Palestine Solidarity Campaign AGM 2020 – an exercise in futility

For the Socialist Action leadership of PSC the last 4 years of fake ‘anti-Semitism’ smears and the defeat of Jeremy Corbyn did not happen

One of the few highlights of last Saturday’s AGM of Palestine Solidarity Campaign was the excellent speech of Omar Barghouti, co-founder of PACBI (the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel) and a co-founder of the BDS movement.

Almost alone Omar denounced the IHRA for branding BDS and solidarity with the Palestinians as anti-Semitic. Fortunately Omar didn’t stay for the rest of the day

Clearly someone hadn’t briefed Omar properly because the first thing he said was that the last time he spoke at PSC’s AGM (2012) the session had been chaired by none other than a certain Jeremy Corbyn! Prior to becoming leader of the Labour Party Corbyn had attended every AGM for a decade. He spoke, chaired and participated in sessions

Omar had obviously not been made aware that Jeremy had become a non-person in PSC since being elected Leader. You could search the Annual Report and Plan 2019 without coming across a single mention of him. Of the General Election defeat in December? No mention either. Indeed the first mention of Corbyn is in Resolution 5 by Brighton and Hove PSC.

It is as if Corbyn had never existed. And this is understandable. Because when you are seeking the approval and attention of Lisa Nandy and Emily Thornberry and others on the right of the Labour Party you have to keep your distance from people like Corbyn and even more so Chris Williamson

The fact that the Zionists were congratulating themselves at how effective their smear campaign had been just proved that it was better to say nothing. With all the ‘logic’ of a child, PSC Executive believes that if you say nothing about something then it doesn’t exist.

When I spoke in the debate (if that’s the right word) on the Annual Report, I remarked that the wonderful thing about PSC Conference is that it operates in a parallel universe. It’s like living in a bubble. However bad things are on the outside of the conference hall, everything is going fantastically and according to plan inside

The repeated attempts of the Board of Deputies and the Zionists to ban our meetings? Doesn’t happen. Zionism has been abolished. Indeed Zionism never existed. You can search the Executive documents and there isn’t a single mention of the dreaded words ‘Zionism’ and ‘Zionist’.

It is as if Israel, for reasons unknown, has chosen to be beastly to the Palestinians. Perhaps the weather in that part of the world makes people horrible. What happens to the Palestinians has nothing to do with a Zionist movement, which doesn’t exist. There is no logic behind the dispossession of the Palestinians. Unsurprisingly some people then conclude that it’s because of something inherent in ‘Jewishness’

After all Israel is a Jewish state and nothing PSC has ever said contradicts that fact or brings into question Israel’s self-description.

Below I include a redacted transcript of an email conversation I had after the AGM with someone who attended it. As you can see, he didn’t seem to get the difference between ‘Jews’ and ‘Zionists’. This email correspondence demonstrates one thing – the appalling level of political consciousness in PSC.

PSC Executive and those who control it have deliberately discouraged any form of political education within PSC. I cannot remember, within living memory, PSC nationally ever sponsoring a tour by an Israeli or Jewish anti-Zionist. There is no attempt to provide any explanation for what is happening in Palestine bar the crudest nationalist formulations.

There is no analysis of the Zionist movement in Britain and who it is or what it does. Not once has PSC called out the Board of Deputies for what they are, a bunch of racists reactionaries whose primary concerns are support for Israel

When I say ‘those who control it’ I am referring to the subterranean quasi Stalinist group Socialist Action and the other offshoots of the long gone International Marxist Group, such as the Communist League. SA are unique on the left in having virtually no open or public presence, no paper, just a web site and an occasional email list

Yet despite this they managed to insert themselves, firstly into the inner circles of Ken Livingstone when he was at the GLC and then into Corbyn’s inner circle. They are a group whose chief theoretician, John Ross, seriously believes that the sweatshops of Shenzin and the concentration camps for one million Uighurs are examples of socialism rather than an authoritarian form of state directed capitalism.

Although there was no mention of the defeat of Corbyn there is little doubt that the effects of that defeat took their toll. The conference was without doubt more right-wing than last year. Whereas last year, when I stood for Secretary against SA’s Ben Soffa I obtained nearly 40% of the vote, this year I obtained 22%

Both motions on the IHRA Definition of ‘Anti-Semitism’ went down to defeat. It is crystal clear that PSC Executive/Socialist Action have accepted defeat on the issue. This was summed up by Jonathan Rosenhead of Jewish Voice for Labour who said we have to accept defeat and move on. Whilst this might make some tactical sense in terms of the 150 Councils that have adopted the IHRA, at least temporarily, it makes no sense more generally.

This defeatism is wholly counterproductive. The IHRA is the main weapon, not only of the Zionists, but the ruling class in its attempt to outlaw free speech on Palestine and Zionism. It is about British foreign policy in the Middle East

The IHRA is being used by Trump to tar BDS with the label of ‘anti-Semitism’ in the United States and in Germany by the Bundestag. The fact that the neo-Nazis in the Bundestag wanted to go even further than the CDU/SPD/Greens and make BDS illegal should have provided PSC with ammunition to counter those who alleged ‘anti-Semitism’. The neo-Nazi AfD declared that they were ‘‘Israel’s one true friend in parliament’

The fact is that the Palestine solidarity movement simply cannot afford to accept defeat on the IHRA and move on. What it means is accepting decisions such as that of Tower Hamlets Mayor, New Labour’s John Biggs, on Holocaust Memorial Day to ban a meeting by Stand Up To Racism because it included Glynn Secker, National Secretary of JVL

It is disgraceful that SUTR/SWP disinvited Glynn as a result of the Board of Deputies intervention thus accepting that the Zionists can dictate who our speakers are allowed to be. Groups like the SWP claim to be ‘revolutionary’ and yet they surrender without a whimper.

Ironically PSC Executive and local Tower Hamlet’s activist Sybil Cock was boasting of their work in Tower Hamlets. Last year the Council’s Mayor refused to allow the Altab Ali park, named after a victim of racists, as a rallying point for the Big Ride for Palestine

What did PSC demand? They asked the Council, not to withdraw support for the IHRA but to add a free speech clause to the policy!

It’s as if you were to ask the BNP to sign a declaration that they won’t discriminate against anyone! The whole point of the IHRA is that it is intended to prevent free speech. Adding a free speech clause is meaningless verbiage as the Labour Party has shown that a similar ‘free speech’ clause is meaningless.

As I tried to stress, although the battle against the IHRA has been lost for the time being in local government it is very much a live issue in universities. To abandon the fight against it, and I hope that Jonathan Rosenhead’s views don’t represent JVL, is irresponsible and political cowardice.

Some universities have adopted the definition (UCL) and some haven’t (SOAS, Bristol). Given that the lecturers union UCU is the only trade union to oppose the IHRA there is a good basis for an alliance amongst students and academics in opposition to the IHRA. I suggested that PSC call a demonstration on the campuses of any university which adopts the IHRA and that in the meantime it sets in train a campaign with academics and students.

But for PSC/Socialist Action the IHRA is no longer a priority. They are perfectly happy to allow the Zionists (a banned word in PSC) to use this weapon unchallenged.

The other curious incident was concerning trade union support for the IHRA. Their international officer, in fact there are 3, twice denied to PSC AGM my assertion that Unite supports the IHRA. Yet the Unite branch that I was representing had been told clearly and unequivocally that Unite has endorsed the IHRA. On 27^th August 2019 I received the following from the General Secretary, Len McLuskey:

With regards to IHRA, Unite’s position is to support the Labour Party’s stance on this.

I don’t see how much clearer Len could have been.

McCluskey, Len
Tue, 27 Aug 2019, 16:34

Dear Tony

We have met with JVL and Gail Cartmail, Assistant General Secretary, acts on behalf of myself and Unite in terms of any liaising/involvement; so my “promise” has been honoured, long ago.

With regards to IHRA, Unite’s position is to support the Labour Party’s stance on this.

Please feel free to contact Gail if you have any further issues.

Len
General Secretary
Unite the Union / Unite House / 128 Theobald’s Road / Holborn / London WC1X 8TN

The UNISON delegate also stated that UNISON didn’t support the IHRA which is an outright lie. My branch was informed months ago that the Executive did support it. Dave Prentis was fawning around Adam Langleben of the JLM when he lost his council seat in 2018.

What is clear is that all the trade union representatives on Labour’s National Executive supported the IHRA. What this is really about is that PSC Executive are refusing to challenge the trade union leaders on the issue of the IHRA, despite Stan Keable having been sacked by Hammersmith & Fulham Council for exercising his right to free speech. This too is in line with Socialist Action’s ‘strategy’ of sweet talking rather than politically challenging the trade union bureaucracy

Essentially the trade union leaders, craving respectability, sought to solve the ‘anti-Semitism crisis’ by caving in to every demand of the Zionist Board of Deputies. They supported the IHRA despite the fact that it impinges on the rights of their own members. They supported it despite their own pro-Palestinian policy including support of BDS, which the IHRA deems ‘anti-Semitic’.

At the PSC trade union conference last October I was asked to leave the conference because I was handing out leaflets on the IHRA. Ben Jamal, the Director of PSC, wrote to Brighton and Hove PSC refusing to incorporate the IHRA as part of the agenda of the conference.

The next major campaign, and an emergency motion to that effect was passed, commits PSC to resisting the new Tory Government proposals to make BDS illegal in the public and statutory sector. The withdrawal of investments by Councils, Pension Funds, Universities or any public body from companies because they want to boycott Israel will be illegal.

My fear is that any campaign that PSC are involved in is destined to be a failure. That much was made clear when it was announced that PSC had taken part in a meeting of 35 unnamed organisations already. The theme Ben Soffa announced would be the threat to freedom of speech.

I made the point that the main thrust of our opposition to the government proposals is not on the grounds of free speech (it is difficult to see how it prevents free speech except in the American sense) but on the threat to international solidarity. Not only would the government proposals have made the Boycott of South Africa illegal (as Margaret Thatcher did at the time) but it would also have made the Jewish Boycott of Nazi Germany illegal. This is the best answer to the Zionist charge of ‘anti-Semitism’.

Boycott has an honourable history in Britain from the Boycott of Slave Grown Sugar, to the Boycott of English Land Agents and Rackateers in Ireland (hence the name) to the Jewish Boycott of Nazi Germany and the Boycott of South Africa. The Tories, who are perfectly happy to work with racist and repressive regimes are, understandably concerned at any threat to profitability.

Such a campaign offers great potential to actually legitimise BDS and put it on the map but with the dead hand of PSC behind it, it is difficult to see how any campaign led by PSC will be a success.

In 1933 all over the world Jews and others began a massive boycott of Nazi Germany. Without doubt it made the Nazis worried as Germany was an export driven economy and the Boycott was hitting them hard. For June 1933 exports were down by 68% compared to May. For the first 6 months of 1933 exports were down by 51%, which given the Boycott didn’t kick in till late March was remarkable. There was a real chance the Nazi regime could be overthrown but it was this that worried them. The accession of the Nazis had been seen by the Zionist leaders as a ‘great opportunity’ for the Zionist movement in Ben Gurion’s words.

The Zionists therefore refused to support the Boycott and instead negotiated a trade agreement, Ha’avara with the Nazis, whose purpose was to destroy the Boycott, which it did. This is the basis of the accusation that Zionism collaborated with the Nazis.

The Zionists are consistent in their opposition to Boycott (unless it’s Iran!). However many people won’t see it that way. Ben Soffa’s fatuous point that the Boycott of Nazi Germany was not about Council investment is wrong. In the ‘30’s the demand was that everyone, including public institutions, should refrain from buying German goods. The parallels with Israel could not be more exact.

There was one surprise in the elections. The long standing but otherwise unknown Campaigns Officer Steve Bell was ousted by BDS activist Adie Mormech. I suspect that Adie will either be incorporated into the overall culture or left stranded.

A motion on opposition to Zionism by ultra Maoists wasn’t taken because the proposer wasn’t present, which is a pity, since it would have made an interesting debate!

The most absurd motion that I’ve ever read, which was in the end remitted to the Executive, along with an amendment of mine which deleted most of the resolution, came from Camden PSC and Sabby Sagall. It seriously proposed adopting the definition of anti-Semitism from the Zionist thug group otherwise known as the Community Security Trust.

I also proposed a resolution on opposition to 2 States. It should be clear today with Israel about to annex much of the West Bank, having been given the green light by Trump, that the two state solution is dead (if it has ever been alive). The response from PSC Executive was that it is for the Palestinians not us to decide.

What this means in practice is hiding PSC’s tacit support for 2 States using the Palestinians as their firewall. It is of course a pretext since the Palestinians aren’t in a position to decide anything. In any case it is irrelevant.

It is absolutely clear that Palestinian opinion has swung decisively against 2 States. Only the Quisling administration of Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah still supports (in theory anyway) 2 states. The job of a solidarity organisation is different from that of a national liberation movement (which unfortunately the Palestinians do not posses).

Our job as a solidarity organisation is to persuade people and organisations to support the Palestinians and oppose Zionism. The first question people ask is what do we want, what is the ideal solution, what are we aiming for.

Given a situation where there is today one Greater Israel the demand for one state, where everyone has equal political, religious and civil rights, is not only obvious to anyone but PSC but it shows that the Zionists’ main objection is to a democratic, non-racist state. However PSC is more concerned with accommodating the trade union leaders who wish to both support the Palestinians and not fall out with the Zionists.

When I introduced the resolution I stressed that 2 States is an Apartheid solution. Can anyone imagine the Anti-Apartheid Movement 30 years ago supporting 2 states – one for Whites and one for Blacks ? Yet that is effectively the position of PSC. It is no wonder that it rejects any mention of the word ‘Zionism’ because it might be forced to conclude that the Israeli state is an illegitimate state. Instead support for the two state solution means that PSC can call Israel ‘apartheid’ without specifying what that means in terms of the replacement (if any) for the Zionist state.

As the title of this piece indicates, PSC AGM is an exercise in futility. It is pointless because there is no serious debate on the Annual Report and Plan which are nodded through. There is no mechanism for amending them. PSC Executive is the nearest to a self-perpetuating oligarchy. Because the leadership wants to keep their control over PSC they want an organisation which says nothing politically and has a sterile political culture.

PSC is intellectually bankrupt. It takes no part in the many debates over Palestine and Zionism that have occurred over the years because the group which control it, Socialist Action, also have nothing to say on Palestine apart from mindless slogans.

The question which I asked the AGM remains unanswered namely what is the purpose of PSC? Presumably not merely to educate and inform British people and win the labour movement to its side but to translate that support into political effectiveness. Yet today there isn’t one MP, bar Corbyn himself, who is a patron of PSC. There are no MPs willing to support BDS openly. The one MP who was prepared to stand up and oppose Zionism, Chris Williamson, was abandoned and received no support from PSC. And Baroness Jenny Tonge was abandoned at last year’s conference when she came under attack from the ‘antisemitism’ smear campaign.

When PSC decided to abstain from the ‘anti-Semitism’ witch hunt and to say nothing about the attacks of the Zionists on Corbyn they demonstrated how futile and purposeless is the organisation. Corbyn was the most pro-Palestinian leader any major political party has ever had. It was inevitable that he would be the victim of a Zionist ambush. It was the duty of PSC to speak out against the Zionist dirty tricks brigade. Instead they said nothing and in a letter to Brighton and Hove PSC, Ben Jamal stated that it had been decided not to give support for individual ‘disciplinary cases’.

The expulsions of Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and myself were not disciplinary but political. The same goes for the suspension and expulsion of hundreds of others. Even when Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley was suspended for having written things offensive to the Jewish Labour Movement, PSC Executive and their officers said nothing, not even about the spiteful and vindictive decision to deny him a press pass.

If I was in the Zionist Federation I would go down on my hands and knees every day and give thank for the fact that Palestine Solidarity Campaign are so supine and timid. If I was of a conspiratorial bent….

Tony Greenstein

An Exchange of Emails with an Antisemitic Member of PSC

Below is an example of how the low level of political consciousness fostered by PSC leads to anti-Semitism. If it is not Zionism and settler colonialism that is to blame for the plight of the Palestinians then it must be ‘the Jews’. This is the line of Gilad Atzmon, the well known anti-Semite. Michael Rabb contacted me to explain how he had supported my amendment ‘to stand up to the Jews’ even though I had not moved any such amendment!

Suffice to say my patient attempts to explain the difference between Jews and Zionists did not make an impression. Michael was quite flattered when I said that I intended to quote him on a blog. He responded that no one had ever quoted him before. I was tempted to say that I wasn’t surprised!

Michael also copied for my approval a clearly anti-Semitic cartoon of a ‘typical Jew’. It’s the kind of cartoon (of Muslims) that the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism are well known for.

Like Atzmon Michael ended up concluding that I was a ‘Zionist’!

Dear Tony,
I was on the other side of the aisle yesterday but I waved my red voting card in support of your amendment to stand up to the Jews and this awful IHRA campaign to smear the struggle for free Palestine as anti-semitic.

We have actually met (last February, attended some kind of show with XXX).

Anyway would like to offer my support for any actions or campaigns you are generating to confront this present day Jewish McCarthyism. Speaking only for myself as an old bald homeless amurikan “anti-semite”, we must stand up to this campaign of intimidation.
I attach a cartoon I drew a couple of years ago and an article I just wrote about fighting back.
in solidarity, End Israel, Free Palestine,
Michael

Fight Back

Michael Rabb, London, January 22, 20

Last night I attended a meeting at SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies) at London University in Bloomsbury. The meeting was sponsored by the SOAS Palestinian Society and was titled ‘BDS, Boris and IHRA’s Attack on Free Speech’. Asa Winstanley of Electronic Intifada and Neve Gordon of Queen Mary University of London were the panelists.

To start Asa sketched the current state of the BDS campaign and where it may go in the future. Neve delved into the politics of the recent election and what a threat the IHRA’s (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of anti-semitism is to free speech and to the BDS movement and to the Palestine liberation struggle.

Neve made the basic point that the accusation of “antisemitism” used by Israel to attack the BDS was a very real threat to the movement for free Palestine. He called zionism a ‘genius’ movement and said the BDS movement had been set back by the “anti-semitic strategy” used by Israel and it’s supporters and is in trouble. He cited the Labour Party’s catastrophic loss as an example of how effective the smear of anti-semitism was chilling debate and stopping criticism of Israel. He called on the movement and particularly young people to develop an effective response. He said it was a grave mistake to underestimate one’s opponent.

There were several proposals from the attendees as to how to cope with Israel’s and the Jews’ anti-semitism accusation strategy. They included forming alliances and coalitions with other causes and activist groups and seeking like-minded Israelis as cohorts in the struggle.

Finally towards the end of the discussion, I offered an ‘American’ point of view.

The current politics of anti-semitism are similar to the red scare and McCarthyism intimidation in the USA in the 1950s. McCarthy deemed himself the high priest of what was American, and communism was un-American. Blacklists and ostracism flourished and guilt by association ruled the day. The progressive-socialist movement in America was effectively shut down. You can’t even say the word communism in the USA.

The lesson learned from the political dialogue of the 50s is that it does no good to shrink away and be intimidated by the bullying and demagogic bigotry.

Compliance with and appeasement of the zionists is fundamentally dishonest. Signing the IHRA definition of anti-semitism which includes criticism of Israel and zionism as “anti-semitism” betrays the struggle for free Palestine. It’s dishonest because it validates the false premise that criticism of a state or a people is racist and cannot be based on objective moral and legal reasons.

Anti-semitism like all racism is a form of bigotry or hatred that belittles and disparages a group of people because of some innate trait or intrinsic characteristic. But BDS doesn’t attack Israel or Jews because of who they are. BDS attacks Israel because of what it is doing. This is precisely why the anti-semitism accusation is false. It is not racist or anti-semitic to demand that criminals stop doing the crime of genocide.

As with the smear of “communism” in the USA, the false accusation of anti-semitism is relentless.

Trying to appease or pacify racism only encourages it.

What must be recognized in the struggle for free Palestine is that this is fundamentally a war of Jews against the Palestinians. Zionism is the Jewish project to build a Jew sate in Palestine using crimes against humanity to accomplish its purpose: genocide, ethnic cleansing and apartheid.

BDS is just one strategy the Palestinians are using in their struggle against the Jews — but importantly BDS announces it’s intention: “end the occupation of ALL Arab lands.” This is not just a throw away term. It is requisite to Palestinian freedom. This does not mean ethnically cleansing Jews from Palestine, but it necessarily means dismantling the Jewish state and regime change.

I made the observation that in standing up to this zionist IHRA construct of anti-semitism, that we had to be willing to say “End Israel”. And that being explicitly anti-zionist was critically part of the struggle for free Palestine. You can’t be shy about what the struggle and the BDS movement are really about. If we are; if we try to appease the zionists and accept the definition of anti-semitism as criticism of Israel, we are doomed to defeat.

And here’s the logical extension and key to fighting back against this dishonest anti-semitism attack: you must acknowledge and be honest that in announcing the objective of ending the Jewish state, you recognize that the struggle is fundamentally posed against the Jews. Yes, ‘the Jews’, the vast majority of whom are zionist and support Israel and it’s continued existence. Anti-Jew in this context and by the INRA (International Nakba Remembrance Alliance) definition is not anti-semitic! It simply recognizes who is doing the genocide against the people of Palestine.

Michael

Tony Greenstein

26 Jan 2020, 17:46 (3 days ago)

Hi Michael,
Sorry we didn’t chat. You talk about ‘stand(ing) up to the Jews.’ I am Jewish. Boris Johnson and Eric Pickles, to name but 2 aren’t Jewish. It is really important not to pose the issues as one’s of a conflict between religious groups. Zionists are both Jewish and non-Jewish and although the Zionists claim to speak on behalf of all Jews these claims should not be accepted.
Likewise your reference to ‘ confront(ing) this present day Jewish McCarthyism’. This McCarthyism is unfortunately coming from a broad swathe of the Right in this country who are shamelessly using Jews as a stick to beat supporters of Palestine.
Your cartoon is of a typical Jew which poses the issues in exactly the wrong way. This is a problem of PSC avoiding the use of the term ‘Zionist’ but it is important not to drive Jews into the arms of the Zionists or accept their claims.
Thanks for supporting my amendment but I hope you will realise that we need to be theoretically and politically clear against our opponents.

Michael Rabb

26 Jan 2020, 20:54 (3 days ago)
Dear Tony,
yes I know you are a Jew. as I understand about half the PSC are. yes there a Jews who stand up to ‘the Jews’ . but (and I know you know this) the vast (90% ?) of Jews worldwide are zionist. The Jews support Israel, the Jewish state that is doing the genocide. I am not posing the issue as a conflict between or among religious groups. You cited the Board of Deputies yesterday in arguing that we had to fight back !! I know you know this. it is baffling as to why you patronize me with this reductionist response to my posit that we must confront the Jews in this struggle against the IHRA definition and campaign against the free Palestine movement. As Omar said yesterday there’s nothing Jewish about genocide. but that doesn’t change the fact that Jews are doing genocide.

Likewise, it is Jewish McCarthyism. In the USA the attack is organized and led by AIPAC and the ADL . Here I think it’s the CAA (which I think you have some first hand experience with). Of course the right wing racists and christian zionists, and Islamophobes have joined in but that does not change the the fact that this strategy of using anti-semtism grew from the Israel’s and the Jews’ zionist campaign to counter BDS.

I thought we were on the same wave length in fighting back against this awful Jew-led McCarthyesque campaign to shutdown the BDS movement.
I guessed wrong.
Michael

Tony Greenstein

26 Jan 2020, 22:04 (3 days ago)
Dear Michael

I don’t think half PSC are Jewish. Maybe around 10%. You are posing it as ‘standing up to the Jews’ but it isn’t a Jewish v non-Jewish fight and its wrong to pose it in such a fashion. Apart from anything else it doesn’t help people understand who we are fighting. It is irrelevant if the vast majority of Jews worldwide are Zionists, though it’s not 90%. The last time opinion was tested 59% of British Jews said they were Zionists. The reason its wrong is that it obscures who the fight is really against. And that is imperialism the British state etc.

Some of the most vociferous Zionists aren’t Jewish – from Trump to Eric Pickles to Johnson, John Mann etc. This is about imperialism and western interests not an ethnic identity. It is therefore completel wrong to describe it as an ‘awful Jew-led McCarthyesque campaign’ because its not true. Boris Johnson’s government isn’t ‘Jew-led’. It is a racist pro-imperialist government.

The attack on BDS is by western governments who use Jews as the pretext.

Hence in West Germany the neo-Nazi AfD are the most hostile to BDS.
It is irrelevant if Jews are doing the genocide. It is not because they are Jews but because they are settler colonialists which is why Omar said there is nothing Jewish about genocide. The Indian army in Kashmir is not Jewish and the fact that it is Hindu is equally irrelevant.

I hope I have made my position explicable because it is a very important point and the comments you made would be used against us if the Zionists ever discovered them

tony

Michael Rabb

27 Jan 2020, 10:14 (2 days ago)

wow ! “It is irrelevant if Jews are doing the genocide.”
please check your Jewishness.
Michael Rabb

27 Jan 2020, 17:59 (2 days ago)

and you need to think about who is doing the genocide and how to stop it.

it’s the Jews.

Tony Greenstein
27 Jan 2020, 17:52 (2 days ago)

What all the Jews? Would it be different if they were Budhists? There are actually Israeli Jews who are opposed to what is happening. A small minority but still a minority. What is equally important is that those who support them include the largest Zionist organisation in the USA, Christians United 4 Israel, which is 1.4 million strong and the Christian Zionist lobby.

You need to stop thinking in terms of Jews and non-Jews and in terms of social and political forces such as imperialism.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 18:26 Tony Greenstein <[email protected]> wrote:

do you have problems with your eyesight? Specsavers do quite good deals these days.

It’s not ‘the Jews’ but the Israeli state which calls itself a Jewish state which carries out the massacres. When pogroms were carried out against Catholics in Northern Ireland by Protestants would you have said it was ‘the Protestants’ without any qualification? Northern Ireland, Ulster, called itself a Protestant State and was based on Protestant supremacy. Are all Protestants thereby tarred with the same brush or do you qualify it by saying Northern Irish Protestants?

I realise that you have difficulty understanding that sometimes labels are deliberately designed to mislead but the claim that the attacks on Palestinians is ‘Jewish’ reinforces Israel’s claim to be a Jewish state representing all Jews. You don’t actually undermine what they are doing but reinforce it.

The logic, in so far as there is any, of what you are saying is that there should be a war against ‘the Jews’. I suspect that such idiocy is exactly what the Zionists desire people to advocate and plays into the hands of people like John Mann who say that any support for the Palestinians is ‘antisemitic’
tony

Michael Rabb
Sun, 26 Jan, 16:15 (3 days ago)
But Auschwitz and the extermination? I haven’t heard any rational person argue that Israel is doing the same thing to Palestinians. — Phil Weiss
Hey Phil,have you heard of the Nakba ? Genocide is a crime no matter Jews doing it !!check it out .
Michael

Michael,
Phil Weiss’s article is a good one. Israel is engaged in what Ilan Pappe calls ‘incremental genocide’ but no one is claiming that they are exterminating a whole people as the Nazis tried.
The Nakba was primarily a case of ethnic cleansing not genocide, though it did include a number of serious massacres. My previous point applies!

tony

Michael Rabb
Sun, 26 Jan, 18:16 (3 days ago)

Tony,
please refer to the UN convention on genocide (i included) . Incremental or not it’s still genocide. you (phil) are incorrect. btw what the Nazis did in ww2 is roughly equivalent to what the Jews have done (and are doing) based on % population ‘exterminated’.

Michael

tony
clear enough: the dreaded zionist epithet comes out … “anti-semitism”. You show your true allegiance, zionist Tony.

please relax with the passive aggressive zionist responses … it is you who are obviously troubled with your own identity and can’t accept that ‘the Jews’ are doing the crime of genocide to the people of Palestine. And perhaps this is why you seem to have some trouble understanding what i am saying.

The first thing that must happen in stopping a crime in progress is identifying the criminal. But you cannot do that: you adopt some tortured logic that it doesn’t matter who is doing the genocide. Somehow to call out the criminal actors is racist.

It is the racist Jew state instituted by it’s own law to privilege the 6 million Jews who are carrying out the genocide against the people of Palestine. In then same way that the German people supported the Nazis in WW2, Jews world wide have been supporting Israel. It is not a racist thing to say the Turks did it to the Armenians, or the Hutus did it the Tutsis. and it’s not racist to call out what Jews have been doing to the Palestinians for the last 100 years.

What the Jews are doing to the Palestinians is genocide. This must be recognized and confronted.

Again, I do not attack the Jews for their racial identity. I accuse Jews of perpetrating the crime of genocide. Like Omar Barghouti said there is nothing Jewish about genocide, ethnic cleansing nor apartheid. But the Jews in Israel supported by millions of Jews worldwide are doing all three.

And you are ‘zionist’: you support the survival of Israel. You will not acknowledge the objective of the BDS for Israel to end the occupation of all Arab lands. This means the ‘state’ Israel must be dismantled, there must be regime change. You cannot say the words “End Israel”. Why not?

I am happy to be quoted. (I don’t think anyone has ever bothered to ‘quote’ me before.) Will this be in the vein of appeasing the Jewish McCarthyesque CAA who are leading the charge against BDS as anti-semitism? or will you be delivering an apology to the Board of Deputies?oh, and as long as your quoting me feel free to publish my cartoon highlighting Jew McCarthyism.
again, nothing inherently Jewish about McCarthyism, but Jews are definitely doing it.

we (even if we’re Jews) have to stand up to it!!

not that there is any hope of having a legitimate conversation with you given your Jewish zealotry, and especially now that you have defaulted into patronizing sarcasm,

but one last attempt:

there are 6 million Jews in the only ‘democracy’ in the middle east who are doing genocide against the Palestinians. We (yes even Jews) need to organize to make them stop. This includes actions, strategies etc. away from the front lines to counter the very effective Jewish lobby, diaspora, etc. e.g., the IHRA /CAA/AIPAC ETC. Jewish McCarthyism.

here’s a plan:

Step 1: stop it
Step 2: dialogue — truth and reconciliation forum
Step 3: apology
Step 4: new state based on equality
Step 5: reparations

the first step (see above and please go to spec savers cause you haven’t noticed this even though I put it to you several times) is STOP IT.

it’s not complicated: end the Jew state.
can you even say those words?
if not you are a zionist.
good luck, Tony. I know it is so tough dealing with the cognitive dissonance.

Michael

the cognitive dissonance is all yours. You oppose the Israeli state, a Jewish (not Jew) state from a Palestinian perspective but you do so from a racist understanding.

You also have some difficulty in comprehending what I am saying. I don’t know whether its cognitive dissonance or something more serious.

For the last time – it is irrelevant who the perpetrators in Israel are and what they call themselves. Primo Levi, the Auschwitz survivor, described the Palestinians as Israel’s Jews. I guess you won’t understand that narrative.

Racial supremacy, given the right set of circumstances, can be the role of any group – Jewish, Black, White, Chinese etc. The markers, the badge or identity of the perpetrators are quite irrelevant to what they are doing.

Attacking them for their ethnic or racial identity is meaningless. Racism isn’t a response to racism.

I am well aware of the population of Israel and I’m surprised that you find it difficult to work out whether I’m a Zionist or not. Fortunately the Zionists have no such difficulty.

I think those of us who are Jewish anti-Zionists do all we can to oppose Zionism which is why I find your antisemitism counter-productive. Is that clear enough?

I will be writing and blogging about the PSC AGM and I trust that you have no problem with me quoting your pearls of wisdom?