The IHRA’s Sole Purpose is to Justify Racism, Ethnic Cleansing & Genocide

To Register for the Seminar Please Click Here

https://tinyurl.com/4p44cym9

Holocaust Survivor, Stephen Kapos, Tells Owen Jones: Israel Is Committing Genocide

This Friday we will be holding a webinar on the IHRA, the misdefinition of anti-Semitism which has been used to chill free speech on Palestine and is now being used to justify the genocide in Gaza.

Its lead drafter, American academic Kenneth Stern testified to Congress in November 2017 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 was what happened, as Stern admits. He then wrote an article that accused rightwing Jews of ‘weaponizing it’,

Let us not forget the ‘two nice Jewish boys‘ laughing & joking about exterminating Palestinians in Gaza like the little Nazis they are. The British media and establishment pretend this does not happen, Mark Rowley the racist Commissioner of the Met say Nazi comparisons are offensive, yet this podcast is Israel’s oldest and most popular

The IHRA has been used on numerous occasions to restrict or close down free speech on Palestine. That was why Gavin Williamson, the former toilet salesman who became Education Secretary, forced universities to adopt the definition under threat of losing their funding. Williamson was an early version of Trump and equally ignorant.

The good thing about the IHRA, at least if you are an anti-Semite, is that it has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. You can say virtually anything you want about Jews as long as you don’t mention Israel or Zionism.

According to the ADL’s Jonathan Greenblatt, Elon Musk’s Hitler Salute was an ‘Awkward Gesture in a Moment of Enthusiasm’

You can even give a Hitler salute, safe in the knowledge that the premiere Zionist organisation in the United States, the Anti-Defamation League, will dismiss it as an ‘awkward gesture’.  You can tell your followers, as the founder of the Azov Battalion, Andriy Biletsky did, that ‘the historic mission of our nation’ to

“lead the white races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led untermenschen.”

knowing that the ADL will have your back.

The Anti-Defamation League masquerades as an anti-racist organisation but its only read concern is Defending Israel – Its Takes US Police to Israel for Training, is Hostile to Black Lives Matter and during apartheid in South Africa acted as a spy on the anti-apartheid movement for the regime

In an interview with Andrew Srulevitch, ADL Director of European Affairs, Professor David Fishman exonerated the Azov Brigade and its support for the Ukrainian Insurgent Army [UPA] and its leader Stepan Bandera, who were responsible for the slaughter of 300,000 Jews and Poles. Fishman said:

UPA attacks were so ferocious that Jews sought the protection of the German army. ‘The Banderite bands and the local nationalists raided every night, decimating the Jews,” a survivor testified in 1948.

Jews sheltered in the camps where Germans were stationed, fearing an attack by Banderites. Some German soldiers were brought to protect the camps and thereby also the Jews.

ADL carried the interview with Fishman on its website and endorsed it in its newsletter.

The term ‘anti-Semitism’ has become meaningless other than as a verbal insult. For example Netanyahu called the International Criminal Court decision to investigate him for war crimes ‘pure anti-Semitism’. Presumably Israeli politicians responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians, including children, are entitled to immunity from the Genocide Convention because they are Israeli/Jewish? 

As I wrote in Zionism During the Holocaust, Zionism has never had any problems with genuine anti-Semitism. It is only the ‘new anti-Semitism’, hostility to or opposition to Zionism and the Israeli state that it opposes.

Even the Tories Director of Freedom of Speech Rejected the IHRA

Although the IHRA definition states that it is a ‘non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism’ in practice it has been adopted by law enforcement and other agencies as a free speech code. I discovered this when I was arrested in October last year by the Metropolitan Police after having delivered a speech equating the Israeli state to the Nazis.

Virtually every academic and legal scholar who has read the IHRA has rejected it as inherently flawed – human rights barrister Geoffrey Robertson described it as being ‘not fit for purpose’

I was told when I was being arrested that it was for a ‘racially aggravated’ offence under the Public Order Act. After having been detained in Holborn Police Station I was bailed and six weeks later told that the Police were pressing no charges.

I have since made a complaint to the Met and in the course of that I discovered a 17 page advice sheet Instructions about tackling the hate speech and actions by HAMAS supporters on the marches that police officers receive when policing Palestinian protests. It reeks of racist bias and malevolence.

Page 16 is titled ‘ISRAELI GOVERNMENT/NAZISM COMPARISONS.’ It begins by saying that

the comparison of either (a) the Israeli Government or the Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu with (b) either Nazism or Hitler (including) comparisons between the actions of the Israeli Government and the actions of the Nazis (i.e. the holocaust) are particularly offensive as it likens the systematic extermination of over 6 million Jews with the military conduct of Israel in the Middle East.

This ‘advice’ could have been written by the Zionist Federation of the UK. Presumably when Veronika Cohen, an 80 year old holocaust survivor from Budapest picketed Yad Vashem in Israel explaining that

I don’t think we can remember our suffering without acknowledging the suffering of Gaza, the deaths of tens of thousands of children, the starvation that’s going on this minute, for which we are partially responsible. It occupies the same place in my heart.

veronika cohen – child holocaust survivor from budapest

She was being anti-Semitic. She went on to say

‘To me, when I read the stories of their suffering in Gaza, it blends completely into how I feel about the Holocaust.’

Ruth Vleeschhouwer Falak, 89, who survived the Nazi-occupation of the Netherlands said she was protesting because

in the 1930s, if Germans had stood up loudly against the Nazi party, maybe they wouldn’t have been able to do what they did to us. Speaking up is not a choice for me.

“The saying is never again; that means never again for anybody. That’s really what we’re standing here for,” added Ilana Drukker Tokotin, 87, who spent her childhood hiding from the Nazis.

Marika Sherwood, who recently passed away, was an anti-racist academic who was also a holocaust survivor from Budapest. In 2017 Sherwood was going to give a speech during the University of Manchester‘s Israel Apartheid Week titled “You’re doing to Palestinians what the Nazis did to me”. The Israeli embassy contacted the university suggesting that the title violated the IHRA. Manchester University censored the title and put conditions on the speech.

Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn went along with the ‘antisemitism’ smear campaign until he too became a victim

Stephen Kapos, another survivor from Budapest, and many others have forcefully compared what happened to them to the actions of the Israeli state. It is no business of racist morons like Mark Rowley and the Met to decide what is and is not offensive to Jews. What is very clear here is that the Met has consciously decided to run with the Zionist narrative.

Of course it offends racist (Zionist) Jews but the right to offend is an integral part of what’s left of free speech after the Metropolitan Police have trampled on it. That was the decision of the (Jewish) Judge Stephen Sedley in the 1999 case Redmond-Bate v DPP where Sedley ruled that ‘“Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.”

The Policy of Jewish Racial Purity Led to a Book on a Jewish-Arab romance being banned in schools in Israel

It is noticeable how the Met advice sheet speaks of the ‘military conduct’ of the Israeli army. That is a strange way to describe a genocide but to Rowley and fellow racists, the slaughter of an indigenous people is ‘military conduct’.

Presumably Mark Rowley doesn’t think that  Israel Starving a Civilian Population to Death is Comparable to the Nazis’ Starving People to Death – or Else Mark Rowley & Fellow Officers are just Ignorant Racist Pigs

The advice sheet says that references to the Nazis means the holocaust. This is wrong. The holocaust took place from 1941-45 whereas the Nazis ruled from 1933-1945. 

Virtually the only group to support the IHRA is the right-wing ‘Trotskyist’ Alliance for Workers’ Liberty

It is noticeable that the title of the Advice Sheet is ‘Hamas Supporters’ rather than Palestine solidarity marchers.

In December 2019 Donald Trump issued an Executive Order under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act 1964 preventing those guilty of anti-Semitism from receiving federal funding.  What was the definition of anti-Semitism that was used?  The IHRA. In his Order Trump stated that

My Administration is committed to combating the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world.

It’s worth remembering that Corbyn voluntarily adopted the 38 word IHRA definition in order to impress the Zionists – and paid the price

Trump has recently, in his attempt to force American universities to repress Palestine protests on campus, threatened the funding of universities. Harvard has lost over $2 billion. Columbia University when faced with the loss of $400 million promptly caved in.

Yet no mainstream newspaper or media group has ever once asked what should be a simple question. Why should an all-purpose bigot like Trump be concerned about anti-Semitism? Trump calls Mexicans rapists, drug dealers and criminals and African countries ‘shit holes’. He banned nationals from 7 Muslim countries from entering the US and his first act when re-elected was to target trans people. He supports the display of the Confederate flag, but calls Black Lives Matter a ‘symbol of hate’. Yet we are to believe that when it comes to anti-Semitism Trump has suddenly become an anti-racist.

A Search of the IHRA website revealed that they had nothing there on the Genocide of Africans by Germany at the beginning of the 20th Century – Anything from the Nazi Holocaust is of no interest to them

It makes no sense unless opposition to ‘anti-Semitism’ is merely a way to disguise his support for an Apartheid state by invoking the memory of when Jews were oppressed. Even Trump’s ‘America First’ slogan is borrowed from the name of an American pro-Nazi organisation in the 30s.

A letter that I co-ordinated in 2016 to the Guardian

Trump is a genuine anti-Semite. He said Jews who voted for the Democrats hated Israel and their religion. He told American Jews that Israel is ‘your country’ and also told them that Netanyahu was ‘your Prime Minister’. In the words of the Washington Post’s Dana Millbank ‘Anti-Semitism is no longer an undertone of Trump’s campaign. It’s the melody.’

The New Labour Mayor of Tower Hamlets Banned the Big Ride from Meeting in a park under the IHRA

Trump is typical of anti-Semites like Tommy Robinson or Richard Spencer – the neo-Nazi founder of the Alt-Right who describes himself as a ‘White Zionist’.

It is little wonder that Israeli politicians, seeing where their most enthusiastic support comes from, have embraced White nationalists and supremacists, including neo-Nazis, in Europe.

The Israeli Government Conference on Anti-Semitism that Welcomed Anti-Semites!

When Israel’s Minister of Diaspora Affairs, Amichai Chikli, organised, last March, an International Conference on Combating Antisemitism in Jerusalem, he decided to invite a wide variety of Europe’s anti-Semites to speak. There is a certain logic to this. If you are going to hold a conference on anti-Semitism, who better to invite than genuine anti-Semites?

Indeed so many anti-Semites were invited that even the ADL, after much pressure, decided to withdraw as did Britain’s racist Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis.

As Ha’aretz observed this was

‘the first time in history that leaders and representatives of far-right political parties in Europe had been invited to attend an official event hosted by the government of Israel.’

The mask is off, the pretence is gone. Zionism and the Israeli government are now in bed with the West’s far right parties. Zionism has come full circle. ‘Anti-Semitism’ is a taunt now reserved exclusively for the Left and those who support the Palestinians.

Not only was Jordan Bardella, leader of France’s far-right National Rally invited, but so was Marion Maréchal, the granddaughter of France’s National Front founder, Holocaust denier Jean-Marie Le Pen. Other speakers included European Parliament members Hermann Tertsch of Spain’s Vox party, Charlie Weimers of the far-right Sweden Democrats party; and Kinga Gál, of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz party.

Chikli also announced that he might lift Israel’s boycott on relations with Germany’s AFD party. The AfD is riddled with neo-Nazis and holocaust deniers.

It’s an interesting party. ‘When it comes to understanding the threat of radical Islam, I think they get it. They get it very well. I’ve been following the history of the party.’

Chikli, has become the Israeli government’s unofficial  ambassador to Europe’s neo-Nazi and far-right parties. He stated that the group’s co-leader, Alice Weidel, is ‘easy to connect with,’ describing her worldview as representing “a healthy liberal patriotism, responsible immigration policies, and a clear-eyed view of the dangers of radical Islam.”

Chikli is following in the footsteps of his predecessors in the Zionist movement, Ben-Gurion, Berl Katznelson and Chaim Weizmann who also found the Nazi party ‘interesting’. 

In early February Likud became an observer member of Patriots for Europe – a European alliance of far-right nationalist parties. As David Issacharroff  observed:

The move comes amid a broader shift by the Israeli government toward establishing ties with far-right European parties that have long been boycotted by Israel due to their history of antisemitism and neo-Nazi affiliations.

Issacharoff speculated about Israel’s ‘evolving stance’ toward Austria’s Freedom Party, a member of the Patriots bloc, founded by a former SS general. The AfD is deeply rooted in neo-Nazi culture, and Germany’s Jewish community describes it having a “blatantly antisemitic ideology.” Antisemitic and neo-Nazi incidents occur with great regularity in its ranks. It has been described as “antisemitic to its core.”

When the Patriots for Europe held their inaugural conference in Madrid in February Likud was represented by Ariel Bulshtein, an adviser to Netanyahu and head of Likud’s foreign affairs department. Here he is seen with Harald Vilimsky, head of the Freedom Party’s delegation in the European Parliament.

Also represented at the Jerusalem conference were the Swedish Democrats who were founded in 1988 by members of Sweden’s neo-Nazi and skinhead movements, and Spain’s Vox which has allowed Holocaust deniers to run for office on its behalf. In another sign of the old Nazi-Zionist alliance. Issacharoff wrote that:

For Austria’s Freedom Party, Likud’s entry into the Patriots was a long-pursued stamp of legitimacy from the Jewish state and its prime minister. The party’s European delegation leader Vilimsky called Likud’s entry into the Patriots a “paradigm shift” that gives Austria’s far right “a new boost in international significance and acceptance.”

And that is the role of the Israeli state and Zionism today. To kosher neo-Nazis and anti-Semites. See 

Israel’s Lost Taboo: How Netanyahu’s Party Is Officially Embracing Europe’s Far-right Extremists, Austria’s Far-right Freedom Party Is ‘Antisemitic to Its Core.’ And It Could Win Sunday’s Election, 

The Mossad roots of the bogus IHRA anti-Semitism definition 

The IHRA

The IHRA owes its origins to Dina Porat and Tel Aviv University’s Stephen Roth Institute.

The IHRA ‘Definition’ of Anti-Semitism is a good example of Marx’s observation that ‘The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas’. So inconsistent and contradictory is the wording of the IHRA that it is highly likely that those who drafted it deliberately wanted to ensure that it lacked clarity.

Hugh Tomlinson QC 

Hugh Tomlinson QC, who gave an Opinion on the IHRA wrote about

an obvious problem with the wording of the IHRA Definition. The use of language is unusual and therefore potentially confusing. The phrase “a certain perception” is vague and unclear in the context of a definition. The use of the word “may” is also confusing. If it is understood in its usual sense of “possibility” then the definition is of little value: antisemitism “may be expressed as hatred towards Jews but may also be expressed in other (unspecified) ways”. This does not work as a definition.

The IHRA consists of a short 38 word definition and then a series of 11 examples of conduct which ‘could, taking into account the overall context’ be anti-Semitic. In practice these qualifying clauses have been disregarded. But this is clearly not a definition.

The actual definition itself is so vague and unclear, that in practice it is never used. The 11 illustrations are used to define what is and is not anti-Semitic. The definition states:

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

Is anti-Semitism just a perception inside someone’s head? If it may be expressed as hatred, what else may it be expressed as?  If it’s directed at Jews and non-Jews that means that everyone suffers from anti-Semitism. If it applies to everyone it applies to no one. This quite useless since it isn’t even a definition.

Seven of the eleven examples refer specifically to Israel yet even the other four examples are designed to demonise anti-Zionism.

The definition talks about the Israeli state being ‘conceived as a Jewish collectivity’ yet in the same breath the sixth example says that ‘Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel… than to the interests of their own nations.’ is anti-Semitic. The final example says that ‘Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.’ is anti-Semitic. Yet if Israel is a ‘Jewish collectivity’ then it’s quite reasonable to hold Jews collectively responsible for it.

The 9^th illustration states that it is anti-Semitic to use

the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism… to characterize Israel or Israelis.’

At first sight this seems innocuous but is it?

One of the myths of classic anti-Semitism is that Jews poisoned the wells of non-Jews. So Israel has said that to accuse it of doing the same to the Palestinians is anti-Semitic. The only problem is that it’s true. 

Israel’s biological warfare campaign in 1948 consisted of infecting the water supply of Acre/Akko with dystentery bacteria.  This is the subject of a long article Place the Material in the Wells’: Docs Point to Israeli Army’s 1948 Biological Warfare, subtitled ‘For decades, rumors and testimonies swirled about Jewish troops sent to poison wells in Arab villages. Now, researchers have located official documentation of the ‘Cast Thy Bread’ operation’.

Ofer Aderert writes about how

The disturbing story behind them was recently uncovered by historian Benny Morris and historian and Israel Prize laureate Benjamin Z. Kedar following extensive archival research.

In the West Bank we see the Israeli army and settlers regularly destroy the water sources of the Palestinians. Yet according to the IHRA, to make such an allegation about Israel is anti-Semitic. In other words anti-Semitism is now based on true facts!

Likewise the 10^th illustration of ‘anti-Semitism’ in the IHRA ‘definition’ states that ‘Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis’. Can anyone doubt, after the genocide in Gaza, that the comparisons stare right at you?

The question which faces us at this webinar is how best can we roll back the IHRA, especially in the universities.

Tony Greenstein