Trending Topics:

British MPs won’t get to see ‘WitchHunt’ in the House of Commons – the very place it needs to be shown

CultureMedia AnalysisOpinion
on 28 Comments

A new documentary ‘WitchHunt’ about the long running accusations of antisemitism in the British Labour Party was due to be shown in the House of Commons tomorrow, 4 March. The screening was cancelled after protests that the film itself contributes to the very antisemitism it sets out to explore.

Since the film has only been shown in a handful of public venues around the country, it’s unlikely that those who demanded the Common’s cancellation have actually seen it. That’s a pity, because having watched a preview copy of the film myself, it strikes me that MPs at Westminster are the very people that most need to see it. ‘WitchHunt’ is a vital corrective to what’s been a mostly shallow and poorly informed debate that’s done much to undermine the British public’s understanding of antisemitism.

The importance of the documentary is best understood after reading a report published last September by the Media Reform Coalition into the coverage of the antisemitism story during the summer of 2018. The research found:

…myriad inaccuracies and distortions in online and television news including marked skews in sourcing, omission of essential context or right of reply, misquotation, and false assertions made either by journalists themselves or sources whose contentious claims were neither challenged nor countered. Overall, our findings were consistent with a disinformation paradigm.”

Challenging the narrative

‘WitchHunt’ sets out to challenge the “disinformation paradigm” that says antisemitism is “rife” and “institutional” under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour party. It’s a narrative that’s dominated mainstream political reporting for the last three years, since Corbyn was elected leader, and it’s done enormous damage to the party’s reputation – and potentially to its electoral prospects.

The documentary’s title, with the absence of a question mark, succinctly sums up the film makers’ counter narrative. It also explains why there’s already such opposition mounting against it being shown.

‘WitchHunt’ tells the story of a malign campaign, reminiscent of McCarthyism in 1950’s America, which aims to vilify critics of Israel and Zionism and in turn undermine a left wing Labour party leader with a long history of Palestinian solidarity. It sets out why it’s impossible to interpret what’s going on without understanding Israel’s determination to counter criticism against it by denigrating opponents as antisemitic. As evidence for this claim, the film looks at Israel’s Ministry for Strategic Affairs & Public Diplomacy, headed by Gilad Erdan, and its campaign to brand BDS as antisemitic. It also draws on the undercover investigation into Israel’s interference in British politics, ‘The Lobby’, carried out by Al Jazeera in 2017.

It’s a counter-narrative that leaves the film makers, and those they’ve interviewed, open to further criticism. By alleging that the antisemitism in Labour is in anyway exaggerated or manufactured or that there is any organised campaign to build pressure on Corbyn, the film runs the risk of looking like yet another antisemitic Jewish conspiracy theory. But in this case it is an entirely unfair criticism. WitchHunt doesn’t dumb thing down with Rothschild conspiracies. Rather, it encourages the viewer to think more deeply about questions of race and politics and how political agendas work to silence opposition.

It’s important to note what the film does not say, since all too often when the counter-narrative receives any coverage it’s ridiculed or dismissed through shoddy reporting.

‘WitchHunt’ does not say that antisemitism does not exist in the Labour Party. Nor does it diminish the pain and hurt that antisemitic tropes can cause to Jewish Labour party members or Jewish Labour MPs or the Jewish community more broadly. What is being questioned is the scale of the problem and the motivation of those who are presenting it as a ‘crisis’ of such proportions that it threatens the safety of the entire Jewish community in Britain.

Non-Zionist Jews

Trying to ban a film is usually a sure way to generate greater interest in what it has to say, so the promoters of the documentary, Jewish Voice for Labour – a non-Zionist, Corbyn supporting group established in the summer of 2017 – may yet be thankful for the free publicity.

The fact that the film has been made by Jewish Labour party members, and highlights their personal experience of false accusations, shows how muddied and confusing this whole saga must appear to the average member of the public.

Jewish critics of Israel and Zionism are invariably dismissed by other Jews as marginal and disconnected from the ‘real’ Jewish community and therefore irrelevant to the debate. They are portrayed as using their Jewish heritage as a ‘cover’ for their unacceptable views.

The mainstream Jewish leadership argues that since most Jews in Britain would describe themselves as Zionist (however critical they may be of current Israeli political leadership) it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence, and they who should determine how the issue of Zionism and antisemitism is viewed and debated.

It’s a viewpoint accepted by most MPs and the mainstream media and it’s enabled the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Leadership Council, the Chief Rabbi and the editors of the Jewish community press to shape and drive the allegations against the Labour party.

The dismissal of non-Zionist Jewish opinions reveals the extent to which modern Jewish identity has become bound up with an allegiance to Zionism. If you don’t ‘sign up’ to this definition of ‘being Jewish’ because you have an alternative reading of Jewish history and what will ensure long-term Jewish security, then you effectively exile yourself from the wider Jewish community. This policing of the acceptable parameters of Jewish debate will in the long term serve the Jewish community badly, leaving it incapable of internal criticism.

My own journey to Palestinian solidarity has taken inspiration from the generations of Jewish critics of Zionism that have come before me. I’ve found Jewish opposition to Zionism to be amongst the most thoughtful and nuanced sources on the subject. They ‘get’ where Jewish Zionists are coming from. They ‘get’ the history of racism towards Jews. They ‘get’ why the on-going oppression of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government is so difficult for the mainstream Jewish community to face into.  In the case of Jewish Voice for Peace, they’re also able to set anti-semitism within a broader understanding of racism and a more inclusive strategy to counter it.

So rather than dismiss Jewish Voice for Labour as irrelevant dissidents, I would urge people to be guided by their ability to critique Zionism and show solidarity for Palestinians without falling into the swamp of antisemitism.

Jackie Walker

At the heart of the film is the story of Jackie Walker and the vilification she’s experienced over the last two years. Walker is a Black, Jewish woman and a longstanding anti-racist campaigner and educator. She was previously vice chair of Momentum, the grassroots organisation which supports Jeremy Corbyn. Walker has twice been suspended by Labour over antisemitism allegations. Her next hearing before Labour’s disciplinary body is due to take place on March 26.

It’s Walker’s dual heritage that brings a real depth to the documentary. Her thinking places antisemitism into a wider social and historical context that includes the centuries of genocide committed against Africans during the slave trade. Walker’s Jamaican born mother was descended from a Black slave woman and a Portuguese Jewish slave owner, while her Jewish father’s family was from Russia. Her parents met as activists during the civil rights movement in the 1950s. It’s this background that gives her a perspective that allows her to understand how any group of people can be both victims and perpetrators of injustice.

The accusations against Jackie Walker are examined in detail in the film. They rely on trawling though social media, taking comments out of context, and assuming the most malign of motives.

Walker has fought back, even writing and performing a one-woman stage show ‘The Lynching’ telling the story of her family and upbringing and the racist and violently misogynistic abuse she’s received since the antisemitism allegations against her began: “Put her in a bin. Throw petrol on her. Set her on fire. Lynch her!”

History can be complicated

As Jackie Walker’s family story illustrates, human history can be complicated. Towards the end of the film she makes this observation:

“I am the product of victims and perpetrators. I am the product of two people who have been victims but who also, because that’s how history works, at times will have been perpetrators. Nobody is pure. Nobody hasn’t been a victim in their ancestral lives. We all share that. That’s the experience of being a human being.”

It’s an insight sorely needed when looking at the history of Zionism. As long as the Jewish community leadership insists that Zionism has no victims and is “no more and no less than the national liberation movement for the Jewish people” we will fail to understand what has taken place over the last 70 years of Jewish history.

Obvious omissions

The antisemitism row which has engulfed Labour shows no sign of ending. It’s impossible to interpret it without also acknowledging the deep left/right divisions within the Labour party and the way antisemitism is used as a proxy battle in a bigger ideological war.

But the longer this row goes on the more peculiar it looks and more obvious the omissions from the debate appear.

Why is so little made in our national media of the Conservative Party’s connections with far right antisemitic parties represented in the European parliament?

Why does the Board of Deputies express no concern when an Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, works to gain electoral advantage by brokering election deals with openly racist political parties in Israel?

And most glaringly, where is the Palestinian voice in this debate? Why is it okay to talk about antisemitism and Zionism in Britain without asking a Palestinian what their direct experience of Zionism has looked and felt like?

The ‘WitchHunt’ deserves to be widely seen. And it will be from Sunday 17th March when it goes online for free viewing.

Robert Cohen
About Robert Cohen

Cohen is a British writer. He blogs at Micah's Paradigm Shift. http://micahsparadigmshift.blogspot.co.uk/

Other posts by .


Posted In:

28 Responses

  1. gamal
    gamal on March 3, 2019, 1:36 pm

    ” ‘WitchHunt’ sets out to challenge the “disinformation paradigm” that says antisemitism is “rife” and “institutional” under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour party. It’s a narrative that’s dominated mainstream political reporting for the last three years, since Corbyn was elected leader ”

    so far so good,

    “and it’s done enormous damage to the party’s reputation – and potentially to its electoral prospects”

    I am not so sure that it’s the Labour Party’s reputation which has suffered in this fiasco or how it has affected their prospects see simon maginn for example his “how to destroy a party” in 14 odd steps, cynicism abounds

    How to destroy a political party.

    1. Select your cause. This could be anything, but it’ll work better if it’s simultaneously highly emotive, imprecise, and presented as something people will find it difficult to argue against. (‘Let’s fight antisemitism’, for instance.)

    https://twitter.com/simonmaginn/status/1102136131418816512

    • just
      just on March 3, 2019, 5:17 pm

      Simon Maginn nails it. Thanks, gamal!

      The pitiful thing is that this method and these steps have been and are widely employed successfully by those that are anti- Palestinian. The moment that justice for Palestinians and concomitant freedom is advocated, a massive revolt occurs in the guise of Zionists and their supporters accusing anti- Semitism at every juncture. One only has to witness what is happening with Corbyn in his party in the UK and what is being said about Ilhan and Tlaib by their own party in the US. There is nobody that won’t defend Israel ‘no matter what’ in Congress, and these two women have only spoken truths and have been vilified for it. Apparently it’s ok to be anti- Palestinian, anti- Muslim, racist, and Islamophobic but it’s never, ever ok to be anti- Zionist, anti- apartheid, or pro- Palestinian according to these ‘Israel can do no wrong no matter what’ doctrinaires.

      I wish Jeremy Corbyn victory. I wish more exposure of the slimeballs everywhere.

      • Citizen
        Citizen on March 4, 2019, 7:23 am

        Agreed.

      • Misterioso
        Misterioso on March 4, 2019, 9:42 am

        @just, et al

        Another timely and informative missive from Professor Lawrence Davidson:

        “Anti-Semitism versus Anti-Zionism in Today’s France—An Analysis” (4 March 2019) by Professor Lawrence Davidson

        “Part I—The Context”

        “We are at a new stage of the fight to realize Palestinian rights and free both Palestinians and Jews from the consequences of Zionist racism. There was a time when very few in the West understood the racist nature of the Israeli state. For a long time the Zionists controlled the public relations message and most people took as fact the fictional account of Israel’s founding—such as the one given in Leon Uris’s book Exodus. After the 1967 war, and Israel’s decision to keep even more conquered Palestinian territory, things began to change. Of course, Israel had always been a racist place designed for one group alone. But now the contradictions created by post-war occupation made, and continue to make, that fact harder to hide, and the mythical picture of Israel as a grand democratic experiment has eroded. Increasingly the real, illiberal Israel has become apparent to Western audiences, and particularly to an increasing number of Jews. As a result, Israel has largely lost the public relations battle at the popular level of Western society.

        “However, the winning of this battle is not to be equated with the winning of the fight mentioned above. The Zionists are still able to maintain Western financial and military support of Israel at obscene levels despite Israel’s revealed apartheid nature. To combat the popular criticism that Israel is now subject to, the Zionists have shifted tactics. They have abandoned popular debate and now use their influence with the West’s ruling elites to simply criminalize any rhetoric that points out the real discriminatory nature of the Zionist state. The gambit here is to have such criticism legally equated with anti-Semitism.

        “This is exactly what has recently taken place in France.”

        “Part II—Emmanuel Macron Disregards History”

        “On Wednesday, 20 February 2019, Emmanuel Macron, the President of the French Republic, addressed the Conseil Representatif des Institutions Juives de France (CRIF) —the Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions. Macron’s topic was the country’s ‘resurgence of anti-Semitism.’ And, indeed, there has been a rise in anti-Semitic incidents in France over the last couple of decades. Significantly, Macron did not attempt to analyze why this was happening. For instance, while asserting that anti-Semites ‘are not worthy of the Republic,’ he did not take note of the historical fact that anti-Semitism has been a major force in France for hundreds of years and through multiple French forms of government. Historically it has ebbed and flowed.

        “We can trace this trend back to medieval France and the absolutist Catholic culture of that time. While ultimately revolutionary 18th century France (a markedly anti-clerical period) was the first European country to emancipate Jews, anti-Semitism never disappeared. It again became particularly virulent in France during the Dreyfus Affair in the 1890s and under the Nazi-allied Vichy regime in the 1940s. Thus, the presence in today’s France of traditional anti-Semites, those who are prejudiced against Jews qua Jews, should come as no surprise.

        “The latest outbreak of hostility involving Jews in France is the product of modern historical factors that more than one Paris government has failed to confront. This failure has increased resentment against some French Jews—particularly those who are Zionists. Yet it is important to note that much of this sort of emotion is not a function of anti-Semitism.

        “For instance, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz has noted that ‘anti-Semitism’ is now ‘often surfacing among radicalized Muslims’ in France. While we can take issue with the notion of ‘radicalized’ Muslims and the description of their sentiments as ‘anti-Semitism,’ we will address the assertion of hostility and ask why should this be so. It may be because France has treated its citizens of Arab origin very poorly while simultaneously and publicly supporting Israel, which, of course, treats its own Arab population even worse.

        “France has a long imperial and colonial history in the Arab world and fought a bitter, relatively recent war to hold onto Algeria. When, in 1962, it finally abandoned that effort, there were 150,000 Algerian Arabs who had fought with the French. They were disarmed and then abandoned to their fate—prevented from emigrating to France by the government of that day. However, ‘through the kindness of individual French commanders … several thousand were illegally smuggled to France where on arrival they were confined to primitive rural camps.’ When they were finally let out of the camps, they continued to be segregated and discriminated against. This prevailing prejudice was maintained in the treatment of other African and Middle Eastern immigrants who subsequently made their way to France. One ongoing sign of this can be found in the culture war against Muslims living in the country. Muslim dress, and even halal food, have been deemed dangerous to traditional French culture. The anger of the French Arab population stems from this continuous discrimination, but why would some of it be directed against a portion of France’s Jewish citizens?

        “Part III—The Israeli Connection”

        “It may well be because more and more French Arabs, angry over their discriminatory treatment by French society, increasingly identify with Palestinians, who are also discriminated against by Israeli society. And, they are encouraged in this identification by the fact that, except for a brief period under the leadership of Charles De Gaulle, France has been a strong supporter of Israel.

        “This is a tradition that President Macron accentuated in his address to the CRIF. He told his audience that he will make anti-Zionism the equivalent of anti-Semitism under French law. Macron justifies this move by claiming that ‘anti-Zionism is one of the modern forms of anti-Semitism.’

        “What Macron is saying is that in France you cannot speak out against the ideological basis for Israeli racism. If you do so, you yourself will be judged a racist and a criminal. Just how unreasonable this is is elegantly explained in an ‘open letter’ to Macron by the Israeli historian Shlomo Sand, posted on 8 February 2019 in the publication Jacobin.

        “In his letter Sand points out that Zionist Israel is not a republic on the Western model, and certainly not a democracy. It is a ‘Jewish communalist state.’ That is why Sand cannot be a Zionist, because ‘I am a citizen who desires that the state he lives in should be an Israeli republic, and not a Jewish-communalist state. … I do not want to live in a state that, according to its own self-definition, makes me a privileged class of citizen.’

        “Sand goes on to explain that ‘the Israeli Interior Ministry counts 75 percent of the country’s citizens as Jewish, 21 percent as Arab Muslims and Christians, and 4 percent as ‘others’ (sic). Yet according to the spirit of its laws, Israel does not belong to Israelis as a whole, whereas it does belong even to all those Jews worldwide who have no intention of coming to live there.’

        “Under these circumstances, one cannot be someone who takes republican and democratic principles seriously and still be a Zionist. So Sand has made his choice: he wants to replace Zionist Israel with ‘an Israeli republic.’ Then he asks, ‘Mr. President, do you think that that makes me an antisemite?’

        “Part IV—Apples Become the Same as Oranges”

        “Apparently President Macron is oblivious to the logic of Shlomo Sand. Perhaps this is because, at this moment, illogic serves his political purposes much better. And so, in Macron’s France apples become oranges. That is, anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism become the same. Why is this illogical? It is so because anti-Semitism is directed against Jewish people no matter where they are found and based on nothing other than their religion/ethnicity. On the other hand, anti-Zionism is opposition to a specific political doctrine based on its racist nature and practice in the state of Israel. It is not just many French Arabs who understand this. Many French Jews themselves are anti-Zionist. At the same time, French anti-Semites, who probably dream of an exclusive French ‘communalist state,’ want to see all French Jews pack up and move to Israel. This puts these anti-Semites on the same team as avid Zionists.

        “And what about the French Jews who are anti-Zionist? Macron is putting these Jewish citizens in a position where they can be legally accused of anti-Semitism. As French journalist Dominique Vidal described the situation to FRANCE 24: ‘if we consider opposition to Theodore Herzl’s theory as anti-Semitic, then we’re saying that the millions of Jews who do not wish to live in Palestine and the occupied territories are anti-Semites. … It’s historical illiteracy, or worse, stupidity.’

        “Part V—Conclusion”

        “Macron is not stupid, but neither is he a principled democratic republican like Shlomo Sand. He knows that if, as his party spokesman now puts it, ‘denying the existence of Israel [that is, Israel as a Jewish state] … has to be made a criminal offense,’ you are making it illegal to stand with the Palestinians and against the racist nature inherent in a religious and ethnically exclusive state. Macron is using the law to silence popular opposition to Israel. Also, in this way the hostility of French Arabs to Zionist French Jews becomes criminal.

        “This is exactly the current Israeli strategy in response to having lost the public debate over the true nature of the Zionist project in Palestine — criminalize the arguments of your critics.

        “No French national leader would support such an anti-democratic strategy unless he or she is a political opportunist who is currying the favor of a politically powerful lobby. In the case of Emmanuel Macron, this is also a maneuver to label his opponents (perhaps France’s Muslims as well as all those protesting ‘yellow vests’) as anti-Semites. No French leader would ally with the Zionists in this effort unless they have no problem with corrupting the logic of the law by demanding that apples legally become oranges. And, no French leader would act in this way unless they have little or no interest in dealing with France’s real racial problems by seeking real answers.

        “It is this last fact that, in the long run, is most dangerous for French culture and politics. As we have seen, anti-Semitism is nothing new in France. It is embedded in a certain French self-image that is, in the end, reluctant to allow entry to anyone not deemed truly French, be they Muslims or Jews. Unless French leaders are willing to challenge this cultural puritanism, they will find anti-Semitism, and other forms of xenophobic passions, poisoning their national life for the indefinite future.”

        Lawrence Davidson
        [email protected]
        Blog: http://www.tothepointanalyses.com

      • just
        just on March 4, 2019, 12:13 pm

        Thanks Misterioso. I think you’ll be very interested in Jeff Handmaker’s excellent analysis that was published here today:

        “Unfounded allegations of anti-Semitism cover up Israeli apartheid …”

        @ https://mondoweiss.net/2019/03/unfounded-allegations-apartheid/

        (Thanks, Citizen!)

    • Misterioso
      Misterioso on March 4, 2019, 8:30 am

      For the record:

      https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20190302-corbyn-calls-for-uk-to-condemn-israels-targeting-of-palestinians/

      “Corbyn calls for UK to condemn Israel’s targeting of Palestinians”

      Middle East Monitor, March 2/19

      “Head of the British Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn has called for the UK government to condemn Israel’s killing of Palestinians as well as to freeze arms sales to the occupation state.

      “His remarks came in the wake of a UN report which found that Israel might have committed war crimes against Palestinians.

      “On Twitter, Corbyn wrote: ‘The UN says Israel’s killings of demonstrators in Gaza – including children, paramedics and journalists – may constitute ‘war crimes or crimes against humanity.’

      “’The UK government must unequivocally condemn the killings and freeze arms sales to Israel.’

      “The UN report, published earlier this week, said: ‘The Israeli security forces killed and maimed Palestinian demonstrators who did not pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury to others when they were shot, nor were they directly participating in hostilities,’ adding that the protests had been ‘civilian in nature’”.

  2. annie
    annie on March 3, 2019, 3:00 pm

    The mainstream Jewish leadership argues that since most Jews in Britain would describe themselves as Zionist (however critical they may be of current Israeli political leadership) it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence, and they who should determine how the issue of Zionism and antisemitism is viewed and debated.

    It’s a viewpoint accepted by most MPs and the mainstream media and it’s enabled the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Leadership Council, the Chief Rabbi and the editors of the Jewish community press to shape and drive the allegations against the Labour party.

    ‘most people think like us therefore we must take precedence. we not only take precedence but we get to set the rules by which the topic is broached, debated and silenced.’

    one would have to be deeply indoctrinated into a group think to accept this logic. this is not how people generally operate when encountering a dissenting view. you might argue your case and denounce the others opinion, but in life rarely can you demand to shape the debate around your preferences. yet this is also the logic behind all this anti-bds legislation. our way or it’s anti semitism.

    i think this kind of logic needs to be challenged right at its core, at its initiation.

    And most glaringly, where is the Palestinian voice in this debate? Why is it okay to talk about antisemitism and Zionism in Britain without asking a Palestinian what their direct experience of Zionism has looked and felt like?

    and what about the overwhelming vast majority of brits who are neither jewish or palestinian? they’re rather a glaring omission too if you ask me. the country’s future, brexit, everything, lies in the balance wrt the outcome of this election and almost you hear coming out of britain is the argument about anti semitism. it’s sucking all the air out of the room. as i mentioned in another comment recently, tom watson said anti semitism should be labour’s #1 issue. the absurdity of this is mindboggling and should be met with a resounding NO.

    • amigo
      amigo on March 3, 2019, 4:17 pm

      “The mainstream Jewish leadership argues that since most Jews in Britain would describe themselves as Zionist (however critical they may be of current Israeli political leadership) it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence, and they who should determine how the issue of Zionism and antisemitism is viewed and debated.”

      Ergo,

      “The mainstream Palestinian leadership argues that since most (if not all) Palestinians describe themselves as being opposed to being oppressed , it,s the majority Palestinian opinion that must take precedence and they who should determine how the issue of Occupation is viewed and debated. ”

      Or is that an antisemitic claim to make. Ie , denying Zionists the right to do as they please with impunity.

      Oops, there I go again with the antisemitic tropes.

      Mea Culpa , I guess I am just an incorrigible Jew hater.

      • gamal
        gamal on March 3, 2019, 4:45 pm

        ” it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence”

        ah Ijma…it’s a knotty problem, but we prefer to decide for ourselves..Ikhtilaf has its charms but its no precedent, don’t you have that in Judaism?

  3. Bumblebye
    Bumblebye on March 3, 2019, 3:08 pm

    1) i’m lucky – i saw WitchHunt online a couple of weeks ago incuding the Q & A afterwards!

    2) because Jackie’s case with the Labour Party is due to be heard later this month i think it possibly inappropriate for the film to have had a screening in the House of Commons *before* that date. It wasn’t called off *for* that reason though, as it seems a film about accusations of antisemitism is deemed (unseen) as antisemitic! Screenings at any other venue before then, or at the HoC after her hearing, fine.

    • just
      just on March 4, 2019, 12:26 pm

      I appreciate your comment very much, Bumblebye. Much more important than the film being screened in the House of Commons is for the constituents of MPs to watch it. Any MP can avail themselves of the film on their own, with their friends and families, etc. I can only imagine the hullabaloo that could ensue in and out of the House of Commons if it is screened before Jackie Walker gets her hearing… one that I hope will be fair and just. This attack on Labour (Corbyn and Walker, et al) should, and I hope will, be exposed for the concerted pro- Zionist, anti- Palestinian vicious slander/calumny that it is.

  4. eljay
    eljay on March 3, 2019, 3:36 pm

    … The mainstream Jewish leadership argues that since most Jews in Britain would describe themselves as Zionist … it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence, and they who should determine how the issue of Zionism and antisemitism is viewed and debated. …

    Neither the ideology of Zionism nor its colonialist, (war) criminal and religion-supremacist “Jewish State” construct can be defended on its own merits. And, so, Zionists routinely and anti-Semitically conflate Zionism and Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Zionism and Israel.

    Or as Zionist JeffB succinctly put it:

    There is nothing anti-Semitic with blaming Jews for stuff that Jews institutionally support. … Not holding the Jews responsible for Jewish policy on the excuse that “well some Jews didn’t agree” is denying them agency.

    With Zionist “friends” like these, non-Zionist Jews don’t need any enemies. I remain unable to comprehend why Zionists hate Jews so much.

  5. JWalters
    JWalters on March 3, 2019, 5:25 pm

    “what’s been a mostly shallow and poorly informed debate that’s done much to undermine the British public’s understanding of antisemitism.”

    Very polite. It’s obvious that the “shallow and poorly informed debate” has been intentional on the part of the Zionists. It is not credible that all these college educated people in Parliament and the press are unaware of the massive dishonesty by the Zionists in this “debate”.

    Further, such a uniform blanket of dishonesty will not occur randomly. The very uniformity of the same grotesque “errors” across the mainstream media spectrum points to some sort of informal monopoly controlling the media. Statistically, if there were true diversity of media control they would not all be making exactly the same absurd “mistakes”. So while the various media corporations may be nominally under different ownership, it’s obvious that Britain needs to look into who holds controlling stock ownership in these various corporations.

  6. just
    just on March 3, 2019, 6:24 pm

    “Man arrested after allegedly hitting Jeremy Corbyn with an egg …

    A man has been arrested after allegedly hitting Jeremy Corbyn with an egg as the Labour leader visited a mosque in his constituency on Sunday.

    Corbyn was in his Islington North constituency in London when the man hit him while holding an egg, Labour sources confirmed.

    The Labour leader was making a visit to the Finsbury Park mosque and Muslim Welfare House as part of the annual Visit My Mosque Day, a national event in which the public are invited to visit local mosques.

    A party source said Corbyn was not hurt in the incident and would be continuing with his plans for the day. The Metropolitan police said a 41-year-old man had been arrested on suspicion of assault.

    Police said the man had been quickly detained after the incident, which took place on Seven Sisters Road. The alleged attacker is believed to have been a pro-Brexit campaigner.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/03/man-arrested-after-allegedly-throwing-egg-at-labour-jeremy-corbyn-london

    Juvenile and really, really stupid behavior by the Brexiter. (the 2nd paragraph is weird…)

    • Bumblebye
      Bumblebye on March 3, 2019, 8:22 pm

      It’s a “weird” para because the G is not quite telling the truth. The ‘Tommeh Robinson’ fanboy hit Corbyn on the head *with his fist* – the egg was contained within said fist.

      • just
        just on March 3, 2019, 10:11 pm

        That’s quite the omission on their part. That’s assault, not stupid and juvenile mischief.

        Thanks, Bumblebye.

  7. JLewisDickerson
    JLewisDickerson on March 3, 2019, 7:50 pm

    WitchHunt (the silencing of pro-Palestinian UK Labour Party activists)

    Red Fight
    Published on Feb 12, 2019
    A documentary promoted by Jewish Voice for Labour exposes the campaign to discredit the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership as one based on disinformation, fake news and dirty tricks.
    WitchHunt, by Edinburgh-based filmmaker Jon Pullman, combines extensive archive material with authoritative new interviews, featuring experts in media, Jewish, black and labour history, racism and the politics of the Middle East.
    Pullman says: “I’ve set out to explore the connections between the attacks on Labour, the unfolding tragedy of Palestine and the wider struggle against race-based oppression.”
    The film examines the use of antisemitism allegations to silence critics of Israel’s human rights violations, such as black Jewish activist Jackie Walker, a former vice-chair of Momentum. She continues to be publicly abused by anti-Corbyn Labour MPs, even in the run-up to her hearing before the National Constitutional Committee scheduled for March 26, 2019.

    ****Update 27/02/19
    This is the film that Labour MP Chris Williamson was prevented from screening to MP’s in Houses of Parliament. The PM has criticised him, and he has since been suspended from the party for his comments defending the party from allegations of anti-semitism.
    The Israeli lobby and it’s supporters in the UK parliament have managed to remove a real socialist and supporter of Palestinian rights from Westminster ****

    • Brewer
      Brewer on March 4, 2019, 1:51 am

      Thanks for that JLD.
      The film rings one thing clearly into focus – we must win this fight.

    • JLewisDickerson
      JLewisDickerson on March 5, 2019, 5:04 pm

      Jackie Walker on Antisemitism scandal within the Labour Party.

      • annie
        annie on March 5, 2019, 7:18 pm

        thanks for posting the video dickerson. could you, or someone, tell me what walker is saying at 9:17. it sounds as tho she says ‘people who have been excluded from power in the labor party as people of color, muslims, and “travelers”‘.

      • gamal
        gamal on March 5, 2019, 7:36 pm

        ” “travelers”‘.” tinkers, the travelling community are Irish and live around the UK, not Roma but are itinerant, they are discriminated against here and there is considerable prejudice they are also very insular and have their own ways, they live in the UK too and are you know negotiating with the state over camping sites, schooling. They have a movement in Ireland, they are famous as bare knuckle fighters, it being a tradition of theirs, youtube records many such contests. Like white gypsies, they are an ethnicity.

  8. John Douglas
    John Douglas on March 3, 2019, 10:22 pm

    Jlewis, Thanks so much for posting this. I have to say that I haven’t followed the issues with the Labour Party very closely. This was very helpful. Jackie Walker is an impressive woman.

  9. RoHa
    RoHa on March 4, 2019, 12:44 am

    “it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence, and they who should determine how the issue of Zionism and antisemitism is viewed and debated.”

    Could be self-defeating. When people see criticisms of Israeli oppression of Palestinians labelled as “anti-Semitism”, they might start thinking “anti-Semitism isn’t bad”.

  10. Jejasalo
    Jejasalo on March 4, 2019, 12:15 pm

    I’d like to see the (unfortunately) useful portrayal of Jews as eternal victims challenged. Almost all of the ‘pro’ Israel propaganda is infused with this – and it continues to work. To some extent, the BDS movement plays into this with its detractors screeching about ‘anti-Semitism’. whenever someone suggests boycotting Israeli goods, especially those made in the settlements. –same with divestment and sanctions.

    Ironically, the Israeli and US political hysteria about the need to back Israel ‘no matter what’ is a joke on itself. The more virulently the Jewish Lobby and its supporters protest any attempts to shed light on what they support, the more they look like bullies. In countries where popular opinion still matters a little, this is important.

  11. John Douglas
    John Douglas on March 4, 2019, 4:45 pm

    “it’s the majority Jewish opinion that must take precedence, and they who should determine how the issue of Zionism and antisemitism is viewed and debated.”

    The majority of a minority in a democracy should determine what people can say and how they say it?

    To call that Sophistry is to insult the Sophists.

  12. gamal
    gamal on March 6, 2019, 10:50 am

    I see that people are now recalling that Margaret Hodge and Corbyn have a little history.

    Margaret Hodge Reveals Corbyn Obsession

    “Ah well. Thanks to Private Eye magazine, we now know how Ms Hodge’s vindictiveness was kindled. Recalling an early meeting between her and Jezza, it tells “MILLIONAIRE newcomer to the House of Commons Margeret Hodge has had a tricky time with some of her fellow Labour MPs … A former leader of Islington Council and now a devoted Blairite member for Barking, Hodge agreed to debate Clause 4 with hard left MP Jeremy Corbyn in front of an earnest crowd at the Red Rose Centre in Islington”. There was more.

    “Corbyn argued to retain the public ownership clause while Hodge said electoral victory must come first. Corbyn won the crowd over completely – at which point Hodge turned from cool pragmatist into fuming maniac. She rose to reply and completely blew her gasket: she called the astonished crowd stupid and accused them of loving being in opposition and of having their heads in the sand.” And the conclusion of this encounter?

    “Of the hundred or so present, only two voted in favour of Hodge, one of them being Stephen Twigg, ex-president of the NUS (and now Hodge’s researcher).” It wasn’t about anti-Semitism then, and it isn’t about anti-Semitism now. It’s about a vindictive and jealous politician enacting an act of retribution for coming second best once again”

    http://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2018/09/margaret-hodge-reveals-corbyn-obsession.html

    I would weep if I wasn’t helplessly laughing, what a bunch of incompetent entitled vindictive dissembling nincompoops.

  13. gamal
    gamal on March 10, 2019, 12:05 pm

    The Labour Party is still growing they say despite the ‘controversy’, a twitter thread on the General Secretarys’ account it seems something may be stirring as Ezzymix snaps “I was going to join but I believe in free speech. So if I want to criticise Israel’s appalling treatment of Palestinian’s without having politically false weaponised AS thrown down people’s throats, so it’s a no. Ps Tom Watson would do well in the Tory party”

    as Brexit looms..it’s going to get ugly.

    https://twitter.com/JennieGenSec/status/1104514927253995520

Leave a Reply