Happily, a Scottish court has made a very sensible ruling that anti-Israel protests are not anti-semitic and thus do not constitute “racially aggravated behaviour”:
Sheriff James Scott ruled that “the comments were clearly directed at the State of Israel, the Israeli Army, and Israeli Army musicians”, and not targeted at “citizens of Israel” per se. “The procurator fiscal’s attempts to squeeze malice and ill will out of the agreed facts were rather strained”, he said
The Sheriff expressed concern that to continue with the prosecution would have implications for freedom of expression generally: “if persons on a public march designed to protest against and publicise alleged crimes committed by a state and its army are afraid to name that state for fear of being charged with racially aggravated behaviour, it would render worthless their Article 10(1) rights. Presumably their placards would have to read, ‘Genocide in an unspecified state in the Middle East’; ‘Boycott an unspecified state in the Middle East’ etc.
“Having concluded that continuation of the present prosecution is not necessary or proportionate, and therefore incompetent, it seems to me that the complaint must be dismissed.”
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2010/04/448790.html
It seems to me the Sherrif’s withering logic is indisputable. This is a prosecution that should never have been brought; it seems to me quite extraordinary that the Procurator-Fiscal has indicated that the Crown will appeal against the Sherriff’s decision. If anybody is acting with malice, it is the Procurator-Fiscal.