ISM on the BBC

Here's an article on the BBC's website about the International Solidarity Movement. The article is slightly marred by a few sentences given over to the Israeli embassy's spokeswoman (presumably) Shuli Davidovitch and a headline (The ISM's controversial activists) that verges on the childish, but the sheer character and idealism of the ISM shines through

Raphael Cohen, a British organiser within the ISM, says they are acting to prevent wanton killing.

"No-one goes there in the belief that they are going to be shot," he says.

"Our presence in itself means the army are curtailed in the level of violence they can use.

"They can't just start firing at a crowd when they know there are foreigners in there. Palestinian lives are held very cheaply.

"The rules of engagement for soldiers in the Gaza Strip have not been made available publicly."

He says the shooting of Tom Hurndall is a perfect illustration of the Israeli army's disregard for life.

"We were taking part in an action to set up a tent on the edge of the civilian settlement in Rafah, on an area where there has been a lot of destruction to property, to create a buffer zone between their military positions on the border and the populated area."

Raphael Cohen, the article says, is barred from returning to Israel for "security reasons." Here's the Israeli spokewoman

To the Israeli authorities, the activists of the ISM are misguided outsiders who are allowing themselves to be manipulated by Palestinian militants.

They say ISM members have met suicide bombers and helped gunmen, something the group vehemently denies. Some activists who left Israel have been prevented from returning.

A spokeswoman for the Israeli embassy in London says: "Israel has no objection to foreign nationals participating in legitimate protests as long as they take place within the law and do not endanger human lives.

"Nevertheless, over the past few months, the International Solidarity Movement has actively inflamed an already tense and volatile situation.

"The ISM is a Palestinian movement using Western activists to present itself as an international peace movement.

"The ISM's radical anti-Israeli politics, combined with their illegal and provocative methods, stand in stark contrast to the behaviour of the other NGOs operating in the area."[yada yada yada]

One more cup of Starbucks for Bob Dylan

Bob Dylan has followed Oxfam in striking a deal with the zionist-led global corporation, Starbucks. This is no surprise to those of us who have followed Dylan's twists and turns since the late 1970s/early 1980s. He first announced that he was some kind of Christian before penning the song Neighbourhood Bully, an angry ditty defending Menachem Begin's Israel against its critics and unarmed victims.

Aaronovitch can surf

In case anyone out there thought that David Aaronovitch was completely useless, it turns out that he does know how to copy and paste from internet sources. In fact reading "his" article on Gilad Atzmon's proposed appearance at the SWP's Marxism 2005 you might think that Aaronovitch could be the next Alistair Campbell.

Not a few left-wing Jews who style themselves "anti-Zionist" have been horrified by the Atzmon-Eisen-Shamir business. And a couple of weeks ago they began to exert pressure on the SWP to disinvite the over-fearless tirader. But the SWP — it of "smash racism" — has refused. The party issued a statement. It was, it admitted, a bit worried about Atzmon, because: "We think that some of the formulations on his website might encourage his readers to feel that he is blurring the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism." But, it nevertheless concluded: "We do not believe that Gilad should be ‘banned’ from performing or speaking. ‘No Platform’ is a principle that the Left has always reserved for fascists and organised racists."

So there we have it - David Aaronovitch: not quite first with the "news".

Beyond Chutzpah update

According to a spokesperson for the University of California Press, publication of Beyond Chutzpah. has not been cancelled altogether, but in spite of Alan Dershowitz's statement that he wants the book published following the excising of the notion that he hadn't written "his" book The Case for Israel. he is still seeking further changes. Finklelstein clearly feels that no more changes are necessary whilst the UCP believes that they are. UCP are still hoping to publish the book in August 2005. Finkelstein wants the "agreed-upon" book published with no more concessions to the serial liar Dershowitz.

Beyond Chutzpah pulled by University of California Press

Bad news from the Norman Finkelstein website. In bold letters it says - Dershowitz wins: University of California Press will not publish BEYOND CHUTZPAH. I haven't been able to get any further info on this yet but check this. In his various threats over the book the Dershowitz said that it published falsehoods about him. Eventually it was found that there was one allegation that Finkelstein couldn't substantiate and the publishers agreed to remove it from the book. The allegation was that Dershowitz hadn't written the book, published in his name, The Case for Israel. Finkelstein's original charge, which he certainly proves on the balance of probabilities, is that Dershowitz plagiarised much of the book from the exposed fraudster Joan Peters's book From Time Immemorial. In various interviews, including the now famous Democracy Now debate, it appeared that Dershowitz may not have even read, let alone written, the book. But anyway, the offending piece was removed and

"I want to see his book published now," Dershowitz said of Beyond Chutzpah, which he said was in some ways "a sequel" to the notorious anti-Semitic tract Protocols of the Elders of Zion. "I want to see it demolished in the marketplace of ideas."

So what's happened here? If Dershowitz wanted the book published, why has UCP pulled it? They have been supportive of Finkelstein until now. Check this

But Lynne Withey, director of the University of California Press, said in an interview Friday that Dershowitz had tried to stop publication of the book. "He doesn’t want the book published," Withey said, adding that it was "outrageous" for Dershowitz to charge the book with being anti-Semitic. "To say that the book is anti-Semitic is to say that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic," she said.

If you are as dismayed as I am by this latest setback for the book, eagerly anticipated since the beginning of the year, then please write to the Director, Lynne Withey to seek a reversal or, at least, an explanation. Thanks.

Hurndall case: Israeli soldier found guilty...

...of manslaughter.

Jewish Chronicle rounds on Atzmon

The Jewish Chronicle (24/6/2005) has named Gilad Atzmon its "self-hating Jew of the week." In his Diary column, Simon Round actually claims that it is "not for the first time" that Atzmon has earned that label from the JC. I said in an earlier post that Atzmon has got off remarkably lightly when it comes to zionist criticism and that previously he has only been criticised for speaking against "his country." So when and where did the JC call him a "self hating Jew" before?

BNP = nazis: official

The Standards Board for England has decided that it's ok to call the BNP nazis. The case arose over the remark "we don't want nazis in our town" spoken by Lib Dem councillor, Gavin Stollar to Jewish BNP councillor, Pat Richardson. According to the same report in Jewish News the same Standards Board is still investigating Ken Livingtone's likening of Evening Standard reporter, Oliver Finegold, to a "concentration camp guard."

Christian zionists' Palestine solidarity

Bartholomew's notes on religion is the site for this expose of Christian zionist hypocrisy over the plight of Palestinian Christians. The post I have linked to in the headline deals, in particular with a William Murray of the so-called Religious Freedom Foundation

But somehow one doubts that Murray will be particularly interested in the actual Palestinian Christian perspective. Last month he boasted on his website that:

This morning I was among 20 evangelical Christian leaders who met with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Washington, DC. Among those in attendance were Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Dr. Pat Robertson, Dr. John Hagee and former presidential candidate Gary Bauer.

…After the public portion of the meeting I pressed the Prime Minister privately to be more specific about the future of Ariel which is the base of the Religious Freedom Coalitions operations in Israel. I specifically asked him if the city would be inside the fence and be a future part of Israel. He smiled and responded, "They don't have to worry." I asked him directly if I could tell that to leaders of the city and he responded by saying "Tell them." I believe this is the most direct answer the Prime Minister has given about the fate of Ariel which is the very heart of Samaria.

In other words, Murray’s “Religious Freedom Coalition” operates out of an illegal settlement in the heart of the occupied West Bank – in an office located on stolen land, built as part of a military strategy to cement the very occupation that Palestinian Christians blame for their woes. To claim to be offering Palestinian Christians support while in such a morally compromised position is, surely, beyond nauseous.

The rest of the site carries interesting commentary on religions and religious news; something that is often neglected in the mainstream media.

Schwarzenegger refuses to act for Dershowitz

I know wags out there will say that Schwartzenegger refuses to act for everybody but this is serious. Alan Dershowitz has written to Governor of California, Arnold Schwartzenegger asking him to intercede with the University of California Press, who are trying to publish Norman Finkelstein's latest offering Beyond Chutzpah. He thought that Arnie had jurisdiction over the Uni and, who knows? maybe he has. But he didn't want to use it if he does

Schwarzenegger, showing unusual wisdom, declined to act. The governor's legal affairs secretary wrote Dershowitz, "You have asked for the Governor's assistance in preventing the publication of this book," but "he is not inclined to otherwise exert influence in this case because of the clear, academic freedom issue it presents." In a phone interview Dershowitz denied writing to the Governor, declaring, "My letter to the Governor doesn't exist." But when pressed on the issue, he said, "It was not a letter. It was a polite note."

Tsk, tsk. More lies from Dershowitz. Why am I not surprised? Anyway, more later.

Lord Carey: Christians owe Israel

Someone sent me an article about the Anglican Church in the UK considering divestment from Israeli businesses "supporting the occupation of Palestinian territory." Not a big deal really but what struck me, but didn't surprise me, was the way Lord (George) Carey expressed his opposition to the proposal:

Lord Carey, strongly criticized the concept of sanctions.

"Israelis are already traumatized and feel that the world is against them," he said at the launch of a new human-rights initiative. "This proposal, if it is agreed, would be another knife in the back. Christians who owe so much to the Hebrew Scriptures and to Israel itself should not be among those who attack Israel in such a way."

Now earlier in the article "a source within the Anglican Church" said

We are fearful that the Christian presence in the Holy Land is dwindling. Our constituency are the Palestinian Christians. They are losing ground every day, they can't go to work, can't go to church. So the well-off and educated are leaving Palestine and the community is drying up.

So which Christians does Carey have in mind? The Phalangists? the Bush administration? Who knows?

Act of Settlement?

According to the Lebanese Daily Star, the route of the wall around Jerusalem is not a security measure but an act of settlement; no doubt securing the hereditary principle for some time to come.

The route of the barrier being completed around Jerusalem reflects primarily the policy of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. The essence of this policy is an attempt to determine the final borders of the state of Israel by means of an act of settlement disguised as a security move, and based on the argument that there is no Palestinian "partner" for a substantial political peace process.

Of course this isn't simply about Jewish settlement but also about the removal of the Palestinians.

The government assessed that some of the 90,000 Palestinians entrapped with their 14 villages between the central barrier and the deep fence, and separated from many of their lands, would seek their fortunes elsewhere - much in the same way chosen by thousands of residents of imprisoned Qalqilya; the remaining Palestinians, meanwhile, would be annexed to Israel. To the south of Jerusalem the path of the barrier was planned south of the Etzion Bloc and east of road 60 and Efrata - condemning 17,000 Palestinians in five imprisoned villages to a similar fate.

So under the two state solution, where does the other state go?

The "new" Iraq

Here's a belated plug in the Guardian for the Riverbend blog aka Baghdad Burning. Unfortunately it doesn't receive comments.

Religious Right

To read the whole article, click the headline then cancel when asked to install the language pack. It appears that anti-zionist ultra-Orthodox Jews in Vienna are allying themselves with right-wing extremists in order to gain official recognition for their community. It reminds me of the 19th Century Viennese anti-Jewish mayor, Karl Lueger. There were some Jews that he favoured and when asked about this by his colleagues he said, "I determine who is a Jew here." Many anti-zionists like these ultras for their anti-zionism, but anti-zionism detached from humanism doesn't take us forward and look where it has led these Neturei Karta types.

Bookmark this!

I've had some complaints about my concentration on the Atzmon/SWP issue, including one text message from America. Hopefully this will be my last post on the saga.

This is Roland Rance's take on the events of last night, together with my own notes and comments:

About 30 activists turned out to protest the talk by Gilad Atzmon at Bookmarks bookshop, significantly outnumbering those who actually went in to the meeting. Several of these had attended for the express purpose of denouncing Atzmon and his views, and it is clear that very few attended in order to listen to and learn from him. Numbers of attendees were further restricted by the SWP's (unannounced) decision to make the meeting ticket only [The only one I saw being turned away on these grounds was an SWP member who happens to be a friend of mine. Her crime was that she was friendly towards me and because she took a leaflet from me. Their claim that the advanced booking rule was in connection with their "health and safety regulations was belied by the fact that other people who definitely hadn't pre-booked were allowed in. The problem was not with the lease on their building, but with the Arnold Leese in their building], thus preventing even some of their own members from attending. Of course, none of the pickets was allowed to attend.[the woman who announced the pre-booking only rule angrily refused a leaflet with a back hand sweep that I presume she learned from Buster Mottram, who was, after all, only a tennis player, erm, with a neo-nazi worldview]

Although some of the audience took our leaflets, and a few engaged in debate with us, the SWP's leadership treated us with arrogant contempt, refusing even to acknowledge, let alone touch, the leaflets; and, in some cases, aggressively pushing us aside without even asking us to move.[Martin Smith even tried to intimidate a woman photographer by falsely accusing her of blocking the door when she was standing on the curb. One of their officials (I was told his name is John McClaughlin) accused us of not fighting fascism when many among us are seasoned campaigners against fascism and what did they think we were doing last night? The same guy told me that he had talked to Gilad Atzmon and that Atzmon has denied being anti-semitic. I asked him when this conversation took place and he remained silent. I called him a liar and the woman who denied entry to my friend protested my rudeness! Many of us believe that the expression "anti-semitism" is unhelpful but Atzmon actually believes that attacks on Jews as Jews are a rational response to zionism]
Despite earlier attacks by the SWP that, by calling the picket, we were "lining up with the AWL", they, and other sectarians and Zionist apologists were totally absent, and the protesters were all clearly opposed to Israel and its Zionist practices. We were further admonished that "reasonable people" like Hilary Rose and Moshe Machover opposed the picket. In fact, Hilary turned up [yup she did, and I'm proud to say I met her] and stood with us in the protest, while Moshe, who was unable to come, sent the SWP a letter strongly supporting and endorsing the picket.

It's clear that the SWP had no idea of the extent and depth of revulsion at Atzmon's ideas, and the anger at them for giving him a platform. They have been given something to think about.[here's hoping]

After the picket, most of us went for a drink, and were later joined by sympathisers who had attended the meeting. We learned from them that Atzmon had not been received well, that no-one had spoken in his defence, and that several SWP members were apparently in dismay at the views they heard, and the damage they have done to the party's image. Our shouts, and the many speeches through the megaphone, were heard clearly throughout the meeting. Apparently, Atzmon devoted a large part of his talk to discussing the highly controversial theories of Otto Weininger (who, as Atzmon himself admitted, was Hitler's favourite Jew), who, in his work Sex and Character, characterised the Jew as "feminine, and thus profoundly irreligious, without true individuality (soul), and without a sense of good and evil". The decay of modern (ie early twentieth century) times was due to feminine, and thus Jewish, influences -see Wikipedia. Atzmon also propounded his own highly sexist theory of gender, before giving a rambling account of his own views, and expressing his bemusement at the picket. In the ensuing discussion, he was roundly denounced by several speakers; John Rose of the SWP reportedly made a particularly powerful and effective response.[thank god for that small mercy]
Members of the SWP who did not know at the beginning of the meeting , certainly realised by the end what an error they had made. However, we must still marvel at their stupidity in even inviting Atzmon in the first place, as well as expressing our anger at the contempt we faced from some SWP leaders, notably their national secretary Martin Smith, who refused (unlike most of his comrades) to exchange even one civil word with us.

All in all, we are pleased with our efforts, which in a short time mobilised a large and vocal protest, and which confronted the SWP with a reality they wished to ignore - that they cannot hold a meeting with a racist and expect it to pass quietly, and that you cannot defend Palestinian rights if you accept the Zionist paradigm which identifies all Jews with Zionism.

Roland touches on what so many of us know. SWP members generally do not knowingly consort with anti-semites. There are members of the SWP who have been appalled by this whole affair and have lobbied the leadership to drop Atzmon. From the behaviour I witnessed I believe that there is some support for Atzmon's worldview (such as you can make out from barely coherent ramblings) and there are clearly leading members of the SWP, in particular the people placed on the door, who are far more keen to maintain relations with a Jew hater than they are with principled anti-racists and anti-zionists. They engaged in smears and lies to their own members, and even bullying and their conduct over this will not be easily forgotten.

Update - I have had an email from an SWP friend who says that "it is simply untrue to say that anyone in the SWP accepts parts of Atzmon's world-view." And I can vouch for the fact that this person believes that Atzmon had no business at an SWP event last night or in the future.

Israel throws itself into the sea

Israel is building a wall in the sea to stop the Palestinian hordes being beached on land reserved for Jews only. Not sure if this trying to halt the waves is a practical policy or if Ariel Sharon is just being a silly Cnut.

The Yanks are coming!

They're not really but here's a solidarity message from across the pond:

This will be a showdown between the principled and unprincipled members of this movement, and I hope that the anti-racists are able to expunge the Holocaust denial, ZOG imagery, and Medievalism which these men have introduced --and which their apologists have defended-- from the movement.

We're doing what we can.

Now that's what I call JAZ

Here's the open letter of Jews against Zionism to all true anti-zionists to picket the SWP's Bookmarks bookshop tomorrow night - 17/6/2005 - and demonstrate that anti-semitism and anti-zionism are two very different things, in fact they are opposites.

Dear Comrades,

As many of you know, Jews Against Zionism (JAZ) are organising a picket of Bookmarks this Friday 17th June @ 5.45 p.m at 1 Bloomsbury Street in protest at the decision of a socialist bookshop to stage a talk by Gilad Atzmon.

Mr Atzmon may be a good jazz player, but his political views cannot be described as anything other than deeply racist and anti-Semitic. We are appalled that the SWP leadership have seen fit to persist with this invitation when we and others have pointed out to them that:

Mr Atzmon has distributed Holocaust Denial literature by Paul Eisen (‘The Holocaust Wars’) which clearly supports the view that there was no deliberate extermination of the Jews or anyone else by the Nazis.

His openly stated support for all the trappings of the world Jewish conspiracy theories.

We believe that it is important that those who support the Palestinians and who are opposed to the racism of Zionism and the Israeli State are also seen to be opposing anti-Semitism. Unlike the Zionists we see no contradiction between the two.

We would therefore urge all those who can to attend the picket.

Below are some of the more choice extracts from Gilad Atzmon’s own web site.

Fraternally,

Sue Blackwell, Angela Dale, Mark Elf, Tony Greenstein, Deborah Maccoby, Moshe Machover, Roland Rance, Inbar Tamari

(Bloomsbury Street runs of the side of the British Museum and Great Russell Street – nearest tube Tottenham Court Road).

The Writings of Gilad Atzmon [http://www.gilad.co.uk/]

"we must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously…. They (Zionists) are especially annoyed when they are blamed for the death of Jesus…. … American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy… I would suggest that perhaps we should face it once and for all: the Jews were responsible for the killing of Jesus who, by the way, was himself a Palestinian Jew.’".’’ On Anti-Semitism
‘Now, it looks as if Zionist lobbies control American foreign politics. After so many years of independence, the United States of America is becoming a remote colony of an apparently far greater state, the Jewish state…. Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Verse 2)
"The J’s are the ultimate chameleons, they can be whatever they like as long as it serves as some expedient…. Occasionally it looks as if they are almost there, you can see them running the show, running American political life, running American show business, running the "new middle East", running the Communist revolution but then, as it appears, something always goes wrong." The J word, the J people and the J spot

If only the SWP would listen to our kind of JAZ instead of Gilad Atzmon's.

Shock and Orr

Apparently Gilad Atzmon can't be anti-semitic because he told the SWP's Judith Orr and other leading lights in the party that he's not. Actually, he hasn't denied being anti-semitic, he has denied being racist. He avoids the word "anti-semitic" altogether in his rambling and dishonest defence. Avoiding the word "anti-semitic" isn't of itself a bad thing but Atzmon's avoidance of it is a deliberate evasion as the SWP leadership knows. Here is the Bookmarks official statement after having knowingly swallowed a load of evasive nonsense complete with the thinly coded anti-semitism I posted earlier.

Bookmarks has [s/b had] a reputation as a socialist bookshop going back over 30 years, we have faced up to Nazi attacks both physical and legal and have been proud to have been part of the struggle against racism, fascism and anti-Semitism [but now it seems that they don't see anti-semitism as a form of racsim] throughout that time. It has therefore been shocking and saddening for us to have been accused of giving a platform to a Holocaust denier by having musician Gilad Atzmon do an event in the shop.[this isn't the accusation - there are many accusations, for the umpteenth time even though everyone in the SWP knows it, they are that Atzmon has smeared Jewish anti-zionists as being zionists because they self-identify as Jews, he has done this on the website of Israel Shamir, who promotes the medieval blood libel that Jews kill Christian babies for their blood, he promotes the world-wide Jewish conspiracy theory, he distributes holocaust denial literature whilst praising its author, Paul Eisen, who is a Hitler apologist. If Atzmon has been denounced as a holocaust denier himself then it's not surprising but the SWP knows that this is not the crux of the issue]

I want to make it absolutely clear that Bookmarks has never and would never give a platform to a racist or fascist or a Holocaust denier.[see how they have dropped anti-semite from the list] When these accusations [accusations now? only they had just one accusation a moment ago] first appeared we talked to Gilad at length and Gilad has given us a statement which we reprint below. [funny how they could talk to an anti-semite at length when they couldn't even give Tony Greenstein the time of day. And instead of talking to him, why didn't they read his stuff?]While we do not agree with all of Gilad's ideas and statements, [what don't "we" agree with and why?] as is the case with many authors who come to speak here, we feel that none justify saying that he should not be allowed to come to the shop to talk about his book. The bookshop is a forum where many debates have taken place among people from very many different, or no, political traditions.[who else who promotes the idea that "Jews are trying to control the world by proxy" has spoken at the invitation of Bookmarks] Gilad was invited on the basis that he is an internationally acclaimed jazz musician whose album Exile won BBC Best Jazz Album of 2003. [Leaving aside the fact that he is not there to play the sax, that may have sufficed for last year's invitation but he is now known to be anti-semitic] He is an Israeli born Jew [he claim he is not a Jew. Who is the SWP to say who is a Jew. He believes that all who identify as Jews are zionists (possibly under-cover) but remember the Hitler apologist Paul Eisen is also a Jew]who served in the Israeli Defence Force and who now lives in 'self-exile' in Britain and campaigns against racism and for the rights of the Palestinians.[but not against anti-semitism?] His visit to Bookmarks to read from and talk about his second novel, My One and Only One' is part of a nationwide tour.[so that's alright then]

This sorry saga gets more and more sad. I was just talking to a friend of mine who is both a member of the SWP and Respect. She told me that she is not familiar with Atzmon's writings and not that familiar with the arguments and issues. But she said she has asked people in both groups what their take is on all this and she has been very disturbed by their evasions and sometimes their hostility.

The question now is to establish how this has happened. Some are saying that it started as a bit of a gaff. I certainly thought so when I first heard about it. But then something to do with the way the SWP operates meant that it was difficult, now it seems, impossible to own up to a simple human error. The other view is that, insofaras, one can agree with Atzmon - I have to point out that this is impossible because he often contradicts himself - some in the SWP do agree with Atzmon. There are two possible reasons for this. The SWP is very big in Respect and Respect gets a lot of support from Muslims. There's an Islamophobic notion doing the rounds that Muslims enjoy the discomfiture of Jews. Knowing many Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians, I know that this is nonsense but it is put about by the likes of Rod Liddle and Melanie Phillips. Now it could be that this is communalist opportunism on the part of the SWP. The other possibility is that some in the SWP really do agree with his general view of the Jews which is that we are trying to control the world by proxy and that we should renounce being Jewish or be branded under-cover zionists or a "powerful lobby". That latter is how he described those of us organising tomorrow's picket to the SWP. And they accepted that. Whatever their reasons, the SWP has opened the door to anti-semitism, and, through Atzmon's associates, to holocaust denial, the blood libel and neo-nazism as represented and promoted by Paul Eisen and Israel Shamir. I hope the damage is limited to the SWP and that it doesn't spread to Respect and the anti-war and Palestine solidarity movements.

Meanwhile in West Ham...

A Jewish cemetary has been desecrated. This was clearly an anti-semitic attack though whether the perpetrators are from an organised political group isn't yet known. According to the Independent, it looks like the work of teenagers

A clue to the identity of the those responsible was found on the side of an elegant [Rothschild]mausoleum, where the words "A Hitler" and several swastikas were scrawled. A number of graffiti "tags", including "snow-man and Greedy" were scribbled alongside, suggesting that teenagers were involved. The scrawled swastikas were the wrong way round.

In another article the Independent lists the attacks on Jewish cemetaries over the last 15 years. In Marie Woolf's article there seems to be a half-hearted attempt to link anti-semitic incidents to the presence of Muslims in the UK but the descriptions in the list point to neo-nazis or churlish (though extremely cruel) vandals.