Chutzpah! If you want to know about racism why not ask racists, they should know

Read this and weep or laugh out loud. I suppose that's an option.  This is from a newsletter from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, aka the Tory Party at Shul.

Redbridge councillors reach out to Board of Deputies over antisemitism

Board of Deputies Vice President Amanda Bowman met Redbridge councillors, including Council Leader Jas Athwal, to discuss antisemitism. Elected representatives from Redbridge reached out to the Board of Deputies after allegations of antisemitic conduct in a Labour Party ward meeting emerged. Amanda said: “It was great to see both Labour and Conservative councillors reach out to the Board of Deputies to learn about antisemitism. That is just the sort of leadership political parties need if they want to rid themselves of racism.” Jas Athwal said: “It was wonderful to meet with Amanda Bowman and Daniel Elton from the Board of Deputies to get a fuller understanding of the challenges facing the Jewish community and our society as a whole. It was an important reminder that the Jewish community’s fight is our fight and that we must all play our part in driving out antisemitism in all its forms.’

The trouble is that one of the challenges facing the Jewish community, as in people who are Jewish, is that people masquerading as the Jewish community make false antisemitism allegations against Leftists whilst giving Rightists like Johnson, Rees Mogg & Co. a free pass.

Geoffrey Alderman on JEWS WHO TURNED AWAY KINDERTRANSPORT KIDS

Here's another article by Geoffrey Alderman in the Jewish Telegraph which, like the previous one will probably be overwritten by the next.  So off to the Wayback Machine go I and I'm posting the article here too.

GEOFFREY ALDERMAN JEWS WHO TURNED AWAY KINDERTRANSPORT KIDS LAST month an important conference took place to mark the 80th anniversary of the Kindertransport. Two leading researchers — Dr Louise London and Professor Paul Weindling — presented what was reportedly regarded as shocking evidence relating to the choice of unaccompanied German and Austrian children who were — or were not — permitted to enter the UK under the Kindertransport scheme. Children were refused places if it was thought that they had ‘disabilities’ or had ‘too Jewish’ an appearance. What was wanted were children who were not religious and so could be all the more easily integrated into British society. Prof Weindling cited the case of a Viennese Jewish boy whom the authorities described as “very well behaved but very slightly mentally backward”. The application made on his behalf was rejected. We do not know what fate befell him. As Dr London remarked, the “problem of what to do with the Jews took precedence over efforts to save them”. I describe the evidence presented by Prof Weindling and Dr London as “shocking”. Unfortunately, those of us who have researched the Anglo-Jewish response to the Holocaust cannot have regarded it was shocking at all. Key to the choice of Kindertransport children was the Jewish banker Otto Schiff, head of the London-based Jews’ Temporary Shelter and ‘Overseer of the Poor’ of the United Synagogue. Schiff worked hand-in-hand with the Aliens Department of the Home Office, so that, in practical terms, Jewish refugees from Nazism were allowed into Britain — or were refused entry — on his authority. The Home Office trusted Schiff because it knew that, in his approach to this task, he would bring to bear prejudices and preferences of which the government approved. The Viennese boy was not rejected by the British government, but by Kindertransport officials in London. That is to say, by fellow Jews! Is there a case to be made in defence of Schiff and his colleagues? Anti-Jewish prejudice appeared to be on the rise in the UK at that time. With a handful of notable exceptions, the Anglo-Jewish leadership — at the head of which was the then-Board of Deputies president, Mancunian barrister Neville Laski — believed that allowing more foreign-born Germanic-speaking Jews into this country would add fuel to the fire. Laski had no qualms in publicly articulating the view that Jews, by their conduct, fostered antisemitism. In his book Manchester and the Rescue of the Victims of European Fascism (published 2011), the late Manchester Jewry historian Bill Williams reminds us that in December, 1935, the Manchester-based Women’s Lodge of Bnai Brith resolved that “the spread of antisemitism in England is largely brought about by ourselves”. But I need to stress that what was true of Manchester was equally true of London. Indeed within British Jewry this view was widely shared. And because it was widely shared, during the 1930s the official organs of Britain’s Jewish communities did their best to ensure that the least possible number of Jewish refugees were admitted to the UK, and that, as far as possible, only those were admitted who might be judged to be the most easily inclined to assimilate into the host society. Beyond that, the fewer foreign-born Jews who were permitted to enter the UK, the better. And what of those heavily traumatised children lucky enough to be chosen for the Kindertransport? Had they all been found billets in Jewish homes, their sufferings might have been lessened. But in 1943, Dayan Dr Isidor Grunfeld, of the United Synagogue’s Beth Din, recalled how in 1938, when the Kindertransport began arriving, Jews who had been only too willing to donate money to refugee causes “showed themselves very reluctant to take Jewish refugee children into their homes”. While a case can be made in defence of Otto Schiff and his colleagues, it strikes me as weak. As for Schiff himself, I never cease to be amazed at the praise still lavished upon him. I noted with dismay that as part of the 2018 Holocaust Memorial Day events, a number of posthumous awards were made to ‘Heroes of the Holocaust’. Among the recipients was Otto Schiff, upon whose activities the then-Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, waxed lyrical. Indeed, so preciously revered is Schiff’s memory in certain circles that a Jewish Care home in Golders Green actually bears his name. I am outraged. E-MAIL: comment@jewishtelegraph.com If you have a story or an issue you want us to cover, let us know - in complete confidence - by contacting newsdesk@jewishtelegraph.com, 0161-741 2631 or via Facebook / Twitter

© 2019 Jewish Telegraph
www.JewishTelegraph.com

The original of this article can be seen at the Wayback Machine.

The Video the Board of Deputies, Momentum's Jon Lansman & Politics Home tried to ban

Sheesh, I thought this video was lost and gone forever.   I first heard about it via this piece in Politics Home.  Here look:

A controversial video criticised as a “slap in the face” by Jewish campaign group is still posted on Jeremy Corbyn’s official Facebook page, PoliticsHome can reveal.

The film, made by Mr Corbyn’s campaign team, features his supporters responding to a number of accusations often levelled at the Labour leader’s backers.

One of the questions is ‘Do you promote anti-Semitism?’ – in reference to a string of suspensions and expulsions over the last year.

One of the participants in the video throws away a piece of paper with the question written on it and says “so that’s gone as well”.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews spoke to veteran left-winger Jon Lansman, Mr Corbyn's campaign director, who apparently agreed to withdraw the video.

It has since been taken down from YouTube and the main page of Mr Corbyn’s Facebook account, but it is still available to view on the ‘videos’ section of his page.

“The dismissive video was a ‘slap in the face’ for the Jewish community,” said Board of Deputies chief executive Gillian Merron in a statement released last night.

“Having spoken directly to campaign director Jon Lansman, the Jeremy for Labour campaign now recognises the inappropriate message conveyed and has committed to remove the video and apologise. This is the right result.

Now, after a couple more paragraphs Politics Home hosted the video that the Board of Deputies had complained about and Jon Lansman had apologised for but now look:

I think we can guess that under the capitulationist advice of Jon Lansman, Jeremy Corbyn's Facebook probably zapped the video too.  I asked one of the participants if they retained a copy but they hadn't. I was getting frantic.  Even when Politics Home hosted the video it couldn't be downloaded.   But when you see the video you will see that there was nothing in it to complain about or to apologise for which I am guessing is why Politics Home removed it.  And now thanks to Jamie Stern-Weiner who found it on YouTube here it is:

So just like the whole of the antisemitism smear campaign against leftists and Palestine solidarity supporters this is yet another case of "nothing to see here", which in the case of Politics Home and probably Corbyn's Facebook page is now literally true.

PS: I've just seen that Harry's Place has missed the point of the removal of the video and hosted it on their racist site.  It was actually HP's David Toube (he calls himself Habibi) who uploaded it to YouTube but rather smartly disabled the comments.

Zionists outnumbered at their own demo

As far as I can tell from the Jewish Chronicle and its twitter account Zionists were outnumbered by Palestine solidarity supporters on a demonstration outside the Palestinian mission in London organised by some major Zionist groups for last night (13/10/2015).  Here's the JC:

An estimated 70 pro-Israel supporters gathered outside the Palestinian Mission in London on Tuesday evening to protest against the lack of condemnation for recent terrorist acts in Israel.

Is that the BNP and EDL in the background?

And here's a tweet retweeted by the @JewishChron account:

About 80 now on the pro-Palestinian side. 6 police officers stand in front of the crowd to stop any trouble. pic.twitter.com/OH459t2qze

— Josh Jackman (@josh_jackman) October 13, 2015

So not UK Zionism's most successful outing.

Board of Deputies launched "two lines of attack" to get Israel conference cancelled

The fact that zionists simply can't make a case for Israel was pretty much proven by their apoplexy over an academic conference which was going to take place at Southampton University on 17th of this month titled, International Law and the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism.

I was reading with some amusement a post on the Israel advocacy site, Engage, where some zionists were clearly concerned that having the conference cancelled would make the zionist movement look bad whilst others thought the title alone should set alarm bells ringing. Still others thought they could actually make a case for Israel, presumably under the heading, Exceptionalism.

But then Sarah Annes Brown came and spoiled all my fun with this comment:

s4r4hbrown Says:
March 31, 2015 at 6:30 am

The conference has now been cancelled on safety grounds.

http://freespeechsouthampton.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/update-from-organisers-31-march-it-is.html

I checked out twitter to see what was being said and eventually put a question of my own:

Does anyone know who or what @unisouthampton said was threatening safety at an academic conference on #Israel? https://t.co/opDmx2nCIB
— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) March 31, 2015

Among the responses was one linking a Jewish Chronicle article putting the name, Sussex Friends of Israel in the frame and some tweeters (tweeps?) thought it was the threat of thuggery from this group that had the uni running for cover.  But another article linked below that one thickened the plot just a tad.  Headed Southampton University confirms it is considering cancelling anti-Israel conference the piece contains this little gem from the Board of Deputies of British Jews' president, Vivian Wineman:

“When we had a meeting with the university vice-chancellor they said they would review it on health and safety terms.

“The two lines of attack possible were legal and health and safety and they were leaning on that one.”

It appears that the university wanted to buckle to the pressure from the lobby but were unsure which excuse they could use.  In correspondence university officials had said that there were no legal grounds to stop the conference.  In fact they acknowledged that they were legally obliged to facilitate the conference.  So the other "line.. of attack" had to be used: health and safety.

I should say at this point that the uni hasn't actually made public or, according to itself, even made the final decision but if it does decide to deploy the health and safety excuse it will have to explain this. Now there's something to look forward to.

Oxymoron Corner: Zionists rally against Racism

Remember those notes I posted up about a Zionist Town Hall type meeting where people kept badgering the Board of Deputies of British Jews over what they're doing for plucky little Israel at a time like this.

The BoD were promising to organise a rally for Israel some time next month.  I think I have stumbled on the details of the rally.  I could be wrong because it's not actually next month, it's tomorrow, but I think this is the flyer:

"They openly say "Hitler was right""? Wow!  Who says that?  Oh well, never mind. The Zionists have realised that there is no positive case for the racist war criminals of the State of Israel so it's back to routine negative hasbara by smear.  You don't get many demos at the Royal Courts of Justice but you do get lots of roadworks and traffic bottlenecks so I am guessing since they know they'll get a paltry turnout they're hiding their shame.  I mean they wouldn't be well seen if they met at, say, Trafalgar Square, but at the Royal Courts of Justice on the Strand the fact that they can't be seen for lack of numbers won't be seen.

UPDATE: I've just seen the Board of Deputies' website on this rally:

This Sunday the Board's Senior Vice President Laura Marks (pictured) will be joining the likes of Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, parliamentary candidate  and co-founder and chairman of Quilliam, Maajid Nawaz, and the social commentator Douglas Murray in addressing a communal rally organised by the Campaign Against Anti Semitism. 

The Board is  firmly   behind this vital initiative at a time when reported cases of anti-Jewish incidents are at record highs across the UK and the need for the law to be firmly applied relating to hate crimes is absolutely vital. The rally will also include messages of support from the denominational movements.

Only a couple of days ago the Board was outraging Zionists by issuing a touchy feely statement with the Muslim Council of Britain which ended with the words, "May the God of Abraham grant our World more peace, wisdom and hope."  Well, if the G-d of Abraham can't grant our world more peace, wisdom and hope, he can always call on Douglas Murray to help him.

Israel: The Community's Response to the atrocities in Gaza

The following are notes taken by Deborah Maccoby at what turned out to be a rally for the State of Israel in its war on the Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere. Comments in bold are by me and those in italics are asides by Deborah. Now read on...

 

NOTES OF BOARD OF DEPUTIES "TOWN HALL" JEWISH COMMUNITY MEETING, 

ISRAEL: THE COMMUNITY'S RESPONSE

13.08.14 HELD IN JFS (Jewish Free School)

SUMMARY OF PANEL SPEECHES

VIVIAN WINEMAN, PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES

I am introducing this meeting with mixed feelings.  I am chuffed that so many have come, but sad about the circumstances in which we meet. We all have relatives in Israel and we are all sad about the terror that they are experiencing there [Note: no mention from VW at all of Gaza].  And with the rise of antisemitism in Britain, we are moving into very difficult territory.[We'd better spread the word that support for war criminals is an essentially Jewish thing]  All the communal organisations have worked well together to organise this meeting.

CHIEF RABBI: EPHRAIM MIRVIS

I have to leave soon, as I am very busy; but I had to be here to accompany the meeting in expressing solidarity with Israel. Ever since the three Israeli teenagers were abducted and murdered, we have been going through anxiety on a daily basis. I am saddened by the loss of Israeli soldiers and saddened by the loss of civilian life in both Israel and Gaza. [Note: this and a reference from Gillian Merron, CEO of the BoD, to "loss of life on both sides", were the only references during the entire meeting to civilian deaths in Gaza, apart from a reference by the BICOM speaker to misleading images of dead children in Gaza and comments both from the BICOM speaker and at question time that the casualty figures can't be believed].  We live with a dual existence, as individuals and as part of a people.  We feel totally part of Am Yisrael.  In July, there were over 200 antisemitic incidents in Britain. Tomorrow I am going to Israel, on my fifth visit since the start of the conflict. I hope the meeting will consider how we can all help for the sake of Israel's future.

DERMOT KEHOE, CEO OF BICOM (The Britain-Israel Research Committee, the UK equivalent of AIPAC).

We all stand with Israel; we are not divided [Paid Israel advocates not divided, shock!].  We are united in our support for democracy.  There is a rise in antisemitic attacks and increasing fear within the Jewish community. BICOM exists to give pro-Israel voices a platform [and Jews a bad name].  I wish we had in Britain a fair and balanced media [no you don't].  I wish we had a media that expressed complex ideas in depth [nope, you definitely don't want that]. But Dan Meridor, Uri Dromi etc [a long list of more names] have been interviewed in the British media.  We have taken the argument to Israel's fiercest critics; we have debated in public with Mira Bar-Hillel, Ben White and Mehdi Hasan.  Not one opportunity to put the pro-Israel point of view has been turned down. A third of children in Sderot are likely to grow up with long-term learning disabilities. BICOM has exposed the use on social media of misleading images of dead children in Gaza that were actually of children in Syria or Iraq [Is he saying that hundreds of children were not killed in Gaza by Israel?].  Hamas casualty figures cannot be taken at face value.  Whenever you see or hear anything wrong in the media, complain to the media and seek help from groups such as We Believe in Israel.  Israel still has many friends in the UK[media].

SPEAKER FROM UJIA (the United Jewish-Israel Appeal)

Every year, we send children on summer tours.  When war broke out in July this year, we asked "can we keep them safe?  Can we still give them an educational programme?"  We decided to carry on, and right now approximately 1,225 children have completed their summer tours in Israel.  A large number of parents from the US cancelled the summer tours; but - without wanting to sound anti-American - only 20 parents from Britain cancelled. UJIA has raised hundreds of thousands of pounds for relief projects in the south of Israel, including projects for the Bedouin [no mention of relief for Gaza][and this may have been a coded reference to the ethnic cleansing Prawer Plan].  We are running a two-day programme in Israel for British Jews to go there to see these relief projects for themselves. This has been the busiest month in the UJIA's history. Yes, there are critical views of Israel in the Jewish community [Note: this and remarks about Yachad and making peace with the Palestinians were the only references to critical views of Israel in the Jewish community in the whole meeting]; but instinctive, gut love for Israel has never been greater [yup, you need a strong gut to love Israel].

GILLIAN MERRON, CEO OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES

This is a high-profile, complex and long drawn out conflict.  We are all deeply saddened by the loss of life on both sides. But Israel's safety and security are paramount.  It has been attacked with rockets and terror tunnels.  I am proud to stand with Israel.  We face a challenging environment in the UK.  Graphic images are beamed into our TVs every night [not faked images from Syria and Iraq then].  There is effective campaigning from PSC and Stop the War.  The British government has acted with integrity. I congratulate our government for pursuing the de-militarisation of Hamas; but it has also reached the decision to restrict the export of weapons that enable Israel to defend itself.  We continue to challenge the Lib Dems over the comments made by David Ward. We have also challenged John Prescott for calling Gaza a "concentration camp".  [did they challenge David Cameron when, presumably at Obama's request, he called Gaza a "prison camp"?]

SPEAKER FROM CST (COMMUNITY SECURITY TRUST)

There were over 200 antisemitic incidents in July,  This is over four times what could be expected.  It is the second highest monthly total since CST started recording antisemitic incidents in 1984 - the first highest monthly total  being in January 2009, under similar circumstances.  There were 374 antisemitic incidents in the first six months of this year.  We have increased security at synagogues and Jewish events. CST is working closely with UJS (the Union of Jewish Students). If you are a victim of an antisemitic incident, please report it to CST.[are they using the working definition of antisemitism? If so, we'll never know how many incidents there have been]

SIMON JOHNSON OF JEWISH LEADERSHIP COUNCIL

We are challenging BDS, which means the delegitimisation of Israel [you're damn right geezer, except Israel had no legitimacy in the first place].  The National Union of Students and the TUC Conference have passed boycott motions. Even Tesco might be in the process of boycotting certain products [certain products?].  There are demonstrations outside the Kedem store in Manchester. Labour and the Lib Dems could have plans for boycott.  [Note: the NUS motion included support for a two state solution; and the TUC motion was only against settlement goods; the Kedem demonstrations are against the Occupation, not Israel per se; Tesco, Labour and the Lib Dems would only support boycott of the Occupation][and the good news?].  What are we doing about it?  Our mechanisms include: a) the Fair Play Campaign; b) supporting the TUC Friends of Israel; c) re-organisation of the way we coordinate responses to the delegitimisation of Israel.  We are protesting against local councils that have taken the ludicrous decision to fly Palestinian flags.  We are opposing the Tricycle Theatre's discriminatory decision to force out the UK Jewish Film Festival [Note; the Tricycle asked the UKJFF to drop its funding from the Israel Embassy, in view of the situation in Gaza, so that it would not look as though the Tricycle was supporting the Israeli government, and offered to make up the shortfall itself; the UKJFF chose to keep its Israeli Embassy funding and leave the Tricycle].

LUKE AKEHURST FROM WE BELIEVE IN ISRAEL

I am not Jewish but am proud to support Israel. MPs have been getting thousands of anti-Israel letters. Anti-Israel groups have generated 58,000 letters to MPs. Our side has only sent 5,000.  The government is threatening to suspend licences for the very weapons that Israel needs to defend itself.  What you can do: complain about media bias; visit Israel; attend rallies.  Sussex Friends of Israel are organising a big rally in Brighton this month.  There will be another Israel Solidarity Rally in London next month. 

QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS INCLUDED:

1) We all know what "from the river to the sea/Palestine will be free" means.

2) Hamas has links with ISIS.

3) The Gaza casualty figures are all lies.

4) Tirade against Yachad, [the UK equivalent of J-Street], for organising tours in which people from Britain are taken on Breaking the Silence tours of the West Bank.

5) Can we try to get Jon Snow off the air?

6) Why isn't the Zionist Federation up on the platform?

7) Why are we not being led by the Board of Deputies? (loud applause and anger against the BoD).

8) A woman said she had gone with a delegation to Bradford to oppose George Galloway's call to make Bradford an "Israel-free zone" and had brandished her Israeli passport there, but had got no support from the Board of Deputies. (Standing ovation from audience).

9) Question from JfJfP signatory: what perspectives do you have on ways to make peace with the Palestinians?  No-one has mentioned this all evening. [she was hissed apparently]

10) Comments from Chair of UK Jewish Film Festival denouncing the Tricycle.

11) Comments about the Hamas Charter

12) Comments about Yvonne Ridley speaking in Glasgow.  What is the Board of Deputies doing in support of the Glasgow Jewish community?

A few responses from the panel (who seemed overwhelmed by the antagonism and didn't answer all the questions).

a) Re Yachad: we caution everyone in this room against demonising any organisation in the Jewish community that reflects a basic commitment to the Jewish and democratic state.

b) re Jon Snow: BICOM rep said they were going to look into prosecuting him for contravening media standards.

c) In response to question 9 from the JfJfP signatory:  we want to acknowledge the absolute legitimacy of this question., 76 per cent of Israeli Jews would like to see a two state solution, but the same percentage thinks it won't happen in their lifetime.  A majority of Israelis wants to see a peaceful outcome.[well that's alright then]

SINGING OF HATIKVA AND GOD SAVE THE QUEEN [Sounds like a BNP rally]

Pics from the Jews Against Genocide demo in London

Jewish in Britain against Genocide demonstrated outside the offices of the Board of Deputies of British Jews in London yesterday, August 4, 2014. 

Quotes and pics from the group:

We are Jews in Britain outraged at the Board of Deputies’ uncritical support for Israel as it commits genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza.

The Board of Deputies claims to speak in our name when it lobbies in defence of Israeli violence. It organises rallies with the Zionist Federation in support of Israel’s slaughter.

It cynically uses the Nazi genocide of Jews to silence critics of the Israeli genocide of Palestinians.

We Jews know, from our history, about persecution, concentration camps, starvation and murder.  Israel has turned the Gaza Strip into a concentration camp by imposing a seven-year military siege, by restricting access to food, water, fuel and medical supplies, by imprisoning 1.8 million people and squeezing them even further by imposing no-go areas within the Gaza Strip.

In the current assault on Gaza, entire families are killed and neighbourhoods obliterated. UNICEF has condemned Israel for deliberately targeting women and children.

Nearly 400 children have been murdered in less than four weeks, and more than 2000 have been injured and maimed. Gaza’s dead children are dead simply because they are Palestinians – this is genocide.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews is condoning genocide in Gaza. They don’t represent us.

At 3.30pm today, 4 August 2014, outside the London offices of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, on the 27th day of Israel’s military attack on the Gazan people, Jews in Britain Against Genocide staged a die-in to commemorate the hundreds of Palestinian children deliberately targeted and killed by Israel.  We displayed toys, clothes and replicas of mutilated children and babies smeared red to symbolise the blood of Palestinian children murdered by Israeli forces. We are Jews in Britain outraged at the Board of Deputies’ uncritical support for Israel as it commits genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza. The Board of Deputies claims to speak in our name when it lobbies in defence of Israeli violence. It organises rallies with the Zionist Federation in support of Israel’s slaughter. It demands that John Prescott be punished for comparing Gaza to a concentration camp (Daily Mirror, 26 July 2014). It attempts to intimidate local councils for flying the Palestinian flag as an expression of solidarity with Gaza, and has written to the prime minister thanking him for his support for Israel’s massacre in Gaza. It cynically uses the Nazi genocide of Jews to silence critics of the Israeli genocide of Palestinians. We Jews know, from our history, about persecution, concentration camps, starvation and murder.  Israel has turned the Gaza Strip into a concentration camp by imposing a seven-year military siege, by restricting access to food, water, fuel and medical supplies, by imprisoning 1.8 million people and squeezing them even further by imposing no-go areas within the Gaza Strip. In the current assault on Gaza, entire families are killed and neighbourhoods obliterated. UNICEF has condemned Israel for deliberately targeting women and children. Nearly 400 children have been murdered in less than four weeks, and more than 2000 have been injured and maimed. Gaza’s dead children are dead simply because they are Palestinians – this is genocide.

At least a quarter of a million Gazans are homeless because of Israeli bombing.  There is nowhere safe to escape to -- Israel has bombed UN-protected schools, hospitals and other UN buildings, killing civilians seeking refuge. Ten thousand people have been killed or injured.  The bombardment of Gaza from the sea, land and air increasingly turns Gaza from a concentration camp into a death camp.  We support the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) and in particular we demand that the British government end its complicity in genocide by first of all ending its arms trade with Israel. The Board of Deputies claims it wants Israel to be treated fairly and impartially within British society, but in fact it demands exceptionalism. It wants Israel to be exempted from any sanctions in spite of its apartheid and now its genocidal campaign against Gaza.  We accuse the Board of Deputies of condoning the atrocities the State of Israel commits in Gaza by attempting to silence Israel’s critics.  This massive blood stain will not go away. We accuse the Board of Deputies of joining with the anti-Semites in equating Zionism with Judaism and telling the world that all British Jews support Israel. That is a lie. Jews in Britain Against Genocide 07592728397, 07880731865, 07816251377 JewsInBritainAgainstGenocide@gmail.com NOTES Genocide is defined by the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide as any act committed with the intention of destroying in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. http://www.un.org/pubs/cyberschoolbus/treaties/genocide.asp Concentration camp is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘a place in which large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labour or to await mass execution’.

Israel advocates becoming "discredited, irrelevant and marginal"

Cor, this is exciting. The Board of Deputies of British Jews is starting to realise that the game is up for hasbara, in particular over the merry dance formerly known as the, ahem, peace process.

See this in Jewish News:

Confidential documents have shed new light on concerns of the Board
of Deputies ahead of the suspension of Middle East peace talks and their
fears of over the potential for growing polarisation within the
community over Israel.


A draft document seen by the Jewish News looks to set out the possible consequences whether the nine-month process ends in failure or with an agreement, as well as to examine how community leaders should respond. It is believed to have been written around six weeks ago......


It warns: “The risk of arguing for the fault of failure lying squarely
with the Palestinians while many will at least partially blame Israel,
is that supporters of Israel will become increasingly discredited,
irrelevant and marginal.”

Alright, they still want to have their cake and eat it, "many will at least partially blame Israel" indeed!  Just a quick reminder here that Israel is the one that keeps building or expanding racist colonies in the West Bank and blockading Gaza and it was Israel who reneged on the commitment to release prisoners.  The Palestinian negotiators response was to apply to join some toothless international organisations and, after Israel had broken off talks, the PLO, with whom Israel was no longer dealing, went for a unity pact with Hamas with whom Israel had not been dealing in the first place.  This actually means that the breakdown is entirely down to Israel, much as it was back in 2000.  The difference now is that the Board of Deputies, for zionism in the UK, recognises that the old blame the Palestinians card isn't going to work this time, or ever again.

So what do we know?  The Board appears to know it is now becoming out of touch with the UK Jewish community and more general public opinion.  Its support for Israel is as firm and uncritical as ever but it has to watch what is supposed to be its raison d'être: British Jews.  Its real raison d'être has been Israel for decades now.  But it now recognises that to support Israel and to honour its members is a balancing act.  How it performs that is very much an open question.

Fair Play for £50 k?

This is a curious aspect of the FUCU tribunal case.  It's about whether or not there was funding from the Board of Deputies of British Jews' Fair Play Campaign Group to the academic Israel advocacy site/group, Engage.

Here's a media release by BRICUP (British Committee for the Universities of Palestine).  Here's the same piece on the Jews for Justice for Palestinians website:

Fraser is the founder and director of the pressure group Academic Friends of Israel and a member of the Board of Deputies (BoD) of British Jews. The hearing revealed the extent to which pro-Israel lobby groups had attempted to interfere with UCU’s policies and decision-making. In his evidence Fraser admitted that “the Friends of the various Israeli University groups” had donated £70,000 tothe Fair Play Campaign Group, set up by the BoD andthe Jewish Leadership Council to coordinate activity against boycotts of Israel. Fraser further alleged that the Fair Play Campaign Group in turn had given £50,000 to Engage, an organisation campaigning against academic boycott.

At the end of the media release there was a note:

“Fraser further alleged that the Fair Play Campaign Group in turn had given £50,000 to Engage” – it should be noted that some of Fraser’s witnesses contradicted him on this point. 

I was curious about it and so tweeted the following:

What happened to the Board of Deputies £50,000 for fighting #BDS? UCU jfjfp.com/?p=41306
— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 7, 2013

This led, ultimately, to the following exchange response from the Chief Exec of the Board of Deputies:

@jewssf @richardarmbach @engageonline Denied, because it didn't happen!
— Jon Benjamin (@JonBenja) April 8, 2013

Now that could have been that but for a comment by a Jim Denham on his Shiraz Socialist cross-post of David Hirsh's denunciation of the Employment Tribunal for being antisemitic. Jim's comment is a rant against a post on the FUCU case by Scottish Palestine Solidarity. Go read the SPSC take for yourself but Jim Denham's comment includes this curious statement:

That the Fair Play Campaign Group funds Engage is now established fact. But not for the purpose stated by the SPSC.

Now I have two queries outstanding.  One to Jim Denham as follows:

could you point to the evidence “That the Fair Play Campaign Group funds Engage is now established fact”?

And the other to Jon Benjamin of the Board of Deputies:

@jonbenja Do you mean it was a different amount or @engageonline received no funding from the BoD Fair Play fund at all? @richardarmbach
— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 9, 2013

Let's see if anyone gets back to me.

Support Stephen Sizer

Here's a post by Craig Murray on the current plight of Stephen Sizer.  I should warn that it contains an appeal for money:

Stephen Sizer has been active for many years in areas of humanitarian concern for the Palestinian population. I was with him on my recent trip to Baghdad, and I am convinced he is a good man.

Stephen is a Church of England vicar. He is under huge pressure at the moment as he is under a formal complaint from the Board of Deputies of British Jews to the Church of England on a charge of anti-semitism. This is very serious indeed and could lead to the loss of both his job and his home.

The essence of the long complaint is that he has posted links on his website to other websites which contain anti-semitic material. It is not alleged that he has linked to material which is itself anti-semitic; but that elsewhere on websites linked to there is such material.

That may or may not be true. But in the real world, the idea that in posting a link to an article you are endorsing every other article (which in practice you cannot have seen) on a website is nonsensical and would make much current blogging practice impossible.

That Stephen is not an anti-semite and has not knowingly endorsed anti-semitism, I have no doubt. But what worries me is the growing bravura with which all critics of Israel or supporters of the Palestinians are charged with the – rightfully – damning slur of anti-semitism....

A list of those who have written in support of Stephen Sizer can be found here.

The formal process in which Stephen is now enmeshed is not only extremely unpleasant, it is also extremely expensive. He has to employ lawyers for his formal defence. A cardinal rule of this blog is never to ask for money, but I ask you now to donate for the defence fund.

Electronic transfers can be made to account name J Moodey, Co-op Bank sort code 08-93-00, account number 80407856. Cheques should be made out to J Moodey and sent to Mr S Leah, c/o York PSC, PO Box 423, York YO24 4WP.

It is important that we do not allow the victimisation of those who try to defend the Palestinians to proceed apace. Please do donate anything you can; if you feel able to add a comment saying that you have done so, that might encourage others.

Craig Murray's blog is here.

Antony Lerman says "Enough already!" in The Guardian and Mike Marqusee says "Enough already!" to The Guardian

Two very different issues only related by my own perception.

Antony Lerman is saying, "Enough already!" to the Jewish establishment in the UK and not for the first time.  He has an article today in  the Guardian's Comment is Free section on line titled,  The abuse of dissenting Jews is shameful.

The Jewish establishment in the UK – which includes the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council, the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, the Zionist Federation and numerous private groupings of the great and the good – is highly experienced at this. I saw it happen in the 1980s when communal leaders sought to make life impossible for the small but highly active radical Jewish Socialists' Group. And I became a target for such treatment myself when I was appointed head of the influential Jewish Policy Research (JPR) thinktank for a second time in 2005, an experience I recall in my book The Making and Unmaking of a Zionist.

By then I had served the community professionally for 26 years. A Zionist for decades, I was one no longer. But I wished passionately that Israel would become a democratic state for all its citizens, end the occupation, recognise the Palestinians' right of return, and acknowledge that Israel's establishment in 1948 was a Nakba, a catastrophe, for the Palestinians. I had no intention of using JPR as a platform for advocating these views but rather made one of my principal aims creating space for Jewish critical thinking and debate about how Jews should relate to Israel, to its policies towards Palestinians and to the serious impact of its actions on European Jews. I believed that only through open and civil discussion of these issues could the necessary change in diaspora Jewish opinion occur.

I looked for the "article history" which used to be a feature of The Guardian's on line articles but they no longer have it so I don't know if the article appeared in print.  It made me think of a complaint Mike Marqusee made recently about how The Guardian exploits journalists by relegating their articles to Comment is free.  Here's Mike on MikeMarqusee.com:

I submitted the article (below), on the tension between the Olympic packaging and the reality of sports, to the Guardian Comment page, hoping that some of it at least would find its way into print. The editors liked the piece and asked me to cut it down to the appropriate length, which I was happy to do. Then, without consulting with me, they stuck it on the Cif website (not the print edition) under the crass and inapposite headline “Spare us the jingoistic Olympic hype.”

Inevitably readers responded to the headline rather than the article, and within hours there were hundreds of angry posts abusing me for being a killjoy and / or ‘anti-British’. The abuse is what you get for contributing anything contentious to Cif and it goes with the territory. But in this case it was made even more pointless than usual by the way the Guardian packaged the article.

Of course, this is only a minor irritation. Editors reserve the right to write headlines and I accept that, though I do think they have an obligation to write headlines that reflect accurately the content and tone of the articles.

There is however a more important issue involved, which is the Cif website and how it treats contributors in general.

Some time ago I resolved not to contribute articles to Cif (as opposed to the print edition) because the rate of pay was so insulting and so injurious to journalism. Many contributors are not paid at all and those who are, including me, receive £90 for 800-1200 words, a small fraction of the minimum NUJ rate, and not remotely a reflection of the labour, skill, research, and accumulated expertise involved in creating the article. I know that for many free-lance writers, including myself, £90 is not to be sneezed at, but the long term cost to our dignity and our craft is just too high. We all want our writings to be circulated as widely as possible, but the Guardian is exploiting that desire to secure virtually cost-free copy. This copy is then used to attract readers and generate revenues for the Guardian, none of which trickles back to the contributors.

If free-lancers enjoyed the slightest degree of industrial muscle, the Cif scam would have been busted long before now. All I can say to my NUJ comrades on the Guardian staff is that you shouldn’t be letting this happen.

There are, of course, other issues with Cif.

PS, In his article, Antony Lerman mentions but modestly doesn't link to his book, The Making and Unmaking of a Zionist.

3 tales of the lobby in the UK

The first story concerns the arrest of Palestinian political activist, Raed Salah, using evidence apparently fabricated by a self-styled Jewish security organisation in the UK, the Community Security Trust. If you follow the link to Asa Winstanley's Electronic Intifada report you will see the evidence of fabrication and if you check out this Guardian article you will see that the Home Secretary appears to have based her decision to excluse Raed Salah, not on anything he had done but on who wanted him excluded in the first place.

I would have missed the second story were it not for the correspondence with the Islington Tribune following an outrageous decision by Haringey Council to prevent schools attending a Palestinian literature festival following lobbying by the Board of Deputies of British Jews. Here's how the story first broke:

A ROW has erupted between Islington North Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn and a senior Town Hall official over advice warning primary schools against taking part in a Palestinian literature festival.

Former children’s laureate Michael Rosen is among those taking part in the event, organised by Haringey Justice for Palestine group, which runs from September 29 to October 2.

Mr Rosen is also angry about the advice that schools should not become involved. He said: “It’s very disappointing and a rather strange way to behave by Islington Council. Instead of entering into a conversation with the organisers they have simply taken the word of someone and then taken this somewhat draconian step to advise people not to take part.”

The advice came from the Labour-controlled council’s corporate director of children’s services, Eleanor Schooling, who warned that the “political” nature of the event might contravene the 1996 Education Act.

Two schools, including Duncombe Primary in Upper Holloway, were due to take part in the Tottenham Palestinian Literature Festival. Both have since reluctantly withdrawn from the event.

However, it appears that Ms Schooling had been advised by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, who had expressed concerns.

By the time letters protesting the Council's decision were being published in the IT the same paper was reporting that the UK Education Minister and "proud Zionist", Michael Gove, had lobbied against schools participating in the event.

Here is the letter that had me taking notice of the whole issue. It is from Yael Kahn:

IT was rather misleading for the Board of Deputies of British Jews to claim it represents all British Jews.

I and other Jews living in Islington would have nothing to do with this partisan, sectarian and Israeli-apologist body. 

Having left Israel because of the apartheid against Palestinians, it is important for me to work with those objecting to racism of all forms.

One such group is the No to Veolia Action Group and if you are appalled by the Israeli illegal settlements then you can join us at 7.30pm on Monday, October 24, at the Regent pub in Liverpool Road.

YAEL KAHN
N1

Good letter! A report, a complaint and a call to action.

And story number three involves the lobbyist and the recent ministerial resignation. Here's former UK diplomat Craig Murray in yesterday's Daily Mail wondering if Liam Fox's "best man" was a willing lobbyist for Israel or just a useful idiot.

The lobby in the UK

There are two curious pieces in Friday's Jewish Chronicle.  The first describes how

The [UK] government has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown after a minister described Israel's security barrier as a "land grab" and said that Israel deliberately took water away from the Palestinians.

The minister's remarks were in a video. Here's more detail:

In the video Mr Duncan declared: "The wall is a land grab. It hasn't just gone along the lines of the proper Israel boundary. It's taken in open land which actually belongs to Palestine". He added: "Israeli settlers can build what they want and then immediately get the infrastructure so that takes the water deliberately away from Palestinians here."

The UK has previously told Israel that it believes the security barrier encroaches on Palestinian territory and the government has a consistent policy of opposition to settlement building.

The Board of Deputies wrote to Mr Duncan on Monday to demand the withdrawal of the video, copying in his boss, Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell, and Foreign Secretary William Hague.

The video was taken down shortly afterwards.

So the Board of Deputies can effectively order the removal of a video from a UK government website but it gets worse. In a front page comment, Martin Bright, the JC's political editor wrote the following, under the headline, It was a Palestinian narrative:

Ministers are in a very difficult position on this matter because Mr Duncan was, strictly speaking, doing no more than expressing official UK government policy. It does believe that Israel has failed to keep to its borders in constructing the security wall, and it is opposed to settlement building and the implications for natural resources such construction brings with it.

So a UK minister has used a video on a government website to express government policy on Palestine and the Board of Deputies of British Jews has told him not to do that.  And he has dutifully removed the video from the site.

We now have two front page articles in the most recent edition of the Jewish Chronicle boasting of a Jewish lobby group's ability to affect government behaviour and policy.  Next week perhaps there will be a couple of front pages telling us that it is antisemitic to speak of a Jewish lobby.

In fairness to Jews like me, it should be called the zionist lobby and the Board of Deputies should make it clear it only represents a zionist perspective.  But of course honesty has never been the best policy for zionists and honesty is certainly not going to be the policy of either the Board of Deputies or the Jewish Chronicle any time soon.

Zionists fight hard for their antisemitic definition of antisemitism

There has been so much flying around the internet about the UCU's rejection of the EUMC working definition of antisemitism that it's hard to know where to start but helpfully The Jewish Chronicle has a kind of round up in the form of an article by one of the rabid right wing loons who plays some role in editing the Jewish Chronicle.

The leaders of the Jewish community have recorded their outrage at the University and College Union, which has voted to distance itself from the European Union's working definition of antisemitism, at its annual congress in Harrogate. 

Delegates overwhelmingly supported the move on the part of the union's executive, which believes the 2005 European definition prevents the full and open discussion of Israel and Palestine on campus.

Straight away there's an issue here in that these people are not the leaders of the Jewish community, they are leaders of Jewish organisations. That is not the same thing. Still, at least he got the UCU's beef with the working definition right. It is designed to prevent "full and open discussion of Israel and Palestine on campus" and elsewhere. But read on:

But Jeremy Newmark, chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, said: "After this weekend's events, I believe the UCU is institutionally racist."

Representatives of the JLC, the Board of Deputies and the Community Security Trust have now appealed to government ministers David Willetts and Eric Pickles to support a formal Equality and Human Rights Commission investigation into the decision.

Their calls were echoed by John Mann MP, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism.

"These claims have been made and should be investigated independently, ideally by the EHRC," he said.'''...

....Trevor Phillips, chair of the EHRC, said he was "surprised" at the failure of the UCU to introduce its motion on the definition of antisemitism "without consulting the EHRC" at all

Ok, he was surprised. But what the article doesn't say is that EHRC chair, Trevor Phillips, also said, in his letter,

neither we (EHRC) nor the EUMC has ever considered the EUMC's working definition to be wholly definitive; therefore its retention or abandonment should not be seen as an indication of what should be regarded as anti-racist [sic] or anti-semitic conduct.

Not quite the sacrosanct document these "leaders of the Jewish community" are making it out to be.

But check out the Board of Deputies on this:

The Board's president, Vivian Wineman, also wrote to university vice chancellors asking them to consider whether maintaining a normal relationship with UCU could still be compatible with their requirement to "eliminate discrimination and foster good relations" with minorities.

"Business as usual should not be an option with an institutionally racist organisation," he said.

He added that vice chancellors should put in place procedures to ensure that UCU's institutional racism and perverse definitions were not allowed to "pollute your own processes for handling reports of antisemitism on campus".

Mr Wineman said that if the UCU refused to address the issue, "we would ask that you reconsider whether formal union recognition of UCU is appropriate at all".

Now this is a serious bit of brinkmanhip and Whine is sticking his neck out here. For a fairly thorough look at the EUMC working definition of antisemitism check out Richard Kuper's article on Open Democracy or Ben White on Liberal Conspiracy where you will see that these Jewish leaders are having a hissy fit over a bogus definition of antisemitism that asserts that, "subject to overall context", it "could be" antisemitic to "deny Jews their right of self-determination by claiming that Israel is a racist endeavour, to compare Israel to the nazis and to criticise Israel over issues that you have not criticised other "democratic nations" over.  It's bonkers that anyone with any self-respect could support such a thing let alone intelligent people with high profiles in public. But the Board of Deputies could be heading for a showdown with the EHRC if Trevor Phillips fails to support them or even dismisses them as a bunch of disingenuous supporters of the last of the colonial settler states.

Phillips might note that it is not antisemitic to say that Israel simply has no right to exist, nor to say that Israel is racist nor to say that Jews are not an appropriate case for self-determination.  He might go further and ask for clarification of the assertion that Israel amounts to a "democratic nation".  He might even dismiss the term as ludicrous since democratic is a description of an institution, not a nation or people unless one is essentialising a people as containing within them a political persuasion. And there is the main rub with this bogus definition, it essentialises Jews not as an identity in the usual sense of the term but as a political persuasion, and in the case of zionism, a racist political persuasion.  What if, horror or horrors, Phillips points out that the definition is itself antisemitic?  I doubt if he will do that but the working definition is so glaringly mischievous I don't see how its critics can lose.  If it is accepted by an august body like the EHRC then it comes under scrutiny and is revealed for what it is, negative hasbara. If it is thrown out by the EHRC then its proponents are discredited even sooner.

I think the UCU has performed a wonderful service no matter what happens in the short term.