them, as they did on two occasions, refusing to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I'm sorry that I can't join you in your praise for the police department.’

The article below compares the lessons of MLK’s Letter from Alabama to Ahed Tamimi. It is well worth reading.

Tony Greenstein

What MLK’s ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ tells us about Ahed Tamimi in a cold Israeli cell

James North and Philip Weiss on January 15, 2018

In recent weeks, several people have said that the liberal indifference to Ahed Tamimi’s detention in an Israeli prison for slapping an occupying soldier on December 15 is reminiscent of the white liberals in Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail, written in 1963. Today, you can give yourself no better political lesson than rereading that inspiring document of the American movement for freedom.

King’s letter is an explanation of the need for “direct political action.” King addresses a group of white liberal ministers and rabbis who have said they’re against segregation but times are changing, so why do “extremist” black clergy have to risk a backlash with provocative demonstrations? King answers that time is neutral and won’t do anything on its own; blacks have waited for hundreds of years for some modicum of justice and learned that the privileged will never give up privilege without pressure. White businesses promised to remove humiliating signs directing blacks to segregated water coolers and bathrooms and never followed through, and meantime anti-colonial struggles in other countries have outpaced American change, and inspired blacks to dream of an equal future.

We need to ratchet up political tension so as to precipitate a crisis, King explained:

[T]here is a type of constructive nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth. . . . we must see the need of having nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men to rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. So, the purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.

Liberal ministers and rabbis were a bigger obstacle to this process than outright racists, King said, because they defused that tension among progressives with “lukewarm acceptance.” In the distant past the church had ended infanticide and gladiators’ fights to the death, but now the church was ineffectual. King warned:

It is so often the arch supporter of the status quo [as to]. . . be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. I meet young people every day whose disappointment with the church has risen to outright disgust.

This is the only thing that Israel lacks - signs directing Jews and non-Jews because they don't need them

Some whites had walked in black people’s shoes and understood the “urgency of the moment,” King said, but the moderate ministers were blindly supporting order, however unjust.

You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping “order” and “preventing violence.” I don’t believe you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its angry violent dogs literally biting six unarmed, nonviolent Negroes.

And he warned that the black community now includes many nationalists who advocate violence against Jim Crow.

The analogies of King in the Birmingham city jail to 16-year-old Ahed Tamimi in an Israeli jail are many. Occupied Palestinians have waited decades for justice as other struggles in the world have been successful. Palestinians have long been promised sovereignty and never gotten it. “Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber,” King writes, but Palestinians have seen their lands robbed year after year with no enforcement mechanism from the world. Many in the Palestinian community now advocate violence. But in their little village the Tamimi’s are part of a non-violent struggle against a violent occupation.

Ahed Tamimi caused tension– and a “crisis-packed” situation– when she slapped the soldier in her tiny village of Nabi Saleh on December 15, just hours after her cousin was maimed by another Israeli soldier.

But her weeks in jail are greeted with indifference or contempt by leftwing Israelis and American liberal Zionists, who tell us there must be equal sympathy for the Israeli soldiers and the Palestinian children. While the U.S. press writes articles about Tamimi’s choice in clothing, suggesting her encounters were staged. These people rationalize Israel’s brutal policy of a “managed conflict” forever with “lukewarm acceptance.”

Some will say, what about Ahed’s slap? Wasn’t that violent? It was not. Violence entails the possibility of producing injury to another. Tamimi’s slap of a towering, heavily-armed soldier was merely an insult, and a resonant one. “We must see the need of having non-violent gadflies.” (And as for throwing stones, even the New York Times Magazine has justified that as a legitimate response to occupation).

King’s letter is a challenge to the indifferent who rationalize the status quo. Moral people — church people, political people — must either take action or support it, he said. Geography is no barrier. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” is the most ringing line in the letter (which one of us used as an epigraph in his book against South African apartheid).

Today we revere King for precipitating radical political change in the U.S. and sacrificing his life to do so. The letter speaks to all who cherish the hope of ending other injustices. It is NOT meaningful as a nostalgic signpost of a huge battle our society won 50 years ago. It is ONLY meaningful as a signpost for what actions we should take today.

King ended his letter with a prayer. It is consciously a spiritual statement. Birmingham 1963 is the “eternal now“ of the letter, and the message passes from King’s soul to the reader right now. It addresses the struggle we all feel inside ourselves: It calls to the idealistic and motivated parts of our nature that see a way to address injustice, and against the lukewarm, timid despairing acceptance we feel in the face of huge odds.

For people who care about the Middle East, the letter can have only one meaning, to look on the lives of our brothers and sisters in Palestine and to hate the occupation and anything that rationalizes it. King tells us to be with Ahed Tamimi in her cold cell, and fight for her freedom.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was released from the Birmingham jail after 11 days. Ahed Tamimi, 16 years old, is still in an Israeli jail — 27 days later, and counting.

↧

Jewish ChronicleRevelations of Fraud, Larceny and Deception by Labour Zionist witch-hunter are ignored by Mass Media

All the evidence is that anti-Semitism is at a historic low in Britain

190 Members of the Labour Party Call for an End to McNicol’s Double Standards

Justice Demands that Jeremy Newmark of the JLM is Suspended NOW

There is nothing 'historic' or 'private' about the allegations against Jeremy Newmark

Jonathan Freedland Turns a Blind Eye to the ‘Jewish’ State’s Inherent Racism

Hoffman, Mandy Blumenthall, Andrew Gatward & Ambrosine Shitrit Are Proof that Zios Have the Ethics of a Rattlesnake as They Try to Exploit the Death of a Friend for Political Purposes

McNicol and his witchhunters are helping genuine anti-Semites

Support for South Africa in the Day of Apartheid

Sign the Petitionto Labour’s National Executive Committee and Iain McNicol

Racists Celebrate as the Labour Right and the Zionists Gets Their First Victim

Reflections on my Expulsion from the Labour Party

The Wit and Wisdom of Jonathan Goldberg QC

Even Alan Dershowitz, Israeli apologist supreme, says that the Deportations have ‘a whiff of racism’ about them

McNicol’s Departure is only the beginning of the campaign to democratise the Labour Party

StatementLAW welcomes the resignation of Iain McNicol

In the world's most racist state, Two out of every Three Israelis Support the Deportation of Black African Refugees

Among the slogans: "Money for the neighborhoods — not for another Holot [Detention Center]" and "No expulsion, no Holot — rebuild the neighborhoods."

Ahed Tamimi and Martin Luther King

Even Alan Dershowitz, **Israeli apologist supreme, says that the Deportations have ‘a whiff of racism’ about them**

Statement
LAW welcomes the resignation of Iain McNicol