The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism is an Israeli Funded Political Group Whose Mission Is to Defame anti-Zionists and Palestine Solidarity Supporters as ‘Anti-Semitic’

The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism is an Israeli Funded Political Group Whose Mission Is to Defame anti-Zionists and Palestine Solidarity Supporters as ‘Anti-Semitic’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Post-Blog

The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism is an Israeli Funded Political Group Whose Mission Is to Defame anti-Zionists and Palestine Solidarity Supporters as ‘Anti-Semitic’

On Monday the CAA Will Attempt to Have My Libel Action Thrown Out – Their Defence?  That Their Accusations are ‘Honest Opinions’! 

One of the most remarkable things about the ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign against Corbyn and the Left is that it has been evidence free. All the main targets – Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth, Chris Williamson, Ken Livingstone and myself, were suspended and then expelled – not for anti-Semitism but for catch-all charges such as bringing the Party into disrepute.

The most vicious Zionist organisation behind this campaign was the misnamed Campaign Against Anti-Semitism. The CAA was formed in the summer of 2014 during the height of Operation Protective Edge. Its mission was to target opponents of Israel’s genocidal attacks, which killed 2,200 civilians including 551 children, as ‘anti-Semitic’.

The CAA was one of the 2 complainants to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The other organisation, the Jewish Labour Movement, ‘the sister party’ of the racist Israeli Labor Party was also reinvented in 2015.

On 6th February 2017 I made a formal complaint to the Charity Commission about the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism complaining that it was a political organisation masquerading as a charity. On 10th February I followed this up with a more substantial complaint. I also put a petition up on Change.org asking people to support my call for the CAA to be deregistered by the CC.


The CAA claimed in its plea to Change.org that its purpose was to promote racial harmony! At least they have a sense of humour

Almost immediately, the CAA had made a panic stricken formal complaint to Change.org, saying that

‘We do not libel opponents of Israel, we factually report the activities of antisemites. Claiming otherwise is severely damaging to our reputation.

The CAA probably forgot they were no longer in Israel. But since every opponent of Zionism or Israeli Apartheid is by the CAA’s definition an anti-Semite, the two amount to the same.

Change.org. emailed me on 9th February 2017 giving me 4 days notice to respond, otherwise they would take the petition down. I spent a very long night writing a 5,000 word response! 8 days later Change.org informed me that they had rejected the CAA’s complaint.

Please be assured that we will not remove your petition unless we are legally compelled to do so.


Change.org’s robust defence of freedom of speech is what British universities should do when these McCarthyists approach them – the CAA shut up and its legal threats vanished

Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs is setting up groups like the CAA in the USA and Europe with a $50m budget

Nothing further was heard from the CAA. Their legal threats had been a bluff. The last thing they wanted was for their lies to be tested in court. The behaviour of  change.org stands in marked contrast to 38 degrees who took down a petition criticising the BBC’s Laura ‘Tory’ Kuensberg, which is why I’ll have nothing to do with 38 degrees.

I did a blog on what happened. To date the petition has gathered more than 8,200 signatures (You can still sign!).

Nothing illustrates better the fake and confected nature of what has been called the anti-Semitism ‘disinformation paradigm’ than the activities of the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism. Despite calling anyone who is a critic of Israel an ‘anti-Semite’ the CAA turns a blind eye to anti-Semitism when it comes from the far-Right.  On one condition.  That these anti-Semites also support Israel. 

Hence why there are over 700 posts on the CAA’s website condemning Jeremy Corbyn and not one with anything to say about Tommy Robinson. Robinson came from the holocaust denying British National Party [BNP]. Today Robinson keeps company with the same Polish neo-Nazis that the CAA purports to oppose. Robinson however is also an ardent Zionist. As was the case with the Nazis, Zionism is more than happy to do business with anti-Semites just as long as they support their project to remove Jews from the diaspora.


It’s no surprise that the CAA’s go to paper is the Daily Mail which campaigned against the admission of Jewish refugees from the Nazis in the 1930’s

The Revenge of the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism

The CAA’s revenge was not long in coming. On 26th February 2017 the first of 5 articles appeared with the snappy title ‘TONY GREENSTEIN’S ATTEMPT TO SHUT DOWN CAMPAIGN AGAINST ANTISEMITISM SHOWCASES THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN FAR-LEFT AND FAR-RIGHT”. It accused me of being a ‘notorious anti-Semite’.

The CAA love capital letters, probably because they believe shouting works best. It is one more thing that they have in common with Trump. In an attempt to discredit a letter that I and 61 others had published in the Guardian (before the letters page was Freedlandised) they referred to 30+ year old minor convictions of mine.

The CAA expressed how ‘extremely grateful they were to 3 Tory  MPs and one Tory Peer including the notorious Islamaphobes Bob Blackman MP and Lady Deech, ‘all of whom rushed to defend our work’. The Daily Mail, a paper  campaigned against the admission of Jewish refugees from Hitler published a supportive article.


When I brought out a book on Fighting Fascism in Brighton it was picketed by the Zionists friends in the EDL, complete with Israeli flag! Presumably they didn’t realise that I was an anti-Semite!

Why I Initiated a Libel Action

On 13th February 2018, just before the one year limitation period was due to run out, I began legal proceedings for defamation. At the same time I launched a crowd funding appeal to pay for it, first with Justgiving and then Go Fund Me. I found the latter deducts less! Without the generosity of hundreds of people who were outraged at the behaviour of the CAA my action would have been short-lived. I am extremely grateful for the sacrifices people have made to fund this action. For tactical reasons I can’t yet divulge just how much I have received but I have spent just over £26,000 on legal advice and representation over the past 2½ years. Compare this with the CAA’s costs of £44,000 for this one hearing alone. Their total costs are over £100,000.

After having obtained initial advice from barrister Jonathan Price from Doughty Street Chambers on a pro bono basis I went on to instruct Jonathan to prepare the Claim Form and Particulars of Claim.


Secretive funding of dirty tricks groups like the CAA is standard practice for Israel’s MSA

There then followed a Defence from the CAA and I then responded with a Reply. The first major hearing was on 14th February 2019, a year after the claim was first initiated. I now instructed David Mitchell of Ely Chambers, now 39 Essex Chambers. Its purpose was to decide on meaning, except that Judge Nicklin, a conservative judge, didn’t rule on what anti-Semitism meant!

However his decision was adverse.  Under the Defamation Act 2013 there are two main defences.  One is section 2, The Truth, under which it is a defence if the Defendant is able to ‘show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true.’ You might have thought the Zionists would have grasped the opportunity to defend the case on the grounds that it was substantially true.  Not a bit of it.

Instead they preferred Section 3 ‘Honest Opinion’ under which a Defendant is not guilty of libeling someone if the allegation that was made is shown to be their honest opinion even if isn’t true!

In other words the choice is between fact and opinion. Quite bizzarely Nicklin decided that if you call someone an anti-Semite then that is a matter of opinion. Nicklin is a good example of the blinkered judge. If you are a food critic and go to a restaurant and your review says that the food was lousy then that is clearly a matter of opinion. If you call someone a racist or anti-Semite then that is a factual matter. However Nicklin decided otherwise.

The parties then had to go through the whole process again, submitting an amended claim and particulars, defence and reply.

After the Defence badgered me with Part 18 and 31 Requests for documents and information, they decided in April that they would go for summary judgement under Part 24, of the Civil Procedure Rules which state that judgment should be given if the ‘claimant has no real prospect of succeeding on the claim or issue’. That is what the hearing this Monday 26th October at the Royal Courts of Justice is about.  It starts at 11.15 a.m. I don’t know if people will be admitted to the court because of COVID-19 or have a separate room. However the make or break hearing is at last here, two and a half years later.

Why the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism and Honest Opinion are Strangers

The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism alleged in their Amended Defence that I was, in their ‘honest opinion’ an anti-Semite because:

i.              I lied, with 61 other people, when the Guardian printed a letter alleging that the IHRA misdefinition of anti-Semitism prevents criticism of Israel. The only problem is we didn’t say that! What we did say was that the IHRA is ‘designed to silence public debate on Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians.’ 

ii.           I lied when I told the Charity Commission ‘that the CAA was a rightwing political Zionist organisation that is not concerned with fascist groups who were anti-Semitic Holocaust deniers.’ In fact I didn’t say that either (see below). But what’s one lie amongst so many?

iii.        Almost all my tweets are about Jews and Israel which are ‘unremittingly hostile towards, and abusive about, Jews, Israel and supporters of Israel. None of them ever say anything positive about Israel or Jews.’ The lies are tiresome. None of my articles are hostile or negative towards Jews. I am also extremely supportive of Israelis who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories or who have the courage and integrity to oppose Israel’s many war crimes. The problem is that there are so few!

iv.        My blog is

‘unremittingly and aggressively antagonistic towards, the world’s only Jewish state and its supporters, and who gladly throws around anti-Semitic tropes such as comparisons between ‘Zionists’ and the Nazis. He regularly uses the word ‘Zio.

The CAA, like all good racists, is pathologically incapable of distinguishing between Jews and Zionists. Yes Israel is the only Jewish state. Nazi Germany was the only Aryan state and South Africa the only White Christian state. The question is what kind of state Israel is not what flag it flies under.

v.           There is a whole lot of trivia concerning my tweets which it would be tedious to go through, so I shall just take a few examples: The CAA inanely claims that a forged tweet from a member of Nazi Germany Labour Against Anti-Semitism, Emma Picken was mine : It read:

did you treat a few Jew boys as well? Try to curb your Zionist racism – although settlers are Hitler’s children.

This is such a pathetic forgery, an indication what fevered Zionist minds imagine we think that its barely worth commenting on. However the CAA alleged that

‘The Claimant has falsely and dishonestly claimed that this tweet was a forgery.’. Quite why it’s dishonest to deny a forgery the CAA never explain.


The CAA has nothing to say about Zionist antisemitism

Jew boy’ is a virulently anti-Semitic term. Out of all the millions of words I have written in the past 3 decades I defy anyone to produce a single example where I have used this term. Whereas ‘Jew boy’ is a favourite term of abuse by Zionists. Aviv Bushinsky, a former advisor to Netanyahu, called the US Ambassador Dan Shapiro ‘a little Jew boy’ when he issued some mild criticisms of Israel. The CAA weren’t interested.


The CAA consistently ‘forget’ that Raed Salah’s deportation was overturned in the British courts – perhaps they think they are in Israel where people are detained without trial for years

vi.        The CAA accused me of anti-Semitism for supporting Raed Salah, a Palestinian Israeli cleric. It was claimed Salah ‘has been excluded from the United Kingdom by the government over concerns about his virulent anti-Semitism.’ What the CAA ‘forgot’ to mention was that the Upper Immigration Tribunal had overturned Raed Salah’s deportation because it was based on a lie, a deliberate mistranslation of a poem of Salahs. But why allow a lie to be disturbed by the truth?


The CAA had nothing to say about Zionist antisemitism such as Netanyahu’s son Yair    classic anti-Semitic cartoon above attacking George Soros

vii.     The CAA alleged that my statement ‘(a) Belief that Jews were responsible for the Holocaust is common to orthodox Jews’ was anti-Semitic. ‘As the Claimant well knows, virtually no Jews, orthodox or otherwise, consider that Jews are responsible for the Holocaust.’ Presumably the late Ovadia Yosef, Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel statement that the holocaust was a punishment for past Jewish sins never happened. It is true his statement was widely condemned but amongst the orthodox it is widely accepted. Why?  Because if you are religious you believe god is responsible for everything.


Gideon Falter accuses me of anti-Semitism for revealing to non-Jews that most Orthodo x Jews hold that the Holocaust was God’s punishment for past sins

Daniel Lasker of Ben Gurion University wrote, in Reflection: The Holocaust as Retributive Justice’that

In the 50 years since the end of the holocaust, theologians of every persuasion have tried to make sense of that terrible event. One explanation, popular especially among the right-wing of Judaism (known as Haredim in Hebrew or ‘Ultra Orthodox’ in English) contends that the Holocaust was visited on the Jewish people as a punishment for their sins. While there is no unanimity as to what the sin was, there is general agreement that ultimately God was the author of the Holocaust, just as He is the author of all history.’ It can be found in a Special Edition of Shofar Vol. 15, No. 3.

I won’t accuse Gideon Falter [GF], Chair of the CAA, of lying. Like most Zionist zealots he knows little or nothing of Jewish or even Zionist history let alone religious debates.

viii.  I was held to be anti-Semitic for saying that

when they came to Israel thousands of Yemeni and other Jews had their babies stolen from them in hospitals.’

The CAA stated that this allegation ‘has been demonstrated to be untrue by 3 independent inquiries in 1967, 1988 and 2001.’ Here you see that the CAA is not only racist towards Palestinians but towards Arab Jews in Israel too.


According to the CAA all mention of the scandal of the theft of Yemenite babies for adoption by White Ashkenazis is ‘antisemitic’

In the CAA’s ‘honest opinion’ there must be a hell of a lot of anti-Semites around, including even at the BBC. There were 3 inquiries in Israel and all of them were whitewashes. It is an ongoing scandal in Israel. [FT, 13.10.16. What happened to the lost Yemenite children of Israel?  Presumably YNet , an Israeli online version of the daily Yediot Aharnot and The Times of Israel  are also anti-Semitic for reporting the same allegations.  As the Guardian reported in January 2018:

Families and activists believe that several thousand children, mostly from poor Yemeni Jewish communities, were systematically abducted by childless Jewish families of east European descent. Other Arab and Balkan Jews have also claimed infants were taken after they arrived in Israel.


Despite being an ‘anti-Semite’ I was targeted by neo-Nazis (perhaps they didn’t realise that I was a closet sympathiser)

ix.        I am alleged to be anti-Semitic for supporting Ken Livingstone’s comment that Hitler supported Zionism. Presumably Zionist historian David Cesarani was also an anti-Semite when he wrote in his book Final Solution (p.96) that

‘The efforts of the Gestapo are oriented to promoting Zionism as much as possible and lending support to its efforts to promote emigration.’

x.           In Para. 9.7. the CAA lies when it claims that I allege that ‘Jews or Zionists were responsible not only for anti-semitism but for the Holocaust.’ I claim neither and of course having made a vague unsubstantiated allegation the CAA provides no proof.

xi.        In para. 9.8 the CAA claims that my blog

is unremittingly hostile towards Jews, Israel and supporters of Israel and is aggressive and offensive in its tone and language. Almost all the posts are on the subject of Israel. None of them ever say anything positive about Israel or Jews.

This is what their ‘honest opinion’ defence amounts to. And the crème de la crème? I am accused of anti-Semitism because:

‘The Claimant attacks Jewish MPs as ‘the MP[s] for Tel Aviv’ including Louise Ellman and Luciana Berger. An honest person could have held the opinion that the Claimant was anti-Semitic from the fact that he accuses Jewish MPs of serving Israel rather than their own constituencies.

I also alleged that Joan Ryan, the non-Jewish Chair of Labour Friends of Israel was the MP for Jerusalem Central. During the years of South Africa Apartheid the MP for Luton North John Carlisle was called the MP for Bloemfontein West. My allegations have nothing to do with the MP’s religion but their political affiliations.

I won’t bore you with the rest but I shall make it available at a later date in order that you have a lesson in lies, deception and evasion.

My Defence

I produced a lengthy witness statement which I shall only precis.

1.             GF alleged in his witness statement ‘Mr Greenstein is seeking to shut down the CAA’. Although I would not shed tears at the CAA’s demise I have never sought to shut them down. I merely wish to give it the same rights as any other political organisation, including the opportunity to pay its taxes. It is fraudulent to hide behind a charity’s tax shield when you are a political group.

2.             Joe Glasman, D’s Head of Political Investigations made a video boasting: ‘The Beast is Slain’ ‘Corbyn has been slaughtered.’ The nice Mr Glasman also tweeted at Sadiq Khan ‘why you nominated an odious antisemite to be leader of the Labour Party’.

3.             The CAA consistently ignores right-wing anti-Semitism. Its only genuine concern is that from the anti-Zionist left. It ignored Boris Johnson’s anti-Semitic comments about Russian Jewish media moguls in his novel ’72 Virgins’.

GF said nothing about Joe Glasman, Sadiq Khan Jacob Rees-Mogg’s retweet of Alice Weidel, the Leader of Germany’s far-Right AfD. AfD’s former leader Frauke Petry’s call for refugee boats to be sunk led to its expulsion from the European Conservative & Reform Group in the European Parliament. The AfD also marched alongside neo-Nazis last year, leading to some of its members being put under formal state surveillance. There is just one mention of Mogg on the CAA’s web site and that is in an article attacking Ken Livingstone! The AfD is a party full of holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis but it also ardently pro-Israel.

GF failed to comment on what Professor Michael Berkowitz, described as ‘an expressly antisemitic sentiment’, again by Mogg, who described 2 Jewish Tories, Oliver Letwin and John Bercow as  “Illuminati who are taking the powers to themselves.” The Illuminati are at the centre of many anti-Semitic theories. The CAA is silent concerning Tory anti-Semitism.

When Tory MEP’s voted to support Viktor Orban, the far-Right anti-Semitic Prime Minister of Hungary, who has waged a campaign against George Soros and praised Admiral Horthy, the pro-Nazi war-time leader of Hungary as an ‘exceptional statesman’ the CAA issued a mild reprimand

Conservative Party allegedly seeks to cover up its MEPs’ Attempt to Thwart Censure of Hungarian Government…

Contrast this with the Guardian’s ‘Tory MEPs voted to protect Orban the authoritarian. This is a stain on Britain.

4.             GF alleged that my decision to join a counter-demonstration, organised by Jewish Voice for Labour [JVL], to a rally organised by the Board of Deputies [BOD] on March 18th 2018 was motivated by anti-Semitism. GF is therefore saying that JVL, a 1,000 strong Jewish organisation, is also anti-Semitic and effectively defining all anti-Zionist Jews as anti-Semitic. Which is what one would expect of an Israeli government organisation.

The Board of Deputies demonstration was called in support of the contention that the Labour Party was anti-Semitic. Not once in its history, not even during the fight against Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts, did the BOD organise a demonstration against fascism or racism. In October 1936 the BOD advised Jews to stay away from confronting the fascists. The only demonstrations that they have ever organised have been in support of Israel.

Attendees at the BOD demonstration included Ian Paisley MP of the anti-Catholic DUP. Another first time attendee at an ‘anti-racist’ demonstration was Norman Tebbit, previously famous for his ‘cricket test’ which said to Britain’s Asian population that they didn’t belong here. If a similar test was applied to British Jews who support Israeli sports teams CAA would presumably consider that anti-Semitic. Or would it?  Many of the demonstrators carried an anti-Semitic poster ‘For the many not the Jew’. I couldn’t possibly have joined such a racist demonstration.

Is opposing Jewish ‘self-determination’ and Comparing Zionism to Nazis anti-Semitic?

5.             GF alleged that I am guilty of ‘Holocaust inversion’ ‘by calling Jews Nazis’ and denying ‘the right of self-determination to Jewish people.’  Of course it is a lie that I call Jews ‘Nazis’. Zionism, being a form of exclusivist ethno-nationalism, is not dissimilar ideologically to Nazism. That is why the obsession over Israel’s ‘demographic problem’, too many Arabs, is common to Zionist political parties.

6.             Even if Jews form a single nation why is it anti-Semitic to oppose self-determination in the form of a state? Is it racist to oppose Scottish or Catalan independence? 

7.             It is a fact that some Jews are neo-Nazis. Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz, of the Hebrew University described the Jewish settlers as Judeo Nazis. The Nazis dehumanised their victims and it was this that led to their extermination. Zionism also dehumanises the Palestinians and indeed all non-Jews. For example:

a.       Rabbi Dov Lior, the Chief Rabbi of the Yesha Settlers’ Council, said that ‘a Jewish fingernail is worth more than a thousand non-Jewish lives.’

b.       Rabbi Yaacov Perrin went one better and said that a Jewish fingernail was worth more than a million non-Jewish lives.

c.        Eli Dahan, Deputy Defence Minister said of the Palestinians that ‘To me, they are like animals, they aren’t human.’ Dahan explained that ‘“A Jew always has a much higher soul than a gentile, even if he is a homosexual,”

d.       In 2016 an Israeli soldier Elor Azaria shot a captive prisoner dead. Because it was filmed he was arrested and served 9 months in prison. A demonstration in his support was held in Tel Aviv where a crowd of thousands chanted ‘Death to the Arabs’. A banner ‘Kill them all’ was held high amongst the demonstrators. Another banner proclaimed ‘My honour is my loyalty’, the slogan of the Nazi SS.

e.             Israeli rabbis have repeatedly compared the Palestinians to the Jews biblical enemies Amalek and the Philistines. As former Israeli Education Minister, Shulamit Aloni wrote, ‘in the settlements the Palestinians are called “Amalek,” and the intention is obvious to everyone’ which is to wipe them out, even the youngest infant.

f.         Military Chief Rabbi Rontzki in 2008 gave soldiers preparing to enter Gaza a booklet implying that all Palestinians are their mortal enemies and that cruelty is sometimes a “good attribute”.

g.        Rabbis Kastiel and Radler, who teach at the Eli pre-military academy told their students that ‘Hitler was right’ although ‘he was on the wrong side, meaning against the Jews’.[1]  Radler also stated that ‘the Holocaust was a divine punishment designed to make the Jewish people leave the diaspora…’ 

GF stated that it is ‘profoundly offensive and historically inaccurate (it is) to invoke the Holocaust and to compare Israeli policy’ to that of the Nazis. But Israeli politicians repeatedly invoke the Holocaust. Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel, described Yasser Arafat of the PLO, during the siege of Beirut in 1982, as ‘Hitler in his bunker.’ Matan Vilnai, a former Deputy Defence Minister, declared that the people of Gaza ‘will bring upon themselves a bigger Shoah…’

If I had said that what Israel was doing was the same as the Nazis then that would clearly be wrong but not anti-Semitic. Until Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of Russia, in June 1941, the Nazi policy towards the Jews had been expulsion not genocide. That is Israeli policy towards the Palestinians.[2]

Professor Zeev Sternhell, a child survivor of a Nazi ghetto, wrote ‘In Israel, Growing Fascism and a Racism Akin to Early Nazism’.  Yair Golan, Deputy Chief of Staff, made the same comparison and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak endorsed his comments.  Daniel Blatman, a Professor of Holocaust Studies compared Israel’s deportation of Black refugees to the West’s refusal to admit Jewish refugees during the Nazi era and developments in Israel to those which led to the Nuremberg Laws. Supreme Court President Esther Hayut invoked the Nazi period while Dr Ofer Cassif, a Hebrew University politics professor compared Israel to Nazi Germany and called the Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked a ‘a filthy neo-Nazi.’ Clearly there are a lot of ‘anti-Semites’ around and most of them appear to be Jewish!

Gideon Falter’s Contempt 4 Academic Freedom

8.             GF’s uses the charge of anti-Semitism to target academics in particular. This is political terrorism. It recalls the riposte of the US Army’s Counsel, Joseph Welch to Joe McCarthy. ‘”Have you no decency, sir?” GF, like McCarthy, is cruel, vindictive and demagogic. Particularly outrageous is the call for universities to dismiss lecturers who defy their dictates.

GF describes as anti-Semitic my statement that:

‘denying the Holocaust is usually anti-Semitic. It is also, especially in the Arab and underdeveloped world a reaction to Israel’s claim that the Holocaust provides it with its legitimation. In other words there is a functional and instrumental Holocaust denial which isn’t motivated by anti-Semitism.

I attempted to explain the causes of the growth in Holocaust denial and its different forms. GF isn’t interested in why Holocaust denial is increasing but in its exploitation. 30 years ago the only people who denied the Holocaust were neo-Nazis. Today there are millions of people who deny the Holocaust because Israel has weaponised it.  Gilbert Achcar, a Jewish lecturer at the School of African and Oriental Studies asked

‘Are all forms of Holocaust denial the same? Should such denial, when it comes from oppressors not be distinguished from denial in the mouths of the oppressed., as the racism of ruling whites is distinguished from that of subjugated blacks.’  [3]

Presumably GF will be writing to SOAS demanding that Achcar be sacked. What Achcar has written pales in comparison with what Israeli historians have written.

The transference of the Holocaust situation on to the Middle East reality… not only created a false sense of the imminent danger of mass destruction.  It also immensely distorted the image of the Holocaust, dwarfing the magnitude of the atrocities committed by the Nazis, trivializing the unique agony of the victims and the survivors and utterly demonizing the Arabs and their leaders.[4] 

Fortunately Professor Zertal is beyond the reach of D. It is ideological book burning.

Charity Commission

9.             GF alleged that I lied when I made a complaint to the Charity Commission. He claimed that:

On a date unknown, the Claimant told the Charity Commission that the CAA was not concerned with fascist groups who were Holocaust deniers.

10.         I said no such thing. What I did say was more nuanced:

The CAA might be expected to concentrate on the far-Right and holocaust deniers if it was genuinely concerned about anti–Semitism. Instead it focuses almost solely on the Labour Party and to a lesser extent on the Lib Dems (my emphasis)

11.         I followed this up with a longer submission of 10th February:

the CAA is not a charitable organisation. It is a political group masquerading as a charity, whose primary purpose is to libel and label critics of Israel and Zionism as anti-Semitic. It devotes most of its time to making false and damaging accusations against anyone who is supportive of the Palestinians and opposed to Zionism. Its web site is dominated by articles and allegations to this effect….

12.         What I was saying was that the D’s concern with the far-Right and Holocaust deniers was minimal not that it had no concerns.

The CAA, Tommy Robinson and the Far-Right   

13.         Not only the leading fascist figure in Britain today, Tommy Robinson, merits just one article on D’s website, and that in passing but that the BNP and Britain First are also only mentioned in passing by CAA but there is nothing on the groups themselves.  The reason for this is because they are pro-Israel.

14.         Other far-Right Zionists who the CAA works with are who was Intelligence Officer for the neo-Nazi Britain First, Paul Besser, Sharon Klaff, a Tommy Robinson supporter who describes herself as a national socialist and Amanda Shitrit, both of whom are supporters of Pegida, a  fascist group originating in Germany.

15.         When in 2017 PSC held a demonstration on the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration it was disrupted by these activists and EDL supporters. In its Report CAA noted gleefully:

‘the marchers did not have the streets to themselves. As they continued through the heart of London, their path was blocked by pro-Israel demonstrators waving Israeli flags and singing Israeli songs, bringing the march to a standstill for a time.’

16.         CAA admitted that ‘Volunteers from our Demonstration and Event Monitoring Unit went into the thick of the protesters to gather evidence.’ CAA worked hand in glove with the counter-demonstrators including Jonathan Hoffman, ex-Vice Chair of the Zionist Federation, who was convicted of public order offences last year. Hoffman works openly works with fascist groups, including the EDL and Tommy Robinson’s supporters.
Mel Gharial (left) and the CAA’s Stephen Silverman (right)


Mel Gharial (left) and the CAA’s Stephen Silverman (right)

Steve Silverman (left with back turned) with Britain First’s Paul Besser (with hat)

17.         At the 2019 Al Quds demonstration which CAA tried to ban, supporters of CAA including their Investigations Officer Steven Silverman, were observed by me and others working closely with far-Right Zionists and supporters of Tommy Robinson. Silverman was photographed in the company of Daniel Thomas, Tommy Robinson’s bodyguard who served 2 years in prison for an attempted kidnapping and Mel Gharial, the link person between far-Right Zionists and Robinson’s supporters such as James Goddard, convicted for harassment of Anna Soubry MP seen with another far-right Zionist Martin Hiser.

18.         The CAA, by its own admission, works closely with far-Right Zionist David Collier who denies even the existence of the Palestinian refugees.


Gideon Falter speaks at Hindu far-Right meeting promising support for their opposition to making caste discrimination unlawful

 Gideon Falter’s links with the Hindu far-right

19.         The CAA has been consistently Islamaphobic since its inception. A Hindu Nationalist meeting called at the House of Commons in 2018 by Bob Blackman MP, a patron of the CAA, was part of a campaign against making caste discrimination unlawful under the 2010 Equality Act.[5] There has been strong resistance by Hindu racists to even acknowledging caste discrimination. GF was an invited speaker. He was reported as

‘assuring the meeting that he and his supporters would do all they could to help eradicate the ‘duty’ on the government to make Caste an aspect of race’.[6]  Blackman called for people  to learn from the way CAA had got the IHRA passed in the Labour Party.

20.         What Blackman meant was that ‘Hinduphobia’ should be used against opponents of Hindu racism and India’s BJP government in the same way as ‘anti-Semitism’ has been weaponised against opponents of Israeli racism. India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, was banned from entering the US until 2014 because of his role in the 2002 anti-Muslim pogroms in Gujarat, where 2,000 Muslims died.

Some of Gideon Falter’s Targets

21.         GF tells how he heard Mr Rowan Laxton, who is currently British High Commissioner to Cameroon, shouting ‘fucking Jews’ at a television monitor in a gym. As a result of this false allegation Mr Laxton was convicted at first instance but cleared at Southwark Crown Court.

Malakha Shwaik

22.         On the basis of allegations against Malakha Shwaik, a student at Exeter University. a number of papers and media, both locally and nationally ran with the CAA’s false allegations.

23.         On 20 February 2017 CAA published a demonic article headlined Expel Malaka Shwaik’. All the black arts were used to portray Malaka as the devil incarnate. CAA accused Shwaik of being ‘a terrorist-supporting antisemite’. There wasn’t a shred of evidence to support such vile abuse.

24.         To most people Malaka speaking at a demonstration called in protest at a spate of anti-Semitic incidents on campus would demonstrate that D’s allegation were false. Instead D, mocked Exeter students ‘They did naturally what comes to them…’  

25.         D acknowledged that Malaka was cleared after an investigation by the Students’ Guild of Exeter University but despite this dishonestly pretended not to know what the allegations were.

26.         Whilst the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Devon Live accepted the findings of the Guild investigation, apologised and retracted their allegations, CAA refused to do so.

27.         The Guild investigation found that none of Malaka’s alleged statements, had been made in comments to her as part of an interview, were anti-Semitic.

‘Zionism ideology is no different than that of Hitler’s.’ To a Palestinian dispossessed from their land this is a reasonable statement. Historian Jacob Boas wrote that

The Zionist ideal had its roots in the same romantic notions of Volk and soil which had proven so enthralling to German society long before Hitler came to power.[7]

Francis Nicosia, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Vermont University, wrote

Zionism was a volkisch Jewish ideology and movement that started from the same philosophical premises as German nationalism…’[8]

Donald Niewyk wrote that the German Zionists were known as‘volkish Jews.’ [9] If CAA is correct all 3 of these historians are anti-Semitic.

28.         Malaka was also alleged to have said:

“If terrorism means protecting and defending my land, I am so proud to be called terrorist. What an honour for the Palestinians!”

The French Resistance were called terrorists by the Nazis. As Lord Carrington, a former Foreign Secretary, observed ‘one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’. This comment, which was made to Malaka, is obviously not anti-Semitic.

29.         If Britain was occupied would it be an act of terrorism to resist the occupation?  Being a racist GF is incapable of understanding the Palestinian perspective.

Rachel Gould

30.         In 2011 Bristol University Professor Rachel Gould wrote Beyond Anti-Semitism’ an article about how the ‘the specter of anti-Semitism’ prevented discussion about the Occupation and how the Holocaust had become ‘an instrument of ideology rather than a means of connecting with the past.’

31.         GF stated that CAA merely made ‘a disciplinary complaint’ to Gould’s employer. In fact they did rather more than that. CAA demanded that Gould be dismissed.

32.         This is not merely chilling it is Orwellian.

33.         GF took exception to Gould’s statement ‘Claiming the Holocaust as a holy event sanctifies the state of Israel and whitewashes its crimes.’ GF claims that ‘Dr Gould’s language fell foul of the IHRA Definition.’ thus proving that the IHRA does indeed restrict public debate and discussion.

34.         There was nothing that Gould wrote that Israeli historians, such as Tom Segev and Idith Zertal haven’t already said. By making a complaint to her employer CAA was attempting to make academics fearful even to discuss certain subjects.

35.         As a letter from Bindmans made clear, D’s complaint about anti-Semitism fails to distinguish between Holocaust denial and ‘criticism of the improper manipulation of the Holocaust’ by the Israeli state.

36.         When Kenneth Stern, the principal drafter of the IHRA, testified to Congress about how the IHRA definition had been abused, he referred to specifically to Gould as perhaps the ‘most egregious’ case where

an off-campus group citing the definition called on a university to conduct an inquiry of a professor … for antisemitism, based on an article she had written years before. The university then conducted the inquiry. And while it ultimately found no basis to discipline the professor, the exercise itself was chilling and McCarthy-like.

37.         The ‘off-campus group’ was the CAA yet despite this GF stated

I do not know who the supposed drafter of the EUMCXR Definition is, or whether they did truly made such comment, or whether it related to CAA’s actions or some other use of the EUMCXR Definition or IHRA Definition.

38.         This is one more lie from GF. On 16th July 2019 RPC the CAA’s solicitors wrote asking me for copies of Stern’s testimony which I sent. It beggars belief that Falter, who has created his own bastardised version of the IHRA doesn’t know who drafted it or who Stern was referring to.

Jackie Walker – Inventing Holocaust Denial

39.         On 7 February 2017 the CAA published ‘Jackie Walker posts text asking whether Hitler can really be blamed for the Holocaust.’ It speculated that Walker’s post ‘leaves open the possibility that he was justified.’ Walker’s post also left out the possibility that the Sun revolves round the Earth! The implication was clear. Ms Walker is a holocaust denier.

40.         The CAA based the above post on a quotation from Nahum Goldmann’s ‘A Jewish Paradox’. Unknown to GF who is a typically ignorant Zionist, Goldmann was quoting from Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben Gurion.

“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true G-d promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our G-d is not theirs. There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”

41.         The quotation said nothing about Hitler’s responsibility for the Holocaust still less anything to suggest that the Holocaust was justified. That was a malicious invention.


Highlighted is the paragraph in Nahum Goldman’s autobiography Jackie Walker was quoting from

42.         GF claimed not to have seen any evidence that Ben Gurion said the above. That is irrelevant. The fact is that Goldman believed he did.

43.         GF admits to a ‘mistake’ whilst claiming to be ‘careful to be factual.’ This was no mistake. It is evidence of D’s methodology, which is to take what someone says, distort it and put the most malevolent interpretation on it in order to label it ‘anti-Semitic’. It is noteworthy that CAA did not apologise for their ‘mistake’.

44.         Despite remembering that it was ‘corrected within minutes” GF could not recall who wrote the post. CAA clearly suffers from a selective memory.

45.         Ben Gurion, despite presiding over the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians was capable of understanding the position of the Arabs. He understood that their opposition to the Israeli state did not stem from anti-Semitism but from the same reasons that indigenous people have always resisted settler-colonialism.


Jack Mendel of Jewish News is another who hasn’t apologised to Jackie Walker

a.       GF alleged that the ‘only person publicising it was Ms Walker herself’, thus blaming the victim. The Canadian Zionist Group ‘Never Again’ shared the post directly from D’s website. Not only was there an extensive discussion underneath but there were 17 shares.

b.       Jack Mendel, Political Correspondent for the Jewish News shared the post from someone else, who also took it directly from the CAA’s site. CAA undoubtedly sent it to their thousands of subscribers too.

46.         GF has perfected the art of labelling anything it dislikes as ‘anti-Semitic’.

The Dishonest Use of the IHRA

47.         GF’s allegations of anti-Semitism are based on his own version of the IHRA which deliberately omits everything before the 11 illustrations. This is dishonest.

48.         GF suggests that if I fall foul of any of their examples of anti-Semitism they meet the test in s.3(4) of the Defamation Act. However honesty is indivisible. All the CAA’s allegations against me are based on a dishonest use of the IHRA.

49.         If the hypothetical reasonable person were to be asked ‘what is anti-Semitism’ their response wouldn’t be the IHRA. It would be something like ‘a person who dislikes or hates Jews’.

50.         The IHRA has no legal standing. The introduction to the IHRA describes it as a ‘non-legally binding definition of antisemitism’ CAA always fails to mention this.

51.         At an international conference on the Working Definition of Anti-Semitism in 2011, Simone Veil described the it as:

a practical guide for identifying incidents, collecting data, and supporting the implementation and enforcement of legislation dealing with antisemitism.

52.         At no stage was it suggested that the WDA should be used to label people as anti-Semites. Kenneth Stern, was clear about this:

(I) worry that some Jewish organizations… are doing so in an inappropriate way, which bastardizes what it was intended to do…. (it) was never meant to provide a framework for eviscerating free speech or academic freedom, let alone labeling anyone an antisemite.[10]

53.         GF purports not to have heard of Stern whom he describes as ‘one of the numerous drafters of the predecessor to the IHRA Definition’. This is disingenuous. Stern is universally acknowledged as the person responsible for drafting the IHRA.

54.         GF goes to considerable effort to avoid mentioning Stern’s name.

55.         D’s misuse of the IHRA, which was described by Stern as ‘chilling and McCarthy-like’. goes to the question of honesty

54.         GF goes to considerable effort to avoid mentioning Stern’s name.

55.         D’s misuse of the IHRA, which was described by Stern as ‘chilling and McCarthy-like’. goes to the question of honesty

56.         I emailed Stern on 21 August 2020 and asked ‘were you just one of many drafters of the IHRA or the principal drafter? His response was:

I was the “lead drafter” of the definition. Many others had a hand, but I drafted the bulk of it and coordinated the process.

57.         I also asked if he agreed that the use of the IHRA to target individuals as anti-Semitic was an abuse? Stern referred me to an extract from his book ‘The Conflict within the conflict.’

The purpose of the definition, of course, was not to label anyone an antisemite but rather to guide data collectors… For example, what should be counted as an antisemitic hate crime? The definition wanted to avoid asking the data collector to look into the actor’s mind, to see if he/she really hated Jews.

58.         Stern wrote in The Guardian of Trump’s Executive Order that

‘The ‘working definition of antisemitism’ was never intended to silence speech, but that’s what Trump’s executive order accomplished… This order is an attack on academic freedom and free speech, and will harm not only pro-Palestinian advocates, but also Jewish students and faculty, and the academy itself.’

59.         In testimony to Congress’s Judiciary Committee on November 7 2017 Stern warned that ‘The definition was not drafted, and was never intended, as a tool to target or chill speech on a college campus.’ Yet this is what CAA has strived to achieve. 

60.         By excluding the actual 38 word definition and the clause saying it is ‘non legally binding’ CAA has created its own definition of ‘anti-Semitism’.


The CAA naturally attacks the mild Palestine Solidarity Campaign as ‘riddled with bigotry’ – a term better applied to the CAA

A Question of Honesty

61.         No right-minded person, especially after the Holocaust, wants to be called an anti-Semite. The accusation of anti-Semitism is designed to intimidate people and make them afraid to speak out against Israel’s human rights abuses and ethnic cleansing.

D has dishonestlyignoredthe following qualifications before the 11 illustrations:

a.   “To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations”

b.       “Manifestations might include…”

c.        “Contemporary examples of antisemitism… could, taking into account the overall context, include…”

62.         The illustrations are not part of the definition. As the IHRA Secretariat has confirmed, the IHRA is only the first 38 words.


This is Zionism – Jews should not live with non-Jews

The Defendant’s hypocrisy over racism

63.         If CAA was genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism it would be at the forefront of opposing other forms of racism. Instead CAA has been prominent in attacking Black Lives Matter [BLM] for ‘anti-Semitism’. CAA claimed the credit for a BBC instruction to staff not to wear BLM symbols. It also boasted of ‘a considerable withdrawal of support from the movement by mainstream society and celebrities…’

64.         If the CAA were antiracist one would expect it to also criticise the racism that is the everyday experience of Arabs in Israel. Yet CAA has never once criticised Israeli racism. Indeed the very mention of such racism is deemed anti-Semitic. Yet if the treatment that Israeli Arabs experienced was meted out to British Jews, CAA would cry ‘anti-Semitism’.


Jewish homes for Jewish people – what if Britain operated a similar scheme and cities refused to rent to Jews – would that be anti-Semitic – Falter has avoided this question

65.         For example in Afula hundreds of Israeli Jews demonstrated against the sale of a single house to an Arab.[11] In Safed Chief Rabbi, Shmuel Eliyahu, issued an edict that Jews must not let property to Arabs. Dozens of other rabbis supported him. Arabs are barred from hundreds of Jewish only communities in Israel. All of this CAA supports.

The Defendant’s Fear Mongering

66.         In 2015 CAA produced a Report which concluded that 45% of British people hold anti-Semitic views.The Institute of Jewish Policy Research [IJPR] said of D’s claim that the majority of British Jews considered antisemitism today an echo of the 1930s that it “verges into irresponsible territory – it is an incendiary finding..’ It also claimed that Report was ‘littered with flaws”. Anshel Pfeffer in Ha’aretz was even blunter.

Jews are represented in Britain in numbers that are many times their proportion of the population in both Houses of Parliament, on the Sunday Times Rich List, in media, academia, professions…. To compare today’s Britain, for all its faults, with the Jews’ situation in 1930s exhibits a disconnect from reality which borders on hysteria.

67.         The Jewish Chronicle’s Survation poll poured scorn on D’s ‘findings’ that over half the British Jewish population were thinking of leaving. Some 88% of British Jews stated that they had no intention of emigrating.

The Defendant’s Anti-Muslim Racism

CAA’s racist caricature of a Muslim male

68.         In 2016 CAA brought out a Report ‘British Muslims and Anti-Semitism’. [12] It spoke of how:

the gradual build up of understanding and friendship between Britain’s Jews and Muslims has been utterly eclipsed by growing antisemitism amongst British Muslims. On every single count, British Muslims were more likely by far than the general British population to hold deeply antisemitic views. It is clear that many British Muslims reserve a special hatred for British Jews…’

69.          This claim is not only a racist generalisation but a deliberate attempt to stir up divisions between Jews and Muslims. As even Dave Rich of the Zionist Community Security Trust observed

This latest poll showed something else that is interesting, and is not specific to Muslims: that people who believe antisemitic things about Jews rarely think of themselves as antisemitic… simply pointing out that somebody has said, written or tweeted something antisemitic is not always a guide to how they consciously feel about Jews.

Such subtlety of analysis is beyond GF. The CAA’s purpose lies in magnifying the level of anti-Semitism as part of the Zionist goal of getting Jews to move to their ‘real home’.[13]

70.         On the cover of the CAA’s Report was a picture of a Black person holding a poster with the slogan ‘Free Gaza – Hitler You Were Right’. I have never seen anything remotely similar on a demonstration. This photograph can only have been intended to infer that such views are the norm amongst Muslims. 4 years later and CAA is still using the same ‘Hitler’ poster:

71.         Equally racist is the CAA’s ‘Profile of British Muslim Anti-Semitism’. If a graphic of a typical Jewish male had been printed then CAA would cry ‘anti-Semitism’.

72.         The CAA is fraudulently manipulating statistical surveys of public opinion, all of which have found that anti-Semitism is greater on the Right than the Left. The IJPR reported:

The political left… appears in these surveys as a more Jewish-friendly, or neutral, segment of the population…. the absence of clear signs of negativity towards Jews on the political left in these surveys appears particularly curious in the current context.

73.         In 2017 even CAA observed that ‘Labour Party supporters are less likely to be antisemitic than other voters’. This ran counter to CAA’s narrative. CAA ‘solved’ this problem in when D’s Antisemitism Barometer 2019 found that

‘Antisemitism on the far-left now exceeds antisemitism on the far-right. The leader of the once fiercely anti-racist Labour Party is now the candidate of choice for anti-Jewish racists’.

74.         How was this stunning turnaround achieved? CAA achieved this by the simple device of changing the questions! Now there were 5 new questions, all about Israel, such as ‘Israel and its supporters are a bad influence on our democracy’

75.         D’s attitude to opinion polls is akin to reverse engineering. You start with the result you want and then devise the questions. D’s methodology is fundamentally dishonest.[14]

D Specialises in Targeting Jewish anti-Zionists

76.         It is not impossible for a Jewish person to be anti-Semitic. Historically most Jewish people saw Zionism as a form of Jewish anti-Semitism. As Francis Nicosia, wrote:

    ‘whereas today non-Jewish criticism of Zionism or the State of Israel are often dismissed as motivated by a deeper anti-Semitism, in Herzl’s day an opposite non-Jewish reaction, one of support for the Zionist idea, might have resulted in a similar reaction.[15]

77.         When Lloyd George’s War Cabinet adopted the Balfour Declaration in 1917 its sole opponent was its only Jewish member, Sir Edwin Montagu who issued a memo titled ‘on the Anti-Semitism of the Present (British) Government’.

It is no more true to say that a Jewish Englishman and a Jewish Moor are of the same nation than it is to say that a Christian Englishman and a Christian Frenchman are of the same nation.

78.         D finds Jewish ‘anti-Semites’ everywhere. Coincidentally all of them are anti-Zionists. Virtually all prominent anti-Zionist Jews have been targeted. Not one Zionist Jew, despite the overlap between the Zionist Right and far-Right, has been named.

a.            Naomi Wimborne-Iddrissi, a senior member of Jewish Voices for Labour [JVL] – CAA has no less than eight articles attacking her as anti-Semitic.

b.           Glyn Secker, the Secretary of JVL has 9 articles attacking him as anti-Semitic.

c.            Moshe Machover, an Israeli Professor at Kings College has 10 articles devoted to him. After Machover spoke at Queen Mary College CAA wrote to the College to ascertain why Professor Machover was allowed to speak and lodge a complaint, and have additionally written to King’s College London and the London School of Economics to ascertain his employment status, and request that disciplinary proceedings be instigated.

d.           The late Gerald Kaufman MP was Father of the House of Commons. He was an MP for 47 years until his death in 2017. He was Chair of the Culture Committee and Shadow Foreign Secretary. Although a Zionist Kaufman was appalled at the treatment of the Palestinians. It was this that made him anathema for extreme Zionists like the CAA.

Before Kaufman’s death CAA made a series of vicious attacks on him. On his death the CAA posted Sir Gerald Kaufman MP’s words have left a rotting stain on our institutions. The sheer nastiness and viciousness of this article says everything that needs to be said about CAA. The death of a Jewish MP who had contributed so much to public life in Britain meant nothing to CAA.

e.            Mike Cushman, Secretary of Free Speech on Israel has only one article attacking him. Clearly he must do better.

f.             Jenny Manson, Chair of JVL has four articles devoted to her including one whose title makes it clear what the D’s agenda is: ‘Why the so-called Jewish Voice for Labour is a sham’

79.         If the CAA were genuinely committed to combating anti-Semitism then it would reach out to all Jews including anti-Zionists. Because D’s purpose is fighting anti-Zionism it can’t do that. That is why it tries to silence even Jewish speakers.


Gideon Falter is Vice-Chair of the JNF which only rents or leases land to Jews – which explains the activities of the CAA

Gideon Falter is Vice-Chair of the Ethnic Cleansing Jewish National Fund 

80.         GF is listed as a trustee and Vice Chair of the Jewish National Fund Charitable Trust registration no. 225910 otherwise known as JNF UK.

81.         The JNF was founded in 1901 to buy and develop land for Zionist settlements. Once purchased no Arabs could work or live on that land again.

82.         The JNF’s land discrimination policies led to the 1929 riots in Palestine. The Report of a Royal Commission into their causes, chaired by Sir John Hope-Simpson found that.

the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extra-territorialised. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future…. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the JNF, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land….

83.         With the establishment of the Israeli State the JNF was incorporated by the 1953 JNF Law and nearly 2 million dunums of confiscated Arab land was given or sold cheaply to it.

84.         The JNF owns 13% of Israel’s land and controls a further 80%. Israeli Arabs are excluded by the JNF from its land. In 2000 in Ka’adan v Israeli Land Administration the High Court ruled that a state body could not refuse to sell JNF land to a non-Jew. The JNF’s reaction was to quote a survey that it had commissioned:

over 70% of the Jewish population in Israel opposes allocating KKL-JNF land to non-Jews, while over 80% prefer the definition of Israel as a Jewish state, rather than as the state of all its citizens

The JNF’s desire for a Jewish rather than a democratic state was enacted into law with the Jewish Nation State Law. Nothing could be clearer. The JNF is an agency of Apartheid and GF is its willing servant.

85.         The Objects of JNF UK on 22 May 2010 were:

The relief of poverty, and the furtherance of any other purposes which are charitable according to English law, within the State of Israel as… Benefit persons of Jewish religion, race or origin.Kadan caused a major debate. The Jewish Chronicle ran a debate titled ‘Is it racist to set aside Israeli land for Jews only?

Imagine if a British Christian National Fund controlling 93% of land refused to allow Jews access to it. Wouldn’t that be anti-Semitic?


[1]           Rabbis say ‘Hitler was right, pluralism the true Holocaust’, https://tinyurl.com/y3a3dql4

[2]           The Origins of Nazi Genocide, Henry Feingold, University of North Carolina Press, 1995.

[3]           Achchar, The Arabs and the Holocaust, p. 261.

[4]           Israel’s Holocaust and the Politics of Nationhood, Cambridge 2005, p.100.

[5]           UK Government will repeal caste law, https://dsnuk.org/2018/08/13/public-consultation-results/

[6]           Amrit Wilson, Milli Gazette, 10 Dec 2019,  UK: Corbyn, the Hindu far-right and Israel’s partisans,

[7]           Jacob Boas, German Jewry’s Search for Renewal in the Hitler Era, D1017.

[8]               Nicosia, Zionism and Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany [ZANG], p. 2.

[9]           Niewyk, Jews in Weimar Germany, p.139.

[10]          https://tinyurl.com/yxgewrfw Kenneth Stern, The Working Definition of Antisemitism – A Reappraisal

[11]          Independent 14.6.18. https://tinyurl.com/yccjn7fr Israeli town residents take to streets in hundreds to protest sale of house to Arabs

[12]          CAA issues report on British Muslims and antisemitismhttps://tinyurl.com/yxqgzqn3   The full report has disappeared from D’s site but a copy can be found here https://tinyurl.com/yymp8bod

[13]          When 11 Jews were killed in the Pittsburgh synagogue killings, the leader of the Israeli Labor Party, Avi Gabbay told American Jews to ‘come home’ to their ‘real home’. https://tinyurl.com/y8y867dg

[14]          My thanks to Alan Maddison and Jamie Stern-Weiner, Brief Response to an ‘Antisemitism’ Hoax, https://jamiesternweiner.wordpress.com/2019/12/03/fake-campaign-against-antisemitism/

[15]          Nicosia, Zionism and Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, p.7. Cambridge University Press 2008.

 

 

 

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share This