The banning of Spencer and Geller from the UK

Following previous posts on this subject I decided to capture the situation graphically.

Spencer and Geller

Allow Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer to Speak in UK Petition | GoPetition

A Statement on behalf of the UK Jewish Board of Deputies on the banning of Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from entering the UK*

By Jonathan Arshole

As Deputies elected by no less than 14 people from across the UK, we speak on behalf of all British Jews in expressing our delight at this ban. Our lobbying played a major role in achieving it.

To ensure that we would never be negatively influenced ourselves by their hate speech, I am pleased to confirm that no Deputy has ever read a word that either Robert Spencer or Pamela Geller has written. However, the Guardian, Al Jazeera, the Socialist Workers Party, George Galloway, Ken Livingstone, Baroness Warsi, as well as every major Islamic Organisation in the UK, have confirmed that Spencer and Geller are racist fanatics who seek nothing less than the death of every Muslim in the world. Even right-wing organisations such as the BBC and the Liberal Democrat Party agree that Spencer and Geller are anti-Muslim bigots.  We also note that among the racist fanatics who ‘support’ Spencer and Geller are so-called abused ‘Muslim’ women and homosexuals, and apostates from Islam, who have all ‘testified’ that Geller and Spencer are ‘freedom fighters who counter Jihad oppression’. These so-called ‘Muslims’ are clearly liars, as evidenced by the fact that not one has been interviewed by the BBC.

The Board of Deputies is especially delighted that the banning of Spencer and Geller means that nobody else in the UK will have to hear a single word of their hate-speech. This represents a major success for freedom of speech in the UK, since every politician, news presenter, writer and Imam is now free to make up any claim they wish about the extent of the evil of Spencer and Geller without the fear of being challenged or having to back it up with any facts. The banning of Spencer and Geller also ensures that the British main stream media is free to continue with not having to cover stories about ‘Islamic threats’ around the whole world that Spencer and Geller claim to exist. As Jews we are especially grateful that we can continue to remain blissfully unaware of the multiple threats posed to us by the Islamists. This enables us to continue to work closely with our Muslim partners in combatting the real common threats posed to us and the whole of humanity: the EDL, UKIP, and the Jewish Defence League.

The Board of Deputies’ relentless commitment to freedom of speech is confirmed by its continued support for the right of every Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah and Al Quaeda Imam to come to the UK to preach. Their presence improves community cohesion by uniting Muslims in their hatred of Western values and Jews, while any attempt to ban them would be counterproductive since it would inflame Muslim sensitivity and  result in understandable violence, especially against Jews.

The banning of Spencer and Geller is a glorious moment for British Jewry since it has brought us closer to our friends in the Muslim Community. As a sign of our closer cooperation I am delighted to announce that the Board will be delegating all future security arrangements to the Islamic Foundation of Europe, and that our Middle East Policy will be subcontracted to the Muslim Public Affairs Committee.

*For those commenters who did not realise it, this is intended to be satirical, although the original statement is not much better

See also: The banning of Spencer and Geller and  More on the Jewish Board of Deputies disgraceful kowtowing to Islamists 

Allow Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer to Speak in UK Petition | GoPetition

More on the Jewish Board of Deputies disgraceful kowtowing to Islamists

Following on from the story about the Board of Deputies lobbying the Government to ban Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from the UK (on the basis that telling the truth about specific Islamic threats - which Spencer and Geller do - is the new 'hate speech')  I posted a message to the Board of Deputies via their website. In doing so, I noticed this article  praising, of all people Baroness Warsi who had been invited to a Board of Deputies exhibition. For the truth about Baroness Warsi - and her continual support for Islamic extremists - see my reports here and here. Given her powerful role in Cabinet as Minister for "Faith and Communities" it is likely that Warsi played a prominent role in advising the Home Office to ban Spencer and Geller. What makes the Board of Deputies story even more shameful is that the other person it praises is none other than Fiyaz Mughal who has been exposed by the Daily Telegraph as using Government funding (via his 'Tell Mama' website) to massively exaggerate the scale of 'Islamaphobic attacks'. Moreover, reports have also claimed that he used the same Government funding to sue a pro-Israel lady (Ambrosine Chetrit) simply for criticising the Tell Mama organisation in a twitter message. His lawyer Farooq Bajwa, who previously represented the Palestinian blood libel cleric Sheikh Raed Sala, sent a letter to Mrs Chetrit's home address,which she had not made public, demanding an apology and damages. Mrs Cherit said: “It is very worrying and scary. All the people who have been threatened by Tell Mama are pro-Israeli.”

While even the spineless Cameron Government appears to have lost patience with Fiyaz Mughal, the Board of Deputies continues to positively slobber over him. Indeed the Board of Deputies report of their recent meeting concludes with the following heartwarming tale:

Rabbi Natan Levy, the Board's Interfaith consultant, and exhibition co-ordinator, said it provides a "unique bridge between the two communities, so that they can celebrate together, remember together, and not be driven further apart." He added: "There was a lovely moment when Fiyaz Mughal ( Director of Faith Matters) and I came together and quoted the same line from our respective scriptures: ‘whosoever saves a single life saves the entire universe’."

I have a simple recommendation for all Synagogue-attending Jews in the UK who do not agree that the Board of Deputies' mandate should include promoting Islamic supramacists and silencing those who speak out about real threats to Jews from Islamists: when you next receive a bill for your Synagogue fees you will notice it contains an itemized 'Board of Deputies levy'. Do not pay it. It is entirely voluntary.

Update: See this statement issued by the Board of Deputies

Update: Geller and Spencer were banned from the UK because they were 'too pro-Israel'.

Allow Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer to Speak in UK Petition | GoPetition

UK bans Spencer and Geller: free speech is dead in the UK and the ban was supported by the Board of Deputies

Due to extreme personal circumstances I have been unable to post much lately. But today's news that Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller have been banned from entering the UK is so shocking that I had to say something (and will be contacting my MP about it). Here are the Home Office letters sent to Spencer and Geller - typically the Government is using legislation explicitly drafted to combat Islamic terrorism to ban people exposing that very terrorism. Spencer is one of the World's foremost experts on Islam and Jihad. Geller is a fearless exposer of Islamic hatred and anti-Semitism, who has actually done more to support the human rights of Muslims (by campaigning, for example, against the abuse of  women and gays in Islamic societies) than any politician in the Western world.

Spencer and Geller have tirelessly exposed threats (not just physical but also against democracy) posed by Islamists around the world. In return they receive death threats on a daily basis by Islamists and anti-Semites, and even more shamefully they are called racist bigots by the main stream media and politicians who have never bothered to even read their work. Such is the fate of anybody who meticulously exposes the truth about specific or general Islamic threats, but Spencer and Geller have attracted especially vicious treatment because of their bravery and perseverance. The Islamists - and their multiple dhimmi supporters across the political spectrum - want them silenced so that the truth remains untold. Instead of hearing what Spencer and Geller have to say the UK public will hear only lies about them, while being told that there is no such thing as an Islamic threat at all.

That the Jewish Board of Deputies should have lobbied in support of this atrocious decision by the UK Government is appalling but not surprising to anybody who has read my blog over the years. When Oxfam and Comic Relief were discovered to be supporting a Palestinian 'charity' that was using the money to publish anti-Semitic material I wrote to both charities, along with the Board of Deputies who had at the time just entered into a relationship with Oxfam (despite much opposition). Whereas both charities provided detailed responses to my letter, the Board of Deputies never responded.

Update here on the increasingly deranged Jewish Board of Deputies

Update: Geller and Spencer were banned from the UK because they were 'too pro-Israel'.  

Allow Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer to Speak in UK Petition | GoPetition

Thousands turn out for Israel 65th parade and rally in London: Pictures

Here are some photos (more to follow tomorrow) I took from today's parade and rally to celebrate Israel's 65th birthday. The parade started from Hyde Park and filled more or less the length of Piccadilly (probably about three thousand people with several hundreds more Israel supporters lining the route). It ended up in Trafalgar Square which was filled for a celebration that involved Israeli singers, and speeches by various religious and political leaders (inlcuding Michael Gove). The inevitable anti-Semites were present outside Trafalgar Square (including 'Jews' from the Neturei Karta and 'Jews for Justice for Palestinians') chanting their peaceful anthem "From the river to the sea Palestine will be free"). How sick they must have been to hear the Hatikvah sung with heart from thousands inside the Square led by outgoing Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (who, unlike the bland 'Kumbaya' speeches by the religious leaders of the Reform and Masorti movements, gave a remarkably inspiring and robust speech calling out the hypocrisy of the 'Israel apartheid state' claims of the anti-Semites).

Fighting Islamic terror by censoring and criminalizing criticism of Islamic terror

Today's Sun: two typical stories of how the media narrative has been framed after Woolwich

The almost universal reaction from our politicians and the main stream media to last week's terror attack in Woolwich has been to

1. Insist that this has nothing to do with 'authentic' Islam (and we now know that David Cameron and Boris Johnson are apparently more qualified than any Imam to judge what is 'authentic' Islam) -
2. Cast Muslims as the 'real' victims by desperately scouring for incidents of 'Islamaphobic' reaction and then massively overhyping the tiny number of incredibly minor incidents found (most of which are bogus)  while almost completely ignoring further acts of Islamic terrorism such as the attacks on prison wardens and on military memorials (note how the Mirror has actually censored out the Islam graffiti in its photos of the latter while bizarrely implying that the EDL is somehow to blame).
3. Pretend to be serious about clamping down on Islamic hate preachers, while in practice use it as an opportunity to censor anybody who exposes the true Islamic threat (in fact, the only Islamic hate preacher who they now really want to censor is Anjem Choudary who actually performs a valuable service by being almost unique in stating very publicly and authoritatively what Islam is really about; in contrast, the many preachers who talk at Universities and even advise government ministers are given a pass because they restrict their hate incitement to Muslim audiences only).
4. Focus their fury on the threat from who it calls 'right wing fanatics' (such as the 85-year-old woman arrested for shouting outside a mosque) and in particular the EDL (who have the temerity to be both British patriots and prepared to expose the dangers to the UK of radical Islam). 

The latter has led, for example, to the kind of stories now appearing as shown above in today's Sun. In the first story we find that the Help the Heroes charity is actually refusing to accept donations that originate from the EDL (compare the hypocrisy of the media's prompting of this action with their total lack of interest in organisations like Oxfam directly funding Palestinian anti-Semitism). In the second story we find that the Police arrested and fined a drunk who 'mocked a Muslim prayer ritual' (compare the speed and resulting action of this with the total lack of action against Muslims who have publicly called for the beheading of 'Kuffars' at many rallies in London). The Sun also has another story today in which it blames the EDL for violence at a rally on Monday, when the violence was actually caused by the 'United Against Fascism' counter-protesters (a grouping of violent socialists and Islamists).

Expect to see many more cases like this one.

Update: excellent article by Bruce Bawer covering this issue

COBRA meeting tonight after Woolwich terrorist attack - and guess who wil be there?

After today's terrorist attack in which a British solider was beheaded outside a school by attackers screaming 'Allah Akhbar' (nothing to do with Islam of course if you are watching the BBC news) it has been announced that an emergency meeting of the National Security Council (COBRA) will be held this evening. We can all be comforted to know that the unelected Islamist supremicist Baroness Warsi (who has made it clear that she views 'Islamophobia' as one of the gravest threats facing Britain)  will be present at this meeting in her role as the Faith and Communities minister.

Islamophobic crime: how bad is it?

In a recent posting I noted the announcement by Cabinet Minister Baroness Warsi that "tackling anti-Muslim hatred was a key priority for the coalition government". I commented that this was a curious priority to have since there was no significant anti-Muslim hatred in the UK. It turns out a Jew is over 16 times more likely to be the victim of an anti-Semitic crime than a Muslim is of being the victim of an 'Islamophobic' crime.

It is not easy to get hold of hard data, but last week I came across a copy of a local paper of the London Borough of Redbridge which sheds light on the scale of  'Islamophobia' and 'Islamophobic crimes'. This borough is second only to Newham in its proportion of Muslim residents; the Borough's own 2011 census results indicate that about 65,000 of the 281,000 population are Muslims. The number of Jews living in Redbridge is believed to be around 9,000. Given that the 'white' population of Redbridge is predominantly working class and generally fairly poor, if there was going to be any area of the UK where you would expect a very high number of  'Islamophobic crimes' then this would be it. The actual figures are here:

So, the latest annual number of 'Islamophobic crimes' is - other than homicide - the lowest number of any official category. Just 7 such crimes in the whole year (while the relatively small number of Jews experienced more than double that number of anti-Semitic crimes).  And that is despite the unprecedented campaign by Muslim organisations, as well as national and local government, to encourage reporting incidents of Islamophobia no matter how minor they may be.

Isn't it wonderful that the Government is devoting so much money and energy to convince us that Islamophobia is one of the gravest threats faced by the UK today?

Daily Mail uses photo of Jewish women being restrained as evidence of mistreatement of Palestinians

Douglas Murray is one of the UK's finest political commentators. He is also a staunch defender of Israel. But in an otherwise excellent article he has written in the Daily Mail about Stephen Hawking's boycott of Israel he has provided the opportunity for a bizarre blunder by the Mail's editors. Because Murray decided (wrongly in my view) to 'balance' his criticism of the boycott with comments like these:

I acknowledge that there are those who are concerned about Israel’s approach to the Palestinians

the Editor (I assume) decided it was an opportunity to smear Israel even in a pro-Israel article by posting a picture showing Israelis 'mistreating Palestinians'. 

Screenshot taken from Daily Mail online article, 11 May 2013

Hence we have this picture captioned

There are those who are concerned about Israel's approach to the Palestinians, but if these academics think a boycott is the right way to address those concerns they are profoundly mistaken 

Except that the women in the photo, including the one being held back by an Israeli policeman, are clearly orthodox Jewish women (12 May Update: Elder of Ziyon has confirmed that the photograph is from AFP, and shows Israeli police stopping a Jewish protest after the murder of Evyatar Borovsky).

Incidentally I believe the whole approach being used by the pro-Israel side to the boycott issue is fundamentally flawed. When the Nazis were boycotting Jewish shops it would have been bizarre to say things like "We recognise that these Jewish owners have not all led perfect lives and so we have some sympathy with your hatred of them, but we think that the goods they sell are fantastic not just for Jews but for Nazis as well. So please don't boycott them". The only sensible - and winning - response is to attack the people behind the boycott for what they are: modern-day Nazis who have no interest whatsoever in the welfare of the Palestinians; their sole objective is to destroy the Jewish state. That's why the image here (by Isreallycool) is so much more powerful than the message here.

Just about the  worst strategy that you can possibly take in confronting the boycotters is the one I heard from the Israeli goverment representative (I didn't catch his name) who was chosen to speak against Exeter University's Israel-hater and boycott leader Ghada Karmi on Nick Ferrari's LBC radio show this week. While Karmi was spouting the standard lies about Israel being an apartheid state (unchallenged by both Ferrari and the Israel rep) the Israeli's response was simply to play the kumbaya card saying that whatever our differences it was much better to sit down and talk rather than boycott. To see the futility of that approach you should read the staggering account reported here.

Just who in Britain stands up for Israel?

As I explained last week, British Jews can no longer rely on the Jewish Chronicle to be either a defender of Israel, or even the provider of news that is anything other than coloured by a far left perspective.

A commenter on that article said that the free "Jewish News" is much more balanced.Sadly, that has not been the case for at least two years and today's issue provides a perfect summary of why. There is a wrap around cover publicising the "Closer to Israel Parade and Celebration' taking place in London on 2 June, but that is an advert and when you look inside the actual paper you will find plenty of evidence to suggest the writers do not sympathise with the advert's message. The articles shown here are especially disgraceful because they would not have been out of place in the Guardian, the BBC, or even Al Jazeera.

• The article headlined "Two killed in confrontation" starts with "An Israeli settler in Nablus and a Palestinian were killed this week as several incidents led to heightened alert across Israel." In other words, in classic BBC style the Jewish News is now making a moral equivalence between an Israeli civilian killed in a brutal unprovoked terrorist attack and the pinpoint assassination of the very member of an Al Qaeda affiliated organisation in Gaza who led last week's rocket attack on Eilat. Even more outrageous is that, while the article names the dead terrorist, it does not bother to name the Israeli civilian. Instead it refers to him simply as "an armed settler" - apparently using that description as justification for him being killed and ignoring the fact that all Israelis living in the West bank must by necessity carry their guns with them when they travel (and he was hitchhiking). The murdered Jew, who the Jewish News feels does not deserve to be named,  was the much loved 31-year-old Evyatar Borovsky, from the settlement of Yitzhar, a father of five (the youngest just 7 years old). But, the Jewish News doesn't want you to know that - just in case you might feel a tiny bit of sympathy.

• The article headlined "Ban on illegal shells" talks about Israel's decision to halt its use of white phosphorous. In fact the headline is a blatant smear. Israel's use of white phoshorous has always been legal (NATO troops use it in exactly the same way) and its decision to stop it was taken unilaterally purely for PR reasons.
• 

• The article headlined "Price tag attacks are an issue Jews worldwide must address" is just more of the nonsense we saw in last week's JC where we have the total inversion of reality in which Jews attacking Arabs is supposed to be the main problem that Israel faces. But in terms of sheer pomposity and stupidity it's hard to beat the message that 'Jews worldwide' must do something about this (non-existent) problem. How about this writer Dr Gvaryahu demanding that every Christian in the world must do something about Christian teenagers brawling in Scunthorpe every Friday night? Or even demanding that every Muslim in the world addresses the problem of Muslim terrorism (oops better rule that one out as it actually makes sense).

So, if the only two Jewish newspapers in the UK now simply parrot the same narrative as the Guardian and BBC about Israel, which organisations actually are there left to genuinely support Israel? It certainly is not the UJIA (United Jewish Israel Appeal) whose leader Mick Davis thinks Israel is an apartheid state; it certainly isn't the Board of Deputies of British Jews whose priority is  not just to partner with the anti-Israel Oxfam, but to continue with that partnership after Oxfam was revealed to be funding Palestinian anti-Semitism and support for terrorism; it certainly isn't BICOM (Britain Israel Communications & Research Centre) who actually employ an anti-Israel activist to do their 'promotion'; and it is no longer even clear we can rely on the Zionist Federation who felt that it was their job to take visitors to Israel 'to meet Palestinians and understand their point of view'. Do these organisations, which are supposed to represent the interests of Israel and British Jews, really think that in the UK of all places it is their job to put across the Palestinian narrative when nothing other than that is forced onto everyone nonstop by the main stream media?

If the Jewish newspapers and organisations really want to talk about the Palestinian's viewpoint then why not focus on telling the British public about their obsessive death cult (which starts very young) their worship of terrorist murderers (the killer of Evyator Borovsky apparently had to murder a Jew to bring honour back to his family - oh and by the way he was a member of Fatah our 'peace partners'), their brutal treatment of women,  homosexuals, and christians, their genuine apartheid (not a single Jew is allowed to live in areas controlled by the Palestinians); or how about the way they treat their disabled children leaving - guess who to pick up the tab; and above all the fact they do not - and never did - want an independent state; they only ever wanted the destruction of Israel. Then perhaps people like Dr Gvaryahu might demand more appropriately that Jews worldwide do something about that.

p.s. There is an outstanding article today by Caroline Glick which tounches on many of the issues above.

A letter to the Labour Party (Ken Livingstone et al)

A friend of mine who is a long-time Labour Party member (yes I do have such friends!) has given me permission to publish the following letter he has sent to his local (Labour) MP (names withheld). He has promised to let me see any response.

Dear XXXX

Continued membership of Ken Livingstone (and other antisemitic, terrorist supporters) in the Labour Party

As I believe you know, I am one of your constituents and have been a member of the Labour party for many years. In the last few years I have become dismayed at the anti-Semitism of an increasing number of Labour MPs and senior party figures. Sometimes this anti-Semitism is dressed up under the guise of anti-Zionism, but of course their obsessive hatred of Israel (and Israel only) reveals their true feelings. Increasingly, certain Labour figures no longer even bother to make the 'politically correct' replacement of 'Jew' with 'Zionist'. It seems the Labour Party as a whole is not only tolerant of these views, but sees them as a potential vote winner among the expanding Muslim communities.

So, for example, we have had Paul Flynn MP accuse Britain's first Jewish ambassador to Israel of having 'divided loyalties'; Martin Linton, MP speaking about the "long tentacles of Israel" reaching into British politics; Gerald Kaufman MP stating that "Just as Lord Ashcroft owns most of the Conservative Party, right-wing Jewish millionaires own the rest," and saying "Here we are, the Jews again" when pro-Israel MP Louise Ellman rose to speak in the Commons. Even more worrying are the continued activities of MPs Jeremy Corbyn, Sadiq Khan, and Andy Slaughter (the latter who even holds the position of Shadow Justice Minister). These MPs not only campaign for the destruction of Israel, but have a long history of support for Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists, and they have all shared platforms with members of terrorist organisations, and notorious anti-Semitic, homophobic Islamic hate-preachers (see, e.g. http://hurryupharry.org/2013/01/29/labour-embraces-islamist-extremists/).

But, above all, it is the fact that the Labour party still hosts Israel-hater and terrorist supporter Ken Livingstone that makes me question why I should continue to be a member of the party. It appears his Jew-baiting (and anti-Labour party activities) are insufficient ground for his expulsion, as is his working for the Iranian government on its Press TV. But then how about his comments on his Press TV show earlier this week (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22352929) where he blamed "Western governments" for the terrorist bombing in Boston on the grounds that it was understandable for Muslims to get angry. Presumably he now feels that the London 7/7 bombings when he was Mayor were also justified. I feel I can no longer be a member of a party with the likes of Livingstone et al. Unless I hear in the next few weeks that at least Livingstone is finally booted out once and for all after his latest outburst I shall be terminating my membership.

Yours sincerely,

Baroness Warsi and her strong support for Islamic extremists

Last year I warned that the unelected Baroness Warsi (the Muslim media darling who is an Islamist supremacist) was not only still a member of Cameron's government but actually was awarded by her failure as Tory Party Chairman with a far more powerful role in the Cabinet.

Now, at least some people in the main stream media are looking closely at her activities with a critical eye. Today's Telegraph has an article by Andrew Gilligan exposing the fact that she spoke at a meeting hosted by the terrorist supporting FOSIS (Federation of Student Islamic Societies).

There is a quote at the end of the article from a spokesman for Warsi saying that she attended the meeting

 "..to specifically discuss tackling anti-Muslim hatred, a key priority for the coalition government". 

Why exactly is the government making the tackling of a non-existent problem its priority? And do they not see any irony in 'tackling this problem' by supporting an organization which promotes REAL antisemitism and violence both on campuses and the wider society?

The increasingly unhinged Jewish Chronicle

The JC's steady morphing into a mixture of the Guardian/Haaretz continues unabated (see here, here and here for some of my previous reports on this,  and there is also the excellent website http://jcwatch.wordpress.com/ that  is dedicated to the subject).

In fact, not only does the JC increasingly share the Guardian/Haaretz worldview (i.e. extreme left wing and grudgingly acknowledging Israel's 'right to exist' while frequently providing a platform to vicious anti-Israel bigots) but it is increasingly dominated by writers who really are from the Guardian/Haaretz. I have already noted the fact that Haaretz stooge Anschel Pfeffer is their primary Israel news reporter and we are now also getting the Guardian's Jonathan Freedland on the Comments page more or less every week now (I can save you the bother of reading what he writes since every piece can be summarised as either "as a Jew I wish to express my disgust with the Israeli government" or "as a Jew I wish to express my disgust with orthodox Jews").

Most Jews in the UK are strongly pro-Israeli and they assume that the one newspaper they can rely on to share their views on Israel is the JC. Most of these people get their ONLY news about Israel from the JC and they assume - if anything - that it is strongly biased in favour of Israel. To show how  they are being deceived here are some highlights from today's issue:

•  The whole front page (and page 11) is taken up with Pfeffer's scare story "Two months to sleep soundly" in connection with the growing threats from Iran and Syria, ignoring the irony that it is  Pfeffer and his left-wing colleagues who have continually warned Israel not to take action against Iran as there is no real threat.  I guess in his world he would rather live with a nuclear Iran - and hence not sleep soundly - than stop Iran from getting the bomb. Of course, Pfeffer has failed to report any of the genuinely good news from Israel in the last few weeks such as the shekel being the strongest currency in the world in 2013, and Israel being on the verge of energy independence with the beginning of the gas flowing from its enormous off-shore fields.  In fact, his other main article this week is on Page 13 titled "Thousands hit by Israeli airline strike"

•  On Page 21 (the Judaism page) we have the most offensive article of the week "We must take a stand against settler violence". This is the ultimate inversion of reality perpetuated especially by antisemitic NGOs. There are an incredibly tiny number of minor incidents recorded against Palestinians by 'settlers' (most of which incidents later turn out to be either hoaxes or, as in the case of Mosque daubings, to have been the work of Arabs) - far fewer incidents per head of population than there are acts of brutal racist violence in London. Yet there is a genuine - but unreported by the JC - intifada taking place against Jews in East Jerusalem and in Judea and Sumaria. This involves daily targetting of cars and even school buses with rocks that sometimes end up killing the occupants. The JC has failed to report on any of this, which has been going on now for several months - not even bothering with the story of the small child Adelle Biton who has been on emergency support and unconscious since she was injured in such a rock attack last month. Today was her 3rd birthday.
• On Page 26 with have the full page "JC Essay" by 'broadcaster' John Ware titled "How peace gap might just be bridged" which is full of the usual Kumbayar cliches about the Palestinians really wanting peace if only the Israelis would not be so aggressive, and including gems of wisdom like:

"Does any rational Israeli seriously believe that score of checkpoints, entry permits to Jerusalem, construction of settlements, restrictions on the movement of Palestinians, can continue in perpetuity without some sort of violent outlet, sooner or later"

It is funny how nobody expects Israelis to turn violent even though they have to suffer checkpoints at every single public building they enter, are currently banned from building in their own capital city, are not allowed ANY movement into Palestinian controlled areas, and actually have to face the continual real terrorism of the Palestinians.
But then again it is funny how nobody expects UK Jews to turn violent when they have to put up with the nonsense in the JC week on week.....

• On Page 2 (for the second time in 3 weeks) we have a story "Board Oxfam links stay" about the Board of Deputies link with Oxfam, which was always a scandal and should have been stopped immediately when news got out that Oxfam was funding the antisemitic, terrorist supporting Palestinian charity Miftah. But both articles have simply parroted  statements from Oxfam which not only whitewash the affair but are factually incorrect. Hence both articles are clearly supportive of the Board's ludicrous decision to continue its link with Oxfam. 
• On Page 4 we have an article "BNP set for trouncing in local election" which is one of the typically dozens of articles in any one week that focus on the 'extreme right-wing threat to Jews'. More often than not these focus obsessively on the EDL which is actually the only genuinely pro-Israel political organization in the country.  What you will almost never see in the JC is anything about either Islamic antisemitism or extreme left antisemitism. In fact you are more likely to see articles by those very Islamists and leftists (indeed it is not a joke that the JC has actually used, as its source of material on the EDL, the anti Semite Weyman Bennett who is a leader of the viciously anti-Israel, violent, socialist UAF which the JC laughingly refers to simply as an "anti racist organization").
• On Page 22 we have the Editorial and letters. As usual you will not find a single word of support for Israel on this page (typically Israel is either ignored or criticised) 
• On Page 23 we have the Jonathan Freedland commentary section. No further comment required.

Casual anti-Semitism of the British middle class

Sometimes even the most seemingly insignificant anti-Israel statements reveal, by their complete irrationality, deep-rooted anti-Semitism. I want to recount two recent such statements - one in a newspaper and one I experienced personally.

The latter occurred in a pub in a middle class area of London. A highly intelligent upper-middle class gentleman had arranged an exhibition of local artists' work (including his own) there, and I ended up in a long conversation with him. I told him I was Jewish because we were discussing the use of religious images in art. The man, who described himself as a lapsed Catholic, said he had refused to hang a painting by another artist because it contained images of women in burkas and he said he felt this would be offensive to Muslims. I asked him why he felt it would be offensive and how such an attitude was consistent with the fact that his own displayed artwork contained graphic nudity. His only response was to say that he felt that it was not his job to offend Muslims. Perhaps feeling that the conversation was at this point getting too serious he decided to tell a joke. It was about a landlord having problems with some tenants in his flat and the police being called, leading to the following  'punchline':

Police: "Who are the occupiers?"
Landlord: "The Israelis of course!"

When I told him that the 'joke' was not only completely unfunny, but deeply offensive because it perpetuated a false stereotype about the Jewish nation he said he was shocked. "How could you possibly be offended by that joke. It was on a BBC show".

He did not realise the irony of his remarks and the fact that he had just made it clear how far he would go out of his way never to offend a Muslim, while thinking nothing of offending a Jew. In the subsequent conversation he asked if I was born in the UK and when I told him of course I was born in London, he said in that case I had no right to be offended by a joke like that.

The second example is from the Editorial here in yesterday's Evening Standard.

Evening Standard Editorial, 24 April 2013

Readers of this blog will know of the rampant and obsessive anti-Israel stance of this paper (see here, here and here), but in many respects this particular Editorial is pretty sensible. It is the insertion of the very small statement in relation to Israel that reveals - when you analyse it carefully - irrational contempt.  Al Qaeda's number one stated goal is to kill every Jew in the world. The Al Qaeda Syrian units have already started firing at Israel from the positions it has overran near the Golan Heights in Syria and its leadership has publicly stated that their first goal after defeating Assad will be to destroy Israel, hinting that they will use Syria's massive stockpile of chemical weapons to do this. There is some threat to the stability of Lebanon from an Al Qaeda takeover of Syria as the writer understands. But, unlike to Israel, this is not an existential threat. So does the writer show sympathy to Israel's concerns as he clearly does to Lebanon's and the peaceful people of Syria? No because whereas Lebanon is 'threatened by chaos' the only concern the writer has about Israel is its 'bellicose reaction'. From this read  "just because the Jihadists threaten Israel with extinction and just because they back this up with actual bombings, terrorist attacks and the potential use of chemical weapons, the thing we REALLY have to worry about is the disgraceful notion that Israel might actually takes steps to defend itself".

Update on the Oxfam/Miftah story

I previously posted about Elder of Ziyon's exposure of the Oxfam funded Palestinian 'charity' Miftah and its promotion of antiSemitism. Elder of Ziyon has numerous updates here and here. The latter article contains a response from Oxfam that is almost identical to the one I have just received from Supporter Relations, Oxfam GB following my own letter to them. I have made the following response using some of Elder's points and some new ones of my own (I have agreed with the person I am communicating with that I would not state their name on this site).

Dear XXXX

Thank you for your response but I am afraid it is unsatisfactory for the following reasons:.

1. The 'apology' was not made in Arabic, the language of the essay, so Arab readers
of Miftah will assume that Miftah (and Oxfam also) supports that blood libel. Moreover, you must be aware that Miftah did not issue its English apology until it was pressured to do so.

2.  Miftah have praised suicide bombers under their own name (see http://elderofziyon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/miftah-removes-its-essay-praising.html) confirming that direct support for terrorism and anti-Semitism are a major part of Miftah's activities.

3. The section of Miftah's site where the offensive article was published was not a "blog" as you say but an essay section where they republish articles they think are interesting for their readers. They even index the section so their readers can read other articles from the same author, and Nawaf al-Zaru has been featured five times.

4. People who donate to Oxfam would certainly not do so if they were aware it funded organizations like Miftah. Not withstanding its anti-Semitism and terrorist support, when you say

"We have worked with MIFTAH since 2010... implementing Oxfam’s regional project Supporting Women’s Transformative Leadership in Changing Times. The project targets marginalized women and men to support women’s rights and gender justice with the goal of increased empowerment, self-confidence, and leadership roles for women in public and private spheres"

you might think this is something good, but you are simply confirming that Oxfam is spending money on things that have nothing to do with what charity donors in the UK think they are contributing to. In short you are defrauding them.

Unless I hear from you that Oxfam is immediately terminating its support for Miftah I will be reporting Oxfam to the Charities Commission. I will also be contacting my MP about this. It is just not good enough.

Yours

Edgar Davidson

UPDATE 8 April 2013: I have received a response from XXXX  saying

"I forwarded your feedback and comments to our Middle East team who deal with MIFTAH and who are currently in talks with the organisation regarding this matter. We will of course be happy to update you with any further information once we have it." 

At least Oxfam seem to be taking this seriously and are courteous enough to respond. To date I have not even received an acknowledgement from either Comic Relief or - disgracefully - the Board of Deputies of British Jews (who recently announced a partnership with Oxfam).

Update: anti-Israel charities

Oxfam and Comic Relief funding Palestinian Jew hatred

I have posted numerous times about how the major charities funded by Comic Relief are directly funding Palestinian propaganda and anti-Semitism (as well as funding organisations directly controlled by Hamas of course). As an example of both the ridiculous causes that are funded and the anti-Semitism that results, Elder of Ziyon  has an expose of how a Palestinian NGO (Miftah) funded by Oxfam published as pure an anti-semitic screed as is imaginable - resurrecting the reprehensible blood libel that Jews ritually slaughter Christian children and consume their blood on Passover (for more on the story see here).

It inspired me to produce the drawing above (feel free to copy it - I plan to drop some copies off at Oxfam shops).

It's amazing how, uniquely when it comes to the Palestinians, 'charity' can be redefined to mean 'giving money for any purpose whatsover'. Likewise we now find that being an 'aid worker' also has a completely different meaning when it comes to the Palestinians (as far as they are concerned anybody who spends their time promoting Israel hatred is an 'aid worker').
And see this spin on the story.

Update on the story here.

Update: A catalogue of charities that fund anti-Israel and antisemitic propaganda.

Redefining anti-Israel bigots as 'aid workers'

Front Page of the Sun, 30/3/2013

It is appalling that two Pakistani-born British women have been raped in Libya. But to call them 'aid workers' as every main stream media outlet has in the UK (see this report about the BBC and Times coverage) is a blatant lie. And it is scandal that this story is also being used to promote the Big Lie against Israel.  Of more concern than the BBC and Times articles is this one that appeared in yesterday's Sun (since it is read by far more people).

Page 7, The Sun, 30/3/2013

These people were not 'aid workers' (as the article linked above makes very clear) and their mission had nothing to do with compassion for the Palestinians. They were part of another publicity stunt aimed purely to demonise the State of Israel, and the Sun has fully taken the bait - notably in the last two columns of the main article (click to enlarge it). Far from Israel blockading medical supplies from reaching Gaza as implied, it actually sends lorries carrying many tons of such supplies daily into Gaza despite the continued attacks at the very checkpoints through which the lorries are sent. And whereas Israel certainly does attempt to stop the flow of weapons and weapons-making equipment into Gaza (a persistent threat that the article does not mention) it never stops humanitarian aid from getting through, which is more than can be said for Egypt which also has a border with Gaza but is strangely exempt from accusations of 'mounting a blockade'.  The article is correct in stating that the convey was run by the Turkish organisation IHH. But IHH is not an 'international aid group' as stated but an Islamist organisation that even Turkey classified as a terrorist group not too long ago (see here for a good expose of IHH). The IHH link inevitably leads the article to repeats the false narrative about the Mavi Marmara ship incident in 2010, thereby further demonising Israel.

New post on Palestinian 'aid' money here.

Remember the massacre of Jewish doctors and nurses because the main stream media won't help you

Daniel Greenfield has a must-read account of the Hadassah Medical Convoy Massacre that took place 65 years ago today, when 78 Jewish doctors and nurses taking supplies to the Haddasah Hospital in Jerusalem were murdered by Arabs (with the full complicity of the British occupying forces incidentally).

 "..the burning alive of doctors and nurses in a medical convoy, showed Israelis that peace was impossible... The barbarity of the attack was then followed by snapshots of the dead, who in some cases had been decapitated, being sold as postcards as yet another reminder that the enemy was operating on a whole other notion of morality."

Few people outside Israel, even Jews, know about the massacre. On the 10th anniversary of the Park Hotel Passover massacre (which was almost totally ignored in the UK) I wrote about this lack of awareness and compared it with the total awareness in the UK of 'massacres' of Palestinians that were actually bogus:

.. when a few days later Israelis attacked a terrorist enclave in Jenin (going hand-to-hand to avoid civilian casualties - resulting in the deaths of 23 Israelis and 53 Palestinians - of whom 48 were 'gunmen') there was condemnation from the whole world as the media became obsessed with the myth that a 'massacre' had taken place. Although the massacre myth was debunked as a hoax within a few days, most people still remember the 'Jenin massacre'. Similarly, in stark contrast to the Passover massacre,everyone knows about "Deir Yassin" which the Palestinians (wrongly) claimed was a massacre of Arabs in 1948 and which is widely commemorated not just annually in the UK but at more or less every meeting where the Palestinians want to make a point about Israel's 'brutality'. In contrast to the zero articles in the UK media about the Passover massacre since 2002 there have been many hundreds of articles commemorating the non-massacres at Deir Yassin and Jenin. 

 If you google about the Jenin or Deir Yassin 'massacres' you will find literally hundreds of thousands of hits including many articles in the main stream media. A similar search for Hadassah Medical Convoy Massacre brings up a tiny fraction of the hits and fails to bring up a single article published in the main stream media.

How to get a letter published in the Evening Standard

As per several previous posts about the Evening Standard all you need to do is write some peurile anti-Israel nonsense, no matter how irrelevant. This letter appeared today:

Based on this template the Standard could roll out any number of future letters based on more or less any Royal activity. For example:

Next time Wills and Kate visit a hospital in Stoke-on-Trent:

 "I was surprised to see the Prince and Princess of Cambridge visiting patients at this hospital. Will they now be going on to visit the 5 billion Palestinians denied proper hospital treatment for 65 years by the fascist Israelis. Or is royal sympathy carefully selected only for those who are not Palestinians or victims of Jews"

Next time the Queen sends a message of condolence to victims of a major disaster:

 "I was surprised to see the Queen send this message of condolence to the families of people killed in this disaster. Will she now be sending  messages of condolence to the families of the 50 trillion Palestinians killed in the last 65 years by the fascist Israelis. Or is royal sympathy carefully selected only for those who are not Palestinians or victims of Jews"

etc.

When political correctness leads to Jewish kids being killed

A year ago Islamic terrorist Mohammed Merah killed 3 children and a parent/teacher at a Jewish School in Toulouse. Before those murders he had killed two French soldiers in separate incidents. The politically correct French authorities - along with the main stream media - insisted initially that the murderer must be a 'right wing white racist', even though it was clear to those who were not naive (including myself as I blogged my views about it before the real killer was known) that the killer was a Muslim.

Murdered because of political correctness:  Rabbi Yonatan Sandler and his sons Aryeh, 6, and Gavriel, 3 (Left);  Myriam Monsenego, 8 (Right)

Now it transpires - see Daniel Greenfield's report - that this political correctness cost the lives of the Jewish children because the French intelligence service had identified Merah as a likely suspect after the first two killings but decided not to arrest him since, as a Muslim, he did not fit their profile of a white racist.