Is Baddiel calling Ken Loach a Holocaust Denier?

David Baddiel attempted a bit of a pile on against me a couple of weeks ago and in so doing seems to have accused Ken Loach of Holocaust denial.

The smearing of Ken Loach begins with the BBC wildly misrepresenting a speech by Miko Peled at a fringe meeting hosted by Free Speech on Israel at the Labour Conference 2017. Labour had done remarkably well in the general election of that year and the establishment decided to focus all the smearing on exaggerated, manipulated or fabricated allegations of antisemitism. Anyway, here's Miko Peled:

There was no discussion, just that remark by Miko Peled. Anyway, let's see now what the BBC did with that:

It's interesting but at some point in the interview the interviewer notes that Loach is alleging that some Labour MPs - actually it was mostly Labour MPs - were "confecting" allegations of antisemitism before going on to do exactly that herself. But anyway, this is the interview where Loach is wrongfooted by a Beeber flat out lying about what had occurred at the aforementioned FSOI meeting. She said that there had been a discussion as to whether or not the Holocaust had happened. Having no clue what she was talking about but knowing she was lying, he couldn't straight up condemn Holocaust denial or debate because that would have seemed like confirming that the discussion that had not taken place had taken place.  Wow, I just looked at the video again and the Beeber was such an outrageous liar.  Look from 01.44 "there was a discussion about the Holocaust, did it happen or didn't it?" Loach shakes his head vigorously and says "I don't think there was a discussion". She then says "well it was reported and it was on the [unintelligible]" She then says 01.57 "would you say that is unacceptable?" Loach then says "I think history is there for us all to discuss", thereby turning to a generalisation about history, not the specifics of the Holocaust.

This is one of the most lied about lines of the whole long smear campaign and the BBC's tweet truncating the clip so as to lie about Loach is still in place. Dave Rich of the Israel lobby and security group, Community Security Trust, couldn't resist his own mischief, tweeting that "Ken Loach said....whether the Holocaust happened "is there for us all to discuss".

But Dave stops short of calling Loach a Holocaust denier. He was challenged by Linda Sayle.

You are wickedly mis-quoting Ken Loach. He said "history is there for us all to discuss". Calling people holocaust deniers without basis and scattering accusations of antisemitism around like confetti does great damage.

— Linda Sayle (@LindaSayle) February 5, 2020

Now if you look, even Dave Rich wasn't stooping to accusing Loach of denial, just of tolerance towards deniers and debate with them.

I didn't call anyone a Holocaust denier, so you are misquoting me. I have no idea whether you are doing it "wickedly" or not.

— Dave Rich (@daverich1) February 5, 2020

Poor Linda didn't know how Dave likes to play with quotation marks. Do you see how his quotes are simply around "is there for us all to discuss", not "whether the Holocaust happened"? Dave does that all the time. Anyway, Dave did not, repeat not, call Loach a Holocaust denier. But note, he stops short of denying "scattering accusations of antisemitism around like confetti". He should have stopped at "I have no idea".

Anyway, David Baddiel picks up and runs amok with Dave Rich's smear and, for the book, sexes it up just a tad.  See page 66 on:

The film director Ken Loach was made a judge of a school competition run by Show Racism the Red Card, which is a football anti-racist charity similar to Kick It Out. In 2016, [it was 2017] during an interview at the Labour Party conference, Loach said, on being asked about the presence at a fringe meeting of a speaker alleged to have questioned the history of the Holocaust, [Miko Peled in the above clip] ‘Well, I think history is there for us all to discuss.’ He has since very strongly refuted being a Holocaust denier*, [my italics] but nonetheless this appointment led to protests from the Jewish community. For a while, SRtRC reacted angrily, doubling down, getting Eric Cantona to tweet about what a great anti-racist Ken Loach was and suchlike. In the end, Loach did step down from judging the competition, but as ever there was no outcry from progressive quarters – only Jewish ones – about the possible incongruity of his appointment.

I wouldn’t particularly mention this – it’s just a standard, everyday example of #JewsDontCount – were it not for the fact that while this minor furore was going on, a man called Dave Rich, who works for a charity, the Community Security Trust, which provides security against racist attack for Jewish schools, synagogues and community centres, [and lobbies the government for Israel and smears Israel's critics] tweeted this:

Followed by a second tweet that just said: ‘I can think of better judges for an anti-racism competition.’ I retweeted it. And then Ken Loach’s son, Jim, tweeted this:

I see @Baddiel casually retweets internet trolls like @daverich1 who defame my father @KenLoachSixteen. You’d think with his background he’d be a bit more careful when accusing others. pic.twitter.com/6gSlz4KSKw

— Jim Loach (@JimLoach) February 6, 2020

First up Baddiel misrepresents Miko Peled. Baddiel has written a book which he intends to be taken seriously. Clearly he is either lying about Miko Peled or he simply didn't check anything, even the thread that he RTd a tweet from. In fairness the lack of checking is possible given he gets the year wrong. But even without checking, surely he realised that Dave Rich was being slippery with the Ken Loach quote. If he didn't know any of this or didn't reason any of this for himself, then why did he ignore most of Jim Loach's tweet?  "@Baddiel casually retweets internet trolls like @daverich1 who defame my father @KenLoachSixteen".

Jim Loach protests Baddiel RTing "internet trolls like @Dave Rich who defame" his father. No pause for thought over the word "defame", no? Jim Loach is accusing Baddiel and Rich (and by extension and most concerning of all, the BBC) of lying about Ken Loach, which they all were. But Baddiel had points to score and scores to settle so he takes the opportunity to show what a know-nothing he really is. 

You see, Jim Loach references one of Baddiel's racist outbursts, this one against the former footballer, Jason Lee who Baddiel encouraged famously racist football fans to mock by way of Baddiel donning blackface makeup and wearing a pineapple on his head to represent dreadlocks.Googling Baddiel, pineapple, Jason Lee, stuff like that, you will happen upon many an article with Jason Lee saying that Baddiel never apologised to him for what he did. Baddiel claims he apologised. He doesn't say who he apologised to and doesn't seem to realise even what he did wrong. Now see page 70:

What the apologies make no difference to is the recurring presence of that photo on my Twitter timeline. Particularly since I started speaking out publicly about anti-Semitism, whether it be anti-Semitism in general or on the left. In fact, it can seem that what the people demanding apologies from me want is not apologies. What they seem to want, really, is silence. They want me to shut up, particularly about anti-Semitism. As far as they are concerned, the photo of me as Jason Lee is a trump card that means I cannot speak about racism...

There is a tactic some of you may be aware of called Whataboutery. 

Yup, there is a tactic called Whataboutery. It's when you justify your own wrongdoing by reference to the wrongdoing of your opponents.  But Jim Loach is not accusing Baddiel of doing what his father has done. He is correctly calling Baddiel a liar about his father and a hypocritical liar over antisemitism. 

But there is another charge of hypocrisy to be made against Baddiel. He says that his own racism is used to try to disqualify him from talking about racism in other situations, in particular in his case, against Jews, He says this is a #Jewsdon'tcount instance. But that's exactly what Baddiel is saying about Ken Loach. The only difference is that Baddiel, Rich and the BBC all lied about Loach. You don't have to look far to find examples of Baddiel's racism. That is, you don't have to lie to make a racist out of Baddiel.

Here he is saying he looks like a "pikey".

Here he is essentialising Blacks, Asians and Jews by occupation. He got some rare mainstream flack for that, albeit in the Guardian's letters page.

But really mentioning two (three with blackface - many with blackface many times) examples of Baddiel's racism spanning over 20 years doesn't convey nearly enough of it.

He does another slippery thing. He claims that people have tried to silence him since he started talking about antisemitism as if this postdates the examples of his racism which go back to the 1990s but I'm sure I saw him alleging antisemitism against Israel's leftist critics back in the 1990s, which you could say was Baddiel's racist heyday if only it was over. 

But the final thing is this. I remember the first time I read Baddiel's stupid book, the line about Ken Loach that baffled me the most was after Baddiel claimed Loach was challenged about "the presence at a fringe meeting of a speaker alleged to have questioned the history of the Holocaust" we have what looks like a non sequitur:

He has since very strongly refuted being a Holocaust denier

Now remember Dave Rich insisted he certainly wasn't accusing anyone, certainly not Loach, of Holocaust denial. So who did accuse Ken Loach of being a Holocaust denier? Why would Baddiel say he denies it?

It rankled with me as I was sure my skim reading had let me down. That's one reason I got the Kindle version, so I can cross-reference, search, copy and paste, etc.

But then a couple of weeks ago I was googling for something, probably Baddiel related and I found that Baddiel himself has been "confronting Holocaust denial", ie, debating with Holocaust deniers,ie, what I thought Baddiel, Dave Rich and the BBC were falsely accusing Ken Loach of promoting.

I noticed that in the BBC puff for the stuff two Holocaust deniers are named and it appeared that Baddiel goes off to debate these people. I tweeted that Baddiel was doing what he falsely accused Ken Loach of doing, ie, debating the Holocaust. Actually, it's worse, it's publicising not simply the fact that some people deny the Holocaust but their names. This meant that people intent on denying the Holocaust could hone and further publicise their arguments by going to the go-to names. 

I tweeted my criticism in a four tweet thread.

The irony of David Baddiel smearing Ken Loach as a promoter of Holocaust debate is that Baddiel & Lipstadt both publicise Holocaust denial and confront it with the facts thereby engaging in the very debate Baddiel falsely accuses @KenLoachSixteen of promoting. https://t.co/dtbyzR5saQ

— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 3, 2021

When Lipstadt wrote a book on deniers, including Irving, Irving's plan was to cross-examine her on the Holocaust & expose that she knew nothing. Thankfully she didn't have to take the stand so he lost but it could have been a disaster. That's the dangerous game they're playing.

— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 3, 2021

The BBC's lie that Jewish socialists discussed whether or not the Holocaust happened was the most disgusting of all the lies in a smear campaign that is still ongoing. In fact, Baddiel's book with the Loach smear replicated in it is the most recent contribution to the campaign.

— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 3, 2021

And the fact that Baddiel publicises Holocaust denial is of course much worse than irony, worse than hypocrisy, in fact it wasn't even hypocrisy,it was projection: accusing people of doing a bad thing that they don't do but Baddiel does.

— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) April 3, 2021

That could have been that but rather then respond to my first tweet that QRTd his tweet, he grabbed the fourth one which didn't name anyone and didn't tag him. He knew that I was slagging him over Loach but none of his followers could know because he grabbed the tweet, he didn't QRT it. Sneaky huh? Look: 

Here's @jewssf suggesting that because I did a documentary challenging and exposing Holocaust denial, I am secretly a Holocaust denier. When people on here hate you, for whatever reason, it's amazing the contortions they will undergo to channel that hate. pic.twitter.com/wg1VOv41Is

— David Baddiel (@Baddiel) April 4, 2021

Now even in the tweet he grabbed there is no suggestion he is a Holocaust denier. That's just silly and his followers are silly. Many of them replied to him saying how illogical I was and some had a go directly at me. I responded pointing out that I had said that he condemned Loach for promoting Holocaust debate whereas by confronting Holocaust deniers he is engaging in the debate that he falsely condemned Loach for promoting.

Well in all the toing and froing, I finally said to someone, the only way Baddiel's tweet tagging me works is if he thinks that me comparing what he is doing to what he accused Loach of doing is if he is accusing Loach of Holocaust denial. Oh wait! Finally the penny dropped. "He [Loach] has since very strongly refuted being a Holocaust denier" followed by the word "but". Baddiel seems to be flatly contradicting his mentor, Dave Rich (or maybe Rich is Baddiel's mentee). Baddiel appears to be accusing Ken Loach of Holocaust denial. I wonder.

By the way, the smearing of Ken Loach is yet another score settling exercise in Baddiel's stupid book. This time it is more aimed at Ken's son Jim. What a piece of work that Baddiel (aged 55) is.

Fake Twitter Account Alert

I got a tweet just yesterday purporting to support my own tweet and Ken Loach.  It was clearly antisemitic.  Here it is:

Ken Loach as always stood up to inequality, if the #Jews in the UK & #Israel can’t handle that, it’s their problem.

— terryfletcher (@terry45336188) October 15, 2017

I wasn't sure what to do at first.  I checked the account and saw there were 4 of my mutual followers (ie I follow them and they follow me) and I alerted them by DM.  Two unfollowed, the other two don't seem to check their accounts regularly.  All four seem to routinely follow the accounts that follow them and this fake account only intersperses tweets with antisemitism.

Here's a screengrab of terry45336188's account:

One of the people who did respond to my DM said that a lot of these bogus accounts use 8 numerics after a name as this terry45336188 did.

I noticed that the account "joined April 2012".  So it appears it wasn't founded specifically to undermine Corbyn but it is definitely a bogus account.

Moral of the story, never just follow an account because it follows you, always scan the profile and a few tweets of an  account you are liking, retweeting or following.  Sorry to come across as censorious but Zionists are jumping through hoops to smear their critics, opponents and victims as antisemitic.  This is all they have because there is, of course, no case for Israel.  Their claims are getting increasingly desperate and ludicrous but they are still space and time consuming so a little bit of due diligence can stop these time and space wasters, er, wasting time and space. N'est pas?

Thank you!

PS: I just checked the account again and I am blocked.  They're determined, these people. Can they be a genuine Corbyn supporter and an antisemite?  It's very doubtful.  If they were sincere in their antisemitism they would surely have remonstrated with me to persuade me that antisemitism is ok.  If they didn't realise that slagging off Jews qua Jews is antisemitic then still they might have put an argument together or simply apologised having seen the error of their ways.  But instead of that, I get this:

I looked at their account with another account of mine and they're just as shrill but there was nothing explicitly antisemitic but he really wants an endorsement from Ken Loach.  See this:

And this:

Don't these Jew haters just love Ken Loach, the high profile anti-Zionist, Zionists have had in their cross hairs since the Labour Party Conference.  Coincidence?  I don't think so.....

A *Real* Celebrity Endorsement for Jews Sans Frontieres

I want to keep this Tweet safe in case Roseanne Barr thinks better of it when she sobers up or gets over whatever it is that's upset her.

She used to follow Jews sans frontieres on Twitter but flipped out at me a few years ago over something I can't quite remember. I don't know if she unfollowed but she blocked JSF. Clearly blocking doesn't prevent a blocker from hassling a blockee and clearly she still likes to lurk and look.

She's a fickle one, I must say.  She followed JSF when she knew I was anti-Zionist because the account was described as an anti-Zionist account. I didn't follow her account much but I did notice her promoting Gilad Atzmon once upon a time and possibly after she blocked JSF.

Anyway, my guess is that she did see herself as anti-Zionist for a time but that she was happy to promote the conspiracist fringe of the movement and then crossed that thin barely existent line between antisemitism and Zionism.  Which brings me neatly to where this mini-twitter spat began with an aide to Bibi Netanyahu calling a Jewish American ambassador a "little Jew boy" thus highlighting that Zionism is as racist against Jews as antisemitism is.  Mind you she doesn't shed much light on why her name on Twitter is @therealroseanne.  Even Roseanne doesn't seem to know the real Roseanne.  Maybe she's just trying to convince herself.

Hadley Freeman accuses George Galloway of Antisemitism

I didn't see the BBC's Question Time (#BBCQT or @BBCQT on Twitter) with George Galloway and Jonathan Freedland.  I could have watched it on iPlayer or some such but I find GG and JF pretty cringe-worthy.

Jonathan Cook wrote an article about it slagging Jonathan Freedland's behaviour in the proceedings and calling him The Guardian's "resident antisemitism obsessive".  Now I would have preferred "resident zionist" because "antisemitism obsessive" could imply that he is obsessed with genuine cases of racism against Jews and this of course would be wrong, Freedland has quite a lot of form for false allegations of antisemitism.

Well another resident zionist at The Guardian, Hadley Freeman, didn't like the "resident antisemitism obsessive" jibe either and got into a bit of a Twitter exchange with Glenn Greenwald about it.

@ggreenwald Yeah, he lost me at "resident anti-Semitism obsessive" and the Palin-esque "liberal media elite." As tho Galloway is not "elite"
— Hadley Freeman (@HadleyFreeman) February 10, 2015

Hadley Freeman also has form for false allegations of antisemitism over campaigning against Israel.

Now at some point George Galloway enters the Twitter fray.  I should say I came to all this very late when someone drew my attention to it when the hubbub was dying down.  I always find Twitter hard to follow beyond one tweet and a reply but here's the first tweet from GG that I noticed:

@HadleyFreeman @ggreenwald you must withdraw this tweet or face the legal consequences
— George Galloway (@georgegalloway) February 10, 2015

Wow! What tweet? Let's have a look at Hadley Freeman's tweets.  Too late, look:

@georgegalloway Seriously? I'm sure our lawyers have better things to do... To save us both a day in court, I'm happy to delete it.
— Hadley Freeman (@HadleyFreeman) February 10, 2015

But someone challenged Freeman over what she had claimed in her tweet:

Can @HadleyFreeman cite 'plenty of' examples to back this up about @georgegalloway? cc: @ggreenwald @Jonathan_K_Cook pic.twitter.com/5cdrEbf1gZ
— Media Lens (@medialens) February 10, 2015

As far as I can tell Freeman hasn't risen to the challenge of finding Galloway saying and doing "plenty of things that cross the line from anti-Israel to antisemitic" and Galloway is insisting that he is taking legal action because her deletion was too late.

So what will come of this?  It would be interesting blowback if Jonathan Freedland had to refrain from his negative hasbara because of the dishonesty of one of his zionist comrades and colleagues at The Guardian.

How are targets selected for promoted Tweets?

Every now and then I get a promoted tweet for Corn Flakes or something for sale anyway but today I got this tweet:

@nytimes bias against Israel damages peace efforts. DON'T subscribe. http://t.co/T7CtyyAAxU
— CAMERAorg (@CAMERAorg) March 19, 2014

It's a coincidence I suppose that the tweet came to me close to this:

‘NYT Book Review’ owes readers an apology for printing blatant racism about Palestinians http://t.co/GUUrRpOwwX via @Mondoweiss
— Joe Catron (@jncatron) March 24, 2014

Now that wasn't a promoted tweet, I follow Joe Catron and MondoWeiss.

So who decides who should get these promoted tweets and how do they decide?

By the way, CAMERA attained some notoriety a few years back for tampering with Wikipedia entries about Palestine and zionism.

Press Complaints Commission cloud still hangs over Scarfe but not his boss Murdoch

From November 2012 to January 2013 there were two complaints of antisemitism against people connected to the Sunday Times.  The first was from anti-racists against Rupert Murdoch for the following tweet:

Why Is Jewish owned press so consistently anti- Israel in every crisis?
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) November 18, 2012

The second was from zionists about this cartoon by Gerald Scarfe:



Of course Murdoch's antisemitic tweet asserting Jewish press ownership and a failure of Jews to live up to his expectations didn't appear in any of his papers.  I just searched The Jewish Chronicle website for mention of the tweet and found nothing.  The Gerald Scarfe cartoon for which Murdoch and Scarfe apologised  got nearly twenty mentions in the JC and there were complaints to the Press Complaints Commission.

Well apparently the PCC is still on the case, three months down the line.  Apparently there were two grounds for complaint.  One is that showing an Israeli leader with blood on his hands recalls the blood libel even though saying Netanyahu has blood on his hands is perfectly true.  The other is that the cartoon appeared on Holocaust Memorial Day.  There are then two problems here involving the privileging of Israel. One is, no matter how violent the State of Israel is to its natives and neighbours, cartoonists are not allowed to show blood on an Israeli leader's hands.  The other is that even if you are allowed to draw such images, there is a day of the year when all other leaders can be portrayed with blood on that hands but not Israeli leaders.

Anyway, here's the JC on the continued consideration of the PCC:

The Press Complaints Commission is still considering what, if any, action it will take over Gerald Scarfe's cartoon about Israel, nearly three months after it appeared in the Sunday Times.

The watchdog has resolved three complaints about the publication of a drawing depicting the Israeli Prime Minister wielding a bloodied knife over a wall dripping with blood on Holocaust Memorial Day.

After the Sunday Times admitted error for the cartoon and printed an apology, three people withdrew their complaints.

But a PCC spokesman said others had confirmed that they did wish to pursue the matter, and their complaints are still under consideration.

What do they want, blood?

Samer Issawi in "critical condition"

From al Akhbar via the Institute for Middle East Understanding:

Palestinian prisoner Samer Issawi is in "critical condition" after 203 days spent on a hunger strike, activists said, sparking fears on Monday that he might not survive his protest against Israel’s abusive prison system.

Issawi is one of thousands of Palestinian prisoners who have gone on hunger strikes in the past year to denounce Israel’s policy of administrative detention and poor life conditions in prisons.

The 33-year old has been refusing food since July 2012, making it one of the longest hunger strikes in the world.

Issawi stopped drinking water and taking vitamins earlier this month, and is refusing medical care. His weight dropped to less than 47 kilograms and he is confined to a wheelchair, suffering from loss of vision, fainting and vomiting blood.

“His heart could stop at any moment,” said Daleen Elshaer, a coordinator for the Free Samer Issawi Campaign.

Elshaer told Al-Akhbar that Issawi’s lawyer and human rights activists were denied accessed to Issawi until Saturday during his most recent hospitalization outside of the infamous Ramlah prison.

Issawi was first arrested in 2002 and sentenced to thirty years in prison over weapons possession and forming a military group. He was released in an October 2011 prisoner swap agreement between Israel and Hamas in which the Jewish state freed 1,027 mostly-Palestinians in exchange for an Israeli soldier captured in 2006.

He was rearrested on 7 July 2012 and accused of violating the terms of his release by leaving Jerusalem. Israeli prosecutors are seeking to cancel his amnesty and detain him for 20 years, the remainder of his previous sentence, despite there being no other charges against him.

The case of Samer Issawis has been promoted heavily on Twitter lately.  Check out  #OpFreeSamer or #SamerIssawi.

Bibi tells Kerry that Israel is committed to peace

Really, he said that.  See Ha'aretz:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday that Israel's new government will be "committed to peace."

I noticed it via Twitter.  Look:

#Netanyahu tells #Kerry #Israel's new government will be 'committed to peace' htz.li/14JZ5pU
— Haaretz.com (@haaretzcom) February 5, 2013

I couldn't resist replying:

@haaretzcom did #Netanyahu tell #Kerry any other jokes? Mind you #Israel "committed to peace" is a hard one to follow. #hasbara
— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) February 5, 2013

I don't know why but my reply doesn't appear as part of a conversation. Any Twitter experts out there?

It's the product not the brand which lets Israel down

Another article "explaining" why brand Israel isn't working.  Here's Ha'aretz:

The social networking activity of Hamas during Operation Pillar of Defense was more effective than that of the Israel Defense Forces, a study by an Israeli researcher has shown.

Tomer Simon, a researcher at the Department of Emergency Medicine and PREPARED Center for Emergency Response Research at Ben Gurion University in the Negev, followed the virtual battle by analyzing the Twitter accounts of the IDF Spokesman and Hamas during November's clashes. After conducting a comprehensive analysis of the hashtags used by each side, the number of mentions for each hashtag and the reactions they received, Simon determined that Israel was under harsher attack by international Web surfers.

“Social networking is based on interaction with the audience, unlike the conventional media, which are one-directional and act only to disseminate information,” said Simon.

Simon's study found that the IDF refrained almost entirely from engaging in Twitter discussions, and in doing so failed to dominate the online discourse and the messages being transmitted.

So whereas Israel controlled the entire theatre of its war on a defenceless Gaza population the failure of Israeli war criminals to put their hashtags and @ signs in the right place had the Palestinians winning worldwide sympathy.

So next time Israel embarks on one of its Palestinian culls expect Mark Regev to ask what the English would do if the Welsh rained hashtags and @ signs randomly at England.

No2VAG and No2Veolia update

On Twitter, the account @No2VAG - ie, the no to veolia action group, is still suspended. @No2Veolia seems to be running at the moment though.  So the following tweet seems to be out of date.

@no2vag @no2veolia are suspended - is this to protect #Veolia #NLWA? Please follow us #No2VAG #No2Veolia till reinstate hackneygazette.co.uk/news/best_chri…
— Yael Kahn (@YaelKahn) December 28, 2012

Try clicking the @no2vag and you get this:

Account suspended

The profile you are trying to view has been suspended. To return to your home timeline, click here.

Clicking on@no2veolia gets you this: 

No2VeoliaActionGroup

@No2Veolia

No2VAG aka No2VeoliaActionGroup the north London Campaigners who trashed Veolia selection for £4.7Bn NLWA waste & fuel processing contracts http://www.No2VAG.org.uk 

North London · No2VAG.org.uk

So, until @no2vag is reinstated, follow @no2veolia.

Ta

No2VAG Twitter account suspended

Oh dear. I was just tweeting my previous post so:

News on #Veolia gets better and better #bds #boycottisrael @no2vag jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/news-o…
— Jews Sans Frontieres (@jewssf) December 28, 2012

When I checked that @no2vag was an existing address I got the following message:

Sorry, that user is suspended.

Has the lobby had more success with Twitter than it had with Hackney Council or the North London Waste Authority?

Watch this space....

Murdoch plays Israel card for Romney

I just found this by accident in the Brisbane Times.  In among a few Murdoch (on twitter, Murdock/@rupertmurdoch) was:

Nightmare for Israel if Obama wins.Biden outright lied about personal relations with Bibi. Susan Rice for State real nightmare.
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) October 13, 2012

I don't know if this helps or hurts Israel or Obama or what. I just thought I'd mention it.

Cassandra Wilson gets career threats for boycotting Israel

Good news from across the pond, sadly tainted by threats and bogus allegations of antisemitism.  First the good news from Ha'aretz:

Grammy-winning jazz singer Cassandra Wilson has called off her scheduled concert in Holon tonight, after receiving requests from pro-Palestinian activists asking that she join an artistic boycott of Israel.

Wilson, an American jazz singer known for her unmistakably husky voice, had been scheduled to perform at the Holon International Women’s Festival.

And now the nasty tweets:

Chris Ar @LastBrainLeft

•  
•  
•  
• · Close

@reallycassandra You are a racist and an anti-Semite and you still find work? Something must be done about that.

Gal Sitty @GalSitty

•  
•  
•  
• · Open

@LastBrainLeft u r right, the EU states that her anti-Israel behavior IS antisemitic bit.ly/zOnQZz @reallycassandra

I've covered the dodgy definition so many times it's a bore I know but see how a zionist has now upped its status from a document hanging in EU cyberspace to something which "the EU states". Long live the UCU!