I was accused on Sky News of making comments attacking the Jewish tribe. Ripped from its context, the remark appeared so offensive I could not conceive I had ever made it. I find now that in fact I did say it, but in the context of a specific remark by an Israeli minister making a claim that the Israeli Prime Minister leads all Jews worldwide. My remark was part of a post attacking all racism. They could equally well have taken the quote “I wish nothing but good to all people, including all Jewish people” out of the post.
To be absolutely open, I repeat the post here:
Israeli economics minister Naftali Bennett has claimed of Binyamin Netanyahu that “The prime minister is not a private person but the leader of the Jewish state and the whole Jewish world.” Really? Netanyahu is the leader of all the Jews in London, or California, or Ethiopia, who may never have set foot in his state?
This extraordinary remark by Bennett lays bare the fundamental flaw in the very concept of Israel. It is not a modern state, defined as a territory and comprising all the various citizens of whatever descent who live within it. It is rather a vicious racist construct, defined absolutely by race, refusing territorial limits, and with an aggressive theocratic overlay that claims tribal superiority over the entire rest of the world.
Here is a picture of the New Zealand cricket team. In the last twelve months, New Zealand cricket teams have fielded payers including Hamish Rutherford, Peter Fulton, Colin Munro, Dean Brownlie, Ross Taylor, Rob Nicol, Corey Anderson, Grant Elliott, Jimmy Neesham, Kyle Mills, Adam Milne and Mark Craig, not to mention the McCullum brothers. But if I told you that Alex Salmond was the leader of all Scots around the world, including the Black Caps, you would quite rightly call me a nutter.
We would not tolerate the level of racism in any other country that we tolerate from Israel. There was a huge outcry against Labour MP Paul Flynn who dared question whether it was sensible to send a strongly professed Zionist Jew as British ambassador to Israel, but when the Israeli government itself proclaim the political leadership of all Jews all over the world, it is a logical impossibility not to ask the question.
I wish nothing but good to all people, including all Jewish people, but by their increasingly hardline racialist approach, their unceasing encroachment on Palestinian land and their rigorous adoption of all the racist mechanisms of an apartheid state internally, I fear that the window of opportunity for a peaceful future for those Jewish people living in what is currently Israel is closing fast.
It must be universally proclaimed: there is not a single racial group in the whole world from whom worldwide racial claims of political allegiance, or an internal racially based legislative order, are acceptable. Bennett’s remarks are beyond the limit of civilised political discourse.
Israel isn’t white, Israel is made up of Jews and Arabs, neither of whom are white.
How illuminating- the diversity debate over the failure of the ‘overwhemingly white’ Motion Picture Academy to nominate any blacks for the major prizes at the last Oscars shindig can thus be explained in this commenters mind by the fact that the Academy isn’t actually, er, ‘overwhemingly white’. Well, you learn something new everyday here !
If its news to you that Jews are not of the “white race” (we’re for the most part shorter, darker features, semitic noses) then I’m glad to have taught you something Mark.
Dude, my mate Johnny is a white dude! He’s got ginger hair and freckles he’s whiter than me and I’m translucent.
He’s also Jewish as are his Ma and Pa! I’ve met ethogram Jews who are brown as chocolate – we’re all different, honey. You should come to my work – we even have women! Amazing!
Yes, we are all different. I’m sure I can also find you some dark featured Danes as well as blond Arabs. Iranians will get very offended if you call them Arab because they too belong to a different race (they are generally fairer and they also don’t speak Arabic). The point it that as a race, white generally refers to European origin. Jews are not of European origin. Some of us may be fair but we are not of the white race. It’s not that complicated.
Jews were classified as white in apartheid South Africa and the Jim Crow South, two systems that established a legal category of “white”.
“There was a huge outcry against Labour MP Paul Flynn who dared question whether it was sensible to send a strongly professed Zionist Jew as British ambassador to Israel,”
Trouble is, Flynn then went and qualified that comment by saying it would be better to have an ambassador of what he called “British ancestry” which buys into the idea that Jews and other non-Christian peoples are not as equally and authentically British as he is. He could have also just questioned the idea of sending a Zionist as ambassador to Israel and not even brought in the fact that this particular one was Jewish. After all, there are plenty of Jews who aren’t Zionists whilst there are plenty of Christians (particularly in the evangelical movement in the USA’s Bible Belt) who are.
Now that goes right to the heart of the matter. Authentically British versus Jewish-British. Is there a valid difference? I think there is, in the sense that Judaism is exclusive. Entrance to the faith is freely open to hereditary Jews, not to new ones. Certainly, a gentile can join, but the procedure is complex and long. Judaism remains a society within a society: any position in the larger society is open to anyone in the smaller, but that doesn’t work in reverse. (Note that a few words in the presence of an imam will admit you to Islam). Being a self-avowedly Zionist Jew – and hence not one of the remaining 99.6% or whatever it is – put Gould in the ideal position for being sent abroad to boost trade deals with Israel. He was targeted. We no longer send ambassadors abroad to lie for their country. We send them abroad to lie for our corporations. His views, not held by the population at large, added much-needed credibility.
‘Israel’, 17:39:
‘Israel’, this is how most people feel. It’s caused by human nature. When people disagree, they argue, and when they argue they make false, hurtful accusations. So far as I know, all humans do this; I’ve read that it’s a psychological thing, about protecting a vulnerable self-image. Those of us brave enough to look back through our own comments find that we’ve done the same thing ourselves.
Good luck living among humans; never really managed it myself.
Well said Clark at 17.39
As I see it the problem lies with the nomenclature – the need we all seem to have to label ourselves under some heading or other: Jew/ Gentile/ French/ Irish/gay/straight – all names to mark us out as different, divided and set apart from some other group. The need for these divisions I think is based on the fear of a loss of our own sense of identity, or ego – self image as you say Clark.
Perhaps if we could confront this fear and see it for what it is, the ego would disappear and we would recognise that our true and only identity is to be human and connected. If enough of us do this at an individual level, imagine the enormous consequences that would have in the world.
We are in some groups out of fear or for protection. Other times we group because we are cooperating.
Families are the obvious grouping – these days families have surnames, but that wasn’t always so.
Ego can die a little death and we can feel connected, but ultimately aren’t egos necessary for day to day life unless we all become monks and nuns. Of course the ego may possibly become transformed. Hopefully in the process we wake up and cease seeing ourselves only according to our badges.
But then one day someone comes along and hits us in the face. What then? “Everyone has a plan till you punch them in the face” Mike Tyson. Punched in the face like being drunk we revert to type, cry for Mum or our tribe Unless our transformation has really permeated our every cell. Me ? I have difficulty remembering my plan even when it’s all plain sailing.
It seems to be the labels we put on others, and the labels that others put on us, that spark the conflict – “You’re a so-and-so”! – “No, you just say that about me because you’re a such-and-such”.
Yes of course we need a self-image, just as we need a working mental model of our world. In each case, it is our lifelong task to remember that they are only models, to keep them flexible, to continually test them against reality and update them accordingly with honesty, to remain in the world of experience and not give in to the laziness of belief.
Do you think that just possibly the same applies to the application of the label Zionist and then the assumption that all Zionists hold the same views which is clearly not the case. Perhaps the worst conflation is by those who refer to UKUSISNato. Neocon is another. Blairite is another that is developing nicely. I am of course all of the above – but at least I have a sense of humour.
or a very thick skin as do all agent provocateurs.
Your right. Labels are convenient tags, or pointers but no more than that.
There’s a saying that when someone is pointing at the moon (or a star) do you look at their finger or the moon.
If you focus on the finger or the tag name brand signpost and keep looking there ……well its obvious isn’t it.
Clarke is right we have to remember to look beyond the pointing finger.
Res is right too. We get a clue when we hear someone called something, but its just a clue
. It could be a start or misleading. Look further.
Some tags are not so useful or have v limited use. To say I’m British doesn’t say much. Too say He’s so British what would that be saying. A lot if this argument is because on the one side are those angry with Israel, who are pro Palestine and they are used to using the tag Zionist. On the other thee are Jews, many of whom support Palestinians and who have a range of views, but who can tell (correctly) that when some people use the Zionist tag it is a racist dog whistle.
So we have to look at where words are pointing, And when we want to point something out we have to think about our words. Ask ourselves if they will be misunderstood, or have they been subverted.
“the assumption that all Zionists hold the same views which is clearly not the case. ”
Zionists all have the same basic belief.
And all Jews, Christians and Moslems share a belief in the same God.
“And all Jews, Christians and Moslems share a belief in the same God.” Resident Dissident.
Actually, thanks for stating that, Resident Dissident.
Zionists can believe in no God or many. Zionism is a political ideology.
This idea of whether the PM of Israel could be the leader of the whole Jewish world is interesting. Its not dissimilar to Islamic law’s concept of jurisdiction based on faith not geography. Even here in Britain we have a Queen who is leader of people far beyond the geography of this island.
Perhaps like money, jurisdiction and leadership are meaningful when there is belief. Belief might arise from trust or fear or ancestory or mysticism or convenience or a daydream or a deception or power. There is no absolute reason why it should be geographical just as we have no absolute right to our boundaries. We just say we do so that everyone believes it.
Of course just because some within a group recognise X as a leader of all doesn’t make it so. Others may or may not be free to follow X or another or.to follow no one at all.
.
The No campaign to remain as part of Britain (“Better Together”), were very keen to portray democracy seeking Scots as Nazis, during the first indyref. The hypocrisy of British and Israeli nationalists, is painful to say the least.
Leave aside whether or not Alistair Darling actually used the term ‘blood and soil nationalism’ in his ‘New Statesman’ interview last week when he dismissed the SNP’s ‘civic nationalism’. At the minimum, Jason Cowley, editor of the ‘Statesman’ thought it an appropriate term of reference to use with regard to the SNP.
A couple of years ago historian and general trouble maker David Starkey called Alex Salmond a ‘Caledonian Hitler’ and then went on at a Bow Group meeting, to gasps and shocks from the audience, saying that he believed the First Minister thought that ‘the English, like the Jews, are everywhere’.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/gerry-hassan/why-nazis-and-1930s-are-alive-and-kicking-in-independence-debate
First indyref? It’s the indyref not the first indyref.
You haven’t quite got the hang of this democracy lark yet, democracy isn’t to keep having referendums till you get the result you want, democracy is accepting the will of the majority.
For ever and ever, Amen!
Democracy means being able to change one’s mind. Perhaps you need to re-think this one?
So you think there should be a referendum every year from now on?
Or were you thinking just until you get the result you want then no more referendums?
I voted no before the price of oil crashed and proved me right, I’m hardly going to change my mind now.
As you appear to want to frame a matter of democratic deficit as one of economics, I would think Scotland would be much the richer if it were to retain all the revenues it generates, rather than the allowance Whitehall deems necessary to return. Anyway,you guys won. Get over it.
The people of Scotland won.
You will never got a job with the EU – not with such outdated thoughts regarding democracy
“democracy is accepting the will of the majority.”
Why would that preclude discovering what it is on a regular basis? Say, every five years for example.
The idea that one referendum having rejected Independence-if you can call being part of the EU and NATO that- the matter should be closed for the future is understandable. But it can hardly be described as ‘democratic.’
Fred.
No Fred, democracy is no one voting for the Tories in Scotland, yet Scotland is under the Tory yolk, with one Tory MP in Scotland.
Democracy is rule by the people not by a country. Each person casts their vote and accepts what the majority decide. You can always sub divide an area up and show the majority there didn’t get the government they wanted, the same could apply to many areas of Britain. Should after the Scottish elections the majority in the Highlands vote for a different party to the Central Belt would you call that election undemocratic?
Fred
Scotland and England are separate nations, always have been. The unitary state called the UK incorporates Britain, which constitutes the political union of Scottish and English parliaments. Check out the Encyclopedia Britannica if you don’t believe me but the purpose of the union was to ensure a Hanoverian succession of the shared monarchy.
So Scotland and England are separate countries, joined in political union almost 300 hundred years before universal democracy was attempted in the UK, sharing one Parliament (Westminster can abolish the Holyrood Parliament at a whim). where there are ten times the number of English MPs than there are Scots MPs.
What part of DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT do you not understand?
Craig, you were on screen next to two immaculately coiffed stooges, with one wing of your shirt-collar sticking out. Next time have a quick look in a mirror. The interviewer lobbed you an easy closed question…. and you didn’t say a resounding “NO!” then elaborate if he asked you more, you gave a discursive open answer that disappeared into waffle before you got round to saying the bleeding obvious. If this is how you talk off the cuff, I think you’re better off not appearing on the telly at all, they make you look as footling as a Liarbour leader. After that fascist started bleating about everyone hating Israel (sic) I switched off to avoid vomiting but I bet you didn’t retort by calmly pointing out that he hadn’t denied the crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes of the zionist occupation did you?
The game is rigged, but you cannot lose if you don’t play.
I’ve read the posts which ‘Israel’ has made and I find them to be both rational and emblematic of the complexity of this issue. And it is a complex issue. I may not agree with everything ‘Israel’ has written but s/he makes some valid points.
Yes, they are provocative but worthwhile reading. Interested to read more from Israel.
There is nothing complex, international law, the Geneva Convetions, say Isreal is illegally occupying Palestinian territory, Isreal’s internationally recognised border are its 1967 border.
The Palestinians are occupied, Isreal is the occupying power. The Palestinians do not have to recognise Isreal’s ‘right to exist’ , an absurd concept as sovereign states have no rights only human have rights.
Palestinins have a right to return and they have a right to self determination .
I agree that Palestinians have the right to self-determination, as do Israelis. As do Kurds and Scots. But Palestine-Israel is particularly complex. And to suggest that it is complex, is not to excuse land-grabs by Israel, it is to state the obvious. And to deny its complexity, as, say, supremacist Zionists and supremacist Islamists do, arguably is to accede to being part of the problem.
There isn’t any complexity. International law is on the side of the Palestinians.
I’m not talking about the Occupied Territories. I’m talking about the whole Palestine-Israel issue/question, which consists of a lot more than the question of the Occupied Territories and which is extremely complex.
But this is the problem which I mentioned in another post on another thread here. It is becoming impossible to have a discussion on this subject. Even to suggest complexity is seen as a sign of something reprehensible.
My own view – which I’ve repeated 100,000 times, is that Israel needs to get out of the Occupied Territories and there needs to a fully-recognised sovereign Palestinian sate there. I now think there is not going to be, but that’s another issue.
Andy, law is rarely on anyone’s side, it’s a question of how you present the facts and interpret the law. That is why the situation is indeed complex.
Complexity is the means by which they draw out the problem.
“It’s all too complex, let’s just leave things as they are”
The NI nonsense, for example, was wrapped up quite quickly when the states involved wanted to move on.
Of course it all gets more and more complex as time moves on, new facts on the ground are created and so on.
Complexity suits the status quo.
S. Saadi-it’s not ‘complex’ at all. The Palestinians are living in a Hell of perpetual brutal imprisonment and suffering, and the Israelis are the gaolers. Simplicity itself.
Craig, I really oppose your support for Scottish nationalism, but you are almost a lone voice against evil and deceit on this issue and I thank you.
@ Israel April 29, 2016 at 17:01
‘You did so crudely put it and you continue to do so – I am an Israeli Jew and you are calling me a colonizer.
So lets get this straight – my people, culture and faith were on this land centuries before Christianity or Islam and yet come to Jerusalem and see how atop my most precious sacred sites sit the Churches and Mosques of the two most violent and murderous colonial imperialistic powers of the last millennium – the Europeans and the Arabs.
You see Manda, the truth is that I am the minority, I am the conquered, the expelled, the colonized. I am the “Native American”, the “African Tribe”, the “Indians of the Amazons” who have come to reclaim their land. I am the People of Israel who has reclaimed its land, its dignity and mastery over its own fate.
I shouldn’t be here, I know, I should have disappeared like all the rest of the peoples that your forefathers destroyed. But I didn’t and that annoys you doesn’t it. Much simpler if the mega-powers could slice up the world between them – Europeans, Arabs, Asians, etc. Why do these pesky Jews need to cause trouble by surviving.
Well Manda, while you yourself did not colonize most of the world and murder millions and as did modern day Arabs themselves not colonize the Middle East by slaughtering whole villages, we must all bear the consequences of the actions of previous generations.
So here we are today. I’m keen for peace happy for a friendly Palestinian State beside me. But don’t you ever dare to call me a colonizer!
There were tribes or groups of people people who later became Jews in what became known as Palestine thousands of years ago; just as there where tribes or groups of people who later became Muslims there.
‘….Why do these pesky Jews need to cause trouble by surviving….’
Unfortunate choice of words – it reminded me of Israel’s (not all, of course; just those in the know) and LBJ’s and his ‘in the know’ cohorts inner response to the ‘pesky’ USS Liberty refusing to sink and it’s pesky crew (those that didn’t die in Israel’s murderous, treacherous attack) surviving, so the attack couldn’t be blamed as per plan on the Egyptians, with a nuclear attack by the US recalled at the last minute (actually the planes, from the Sixth Fleet and a base in North Africa, were three minutes from their targets when recalled).
See ‘Operation Cyanide’ by Peter Hounam.
‘…murder millions and as did modern day Arabs themselves not colonize the Middle East by slaughtering whole villages, we must all bear the consequences of the actions of previous generations…’
‘…But don’t you ever dare to call me a colonizer!’
So how did Jews get to COLONISE the area in the first place?
http://adath-shalom.ca/commandment_genocide.htm
‘In Ethannan, Ekev and Shoftim there are unambiguous divine instructions to wipe out all the Canaanites[1] – men, women and children. The operative verses are –
Deuteronomy, chapter 7
1: “When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you are entering to take possession of it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Gir’gashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Per’izzites, the Hivites, and the Jeb’usites, seven nations greater and mightier than yourselves,
2: and when the LORD your God gives them over to you, and you defeat them; then you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them.
3: You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons.
4: For they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods; then the anger of the LORD would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly.
5: But thus shall you deal with them: you shall break down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and hew down their Ashe’rim, and burn their graven images with fire.
6: “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his own possession, out of all the peoples that are on the face of the earth.
16: And you shall destroy all the peoples that the LORD your God will give over to you, your eye shall not pity them; neither shall you serve their gods, for that would be a snare to you.’
Shalom, and nazdrovya.
So lets roll everything back to Biblical times – England for the Celts, kick the Picts out of most of what is now Scotland.
If you were Alfred (can Speccy), you’d want everything rolled back to Neanderthal, or even Devonian, times. I have a bit of gene that proves that I am a direct descendant of T. Rex!
Your people? The ones who remained either stayed Jewish, became chris or muslim or grew up into atheists, like sensible people do. Pretending that Europeans and Americans have a right to invade Palestine and murder anyone in the way, is the antithesis of Judaism, It’s been the behaviour of European racist imperialists ever since the C15th. Shame on you.
Even European Jews are of Semitic descent, mixed , as we now know with Italian ancestry. But you may be disappointed to know that the majority of Israelis ( 61% ) are Middle Eastern Jews who never left the Middle East.
You elide Palestinian Jews with Middle Eastern outsiders in a transparent attempt at sleight of hand. Some Jewish Europeans are related to semites of the past and some aren’t, just as some European muslims are related to semites of the past and some aren’t and some European chris are related to semites and some aren’t..
Thanks for this, @Paul Barbara. Interesting info on the USS LIberty. That attack that went on for so long could not possibly have been a case of misidentification.
Have you studied Jewish religious apocalypticism too? I’d be interested to hear your take on it.
N. there is an interesting example of Jewish apocalypticism in the Wikipedia entry on ‘Samson Option’, the Israeli doctrine to fire nuclear weapons about if Israel ever looks like ‘going down’. It is the contribution by a US Jewish worthy, a Professor Perlmutter, and was actually published by the LA Times in 2002. Perlmutter was so outraged by EU criticism of Israel’s brutal suppression of the Al Aqsa Intifada, that he proposed setting off enough nukes to cause a ‘nuclear winter’, that would kill billions. He thought it appropriate punishment for centuries of oppression by a ‘Jew-hating world’. You see, we’re ALL guilty, and it’s only a matter of time before we get our just desserts.
Paul, when the ancient tribes of Canaan come forward I’ll find myself in a pickle. But till that happens you just look like a fool who knows not how to make a good argument.
Israel, the ancient tribes of Canaan, among whom the Israelites was one, were among the many ancestors of the indigenous Palestinian population. I was going to say, ‘…those that survived the Israelites’ Holy Genocides..’, but they are, thankfully, mythical, the wishful thinking of a religion whose prime operating principle was re-stated by the Zionist fascist Jabotinsky, ie ‘We’ll kill anyone who gets in our way’.
One of the greatest tragedies and obstacles towards world peace today is the fact that the brutal Israeli regime, and all the horror it has done and continues to do, is predominantly made up of a tribe that is shielded from recrimination because of its own horrific experience 80 odd years ago. It doesn’t in any way justify the greatest social injustice of the world today – the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, nor can it ever be used for cover against the racist and apartheid Israeli state.
NO! The big lie of zionism is that it has anything to do with Judaism. Zionism is a secular, fascist antisemitic ideology.
@ Israel April 29, 2016 at 13:58
‘You are a modern day reflection of the very thing you abhor Mr. Murray. You are a patronizing colonialist judging an ancient culture you know nothing about while having the audacity to tell us we should be more like you. Just like your forefathers did while they raped and pillaged, sorry, I meant “brought the word of Christ” to the uncivilized primitives.
Yes, you are right, Jews are tribal and tight knit. We had to be in order to survive the 12th century, 14th century, 18th century or any century version of you – always waiting to find a reason to crucify, burn or simply expel us.
For 2000 years there has been constant communication between Jewish communities all over the world and we perceived ourselves as one people exiled and dispersed. By the way, it was for this reason that Israel was so successful in absorbing immigration. Ever wondered how Jews from all over the world – from Ethiopia, Iraq and Yemen to Austria, France and the UK – succeeded to ease so seamlessly into their new identity of being Israeli? In contrast, just take a look at how Arab countries around Israel fell apart once their dictator was removed. That is because the peoples of those countries never shared a common identity – they were a collection of different tribes forced into a country with defined borders by….oh, by people like you – Europeans who know what’s best.
So, in conclusion.
You have no idea of the historic references and ideas that lie behind Bennetts words but they certainly have nothing to do with claiming tribal superiority over the entire rest of the world. I’m not so sure whether you’re so much anti-semitic as you are simply ignorant.’
‘..Ever wondered how Jews from all over the world – from Ethiopia, Iraq and Yemen to Austria, France and the UK – succeeded to ease so seamlessly into their new identity of being Israeli?…’
Senior Rabbis were at loggerheads about Ethiopean ‘Jews’ being really Jewish; in the end it was ruled they were and were allowed in, but had to still undergo a ‘conversion’. Israel needed them to fill land taken over by Israel from native Palestinians, and to do menial jobs.
‘.. ease so seamlessly..’ – yer, if you say so: ‘The tribulations of being an Ethiopian Jew’:
http://www.irinnews.org/report/94819/tribulations-being-ethiopian-jew
‘…. I’m not so sure whether you’re so much anti-semitic as you are simply ignorant….’
I don’t know if you are just an apologist for daily Israeli abominations against Palestinians, or just a blinkered bigot.
Mate, you sound like you’ve been on the cool-ade again.
Paul, the term “Native Palestinians” includes Jews. It was only after the establishment of Israel that Jews became “Israelis” and the Arab population adopted the term “Palestinian”.
Although the Jews predate the Arab and Muslim culture that colonized this region, it doesn’t matter now and the fact is that today both Jews and Arabs can be considered native to this land.
As for Ethiopians. Like all immigrants anywhere in the world, especially immigrants who come with an extreme culture and education gap, they certainly have their challenges. But the fact is that if you ask any Ethiopian Jew about his identity, whether he is a proud Israeli and whether he feels a part of this country, chances are he’ll say yes.
It amazes me the number of people in this discussion who preach to me about the country I live in. If this discussion was about Kenya, Finland, India, or someplace, I would be curious to actually ask questions rather than have the arrogance to throw around claims based on shit I read in the paper.
What a group of arrogant patronizing “Europeans” you are – no different from your colonizing forefathers…
Here’s a question for you.
Don’t you think that Palestinian refugees, forced to leave their homes to make way for the state of Israel and their descendent have a right to return to the land their forefathers lived on and worked for generations?
Sure I do Fred, as do I believe that the economies of the major European countries should be shut down in order to pay trillions in damages for the damages they caused over of the past 150 years. India, Africa, Australia, Native America – the millions who were murdered, the cultures that were destroyed into extinction, the resources that were pillaged, the slavery.
I think it’s time for you guys to live on rations for a while while you pay off your debts and rebuild your economies.
While you do that we’ll let bygones be bygones with the Arab Palestinians.
Deal?
If you had been reading this blog for any time you would have realised there aren’t too many apologists for western governments here, quite the opposite. Where the human rights of others have been infringed by our own governments we have been the ones shouting loudest against it. We don’t duck the issues with “well what about…” .
So how about addressing the issue I raised with more than four words at the start before trying to turn the table.
Fred, you didn’t ask me for an apology and I didn’t ask you for an apology. You asked me for my view on something that is actionable and I responded with the same.
The answer as I would assume your answer is that life is just a little more complicated.
We all pay for the actions and mistakes of past generations.
Most of the Arabs in Palestine are not ancient. Many have Egyptian and Syrian family names having come during economic upturns in the 18th and 19th century. In 1800, the population of Palestine was just 275,000.
This place was a desolate shithole. It’s only now that the Jews have built the strongest economy in the Middle East that the Arabs got big eyes and imagine that this would have all been theirs.
But the likelihood is that if Israel wouldn’t have been established Palestine (having no natural resources) would be another failed state and the Palestinians would now be knocking on Europe’s door while some Arab despot shows them what a real ethnic cleansing looks like.
So, while I’m happy for a Palestinian State to be founded alongside Israel, it is unfeasible for the Arabs who left to come back to what is today Israel. That ship has sailed. It would not work just like my suggestion to you for Europe is unfeasible. It would make Israel unstable – I don’t think I need to explain why.
If you had been reading this blog for any time
He hasn’t, of course. He’s probably covering several blogs, and his approach is textbook hasbara. He is presenting The Gospel According to Likud, and he popped up just when this major co-ordinated media fuss did. He may even have daily meetings with Regev.
A long way down the list of things I believe comes the proposition that some random punter in Israel gives a flying one about what is said by commenters on this blog.
@Israel
Life is just as complicated as you make it. There are a lot of Palestinians living in refugee camps in Lebanon who’s human rights have been, and continue to be, violated. Each individual person, some for their entire lives. They are people each one different and each one with their own hopes and expectations and we have a duty to each and every one of them. It wasn’t infeasible for the Palestinians to be forced out why would it be infeasible for them to return?
Fred, they don’t live in refugee camps they live in villages. Most of them are not refugees, most were born in Lebanon. Most of my mother’s family from Lithuania was murdered and their property taken a mere 70 years ago. So what do you propose I do? Sue them for the lives lost? commit terrorist attacks in Lithuania? Start a BDS movement?
We all have to deal with consequences of the actions of previous generations.
The fact is that you cant take back time. If you want to help these people help them build their future not hang on to the past. They are now in Lebanon, they are Lebanese. Hopefully one day there will be a peaceful Palestinian State which they can move to.
But they won’t be returning to Israel just as millions of people around the world won’t return to what once was,
Such is reality. Such is life.
Read this – http://www.nationalreview.com/article/207251/defeat-terrorism-first-tashbih-sayyed
Formerly racial and colonialist states can shed that past. South Africa has. My own country of the United States used to define itself as a white nation. The immigration and naturalization law passed by the first U.S. Congress only admitted free whites. Discrimination under the law against blacks, Asians, and others persisted until well into the last century. But the law in the U.S. is now equal and nondiscriminatory.
Israel must also adapt. As long as it accepts immigrants who have no more connection with it than the mere fact of being Jewish, it must also accept the descendants of the Palestinians whom it expelled, to whom it has a much greater responsibility.
@Israel
There are 12 refugee camps in Lebanon with half a million registered refugees, 10 in Jordan with two million refugees. There are five million Palestinian refugees registered with UNRWA. They are not Lebanese citizens and do not have Lebanese passports.
They are each individual people, your link from 2003 talks of Palestinians being terrorists and bombers, I havent stereotyped the people of Israel I have just talked of individual people who are being denied justice.
Fred, you missed the point of the link:
“The children and grandchildren of Palestinian refugees who have been made second class citizens in Lebanon, Syria, or the Gulf States (nations which refuse to grant them citizenship or equal rights) cling to the illusion that defeating the Jews will restore their dignity.”
These people are as much refugees as the majority of the population of New York or London are refugees.
They are grandchildren of refugees and should be granted citizenship and equal rights by the countries in which they were born. Can you imagine children and grandchildren of refugees living in refugee camps in the UK with no rights for half a century? children who’s parents were born in the UK still being referred to as refugees!!!
Now here’s my question to you – who would you complain to, the country they left 70 years ago or the UK government for not giving them equal rights?
Who am I to say? But here is my tuppenceworth in any case.
I think the people in camps should be given the option of moving to a (new, sovereign) Palestinian state. For those who now are properly settled in other countries – not in camps, etc. – there ought to be some form of financial compensation. Maybe, too an exchange of land b/w Israel and Palestine. The Arab Israelis by and large have indicated they would not wish to move to a new Palestinian state (And who can blame them? First World to Third World, relative rights to… who knows?). But there could be dual citizenship.
The main sticking point related to Jerusalem. But that could be decided later.
You know, this is all negotiable, if there were the will. The USA is key but it is not the only factor. The Middle East is massively complex, with Iran, the Gulf Coop Council, Israel, Turkey and all their proxy armies/militias. Russia (and the Russian-Israeli mafija), NATO. Now, it is a morass.
This is pie-in-the-sky, though. Things seem to have moved towards both extremes. Religious extremes, where everything is black and white and nothing is negotiable. 2000 was a missed opportunity and both sides were to blame. To some extent, both sides were beholden to their respective supremacists and were leveraging/were leveraged by these increasingly powerful groups. That’s my understanding of it.
Now, I do not see a happy ending, or even a peaceful ending.
Look – millions of Hindu Bengalis were thrown out of their homes in East Pakistan in 1971 for no other reason that they were Hindu. What did they get? Zilch. Millions of Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus were displaced (if they were lucky enough to survive ) in 1947 during the partition of India for no other reason than religious bigotry. Like Istanbul, Lahore used to be a mixed city. Look at Cyprus, look at the Balkans in the early C20th and again in the 1990s.
Compromise is the only way to lasting peace. But I see no sign of it.
Suhayl, you are the first person here with whom i I can say that i for the most part agree.
Thanks, ‘Israel’. Very much appreciated. Actually, your contribution here has been a breath of fresh air.
Btw, I’ve always put your handle in inverted commas like this only because otherwise it would look as though I am addressing, or thanking, the state of Israel! And if someone, somewhere, took that out of context and quoted me… I’d have done the same, though, if you’d called yourself, ‘Fiji’ or ‘China’ or ‘USA’!
Jonathan Freedland writes in the Guardsin today..
“As for the notion that Israel’s right to exist is voided by the fact that it was born in what Palestinians mourn as the Naqba – their dispossession in 1948 – one does not have to be in denial of that fact to point out that the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile and countless others were hardly born through acts of immaculate conception. Those nations were forged in great bloodshed. Yet Israel alone is deemed to have its right to exist nullified by the circumstances of its birth.”
Poor Freedland doesn’t know Isreal is illegally occupying Palestinian territory and several million Palestinians live under brutal military occupation. Does he really think the cleansing of Palestinians ended in 1948?
And the US and it’s allies does come under fire for it’s wars and occupations, just not in the Guardian which supported every bloody US lead war.
Do you believe that Israel’s right to exist has been nullified or that it ever had such a right in the first place.
I am happy to acknowledge that Israel is illegally occupying territory that doesn’t belong to it and has mistreated many Palestinians since 1948.
States don’t have rights, like rocks, trees, lakes haven’t rights. Isreal isn’t a
person. It’s a sovereign state like every other.
Humans have rights.
Chomsky writes,
“No state demands a ‘right to exist,’ nor is any such right accorded to any state, nor should it be.
Mexico recognizes the US, but not its ‘right to exist’ sitting on half of Mexico, acquired by aggression. The same generalizes.
To my knowledge, the concept ‘right to exist’ was invented by US-Israeli propaganda in the 1970s, when the Arab states (with the support of the PLO) formally recognized Israel’s right to exist within secure and recognized borders (citing the wording of UN 242). It was therefore necessary to raise the bars to prevent the negotiations that the US and Israel alone (among significant actors) were blocking, as they still are. They understood, of course, that there is no reason why Palestinians should recognize the legitimacy of their dispossession — and the point generalizes, as noted, to just about every state; maybe not Andorra.
– http://mondoweiss.net/2007/06/the-other-night/#sthash.8LPlZyuz.dpuf
“It’s a sovereign state like every other”
And do you believe that Israel is entitled to its sovereignty. Yes or no will suffice without resorting to Chomsky/Mondoweiss/other dubious sources..
Of course, but why ask? Isreal, within its internationally recognised 1967 borders is a sovereign state. Nobody disputs
that fact apart from Isreal that believes the territories it capture in war bling to it. But internal law is clear, those territories are Palestinian.
It’s absurd to say Chomsky is a dubious source.
RD.
Well done, RD, awhile back there, I thought your moral compass had broken, but you’ve proved me wrong, I’m glad to say . ?
I do however believe that Israel does have the right to exist, in a two state form, but it is a monumental task to bring the states into being. Men with vision, or women for that matter are required, to try, and resolve the problem peacefully.
Isreal does exist, it’s an internationally recognised state within its 67 borders. Nothing will change that. What you believe is irrelevant.
The Palestinians could have a state tomorrow.
Andy.
Yes I well aware that “Israel exists” I wasn’t stating anything other. However there are those who believe it shouldn’t, as my previous comment says in a very lucid manner, I’m not one of them.
Now what was your point? if you had one to begin with.
“The Palestinians could have a state tomorrow.”
Really!
By what miracle will that come about? Do elaborate.
What makes you think they want to sort out the problem.
Is there any evidence of that?
Herbie.
Yes you have good point, I don’t see Israel and the Palestinian people sorting it out per se, between themselves. A new approach must be found, I hear you pfft, and mutter but how? In my opinion the key is the US, and finding an accord to allow the UN to broker a peaceful treaty, and a two state solution.
Yes it’s a very difficult task, but what other peaceful option is there? Unfortunately every so often conflict breaks out between both peoples, it’s a vicious circle, with vengeful thoughts passed down from father to son.
I see no end in sight to the generational conflicts other than a two state agreement.
Yup.
My view is that there won’t be much in the way of sorting out until there’s some sort of reallignment in the region.
The Israelis currently have no interest in moving on the issue and the Palestinian leadership has its own alliances which must be obeyed.
Meanwhile the poor ordinary Palestinians just keep on suffering.
That’s usually the way these things work.
Andy,
And to all readers of this blog, may I draw your attention to the fact that the Jonathan Freedland ‘Comment’ article you have drawn our attention too in today’s (Saturday, 30th April) edition of The Guardian is ‘closed’ for readers to actually comment upon, as have several other articles/leader columns been closed for the readership to comment upon and actually articulate criticism of.
This from a fucking newspaper that claims “Comment is Free”.
Given the above facts and the censorship The Guardian now engages in on a daily basis to propagate its own pro-Zionist anti-cornyn propaganda, I urge all readers of The Guardian to question any and all articles it runs, most of which are supportive of the present establishment policies that follow a neoliberal economic orthodoxy and neoconservative overseas policy – both of which are anathema to the wellbeing of the majority of citizens of the United Kingdom. Well done The ‘fucking’ Guardian, you have descended to new lows in your undermining of the duly elected leader of the Labour Party and uncritical support of the state of Israel – Mr. Freedland and the other cohort of Zionist supporters at The Guardian, not all Jewish I hasten to add, will no doubt be safe in their jobs with their huge salaries when Ms. Viner disposes of 250 of their peers. What has fucking Freedland got to say about that fact?
The Guardian is drawing a lot of criticism in the comments. People are asking what exactly is factually incorrect in what Livingston said. None of the Guardian’s so called journos of course can answer because Livingston was right. That’s why they have closed comments.
For some reason I can’t copy links but look up an article on Livingston’ s claims by Jamie Stern-Weiner. He cites the historian Francis R. Nicosia.
Quote , there was ‘[t]hroughout the 1930s . . . almost unanimous support in German government and Nazi party circles for promoting Zionism among German Jews, and Jewish emigration from Germany to Palestine’.
Freedland is asking for history to be rewritten. It’s quite extraordinary. Utterly shameful.
Andy, while Freedland denies irrefutable history, the even more odious Nick Cohen, dismisses it all, as a ‘conspiracy theory’. In my opinion, hasbara does not come any lower than that.
Craig, it was +very+ brave of you to go into this lion’s den. Well done!
Even if you had read out the local bus timetable, it would have been twisted round into “anti-semetic remarks”.
As far as I can see, this “crisis” is something that has been carefully manufactured to shut down any criticism of the Israeli regime and also take out Corbyn along the way.
No surprise that the UK corporate elite and their media mouthpieces are having a field day.
be good to read N_’s comments here.
Just as a reminder to Israel what he likes to paint over white and blue,the responsibilities and duties that are part and parcel of the Balfour declaration,
‘His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.’
Nothing about the Nile and Euphrates, or any dreamland, a quarter of the ME that can be taken and is forever Israel, nothing whatsoever.
Anybody who would like to see their children grow up in peace and harmony with those who also live there, with the same ancestral rights, must now think twice about the Zionism that keeps Israel in perpetual war, the creeping steal of land and resources, the brutality of a regime that incarcerates children, shoots children and has a policy of disturbing communities by targeting children, those held most dearly, cherished among their friends and loved by more than just their own family, a despicable policy.
I’ve just been listening to Ken Livingstone debating with David Mellor and Michael Crick on LBC. Could hardly have been bettered – he stood up almost flawlessly to a serious (but not unfriendly) battering, although I think he could have done with dragging the Prime Minister of Israel in for support rather less often, given that his statements have also caused extreme controversy.
Challenged repeatedly and forcibly to say that he was sorry for mentioning Hitler, he said that he regretted that a throwaway aside should have caused so much upset, but that he would never be sorry for telling the truth – and then he placed the blame firmly where it belongs. He said a group of embittered Blairite MPs had seized upon this in order to hurt Labour’s performance in the upcoming elections, so that they could blame Jeremy Corbyn for it and weaken him as leader. He said he was not responsible for all this fuss but that John Mann and Wes Streeting et al had caused it deliberately.
Spot on, in my view, and I actually think that this is going to backfire badly on Mann and his circle. I think Ken Livingstone will have regained a great deal of respect, if he ever lost it.
I do wish they’d leave Jeremy alone. It’s seems a different era now but one year ago Labour was 1/3 on to form the next government.
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/crushing-defeat-israel-lobby-anti-boycott-litigation-fails-uk
You might find this interesting.
I do, very. Thank you.
K. Crosby, in the USA all that the all-powerful Israel Lobby is DEMANDING is that the BDS movement be banned, possibly criminalised, and the USA’s precious ‘First Amendment’ and ‘Freedom of Opinion’ can go to Hell. And they will get their way. Now THAT is a Master-Slave’ relationship.
[ Mod: Caught in filter, timestamp updated ]
David Mellor?! Wow! Hadn’t heard from him for ages! He was forced out of government office in 1992 because of his “Palestinian links”. But I can guess why the Foreign Office has dragged him out to oppose Ken Livingstone, rather than using those with long and open Israel-promoting track records.
Every time a story like this happens, when Jewish power whacks a British politician openly, there are those in the Foreign Office and SIS who think “OMFG! How are we supposed to keep any friends in the Arab world?”
Can you imagine. You’re in SIS and you’re going to one of your regular lunches with some contact of yours from the Gulf. In some posh hotel. You’re just about to close on an arms deal and you’re looking forward to your big kickback. Then this happens. What are you going to say if he mentions it?
This, my friends, is why people such as Jonathan Aitken and Alan Clark (who admired Hitler and saw himself as a Nazi) were Ministers of Defence Procurement.
As the ratchet is turned a few more notches, soon it won’t matter. Soon they might as well appoint Mark Regev in that role.
Lol not quite, N_. Ken Livingstone and David Mellor have been media buddies for years, co-presenting a Saturday show on LBC. There’s nothing sinister about the timing there.
I didn’t know that, John! Many thanks for the heads-up 🙂
Still, good to remember David Mellor’s background.
Who owns LBC nowadays? Shirley Porter flogged it to Reuters, IIRC. Daughter of the founder of Tesco and head of Westminster Council (nice work if you can get it – Westminster includes Soho and the council used to own a big share in Dolphin Square), she ran off to Israel (presumably entering on an Israeli passport) to avoid having to pay a massive surcharge for all the crimes she’d committed when in public office, and hid most of her assets. Now she’s back in London again. Talk about taking the piss!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UGAFYnpKoU
They seem desperate for him to back down. Pity he didn’t tell them that they were sounding like Hitler and waving their arms about as histrionically as Hither.
Another US politician finds that adopting the “It is anti-Semitic to ever criticise Israel” attitude is a boost to a career in politics.
How Chris Van Hollen learned to love Israel
by Philip Weiss
On Tuesday, Rep. Chris Van Hollen handily defeated Rep. Donna Edwards for the Democratic nomination to be Maryland’s next senator, in what the Forward described as a victory for “the mainstream pro-Israel establishment.”
Van Hollen “vastly outspent his rival, $6.3 million to $2.7 million,” per the Washington Post; and the race became racially somewhat-polarized; but Van Hollen was able to count on the support of the Israel lobby against Edwards, who was seen as more sympathetic to Palestinians. Pro-Israel megadonor Haim Saban gave Van Hollen $100,000; and Van Hollen dutifully enlisted in the battle to fight Israel’s international delegitimization, calling that effort a form of anti-Semitism:
He believes we must also remain absolutely committed to ensuring the security of our ally Israel and fight anti-Semitism wherever it raises its ugly head.
Interestingly, both Van Hollen and Edwards once had sterling progressive records on the Middle East. And then Van Hollen got an education. Here’s the story.
Continued at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/04/how-chris-van-hollen-learned-to-love-israel/
Further to Haim Saban and his support for the Democrats:
http://forward.com/opinion/national/325490/does-hillary-clinton-have-a-haim-saban-problem/
“I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel,” Saban told the New Yorker in 2010.
Silvio, the manner in which the Israel Lobby has OPENLY bought the entire, wretchedly corrupt, US political system, has now been replicated in much of the West. This also explains Israel’s antagonism towards China, which they will NEVER control. Israel, of course, acts friendly itself, because there’s money to be made and stolen US secrets to sell, but it gets its stooges to prepare to ‘bring China down’. While the dominance of Jewish money power in the West guarantees a de facto Israeli global dominance, China will never have a controlling ‘Sino-Zionist Lobby’, that’s for sure.
What I find interesting is how those who claim to be Anti- Zionist and quite rightly maintain that there is a distinction between Anti Zionism and Anti Semitism do seem to make very little effort (with some honourable exceptions) to clear up the anti-Semitic shit that comes out of the mouths of some who profess anti- Semitism. Quite frankly I am somewhat sick of doing their dirty work especially if doing so gets me falsely labelled as an agent provocateur by the blog’s owner.
If any Anti-Zionists wish to clean up their own stable might I suggest that there is plenty of shit on this tread to which they can now direct their attention.
Examples? I haven’t read all the comments.
Seek and you shall find – I will be accused of being an agent provocateur if I do.
Why don’t you make the same challenge to zionist antisemites? It would be even handed and then we could enjoy the spectacle of people claiming to be zionist squirm on the hook as we list the facts of zionism being an antisemitic ideology and their colony in Palestine being unable to exist without crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes; or is fair play not your bag?
Zionists are only anti-Semites by your definition. If there are really people on this blog who support the continues existence of the State of Israel as well as showing discrimination against or prejudice or hostility toward Jews then please point me in their direction.
Craig Sir,
In relation to your detailed quote captured in this post, may I add that Carwyn Jones, the Labour leader of the Welsh assembly and head of the Labour Party within Wales, does not and cannot speak of me or being my leader despite the fact that i am very proud to have been born and raised in Wales, therefore I am Welsh. Indeed, those of Welsh heritage live all over the world, many in England, they support a multiplicity of political movements, including a ‘nationalist’ movement, Sa such, Carwyn Jones can only speak for a small percentage of those who are Welsh or can claim Welsh heritage. Indeed, given Mr. Carwyn’s continued attacks on Mr. Jeremy Corbyn via his underhand attacks on Ken Livingstone – Carwyn being a well known anti-Corbynite, at the forthcoming Welsh Assembly elections, and despite being a lifelong Labour Party voter, I shall not vote Labour but will vote either Plaid Cymru or Green. Given this political stance of mine, does not supporting the dictator Carwyn make me an anti-semite?
This is how crass, stupid and low this dialogue of supposed anti-semitism has got within the Labour Party, an anti-semitism whipped up by Zionists and anti-Corbyn factions to undermine the leadership of the duly elected leader of the Labour Party, which was the largest democratic vote ever help within the Party’s history and any other political party within the UK.
Here’s a word of advice to Mr. Carwyn Jones who claims as an alleged Socialist to speak on my behalf: “FUCK OFF”.
@Israel
April 30, 2016 at 13:24
“Andy, law is rarely on anyone’s side, it’s a question of how you present the facts and interpret the law. That is why the situation is indeed complex.”
The facts are Isreal is occupying Palestinian territory, the occupation is illegal.
It’s very very simple.
[ Mod: caught in filter, timestamp updated ]
I have also just been reading the transcript of Ken Livingstone’s offending remarks in the interview with Vanessa Feltz on BBC Radio. I did not appreciate before (and I certainly would not have picked it up from media treatment of this matter) that Livingstone did not “drag Hitler in” to any conversation. Hitler was raised first by Vanessa Feltz, and Livingstone responded to her comments. And he also said himself that Naz Shah was wrong to raise Hitler’s name at all.
So Mellor and Crick were going on at Livingstone – “Why on earth mention Hitler, etc etc” on wholly false premises. The political and media dishonesty over this matter really is astonishing, and disgusting.
I think Livingstone should see Mann in court for slander. I would not take kindly to being called a “Nazi apologist” in front of the public and television cameras for saying something that was true and provable. And I also think that Mann should be thrown out of the Labour Party for bringing it into disrepute.
The media is acting like a herd, I’m sure most journalists know exactly what is going on, either they agree and believe Corbyn should be removed , they support the lies or they are doing what they are doing because they don’t want to loose their jobs.
One week the media is all about the Prime Minister and a pig, another it is about rich people keeping their money abroad. Then when it is about anti-Semitic remarks from a labour politician suddenly they are all out to get Corbyn.
Fred, I don’t think Ken Livingstone acted wisely in making the remark he did, but it was over in about a second and a half and in my view it was quite deliberately seized upon by John Mann in order to pick an extremely public fight and precisely to provoke the kind of media controversy that has now happened.
I will go so far as to say that I think Mann probably co-ordinated plans for his performance beforehand with people like Streeting. And I certainly believe that certain media commentators – Nick Ferrari and Iain Dale, for example – have deliberately assisted to prolong the matter in order to damage Corbyn. I had a peculiar sense of unreality listening to various news programmes yesterday. No commentator appeared to pay the slightest attention to the fact that Livingstone was, or even might have been, correct in what he said. Nor did they have anything to say about Mann’s astonishing antics, which I would have thought was absolutely the most newsworthy performance of the decade. It was all about why Corbyn took five hours to suspend Livingstone and whether or not this was evidence of anti-Semitism within the Labour Left. It felt rather dreamlike. Once or twice the question of whether Livingstone was correct was raised, and it was immediately choked off as irrelevant. It was as if media and political commentating alike were following a kind of directed script. I am sure that wasn’t the case, but it really was very strange.
The media act like a herd because they are a herd and always have been.
One day the right wing gets bad press for doing what the right does and the next the left wing gets bad press for doing what the left does and next week it’s fish and chip wrappers.
Fred.
Then the following week the media, broadcasts #SNPBAD . ?
The media are acting like a herd, alright but I’m not sure that most journalists have a clue what is going on. Not thinking too much is a very useful survival technique for those working for people like Murdoch or the BBC- they tend to put the broader questions aside and concentrate on the detail. This is why there is so much idle nonsense about Livingstone “causing offence” or “bad taste” the real issues, such as the historical record, which confirms Livingstone’s position, or even the obvious probability-that enemies of the Jews would wish them to go away, are not considered.
The sad reality is that the amorality and irresponsibility of so many workers in media-Just doing my job, mate- is very reminiscent of the manner in which European Academia collapsed into complicity when the guy issuing the pay cheques put on a uniform and start saluting.
JSD,
Like you, I believe Mr. Mann should be expelled from the Labour Party. Indeed, I’ll go further is saying all the Blairite malcontents should be expelled from the Labour Party. Obviously, for making said statement no doubt I’ll be accused of ‘anti-semitism’ judging by the appalling article Marina Hyde has penned in Saturday’s The Guardian: “Two men dancing in their underwear – Boris and Ken.”
Note how they are now trying not only to undermine the Labour Party leader, but also undermine the supporters of those who desire to leave a corrupt and anti-democratic EU. Talk about killing two birds with one stone!
Bloody disgusting, but at least the we now know what lies at the heart of all this bullshite. In a nutshell, neither the Labour Party or socialists in general are anti-semitic, and to draw that conclusion is an outright lie of mythical proportions.
.
Typical authoritarian mindset I’m afraid – how else does someone who has already announced that they intend to vote against Labour think they have any right to say who should and should not be a member of the party.
@RD,
Given I have here on my email system a letter from the Labour Party informing me as a lifelong Labour Party voter that my vote for Corbyn/Watson in the last Labour Party leadership election was ‘voided’ because I allegedly as a lifelong socialist and Labour Party voter did not share the aims and ambition of the Labour Party just about sums it all up. Essentially I was one of the ‘blacklisted’. Now fuck off.
Well done you. There is obviously an existential panic going on in NuLabour, and about time too. I’m not a member of the SPGB, and have no particular axe to grind, in addition to being profoundly cynical about idealistic groups on the left, but you may find the principles outlined here of interest, even as you continue to vote for anyone who looks like a Corbynite in national elections:
http://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/
From what I have seen you do not share the aims and values of the Labour Party. (see below)
Aims and Values
1. The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour, we achieve more than we achieve alone so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.
2. To these ends we work for:
•a dynamic economy, serving the public interest, in which the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition are joined with the forces of partnership and co-operation to produce the wealth the nation needs and the opportunity for all to work and prosper, with a thriving public sector and high quality services, where those undertakings essential to the common good are either owned by the public or accountable to them;
•a just society, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work; which nurtures families, promotes equality of opportunity and delivers people from the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power
•an open democracy, in which government is held to account by the people; decisions are taken as far as practicable by the communities they affect; and where fundamental human rights are guaranteed;
•a healthy environment, which we protect, enhance and hold in trust for future generations.
3. Labour is committed to the defence and security of the British people, and to cooperating in European institutions, the United Nations, the Commonwealth and other international bodies to secure peace, freedom, democracy, economic security and environmental protection for all.
4. Labour will work in pursuit of these aims with trade unions, co-operative societies and other affiliated organisations, and also with voluntary organisations, consumer groups and other representative bodies.
5. On the basis of these principles, Labour seeks the trust of the people to govern.
Blimey, how many of the Labour Right could be said to share all those values?
“power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few”
“with a thriving public sector and high quality services, where those undertakings essential to the common good are either owned by the public or accountable to them”
“a just society, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work”
“delivers people from the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power”
“where fundamental human rights are guaranteed”
“a healthy environment, which we protect, enhance and hold in trust for future generations”
Laudable sentiments: I wonder if most people think they are a legacy which Blair left to the Labour Party, and I wonder if most people think Jeremy Corbyn, or, say, Ed Miliband or Chuka Umunna are more likely to act as a good steward for them.
No problems to report here, Chris. Jihad Jezza is ensconced right where we want him 😀
4. Labour will work in pursuit of these aims with trade unions, co-operative societies and other affiliated organisations, and also with voluntary organisations, consumer groups and other representative bodies.
And…
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2015/03/24/list-of-labour-cash-donors-non-trade-union/
Anon1.
Here you go Hindu man hacked to death in Bangladesh for supporting the LGBTI community the report claims several other men were also murdered.
Meanwhile Bangladesh’s best known blogger said he had received a death threat on Sunday.
Imran Sarker, who led major protests by secular activists in 2013 against Islamist leaders, said he had received a phone call warning that he would be killed “very soon”.
Suspected extremists in Bangladesh are gaining a sense of security that they can carry out killings with impunity, say the report.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-36128729
@RD,
May I remind you that us ‘anti-Blairites’, that is those who abandoned Blair Labour because of its leaderships greed and continued warmongering had an olive leaf issued to us by Harriot Harman at the early stages of the Labour leadership election, so many of the Blair Refuseniks returned to the Labour fold via the £3.00 supporter of Labour method to vote in the election. Now, as it became clear none of the three Blaire candidates was going to win as Corbyn gained traction all sorts of dirty tricks were deployed to stop tens of thousands voting for Mr. Corbyn – indeed, the hysteria of the Blairites and establishment was a disgrace. Now, my money and my vote were initially accepted, and then I was purged and my vote rescinded, despite following the rules myself as a former longstanding Party member, and as someone who actually voted for the Blair/Prescott ticked after John Smiths death. Blair sold all out for COIN and I’m ashamed to say I ever voted for the bastard. Now, fool me once, but please don’t try fool me twice. As far as I’m concerned I’d burn Blair and his fucking wife at a stake, that’s how much I detest him and his legion of supporters, none of whom in anyway can claim to be socialist, or for that matter left-of-centre.
Dislike of Blair is not why you were not allowed to vote – you either publicly supported someone opposing the Labour Party or publicly expressed opinions that were counter to the party’s aims and values. No smoke without fire I’m afraid.
This may or may not be a good moment to mention Blair’s securities brokerage, ABG, LLC, nearly wholly-owned by his Firerush Ventures No.3 LP, which is registered in Kansas City, Missouri (as good as a classical offshore). It’s licensed to perform private placements (deals involving securities transfers to invite-only buyers) and has a registered securities broker, as required by US law. Full details here:
http://brokercheck.finra.org/Firm/167190
This has never been listed by Blair or anyone else as being integral to his web of possible deception. Anyone who can make the information more widely known will have my blessing. What Blair can do in financial terms with a UK company is restricted by UK law, but Kansas City is a good deal more relaxed about its permissions. Peripheral and background material in Blair Miles, q.v..
@RD,
Unlike you old bean I post near enough everywhere under my real name, and in relation to the Labour Party, I was one of those who took to Twitter and Facebook and condemned my own Labour MP as a “Fucking Cunt”, “Class Traitor’ and “waste of space” for abstaining in the Parliamentary vote on the Tory Welfare Reform Bill in July 2015 – all personal attacks undertaken again using my real name, unlike cowards such as yourself.
I shall continue to fight for a more egalitarian and democratic society and oppose Blaitites, Tories, Zionists, greedy fuckers and warmongers until my last dying breath, whereupon I trust my daughter will continue the good struggle.
Now, as with Habbakuk and others, until you utilise your real name, rather than a coward’s pseudonym, anything you post on these boards is treated with the contempt they deserve – you are but an arsewipe of the establishment and my class enemy period. Now either grow a pair or fuck off.
The same fucking right as the Blairite scum who blacklisted me and rescinded my vote for Corbyn and accused me, a lifelong Labour Party voter, long time member and actual activist, of not supporting the Socialist aims of the Labour Party.
Which is a fucking laugh given I’m a lifelong socialist, former head of my University’s Labour Party Club and someone who canvased for the Labour Party throughout the 80’s and 90’s. Again, I have zero tolerance for Blairites, and you sir are a fucking Blaire, so get out of my Party please and go form your own Greed and warmongering Party, for you and your ilk do not represent the Labour Movement in the UK, a movement I’m a member of because of birth, that is I’m bloody working class and proud of the fact.
Clearly you missed the bit in the values section about
“where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.”
No mate, I think the fucking Blairites missed the ‘values, aims and socialist ambitions’ bit associated with the Labour Movement, which is why, and despite overwhelming public opposition, Blair and his legion of cohorts, among them you, took our nation to war against Iraq on a tissue of lies and deceit. Please don’t lecture as you are gutless and a typical middle class liberal in the wrong political grouping I’m afraid.
Agreed, John. I was wondering too about a possible defamation case. Millions have heard Mann call Livingstone a “Nazi apologist”, and I am quite sure there is no evidence whatsoever to support that deeply insulting, damaging and false accusation. I hope Ken considers the possibility of a defamation suit.
Some of us remember when Jim Allen was also called “anti-Semitic” because he wrote a play called “Perdition” about what happened to hundreds of thousands of Jews in Hungary.
“Every time a story like this happens, when Jewish power whacks a British politician openly”
This anti-Semite defends someone against accusations of anti-Semitism. Tells you all you need to know about what he really thinks.
Anon1.
What Ken Livingstone said, especially on live tv (the Politics show) regarding trying to defend Naz Shah, was borderline stupid. Livingstone should also have known better not to get drawn into a debate (on live tv) on Hitler and his policies towards the Jewish people.
Having looked into Livingstone’s claims of Nazi Germany, and accords with Zionists, I discovered this.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haavara_Agreement
It of course in no way justifies any atrocities committed by the Nazi’s.
“I think Livingstone should see Mann in court for slander.”
Yes JSD plumps for litigation once again. No surprise there! You really are an inadequate little man.
You, of course, are as brave as a barrelful of bears. Anon1.
Next you’ll be suing me for calling you a litigious little shit.
Sure, sure, sure. Calm down and clean the foam off, Anon1.
If you’re referring back to an earlier posting, you’re too inadequate to remember what you actually called me. In any case, can’t sue someone if you don’t know who they are.
Some people on here express views which are highly controversial and unpopular with the public, and possibly employers might look a bit askance at the risk of continuing with them. I understand that. You, on the other hand, never say anything that would in the slightest upset any gold-plated member of the establishment who could be persuaded to give you a miserable tuppence for it. You have no excuse whatever for your cowardly anonymity. So when you start posting under your own name, chicken shit, perhaps I might start listening to you.
@JSD,
Nice put down of Anon1, given the likes of RD and Anon1, are supportive of the establishment, I do find if funny how they refuse to actually reveal themselves and post under their real names, it’s not as if they face blowback or persecution for their views from their masters. As such, whilst I understand some posters are fearful for their views given they may lose their job for holding said views, that does not apply to the Establishment arsewipes who post on these boards parroting their masters point of view – indeed, it would probably advance their careers as ‘class traitors’ to put their name to the tripe they peddle.
They may be afraid of revealing that different people post under the same screen name.
“it’s not as if they face blowback or persecution for their views from their masters”
I very much doubt that my masters would regard my views as establishment ones (not that I hide them if we get into discussion on politics), but they would not be over keen on them being known to clients and becoming a focus of discussion rather than business. When I was a student I worked as a barman and I was told by someone quite wise never to discuss religion or politics as that is not what most customers want to hear about.
Perhaps I could retire early and reveal my identity and then live earnings from being libelled by the likes of Chris Rogers. I don’t think most people who know me and are not members of the 0.01% of ersatz lefties who populate this blog would consider my views to be establishment ones – and Mr Putin and his thugs certainly wouldn’t.
John, the political and media dishonesty is truly disgusting and filthy, but NOT at all ‘astonishing’. It’s simply Standard Operating Procedure for liars and hyopcrites who know who signs their pay-cheques.
The ‘instrumentalisation’ of a relationship gone sour, dare I say more here…
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/germany-begins-to-look-critically-at-support-for-israel-a-1090044.html
I appear to have had a post deleted for calling N*t*ny*hu an *nt*s*m*te. But are his policies actually benefiting J*ws? It’s a question which deserves consideration.
I had one deleted with the Balfour declaration, a little reminder for Israel to recite daily, but it failed to make the moderation.
N_ had also a couple of posts stuck in moderation.
One possible reason for these shills’ apparent poor memory is that different people post under their screen names at different times.
I had a posting deleted where I quoted Rudolf Hess saying at a Nuremberg rally that his country’s goal was to be a homeland for all Germans all over the world.
@ Israel April 30, 2016 at 13:27
‘Paul, when the ancient tribes of Canaan come forward I’ll find myself in a pickle. But till that happens you just look like a fool who knows not how to make a good argument’
I’m sure you don’t lose much sleep over the possibility of hordes of Canaanites demanding the ‘Right of Return”, because ‘G*d’s’ ‘Chosen Genocidists’ made sure that wouldn’t occur.
‘..not how to make a good argument’
I think it’s a jolly good one against your ‘…as did modern day Arabs themselves not colonize the Middle East by slaughtering whole villages, we must all bear the consequences of the actions of previous generations…’
Anyone who has any Jewish link, no matter how tenuous, is welcome into Israel under the ‘Right to Return’, but Arabs whose ancestors have relatively recently been forced to flee Palestine in the face of Jewish massacres cannot return?
And you might like this: ‘European link to Jewish maternal ancestry’:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24442352
Give me one good reason why ‘Jews’ have the ‘Right of Return’, but not Arabs? You conceded you’d be in a pickle if a Caananite descendent arrived.
@ N_ April 30, 2016 at 08:37
‘Thanks for this, @Paul Barbara. Interesting info on the USS LIberty. That attack that went on for so long could not possibly have been a case of misidentification.
Have you studied Jewish religious apocalypticism too? I’d be interested to hear your take on it.’
No, I haven’t studied Jewish religious apocalypticism, I’m afraid, but as a Christian I have a passing knowledge of the ‘Old Testament’ – I must say it does not impress me.
Re the ‘Liberty’, you really should read ‘Operation Cyanide’ by Peter Hounam; ask for it at your local library – it would be interesting to see if they have it; if they don’t, ask them to get it for you.
In the interim, a very good BBC Documentary ‘Dead in the Water’ can be seen here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjOH1XMAwZA
I don’t feel at all sorry for Craig. He has smeared so many people he disagrees with as “far-right” and so often conflated criticism of Islamic extremism with “Islamophobia” and “racism” that I really couldn’t give a toss how he is treated. He also calls for personal attacks on Tories and those against Scotch nationalism and so he can go stuff himself as far as I am concerned. I don’t respect him any longer.
Latest bullshit in the Guardian,the leader of the Israeli Labour party and the country’s opposition, Isaac Herzog says,“While Ken Livingstone is surely antisemitic beyond hope of redemption……”
Herzog recently said he doesn’t want his party to be seen as a bunch of “Arab lovers.”
@ Israel April 30, 2016 at 13:09
‘Paul, the term “Native Palestinians” includes Jews. It was only after the establishment of Israel that Jews became “Israelis” and the Arab population adopted the term “Palestinian”.
Although the Jews predate the Arab and Muslim culture that colonized this region, it doesn’t matter now and the fact is that today both Jews and Arabs can be considered native to this land.
As for Ethiopians. Like all immigrants anywhere in the world, especially immigrants who come with an extreme culture and education gap, they certainly have their challenges. But the fact is that if you ask any Ethiopian Jew about his identity, whether he is a proud Israeli and whether he feels a part of this country, chances are he’ll say yes.
It amazes me the number of people in this discussion who preach to me about the country I live in. If this discussion was about Kenya, Finland, India, or someplace, I would be curious to actually ask questions rather than have the arrogance to throw around claims based on shit I read in the paper.
What a group of arrogant patronizing “Europeans” you are – no different from your colonizing forefathers…’
‘..the term “Native Palestinians” includes Jews. It was only after the establishment of Israel that Jews became “Israelis” and the Arab population adopted the term “Palestinian”…’
Sure, just as people living in the area only became Muslim after conversion, but they were still there.
Britons only became known as such after ‘Britain’ was established, as Germans only became known as Germans when Germany was established.
Point is, why can one group have unfettered ‘Right of Return’ (even a convert to Judaism from Tierra del Fuego or the Solomon Islands) but other groups whose ancestors lived in the area in the recent or historic past don’t?
‘..It amazes me the number of people in this discussion who preach to me about the country I live in. If this discussion was about Kenya, Finland, India, or someplace, I would be curious to actually ask questions rather than have the arrogance to throw around claims based on shit I read in the paper.
What a group of arrogant patronizing “Europeans” you are – no different from your colonizing forefathers…’
A good portion of the info we use is by Israelis who tell the truth about what is going on in Israel, many of whom live there. Asking you something about Israel is like asking Larry Silverstein or Dick Cheney something about what happened on 9/11.
‘…around claims based on shit I read in the paper…’
As I’m sure you are aware, most ‘shit’ we read in the paper is pro-Israeli…
‘..What a group of arrogant patronizing “Europeans” you are – no different from your colonizing forefathers…’
I personally deplore the colonising ‘British Empire’, and the ‘Roman Empire’, and the colonisation of North and South America, South Africa, Congo, Australia and New Zealand, Muslim conquests etc.
Straying off the Israel/Zionist/Jewish thing, for a moment, which can become overbearing at times.
The BBC”s World Service, reported that Venezuela, is suffering greatly from the reduced oil price, add to that, a severe drought has seen power levels plumment, due to hydro-electric fed dams drying up.
The Venezuelan population, are also up in arms that Caracas (the capital) has not seen a reduction of power supply whilst provincial areas have. A petition has been set up to remove the current president, (Maduro) and has reached almost 700,000 signatures.
Venezuela could be ripe for a coup.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/protests-erupt-venezuela-power-crisis-deepens-160429072951748.html
Yes RepublicofScotland, not could, but most likely in all probably be victim of a CIA/US-led coup, just like the one Hilary Clinton led in Honduras there is also the little question of the US-led embargo against Venezuela, which adds to their economic woes greatly.
Much of South/Central America that managed to free themselves are under threat of being returned to control of local elites, US and corporate/banks plunder and their efforts to raise the living standards of the people curtailed or snuffed out. Citizens have to be convinced or forced to know that getting healthcare, basic services, education, books, democracy and control of their lives etc. is only for those better off than the majority. Brazil committed a particularly grave crime, it joined BRICS. The South American spring is becoming another winter of horror they had only brief respite from so still much still to do. Tragic.
I am currently reading Andre Vltchek’s book ‘Exposing Lies of the Empire’. A series of reports written 2012 – Dec 2014 as he continues his travels constantly roaming the world, writing and reporting on what he sees and hears and the changes over time. Very raw and passionate writing and even if you have an awareness of what goes on in our names, it has some shocks. He writes especially passionately and movingly about South/Central America.
http://paulflynnmp.typepad.com/
Thank you for the post, it’s a great shame my own constituency in Torfaen does not have a Labour MP in the mood of Mr. Flynn, instead we have a Blairite apologist who lacks balls I’m afraid to say.
Lack of balls is one tragedy of this awful situation. There is great power in numbers if people step up in solidarity. I salute those who do and especially Jewish people. Strangely, letters such as that rarely get any press so I make it my business to share them.
Jamie Stern-Weiner. https://jamiesternweiner.wordpress.com/2016/04/29/ken-livingstone-gobshite-yes-antisemite-no/
This doesn’t seem like the work of a Blairite apologist
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/dec/28/nye-political-life-of-aneurin-bevan-review-nicklaus-thomas-symonds-chris-mullin
Perhaps the real reason why you were not accepted was your support of the Green Party
RD,
Until you grow a pair of testicles and post under your real name, as I unashamedly do, please fuck off as your opinion is that of a piece of toilet paper, namely to be flushed down a toilet as human waste. Case rested, a waste of space and coward!
Oh dear – I win.
Baal
You wrote about “Israel” as follows:
“A long way down the list of things I believe comes the proposition that some random punter in Israel gives a flying one about what is said by commenters on this blog.”
_________________________
Whereabouts on your list comes the proposition that an Oxford Greatsman (college undisclosed) and holder of several “higher degrees” turned US Navy officer turned Washington DC lawyer gives a flying one about what is said by commenters in this blog?
LOL. Fair dig. Somewhere about the same level, I guess.
🙂
If UK sends an ardent Zionist as its own ambassador to Israel, there is surely a problem, considering that Israel declares itself (and, worse, is considered by many Jews, who enforce a tribal fealty to Israel upon other Jews) the nation-state of the Jewish people; and that problem is one of confliuct of interest. From whom does this ambassador take his orders? Whom does he represent? Of course, this “problem” appears to be somewhat moot as so many politicians in UK have tied themselves so tightly to Israel (as USA politicians have mostly done) that the interests of UK and of Israel, or at least of their politicians in this neoliberal age, needs must be seen as one and the same.