The Incredible Disappearance of Shai Masot 345


A Google news search reveals that not one single mainstream media outlet has mentioned Shai Masot in 2019. Not even once.

Yet the main political news story the last two days has been the suspension of Labour’s Peter Willsman for “anti-semitism” for making the suggestion that the “anti-semitism” witch-hunt is promoted by the Israeli-Embassy. This has been demonstrably a massive story:

The overwhelming majority of the tens of thousands who will read this article know who Shai Masot is and know why his activities are absolutely central to the Willsman story.

And here is the truly terrifying thing.

The overwhelming majority of the mainstream media “journalists” who produced those scores of stories about Willsman also know exactly who Shai Masot is and why his activities are central to the Willsman narrative. And every single one of those journalists chose to self-censor the crucial information that casts a shade over the “Willsman is an anti-semite” line. Every single one. Their self-censorship is not necessarily a conscious and singular act, though in many cases it will be. They are simply imbued with the line they are supposed to adopt, the facts they are supposed to ignore, to forward their career and remain accepted in their social group.

Because the plain truth is that the Al Jazeera documentary The Lobby (part 1 below) showed to the entire political world that Mr Willsman’s thesis about the involvement of the Israeli Embassy in British politics and its objectives is broadly true. It says something about the current dystopia that is the UK, that this truly shocking documentary did not result in any official action against Joan Ryan (who has thankfully since hurtled herself into the political abyss), but that pointing out the undeniable truth about Israeli Embassy interference in British politics is an expulsion offence.

I should be very happy to go on the BBC and say this and so would many other people. Yet the mainstream media have been unable to quote this point of view from a single person. Yesterday’s 12 noon news on the BBC had Willsman as the top story with interviews with first Charlie Falconer, calling for Mr Willsman’s expulsion, then a six minute live rant from extreme zionist John Mann, calling for Mr Willsman’s expulsion. There was no attempt to balance this at all with a remotely sane guest. To be fair, the presenter did baulk at some of Mr Mann’s more frothy mouthed utterances, but the BBC knew precisely what they would get when they invited him, and the decision to have a major news item with only two intervewees, both from the same side of the argument, was a quite deliberate one.

This was a much worse example of lack of balance than those for which Russia Today is routinely censured by Ofcom and threatened with closure. But doubtless as it was a pro-Israel and anti-Corbyn lack of balance (Corbyn was condemned by both interviewees) Ofcom will take no action whatsoever. I am however putting in a complaint to Ofcom about this specific news item and I urge you to do the same.

Al Jazeera’s exposure of Shai Masot led to his quietly being removed from the UK, however he was but the tip of the iceberg. With my FCO inside knowledge I could show that the Israeli Embassy has an extraordinary and disproportionate number of “technical and administrative staff” like Masot, and that there was a mystery over what kind of visa he had to live in the UK. The FCO refused to answer my questions and no mainstream media “journalist” was willing to pursue the case.

The readership of this blog has grown fast over the last two years. I therefore do recommend that you read this blog post which ties in Masot’s activities to the Mossad collaboration of Liam Fox and Adam Werritty – which was the real story behind the Werritty scandal, again completely hidden by the mainstream media. I should mark my debt to the late Paul Flynn MP in helping me prove that fact beyond dispute, as you will see if you read the article. Not one of the media and political hypocrites who so recently eulogised Paul was willing to support him in this or even mention the facts that he had winkled out. Jeremy Corbyn also helped me expose the Werritty/Israel links in his pre-leadership days by asking parliamentary questions.

I do blame Jeremy for not taking a more robust line. Genuine anti-semitism should always be called out and condemned, and it plainly exists, even in the Labour Party. But the open attempt to stifle all criticism of Israel, and in effect to make adherence to zionism a pre-condition for membership of the Labour Party – or indeed acceptance in wider society – is a vicious form of authoritarianism that should have been repudiated robustly from day one.

——————————————

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



 


345 thoughts on “The Incredible Disappearance of Shai Masot

1 2 3
  • Crispa

    As this thread is developing the Guardian is running a piece about the “discovery ” by a “free-lance journalist”, by the name of Iggy Ostanin, of the Peterborough’s by – election Labour candidate’s “liking” of tweets that suggest anti – semitism. You don’t discover those things by accident of course and a quick link to his twitter page depicts this guy with a picture of an Atlantic Council banner in the background. His journalist output as listed from Google is just pure anti – Corbyn hate, and we are led to believe none of this is orchestrated!

    • N_

      Interesting info. An awful lot of resources seem to be being put into ramping up

      a) the newly-founded Brexit Party, and
      b) a crashout Brexit.

      Before the last general election, the Tories showed their lack of understanding of the working class by figuring that the voteshare that had gone from Labour to UKIP would fall into the lap of the Tories. For all Theresa May’s past talk of knowing how the Tories were viewed as “the nasty party”, I wonder how many Tory members and staffers realised quite how disgusting a bunch of arrogant “f*** the poor” scumbags they actually ARE perceived as by most working class people, or at least among those who don’t aspire to be landlords, mortgage advisers, secondhand car salesmen, or some other kind of spiv. For those who DO realise how despised the Tories are, it came as little surprise that they DIDN’T pick up the UKIP vote, which largely went back to Labour.

      But that was 2017 and this is now. So far the Brexit Party looks like a highly successful operation, winning votes from both Labour and the Tories.

      Could the two claws of the pincer movement against the Labour Party (false accusations of anti-Semitism and the dogwhistle racism of the Brexit Party) possibly be related?

      As a crashout looms, the idea of hoarding food is another thing, along with Shai Masot’s dirty doings, that seems to have got forgotten about in the media.

  • Harry Law

    It is Peter Willsmans assertion that the actions of the Israel embassy [i.e.as the representative of the Israeli state] in infiltrating the Labour party are true and that they are political actions with the intent to achieve a political aim, which is undoubtedly true, as the Al Jezeera undercover film proves. Then Willsman has not been Anti Semitic, It is Falconer who is equating Jews as collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel, in other words it is Falconer who has said Willsmans criticisms of the Israeli embassy are anti-Jewish, Falconer is in breach if the IHRA. “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” [IHRA definition].

    • Andyoldlabour

      Harry Law

      Yes Harry, but how do we hear that form our media.
      We are reading from the same page, but we are in a minority.
      I want to learn how to change that.
      You and I are part of the mechanism of change, but how do we jolt the mechanism into action.
      I would be grateful to Craig for helping us, because he provides the background information.

    • N_

      As far as Zionists are concerned, the idea that Israel should be held responsible for its actions BY ANYONE WHATSOEVER is considered suitable for being denounced, when in the Zionists’ interests, as “anti-Semitic”. This is a foul insult to those Jews who do not support the existence of the filthy little Hitler state in the Middle East, but what else is new?

  • Clark

    Connections between Liam Fox, the neocon think-tank and fake charity Atlantic Bridge, climate change denial organisations, Trump’s allies, Cambridge Analytica and Brexiteers:

    https://littlesis.org/org/232750-The_Atlantic_Bridge/interlocks
    https://www.desmog.co.uk/cambridge-analytica
    https://www.desmog.co.uk/2017/01/16/mapped-new-special-relationship-america-and-britain-emerges-between-climate-science-deniers-trump-and-brexit

    This is all entirely predictable. Interests of the fossil fuel companies converge with Israeli expansionism, US neoconservatism and climate change denial, and conflicts with European influence upon the UK.

    • Dave

      If you think neo-con wars are all about oil and you oppose the wars then promoting alternatives to oil to stop the wars and claiming oil companies promote “climate denial” to protect their oil interests and de facto support war makes the alleged link between neo-con wars and climate denial appear at face value logical. Its a good conspiracy theory from Clark but its also silly.

      Neo-Con Wars in the Middle East and elsewhere are not about oil, they are about destroying the real or imagined enemies of Israel and its good for MIC. US does not need to destroy poor countries to secure oil supplies, they just need to do a commercial deal with whomever’s in power.

      Trading oil rather than trying to steal it is the capitalist way to proceed because its trade rather than stealing that makes us rich in the long term and oil companies prefer the stability of peace to extract the oil, because war and destruction of infrastructure is bad for business.

      Also oil companies are not worried by the climate scam, because rising energy needs means an increase in oil production is required, even if oil’s share of total energy production falls as a percentage and they have already ‘branched out’ to make money from the climate scam, through government subsidy.

      And attributing “denial” to oil companies, ignores the fact MMCC is an elementary scam as carbon dioxide is essential to life on earth and because many things determine climate.

      • pretzelattack

        oil companies have been worried about the climate science since their own scientists told them in the late 70’s and early 80’s that fossil fuel emissions cause global warming. they elected to hide this and fund a propaganda campaign denying the science. you just repeat long refuted talking points from that propaganda; water is essential to life on earth, and yet you can still drown in it, and floods can be very damaging.

        • Dave

          Did their scientists also tell them about the coming ice age? Many things determine climate and man made carbon dioxide is the least of them.

          • pretzelattack

            1. yes people have known that an ice age is coming in a hundred thousand years or whatever for some time. the scientists know what determines climate now, we are changing it with fossil fuel emissions. you think the oil companies wouldn’t counter the science if they could? as i said, they know it’s true, just like the cigarette companies knew of the link between smoking and lung cancer. they adopted the same solution, and the same ad firm, as the tobacco industry, for their propaganda campaign against the science.

          • Hatuey

            I have no view on climate change. I’m not qualified to make a judgement. Can someone simply tell me how you would disprove the theory?

            I’m sure you’re all aware that in science it has got to be at least possible to disprove a theory. So, what would the climate need to do over say the next 15 years to disprove the theory?

          • michael norton

            For a little more than two and a half million years we have been in the Pleistocene,
            it is unlikely that has ended.
            It is on a one hundred thousand year cycle.
            Twenty thousand years of glaciation, followed by twenty thousand years of Interglacial warmth, followed by a generally cooling climate, till the next glaciation, kicks in.

          • Ian

            It’s a shame you are entirely unaware of the science around climate change, and choose it ignore it. However, your ignorance won’t change what is happening.

          • WJ

            The fact that we remain in the Pleistocene cycle does not by itself demonstrate that human activity cannot and does not contribute to climate change. This is a logical fallacy. Empirically, the rapid uptick in observable changes in global climate since the 1970s–a blink of the eye in geological terms–offer strong evidence in support of the thesis that world-wide industrialization is rapidly accelerating any hypothesized geologic-based transitions based on the Pleistocene cycle. Because changes in this cycle–absent extraterrestrial catastrophic events–develop over millenia, not in the course of half a century.

          • glenn_nl

            @Ian: This is Dave’s thing – he’s a one-trick pony. Just deny, deny and deny – putting himself on the same wrong side of history as Trump, every single US Republican party member, and acts as a useful idiot for the fossil fuel multinationals. There’s no substance to his oft-repeated points whatsoever.

          • J

            Dave, dear friend.

            Apparently, we’re in the middle of a solar minimum period, in which sun spot activity is, by historic measurements (over five hundred years) extremely low. In the past the Earth has experienced substantial cooling during such periods of low solar activity, but instead we have record high temperatures week on week, month by month, year after year.

            In other words, global warming is far worse a problem than has been discussed. Because if this level of heating is not from solar input into Earth’s temparature system (energy input from the Sun has been steadily declining over the last century, toward the current minimum) and neither is it from the phenomenal amount of carbon we’ve introduced, then where should we look for this unknown cause of extremely rapid heating?

            I propose we call this anomaly ‘Dark Warming.’ Eagerly awaiting your scientific exposé.

          • Bayard

            “I guess nobody can answer my simple question.”

            Possibly because the matter of contention is not climate change, because the climate has always changed and always will. The matter of contention is whether the change is caused by anything being done by the human race and that is far more a matter of belief than scientific proof or otherwise.
            However, the scientific method, the method by which all science should be advanced, is a method, not of proof, but of disproof. There really doesn’t seem to be much effort being expended in trying to disprove AGW.

          • Bayard

            “instead we have record high temperatures week on week, month by month, year after year.”

            Funny how these record high temperatures are causing colder winters.

          • glenn_nl

            @Bayard : Try not to be quite so simplistic, not to say idiotic (unless you’re being disingenuous of course).

            Extremes of weather do not simply mean everything is hotter everywhere, all the time. The global average is most certainly on the increase.

            Are you seriously trying to pass off simple-minded nonsense like this? Are you happy being the intellectual equivalent of Senator Inhofe, when he threw a snowball inside the chamber offering that as “proof” that global warming doesn’t exist?

            It’s so sad that debate has to be reduced to childish levels by tactics like this from people like yourself, so that the most significant danger to the existence of life on Earth is dumbed down and dismissed.

        • N_

          @Pretzel – You ought to examine your use of the word “science”. Science isn’t a collection of facts or statements that can be affirmed or denied. Science is a method of investigation and reaching conclusions that is quite useful as one way to investigate certain kinds of questions. It absolutely does not mean “truth”, and it absolutely is not a good method for looking at all types of questions, and it is not even all there is to it when the questions it does look at are looked at. Monkeys do it. It’s really nothing much to write home about. Hypostatising it is akin to black magic. As for “propaganda”, there is wall-to-wall propaganda in support of the “you’ve got to change your behaviour in order to stop the climate from changing” position. I really can’t believe you haven’t noticed this. BP have had a green symbol as their logo for decades. Are you sure you’re on top of oil company propaganda and for that matter the unity, to the extent that there is unity, across different sectors of big business? (I know there is competition but there is also cooperation.) Smoking cigarettes may have given way to picking smartphones for many consumers (there’s a limited amount of advertising you can print on a cigarette), but the oil business isn’t going away. It’s not on its back foot, as you seem to think.

          • pretzelattack

            scientist, using this set of procedures and conventions, n, and the scientists are quite confident that gravity exist, that climate change exists. i trust their knowledge of their own field more than your knowledge of it. climate change is right up their alley, n, this is the kind of question science is qualified to answer. for all your airy talk about truths, you still fall, apparently for the oil company propaganda (as you say, they are not on their back foot, they are fighting back with the tools available to them; propaganda and buying politicians. i sometimes think you deniers must live in some narrative universe where big corporations that heavily influence governments are helpless somehow to do this. i wish that were true, but it’s not the world we live in. you describe people mentioning a fact, that fossil fuel emissions cause warming, as “propaganda”. this is exactly the effect the fossil fuel propaganda campaign hopes to have.

        • Dave Lawton

          Scientist`s.What a joke some of them are. Am not impressed with the latest crop of scientists. Their education seems to have gone down the pan. I made a comment that a black hole could be a object travelling faster the speed of light.
          I was immediately told in a put down sort of manner that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. This was from a PhD in physics who worked at CERN. Anyway it took me ten seconds to educate him. So don’t believe what they tell you do your own research.

          • pretzelattack

            sadly, dave, we can’t do research on every single question we need to answer. do you have any evidence that the roughly 200 year old science behind climate change is wrong?

          • Dave Lawton

            pretzelattack
            The climate has always been changing. I watched a BBC2 program on global warming two years ago presented by a leading Oxford climatologist who was running experiments on global warming in the Namib desert.He said he measured no temperature change. I watched it three times to make sure I heard correctly. Also now it is called climate change before it was Global Warming. See the game being played. These anomalous weather effects which we have now and then is a effect created thousands of miles away due to local local slash and burn due to Non-Linear stochastic resonance. People need to be aware of a real effect on this planet which could have a influence. It is the magnetic pole shift and it is speeding up and is now 50km a year.

          • Bayard

            “People need to be aware of a real effect on this planet which could have a influence. It is the magnetic pole shift and it is speeding up and is now 50km a year.”

            Sorry, that lacks the essential “you, too can help save the world” element. It will never become a global movement.

          • EricsEars

            @Dave Lawton could you, if you have a spare 10 or so seconds, educate me on the Black Hole moving at greater speeds than light-speed theory. I really am fascinated. Also, do you worry about this black hole, moving through time, coming to gobble you up? It’s certainly made me worry. And the pole shift, it also could happen at any moment. Frightening stuff eh? Global warming seems really congenial by comparison I suppose! A faster sun tan and good wines being grown in Kent. More of that eh?

      • Deb O'Nair

        “Neo-Con Wars in the Middle East and elsewhere are not about oil”

        That should be “not *all* about oil”. War of choice usually benefits multiple parties who have a vested interest; from the arms manufacturers to the energy businesses and, quite often, considerations as expressed through various lobbyists, both national and corporate. It’s when the interests of a critical mass of these various actors coincide that a consensus is reached and the policy is set.

        It is easy to focus on a particular group (e.g. pro-Israel lobbyists, oil businesses or the MIC) and say they caused the war, when in fact they are just one of many beneficiaries. Whatever one feels about the power of the Israeli Lobby the state of Israel is just as much a vassal of US foreign policy as the UK and most other NATO members, as can be easily gleaned from seeing who’s military bases are in who’s country.

        Iraq and Libya were both destroyed after selling oil for non-dollar currencies. Iran started selling oil non-dollar a couple of years ago and Venezuela last year. The problem for the US is that the dollar is underpinned as the worlds reserve currency via the oil trade and simply can not tolerate any non-dollar oil trading. If attacking these countries can be done under the cover of protecting Israel from a regional threat then so be it, if they can be attacked under the cover of defending human rights then so be it. What they will not say is “we are attacking country x to defend the US dollar”.

        • Dave

          Chicken and Egg. Finding an alternative to the dollar is pursued as a result of US aggression not the cause.

      • Courtenay Barnett

        Dave,

        Why do you think in binary terms:-

        ” Neo-Con Wars in the Middle East and elsewhere are not about oil, they are about destroying the real or imagined enemies of Israel ”

        Could it be both ‘oil wars’ and geopolitically motivated protection of Israel as ME proxy state for US – couldn’t it be so?

        I prefer to listen to the scientist and go with the experts on ‘global warming’ when there appears to be a reputable and honest consensus. Why would so many independent scientists want to compromise themselves and/or their hard earned academic reputations?

        • pretzelattack

          no dave, very few scientists think it’s a scam, and the ones who claim it is are usually getting money from fossil fuel companies.

      • remember kronstadt

        Silly, really Dave?
        Oil is Americas blood. Of course their interest in Venezuela’s oil (not in the middle east) is all about

        Hallaca. Hallacas consist of a corn dough wrapped in plantain, filled with a stuffing called “guiso” made with beef, olives, pork, capers and many vegetables and then cooked in boiling water. ..

  • Bosely Jackson

    There is a lot of Twitter activity around the Masot affair at the moment, and funnily enough Masot has a Twitter account ( @ShaiMasot ). Maybe efforts should be made to bring him into the conversation, he was active on Twitter as recently as 1 hour ago. Forcing Joan Ryan and Masot into association by virtue of @ mentions could be a useful way to increase the pressure.

    • Brendan

      On the top of his Twitter page (I’m assuming the Twitter account is genuine), Shai Masot describes himself as “@AJEnglish Superstar” (AJ = Al Jazeera).

      He’s obviously not hiding the fact that he was caught offering bribes on behalf of Israel to damage British politicians – he actually seems proud of it. But the British mass media is studiously ignoring him in what looks like a conspiracy of silence.

    • N_

      Shai Masot has been caught. What do you want to converse with him about? Having a good tweet-up with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs or whatever agency runs his Twitter account isn’t the way. Ryan and Masot are already in association. Those who only believe something when they see it on Twitter wrapped in shipping or accountants’ “at” signs are, well they are beneath contempt and they aren’t about to get together to bring down the oppressors. Better to tell your neighbours and acquaintances about the Al Jazeera film and maybe one or two of them will watch it.

  • Wikikettle

    I listen to Norman Finkelstein and Gilad Atzmon, when it comes to Jews themselves, despairing at Israels brutal, headlong march, to slow but eventual self destruction. No wonder so many Israelis have dual passports and dont want their children drafted. There will eventually be a backlash in America against the Lobby, the huge sums supporting Israel and its influence on US elections and policy. Even the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Gulf Potentates will be overthrown by their own Jihadis which we created ! A world gone mad, with everyone just walking on by.

    • Goose

      Did you see Netanyahu holding up the map Trump’s son-in-law, the unabashedly pro-Israel, Zionist advocate Jared Kushner gave him, with Golan shown as part of Israel, a fact emphasised with an arrow and ‘nice’ penned in. The very fact the US looks more like a Kleptocracy these days with Trump’s family making up his cabinet, is one of the more bizarre developments to someone looking at the US from Europe. You can only imagine how the US would see some other country in which ‘the whole family’ ran the show , how on earth is this nepotism and unilateralism remotely acceptable to US citizens?

      • giyane

        Goose

        Kushner assisted MBS thin out the nepotees in the Saudi regime by hanging them upside down. Among the 1% nepotism is regarded as classy. Barzani has just installed his nephew in his place to ensure blood continuity in an elected position as President.?!?!

        I mean, if we’re a democracy why don’t we get a vote for the Queen? No doubt all these matters will be discussed at the Royal dining table this week. ?!?!

        • Goose

          Given Trump ripped up the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal), if May and her govt are all smiles it’s a demonstration of complete subservience.

          One of the key questions that needs asking of the Tory leadership candidates, when that contest starts formally on Tuesday , is where each stand on maintaining the JCPOA. The idea of someone becoming PM and immediately pulling the UK out of the agreement and throwing the UK into John Bolton’s war with Iran, well, it’s a hideous prospect.

          • Andyoldlabour

            Goose

            “The idea of someone becoming PM and immediately pulling the UK out of the agreement and throwing the UK into John Bolton’s war with Iran, well, it’s a hideous prospect.”

            That would be an absolute nightmare scenario, which IMHO would clearly lead to war, an unthinkable idea.

          • Goose

            @Andyoldlabour

            You’d imagine so, but that’s why leaders’ debates are needed and an Andrew Neil grilling for the final two exploring their views. If wider foreign policy isn’t mentioned, it’ll be a disgrace, considering one of them is soon going to be PM.

        • N_

          The guest list for the “US and British business leaders” at the dinner attended by the deranged Donald Trump and the insane crown prince Charles is unlikely to published. Perhaps some “great deals” will be done. There’s money to be made from Brexitmageddon.

          Trump is bound to notice that the British monarch does not only own equivalents of his Mar-a-Lago estate at Balmoral and at Sandringham, but she also owns one in central London in the form of the huge private park (by far the biggest in London) behind Buckingham Palace.

    • Republicofscotland

      Actually there has been violent demonstrations in Israel by the Ultra-Orthodox Jews. The reason for their displeasure is the possible change in the law which would require them to complete military service, something which they currently need not do.

      Netanyahu, is in a bit of tight spot over
      corruption charges and attempts to form a government, and Leiberman as potential kingmaker.

  • Wikikettle

    An illustrated description of a troll for me, is a scum bag in the middle of the road, on the far side a gang of thugs are taking turns kicking someone in the head. Passers by on the pavement can see and sense what is going on, but hesitate to step off the pavement and approach. Between them and the gang is our troll urging them to walk on by – nothing to see here – be happy with your own little life and don’t get involved – or else…..

    • Wikikettle

      Very few, Norman, Gilad, Julian and Craig stepped of that pavement ….

  • Harry Law

    Willsman is accused of saying: “This is off the record. It’s almost certain who is behind all this anti-Semitism against Jeremy [Corbyn], almost certainly it’s the Israeli embassy.” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48472977
    That is a purely political statement
    “The Board of Deputies of British Jews president Marie van der Zyl called for Mr Willsman’s expulsion from the party, saying he had “not only denied anti-Semitism in the Labour Party but has resorted to a well-known anti-Semitic trope to make his point”.
    The trope, presumably meaning the Israel Embassy as a Jewish collective is behind all this and is ipso facto Anti –Semitic.
    If what Willsman said was true, and what he said was legitimate ‘political’ comment, then how can that be a trope or Anti-Semitic?
    “The Willsman case is an acid test of whether or not the Labour Party can be trusted in relation to anti-Semitism.”
    That is true, it will be a test case on whether it is even possible to criticise Israel in any way.
    Mr Watson condemned Mr Willsman’s remarks and said they illustrated “how serious the problem of anti-Semitism is in our party”.
    No Tom Watson they illustrate how twisted with hatred you and the country you love ‘Israel’ are in conspiring to destroy J Corbyn. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvUtuzoHgCg

    • Goose

      Is Corbyn his own worst enemy?

      The unions and allegedly Corbyn himself conspired to block open selection being adopted at last year’s conference(2018) the belief was it’d be too controversial and called a ‘purge’ measure. Instead they lowered the required threshold for reselection trigger ballots to 33% , before that it was 50%.( With just 33% needed, is that why MPs like Ruth Smeeth have been so quiet of late?) The trigger ballots approach however,still involves campaigning ‘against’ a sitting MP, rather than the more neutral, fair to all process that is open democratic selection. The US has primaries, imho we should have open selection for both major parties, Tories and Labour.

      Just for example, can you imagine CLPs asking prospective candidates, including the sitting MP, whether they’d support recognising Palestine? CLPs could get the candidates they want who’ll reflect their views and not those of LFI lobbyists.

      • giyane

        Goose

        May has run her tenure at no 10 as a dictatorship, consulting nobody.
        So maybe Corbyn hopes he can overrule his executive if he wins power.

        A very dangerous precedent in the wrong pair of hands

        • Goose

          Corbyn’s people control the NEC, hence why Blairites want Willsman expelled to shove in a Progress member , a place they couldn’t win via election.

          As for Corbyn, he is risk averse. He won’t even defend his closest allies : Willsman and Williamson, or argue antisemitism is being weaponised by PLP opponents(which it clearly is). I agree with his political direction of travel (away from New Labor and back towards socialism) , but the man himself is a bit of wimp, who struggles really impose himself.

          Chris Williamson is much steelier, he should be made deputy leader replacing the vile, scheming Tom Watson, en route to being leader. Then you might see the Blairites finally meeting their match.

    • N_

      Most who use the word “trope” have no idea what it means.

      Is criticising the Ku Klux Klan “anti-white”?

      The core belief of Zionism is practically identical to the “14 words” loved by so many neo-Nazis.

  • Ivan Sharkov

    I am surprised no one put the blame on Labour party for suspending him. Conservatives or Labour, it all looks the same to me.
    There seem to be some good and educated people on this blog. I hope someone takes the chance to form a new party.

    • Twirlip

      Unfortunately, the only people who have formed new parties recently do seem to be chancers. 🙂

      • Ivan Sharkov

        Nothing would change if no one tries.
        Again I am not talking about new formed parties by people who have already been a part of the establishment. It has to be something new and pure. Otherwise it won’t work.

    • Twirlip

      Seriously, though, wouldn’t it be an enormous, even suicidal, political risk for Corbyn and his allies to separate themselves from the Labour Party? Tactically, it must be at least a bit tempting, but wouldn’t it be a strategic disaster, leaving Corbyn in the wilderness for ever? The Blairites are so damnably good at pretending to be the “modernising” representatives of Labour’s historical constituency, making their “tough decisions”, in the interests of “reality”. But economic oppression continues, and it continually worsens, even while it assumes bewildering new forms. And surely this truth will out? Surely the great Blairite con trick can’t work for ever? Surely it’s Corbyn who’s more in touch with the Party’s roots, and the pendulum must swing back eventually? Surely his judgement is right on that? Isn’t it?

      I’m sorry, I’ve never understood politics, and I’m whistling in the dark here. I’m reminded of someone in a radio comedy sketch, many years ago, saying something like “Thatcher can’t go on forever … can’t she? … Oh my God, she’s going to go on forever!”

      I’ll get me coat.

      • Ivan Sharkov

        If Corbyn is as good as many on this site think he is, he will have to take some risks. I have the feeling that most of the high ranking Labour officials do not support him at all. On the contrary they are looking for ways to get rid of him.

        • N_

          I can’t remember the last time Jeremy Corbyn took a risk. He should tell the Equality and Human Rights Commission to go and f*** themselves, but he won’t. Everybody knows Peter Willsman is right but few have the guts to say so.

          The reason the Labour Party is still standing is because the Tories didn’t realise in 2017 that working class people actually care about getting into huge debt just to be able to get some kind of formal education, and they are able to link this to the general deterioration of living standards expressed especially in ever more precarious housing conditions, in having to be the tenants of private-sector landlords, paying ever higher rents and getting ripped off all over the place.

          The Tories, or to be more exact the ruling class, will not make the same mistake again. The political Brexit brand is all about white racism, it is fundamentally about white racism, and there is a lot of mileage in the white racist fear of “invaders”.

          Think of the next general election – or perhaps there will be a second Brexit referendum – as a retrial after an only moderately-skilled prosecution team have heard the defence case.

          Do we think Stephen Bannon wants or does not want a second Brexit referendum?

  • Mist001

    I’m being completely serious here, so no trolling but I can’t work out by myself why a tiny country like Israel has so much power and influence over so many foreign countries? Do people and countries allow them to get away with it because of guilt over the holocaust or is it because of superstitious nonsense that the countries want to keep in with Israel in case they really are ‘the chosen people’?

    These are the only two reasons that I can come up with by myself in answer to my original question, so am I missing something else?

    To be clear, I have nothing personal against Israel or Israelis themselves, I’m genuinely trying to find out why they’re allowed such influence.

    • Casual Observer

      Bridgehead in the region that provides better than 60% of the worlds energy resources maybe ?

      What is more intriguing is why on earth British Jewry seem so happy to go along with the Labour Anti-Semitism gag ? Recall it is being propelled by the same crowd who painted Millibands dad and grandad as being nasty people for not showing gratitude for being saved from the Nazis, and then showed Milliband himself making a funny face whilst eating a Bacon roll.

      Safe to say that there will be pockets of Anti-Semitism in all three major parties in the UK, but that Labour will be the least Anti-Semitic.

    • giyane

      Mist001

      The rules and revelations of divine guidance have been altered to the satisfaction of the wealthy. Considerable progress has been made by Islamists in re- interpretation of the Qur’an to allow all the crimes it’s predecessors benefited from.
      In the meantime we’re stuck with the status quo. It forms the basis for all current injustice in the world. You’ll have to be patient. It takes time.

    • Goose

      Just my opinion.

      In the US, it’s commonly held that to get elected you need endorsement from AIPAC. The US being such a large country , big State wide campaigns(involving buying TV time- negative ads, billboards) literally cost a fortune($millions) and the ‘Jewish lobby’ is prepared to put their money where its mouth is. If you oppose Israel in any way, you may as well be kissing your political career away as they’ll fund an opponent who WILLl do their bidding.

      Those elected then put the heat on the rest of the world.

      • Goose

        Mehdi Hasan of the Intercept, explains it better : https://theintercept.com/2019/02/12/there-is-a-taboo-against-criticizing-aipac-and-ilhan-omar-just-destroyed-it/

        From the article :

        ‘As Friedman explained to me in an interview in 2013: “Mehdi, if you and I were running from the same district, and I have AIPAC’s stamp of approval and you don’t, I will maybe have to make three phone calls. … I’m exaggerating, but I don’t have to make many phone calls to get all the money I need to run against you. You will have to make 50,000 phone calls.” (Is Friedman an anti-Semite too? Asking for a friend.)’

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Goose June 2, 2019 at 20:10
        And the ‘Lobby’ and Israel get their money back, and infinitely more, from Joe Blogs the taxpayer, once ‘their’ politicians are in power.
        Then there are the set-ups and blackmail to ensure compliance.

    • Spencer Eagle

      Think of the state of Israel as a business, the physical country is ‘head office’, there are subsidiaries in almost every other country, that’s how it has so much influence.

      • Goose

        Israel is hyper vigilant for understandable reasons given the collective traumatic history of the Jewish people. I have family who died in WW2 fighting Nazism. THat’s what ‘s so baffling about Israel’s lack of respect for the UK people in the form of Shai Masot et al.

        That desire for influence has warped into something more sinister : interference in the domestic politics of allies.

        • Andyoldlabour

          Goose

          Your posts ring true to me, and really highlight the classic case of a group of people who have been horrendously abused, hold such hatred of everything, and then try to hurt everyone around them.
          They also develop a narcissistic personality disorder, where everything on the World stage has to revolve around them and they are alwyas the perceived victim.

        • nevermind

          yes Goose, its agents like Shai Masot who are by design biting the hands that saved them from peril in the past.

          The mistakes have been made a long time ago, if the British who were attacked by zionists and killed so they could control and annex Palestine would have sat put and reinforced their stay, rather than cave in to blatant violence, a different course would have been steered.

      • N_

        Yes – head office or a “base”.

        People might to have a look at Jewish religious eschatology (“the end times”), which is very different from Islamic and Christian eschatology.

        • N_

          Although he doesn’t cover the eschatology, Israel Shahak’s short book “Jewish History, Jewish Religion” is well worth reading.

    • Hatuey

      Mist001, the reasons are obvious on one level and Casual Observer outlines the main and initial reason for US support of Israel. It needs to be remembered that the US in the immediate postwar period did not support Israel. It wasn’t until the 1960s that US policy shifted dramatically in that direction.

      On another level, and I say this in all seriousness, it suits the US to keep the Middle East in a state of perpetual uncertainty and instability and supporting Israel so enthusiastically — militarily, politically, and economically — more or less guarantees there’s a high degree of bad feeling and volatility there. Consequently, as long as that’s the case, you have grounds for stationing troops etc. in this vitally important oil rich region… etc., etc., etc.

      Of course, US arms manaufacturers do pretty well out of the relationship too. Military aid to Israel equates to a huge welfare cheque for those in the various industries that supply jets, missiles, and other hardware to Israel. The US taxpayer picks up the bill and if anyone complains they’re simply anti Semitic.

      As for wider support for israel outside of the US, a lot of countries are just following the US lead and hoping to pick up some crumbs that fall from the table. Big business isn’t very fussy about who it deals with and if they can sell riot gear or tasers to Israel, who cares about the treatment of Palestinians? It was the same with South Africa, on the face of it the whole world more or less supported the apartheid regime.

      • Goose

        @Hatuey
        I agree with some of that analysis.

        The ultimate nightmare, for Israel would be regional peace united Muslim position (Sunni & Shia). For a long time both sides lived in relative harmony; Sunni/Shia intermarriage was common in Iraq for example. It suits the US, Israel and Saudi have stoke tensions in order for the former to divide and conquer. Even a united Arab front against occupation was seen as dangerous. Saddam Hussein ( very pro-Palestinian, funded rebuilding of homes bulldozed by the Israelis). Libya’s Gaddafi was outspoken on behalf of the Palestinians, Egypt’s Morsi was very pro-Palestine. The lesson is if you back the Palestinian’s the US on behalf of Israel will seek regime change. Ditto Syria and Iran.

        • DaveX

          I agree Goose. In the 1950s & 60s Nasser was trying to unite the Arab world, to gain more control of their own resources (eg oil) so the wealth could be used for the benefit of the Arab peoples. The US (govt & car industry) feared this & had to stop it – Isreal was a willing stooge/accomplice. The policy of the west since then has been to keep the area unstable & fractious (& a good market for weapon sales). Any Arab leader who opposed US capital/foreign policy -on economic or political grounds, had to be silenced. Thus a void was created which was filled by opposition on religious grounds. One consequence was the rise of ISIS.
          All the people of the Middle East have suffered & continue to suffer as a result -none more so than the Palestinians.

        • Hatuey

          Not sure it’s that simple, goose. Saudi Arabia used to pump a lot of money into Palestinian causes and nobody talked about regime change there.

          Egypt used to be central to everything and through The Camp David Accords in the 70s they’ve been kept out of things for the last few decades. It’s quite an achievement that people don’t even see Egypt as part of the Middle East nowadays.

          Needless to say, US Aid has been flowing to Egypt ever since 1978 and it continues to this day. It’s basically a bribe along the lines of “keep your nose out of the Middle East and Palestine and we will give you billions in military aid…”

          Palestinians are basically Egyptians though, sold down the river by successive Egyptian governments and US meddling.

          • SA

            “Palestinians are basically Egyptians”. Where did you get that from. Is your orientalist mask slipping Hatuey?

          • Hatuey

            SA, that whole region right up and into Pakistan was Egypt at one time.

            Looking at more recent demographics based on the lines we drew on maps etc., the line that separates Gaza from Egypt is clearly artificial and very recent.

          • SA

            The whole of Britain and France were Roman but it never made them Roman. The Middle East is a melting pot of many different ethnic groups and what you have just said is exactly what many imperialists say, oh well they are all Egyptians, Arabist or whatever group you want to name.

      • WJ

        Ahem, in the 1960s after the assassination of JFK, who was opposed to Israel getting the bomb.

        • N_

          @WJ

          JFK was also in favour of requiring Zionist organisations in the US to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), as agents of a foreign power.

          Just imagine how that would work today, with AIPAC.

          Then he had his brains blown out in public.Two days later, he man who had been set up to be the patsy was also shot dead in public, on live TV.

          No more problem.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ N_ June 3, 2019 at 14:25
            ‘…JFK was also in favour of requiring Zionist organisations in the US to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), as agents of a foreign power…’
            Interesting – I didn’t know that.
            Another of the dozen or so major reasons JFK was assassinated was he had started printing USG dollars, sidetracking the Federal Reserve scam. That was the first thing LBJ overturned on becoming ‘President’.

    • Antonym

      A rational question on the “magic powers” attributed to 6.6 million Jewish Israelis?
      Perish that thought here!

      Powerful Americans, Saudis, British etc. are merely hiding behind them to disguise their own machinations, but too many of their ordinary countrymen are lapping this rubbish up as if it was ice cream laced with crack cocaine.

      • WJ

        Lots of the “Powerful Americans and British” you speak of–I cant speak to Saudis–are also powerful Jewish Israelis, on account of dual citizenship.

        It’s simply ridiculous to deny that AIPAC has a financial stranglehold over the U.S. Congress as a whole. AIPAC itself and its supporters in the U.S. have bragged as much to be true. And it is. Zionists in the U.S. control a large portion of the press, financial industry, and D.C. foreign policy think-tanks and the like. Trump’s biggest donor says his ONLY issue is the State of Israel! Everybody knows that the U.S. is in the Mideast because of Israel. Nobody is allowed to *say* it.

        • N_

          A general rule in the US is AIPAC – legislature, CPMAJO – executive, ADL – culture.

    • Dungroanin

      Consider the concept of citizenship (passport)

      1. It is not recorded by the UK Parliament or Civil Service how many MP’s (and who) have additional citizenship from other countries.

      2. Johnson had/has US citizenship. Blair had/has Irish citizenship.

      3. Israel demands only Israeli citizens can be Ministers – Netanyahoo gave up his US citizenship (temporarily). It is reported that Bolton has Israeli citizenship

      4. Australia has lost a lot of MP’s for having multiple citizenships, so it is not controversial is it?

      SAY IT AGAIN ..
      1. There are no records available of how many UK MP’s / Military / Civil Service have multiple citizenships and what they are.

      WTF ??? WHY????

      • N_

        That is an excellent question, @Dungroanin.

        If it is gain to traction, it might be a good idea to concentrate on the members of the government (there are about 120 including law officers) and their special advisers.

        I didn’t know Netanyahu gave up his US citizenship temporarily. A while after he became British Foreign Secretary (sic), Boris Johnson gave up his US citizenship too. (I don’t know whether he paid his outstanding US tax or whether somebody paid it for him.) Did he give up US citizenship “temporarily” too??

    • WJ

      The ideology of Zionism encourages among Jewish believers in it (“it” being Zionism, not Judaism) a political allegiance to the State of Israel in tandem with or (given the reality of nation states) in competition with the allegiance they owe to the country of which they happen to be a citizen: be it the U.K., the USA, Russia, France, etc. It often happens, in fact, that Zionists will hold dual citizenship in Israel and in one of these other countries. Now, obviously, dual citizenship is not bad in itself; also obviously, Jews do not have “dual loyalty” on account of their Semitic heritage or religion or any other such anti-Semitic nonsense. What creates dual allegiance is the political ideology of Zionism, full stop. Given that ideology, and money, you get the powerful Israel lobby across the West and Russia.

    • Stephen Miles

      As someone typed above ” anti-semitism ” has been weaponised…as has the H word.
      The motto of Mosad is succinct ” By Deception We Make War “

  • mog

    One way of approaching this matter is to consider the problematic word ‘antisemitism’. I have read many instances of this word being used with a range of quite distinct meanings. Off the top of my head I can think of the following:
    (a) any hatred/ criticism of Jewish people for being Jewish (i.e. a racially determined discrimination),
    (b) any criticism of the ideas, practices and doctrines of Judaism,
    (c) any criticism of ‘Jewish identitarian politics’ (such as that explored by writers like Gilad Atzmon),
    (d) any criticism of current/ recent Israeli politcs,
    (e) any criticism of Israeli politics in general,
    (f) any criticism of the fundamental nature of or the historical origins the state of Israel,
    (g) any mention of disproportionate representation of Jewish people in certain areas of public life in the UK and USA,
    (h) any criticism of public persons who happen to be Jewish,
    (i) any controvention of the IHRA rules regarding anti-semitic comments,
    (j) any criticism of zionism as a poltical ideology
    (k) any questioning of the media narrative about the occurance of ‘antisemitism’ in the Labour Party….

    ….and so on.
    It’s almost too obvious to say, but there clearly is a power of silencing criticism of power. Perhaps unpicking/ challenging the use of the term ‘antisemitism’ rather than acquiescing to its slippery meaning is one way of responding (?).

    • SA

      Are all Jews ‘semites’? Are all ‘semites’ Jews? Is Judaism a religion or an ethnicity?

      These are questions that must lie in the heart of this controversy.

      • Goose

        This debate generate furious anger as antisemitism is classed as racism.

        However, there is no such thing as a Jewish genotype and the very fact you or I can convert to Judaism just as someone can reject their faith(apostasy) makes the idea of a Jewish race a nonsense.

        • SA

          Given also that hundreds of thousands of Russians now have the right to live in Palestine, unlike the Palestinians who had left or deported it also makes the right of return a bit of a strange concept.

          • Goose

            The two state solution seems to be being quietly dropped as a viable option. Yet Netanyahu doesn’t want to make the Palestinians Israeli citizens either, with full voting rights etc. Israeli Arabs (21% of the population) are already second-class citizens. Really, were any state behaving like this other than Israel, the US would be leading the calls for sanctions. Can you imagine any civilised western country getting away with behaving like this?

          • Goose

            Quote : Given also that hundreds of thousands of Russians now have the right to live in Palestine..

            A similar point was made by Corbyn, albeit slightly different context, in his now infamous ‘not getting irony’ comment. That comment created loads of headlines about his alleged antisemitism ,but Corbyn’s point was reasonable, in the context of people with a right to live in Palestine who were shouting down Palestinians present, who have no such right.

          • Hatuey

            Goose: “were any state behaving like this other than Israel, the US would be leading the calls for sanctions.”

            That’s far from true. Actually, the opposite is more true — most countries that have practiced internal repression on a massive scale (assuming you regard the occupied territories as internal to Israel, of course, which I’d say they were on a de facto level) since 1945, have done so with enthusiastic support from the US.

            The list includes, Iran, Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, phillipnes, Chile and a bunch of other South American regimes, South Africa, Iraq, Turkey, and many others.

            In all of the above examples, US support included military support as well as political support on the international stage. And in almost all of the above examples, US allies like Britain and most European countries followed the US lead and mirrored that support.

        • Laguerre

          “However, there is no such thing as a Jewish genotype”.

          There’ve been a lot of Israeli studies of DNA, intended to prove that the DNA is from there. In that sense, many there would disagree with you. I wouldn’t comment on whether they could be considered as having succeeded in their aim, though they think so.

          • Goose

            Well, the rationale for calling antisemitism ‘racism’ is from the fact the Nazis persecuted Jews, Roma, Gypsies etc on a pseudo-racial basis, but the Nazis used bizarre arbitrary methods like measuring ‘nose width’ and forehead slant or size in their attempts to prove people weren’t Aryan, therefore ‘different’ -simply as a means to justify their discriminatory and indeed murderous policies. The work on structure of DNA came about in 1953 i.e., post WW2 and all the research shows there is no such thing as a Jewish genotype.

            Some seem to hate this because it contradicts the basis a ‘Jewish state’, but it’s actually undermines the racial basis for discrimination some far right groups try to still use today..

          • Laguerre

            “The work on structure of DNA came about in 1953 i.e., post WW2 and all the research shows there is no such thing as a Jewish genotype.”

            There’s a lot more recent work, intended to show that Jews originated in the Near east, and weren’t, for example, Khazars.

          • michael norton

            I think it is now about how much Denisovan or how much Neaderthal you have in you.
            Europeans have between 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 percent Neaderthal and no appreciable Denisovan.
            Howerev this also includes South West Asian, so Jews and Arabs are linked in with Europeans, Africans have no Denisovan and no Neaderthal, at all.South East Asian and Polynesians and Native Australians have some Neadethal and quite a lot of Denisovan.

          • Goose

            By that standard, and it’s highly dubious btw, do I and all other Brits have a right to live in Rome because of the Roman conquest of Britain 43–84 AD, 70% of Brits have German ancestry. Do US citizens have a right to live in their more recent European ancestral homelands?

            Heck, if you go back far enough should we all assert our right to live in the Rift Valley of Ethiopia, it was the ‘cradle of mankind.

            /S

      • N_

        Are all Jews ‘semites’?
        No.

        Are all ‘semites’ Jews?
        No. There are more than 400 million Arabs without a Jewish religious background.

        Is Judaism a religion or an ethnicity?
        It’s a religion.

        And it is a racist religion. (Seriously – why was Jehovah better than Baal? Why did the inhabitants of Jericho deserve to get exterminated?) Those religious factions who have to some extent ditched the racism (a different business from simply not wanting to get called up into the army) are tiny.

        Another consideration: many rabbis are atheists…

      • WJ

        The answers to these questions differ depending upon what the Zionist perceives the most advantageous answer to be at the moment.

  • Harry Law

    In order to make any comment about Israel, you have to be aware you are entering a minefield and take the necessary precautions.
    1/ Hire a team of top notch Lawyers to parse every word and phrase [you will need to take out a second mortgage]
    2/ submit said article to teams of English professors and/ or Professors of Linguistics.
    Again very expensive but just think your life could be destroyed and you could be ostracised from society for life if you are accused of Anti-Semitism without taking those necessary steps. The aims of the IHRA are to chill speech and stifle criticism of Israel, either invest in the above or don’t criticise Israel. /S

    • Andyoldlabour

      michael norton

      I agree with you Michael, but we might as well ask how many times did Tony Bliar visit Palestine during his time as Middle East peace envoy.
      These evil people never have to provide answers.

  • Xavi

    If after the past four years Willsnan still failed to foresee how such remarks would be received and depicted he was too stupid to be on the NEC.

    • doug scorgie

      In other words he should have kept his mouth shut?

      He was giving his honest opinion and I agree with what he said.

      Of course that makes me a racist against J..s.

        • nevermind

          yes, thats part of the plan Xavi, to remove as many of Corbyns allies from the NEC/Labour party, this is a concerted campaign to destroy anything that keeps Corbyn in his position.

          If Yvette Cooper or Watson would lead the party this campaign would stop dead and all the civil obedient s in the media could carry on writing about walking their dogs.

          • Xavi

            That has been the whole intention of the “Labour riddled with antisemites” narrative, to isolate and delegitimize Corbyn. The same elements are currently demanding that he sack all his closest advisors because they refuse to forsake most of the party’s parliamentary seats and target seats in order to champion a 2nd referendum and become an unequivocal remain party.

    • N_

      too stupid to be on the NEC

      Like a French politician under Vichy who told a German theatre director in a restaurant that the Berlin government was using its covert network to influence French politics? Too stupid for his own good? Probably.

      How about right and wrong, though? What helps fascism and what doesn’t?

    • J

      Naive to think keeping one’s head down will keep it out of trouble. It’s precisely the opposite, the sooner people refuse to be be bullied away from a reasonable and evidenced position, the sooner we can write a new chapter.

      • Xavi

        J, it’s gone way past the stage now where any public figure would be allowed to rebutt the witch hunters with reason and evidence. All the data has always shown antisemitism is rife in the Tory party, not Labour. That data should have been foghorned by Corbyn and his allies on day one when the first allegations were issued. But anybody attempting to do so now would quickly meet with the same fate as Chris Williamson. Corbyn had few enough allies to begin with. He can no longer afford to lose any more.

        • J

          Chris Williamson will be fine. If we follow your advice we cede all meaningful communication to right spectrum, which is most of the public discourse including all mainstream media.

          No.

          I won’t. I hope others see the sense of not joining you in your self censorship.

          • Xavi

            I’m obviously not talking about self-censoring, you can say what you like and you’ve just seen me state my opinion that it is a completely dishonest smear campaign. What I’m talking about is the successful effort to remove any prominent Corbyn allies from the Labour party if they so much as suggest it is a smear campaign. Not a single one of them has been afforded a MSM platform to challenge their accusers and make a reasonable and evidenced case. That won’t change. The Blairites and their media allies are simply lying in wait to force the removal of the next prominent Corbyn ally. They have been 100% successful thus far.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Don’t understand this fuss over nothing.f one googles Shai Masot directly instaed of using Craig”s shortcut, there are all kinds of articles

    Can’t waste my time reading the following comments.

    • Twirlip

      If there have been “all kinds of articles” recently about Shai Masot in the mainstream press, it should be easy for you to give URLs for some of them.

    • Tony

      “Can’t waste my time reading the following comments.”

      pmsl. This is a discussion forum

    • SA

      Trow
      Did you notice that the date of all of them is from 2017, nothing since or can’t you be bothered with facts?

  • Brendan

    The subject of Julian Assange’s detention is also being deliberately ignored by the media, just like Israeli interference in British politics.

    The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture said today:
    “For the record: On 31 May, I have also given similar exclusive TV interviews to both @SkyNews and @BBCWorld on #JulianAssange but it seems they decided not to broadcast them.”
    https://twitter.com/NilsMelzer/status/1135117906616954880

  • Blissex

    «open attempt to stifle all criticism of Israel, and in effect to make adherence to zionism a pre-condition for membership of the Labour Party»

    But this a crass confusion that can only help the enemies of Labour and of Corbyn: Labour’s official policy of decades is definitely pro-Israel and zionist, and J Corbyn has always been pro-Israel and a committed zionist:

    http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/153303/jeremy-corbyn-must-do-more-address-concerns-says-board-deputies-after-meeting
    «Mr Corbyn and two advisers held talks with Board of Deputies president Jonathan Arkush and chief executive Gillian Merron this afternoon. Following the meeting Mr Arkush said: “We had a positive and constructive meeting and were pleased that Mr Corbyn gave a very solid commitment to the right of Israel to live within secure and recognised boundaries as part of a two state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict.»

    What blogger does, just as Corbyn’s and Labour’s enemies do, is to confuse support for Israel and two-state zionism with support for Likud and one-state zionism or religious discrimination against muslims and christians by Likud, or ethnocultural discrimination against palestinians.

    J Corbyn and Labour indeed not only uphold “the right of Israel to live within secure and recognised boundaries as part of a two state solution”, but the right of *palestinians* be able to “live within secure and recognised boundaries as part of a two state solution”. That’s what Likud hates. Confusing zionism and pro-Israeli attitude with support for Likud is quite wrong because it makes look Likud’s policies legitimate, or zionism and pro-Israeli attitudes tainted by associated with Likud.

    A little quote from the Hansard will help understand:

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141201/halltext/141201h0001.htm
    «Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough) (Lab): My hon. Friend talks about Hamas’s charter, which refuses to recognise Israel, but the charter of Likud, the ruling party in the coalition, states: “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.” Is that not a fetter to progress on this issue?
    Jeremy Corbyn: Absolutely. The Likud charter, which is not talked about too much by those who support the Government of Israel, says that in those very specific terms, and there has to be some recognition that the Prime Minister of Israel is a member of Likud and is in power because of Likud support.»

    • SA

      But if the two state solution is now no longer viable as most think then where does that leave the right of Palestinians to have a separate state?

        • Blissex

          «if the two state solution is now no longer viable»

          That is entirely viable, if the Israeli voters agree, and stop voting for Likud and similar extremist far-right parties. It is a political issue, not an ethnic or religious one.

          Regardless, that is what Labour and J Corbyn have supported for decades: two-state zionism and the right of Israel *and* Palestine to exist as safe, independent states. People within Labour that oppose that are going against party policy, whether they want to throw out the palestinians or the israelis.

          «The Two State Solution, is Israel and Jordan.»

          That’s the Likud solution, as quoted above, and it is against the policy of Labour, the UK government, the EU, and the UN.

          • michael norton

            The only solution that will be allowed to occur is Jordan and Israel, anything else would not be agreed by Jordan, Israel or America.

          • giyane

            Michael Norton

            Jordan is not in Israel even though some refugees from Palestine have sought refuge not only in Jordan but in every other country in the world.

            In the Zionist concept of the Greater Israel Jordan is regarded as Israeli and Syria and parts of Iraq and Egypt
            Within that framework some Zionist extremists might consider Jordan as a concession to Palestinians in return for absolute ownership of all of Israel.
            But they would still lay claim according to that extreme view to all of Syria and much of Iraq and Egypt as well as all of Syria

            It seems as though the weird logic of historical claims to territory have induced a concept that anywhere the Jewish diaspora has ever been ought also to be controlled by Israelis. In fact a universal right of permanently being the Chosen People.

            A claim refuted in the Gospels and the Qur’an but maintained by Zionists of every country and religion.

            They would have you believe that the entire universe is the rightful inheritance of the ” Semites”.
            The ridiculousness of that claim might just be th reason why God dispossessed them of Palestine in the first place.

            Are all United in opposing cloud cuckoo land? No , apparently the Zionists think cloud cuckoo land is The place to be.

          • SA

            Elections will not change anything because the basic policy of not relinquishing the settlements runs through all politics.
            What is left of Palestine is Gaza and little discontinuous municipalities in the West Bank with annexations of territories, according to the leaked deal of the century of Kushner.

        • Goose

          Quote: The Two State Solution, is Israel and Jordan.

          Further evictions to make way for newly arrived settlers. Anywhere else in the world it’d be called ethnic cleansing —the forcible deportation of a population—is defined as a crime against humanity under the statutes of both International Criminal Court (ICC).

          • Goose

            …And the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

    • Jimmeh

      “J Corbyn has always been pro-Israel and a committed zionist”

      Tommyrot.

      Corbyn has for decades been a supporter of the Palestinian cause. I don’t know what you mean by a “zionist” – that term seems nowadays to be deprecated, for fear of misunderstanding; he is however an opponent of the discriminatory apartheid policies of the state of Israel. That is why he and his supporters are accused of antisemitism.

      • Goose

        He’s regularly called a “Jew hater” in online comment forums by trolls, which is the most absurd, warped interpretation of what he stands for possible.

        His policy postions aren’t that much different from Theresa May’s: two state solution and support for the JCPOA.

      • N_

        Corbyn has tried to play both sides of the street. As well as supporting the existence of the fascist regime called “Israel” (you can’t support the existence of the Jewish state called Israel while opposing all “discrimination” against non-Jews – it is just not possible), he has also tried to sit on the fence regarding its existence. Yes, that’s contradictory. For example in answer to a highly impudent question from a British parliamentary committee as to whether he supported the “right of Israel to exist”, he squirmed and replied “I believe it does exist”. Playing both sides of the street while sitting on the fence rarely ends well. He should have responded “That’s a bloody impertinent question, and I didn’t realise political parties had to be vetted by parliament, but to answer your question, no I do not support the existence of the fascist and racist regime that you mentioned, and it is disgusting to me that you sit here and you seem to suggest that you yourself do support it as if baby-burning by racist murderers was some kind of humanitarian act”. But had he said that, he would have been going against Labour party policy. (The Jewish Chronicle would also have got him out of office even faster than they brough down Jenny Tonge in the Liberal Democrats.) He has compromised himself, as all politicians do.

        A small number of Labour politicians may possibly eventually say (once it’s too late) that cooperating with the Equality and Human Rights Commission was the wrong decision – perhaps they’ll say it in their memoirs or something.

        • Doug Scorgie

          I think that Jeremy Corbin was being a bit more diplomatic than what you suggest he should have said N.

  • CameronB Brodie

    English national identity has been shaped to quite a large extent, since the middle of the 19th century anyway, by Christian Zionism.

    The History of a Metaphor : Christian Zionism and the Politics of Apocalypse / L’Histoire d’une métaphore : le sionisme chrétien et la politique de l’apocalypse [article]
    https://www.persee.fr/doc/assr_0335-5985_1991_num_75_1_1609

    • Hatuey

      Armageddon, the rapture, etc… difficult to see any evidence of US foreign policy being affected by that though. More of a social thing in the Bible Belt etc.

      Nobody was interested in the Middle East generally until the combustion engine appeared. The region barely features in histories of colonialism… I think the British called it the “near east” and the fact that so few people even know that is indicative. It was the same with Romania, nobody cared until the opened the oil fields.

    • Laguerre

      British Evangelism, and the chapel, is the past now, 19th and beginning of the 20th century. It doesn’t play any significant political role today, unlike in the US, where such nutters are still in power.

      • giyane

        Laguerre

        IMHO
        British evangelism is very much alive in UK mosques. It has not disappeared at all and is just as openly colonial as before. The only thing that has changed is the religious doctrine on which it is based.
        If anything its intensity within its own ethnicity has intensified and now runs at 20% of UK Muslims who support British colonial interference abroad.under the flag of British -backed Islamism.

        • Laguerre

          Evangelism in Britain wasn’t particularly colonialistic either. Like in the hymn ‘Jerusalem’, it was about building a land of God in Britain. It’s the American evangelists who want to impose it on the Middle East. I’m not sure about the comparison of Christian Zionism with British Islamism either, but I bow to your greater knowledge there.

    • Deb O'Nair

      “since the middle of the 19th century anyway, by Christian Zionism.”

      Yeah, more commonly known as Freemasonry.

  • SA

    The two state solution is a mirage used to keep the pretence that a solution to the Palestinian problem is actively being sought whilst the cantonisation of Palestinian Territories is being actively carried out with f irreversible ‘facts on the ground’.
    The only two state solution that would have been viable would be either reversal to the 1948 partition lines or the 1967 lines agreed by the UN. But of course this is not what is being talked about now.
    There is now only the possibility of one state solution. For US and Israel this means complete annexation of 88% of original Palestine, with a token bantustan Palestinian statelet which is not self viable, or incorporation of all the Palestinians into Israel whilst continuing to treat them as second class citizens or even non-citizens. What has actually happened is a gradual ethnic cleansing of Israeli occupied territories of Palestinians and the world just watched.
    The only other interpretation of a one state solution incorporating all Palestinians living within Palestine and with equal democratic rights is of course unacceptable to those running the show and that is why it is stressed that Israel is a Jewish and Democratic State, the Democratic part applying only to that group only.

    • Laguerre

      That is what is meant by Jared Kushner’s remarks: “Jared Kushner casts doubt on Palestinian ability to self-govern”

      One or more Bantustans is the plan, very much on the South African model, with no rights and no liberty. The plan won’t be accepted of course. Palestinians are not going to settle for Bantustan status, after all they’ve been through. I shouldn’t think Netanyahu is bothered whether it’s accepted or not. He seems quite happy with the present situation. I don’t think he’s right, naturally, but then I’ve always preferred one of the two camps in Israel – those who think that Israel has to, is obliged to, find a political solution for the future. The other camp, to which Netanyahu belongs, has always held to the idea of eternal war, and a militaristic alien implantation in the Near East. The Crusaders thought that way too, by the way.

    • Jimmeh

      I understand that many Palestinians living in Palestine have long supported a one-state solution, based on democracy and equal rights for Palestinians and Jews in the whole of Israel and the occupied territories. This seems to be largely working in the other notorious former-apartheid state, South Africa (yes, there are serious corruption problems, but it’s miles better than it was).

      I don’t know what view is taken among Palestinians about right-to-return for refugees outside Palestine; I am no longer in touch with my Palestinian friend. These are people who still have the keys to their former homes in Israel, that Israeli Jews are now living in. That seems a very fraught issue to me.

      Interesting to remember that Israel plotted with apartheid South Africa to help SA acquire nuclear weapons. They didn’t succeed, but they tried…

      • Goose

        Arab Israelis are treated like second class citizens now (21% of the population), so Palestinians were they to be given Israeli citizenship would be third class(probably wouldn’t even get voting rights). That’s what’s so ludicrous about the ‘one state’ solution Netanyahu is now insisting upon. They are talking about moving the Palestinians to some other area of the ME whereby they’d be given equivalent land to set up a state of their own. Outrageous really, a UK MP Naz Shah, took a hell of a lot of aggro for once suggesting Israel should be moved.

  • George

    John Mann seems to specialize in six minute live rants. When I first saw him interminably assaulting Ken Livingstone on the BBC, I had to go on the net to find out what it was actually all about. I’m guessing that Mann is kept in a cage most of the time and released whenever a thought-obliterating barrage of vitriol is needed.

  • Komodo

    There was a comment referencing the al-Jazeera story on Radio 4. It came from a caller to Any Answers who had listened to the unbalanced assault on Willsman on Any Questions, and managed to get the idea across that there was indeed some evidence of Israeli tampering with our governance. He was very swiftly shut down by the presenter!

    I have yet to find out who funds the Parliamentary Friends of Israel groups, incidentally. Anyone?

    • MJ

      Unknown. The organisations are classed as unincorporated associations and are therefore not required to provide accounts.

      • N_

        @MJ

        The organisations are classed as unincorporated associations

        The Conservative Friends of Israel Limited is a company, incorporated in England in 2012. (Companies House link.)
        So is the Labour Friends of Israel Limited, incorporated also in England in 2015. (Companies House). (The latter is late in filing its confirmation statement. Will they be fined? 🙂 )

        I’m not sure what the legal status is of the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel, or of the Zionist group called the SNP Friends for Peace in the Middle East.

        • Komodo

          Sir David Garrard, lavish donor to Labour under Blair, is still listed as a director of LFoI, I see. But he’s just left Labour in a fit of prosemitism, and started giving to the Chancers instead. While the Tories’ new treasurer is an Israeli – Ehud Sheleg.

          Don’t even think about this. Or the CST will be on your case.

  • Republicofscotland

    Apparently Galloway is to take legal action on his sacking by Murdoch’s station. OFCOM had already censured TalkRadio when Galloway cast doubt on the British version of the Skripal case, of which he was in my opinion correct to do. George isn’t one to tread lightly.

  • ronan1882

    Ironic he ends up getting fired for taking the part of an establishment darling club against a derided outsider/underdog. Completely ignorant too about why the odd Israeli flag is very occasionally seen at a Spurs match.

  • George

    “The former Labour and Respect party MP had presented the Friday night programme, called The Mother of All Talk Shows, since 2016. Earlier this year, the station was censured by the media regulator Ofcom for breaching broadcasting impartiality rules when Galloway cast doubt on Russian involvement in the poisoning of Yulia and Sergei Skripal in Salisbury last year.”

    Doubt will not be tolerated.

  • doug scorgie

    George Galloway has been sacked for a remark deemed anti-Semitic when congratulating Liverpool win over Spurs.
    He said:
    “Congratulations to the great people of Liverpool to the memory of the socialist miner Bill Shankley to the fallen 96 to those who fought justice for them and to the Liverpool dockers. No Israel flags on the Cup!”

    • Goose

      Silly, flamebait comment from Galloway, especially given the fact the PLP are using any hint of AS in their attempts to undermine Corbyn and those on the left.

      • Vivian O'Blivion

        Galloway is merely stating the obvious. Spurs have a strong following amongst the Jewish community (absolutely nothing wrong in that) and a portion of the Jewish community bear political fealty to Israel (as is their right).
        https://images.app.goo.gl/fWPG1Y4hDexiGPrx9
        Galloway is threatening to sue (breach of contract?). If that tweet is adjudged in court to be “anti Semitic”, the bar hasn’t so much been lowered as burned and dispatched to landfill.

        • Republicofscotland

          Like I said on another blog, Spurs fans literally fly Israeli flags. Galloway’s comment is literal fact. He made no mention of Jews.

          • Twirlip

            That’s naive. Of course Galloway has a reasonable explanation for his tweet, and he’s not anti-Semitic. And of course we all resent the chilling effect of the bogus anti-Semitism campaign. Galloway, being Galloway, must have thought he could get away with simply ignoring it. After all, why shouldn’t someone be able to tweet casually about the result of a football match – and if it accidentally causes offence, then explain and apologise afterwards? But that is expecting others to read an unrealistic amount of context – by no means familiar to everybody – into a single tweet, while wilfully (and I would say, arrogantly) ignoring the context of the hysterical witch-hunt for “anti-Semites” that’s been going on. For an ordinary Joe to make such a mistake, even in the present climate, is understandable and excusable. But for a politician? No! (Incidentally, I don’t think that Ken Livingstone was similarly naive or arrogant when his remarks were seized upon. Ditto, for many others who have been picked on – including Craig! But this instance by Galloway really was a stupid mistake.)

          • Twirlip

            J [sorry, there’s no ‘Reply’ button] –

            I can see that what I wrote can be read that way – quite naturally, and in good faith (you’re not twisting my words, I just wrote them badly!) – and I was a bit worried that it would be; but that’s not what I meant. I’ll try to clarify. (But I’ve been hitting the bottle, and I’m a bit the worse for wear, so this may be a mess!)

            What the “anti-Semitism” campaigners generally do is dig for “evidence”, which is taken out of context. (I still vividly remember how Craig, for instance, was ambushed on television – I don’t have a TV, but I saw it on YouTube, and seethed!) But they don’t need to dig for it in this case, nor do they need to take anything out of context. Rather, in order to defend George (as he deserves to be defended – and is well able to defend himself, of course), one has to drag in an unnaturally large amount of context.

            In particular, one has to have a pretty good idea of what sort of person George is. Just as importantly, one has to know something of the history of Spurs fans being on the receiving end of anti-Semitic (*really* anti-Semitic) taunts, and some of them reacting (understandably enough, whatever else one might say about it) by waving Israeli flags. George himself has given some of this context – *after* the tweet! And ronan1882, below (at 15:19 today) has very helpfully given some more.

            Just to make quite sure (because I knew little or nothing of all this myself), I checked with my football-loving, Conservative-voting, Galloway-disliking sister, to see if my impression of George’s tweet was realistic. As far as I can tell, my reaction is unlikely to have been an unusual one.

            To me, setting aside what I know about George Galloway, and the anti-Corbyn “anti-Semitism” campaign, that tweet about the result of a football match *looks like* (although it *is* not) a textbook example of the supposed “new anti-Semitism”, in which mention of Israel is used as code for Jews. It *looks like* (although I repeat, it *is* not) a crude racial taunt at Spurs fans.

            What I’m saying (although I’m not finding it easy to express clearly) is that George ought to have realised that that was how it would look. As plenty of others have said already (but this was also my spontaneous reaction), he was “handing ammunition” to the anti-Corbyn propagandists. I’m sorry to say it (and I feel silly saying it, because he’s a seasoned politician, and I’m only a silly little twerp on the Internet), but that was stupid.

            This is *not*, repeat **not**, repeat ***NOT!*** (sorry, it’s the whisky talking!) the same as saying that we must all walk on eggs, constantly monitoring and censoring ourselves, in case we say something factual and not at all bigoted, in private or in public, which can nevertheless be dug up, dragged out of context, and used against Corbyn and his allies in the Labour Party by a bunch of cynical and hypocritical (and highly organised) propagandists.

            [I’d better shut up now. I don’t know if I’ve really managed to clarify anything. Maybe tomorrow?]

          • seydlitz

            Celtic fc and the republic of Ireland flag at their matches, did that mean supporters were in sympathy with the ira.

          • Twirlip

            [Replying to J again – I hope more succinctly, this time!]

            Having been obliged to go over this incident in my mind again, I offer a speculation as to how it may have happened.

            However relaxed GG may have been when he composed his tweet, he cannot have been “ignoring” the relentless bogus AS propaganda campaign (as I unfortunately put it). Rather, in typically combative style, he must have been *defying* it, aware that his tweet would be seized upon, but confident that he could defend it (in court, if necessary).

            The trouble (as I said, this is sheer speculation) isn’t that he “ignored” that context, but that that was the *only* context he considered. Under the pressure of the relentless campaign by propagandists, he developed tunnel vision, and considered only how his mention of Israel in the tweet would look to those people, and not how it would look to an ordinary person.

            I think that was his error of judgement. If I’ve guessed correctly, it’s more understandable than I thought – and the blame for it is far from his alone! – but it was still an error. The propaganda campaign had succeeded in turning his strength against him.

            [OK, that’s more than enough from me! I hope at least I’ve corrected the clumsy way I put it the first time.]

          • Komodo

            Exactly, RoS. It’s a sign of the creeping erosion of free speech that such a remark can tactically be inflated into a sacking offence. And on behalf of a foreign country.

    • ronan1882

      Ironic that he should end up getting fired for championing an establishment darling club against a derided outsider/underdog. He also revealed a painful ignorance of why the odd Israeli flag is very occasionally seen at a spurs match. a residue of decades of anti-semitic hate directed at spurs fans from Chelsea, arsenal and west ham fans – “spurs are on their way to Auschwitz, Hitler’s gonna gas em again,” “put the yids back in the oven”, constant hissing sounds mimicking gas. On the rare occasion an Israeli flag is seen it is displayed merely as a symbol of defiant celebration or adoption of Jewish identity in the face of all the abuse from racists. Bugger all to do with Netanyahu or illegal occupation. I see he’s tweeting that he will sue Murdoch and receive damages in court. Good luck with that!

      • Jimmeh

        Indeed.

        I used to live near the old Highbury ground; there were graffiti on the walls around there saying things like “Arsenal kill yids” – they meant Tottenham fans, who were called “the yids”. Nasty. This was a couple of decades ago – things may have changed.

        • seydlitz

          Is the term yid anti semetic?I think it is more disrespectful,the same as jock, mick,taffy,frog,and many other names.

          • ronan1882

            Best way to cone to a definitive answer: try calling any Jewish person that and see how you fare in court.

  • BrianFujisan

    It says it all about how we are Ruled over – And Through USA relentless Bullying – The entire world

    Because Everyone Knows Willsman is right.. gets no support, and he loses his job

    Everyone knows lLLMAN Omar is right about AIPAC, and only barely held her job.. but look at the Clamour from almost everyone in both the Republicans and her own Democrats, For her to be sacked.. Cowards

    AND IT’S OK For a nasty piece of stuff like this Cretin.. to call for Corbyn to be ‘sacrificed’.

    Speaking at the BoD meeting on 19 May, Lionel Kopelowitz said:

    “The word Corbyn is a very suitable one for him, after Corbyn in Hebrew is ‘korban’, which is a sacrifice. And I think we should sacrifice him for all the trouble that he has caused.”

    He didn’t know, or didn’t care.. That he was on live stream..But was immediately Told

    “I remind you that you re live streamed, and i remind everyone here we are being live streamed”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuegEcB7QgI

  • Ian Fantom

    This case will be hard for Peter Willsman, but in the big scheme of things, the more ludicrous the state propaganda becomes, the easier it will get to expose it. There’s just been a case in which Peter Gregson has been expelled from an organisation he wasn’t a member of. That’s Campaign for Socialism, which claims he was a member because he joined Momentum. Yet that’s the first he heard of that, and no agreement with Momentum is mentioned in the Constitution or their Standing Orders.

    I think the only solution is to call for the closing down of the Israeli Embassy in London. But that could lead to our expulsion from the Labour Party, the Campaign for Socialism, and the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party.

  • Martinned

    This post misses the point, except the last paragraph. Strictly speaking Labour doesn’t have an antisemitism problem so much as a “responding to antisemitism”-problem. If they were better at kicking out antisemites, they wouldn’t be so vulnerable to the accusation that they blur the line between antisemitism and anti-zionism.

    “Israeli embassy employs lots of spies” is a “dog bites man” level non-story. The question is why Labour is so vulnerable to their efforts.

    • Laguerre

      Labour isn’t so vulnerable to their efforts, but it’s a big attack. And no, Willsman has been accused of anti-semitism, based on remarks which were clearly not anti-semitic, but rather a criticism of Israel’s political acts. Of course, Shai Masot was not so much spying, getting information, which might be considered quasi-legitimate, but actively intervening in British politics. At least in the US, we’ve just had a big investigation about Putin’s supposed intervention in US politics – there it’s illegal. As a lawyer, you would know better than me whether it’s illegal in Britain.

      • Tony

        And, whereas the investigation in the USA rumbled on like a juggernaut for nearly three years without any real evidence, the Shai Masot story disappeared off the face of the Earth, despite him being caught bang-to-rights!

  • Gary

    I now see that George Galloway has been sacked from his radio programme for referencing “Israeli flags” This helps to continue the narrative that anything remotely critical of Israel is anti-Semitic. Helped, in George’s case by the fact that he is a dolt and often makes remarks that are either uncalled for or deliberately provocative. He has flip flopped so much on many of his principles it’s hard to believe that he wants to be taken seriously. BUT, when all is said and done he is being criticised as anti semitic when his remarks are nothing of the kind.

    This constant negative reporting of figures on the left being made out as anti Jewish for stating mere facts about the government of Israel and it’s employees is, as you report, producing a ‘chilling effect’ None dare to go against the new thinking.

    I’ve often thought that the extreme, and fairly new, anti Muslim line taken by mainstream politicians would fail to stand the test of taking their speeches and replacing and replacing the word ‘Muslim’ with the word ‘Jewish’ But were the politicians targeted to have their speeches ‘reversed’ and replace ‘Israel’ with literally ANY other country, would anyone even notice what they were saying?? I think not.

    The Israeli government and it’s embassies have done an excellent job, it is now no longer possible to criticise them in any way, shape or form and still remain in the mainstream. It’s a sad day for freedom of speech and for the freedom of our politicians to call out governments who have racist policies like ‘The Deposit Law’ and ‘The Nation State Law’ These go unreported and uncriticised, as does their oppression of innocent civilian Palestinians…

1 2 3

Comments are closed.