Trending Topics:

France’s Macron leads the way as western leaders malevolently confuse anti-Zionism with antisemitism

Middle East
on 56 Comments

How far the international community’s approach towards Israel has reversed trajectory over the past half century can be gauged simply by studying the fate of one word: Zionism.

In 1975 much of the world broke ranks with the United States and Europe at the United Nations general assembly to declare that Zionism, Israel’s founding ideology, “is a form of racism and racial discrimination”.

Western publics were generally shocked. Zionism, they had been told, was a necessary liberation movement for the Jewish people after centuries of oppression and pogroms. Its creation, Israel, was simply the righting of terrible wrongs that had culminated in the horrors of the Holocaust.

But Zionism looked very different to those countries around the globe that had been exposed to centuries of European colonialism and the more recent advent of US imperialism.

The long history of crimes against Jews that led to Israel’s establishment took place mostly in Europe. And yet it was Europe and the US that had sponsored and aided the arrival of Jews in another people’s homeland, far from their own shores.

To the global south, the great purges of native Palestinians carried out by European Jews in 1948 and 1967 looked all too reminiscent of white Europeans cleansing indigenous peoples in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.

A colonial anachronism

By 1975, the time of the UN vote, it was clear that Israel had no intention either of handing back to the Palestinians the occupied territories it had seized eight years earlier. Rather, Israel was entrenching the occupation by illegally transferring its own civilian population into the Palestinian territories.

Across much of the globe, these Jewish settlers looked like an anachronism, a reminder of the white “pioneers” heading westwards across the supposedly empty lands of the US; the white farmers who seized vast tracts of South Africa and Rhodesia as their personal homesteads; and the white newcomers who herded the remnants of Australia’s Aboriginal peoples into reservations or turned them into a sideshow at its tourist sites.

The UN’s “Zionism is racism” resolution lasted 16 years – until the fall of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the US as the world’s sole superpower. After a lot of diplomatic arm-twisting by Washington, including promises that Israel would engage in a peace process with the Palestinians, Resolution 3379 was finally scrapped in 1991.

Decades later, the pendulum has swung decisively the other way.

US and European elites have moved on from their once-defensive posture that Zionism is not racism. Now, they are on the attack. Their presumption is that anti-Zionism – the position of much the international community 44 years ago – is synonymous with racism.

Or more specifically, it is increasingly being accepted that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are two sides of the same coin.

Apartheid-style system

That trend was consolidated last week when Emmanuel Macron, the centrist French president, went further than simply reiterating his repeated conflation of anti-Zionism and antisemitism. This time he threatened to outlaw anti-Zionism.

Macron’s confusion of anti-Zionism with antisemitism is patently nonsensical.

Antisemitism refers to the hatred of Jews. It is bigotry, plain and simple.

Anti-Zionism, on the other hand, is opposition to the political ideology of Zionism, a movement that has insisted in all its political guises on prioritising the rights of Jews to a homeland over those, the Palestinians, who were already living there.

Anti-Zionism is not racism against Jews; it is opposition to racism by Zionist Jews.

Of course, an anti-Zionist may also be antisemitic, but it is more likely that an anti-Zionist holds his or her position for entirely rational and ethical reasons.

That was made only clearer last summer when the Israeli parliament passed a basic law defining Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people (PDF). The law asserts that all Jews, even those with no connection to Israel, enjoy a right to self-determination there that all Palestinians are deprived of, including the fifth of Israel’s population who are Palestinian and formally citizens.

In other words, the law creates two statuses in Israel – and implicitly in the occupied territories too – based on an imposed ethno-religious classification system that entitles all Jews to superior rights over all Palestinians.

In constitutional terms, Israel is explicitly operating an apartheid-style legal and political system, one even more encompassing than South Africa’s. After all, the apartheid rulers of South Africa never claimed that theirs was the homeland of all white people.

Criminalizing BDS

Macron’s threat to outlaw anti-Zionism is the logical extension of existing moves across Europe and the US to penalise those who support BDS, the growing international solidarity movement with Palestinians that calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.

Many members of the BDS movement, though not all, are anti-Zionists. A proportion are anti-Zionist Jews.

The movement not only leapfrogs western policy elites’ decades of complicity in Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians but highlights the extent of that complicity. That is one reason it is so reviled by those elites.

France has gone furthest so far in this direction, criminalizing BDS as a form of economic discrimination. It thereby conflates a state, Israel, with an ethnic group, Jews – precisely as antisemites do.

Such legislation makes as much sense as France outlawing a boycott of apartheid South Africa back in the 1980s on the grounds that it discriminated against whites.

Israel lobbyists in action

France, however, is simply at the head of the curve. In the US some 26 states have enacted laws to punish or sanction individuals and organisations that support a boycott. Similar legislation is pending in a further 13 states.

None seem concerned that they are violating Americans’ much-cherished First Amendment rights, and making an exception to the right to free speech in one case only – that of Israel.

This month the US Senate joined the fray by passing a bill to encourage states to inflict economic punishments on those who support a boycott of Israel.

These victories against the non-violent BDS movement are the result of vigorous and malevolent efforts behind the scenes by Israel lobbyists to confuse anti-Zionism with antisemitism.

As Israel’s standing among western publics has plummeted with the advent of social media, endless videos of violence by the Israeli army and settlers caught on phone cameras, and Israel’s starvation of Gaza, Israel’s lobbyists have moved to make it ever harder to speak out.

Redefinition of antisemitism

Their coup was the recent widespread acceptance in the west of a redefinition of antisemitism that intentionally confuses it with anti-Zionism.

Israel’s fingerprints are all over the work of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). It is therefore hardly surprising that the lengthy and vague definition of antisemitism devised by the IHRA has been supplemented by 11 examples, seven of which refer to Israel.

One example, stating that Israel is a “racist endeavour”, suggests that the 72 UN member states that voted for 1975’s “Zionism is racism” resolution, as well as the 32 that abstained, were themselves espousing, or turning a blind eye to, antisemitism.

Western governments, local authorities, political parties and public bodies are now racing to adopt the IHRA definition.

The result has been a growing fear among western publics about what can be said any longer about Israel without eliciting accusations of antisemitism.

That is the goal. If people become afraid that others will think them antisemitic for criticising Israel, then they will keep quiet, giving Israel greater leeway to commit crimes against Palestinians.

‘Self-hating Jew’ trope

Were Macron and the IHRA right – that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are all but indistinguishable – then we would have to accept some very uncomfortable conclusions.

One would be that Palestinians should be uniformly damned as antisemites for demanding their own right to self-determination. Or put another way, it would be impossible for Palestinians to demand the same rights as Jews in their homeland without that being declared as racist. Welcome to Alice Through the Looking Glass.

Another conclusion would be that a significant proportion of Jews around the world, those who oppose Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish state, are also antisemites, infected with an irrational hatred of their fellow Jews. This is the “self-hating Jew” trope Israel has long relied on to discredit criticism from Jews.

On this view, those Jews who want Palestinians to enjoy the same rights as Jews claim for themselves in the Middle East are racist – and not only that, but racist against themselves.

And if Macron’s efforts to criminalise anti-Zionism prove fruitful, it would mean that Palestinians and Jews could be punished – maybe even jailed – for demanding equality between Palestinians and Jews in Israel.

Preposterous as this reasoning sounds when laid out so bluntly, similar approaches to dealing with antisemitism are being readily accepted by actors across Europe and the US.

The extent of this insanity was evident in the decision of Germany’s Bank für Sozialwirtschaft, or Bank for Social Economy, to shut the account of a Jewish anti-Zionist group, Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East, over its support for a boycott of Israel. It was the first time a German bank had closed down a Jewish organization’s account since the Nazis were in power.

The bank took the action after complaints that Jewish Voice was antisemitic by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a group that masks its fervent support for Israel behind campaigning for Jewish rights.

Eliding the left and far-right

Macron’s antipathy to anti-Zionism – shared by many others seeking to confuse it with antisemitism – has an explicit cause as well as a more veiled one. Both are related to the political crisis he faces. After two years in power, he is the most unpopular president in the republic’s history.

According to Macron, the rise of anti-Zionism, or more broadly growing opposition to Israel, is swelling the ranks of those who want to harm Jews in France, whether through attacks, the scrawling of swastikas on Jewish graves or the polluting of public discourse, especially on social media.

Two groups that he and French Jewish lobby groups have identified as at the core of the problem are French Muslims, often recent immigrants who are seen as importing with them supposed racist Middle Eastern attitudes to Jews, and secular leftists who have taken the lead in supporting BDS.

Although a small number of French Muslims have adopted extremist positions, most feel hostility towards Israel because of its role in displacing and oppressing Palestinians. That sentiment dominates among BDS activists too.

But the implication of Macron and the lobby is that these two anti-Zionist groups are actually closely aligned with the antisemitic far-right and neo-Nazi groups, whatever their obvious respective differences in ideology and attitude towards violence.

The blurring by Macron of anti-Zionism and antisemitism is meant to sow doubt about what should be obvious distinctions between these three very different ideological constituencies.

Macron’s sleight of hand

Macron’s sleight of hand has a related and more specifically self-serving agenda, however, as has become clear in the wider misuse – or weaponisation – of antisemitism slurs in Europe and the US.

Macron is faced with a popular revolt known as the Yellow Vests, or Gilets Jaunes, that has taken over high streets for many months. The protests are rocking his government.

Like other recent grassroots insurrections, such as the Occupy movement, the Yellow Vests is leaderless and its demands difficult to decipher. It represents more a mood, a spreading dissatisfaction with an out-of-touch political system that, since the financial meltdown a decade ago, has looked chronically broken and unreformable.

The Yellow Vests embody a grievance desperately searching to hitch its wagon to a new political star, a different and fairer vision of how our societies could be organised.

The movement’s very inarticulateness has been its power and its threat. Those frustrated with austerity policies, those angry at an arrogant, unresponsive political and financial elite, those craving a return to a clearer sense of Frenchness can all seek shelter under its banner.

But equally it has also allowed Macron and the French elite to project on to the Yellow Vests any kind of malevolent motive that best serves their efforts to demonize the movement. A charge spokespeople for the movement deny.

And given the rising tide of nativist, far-right movements across Europe, casting the Yellow Vests as antisemitic has proved difficult to resist for the embattled French president.

Just as Macron has presented leftwing and anti-racism activists supporting BDS as in cahoots with neo-Nazis, he has lumped together the Yellow Vests with far-right white nationalists. Much of the French media have happily recycled this mischief.

Centrists’ love of authority

For those who assume that centrist leaders like Macron are acting not out of naked political self-interest but from a concern to eradicate prejudice and protect a vulnerable community, it is worth pausing to consider recent research on global political attitudes.

Last year the New York Times published a commentary by David Adler showing that, contrary to popular wisdom, centrists were on average significantly less invested in democracy than the far left and far right. They were least supportive of civil rights and “free and fair elections”.

These trends were particularly pronounced in the US, Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand, but noticeable in many other western liberal democracies.

Additionally, in most western countries, including France, support for a strongman and for authoritarianism was much stronger among centrists than on the far-left. British and US centrists also outpolled the far-right in their love of authority figures.

Adler concluded: “Support for ‘free and fair’ elections drops at the center for every single country in the sample. The size of the centrist gap is striking. In the case of the United States, fewer than half of people in the political center view elections as essential. … Centrists …seem to prefer strong and efficient government over messy democratic politics.”

Lobbyists’ stranglehold

It is therefore perhaps not surprising that centrist leaders like Macron are among the most ready to disengage from fair and open debate, smear opponents and readily blur the ideological distinctions between those to their left and their right.

And similarly, supporters of centrism are most likely to lap up unfounded accusations of antisemitism in the service of maintaining a status quo they perceive as benefiting them.

That process has been starkly on show in Britain and the US of late.

For decades the centrists in Washington have dominated politics on both sides of a supposed political divide. And one issue that has enjoyed especially strong bipartisan support in the US is backing for Israel.

The reason for a narrow Washington consensus on a whole range of issues, including Israel, has been the stranglehold on the US political process of corporate money and paid lobbyists.

Lobbies prefer to operate in the dark, wielding influence out of public view. In the case of Israel, however, the lobby has become ever more visible to outsiders and its defences of Israel ever harder to sustain as abuses of Palestinians are readily displayed on social media.

That, in turn, has spurred the growth of the BDS movement and a new, if still small, wave of insurgency politicians.

Ilhan Omar attacked

Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar showed how the established system seeks to tame wayward freshmen after she tweeted an obvious point that the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC – like other lobbyists – uses its money to enforce political orthodoxy in Washington in its chosen field. Or as she expressed it, “It’s all about the Benjamins” – slang for $100 bills, which feature an image of Benjamin Franklin.

She was quickly submerged in an avalanche of claims that her comment was evidence of antisemitism. They came from across the so-called political spectrum, from the grandees of her own Democratic party to President Trump. Weighed down with the criticism, she apologized.

Omar justified her decision, saying it was up to Jews to decide what is antisemitic. In an age of rampant identity politics, this sounds superficially plausible. But it actually makes no sense at all.

Even if a clear majority of Jews do in fact think criticism of Israel or its lobbyists is antisemitic – a highly questionable assumption –  they don’t enjoy some special or exclusive right to make that determination.

Israel victimises Palestinians, as has been endlessly documented. No one has the right to claim the moral high ground as a victim of racism when they are using that same high ground to obstruct scrutiny of Israel’s crimes against Palestinians. To think otherwise would be to prioritise the defense of Jews from a possible racism over the vast evidence of concrete racism by Israel against Palestinians.

But more to the point, Omar’s apology assumes that those Jews with the loudest voices – that is, those with the biggest platforms and the most money – represent all Jews. It makes organised American Jewry, whose vigorous support for Israel has proved unshakeable even as Israeli prime minster Benjamin Netanyahu has driven the country to the far right, the arbiter of what all Jews think.

In fact, it does more. It makes the Israel lobby itself the one to determine whether there is an Israel lobby. It gives the lobby permission to shield itself entirely from view, allowing its influence to become even more entrenched and opaque.

Omar is far from alone. Other prominent critics of Israel, often black, have found themselves singled out for accusations of antisemitism over the criticism of Israel, including recently Marc Lamont Hill and Angela Davis.

Through a drip-drip of accusations that Omar is expressing “antisemitic tropes” when she speaks out, the aim is to make sure she starts to self-censor, becomes as “moderate” as her fellow politicians, and joins the bipartisan consensus on leaving Israel to get on with abusing Palestinians.

If she doesn’t, it is assumed, she will be finished politically, kicked out either by her own party bureaucracy or by voters.

Corbyn on the back foot

That process is much further advanced in Britain with a concerted and long-running campaign to stigmatise Jeremy Corbyn with claims of antisemitism since he became leader of the Labour party more than three years ago.

Corbyn is both a throwback to a socialist tradition in Britain that was killed by Margaret Thatcher in the early 1980s and a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause. In fact, he is a major anomaly: a European politician in sight of power who prioritises the right of Palestinians to justice over Israel’s policy of oppressing Palestinians.

The Israel lobby has a great deal to fear from him in changing the political climate in Europe towards Israel.

In the UK, the ruling Conservative party has moved relentlessly to the right in recent decades, leaving the Labour party in parliament to occupy the centrist ground carved out for it during Tony Blair’s leadership in the 1990s.

Although enjoying huge support among Labour members that propelled him into the leadership, Corbyn is at war with most of his MPs. The centrists there have happily weaponised antisemitism to damage Corbyn and the hundreds of thousands of members behind him, just as Macron has against his own political opponents.

Corbyn’s own MPs have publicly accused him of indulging an “institutional antisemitism” in Labour, or even of being antisemitic himself.

They have done so even though all evidence suggests that there is very little antisemitism among Labour members – and less than in the ruling Conservative party.] Labour members, however, have felt liberated by Corbyn to be much more outspoken in criticizing Israel.

Appeasement fails

This month a group of eight Labour MPs split from the party to set up a new faction, the Independent Group, citing Labour’s supposed “antisemitism problem” as one of the main reasons. Highlighting their centrist agenda, three “moderate” Conservative MPs joined them, opposed to prime minister Theresa May’s hardline on exiting the European Union, known as Brexit. More MPs from both sides may follow.

In response, Corbyn’s deputy, Tom Watson, another centrist, backed the defectors and scorned his own party members, reiterating claims of an antisemitism crisis in the party and saying it was time to root it out.

Corbyn has repeatedly tried to appease the centrists, as well as pro-Israel lobby groups in the UK – both those inside his party like Labour Friends of Israel and the Jewish Labour Movement, and those outside like the Board of Deputies, BICOM and the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism.

Over apparent opposition from members, the Labour party has even accepted the IHRA definition of antisemitism, including the examples meant to shield Israel from criticism – all to no effect.

In fact, the more Corbyn has conceded to critics, the more his critics have trumpeted a supposed antisemitism problem in Labour.

Corbyn is slowly learning, as others are in the US and Europe, that this is not a good-faith disagreement and that there is no middle ground.

The smear industry doesn’t want safeguards on antisemitism, they want a return to a political culture in which their power was left unchallenged and unscrutinised.

For the Israel lobby, that means the revival of a political climate that existed before the discrediting of the Oslo process, in which criticism of Israel was publicly shunned and the Palestinians were treated chiefly as terrorists.

For the centrists, it requires the entrenchment of a managerial, neoliberal politics in which major corporations and the financial industries have the freedom to dictate economic and social policies and their failures are unquestioningly bailed out by the public through austerity programmes.

It is an unholy pact, and one in which Jews are being used to oil the wheels of a failed, impotent and increasingly authoritarian politics of the center.

Jonathan Cook
About Jonathan Cook

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His new website is jonathan-cook.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

56 Responses

  1. Maximus Decimus Meridius
    Maximus Decimus Meridius
    February 27, 2019, 11:42 am

    “Corbyn is slowly learning, as others are in the US and Europe, that this is not a good-faith disagreement and that there is no middle ground.”

    Au contraire, he seems to be doing nothing to stop the hounding of Chris Williamson, the latest in the long saga of ‘antisemitism’ sinners. He should have seen this nonsense for what it was – a plan to entirely neuteur if not destroy him – years ago. Once he threw Ken Livingstone under the bus in an attempt to appease the unappeasable, his enemies scented blood and have been hunting him ever since.

    As George Galloway puts it: if you don’t run, they can’t chase you.

    • annie
      annie
      February 27, 2019, 5:55 pm

      i was reading about this latest williamson accusation this morning and now they’ve thrown him out. it’s horrible. there’s no way this resentment won’t blow back. they’ll have 4 more years of tory over the antisemitism hounding.

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        February 27, 2019, 6:20 pm

        https://labourheartlands.com/we-stand-with-chris-williamson/

        contains video of his speech.

        https://jewishdissident.blogspot.com/2019/02/ defend-chris-williamson.html

        I’m not sure who has the authority to suspend an MP in the Labour Party, i couldn’t find it in the rulebook!

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        February 27, 2019, 7:38 pm

        Suspension is not one of Corbyn’s powers as leader.
        That turns out to be Chief Whip Nick Brown, with investigations under General Secretary Jennie Formby. That is who complainant Tom Watson, Deputy Leader, addressed his complaint to.
        So you guys can stop blaming Corbyn now.

      • Keith
        Keith
        February 27, 2019, 7:54 pm

        BUMBLEBYE- “So you guys can stop blaming Corbyn now.”

        So you are saying that Corbyn didn’t throw Ken Livingston under the bus, he merely stood by and helplessly watched as someone else did this, keeping a respectful silence all the while? Is he some sort of figurehead? What is it, no power or no chops?

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        February 27, 2019, 8:21 pm

        Bumblebye: Suspension is not one of Corbyn’s powers as leader. […] So you guys can stop blaming Corbyn now.
        ————————————————-

        But did Corbyn condemn the suspension in the strongest of terms, and promise to fight against it vigorously ? Did Corbyn make a loud and compelling case that this suspension is not only wrong but part of a larger malevolent campaign? (Not rhetorical questions.)

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        February 27, 2019, 10:24 pm

        Speaking out could be considered to be interfering/prejudicing internal party disciplinary matters which are not in the leaders remit. On that basis he could come under even more strife. Jennie will investigate promptly and properĺy. She completely wrong-footed the last lot, especially Hodge. I don’t think there’s much to worry about.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        February 28, 2019, 4:24 am

        Bumbleye,

        You are correct in saying that Corbyn is not the one who personally decides on suspensions.

        However, as leader of the party, he is ultimiately responsible for allowing things to get to this point. As I say, it started with him dumping his decades-long ally, Ken Livingstone, numerous attempts to ‘apologise’ with the Board of Deputies and others who everyone knew would stop at nothing to destroy him, alllowing ‘Dame’ Margaret Hodge to insult him in public and get away with it – and more. And now, although it’s been said that he is very much against the suspension of Chris Williamson, he has said not a word about that in public, nor will he.

        So no, I won’t stop blaming him. And I speak as someone who used to be – and in some respects still is – a huge fan.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        February 28, 2019, 4:26 am

        Annie,

        Williamson can appeal the suspension, and has said he plans to do so. I’d say he has a very good case, but is that even the point?

        But the damage has been done. It’s been building for getting on 4 years now, and it’s not going to stop.

        Britain is now effectively a one-party state.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        February 28, 2019, 8:15 am

        Bumbleeye,

        ” I don’t think there’s much to worry about.”

        Other than:

        – the destruction of Corbyn and everything he stands for;
        – the de facto criminalisation of any meaningful criticism of Israel;
        – 4 more years of unchallenged Tory rule;
        – the McCarthyisation of British politics.

        Nope, other than that not much to worry about.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        February 28, 2019, 7:13 pm

        “Britain is now effectively a one-party state.”

        From my perspective on the other side of the world, it looks to me as though the Tories are cracking up over Brexit. Britain is becoming a no-party state.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        March 1, 2019, 2:28 am

        The Conservative party is going to collapse over brexit . They promised something they cannot deliver

        Neoliberalism is on the way out with huge implications for the Zionist power structure

        Zionism is pure Tammany Hall at this stage.

        “Where you come from is gone, where you thought you were going to never was there, and where you are is no good unless you can get away from it.” Flannery O’Connor

        Israel has given up on justice
        The Tories have given up on looking after the voters

        (https://monthlyreview.org/2011/03/01/structural-crisis-in-the-world-system

        « Eventually, the secular trends move the system too near its asymptotes, and the system is unable to continue its normal, regular, slow upward push.

        Thereupon, it begins to fluctuate wildly and repeatedly, leading to a bifurcation—that is, to a chaotic situation in which a stable equilibrium cannot be maintained. «

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        March 1, 2019, 2:37 am

        If the U.K. leaves the EU it will need a trade deal with the US
        One of the conditions will be to fight BDS

        https://mobile.twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1101362544177004545/photo/1

        I guess this qualifies as a truly insidious trope

        @davidschneider
        ·

        “A truly insidious trope is the one re secret groups of Jews controlling things (capital, governments, the media etc). Medieval pogrom inciters, Nazis, Stalin etc all played on this which is why it’s disturbing to see it reappear, now often in the form of the “Zionist” conspiracy.”

        Zionism is either bipartisan or nothing. Zionism vs the people is only going to have one winner.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        March 1, 2019, 10:20 am

        It is much worse than bullshit antisemitism in the U.K. Labour Party

        The US has revealed its demands in trade deal
        negotiations with the U.K.

        If the U.K. wants a deal it will have to fight BDS

        https://www.ft.com/content/09bfe7ca-3bae-11e9-b72b-2c7f526ca5d0

        In commercial partnerships, the US is asking the UK to “discourage politically motivated actions to boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel”.

        This is much bigger than Corbyn

        BDS scares the shit out of Israel
        Because it is non violent

        Fuck Zionism

      • annie
        annie
        March 2, 2019, 10:56 am

        Maghlawatan, this is horrendous. i wish i could read the FT link but i saw the screenshot you linked to. vassal state indeed. demanding an israel loyalty oath from foreign countries enshrined in our trade deals, my god where will it end.

    • Keith
      Keith
      February 27, 2019, 6:49 pm

      MAXIMUS- “Once he threw Ken Livingstone under the bus in an attempt to appease the unappeasable, his enemies scented blood and have been hunting him ever since.”

      At this stage of the game, Corbyn makes Neville Chamberlain appear stalwart and uncompromising in comparison. All talk, no fight. With friends like this, who needs enemies?

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        February 28, 2019, 7:41 am

        Exactly. Livingstone and Williamson have both been close to Corbyn for years, even decades. And he does not lift a finger to prevent their being slandered and their careers destroyed.

        Corbyn himself is the next in the firing line and if I’m being perfectly honest, I’m not sure I feel all that sorry for him at this stage.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        March 1, 2019, 1:43 pm

        The assaults on Labour are relentless for a reason.
        All Labour have to do is wait for the Tories to collapse.
        Israel will get payback .

    • JWalters
      JWalters
      February 27, 2019, 8:00 pm

      I’m looking at what Corbyn is up against. Zionists control all Britain’s mainstream press and most of the government (as in the US). It seems to me he has to be careful to avoid getting knocked out by a fake scandal (like Ilhan Omar). Macron and everybody else parroting the Zionist script of glaring denial and illogic (Trump, Pelosi, etc) are obviously under Zionist influence. There’s no other reasonable explanation for normal people totally trashing their own self-respect.
      https://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/western-malevolently-antisemitism/comment-page-1/#comment-943066

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        February 28, 2019, 7:48 am

        “It seems to me he has to be careful to avoid getting knocked out by a fake scandal (like Ilhan Omar).”

        But he’s going to get knocked out anyway! That’s the thing! He has made concessions and apologies, sacrificed his own personal friends, and nearly 4 years on, he’s in a wrose position than ever.

        However, let’s imagine he’d said something like:

        “Antisemitism is horrific and has no place in British society or in the Labour party. I and the Labour party stand firmly against it and all forms of bigotry, as we have always done and will continue to do. Any incidents of antisemitism will be dealt with severely according to party regulations. However, antisemitism is no more – and is probably less – of a problem among Labour members than it is in other parts of society, and I will not allow my party to be besmirched in this way. Nor will I tolerate any infringements to our right to free speech as regards criticism of Israel, and I will never accept that such criticism has anything to do with antisemitism.”

        I get that he’s in a very difficult situation and it’s easy for me to talk tough sitting behind my computer. But there’s no denying he’s dealt with the whole affair terribly, and it’s hard to see how there can now be any way back.

      • Keith
        Keith
        February 28, 2019, 11:04 am

        MAXIMUS- “But there’s no denying he’s dealt with the whole affair terribly….”

        Absolutely. These ludicrous charges of anti-Semitism don’t represent legitimate concern over a real problem. They are weaponized charges intended to attack a revitalized Labour movement trying to resist neoliberalism and should be treated as such. When under attack, you don’t stand by while the enemy eliminates your strongest supporters. If Corbyn had no stomach for this predictable fight, he never should have gotten into the ring. Raising hopes only to dash them is worse than doing nothing.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        February 28, 2019, 7:20 pm

        “If Corbyn had no stomach for this predictable fight, he never should have gotten into the ring.”

        I suspect it took him by surprise. As I recall it, when he first got the leadership, the message was “He’s a dangerous socialist”. Then the Powers saw that the people didn’t seem to mind a bit of dangerous socialism, so they had to cook up something else. It became especially urgent when they had to try to hide or distract from their efforts to block Brexit.

      • Keith
        Keith
        March 1, 2019, 12:24 am

        ROHA- “I suspect it took him by surprise.”

        Just how a dull a tool do you suppose him to be? If he is this blind, what kind of leader would he make? Enough of these excuses already.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        March 1, 2019, 1:47 pm

        Keith, the Tories are on the ropes.
        We are not in business as usual. The neoliberals are throwing the kitchen sink at Labour but neither they nor the Tories can fix the U.K. economy. The future is left wing in Europe and the US. Green new deal, pro demand, anti plutocracy. Israel is ancien régime.
        It is going to get very interesting.

      • Keith
        Keith
        March 2, 2019, 12:32 am

        MAGHLAWATAN- “Keith, the Tories are on the ropes.”

        Overly optimistic, but irrelevant nonetheless. The political system has become completely subservient to the economic system. Whoever survives will give the fat-cats what they want.

        MAGHLAWATAN- “The future is left wing in Europe and the US. Green new deal, pro demand, anti plutocracy. Israel is ancien régime.”

        Is it possible to be this far out of touch with reality?

        MAGHLAWATAN- “It is going to get very interesting.”

        Yes, but not what you imagine. Not even close.

  2. bcg
    bcg
    February 27, 2019, 11:49 am

    Peter Beinart in the Forward: https://forward.com/opinion/419988/debunking-the-myth-that-anti-zionism-is-anti-semitic/

    “Debunking The Myth That Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitic…a new official definition of anti-Semitism. That definition, produced by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, includes among its “contemporary examples” of anti-Semitism “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination.” In other words, anti-Zionism is Jew hatred…
    In so doing, Macron joined Germany, Britain, The United States and roughly thirty other governments. And like them, he made a tragic mistake.

  3. Maximus Decimus Meridius
    Maximus Decimus Meridius
    February 27, 2019, 12:27 pm

    News just breaking that Williamson has been suspended, despite issuing an apology – for doing nothing wrong.

    Corbyn might just as well join the Friends of Israel at this point. To say I’m disappointed in him would be an understatement.

  4. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    February 27, 2019, 2:02 pm

    One of first “major” targets of Erdan`s Ministry of Strategic Affairs here in the UK was a Jewish member of the Labour Party , Jackie Walker, who fought back big time. As MDM points out courtesy of George Galloway she didn`t run:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASqyg2FT5-0&feature=youtu.be

    I continue to be absoulutely appalled at the connivance of the MSM in this shitty “Anti – Semitism” conspiracy and I believe that the Israeli Firsters in the UK in their desperation have gone seriously crazy – largely because of their unchallenged control of the MSM narrative and a sense of invinibility which it has given to them but equally because of the connivance of the Labour Party Bliarites and the closet Bliarites like the odious Tom Watson and John Mann.

    Time for Labour Party activists to push back. As I said on a previous thread. Labour Party constituency members should be calling for Extraordinary General Meetings with their constituency MPs to debate the issue and to call for a statement of position on the issue and an explanation of that position.

    This is now clearly a blatant attack on the Labour Party orchestrated by a foreign power and if that foreign power is allowed to get away with it then British Democratic values will have been dealt a serious blow.

    Time to take a stand and fight.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      Maximus Decimus Meridius
      February 27, 2019, 2:24 pm

      Too late. Corbyn has proved incredibly weak on this issue, and I can’t see any way he can roll this back now. Any form of solidarity with Palestinians is now effectively a crime. If you appear to be in the slightest bit left of the approved ‘centre’, you are doomed. Chris Williamson was one of the scalps they had in their sights, once they’d got Ken Livingstone, but make no mistake, the real prize is Corbyn.

      And I hate to say it, but they pretty much already have him in the bag. He’s a spent force. Supposedly he tried hard to stop the suspension of Williamson and failed. Tom Watson is effectively the leader of Labour now. Corbyn should have nipped this in the bud months if not years ago. And no, that’s not just hindsight. I said this at the time, as did many others. Maybe the criticism which has often been made of Corbyn is true – he’s just not cut out for front line politics.

  5. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    February 27, 2019, 2:19 pm

    @amigo
    You may not be aware of the latest development in the Irish boycotting of Israeli Settlements goods saga ?:
    https://electronicintifada.net/content/us-lawmakers-bully-ireland-over-move-ban-israels-settlement-goods/26736

    The Zios are starting to become seriously seriously paranoid.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      Maximus Decimus Meridius
      February 27, 2019, 4:36 pm

      It would be interesting to know what our “Irish Catholic” friend Mondonut has to say about this?

    • amigo
      amigo
      February 27, 2019, 6:31 pm

      0ssinev,thanks for the not unexpected news.

      Ireland has always been a pain in the zionist arse so they have to run to big daddy to demand they go and beat up on the truculent Irish Antisemites.

      Odd thing about the Irish is the more you try to put them down , the more they hit back.Consult British/Irish history.

      I just hope our clear thinking Politicians who are in tune with the views of the majority of Irish people , are not likely to give in too easily. .

      Leo Varadakar /Simon Coveney may well be intimidated by Trump and his henchmen , but the pols who support human rights will not.

      US companies set up business in Ireland because we have a well educated and English speaking labour pool and we are part of the of the EU offering low tax rates.US companies have huge infrastructure invested in Ireland and are not about to move and leave multi Billion dollar plants behind and construct new plants elsewhere and incur huge losses.Not going to happen.

      Obviously , any indication that Ireland might set an example to other nations to ban products from the Occupied Territories presents a huge threat to the apartheid zionist criminal entity and has to be nipped in the bud .

      They might convince a few “Assy Plants ” to leave as they will just move elsewhere and set up their assembly tables elsewhere at minimal cost.

      Best of luck to King and the other zionist shills.

  6. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    February 27, 2019, 3:16 pm

    @MDM
    “Too late. Corbyn has proved incredibly weak on this issue, and I can’t see any way he can roll this back now”

    I understand your point of view and share your frustration. However I still believe that Erdan and Co have seriously overstepped the mark with this witch hunt and that it is causing deep resentment amongst grass roots Labour members. I am hoping for a major fight back from them and perhaps from the larger British public who may be getting sick and tired of this being constantly shoved down their throats as the major crisis facing the nation as opposed to Brexit/the NHS / Austerity cuts ?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      Maximus Decimus Meridius
      February 27, 2019, 4:35 pm

      Oh I agree. There is great anger amongst Labour members and I’m sure many of the public are rolling their eyes at how, in a time of great turmoil for the country, the media is obsessed with the innocous words of a minor politician.

      But what can they do about it? BBC etc are not going to stop this obsession. And here’s the killer: As Chris Williamson showed, even questioning the veracity of AS claims is in and of itself AS. It’s a sick joke. Other minorities in Britain must be wondering what they did wrong not to merit such unceasing concern and attention for their ‘feelings’.

      • JWalters
        JWalters
        February 27, 2019, 7:47 pm

        The big problem for the Zionists is that through the internet more and more people are finding out that the MSM is a Zionist propaganda machine. When enough of the public learns that, Zionist money and media will become political poison. Then it’s game over. That’s what we have to strive for. That’s why outlets like Mondoweiss are so important. We’re looking at an immense level of corruption that is screwing the general public. They’re waking up and not liking what they see. Brexit is a move to extricate from that corruption.

  7. just
    just
    February 27, 2019, 3:19 pm

    That’s a bit more than bullying, isn’t it? It is a direct threat made by Israel- first thugs who should NOT be interfering in Ireland’s business. Their constituents should be hopping mad about this.

    Here’s a bit of good news:

    “Dutch Green Left Party Votes to Endorse Israel Boycott

    ‘BDS is a legitimate means to help Palestinians,’ says first mainstream political group in the Netherlands to back the boycott, sanctions and divestment movement …

    … While practicing a boycott of Israeli goods or products is legal in all of Europe and in other countries around the world, promoting such boycotts is a violation of anti-discrimination laws in France and Spain, courts in those countries have ruled.

    (~~~of course these lies followed~~~)

    The Dutch Center for Information and Documentation on Israel, which is a Jewish group committed to fighting anti-Semitism and performing Israel advocacy work, condemned the resolution.

    “Green Left conveniently ignored how, in practice, BDS goes hand in hand with expressions of anti-Semitism and is linked to terrorist groups,” CIDI wrote.

    The Likoed Nederland pro-Israel group wrote in a statement that Green Left “has declared itself a racist movement,” noting that the party has passed no other motions on boycotting Morocco, China, Turkey or Russia – all of which are internationally considering occupying powers.”

    https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/dutch-green-left-party-votes-to-endorse-israel-boycott-1.6975670?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

  8. marc b.
    marc b.
    February 27, 2019, 4:57 pm

    a little insight into the French view of the long-term viability of the israel project.

    “It is in these conditions that De Gaulle commissions French parliamentary Alain Peyrefitte to consider scenarios of a partition of Algeria in which French interests will remain. In a report that was shortly later published as a book, Peyrefitte thus imagine six hypotheses of partition in a program that he (and many with him) candidly calls an “Israelization of Algeria.” The idea would be to declare the Sahara southern region a “neutral” territory, while the populated north of Algeria would be divided between the new independent Algerian state and another one gathering the European settlers and Algerians who would like to remain French, closely affiliated to France. Although Peyrefitte systematically refers to Israel and its successes (!) throughout his report, he writes that he would prefer a “French-Muslim Lebanon” than “a French Israel” — he indeed considers the hostility of Israel’s neighbors as somehow not desirable for this new state! The most limited scenario would consists in two French ‘islands’ around the cities of Oran and Bone (current Anaba), where the settlers are in majority, while the most extensive one would cover the entire northwestern part of Algeria, all the way to Algiers, which is imagined as a shared city in all hypotheses — remember, we are in the summer of 1961, exactly when the Berlin wall starts to be built.

    In the end, this project of partition of Algeria will be quickly disregarded (provisions on the Sahara will however not); perhaps they were even meant for De Gaulle to put pressure on the GPRA during the negotiations. However, this project provides at least two teaching points. The first one concerns the colonial project in general, and French colonialism in Algeria in particular. What this partition project demonstrates is the sustained attempt for colonial powers to trace lines in maps according to their interests (Peyrefitte’s maps all show the location of oil and gas pipelines), regardless of the impact of their materialization ‘on the ground.’ In her book Mirages de la carte: L’invention de l’Algérie coloniale (Mirages of the Map: The Invention of Colonial Algeria), French historian Hélène Blais illustrate how the French military cartographic survey of the Algerian Sahara after that the colonization of the coastal territory had been more or less secured in mid-19th century, was simultaneous with the trace of line-based borders to define Algeria as a precise colonial territory — regardless of the fact that, to the exception of Italian-colonized Libya, all territories beyond these lines were already or soon-to-be under French colonial sovereignty too. In a desert where no element suggests the presence nor the necessity for sharp thick-less borders, such a colonial enterprise appears in its whole absurdity and violence. The later dreadful lines traced in 1916 by British Colonel Mark Sykes and French diplomat François Georges-Picot splitting the Levant in two areas dominated by the French colonial empire (Syria and Lebanon) and the British one (Iraq, Kowait, Jordan, Palestine) are perhaps even more blind to the violence of their arbitrarily dividing borders.

    The second teaching point consists in seeing how this rhetoric of “israelization” allows an additional retrospective reading of the Zionist project — also the alternative vision of Zionism remaining only a project much like the French one. What the 1961 partition of Algeria project (13 years after the violent creation of the State of Israel) shows us in what very few now would not call its absurdity and its violence, is that the 1947 United Nations partition plan of colonized Palestine between its Jewish population (and the hundreds of thousands who will later become settlers in Palestine) and its Arab population was in no less (if not more, given that the French plan would probably have not intensified its settler colonial policies towards the newly created state) absurd and violent. Furthermore, the UN plan also remained a project, while the actual partition that resulted from the 1948 Nakba (initiated weeks before the end of the British mandate) violently evicted 800,000 Palestinians from Palestine, without them having been able to return since then.”

  9. Keith
    Keith
    February 27, 2019, 6:37 pm

    jONATHAN COOK- “Macron’s confusion of anti-Zionism with antisemitism is patently nonsensical.”

    Wrong. Your claim that Macron is “confused” is patently nonsensical. Former Rothschild banker Macron is hardly “confused.” He knows what the real rulers expect and performs accordingly. One would be terminally naive to expect anything different. Below is a quote and a link to the Saker blog regarding the CRIF.

    “Check out this video of Macron at the biggest Zionist event of the year in France, the infamous “CRIF dinner”. If you don’t now what the CRIF is, do not bother with the Wikipedia article – it’s all sanitized – but think of the French CRIF like (AIPAC+JINSA+ADL+B’nai B’rith)2: all the power of the Israel Lobby in the USA, but squared (yeah, I know, hard to imagine, but true).” (The Saker) http://thesaker.is/sitrep-france-is-macron-a-puppet-and-if-yes-whose-puppet-is-he/

  10. Misterioso
    Misterioso
    February 27, 2019, 7:34 pm

    Meanwhile, in Britain:

    https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/blog/jon-lansman-a-rebuttal/

    Jewish Voice for Labour, Feb. 26/19

    “John Lansman gave a radio interview on the Today programme on 25th February about antisemitism in the Labour Party. The Guardian reported it under the headline ‘Labour has widespread problem with antisemitism – Momentum founder.’

    Mike Cushman was asked by members of his local Labour Party to respond to it. This was his retort.

    “Jon Lansman – a rebuttal”

    By Mike Cushman, 26 February 2019

    “I will respond but it is a sign of the intimidation of party members that many of them feel frightened to comment on this issue and have asked me to write on their behalf..

    “There are a few points in John Lansman’s piece I agree with. Tweets and Facebook comments leave a trace that can be exploited by those trying to damage the Labour Party; gossip in the golf club bar leaves no such trace for those seeking to explore Tory members’ attitudes.

    “He is right that Jeremy is no racist or antisemite and as leader he should not meddle in individual cases – it is the General Secretary’s responsibility to manage the process and she is doing a good job. Her report to the PLP which they demanded like petulant 4-year olds was detailed and thorough but all it demonstrated that no matter what the Party does it will never satisfy those who are set on defaming it. The Party can never do enough.

    “Are there some conspiracy theorists among the hundreds of thousands of new members? Quite possibly. Are there a significant number? No one has produced any evidence of that. Are the new members (and most of the old members) overwhelmingly people motivated to build a better Britain and a better world on the basis of equality and human rights? Certainly.

    “Where I see a mass of conspiracy theorists it is on the right of the Party among those who keep on asserting there is a conspiracy to turn the Labour party into a Jew-hating machine. The lack of evidence for their claims and the damage they do is similar to the anti-Vaxxers. The anti-Vaxxers are making our children vulnerable to measles and other preventable diseases; the antisemitism witch hunters are making Palestinians vulnerable to abuse by the Israeli regime by making people scared to speak in their defence.

    “Whether the number of ‘hardcore antisemites’ are a handful or a few dozen I don’t know but I doubt very much they are the few hundred Lansman claims. I have seen no tweets that appear to be driven by hatred of Jews, I have seen screen shots of some that confuse Jews, Israelis and Zionists and drift into making hurtful statements. Such statements cannot and must not be tolerated but the response is intelligent engagement and education not knee-jerk reaching for the executioner’s axe. If people keep on getting it wrong after engagement then, of course, sanctions must follow.

    “The confusion that individuals make between Jew, Israeli and Zionist is not surprising when the Israeli Government asserts it represents Jews worldwide (full disclosure: they don’t represent me). Similarly when the Board of Deputies and the Chief Rabbi, who are both representative of only a minority of British Jews, claim that Zionism is integral to Jewishness, that further confuses. The Zionist movement only dates back to 1880 and until the Holocaust was a minority movement among European Jews. Bundism, the commitment to using Jewish traditions to build a home where we live in a free and equal society, was the dominant trend based on a principle of hereness (doykeyt). This is the diaspora tradition that JVL seeks to continue: we live here, we belong here, we are committed to struggling for a better, fairer society for all.

    “Lansman says ‘I don’t want any Jewish member in the party to be leaving. We are absolutely committed to making Labour a safe space.’ It would be good if there was a commitment to making the Labour Party a safe space for non-Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews and would take the daily abuse we face seriously and sanction those who call us ‘fake Jews’ and ‘self-hating-Jews’ and Kapos and Quislings. It’s open season on Jews who try to speak up for what we see as a struggle for freedom and justice for the Palestinians and who try to advance the Corbyn project.

    “Whether Jon Lansman is driven by personal ambition, a residual commitment to his childhood Zionism and a totally mistaken concept of how to defend Jeremy is between him and his therapist and not for me to comment on – it is a mystery to me.”

  11. Boomer
    Boomer
    February 28, 2019, 6:23 am

    re: “leaders malevolently confuse anti-Zionism with antisemitism”

    I don’t think they are confused. I would say that they “conflate” the two, in an effort to confuse the public.

  12. Kay24
    Kay24
    February 28, 2019, 8:55 am

    So what will Macron and other leaders say about this:

    UN says Israel’s killings at Gaza protests may amount to war crimes
    Inquiry accuses army of killing demonstrators ‘who were not posing an imminent threat’

    UN investigators have accused Israeli soldiers of intentionally firing on civilians and said they may have committed war crimes in their lethal response to Palestinian demonstrations in Gaza.

    The independent Commission of Inquiry, set up last year by the UN’s human rights council, said Israeli forces killed 189 people and shot more than 6,100 others with live ammunition near the fence that divides the two territories.

    The panel said in a statement that it had found “reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers shot at journalists, health workers, children and persons with disabilities, knowing they were clearly recognisable as such”.

    Thirty-five of those killed were children, three were clearly identifiable paramedics and two were clearly marked journalists, the report said.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/28/gaza-israel-un-inquiry-killings-protest-war-crimes-army

    It seems the US, France, Germany, and all the others who keep doing Israel’s bidding, totally ignore the zionist massacres, and that the IDF butchers keep killing unarmed civilians with impunity.

    • just
      just
      February 28, 2019, 10:44 am

      Remember this, Kay24? The US and others will continue to circle the drain…

      “US quits UN human rights council – ‘a cesspool of political bias’

      Nikki Haley says council is ‘protector of human rights abusers’ that targets Israel in particular and ignores atrocities elsewhere

      The US is withdrawing from the United Nations human rights council, the Trump administration announced on Tuesday, calling it a “cesspool of political bias” that targets Israel in particular while ignoring atrocities in other countries. …

      Advocacy groups accused the US of withdrawing from its global obligations to protect human rights.

      “The Trump administration’s withdrawal is a sad reflection of its one-dimensional human rights policy: defending Israeli abuses from criticism takes precedence above all else,” Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch, said.

      “The UN human rights council has played an important role in such countries as North Korea, Syria, Myanmar and South Sudan, but all Trump seems to care about is defending Israel. Like last time when the US government stepped away from the Council for similar reasons, other governments will have to redouble their efforts to ensure the Council addresses the world’s most serious human rights problems.””

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/19/us-quits-un-human-rights-council-cesspool-political-bias

      ~~~~~~~

      “On 19 June 2018, the United States pulled out of the UNHRC accusing the body of bias against Israel and a failure to hold human rights abusers accountable. Nikki Haley, US Ambassador to the UN called the organisation a “cesspool of political bias”.[208] At UNHRC’s 38th Session, on 2 July 2018, Western nations held a de facto boycott of Agenda Item 7 by not speaking to the item.[209]”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council

      (Agenda Item 7 ~ Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories

      *Human rights violations and implications of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and other occupied Arab territories

      *Right to self-determination of the Palestinian people)

      • Kay24
        Kay24
        February 28, 2019, 12:10 pm

        America’s outrage is very, very selective. The problem is, we cannot afford to criticize Israel, even if we want to, because we are just as guilty as they are in various human rights violations, plus we keep sending them the aid, and the weapons, that they use to kill helpless civilians.
        The US under Trump has withdrawn from many international bodies, and like Israel, it is one more step to act above international laws.

  13. StephenKMackSD
    StephenKMackSD
    February 28, 2019, 11:11 am

    That Macron was ‘elected’ with a 36.5% of the voters, in the final round, rendering their ballots ‘spoiled’ or otherwise uncountable was the beginning of the end for Macron. His ‘Jupertarian Politics’ , the coded language for authoritarianism, and his ‘La République En Marche’ that began with ‘Rule by Decree’ .
    Even now as his Finance Minister Muriel Pénicaud announces to Financial Time, of January 22, 2019 the House Organ of a collapsed Neo-Liberalism, the headline & sub-headline describe the intransigence of these ideologues:

    Headline: Paris vows to extend labour reforms despite ‘gilets jaunes’

    Sub-headline:Macron aides say protests have spurred government to redouble liberalisation efforts

    According to Ms Pénicaud, between 300,000 and 400,000 jobs in France cannot be filled because of a lack of qualified applicants — 80,000 of them in the information technology sector. “Our challenge is upskilling the nation,” she said, adding that entrepreneurs and employers appreciated last year’s reforms to simplify the labour code but that half of companies complained of recruitment problems. “They say: ‘We are no longer scared of hiring but we can’t find the skills’,” she added. In Mr Macron’s overall programme, Ms Pénicaud said, “in order to reform France to give it a future, to give it economic and social momentum, one of the big priorities is the step-by-step transformation of the labour market”.

    https://www.ft.com/content/3e2bce58-1e57-11e9-b126-46fc3ad87c65

    There will be no social peace in France for the foreseeable future, because of the gilets jaunes, but what better way to deflect attention away from this internal crisis, prefigured by that 36.5 % of ‘spoiled ballots’, than to engage in a campaign of misdirection, factoring in the verbal attack on the notorious Neo-Conservative Alain Finkielkraut in Paris, as proof that there is an Anti-Semitism crisis in France that needs to be addressed by the force of Law.
    But how are these prophets of political virtue to handle the fact that Netnayahu is embracing Orban?

    Headline:Anti-Semitism doesn’t bother Benjamin Netanyahu if it comes from his political allies

    Sub-headline: Why Israel is cozying up to Viktor Orban’s Hungary and overlooking Poland’s Holocaust law

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has now joined the likes of his sworn enemies, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and former Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, by engaging in Holocaust revisionism to promote his own political interests.
    The leader of the Jewish state signed an agreement with Poland late last month that absolves Poland of its role in the extermination of its Jewish population during World War II, despite ample evidence of passive and active collaboration — as was the case throughout Europe.Netanyahu spun the accord as a sign that he had forced Poland to soften its law about the country’s role in the Holocaust, but it really shows that maintaining power matters more to Netanyahu than fighting anti-Semitism
    ….

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/07/13/anti-semitism-doesnt-bother-benjamin-netanyahu-if-it-comes-from-his-political-allies/?utm_term=.2bda391c9af1

    StephenKMackSD

     

  14. James Canning
    James Canning
    February 28, 2019, 11:40 am

    Suppressing free speech is a central component of the program of continuing illegal settlement of Jews in the occupied West Bank. Does anyone doubt this?

  15. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    February 28, 2019, 2:32 pm

    “Her report to the PLP which they demanded like petulant 4-year olds was detailed and thorough but all it demonstrated that no matter what the Party does it will never satisfy those who are set on defaming it. The Party can never do enough”

    Watching the BBC lunchtime news on the day that the Chris Williamson fake allegations of “Anti -Semitic” remarks surfaced I had a serious double take when Norman Smith the BBC Assistant Political Editor who is tasked with commenting on breaking news live from the Houses of Parliament actually invited viewers to listen to Williamson`s remarks and decide for themselves whether the remarks were “Anti – Semitic”. A serious if possibly inadvertent departure from the standard BBC line which is more or less as with the rest of the UK MSM = if a Labour Party member or elected representative is accused of saying something “Anti – Semitic” then automatically it is guilt proven.

    As far as I am aware Norman has not been accused of “Anti – Semitism” because of this or disciplined by the BBC for failure to adhere to the Zioscript but who knows – two strikes etc ?

    It would appear that Erdan`s MSA has sent out clear new modus operandi instructions to its operatives here in the UK along the lines of ” any statement by anyone in the Labour Party who is accused of “Anti Semitism ” disputing the accusation or allegation should in itself be categorised as proof of “Anti – Semitism”.

    This blatant assault on UK democracy by a Foreign Power would be hilarious if it wasn`t so serious in terms of the damage it is doing to the integrity of our politics and the fact that it has the potential to rebound seriously in terms of the perception of the Jewish community as a whole.

  16. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    February 28, 2019, 2:56 pm

    I think that the bots are playing a very dangerous game.

    @davidschneider
    ·
    13h

    A truly insidious trope is the one re secret groups of Jews controlling things (capital, governments, the media etc). Medieval pogrom inciters, Nazis, Stalin etc all played on this which is why it’s disturbing to see it reappear, now often in the form of the “Zionist” conspiracy.

    A lot of people are sick of the bullshit

  17. CHUCKMAN
    CHUCKMAN
    March 1, 2019, 2:15 am

    Quite an excellent article, providing a survey of the various efforts we see at work to confuse two unrelated things, anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.

    I like to think that a great many people do understand the distinction.

    However, the constant effort to blur and conflate is one of Israel’s major weapons in getting what it wants from governments in the West.

    And it does, indeed, have quite a list of wants – from the formal recognition of illegalities and outright thefts like those in the West bank, Jerusalem, and the Golan to the continuous promotion of war against any state in its region that does not subscribe to Israel’s rather special idea of itself.

    It succeeded in stoking up the vast and destructive Neocon Wars, and now it intensely wants something done about Iran, a country it hates, not out of fear, as it pretends, but out of competition to be the region’s dominant and most influential state.

    It keeps the attention and support of France and the UK and the US and some others with a non-stop campaign of influence-peddling and it works hard to make sure no one comes to power who might be less vulnerable to its influence – eg, Corbyn. In its efforts for the latter, the anti-Semitism dark-op is still a useful one.

    I think the only way we can ever hope to get rid of this terrible interference in the internal affairs of Western states (Oh, my God, that Putin should ever dream of having such influence in the affairs of others!) is to do something serious about the laws governing the operations of lobbies and the role of money in election campaigns.

    In the United States, the reality of the work of lobbies and the influence of money is scandalous and destructive of any sense of democracy. I’m pretty sure it’s not too much different in Britain and France. After all, we see those two states do so many things that would virtually certainly not be done in the absence of such influence, from passing unfair laws to working against honest politicians to helping with such destructive projects as the Neocon Wars. These are not things in the genuine interests of their own overall populations

    But who is to change the laws? The existing leaders are under heavy, intense influence, and every weapon in the arsenal is employed against potential new ones rising and displacing them.

    https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/

  18. Mayhem
    Mayhem
    March 2, 2019, 6:44 pm

    Jonathan Cook at his most despicable concluding with a classic piece of conspiratorial anti-semitism at the very end – “It is an unholy pact, and one in which Jews are being used to oil the wheels of a failed, impotent and increasingly authoritarian politics of the center”.
    But I track back through his litany of tropes, lies and innuendo.
    1. “The long history of crimes against Jews that led to Israel’s establishment took place mostly in Europe.” Yes, it is so convenient to forget the diminution of Jews for centuries in Muslim lands, just because it wasn’t quite as bad as what Christianity had inflicted upon the Jews in Europe.
    2. “the great purges of native Palestinians carried out by European Jews in 1948 and 1967”. Cook is saying it was only the Europeans who fought defensively in 1967 as Israel Arab neighbours attacked Israel from all sides? No, the Sephardim were there too defending their new-found homeland.
    3. The word “malevolently” is used maliciously and dishonestly to describe the sincere efforts by those who can see the global rise of anti-semitism that is fuelled by the likes of Mondoweiss.
    4. “Israel was entrenching the occupation by illegally transferring its own civilian population into the Palestinian territories”. Professor Eugene Kontorovich has put paid to this ruse.
    5. “it is increasingly being accepted that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are two sides of the same coin”. This is a deceptive remark that prevails upon the false suggestion that ALL criticism of Israel is being construed as being anti-Zionism and therefore anti-semitic. This is Cook’s insinuation; he is trying to delude us into believing that criticism of Israel is the same as being anti-Zionist when they are not.
    For example in an article in The Guardian “Particularly in sections of the left, anti-Zionism has more and more appropriated, often unrecognised, antisemitic tropes. All this is undeniably true. Yet, it remains important to resist the equation of anti-Zionism and antisemitism.” in Antisemites use the language of anti-Zionism. The two are distinct and as the Working Definition of Antisemitism points out clearly “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic”. However the kind of “criticism” that emanates from Cook’s poison pen and his mates at Mondoweiss goes way beyond being criticism like that leveled against other countries where hellish actions by truly heinous regimes abound virtually unchallenged by those who damn Israel incessantly.
    6. Cook is conveniently concocting a definition of anti-Zionism to get himself and his supporters off the anti-semitic hook. He is lying as to France having any intention to equate anti-Zionsim and anti-semitism when in fact France is taking steps to define “anti-Zionism as a modern-day form of anti-Semitism”. That is to say that anti-Zionism when it coincides with anti-semitism, as it often does these days, should be considered as criminal.
    7. “it is more likely that an anti-Zionist holds his or her position for entirely rational and ethical reasons”. Here is Cook making a purely opiniated, unsubstantiable assertion. One only has to have wintnessed the hate-filled rants of the extreme left whose style of debate and discussion is the very opposite of rational.
    8. “entitles all Jews to superior rights over all Palestinians”. Cook seems to forget that Israeli Arabs who are citizens of Israel have the same entitlements under Israel law and have achieved position and status in Israel that makes accusations of apartheid in Israeli society a sick joke.
    9. Cook makes reference to self-hating Jews as though they are some kind of myth. Sadly they exist in dangerous numbers; many lurking around at Mondoweiss. The old testament has stories that testify and warn us frequently that our fellow Jews are our own worst enemies.
    10. “most (French Muslims) feel hostility towards Israel because of its role in displacing and oppressing Palestinians”. In fact most Muslims feel hostility toward Israel because that is how they have been brought up and educated. To paraphrase Israel Katz Muslims as do the Poles “suckle anti-Semitism with their mothers’ milk”.
    11. Cook tries to fob off the anti-semitism that has emerged from the Yellow Vests movement and the institutionalised anti-semitism that pervades the British Labour Party, refuting all indications and trends that plainly indicate what is going on, contrary to what is actually happening. His statement, “all evidence suggests that there is very little antisemitism among Labour members – and less than in the ruling Conservative party” is laughable.
    [repaired version]

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      March 2, 2019, 9:08 pm

      ” Cook makes reference to self-hating Jews as though they are some kind of myth. Sadly they exist in dangerous numbers; many lurking around at Mondoweiss. The old testament has stories that testify and warn us frequently that our fellow Jews are our own worst enemies.”

      You bet, “Mayhem”! Just think how many more Jews there would be if Zionism can drive lots of Jews away from Judaism. It’ll keep those percentages way up there.

    • Talkback
      Talkback
      March 3, 2019, 11:57 am

      Mayhem: “Jonathan Cook at his most despicable concluding with a classic piece of conspiratorial anti-semitism at the very end – “It is an unholy pact, and one in which Jews are being used to oil the wheels of a failed, impotent and increasingly authoritarian politics of the center”.”

      No antisemitism, because Jews as such were not defamed.

      Let’s backtrack through Mayhem’s litany of tropes, lies and innuendo.

      Mayhem 1 : “Yes, it is so convenient to forget the diminution of Jews for centuries in Muslim lands, just because it wasn’t quite as bad as what Christianity had inflicted upon the Jews in Europe.”

      Cook is correct when he wrote that the crimes against Jews took MOSTLY part in Europe. You sound desperate.

      Mayhem 2: “Cook is saying it was only the Europeans …”

      Cook never didn’t use the word “only”. Now you really sound desperate.

      Mayhem 3: “The word “malevolently” is used maliciously and dishonestly to describe the sincere efforts by those who can see the global rise of anti-semitism that is fuelled by the likes of Mondoweiss.

      Nope. The word “malevolently” is used to describe the equation of antizionism and antisemitism which is a part of the rise of fabricated antisemitism by the likes of you. Yourr desperation is unbearable.

      Mayhem 4: “Professor Eugene Kontorovich has put paid to this ruse.”

      ROFL. It’s understandable that you would endorse an opionion by an illegal Zionist settler. It is even more understandable than an illegal Zionist settler would fabricate a justification for illegal Zionist settlements.

      But his opinion doesn’t matter in the international world. Neither will he be able to persuade every other country than the Jewish settler state that the settlements are legal, nor will his fabrications have more legal effect than the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. Btw. is “ruse” an antigentile trope?

      Mayhem 5: “This is a deceptive remark that prevails upon the false suggestion that ALL criticism of Israel is being construed as being anti-Zionism and therefore anti-semitic.”

      His remark simply prevails upon the false suggestion by US and European elites that antizionism is antisemitism.

      Mayhem: “However the kind of “criticism” that emanates from Cook’s poison pen and his mates at Mondoweiss goes way beyond being criticism like that leveled against other countries where hellish actions by truly heinous regimes abound virtually unchallenged by those who damn Israel incessantly.”

      You are confusing the definition of antisemitism with examples of antisemitism which can only be considered to be examples if “taking into account the overall context”. And the overall context is either openly and clearly antisemitic – which means that Jews are defamed as such – or it isn’t.

      If you only critisize one country (and even harshly) allthough it commits the same crimes as another(or even your own) that doesn’t necesseraly mean that you hate the people of the first country: It could simply mean that you don’t want to condem the other for personal, patriotic or other reasons.

      Mayhem 6: “Cook is conveniently concocting a definition of anti-Zionism to get himself and his supporters off the anti-semitic hook. ”

      ROFL. This is his definition: “Anti-Zionism .. is opposition to the political ideology of Zionism, a movement that has insisted in all its political guises on prioritising the rights of Jews to a homeland over those, the Palestinians, who were already living there.”

      There’s nothing wrong about this definition. But your “anti-semitic hook” is quite revealing when it comes to your agenda.

      Mayhem: “He is lying as to France having any intention to equate anti-Zionsim and anti-semitism when in fact France is taking steps to define “anti-Zionism as a modern-day form of anti-Semitism”. That is to say that anti-Zionism when it coincides with anti-semitism, as it often does these days, should be considered as criminal.”

      You are lying to yourself, when you claim that that Macron is not equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism when he claims that anti-Zionism is just “a form of” anti-Semitism.

      Mayhem: “Here is Cook making a purely opiniated, unsubstantiable assertion. One only has to have wintnessed the hate-filled rants of the extreme left whose style of debate and discussion is the very opposite of rational.”

      Another hate-filled attempt from you to paint those who are antizionists as antisemitic and rule out the possibility that an anti-Zionist holds his or her position for entirely rational and ethical reasons.

      It is blatantly obvious that you want to equate antizionism with antisemitism.

      Mayhem: “Cook seems to forget that Israeli Arabs who are citizens of Israel have the same entitlements under Israel law and have achieved position and status in Israel that makes accusations of apartheid in Israeli society a sick joke.”

      Mayhem seems to forget that his beloved Apartheid Junta recently put into law that the right to self determination is only reserved for Jews. He also seems to forget that while Israel’s citizens may seem to enjoy the same rights in theorry Israel’s nationals (aka Jews) enjoy even more. And he also forgets that Israel is in fact an Apartheid state, because it needs to keep Nonjews expelled to maintain Jewish dominance.

      Mayhem: “Cook makes reference to self-hating Jews as though they are some kind of myth. Sadly they exist in dangerous numbers; …”

      This is just another lie. Cook claims Israel uses the “self-hating Jew” trope to descredit critism from Jews or Jewish opposition to Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish state. You can’t be a worst enemy to Jews than accusing them of self hatred, because they don’t share an ideology. That’s opinion fascism in its truest form.

      Mayhem: “… many lurking around at Mondoweiss. The old testament has stories that testify and warn us frequently that our fellow Jews are our own worst enemies.”

      Indeed. Who could be a worst enemy of the Jews than a fellow Jew who accuses them of self-hatred, because they simply don’t share the same political nationalistic ideology?! That’s the worst opinion fascism anyone can do to its own people. It’s no coincidence that German Neo-Nazis accuse their fellow Germans of self-hatred, too. You are in good company, Mayhem.

      Mayhem: In fact most Muslims feel hostility toward Israel because that is how they have been brought up and educated.”

      That’s just a pathetic attempt to rule out that hostility towards Israel and its policy of displacing and oppressing Palestinians could be the reason for hostility towards Israel. Instead Mayhem resorts to the most imbecile racism he could find:

      Mayhem: “To paraphrase Israel Katz Muslims as do the Poles “suckle anti-Semitism with their mothers’ milk”.”

      Just imagine that someone would claim that Jews would “suckle supremacism/racism with their mother’s milk.”!

      This is just a perfect example that Mayhem and his ilk need to disredit critics of Israel as antisemites, because they neeed to distract from the fact that it is actually them who are the worst racists.

      Mayhem: “His statement, “all evidence suggests that there is very little antisemitism among Labour members – and less than in the ruling Conservative party” is laughable.

      Every evidence is laughable that doesn’t help you to distract from your racism, Mayhem. But please endulge us. Does the racism in the Knesset compare to Labor’s antisemitism? Especially in its call for policies and actions against Israel minorities? Quick, find a way to distract from it.

    • pjdude
      pjdude
      March 4, 2019, 3:23 am

      there is some much wrong and so much bs that its hard to unpack it all but i shall try.

      1. Israel creation was pushed by european jewry so its hardly accurate to say antisemitism in the muslim world was responsible for it.

      2. this is a flat out lie. Israel was the aggressor in 67 and also in 48(in a war of independence the side declaring independence is the aggressor)and israel has always put the european decended jews over the middle eastern ones.

      3. bull. it is appropriate to use malevolently. whats being pushed is not an honest concernfor anti semitism but an effort to quash criticism of Israel. it why the left gets attacked for criticizing israel but hardly a peep of the rightwings kill the jews efforts. the focus is almost exclusively on protecting israel.

      4. no he doesn’t he is trying to push a letter of the law to violate the spirit argument. the 4th geneva convention was designed in part to stop exactly what israel is doing. your just touting this because he is defending a war crime you support.

      5. i can’t even quite figure out what your ranting about but yes it is equating anti zionism as explictly antisemitc and criticism of israel as illegal.

      6.no cooks right and your as usual lying

      7. considering most of the bigoted tripe you post is opinion your really dont have a leg to stand on here.

      8.the only sick joke here is you. palestinians in israel do not have equal rights and to honestly think they do one has to be delusional. the law in the Israeli theocracy puts jews above all others.

      9.self hating jew being a jew who has a problem with war crimes. no true self hating jews are probably very rare. the smear people like you do to attack your critics sadly is all to common.

      10. ah yes the classic gentiles are just naturely anti semitic canard. the hatred is baswed in the feel people they feel brotherhood to are being abused by jews. that typically engenders hate.

      11. their is no institutionalized anti semitism in the labor party. thats a lie you use to smear people who take issue with israeli war crimes.

      so in conclusion your lying

  19. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    March 3, 2019, 7:44 am

    @maybot
    “Professor Eugene Kontorovich has put paid to this ruse”
    Ah you mean that totally unbiased Ukrainian/American/Jewish Israeli ” independent” legal”expert”

    http://jcpa.org/why-israeli-rule-in-the-west-bank-is-legal-under-international-law/

    He spins so much that he has disappeared up his own professorial posterior.
    “People say that the status quo is not stable, but in fact the status quo here is the most stable in the entire Middle East. A final status plan needs to look like the status quo – only official, organized, and not temporary”

    FFS!!

    Fascinating but increasingly predictable how Ziobots like yourself casually throw in the “conclusive” arguments or proofs offered by fellow Ziobots as being the definitive end of discussion.

Leave a Reply