Fighting Back for the Right to Support Palestine 542

Last week, Israel bulldozed twelve Palestinian homes in Area C of the illegally occupied West Bank to make way for new illegal settlement building, while two Palestinian minors were killed by the Israeli Defence Forces.

This makes it a totally unexceptional week for the Palestinians. It has not however been an unexceptional week for Palestinian supporters in the UK, who have suffered the most vicious coordinated media witch hunt in memory. Two things are happening. The Blairites are trying to engineer a coup against Corbyn by sabotaging Labour in forthcoming elections, while the Israeli lobby seek to discredit all supporters of the Palestinians as anti-semites, including people like me who have no connection to the Labour Party.

The Daily Mail’s Jake Wallis Simons has been at the forefront of this campaign. He implied I am an anti-semite on television. Two years ago in Israel he gave an interview to Haaretz newspaper of which this is a snippet

Screenshot (22)

Now consider if we apply this transposition. It makes plain just how astonishing Wallis Simons’ admission is:

“He and his classmates at his Islamic school would debate which side they would support if Britain and Syria went to war. The consensus, he recalls, was that they would throw their lot in with Syria.”

There is no doubt at all that a Muslim who published this would instantly be arrested and taken for police questioning, to see if their extremist religious indoctrination at school and their fantasies of fighting against Britain meant that they remained a threat. There is no doubt whatsoever that the Islamic school in question would be subject to intense investigation – no matter how long ago the incident was. Almost certainly the Governors would be suspended in the interim and the inquiry extended to similar schools. There is no doubt whatsoever that Mr Wallis Simons’ own Daily Mail would be proclaiming in lurid banner headlines about this Islamic danger.

If the Prevent programme were not in fact purely Islamophobic in both construction and content, action would have been taken against such schools which inculcate anti-British feelings and philosophies. Wallis Simons would have been questioned. But no, it appears some religious extremism is OK, and only some is frowned upon. A Muslim could not publish what Wallis Simons publishes, let alone occupy well paid roles in the UK corporate media.

In the Haaretz article, the Daily Mail’s Wallis Simons expresses regret at having published his anti-British views. But note the grounds on which he regrets. Because it is “too personal” and because people “keep digging it up” when he writes on the Middle East. It “undermines everything”: in other words it reduces his influence in the UK.

He does not say in Haaretz that he no longer holds the same views. Rather he shows concern that, because people can discover that view, the value and influence of his pro-Israeli propaganda is diminished in the UK. It is also interesting that in this article Simons refers to the West Bank as Samaria – the term is only used by those Zionists who claim that all of the West Bank is an integral part of Israel.

At this stage I should very much like, in all fairness, to read the Guardian article referenced by Haaretz to see if in that article he says he has changed his mind and, as someone who was born a Londoner and has lived all his life in Britain, his allegiance is firmly to Britain and not to Israel. I can perhaps understand he would not say that to Haaretz while promoting his book sales in Israel. But I cannot find the Guardian article anywhere online.


The article incriminating Wallis Simons appears shortly after his Haaretz interview to have vanished from the internet, even from the Wayback machine and Given that it must have been very controversial, it has left astonishingly little trace. You can find the odd tantalising reference here or there, but the link never works, and not only to the Guardian. Here is but one example of am entry we found:

Jake Wallis Simons (biographical details)
This is a biographical profile of Jake Wallis Simons. … When British author and journalist Jake Wallis … they would support if Britain and Israel went to war.

But when you try that link, you cannot get the page, and the same is true of everything else online that looks like it is going to reveal Wallis Simons’ once public declaration.

Wallis Simons complained to Haaretz that “whenever I write about the Middle East, people dig it up”. And yet we have found it impossible to dig up. In fact is appears that very substantial effort must have been put in to expunging from the internet all trace that Wallis Simons ever wrote it. That is really hard to do, and requires a great deal of resources, and probably the collusion of The Guardian.

Obviously to preserve Wallis Simons’ effectiveness as an Israeli propagandist, it was considered worth those resources.

I do hope that by now you have been angry with me for not putting a link to the Haaretz article and only giving you highly selective quotations. I have done this deliberately, just to make plain how entirely unfair it is as a technique. Simons used this technique on me on Sky News by selectively quoting one phrase – not even the whole sentence – out of context to show I was an anti-Semite who sneered at the “tribe” of Israel. Out of context this part sentence was so outrageous I did not recognise it, and I called Mr Simons a liar, in which I was wrong. He then went on twitter to tweet around a tiny snippet of what I had written, causing the expected stream of abusive tweets to come my way.

Screenshot (27)

My response was to republish the entire post, acknowledging that Mr Simons did not lie but putting the phrase in its context. Mr Simons has nevertheless said that he will sue me, and I look forward to that. But unlike Mr Simons – who has still never given a link to my full article from which he took the phrase out of context to misrepresent me – I do not cheat and distort in argument, so his full Haaretz interview is here.

Indeed, could I find anywhere that Mr Simons had said that he retracts his view and that he would not fight for Israel against the UK, I would very definitely publish that too in the interests of fairness. But I simply cannot find it.


What is particularly infuriating about Simons is that “divided loyalties” is indeed a trope that has been used against Jews – and against Catholics and immigrant groups – by racists over the years. By his stupid point about once wanting to fight Britain for Israel, Simons reinforces and perpetuates this trope. This is infuriating to those of us campaigning for a peaceful multicultural Britain, just as infuriating as it is when our efforts against Islamophobia are undermined by the occasional Islamic extremist doing something stupid.

In this context, my article from which Simons extracted one phrase is extremely revealing in its subject matter. He chose an article in which I attacked a statement by Israeli economics minister Naftali Bennett. Responding to criticism of Netanyahu by Obama’s White House, Bennett said:

“The prime minister [Netanyahu] is not a private person but the leader of the Jewish state and the whole Jewish world. Such severe insults towards the prime minister of Israel are hurtful to millions of Israeli citizens and Jews all over the world.”

This statement is completely unacceptable. Benjamin Netanyahu is not the leader of British Jews, and Israel does not lead “the whole Jewish world”. All of the British Jews I know would utterly repudiate, and be horrified by, the idea that Benjamin Netanyahu is their leader. Jewish British people are British, just like Black, Asian or other British people. They are British not Israeli. For an Israeli minister to claim leadership of all Jews in the world absolutely cannot be admitted. But – and this is the important point – it is exactly the same argument as the contention by Jake Wallis Simons that he, a British Jew, would have fought for Israel against the land of his birth.

It is exactly the same argument that Israeli and Jew are synonymous, and therefore to attack Israel is anti-Semitism. It is exactly the same argument that Jew equals Israel so anti-Zionism equals anti-Semitism. It is exactly the same argument the entire corporate and mainstream media have been drumming into our heads 24 hours a day. And the object is to outlaw any criticism of Israel or active support for the Palestinians. The object is to make Zionism compulsory, at the very least as political correctness, and there are rumblings that anti-Zionism should be made illegal.

It only appears surprising that those of us who have fought all racism – including anti-Semitism – our entire lives, now come under attack. It is not surprising when you look in to the motives of those who lead the attack; they are supporting a racist, apartheid state. We should stop being defensive and shout this from the rooftops. In an appalling article in the Guardian, Gaby Hinsliff listed use of #apartheidIsrael as an indicator of anti-Semitism. Even more astonishing, Jonathan Freedland wrote in the same newspaper that we are hypocrites for attacking Israel, which is only doing what Australia, Canada and the USA did to their indigenous populations. He did not acknowledge that these were appalling crimes, subject of recent historic apologies and the source of much shame. Nor that the world is supposed to have moved on from Imperialism.

The media onslaught against Palestine is as unrelenting as it is intellectually bankrupt.

To finish with Jake Wallis Simons, he is a major figure in the anti-Palestine barrage. Wallis Simons was the author of the highly tendentious Daily Mail article of 7 August 2015 headlined “Jeremy Corbyn’s “longstanding links” with notorious Holocaust denier and his “anti-Semitic” organisation revealed.” The inverted commas are in the original headline and they are sure signs that the Mail’s lawyers have pointed out something is completely untrue – so they indicate the Mail is only “reporting an accusation”. This article was the origin of the joint Israel/Blairite campaign which has been gathering momentum ever since, up until the current explosion of orchestrated media hatred against Palestine supporters.

Precisely what is happening became much more obvious this week with the revelation that Alex Chalmers, the Oxford student who had made the entirely unsubstantiated claims of anti-Semitism at Oxford University, had previously been an intern at BICOM, the oligarch funded Israeli propaganda outfit (officially the British Israel research and Communications Centre). Possibly the best-funded lobby group in UK politics, BICOM has contributed funding and trips to Israel to many of the Blarities involved in the present propaganda blitz.


Chalmers’ claims have been central to all published accounts of “Labour anti-semitism” and were used by Cameron to attack Corbyn in the Commons. University authorities have found no evidence to back Chalmers’ claims and his main complaint was that there had been an Israeli Apartheid week held by students. In fact his claim depends entirely on the notion that to criticise Israel is anti-Semitism. A theme is emerging here. BICOM is also the organisation which funded Adam Werrity to accompany Liam Fox to Israel, and to which Hillary Benn said shortly before his Syria War speech “we must seek to take on those who seek to delegitimise the state of Israel”

Which gives us yet another pointer. The cheerleaders of the current “anti-Semitism” witch-hunt have a 99% correlation with the supporters and cheerleaders of the Iraq war, and their targets are, I believe without any exception, opponents of the Iraq War. This is in part a kind of twisted revenge for having been shown, not least in the last couple of days, to have been hopelessly wrong about Iraq. The wound of being labelled with that monstrous policy failure has fatally undermined the Blairites. Now they delude themselves that they have unanimous mainstream media “vindication”, because all their opponents were just racists all along!

I make not one penny from expressing my views to the public for the purpose of debate. This blog does not even have adverts. I have no official position. There is nothing from which I can be expelled. I am not scared of courts. We face an attempt to make it compulsory to support Zionism. To make it impossible to stand up for the rights of the Palestinians. Yet that campaign is led by a totally self-centred and isolated metropolitan elite, who cannot understand that on Palestine as on so much else they do not represent us. I shall not be intimidated into abandoning my campaigning against apartheid Israel, and nor will many others. The battle for truth is a hard one at the moment, but we will prevail.

542 thoughts on “Fighting Back for the Right to Support Palestine

1 3 4 5
    • BrianFujisan

      its a Great Piece

      I just sent you a link to your above post on the Pew Poll he mentions

  • BrianFujisan


    You might find this piece informative Re the deciet over Drawing of Borders-

    Israel’s declaration of sovereign borders on May 14, 1948 was a deception practiced upon President Truman and the rest of the world, designed to elicit recognition of Israel. Israel never had an intention to stick to those borders. Since those days, Israel and its Zionist supporters have practiced another deception: that the border definition never happened.

    How did such a nonsensical and easily disproved idea become something that “everyone knows”? And “everyone” includes some surprising people: the historian Avi Shlaim, Professor at Oxford University, said in an interview that “the Armistice Lines are the only internationally recognized borders that Israel ever had”; John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer and Palestinian adviser, has said that “Israel has never defined its own borders, an act that would necessarily place limits on them”; Uri Avnery, veteran Israeli journalist, politician and peace activist, has said that “from its first day, the State of Israel has refused to fix its borders”; Jeremy R. Hammond, editor of Foreign Policy Journal, in his book The Rejection of Palestinian Self Determination (Chapter IV) says, of the creation of Israel, “significantly, no borders for the newly proclaimed state were specified”; John B. Judis, political historian, in his recent book Genesis about Truman, Zionism, and the creation of Israel, discusses the events of May 14, 1948 in Washington (page 317), mentioning that Clifford worked with Epstein on the letter asking for recognition, but shows no knowledge of its content and gives no reference to the text.

    Provision of misleading information, such as the article about Israel’s Declaration of Independence discussed above, is one Zionist propaganda technique, but the main one is simple silence and suppression of information.

    I may be exaggerating somewhat by describing Epstein’s letter to Truman as “hidden”, since it has been in the public domain since May 15, 1948, but for a document of such historic significance it has a very low profile on the internet. As far as I can determine there is not a single Israel Government or Zionist website which mentions this letter when talking about the foundation of the State of Israel and Truman’s recognition. The full text appears on only three well-known websites: as an unsearchable facsimile of the original in the Truman library; the Avalon project at Yale Law School; and in the Jewish Virtual Library, where it is indexed only as a “Letter from Provisional Government to USA” and nowhere are its contents or significance discussed. Otherwise it appears mostly on blogs, news archives and discussions.

    Active suppression also takes place. I have sometimes entered a polite and relevant comment, quoting the first sentence of the letter, into the website Times of Israel, to find that it has quickly been moderated out.

    My second document, Epstein’s telegram to Shertok, is both a fascinating piece of history and of great importance since it confirms that the US would not have recognized Israel if it had not defined its borders according to the UN partition lines. This one has really been well hidden. A link to it, as an unsearchable facsimile, first appeared in 2012 in a story on the website of the Israel State Archivist (Document No. 3). Until now, the only other links to it on the internet have been from my own writings, and the only plain text copy of the document on the internet has been on my website.

    Summary of conclusions

    The Zionist leadership did not want to define the borders of Israel when they declared independence from the rest of Palestine on May 14, 1948, but were forced to specify borders according to the UN Partition Plan in order to achieve recognition by the USA. The territory captured by Israel outside these borders in the 1948-49 war and incorporated de facto into Israel was obtained by war in violation of the fundamental principles of the UN Charter. Since 1949 Israel has attempted, very successfully, to convince the world that this border definition never happened in order to hide the fact that the captured territory is outside Israel’s declared and recognized sovereign borders and is therefore rightfully part of the territory of Palestine, within which the Palestinian people have the right of self-determination. Although the Palestinian leadership has accepted that Israel can keep this territory in a peace agreement, there is a very strong case for compensation for its loss in the form of a transfer of Israeli territory in the southern Negev to Palestinian sovereignty.

    For more details on the topic of this essay please see my website article The Borders of Israel and Palestine.

    – See more at:

    • Andy

      That’s very interesting. It is extraordinary, the Zionists declared their independent Jewish state on May 14, Truman then recognises the provisional governmnt as the “de facto authority” of the State of Israel.

      So the question I ask, since Isreal didn’t exist as a sovereign state in May 1948, a US president alone cannot create a sovereign state, what did the Arab armies attack?

        • Andy

          Yes, didn’t go to link, read the whole piece now, fascinating, I only knew some of the story, but here, quote, ”It is sometimes asked whether the creation of Israel was legal. The answer is that it was neither legal nor illegal, because there is no system of law governing the creation of states. Israel exists as a sovereign state because it satisfied the requirements of the Montevideo Convention, and was recognized as such by other states.”

          Tough on May 14th, as far as I know, only Truman recognised The State of Israel. The US president isn’t THE US government. What authority did he have to recognise Israel?

          link to the Montevideo Convention….

    • Mulga Mumblebrain

      Brian, Eretz Yisrael has always been defined as ‘..from the Nile to the Euphrates’. Some ultras also claim the Arabian Peninsula. The Deputy Knesset Speaker Smotrich recently declared on Israeli TV that Damascus belongs to the Jews, and Begin was reviled for turning over the Sinai under Carter’s pressure, but replied that it was a tactical move, while ‘Judea and Samaria’ were being annexed.

    • Chris Rogers


      Many thanks for bringing this to our attention.

      Further, I particularly liked the ‘comments’ themselves and your own willingness to engage, which further adds to my own annoyance that anyone one who challenges the official memes and narrative with regards Israel and the founding of the Israeli State is deemed a ‘anti-semite’, which is a staggering suggestion to make.

  • N_

    I’m going to stop posting here for a while, because my comments haven’t been posted in which I’ve talked about the extremely strong racism that is prevalent in Jewish culture, which I consider to be a major issue in the world. Unfortunately only very few Jews are willing to oppose that racism in a thoroughgoing way, and those who do so tend to drop the Jewish identity and stop being Jews. (Gilad Atzmon is a good example.) Those who oppose racism do NOT say things like “as Jews, we have a duty to show a lead in the struggle against racism”. On the contrary, such an attitude makes them want to vomit. They despise the deceitful practice of appearing in such a way just to “make the Jews look good”, so as not to be a “shanda fur die goyim”.

    I would encourage people to read the writings of Gilad Atzmon, and also the book by Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion.

    Those anti-racists who aren’t Jews tend to shy away from the issue because a) they don’t know much about the extent of Jewish racism in Jewish culture and their jaws would drop if they ever found out (goyim? yoks? shiksas? find out how these terms are used, if you’re interested), and b) they’re afraid of being called names. That is a sad situation.

    They don’t know how the religion functions either. Shahak did – he hated the hypocrisy that is so prevalent in it, from the notices on the walls of banks declaring that lending at interest to other Jews was OK because rabbis said circumstances were “special”, to the use of “Sabbath goyim” on Saturdays. But more than this, he understood about how Zionism was a secular reformulation of religious racism. That is a very big topic, and the development from the “return to Palestine” to the apocalyptic prophecies in the religion is going to feature very large in the future. You really had better believe it. It is common nowadays for massacres by the Zionist army to be given religious operation names. Casual nuclear threats have also been made. More and more is coming out into the open, in the way that Jewish power operates in France, Britain and the United States. Expect more of this. Many Arabs use the term “Israel’s lawyers” to describe the US diplomats involved in supposed negotiations on Palestine, along with an occasional Blair. That doesn’t say the half of it. Francois Hollande, Angela Merkel, and David Cameron have been forced into showing humiliating public obeisance to what, if I recall correctly, George Galloway eloquently called a “neo-Nazi state”. (That said, the term is not perfect, and Zionist protagonists don’t view themselves as taking any of their ideas from goyim.)

    Before I go, I want to say something on the comparison that some anti-Zionists draw between Zionism and South African apartheid. There have been specious arguments here put forward by the uncompromising racists who are allowed to post here and who, as far as I know, haven’t had any comments stopped. They disgustingly raise the matter of the high black-on-black murder rate in places like Soweto, which simply isn’t the issue. These people think in racial terms first and foremost, so please let’s not imagine they don’t know what they are doing. Just compare the rate of Jews killing non-Jews in Palestine (i.e. Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem, and territories that have been under Zionist control since before 1967) with the rate of whites killing non-Whites in South Africa under apartheid. Disingenuous Zionazi filth always claim that they are being picked out by “anti-Semites”, and that nasty racism and stuff happens elsewhere in the world too, totally ignored by everyone who opposes Israel. But nothing in the last few generations has compared with the scale of Jewish nationalist crime in Palestine.

    So…in closing…good luck to Craig with this blog and best wishes to all anti-racists who post here. Never mind about small differences. Unity among those who are serious about anti-racism because they uphold universal humanitarian values is a good thing. Encourage BDS: boycott, divestment and sanctions against “Israel”. Delegitimise it. This is a crucial issue for the world, which is why the political culture is being rearranged to reduce and marginalise our scope for recognising it.

    • Miss Costello

      Another one bites the dust: the blog (in my opinion) all the poorer for it.

      Despite my initial wish to be so, I never did become a part / ‘mesh’ with this blog: I’ve nothing against strong language if it helps to hammer a point home, get a message across – (I’ve used it often enough myself, when ‘pushed’). Neither do I have a problem with passionately opposing points of view: what’s a blog without them?? The reason for my ever increasing retreat (in the main) was the merciless bullying of Mary (a terminally ill woman) with no *apparent* intervention on the part of the blog owner to (if not stop it altogether) at least CURB it. I saw none of it. If anything, it increased. Even *after* Mary left, it continued! Add to that, I simply couldn’t hack the *HABITUAL* filth emanating from that twisted sadistic’s vicious, lascivious,megalomaniac mouth. ‘Creaming ones pants” just *one* example. Considering I was brought up amongst the *humblest* of people, the rock of self respect became my Raison d’etre.

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        Why do you call yourself “Miss” when you are male?

        • Miss Costello

          You are a complete & utter imbecile. I was born female, I’ll die female. Why you should think otherwise is beyond me. It’s not the first time you’ve made this comment. ‘Fishing’ are we? Ok then: I’m ten feet tall and weigh 20 stone: with big black hairy legs and muscles (not breasts) the size of prize melons. Happy now, are we? Make the most of it. Over & out.

          • Habbabkuk (calling a spade a spade)

            Deny away.

            And, by the way, stop playing the pity card. Mary tried that as well and it didn’t get her anywhere as too many people saw through it.

  • N_

    I’ll be stopping posting here for a while, because of moderation policy. I hope my 9.09am post gets through. Best wishes to all the good people here – you know who you are!

    • nevermin

      N_ I also had a post disappear yesterday afternoon, it must have been so bad that i could not get back on this site, even after re-starting my computer.

      this site has been under scrutiny and it would be great hear some comments about this, it can’ t all be down to moderation.

      that said, it was great to read your comments, come bck soon.

    • Node

      I considered stopping too. Some of my posts about Israel have been deleted, apparently on the grounds that they are provocative, presumably towards other posters who defend Israel. Very ironic.

      However, although I would wish it otherwise, I have to acknowledge that discrimination against critics of Zionism is advisable even on a thread supporting criticism of Zionism. This blog will only survive as long as Craig keeps on the right side of a very thin ill-defined line. I suppose the mods are erring on the side of caution, so although I believe I have been treated unfairly, I have decided to bite the bullet and continue posting. Despite its flaws, this blog is still my most valuable window on the world beyond my personal experience.

      I’ve learned a lot from your posts, N_. I hope you come back soon.

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        Yes, Node, I always thought that you posted those lists of so-called Israeli “atrocities” from that dubious NZ website merely as a provocation. Very foolish of you.

        Perhaps you had forgotten Craig’s injunction that people should not merely cut-and-paste from other websites without adding a personal contribution or thought.

        Your personal contribution or thought consisted of a simple few words like “Here are the latest examples of Israeli genocide/atrocities”.

        Not good enough – and so your lists have been deleted.

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

      Good. And good riddance.

      Perhaps the Mods and Craig are fed up with the endless steam of racist filth (anti-Jew and anti-Israel filth) that you ‘ve been spewing out ever since your return to active posting*. I – and most decent people on here – certainly am.


      * I recall that you were active until I outed you in my public list of Eminences and their hangers-on while back. And then, from one day to the next, you vanished off the public radar. (But not other radars).

      • N_

        If poor ickle ultra-racist hasbaranik thinks I’m scared, why the need to threaten me? You’re the one who’s stuck, boy, so self-satisfied with the filthy work you do here, based on two or three dance moves. Radar isn’t so good at discovering intentions, whether it scans public communications and movements or so-called “private” ones. For that, you need humint. And that’s a field in which suffering from ultra-racist rabies, as you do, and considering your enemies all to be as thick as two short planks, as you do, are a hindrance.

    • Chris Rogers

      Thanks Bert, the fact remains, due to ‘auto correct’ that Blairites gets ‘auto-corrected’ and usually displays as ‘Blaires’, so it’s an eternal struggle to try and beat the auto system. Which, as you’ll note on the suggestions forums, I’ve requested if we can have a ‘edit’ facility, as other sites do. That said, as long as the meaning of our ‘intent’ is understood, not really necessary to worry too much, lest we all become pedants continually correcting all grammatical errors – this is a Blog after all!

    • Ba'al Zevul

      Not at all. A Blairity (pl. Blairities) is a Blair charity, identifiable by its vast output of ghostwritten publicity material and its invisible beneficiaries. For instance, the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. Always glad to help.

      • Chris Rogers

        As with many others, one often foams at the mouth at the merest hint of our former PM and one-time leader of the Labour Party. Indeed, is it possible ever for those of us seduced by the bugger into voting for him after John Smiths death to repent for our sins against humanity, that is, we enabled him to grasp power and utilise it in a manner that not only screwed many over, but resulted in millions of death?

  • Trowbridge H. Ford aka The Biscuit

    My, how you guys go on.

    Why not talk real problems, like the gigantic fires around Ft, McMurray, Alberta where a couple of friends live?

    They thought they had it made, with him working half the year, around the clock, in its oil fields, and they spending the rest of the year, vacationing in her home country, Thailand.

    Now his job is gone, the house burned down, and the Thai junta, cracking down on dissent, especially from Anglos.

    Must find out where they are, and if I can help.

  • Monteverdi

    Sometimes Israeli Zionists just have to admit the truth [ see above] before backtracking no doubt under intense political pressure . Meanwhile Zionist apologists refuse to acknowledge the truths being spoken by some leading Israelis even IDF Military Chiefs !! . That’s the problem with being a Zionist Apologist , the Israelis themselves keep on undermining your desperate propaganda .

    • Israel

      Monteverdi, you are referencing things you know nothing about but thank you for posting this.
      The deputy commander of the IDF was referring to hate speech, to hateful talkbacks on social media, to racist songs that football fans have been singing (things that are routine in the UK) but that in Israel creates harsh discourse.
      Holocaust Remembrance Day is a day that Israelis take for introspection to see how we fight against racism in our everyday lives. THat was what he tried to say rather clumsily (which is why he backtracked).
      The fact the the Deputy Commander of the IDF said it though demonstrates the extent of free expression and sensitivities to racism at the highest ranks in the IDF.
      So again, thank you for bringing this…

  • Trowbridge H. Ford aka The Biscuit

    Even the DM has descended to the depths with Chris Matthews dropping the ball when he ogled Melania Trump’s walk in triumph rather than push SS agent Clint Hill about Donald’s claims about Rafael Cruz, and what he thought happened on November 22, 1963 in Dallas.

    Just more of our living in assorted shit holes.

    • Trowbridge H. Ford aka The Biscuit

      What a load of shit, Israel.

      Your narrative justifies any opposed people wherever they go, and whatever they do, taking back whatever they want, like the native Australians kicking out all the recent arrivals, or the descendants of the Vikings laying claim to all of Europe and North America..

    • Chris Rogers


      Many parallels exist between the Celts and the Jews, many of my own brethren being slaughtered by Roman invaders and our religion all but eradicated – we too have had a dispora to all parts of the World, although, with the exception of Ireland, we have no actual homeland as Britain is our homeland for those born within it, or with a right to claim British status if we can prove one grandparent, living or dead, was British, part from that the Celts have no ‘Right of Return’. In a nutshell, if I and my fellow Celts behaved in a manner the Zionists have behaved since the later part of the nineteenth century, we’d be condemned and imprisoned, as many of our forefathers have been when trying to engage in positive social change, rather than violent acts of nationalism. And here’s the fancy bit, how to discern one is a Celt, for if its based on DNA, most British are Celts and remain Celts, though they may be ignorant of said fact, which would mean, if wales took up arms to gain independence from England and eject all English from our soil, we’d actually be removing liberties and property from our own people, despite the fact some are English and some are Welsh. It’s a thorny issue, perhaps you can offer assistance, but in no way does that give me a right to kill a English person, which would be murder.

      We all have historical baggage and have all been on the receiving end of an iron heel, in our instance one initiated by the Normans or the Romans, and yet, I don’t desire to take revenge, bomb and maim or invoke so God or the other, something to do with rationalism I believe. And when our more nationalistic brethren do turn to violence taking matters into their own hands, they are usually condemned from all quarters, as killing really ain’t nice!

      • Israel

        Chris, I don’t know anything about the Celts but I do believe the beauty in this world is a result of its diversity. Keeping ancient cultures alive should be important to all people.
        As for ” in a manner the Zionists have behaved since the later part of the nineteenth century”, i’m not sure what you’re talking about.
        The “Zionists” – you mean the Jews and Israelis, have been behaving like a people fighting for its life. 6 million Jews surrounded by half a million Arabs.
        Let me ask you a question. If the Arabs would have succeeded in any of the many wars to destroy Israel. Where do you think I and all my family, my neighbors and fiends would be now?
        Possible answers: living in a stable democratic state with all freedoms? living under Islamic rule? living under ISIS rule? (not sure you’re aware but ISIS is on Israel’s borders from all directions – Sinai and Syria. dead? should we ask the Yazidi’s what they think might happen to the tiny Jewish minority in the Middle East the minute the Arabs get to rule everything…
        Now if the Arabs would start killing Jews here would you come and fight for me?
        Didn’t think so…
        After centuries of oppressing the Jewish Minority in Palestine, not allowing Jews to own land and destroying Jewish sacred sites the Arabs in Palestine refused to accept the uprising of this minority and its demands for autonomy and self-determination.
        So you can keep on judging our “behavior” but until the Palestinians stop teaching hatred to their children and accept that the Jews also have a history and a right in their “sacred Arab land” I will keep on fighting.
        You, in the meanwhile, are merely protecting on of the most powerful imperialistic powers of the past millenia – the Arabs.

        • Shonnicker

          By designating all jews as zionists, you make a grave error in that the religious arguments for israeli nationalism are very weak, and not supported by the majority of rabbinical scholars. Not all jews are zionists, and not all zionists are jews.

          Its hard for me to see how 6 million heavily armed israelis, supported by 3 billion dollars per annum in military aid from the US, are surrounded by half a million arabs armed mostly with rocks?

          As for your question, if the Arabs would have defeated the invading settlers, then you would have been born in a different country, just as millions of Palestinians around the world are, being denied their right to return to their homeland.

          The centuries of oppression is overstated, since Palestinians were not the rulers nor the lawmakers in Palestine, that was the down to the Turkish sultanate. And besides, jews were a miniscule minority in Palestine before Europe shipped settlers there.

    • Doug Scorgie

      Sorry Israel that link you give is merely the opinions of a Zionist propagandist and is almost a fairy story. But you believe what you want to, no need to bother with facts and true history.

      • Israel

        Doug, on what do you base your claim that its propaganda? besides your fear to have to revisit your world view

    • Israel

      Wow, your inability to listen, hear and consider a narrative that is contrary to your world view is astonishing. Like a wise man once said. Extremists, whether on the left or the right, have one thing in common – they cannot see past their own noses.

      • Chris Rogers


        If you could be arsed to perhaps look at much of the mythology and legends that abound about the Celts, most notably Arthurian Legend and legend focusing on the Druid Mystic Merlin, as suggested, you may gauge how some of us with an attachment to Wales and our Celtic roots feel. It is held that in the woodlands of the Welsh Marches you can hear Arthur in the wind, and that one day in our moment of need Arthur will come and unite and protect us, with we hope his old side kick Merlin. The Welsh Bards who speak about Arthur have a beauty in their prose, our language being compared to that of the Gods. Now, regrettably our culture and history was oral and passed from generation to generation by the Druid Priesthood, a priesthood that our Roman conquerers extinguished in their last stronghold Anglesey, not too long after the initial invasion – clever chaps them Romans, hence, we do not have text available to us that hebrews do, but nonetheless many have a romantic attachment to our past, one that is not utilised for nationalist fervour or to brutalise those who are not Celt in our historical lands -and you know what, not being Christians, or followers of any of the three main Abrahamic religions, has its benefits, one of which is we don’t believe we are special, indeed, we believe we are as one with our surroundings, trees holding great significance. Again, we make no special claims, we don’t promote rabid nationalism, we don’t promote ethnic cleansing of the lands we once worshipped. And yet, and yet, allegedly we are closed to what you try and tell us as you apologise for the excesses of those you support, instead of joining this chorus and condemning all brutalities against anyone with claim to be human.

        Which is why I suppose its easier to deal with the realities by calling them ‘anti-semites’, antisemites for their humanism!!!!!

      • John Spencer-Davis

        You haven’t let me know yet if your female Arab friend regarded Craig’s comments on the pregnant Palestinian woman and her 16-year-old brother shot and killed at the checkpoint as contributing significantly to the creation of the “Palestinian sympathy monster”. Thanks.

    • Israel

      You all keep missing the point of the essay. I”ll be clearer.
      Can we all agree that Israel was never a colonizing power because colonialism is when one country takes control of a second country and colonizes it for its resources or strategic positioning.
      Never in the history of colonialism has a people without a “colonizing country of their own”, colonized a crappy little strip of land (with no natural resources) in which they actually already had a significant presence (as a minority) and with which they had a deep, ongoing and ancient connection.

      • lysias

        Britain established a national home for the Jews in Palestine precisely because of Palestine’s strategic position: Britain wanted to have a minority loyal to the Empire near the Suez Canal who could help to defend that canal. Turkey had attacked the Suez Canal through Palestine and Sinai a number of times during World War One, and Britain did not want to repeat the experience, since holding the Suez Canal was considered vital for holding India.

      • Israel

        lysias, please send me a source on which you base the presumption that Britain established the State of Israel?
        This is interesting news.

        • Monteverdi

          Never even heard of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 the endorsement provided by the then British Government during WW1 to the World Zionist Congress to provide Palestine a then unconquered part of the Ottoman Empire to the WZC .
          The text [ actually written WZC itself ] and submitted to the British Government refers to a ‘ homeland ‘ but both parties were fully aware this was the precursor to a State the word ‘ homeland ‘ used not to upset diplomatic sensibilities at the time .
          Read , digest and learn .

        • Israel

          Monteverdi, you know snippets about history and jumble them up to create a world view.
          Jews were fighting for autonomy and the Zionist Movement was established way before the British Mandate in Palestine and irrespective of whether the British approved, endorsed or supported. The Zionist Movement was not even led by British Jews.
          As part of the political struggle the Zionist Movement wanted international support and that is indeed what the UK gace with the Balfour Declaration. What you missed when you decided not to read all the way to the end of the paragraph in Wikipedia is that the British backtracked on their support and in fact took measures against the Zionist Movement during the British Mandate. Furthermore the UK abstained on the UN Partition Plan vote!!!
          So while Britain for one short period supported it certainly did not establish the State of Israel.
          Once again I have had to waste time explaining things that any child can find in historical sources because you people are too lazy to read and learn and instead to spew any shit you read on a flyer given out at the latest “anti-something” protest….

        • John Spencer-Davis

          Lysias does not say that Britain established the State of Israel. Lysias says that Britain established a national home for the Jews in Palestine. The source is the British Mandate for Palestine of 1923.

          You are too lazy to read and learn yourself, so don’t accuse others of it.

          • lysias

            It seems to be a characteristic of these hasbarists to display the arrogant attitude that the people they’re talking to are idiots. How that is supposed to persuade anyone, I do not understand.

          • Israel

            lysias, it seem according to you a Jew can’t have an opinion without you implying he must work for the government which brings me to the conclusion that you are a racist piece of shit.
            If you think the Israeli government would pay someone to speak to you lot then you must really be up your own arse.
            Sad thing is that very much like most of anything to do with the Middle East you have no idea what hasbara even means.
            Now get out of my face, I talk with people who are willing to listen not brain dead paranoids.

          • Israel

            One last thing, I’m not trying to persuade you, i’m trying to educate you as someone who happens to live in the bloody place…but one can only take a donkey to the water, up to him what he does there…

          • John Spencer-Davis

            Lysias didn’t say you worked for the government. Learn to read. He said you are a hasbarist, which you obviously are. You can be a hasbarist without working for the Israeli government. HonestReporting advertises itself as having a section devoted to social network activism – perhaps you act on their behalf yourself. If you are acting entirely on your own behalf, you are a hasbarist nonetheless.

            So Lysias is entirely correct, and has promptly been called a “racist piece of shit”, “up your own arse”, “brain dead paranoid”, and a “donkey”.

            Nice. You really are working hard on getting people to listen to you.

          • Israel

            John, why should I be accused of working for any organization?
            What is he trying to say by claiming I’m a hasbarist? coz what i’m hearing is that for some reason I am not assumed to be a regular individual but part of organizational conspiracy (something Jews have historically been accused of often).
            You see, as a Jew living in Israel – I get called alot of names and then you wonder why we suspect you of anti-semitism – just in this conversation I’ve been called a hasbarist and a Zionist (like many Israeli’s I don’t consider myself a Zionist since the Zionist Movement aimed at establishing the Jewish State which now exists – so i’m just Israeli). If you want to know what my “isms” are, just ask – atheism, socialism, human rights, feminism…
            I am an individual working for nobody except my own frustration at the way people perceive me, my people and my country. Lysias claim is as offensive as asking a black man what gang he belongs to. He’s welcome to ask me if I work for an organization but the assumption has no place in this conversation.
            In any event, as you yourself claim, I’m not very good at presenting my argument since I get emotional and call people names – probably the last thing a “hasbarist” would do. By the way, unless you all intend on speaking hebrew, hasbara means “explaining” or in more common terms PR. So call it PR.
            Now I’m off for a run on the beach and the gym. Good day.

      • nevermind

        Can we all agree that the 1967 agreement still stands with regards to Israel’s undeclared borders, that the Golan is Syrian territory, Sheeba Farms and southern Lebanon belong to Lebanon, all of which have been ‘colonised’ under occupation?
        Further that housing policies in these occupied areas, stipulates that only Jewish tenants have access to this new housing in occupied east Jerusalem, for example.

        • Israel

          Nevermind, you may have not heard the news but Syria doesn’t really exist.
          The truth is that Syria and Lebanon and all these countries never really existed. They were lines in the sand drawn by European colonialists who carved up the Middle East for themselves.
          That’s why since they established these countries have only been able to be held together by cruel despots or in a state of civil war.
          Israel is the only stable country because it is based on a real people with a real common identity and a historical narrative. It is the only county where the ruling group is also the majority (in contrast to Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq).
          You should listen to ISIS once in a while – that’s what they’re fighting against. The borders that you colonists decided. So don’t talk to ,me about colonizing Syria you comedian.

          • fred

            The ruling group is only the majority because they keep a vast section of the electorate in refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan so they can’t vote. Give Palestinian refugees their legal right of return then hold an election.

          • Israel

            Fred, the only people keeping those people in camps (they are not refugees since most were born in Lebanon and Syria) are Lebanon and Syria who refuse to give them any rights. Would you accept people living on British soil for 50 years in camps with no rights? would you not demand of the British government to give these children born on British soil their rights?
            After the second world war hundreds of millions were killed or displaced and never returned home, the Palestinians in Syria and Lebanon are no longer Palestinian.
            If Israel would allow them back it would completely destablise Israel (since they do not want the State of Israel) and turn Israel into what Syria and Lebanon are – civil-war torn regions with ISIS waiting on the sidelines. Millions would die and Fred would be sitting on his sofa shaking his head about what a tragedy it all is.
            That what you want or should we agree you just didn’t really think this through…

          • fred

            They have a legal and moral right to return to Palestine, the ones denying them that right is the Israeli government.

            Those are the facts.

          • John Spencer-Davis

            No, those are the facts in the world of the United Nations. Who, no doubt, are a bunch of comedians according to you.

          • Israel

            You don’t need to agree with me and you don’t need to agree with the Arab gentleman who wrote the following piece. What I do ask is that you consider that things may be more complex than the “goodies” and “badies” dichotomy you all seem to subscribe to…

          • Israel

            John Spencer-Davis – As for the UN – its a political organization not a moral compass. The UN represents the countries of this world, most of which are not western and many of which are Muslim or Arab (which is why it likes to bash Israel).
            Try passing a decision that makes gay sex legal everywhere in the world and I guarantee you that hell will freeze over before such a motion passes. If the UN is your references for good and bad then…
            So yeah…comedians

          • John Spencer-Davis

            Among the countries who have affirmed the right of return to Palestine have been the following.

            Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States.

            All comedians, according to you. How many of those are Muslim, Arab, and/or not Western?

            All part of Fred’s world, according to you.

          • Israel

            Yes, it’s a political organization. Behind every decision are political deals. Is this seriously news to you?
            No country can accept an influx of so many people without destroying itself. If Israel were to do it hundreds of thousands from all sides would die and ISIS would probably then step in to the mess and kill anyone who remained.
            Good think you’re not in charge of the cookie jar…

          • Israel

            The Palestinian “refugees” fled over 60 years ago because of a war that Israel did not start. The Palestinians were give a state by the UN just like the Jews did. They wanted everything and lost it all as a result.
            If there will be a Palestinian state in the future it will only be after they accept Israel’s existence so that we can live peacefully side by side. All the war mongering by extreme groups such as this one do neither side any good.

          • John Spencer-Davis

            You said that Israel was the only country where the ruling group is also the majority. Fred pointed out the reason, which is that that majority is artificially sustained by denying the franchise to people who would remove that majority if they were treated equitably. Thus demonstrating your assertion to be nonsense.

            Your response is not to acknowledge that Fred is correct, but to shift your ground and start to insult him, saying only in his world do these facts exist. Then, when I point out that these facts are very much part of political reality, your response is not to acknowledge that I may have a point but to shift your ground again and say it’s all the fault of the nasty bits of the UN. When I point out that the nice bits of the UN agree with the nasty bits, then instead of acknowledging that I may have a point, you shift your ground yet again and start to insult me.

            You came here and began by insulting everybody who disagreed with you, implying that they were anti-Semitic, or idiots, or both. Craig asked you politely to take it easy. Instead, you have escalated your insults, to include everyone who disagrees with you. People who disagree with you are neither stupid nor anti-Semitic. Get that through your head and start being a bit more polite.

          • Shonnicker

            “They were lines in the sand drawn by European colonialists who carved up the Middle East for themselves.”

            – Thats how Israel was (re)invented

            “Israel is the only stable country because it is based on a real people with a real common identity and a historical narrative”

            – So everyone else is fake with no real historical narrative? Much of what jews believe to be historical narrative is fantasy, mythical stories from the torah which jewish archeologists can find no evidence for e.g. 5000 years of history, and other such fabrications which can never form the basis of a legal claim to arab lands

            “The borders that you colonists decided”

            – You decided all of the borders in relation to palestine, and you dont recognise the borders of your neighbours (Syria)

        • Ba'al Zevul

          It said itself that it wanted to ‘educate’ us. That’s what hasbara means.
          Education, in its book, invariably consists in insulting anyone challenging its received wisdom, which may provide a valuable insight into the views of 80% of the Israeli public – which is certainly no more educated than most people anywhere else – but takes no account of the views of the Palestinians, or of the rest of the world, if it comes to that. Points arising from its harangues:
          1. Israel may declare the Palestinians its enemy and attack them at will: Palestinians may not declare Israel their enemy and attack them at all.
          2. The Nakba was the Palestinians’ fault, notwithstanding that the nascent Israeli state pre-empted the provisions of the UN-mediated agreement to create Israel, took what it could grab, and evicted as many Palestinians as possible. This was not, incidentally, a colonialist enterprise by Israel.
          3. The Jews are the historical inhabitants of Palestine: no-one else is, and no-one else has any rights there at all.
          4. Peaceful coexistence between the Jews and the other former inhabitants of Palestine is possible provided the Palestinians agree with the above.

          I won’t call it a comedian: that would be to descend to its level of personal abuse. But these assertions would be comical if they were not so aggressively stated. If they were not so blatantly directed at shutting down debate on the topic. Which debate, as Mearsheimer and Walt demonstrated ( in The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy , published 2007, just after the latest assault on Lebanon, and, less prominently reported, one of several on Gaza) is central to preventing Israel from harming, not just US interests, but its own.

      • Shonnicker

        Having a “deep ongoing connection” doesn’t count for anything, can the Greeks reclaim Anatolia, can the Italians claim half of Europe, will native americans ever have their lands returned to them? So why is the jewish state a special case historically? Your spurious argument about not being colonists, essentially means that the settler/invaders were much like barbarian tribes, who were also stateless. This is typical of the way Israel continues its project of ethnic cleansing and theft of land, while telling the world not to believe its lying eyes.

        Why did the 1947 UN partition of Palestine allocate 56% of Palestine for a Jewish state when they owned just 6% of the land and formed 30% of the population? Was this the reason this conflict has lasted for so long?

        56% of Palestine’s land was to become a Jewish state, 43% to become a state for the Arabs. The Jewish State was to include 85% of Palestine’s agricultural land.

        In 1945 the Jews owned just 6% of the land, the rest almost entirely being Arab owned. More than half of that 6% of Jewish-owned land was also owned by the JNF and PICA, so not Jewish individuals.

        In 1945 Jews made up just 31% of the population, almost all of them being immigrants. 68% were Arabs of the Muslim and Christian faiths. 1% were others. In 1931, only 17% of Palestine was Jewish, and their population increased by five times within that 14 year period.

        Preventing the right of return to non-jews is an abhorent policy designed to destroy the demographic of the country.

    • Shonnicker

      Ask yourself: how many tribes throughout history have been displaced, never to return to their ancestral lands, why are zionists afforded the singular right to seize by force of arms and ethnic cleansing, lands which have been occupied by arabs longer than any significant numbers of jews?

      There is no rational basis for the argument that criticism of the state of Israel and the political ideology of Zionism is anti‑Semitic, just as it makes no sense to consider criticizing apartheid South Africa’s racist policies toward blacks as evidence of racism toward whites, or that criticism of Nazi policies toward the Jews should not be allowed because it is evidence of racism against Germans.

      Similarly, if you criticize American policy toward the Iraq war and torture at Abu Ghraib Prison, or the Jim Crow laws that institutionalized discrimination against blacks in the southern states, that you are racist against Americans. This argument is obviously absurd and should not even require a response.

      In a free society, one has a basic right to evaluate and criticize a political ideology or movement and to review and criticize a state’s policies. A critique should be evaluated on the basis of the truthfulness of the facts and the logic of the arguments presented. One also has a right to present alternative facts and engage in debate. When one side wants to avoid debate, divert the discussion or suppress the topic and launches personal attacks against its opponents, it is almost certain that it is hiding some uncomfortable truths.

      Palestinians are, however, charged with anti-Semitism if they complain about the destruction of their villages; the ethnic cleansing of their cities; the loss of their country and rights to citizenship, and then not being allowed to return to their homes in contravention of international law; or the discriminatory policies of the Jewish National Fund; the inequities of the Jewish Law of Return; house demolitions; discrimination against Muslims and Christian Palestinians; illegal Jewish-only settlements; the more than 600 Israeli military checkpoints in the West Bank; the years of military occupation of Gaza and the West Bank; the well-documented cases of torture; the imprisonment of more than 11,000 Palestinians, including women and children, many held without charge under what is called Administrative Detention; or the 2014 slaughter in Gaza.

  • bevin

    Trowbridge makes an interesting point: the ideology of zionism, if it were to become accepted (which is something that will require extreme climate changes in hell) would immediately de-legitimise all colonial property in America and many other places.
    But of course zionism rests not on this “return” rubbish but on sheer brute force exerted until the victims either disappear or submit. Which of course, is pretty well what happened in Canada, the US etc etc.
    As to Fort McMurray: it is enough, I am sorry to say, to make one believe in divine judgement, in the face of a monstrous crime against the environment. Which puts one in mind of what is going on Israel again, for zionism is about as convincing as the fossil fuel companies’ quibbles and special pleadings on man made climate change.

    • Trowbridge H. Ford aka The Biscuit

      And not forget, Bevin, that it could be applied in Europe with Germany taking over Britain, the UK taking over Portugal and France, and Norway taking over the whole lot.

      And Australia is worried enough about the US taking over with another constitution coup that PM Malcolm Turnbull is volunteering: not to worry if Trump become POTUS, we can put up with anything from Washington.

      And climate change, natural and man.made, is in the process of already creating the hell you refer to.

      And I do agree with you about the mad rush to get oil, as if it makes anyone fuel independent, but my good friend Hartly had a golden opportunity to work 18 hours a day at great wages if he wanted. Now it is all gone.

  • nevermind

    o/t but very interesting as Craig myself and many others on here have experienced Blackburn and Bradford.
    ““In the end I was not looking at it only from what I saw in the UK, but also what I saw in Afghanistan,” he added. “There were several camps of ‘Harakat al-Ansar’ [or Harkat ul-Mujahideen] in Afghanistan that received dozens of UK citizens, all Deobandis from London, Luton, Blackburn, Bradford.”

    by Nafeez Ahmed, crowd funded.

  • Paul Barbara

    Craig, on one of your recent posts you mention some kind of ‘fighting fund’, and say ‘many a mickle makes a muckle’. Well, I don’t have many mickles, never mind muckles, but why not design or get designed and printed t/shirts with some simple slogan against the Zionist trick of equating anti-Apharteid atrocities with anti-Semitism, or something of that nature, and sell them like you sell your books?
    Something like: Support for Palestine (mathematical symbol for ‘does not equal’) Anti-Semitism ?

  • fwl

    I have previously commented on how open and self critical a state Israel is because for all its terrible faults we keep seeing powerful Israelis speaking their mind.

    Deputy Chief of Staff Major-General Yair Golan spoke out yesterday in such terms that if he had been a member of the British labour party he would have been suspended by now.

    Today he has had to retract and as the Jerusalem Post makes clear that is because he did not pay heed as to how his words would be used against Israel. Anyway he is not suspended and he said a damn sight more than Ken Livingstone. He has my respect. Retraction or not. He has guts.

    We don’t have guts here anymore.

    • Ba'al Zevul

      Worthwhile reproducing what he said, I think.
      “The Holocaust must lead us to think about our public lives, and even more than that, it must guide anyone who has the ability, not only those who wish to bear public responsibility.

      “Because if there is anything that frightens me in the remembrance of the Holocaust, it is discerning nauseating trends that took place in Europe in general, and in Germany specifically back then, 70, 80 and 90 years ago, and seeing evidence of them here among us in the year 2016.

      After all, there is nothing simpler and easier than hating the foreigner, there is nothing easier and simpler than arousing fears and intimidating, there is nothing easier and simpler than becoming bestial, forgoing principles and becoming smug.”

      He was then traduced by Naftali Bennet, implying that he had compared the military to Nazis, and issued a retraction and apology, saying that this was not what he intended, and that the IDF was not his target. As, plainly, it wasn’t. He was challenging the Israeli zeitgeist as a whole. The Army doesn’t make policy, but it has to carry it out. Though that wasn’t a defence at Nuremburg…

      • fwl

        Ba’al you were the only person, who picked up on this. I see now why there was such a campaign to drive Mary off the site. I didn’t quote Major-General’s words because I could see how I would just be accused of being one of those who make use of internal criticism. I was too tolerant.

        However, the April 7-20 edition of the New York Review of Books has a piece by David Shulman exposing the extreme steps now being taken in Israel to silence the Israeli left. He describes it as a witch hunt and I begin to see where Yair-Golan was coming from, and worse from a Brit point of view if we have sunken into such a pit that we can’t talk about this without being called anti-Semitic.

  • fwl

    Habba, I think you can relax and infer that Israel does not have any enemies here, of if it has they are not ones it should be unduly concerned about. G’d evening.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jacqueline Walker, Vice-Chair of Momentum and of Thanet Labour Party, has been suspended by the Labour Party, reportedly at the instigation of the Israel Advocacy Movement. Jackie Walker is herself of both Jewish and Black descent, and her crimes appear to have been to state that there was Jewish involvement in the slave trade and in the African holocaust.

    Jackie’s partner, Graham Bash, who has edited Labour Left Briefing and has been a Labour Party member for nearly 50 years, and is himself Jewish, has issued an open letter on anti-Semitism and the Labour Party:


    “Anti-Semitism and the Labour Party

    As a Jew (all my life) and Labour Party member (48 years) I am outraged at the way allegations of anti-Semitism have been used to silence legitimate criticism of Israel and undermine Jeremy Corbyn as my party’s leader.
    I know what anti-Semitism is. I was brought up to learn how the Jewish East End fought with the dockers against Mosley’s fascists at Cable Street. I was told at school how it was a pity that H didn’t finish off the job of murdering all Jews. And very quickly I learned what it was like to be made to feel an outsider. It was hardly surprising that I started going on anti- fascist demos in my late teens and very soon afterwards joined the Labour Party, which I remain a member of to this day.
    I know what anti-Semitism is. Apart from socialist, anti-racist politics, my other love is football. How many times as a West Ham fan have I had to endure my own team’s fans singing “I never felt more like gassing the Jews”? Or being attacked by my team’s own fans for daring to put up a ‘West Ham fans United Against Racism’ banner at Upton Park.
    I know what anti-Semitism is – I have a sensitive ear for anti-Semitic comments – and, without doubt, the place I have encountered it least is within the Labour Party. In 48 years, I have encountered anti-Semitism once, perhaps twice, compared to countless episodes outside.
    Of course I have encountered deep antipathy to Israel, and its murderous actions to deny justice for Palestinians, but that is what I would expect from a democratic anti-racist party – and these are views shared by me and many other peace loving socialist Jews.
    Throughout most of my years in the party, I have worked closely with Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell. They have always been the first to fight injustice and inequality and from them there has never been a hint of anti-Semitism.
    What is happening in the party today is an attempt to cynically use rare examples, and usually false allegations, of anti-Semitism as part of a McCarthyite witchhunt against supporters of Jeremy. As if to prove the point, the latest victim is my own partner and anti-racist campaigner, Jackie Walker, of mixed heritage (Afro- Caribbean and Jewish), outrageously suspended from the Labour Party, simply for telling the truth that her Jewish ancestors were involved in financing the Slave Trade, that the African holocaust was even worse than the Jewish holocaust, and that anti-Semitism is not a major problem in Corbyn’s Labour Party.
    I am proud of the heritage and family traditions that helped my development on the road to being an anti-racist, international socialist. This current witchhunt will not deflect me, and countless thousands like me, from the struggle for justice worldwide and for a socialist Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn.

    Graham Bash”


    It seems a pretty sorry state of affairs when people like this are treated by the Labour Party in such a manner.

    • Shonnicker

      Even if antisemitism is very rare within the Labour party as Jamie Stern-Weiner says, it is a disproportionately big political problem.

      Those rightists who are bleating about Labour’s antisemitism are of course rank hypocrites: they are happy to use racism in the London mayoral election; laughed off the racism of Boris Johnson; and seemed relaxed about using an anti-Semitic dog-whistle in some attacks upon Ed Miliband. But this is only to be expected. The right will use any stick to beat the left. The left should not help by handing them those sticks. In tolerating even the slightest whiff of antisemitism, Labour is breaking one of the first rules of politics and of life: never give a cnt a chance.

  • Carlyle Moulton

    One thing really puzzles me. How is that in 1948 the world seems not to have noticed the crimes committed by Zionists during Israel’s war of establishment, these include the murder of 10,000 Palestinians in order to implement the ethnic cleansing of 700,000.

    Is it that in 1948 the term “Ethnic Cleansing” did not exist and because there was no term for what Israel did citizens of the rest of the world were incapable of recognizing Israel’s actions as a crime or is it that the world was rightly so filled with well warranted shame at the inaction against the holocaust that no one could dare criticize Jews no matter how egregious their actions.

    The term for ethnic hygiene maintenance came into use because of events during the wars of Yugoslavia’s break up in the 90’s. Now there is no reason for failing to apply it to Israels actions in 1948 and indeed Israel’s current actions. Israel wants a single state Palestinian Free, and all the brutality and discrimination against the Palestinians is designed to get them to give up and flee Palestine. The problem is that when people have an irrational attachment to a particular piece of land even extreme force fails to make them flee so Israel desperately needs a final solution to the Palestinian Question.

    • John Spencer-Davis

      An absolutely superb article that completely takes apart, among others, Jonathan Freedland for his utterly disgraceful and false reporting and opinion pieces on this matter. Freedland should be sacked immediately for his blatant dishonesty. How he can draw his no doubt extremely handsome salary from the Guardian and continue to sleep well at night is beyond me, but there you go.

  • Shonnicker

    It is not right to bow to these disingenuous, underhand tactics employed by Mann and the rest of the New Labour cohort attacking Livingstone. Yet how different would things look if roles were reversed? Imagine, for example, a situation in which anyone who espoused pro-Israeli views or became furious at perceived anti-Semitism, were castigated with the same ferocity by an incensed majority on account of their deep-rooted Islamophobia. How perverse and unlikely does this state of affairs seem?

    Corbyn’s hand has been forced, and an investigation must be conducted, as the alternative is to be buried by our righteous guardians in the media/political sphere. But he is right in saying that there is no crisis in the Labour Party.

    It is no surprise that this storm has been created just before the imminent elections for city and district councils, the Mayor of London, Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly. Yet the fervour with which Creasy, Kendall, Hunt et al have pursued Livingstone’s punishment has come during the week in which unprecedented industrial action was taken by Junior Doctors against the imposition of a contract which is so discriminatory that the Equality and Human Rights Commission has written to the UN to express its concern. This, though, was of little importance compared to the spectacle that a beleaguered Livingstone represented to those intent on perceiving anti-Semitism in his words.

    The fight to wrest back control of the Labour Party from Corbyn and reinstate the Blairite principles of neoliberalism has plunged to new depths – a sure sign of increasing desperation from the enemies of a real leftist alternative.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Update, illustrating the comprehensive falsity of any claim by the Israeli government to so much as be considering a two-state solution, or indeed any solution not involving the eventual ejection of the Palestinians:

    The question now is whether it would be possible to continue with the same policy that was used during negotiations, even though it was an illusion, and Israel is now becoming more vicious and refuses to partake in any negotiations whatsoever. It continues to impose its own solutions on the ground, stating clearly what it intends to do as it takes advantage of developments in the Arab region (where the Iranian threat has more priority than anything else) and around the world, which it believes have improved its strategic position.

1 3 4 5

Comments are closed.