Hard-hitting campaigns or outright anti-Semitism?

This is a guest post from Jak Codd, Communications and Internal Affairs Officer for Leeds University Union.

Having been a student at Leeds for over three years, I am used to the rough and tumble of the student political environment. However, recent events on campus have shocked even myself. Leeds has always had one of the largest Jewish societies in the country, and coupled with an active Palestinian Solidarity Group, this often results in a robust political environment – especially where the Middle East is concerned.

Leeds Palestinian Solidarity Group has often been accused of having, at best, a dismissive attitude towards the anti-Semitism many students feel exists within the organisation’s midst. In November 2008, Jewish students decided that their student union needed to do more to combat the worrying rise in anti-Semitic incidents on British campuses, which resulted in a referendum motion proposing the adoption of the EUMC’s working definition of anti-Semitism. Rather than accepting that anti-Semitism was a major issue facing Jewish students, Leeds PSG and their so-called ‘progressive’ allies unleashed a ferocious campaign in response – peaking with a banner picturing an Orthodox Jew holding a placard stating ‘End the Holocaust in Gaza’. It was argued that the passing of the definition may shut down the Palestinian society but, as Bernard Harrison succinctly points out, surely anyone that claims that a restriction on anti-Semitism will deprive them of their best arguments is de facto admitting being complicit in anti-Jewish racism? Rather than self-reflect as to why the National Union of Students, the State Department of the USA, and the European Union to name but a few, considers their group to fall under the EUMC Definition, all Leeds PSG could do was pour petrol on the flames of their offensive discourse. This worrying attitude towards anti-Semitism is the context for the disturbing events that have embroiled Leeds PSG in 2010.

In January of this year, Leeds PSG ran a series of events to mark a year since Israel’s war in Gaza, which was conveniently timed to coincide with the student union’s week long commemoration of Holocaust Memorial Day.

One event, hosted in conjunction with the Leeds city Palestinian solidarity campaign, was a lecture given by Sameh Habeeb. Habeeb is the editor and founder of the dubious newspaper the Palestinian Telegraph, and a cheerleader for the anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon. Habeeb published an article by Atzmon on Holocaust Memorial Day, which stated that “the true interpritation of the Goldstone report is that Israelis are the Nazis of our time”, and that “Israeli… involvement in organ harvesting is well documented and an accepted fact”. Leeds PSG are no strangers to hosting speakers that are near the knuckle, having supported BRICUP’s tour of Bongani Masuku, the South African trade unionist found guilty by the South African Human Rights Commission for hate speech. However, it was their behaviour at another event that show the true colours of Leeds Palestinian Solidarity Group.

Ishmael Khaldi is an Israeli diplomat of Bedouin origin who was invited to speak on campus by the student Jewish society, to address the issue of a boycott of Israel. Instead of engaging and debating with the speaker, Leeds Palestinian Solidarity Group attempted to stop the event going ahead by repeatedly banging on the windows of the lecture theatre and storming the venue. As a result, a female security guard and a representative of University security were both shoved; with one being kicked in the back by a protestor. Most seriously, a Jewish student has recently complained to the University of Leeds that they heard chants of “throw the Jews into the sea” outside the lecture theatre. Of course, the Palestinian society vigorously denies this claim. Leeds PSG’s behavior that night has resulted in the society being banned by the student union from booking rooms for the foreseeable future.

On the back of this, Leeds University Union recently held their annual sabbatical elections. As a result of hard work and excellent campaigns, four Jewish students were elected to sabbatical positions within the student union. These students were of varying political affiliations, their only common connection their religion. Amid the celebrations in the union bar, a student entered and proceeded to wave a Palestinian flag silently. A protest at the recent room booking ban? Or was there something more sinister at play? It could be merely a coincidence that a Palestinian flag was waved as four Jewish students are elected to office, but having experienced the rhetoric and tactics of Leeds PSG and their comrades for four years, I am not so sure.

These single examples could probably be explained away as merely hard-hitting direct action against the Israeli state. But put into context, there is clearly a worrying pattern of behaviour from Leeds PSG that at best is intimidation of Jewish students, but at worst is outright naked anti-Semitism. I know which one I believe.

Northern Ireland: Trade unionists make the case against BDS campaign

This report is from TULIP.

Last night, four trade union opponents of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) campaign targetting Israel were given the opportunity to make their case before a standing-room only crowd in Belfast.

In an event organised by Northern Ireland Friends of Israel (NIFI), activists from unions in the UK and the Republic of Ireland spoke out against the “Israel is apartheid” slander and called for engagement rather than boycott.

The speakers included Terry McCorran (who chaired the meeting) — a Unison branch official in Northern Ireland; Lilach Head, a Unison activist from England; Chris Hudson, who spent 18 years working as a full time official for Irish trade unions; and Eric Lee from TULIP (a member of the National Union of Journalists in the UK).  McCorran chaired the meeting and all four speakers appeared in an individual capacity, not representing their unions.

Head spoke about the experience of being an Israeli-born trade unionist in Britain, of the exclusion of Trade Union Friends of Israel (TUFI) from the Unison conference last year, and of the courage required to get up in front of thousands of conference delegates and make the case against boycotts.

McCorran spoke about examples of anti-Israel sentiment in Northern Ireland — but also about how many in the community identify closely with Israel.  He also reported on his participation in a TUFI delegation to Israel and the West Bank in November 2009.

Hudson, who has had years of experience not only as a trade union leader, but also a leading anti-apartheid campaigner, made a strong case that Israel can in no way be called an apartheid society.

Lee explained what the BDS campaign was all about, who supports it and who opposes it, why it is a bad idea — and what we can all do about it.  He made six concrete suggestions:

1. If you support genuine peace between Israelis and Palestinians, support those organizations in Israel and Palestine that campaign for this – including Peace Now, One Voice, the Parent’s Circle and many others.
2. Here in the UK, support those organizations that campaign against BDS – including TULIP, TUFI and NIFI.
3. Challenge BDS supporters without fear – it is their argument to lose, and they are the ones who do not want debate.
4. Practice zero-tolerance of anti-Semitism – just as we would not tolerate any other form of racism.
5. Buy Israeli products.
6. Visit Israel – see for yourself what “apartheid” looks like.

Over 200 copies of the TULIP founding statement were distributed at the event.

John Pilger & New Statesman: still an anti-kosher conspiracy?

Mark Gardner on the the CST blog.

The 11 February 2010 edition of the New Statesman, ‘Everything You Know About Islam Is Wrong’ was devoted to demanding clarity, precision and understanding in the way that the media and public discuss issues concerning Muslims, Islam, political Islamism and extreme Jihadist terrorism. Its editorial stated

Fear and ignorance are a toxic combination, and myths and misconceptions abound.

Any hopes, however, that the New Statesman would heed its own advice when it came to representations of Zionism appear to have been dashed with its publication of John Pilger’s latest rhetorical assault on Zionism, Israel and “Jews in western countries”.

When considering where fear, ignorance, myths and misconceptions can lead, the New Statesman and John Pilger need look no further than the current relatively high levels of antisemitic race hate attacks; and the manner in which in some extreme political circles, the word “Zionism” has increasingly become synonymous with a global conspiracy variously headquartered in Washington and / or Jerusalem, supported by co-conspirators in New York, London, Paris and other western power centres.

This global “Zionist” conspiracy is dedicated to the pursuit of oppression, war and profit, and is therefore set against the rest of humanity. The conspiracy is concealed, but reveals itself in its alleged control of finance, politics and media. The conspiracy is not exclusively staffed by Jews: but (real) Zionism is a Jewish construct and Jews are of course its likeliest adherents – and are therefore the ones who get it in the neck when people physically attack these dastardly Zionists. Jews have heard all of this before and have suffered from it all before. The themes of hidden Jewish conspiracy, wealth and power lie at the core of antisemitism and were codified within the notorious Tsarist forgery “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.

Where once the mythical antisemitic image of “the Jew” ran rampant, now we have the image of “the Zionist”. Arguments rage over whether or not this image of “the Zionist” is legitimate, mythologised, antisemitic, or whatever. The issue is made yet more complex by the fact that many dedicated anti-Zionists self-define as philosemitic: they are fighting Zionism because it is in the best interests of Jews that Zionism is defeated. (Never mind the details of this argument, such as what would have happened to European Jewry in the 1940s had they been able to flee to Israel.)

Regardless of the endless philosophising and the irrelevant ivory tower distinctions, at street level two things are very clear:

1. If Zionism is depicted in exclusively hateful terms, then all Zionists will be hated.

2. Large numbers of Jews self-define as Zionists. (In the REAL sense of the word.)

It follows, therefore, that when mainstream media, journalists and political activists write about Zionism and Jews, that they should do so with caution and precision. One of the worst failures to do so was the infamous 14 January 2002 edition of the New Statesman which depicted a golden Star of David piercing a supine Union Jack, with the headline “A kosher conspiracy?”. Beneath this headline, the cover read“John Pilger and Dennis Sewell on Britain’s pro-Israeli lobby”.

Grudgingly and belatedly, the New Statesman apologised for its cover: but neither this, nor its rightful concern for clarity of reporting in Muslim-related issues, has prevented the magazine from running numerous further articles by John Pilger in which he vociferously condemns Zionism. This most recent edition and article, however, keenly illustrate the choices that both Pilger and the publication need to make when it comes to defining just what they mean by Zionism: and what they mean by anti-Zionism. Get it wrong and they place themselves at the service of antisemites. Get it right and they do the rest of us favour.

The latest article is entitled “Listen to the heroes of Israel”, and the heroes in question are Rami and Nurit Elhanan. Pilger writes

Whenever I am asked about heroes, I say Rami and his wife, Nurit, without hesitation.

The Elhanans helped found Parents Circle. This is a joint initiative by Israelis and Palestinians who have tragically lost loved ones in the lengthy conflict between their respective peoples. Parents Circle website states

Parents Circle – Families Forum (PCFF) is a grassroots organization of bereaved Palestinians and Israelis. The PCFF promotes reconciliation as an alternative to hatred and revenge.

Pilger’s article, however, is not about reconciliation. Rather, it is furiously anti-Israel and anti-Zionist: premised upon quotes from the Elhanans; and the dreadful stories of two child casualties of the conflict, Smadar Elhanan and Abir Aramin.

CST is not concerned with Pilger’s criticism of Israel, but the conclusion of his article goes far further than this. It ends with a blanket condemnation of Zionism; approvingly quotes Gilad Atzmon; and warns that the silence of Jews“renders them culpable”. He writes as follows

…proof of the murderous, racist toll of Zionism has been an epiphany for many people; justice for the Palestinians, wrote the expatriate Israeli musician Gilad Atzmon, is now ‘at the heart of the battle for a better world’.

However, his fellow Jews in western countries, such as Britain and Australia, whose influence is critical, are still mostly silent, still looking away, still accepting as Nurit said ‘the brainwashing and reality distortion’.

And yet the responsibility to speak out could not be clearer, and the lessons of history – family history for many – ensure that it renders them culpable should their silence persist. For inspiration, I recommend the moral courage of Rami and Nurit.

As explained here at Times Online Blog by Oliver Kamm and here at Z Word Blog by David Adler, Pilger’s depiction of Atzmon as merely an “expatriate Israeli musician”beggars belief. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of Atzmon’s writings will immediately appreciate the ludicrous and self-defeating irony of writing “fellow Jews” in relation to a man who has such an extreme and elaborate hatred of Zionism, along with an apparent rejection of his own Jewish identity and“Jewishness”.

Next, we have Atzmon’s actual assertion, so warmly quoted by Pilger, that “justice for Palestinians” is “now at the heart of the battle for a better world”. It is not uncommon for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be cited as emblematic of the global struggle between oppressed and oppressor, but it is another matter entirely for Pilger to go from this to laying the collective blame for the conflict at the feet of world Jewry: “fellow Jews in western countries…still mostly silent…renders them culpable should their silence persist”.

Jews have extensive and bloody experience of what happens to them when they are collectively blamed for preventing the birth of a better world. It is deeply troubling that a journalist and activist of Pilger’s reputation and knowledge seems impervious to such matters. Why the New Statesman should uncritically publish such material is another, but not unrelated matter. Ignorance? Excessive anti-Israel fury? Lack of concern for mainstream Jewish – potentially “Zionist” – worries? Probably an unthinking combination of all three.

Where, however, did Pilger find this particular quote from Atzmon? As mentioned above, it is not an uncommon claim, but a Google search of Atzmon and “now at the heart of the battle for a better world” suggests that it is taken from Atzmon’s article of 19 February 2010, entitled “The Tide Has Changed”. It includes the following paragraph – and even if this is not the actual source of Pilger’s quote, it gives a decent indication of Atzmon’s perspective on these matters. By wicked coincidence, the 2nd and 3rd sentences would have fitted gloriously with the infamous New Statesman ‘kosher conspiracy?’ front cover

The truth of the matter is tragic. The British political system is paralysed by the Israeli Lobby. Like in the USA, British national interests are sacrificed for the sake of dirty Zionist cash. If Britain wants to liberate itself from the Zionist grip and have any prospect of a future, it must move fast and clean the entire list of Zionist infiltrators from its political ranks, Government offices and strategic positions. I am not talking here about Jews. By no means do I mention ethnicity or race. I am talking here about a political and ideological affiliation. Considering Zionism is a murderous, racist, expansionist ideology, it is natural to stress that people who are affiliated with Israel and Zionism must be removed immediately from any political, government, military or strategic posts and so on.

Finally, the next time that Pilger and his publishers repeat their blanket condemnations and demonisations of Zionism, they should very seriously contemplate: do they mean Zionism as explained above by Atzmon – or do they mean Zionism as it is basically understood and felt by millions of Jews throughout the world. For Jews at least,  there is a vital distinction between the two positions: and if neither Pilger nor the New Statesman can grasp that fact, then things are even worse than many of us had feared.

To help them decide, they can contrast Atzmon’s above description with that of Pilger’s hero Rami Elhanan, explaining why he himself is a Zionist (despite his criticism of Israeli politics and actions). It is taken from the “I am a Zionist” section of his powerful and impassioned autobiographical article, “Turning Pain into Hope”

I am a Zionist

I am a Zionist in the sense that I deeply believe that the Jewish people, like any other people in the world, deserve their right to self-determination, in their ancient homeland. Now, that brings very big and problematic questions. What does it mean to be Jewish? What are the real Jewish values? What makes one a Jew? What does it mean having a Jewish State?

Being Jewish is part of me. I’m a Jew as my eyes are green. It’s a destiny and an identity which I cannot escape. It’s because of the my own history, my forefathers, my roots, and because of the fact that I fill deep emotional connection to this people that was murdered and persecuted and victimized throughout history. Never the less, I believe that this huge and successful revolution of the Jewish people in the form of its national liberation organization, the Zionist movement, was accompanied with some great mistakes. The idea of “a land without people for people without a land” was terribly wrong and totally blind. Even so, I think you can not correct one evil or a wrong by creating other evil and more wrong. Today after all the blood that was spilled and the heavy price that was paid by the two sides, all the mistakes, all the brutality by the two sides the only way out of this endless cycle of violence, is the “Two states” solution…

Steve Clark’s Election Address

Dr Steve Clark from Nottingham Trent, one of the ten people standing for the UCU NEC, makes the following observation in his election address:

I am not a member of any political party/grouping and am concerned that perennial effort (and union funds) expended debating political fringe issues (like the proposed Israel boycotts) saps time, energy and resources from the real issues of membership concern.

Hat Tip to Sarah Annes Brown.

UCU Elections.

Engage supporters have been emailing Engage with regard to the forthcoming UCU elections.

Broadly there are two factions within UCU.  One, is ‘UCU left’ which is dominated by the Socialist Workers Party.  UCU left has consistently supported candidates who support the exclusion of intellectuals who work in Israel from British universities.

The other faction is a soft-left faction which has, by and large, opposed the boycott, although it has been ineffective in opposing it and it has been ineffective in standing up to antisemitism in the union. Their letter is below :

Dear all,

We are writing to you about the current round of UCU elections. We would encourage you to take the time to vote as those elected will be responsible for determining the direction of the union in what is certain to be a difficult period.

Attached below is a list which we hope you take into consideration when voting. We believe that those listed will work to ensure that the union focuses on a core, trade union agenda in a non-sectarian manner. All are standing on their own platform with no pre-selection or manifesto screening.

With funding cuts and job threats, we believe the union must take practical measures to protect members. Employers will, of course, seek to exploit the situation to hold pay levels down and we must be prepared to take all reasonable and possible measures to protect the interests of members. Equally, however, we must not allow ourselves to be provoked into ill considered, knee jerk reactions on pay. Indeed, given the severity of the threatened cuts, we must seek to put ourselves at the head of the widest possible coalition to defend FE and HE. This will, necessarily, involve a willingness to work with all stakeholders – with universities and colleges as well as with our more traditional allies in the student movement, professional bodies and other trade unions. UCU should throw down a challenge to VCs and principals to follow our lead in a joint endeavour to fight the cuts and defend education.

This year, there is an election for the Vice-President (Further Education) and all members, FE and HE, are entitled to vote in this election. The winner of this election will become overall President in two years. Thus, we would particularly encourage members in higher education to vote in this election, even though it appears as an FE election. We strongly recommend voting for KATHY TAYLOR. Kathy has much experience in FE and has also sought to understand the culture and context of industrial relations in Higher Education and supported those of us in HE where possible. In addition, Kathy has shown an acute understanding of the wide variety of members in UCU- FE academic staff, HE academic staff, Academic-related staff, women- as well as understanding the needs of those in each of England, Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland.

We hope you find this of assistance

Alan Carr- Open University, National
Treasurer UCU

John McCormack, Northland College,
NEC (FE)

Joanna DeGroot- University of York and
NEC(HE)

Anne Bainbridge – Bishop Auckland
College Branch Secretary (FE)

Roger Brooks, President Liverpool UCU
and NEC

Angela Roger- University of Dundee,
UCU Scotland Honorary Secretary and
NEC(HE)

Simon Renton- UCL and NEC (HE)

David Limb, North Western Regional
College UCU, N. Ireland Region
Secretary, NEC(FE)

Roger Walters, President Open University
UCU and NEC (HE)

Tricia Gott- Bradford College Branch
Secretary, NEC

Jimmy Donaghey- Queen’s University
Belfast and NEC(HE)

Pauline Collins- Open University,
NEC(HE)

Terry McKnight- University of Ulster and
NEC(HE)

Cath Hepburn – Sunderland College and
Northern Region FE Committee
Secretary (FE)

David Branson – Middlesbrough College
and Northern Region FE Committee
Chair (FE)

Roger Undy, President Oxford UCU

Ian Cusack – Tyne Metropolitan College
Branch Secretary(FE)
Joe Gluza, Treasurer Cambridge UCU and
NEC

Jonathan Spink – South Tyneside College
Branch Secretary (FE)

Dave Guppy, UCL UCU and NEC(HE)
Mavis Taggert – Northumberland College
Branch Secretary (FE)

Steve Clark, Nottingham Trent UCU,
NEC(HE)

John Perry St. Austell College NEC FE
member for the South (FE)

Steve Snowball – Branch Secretary
Newcastle University, (HE)

Angi Lamb, LA President Edinburgh
UCU(HE)

Philip Burgess, University of Dundee and
NEC(HE)

Bob Langridge, Oxford Brookes Branch
Secretary (HE)

Recommendations

Note: in most constituencies there are fewer recommended candidates than seats available- this reflects that it is important to maximise the vote for the candidates listed. Feel free to continue preferences to as many as you see fit. In most elections, there is no advice on ordering candidates but it is important members extend their preferences to all the candidates listed below.

In the VP (Further education) and the HE/FE Women’s seats, all members may vote and we would strongly encourage you to vote even if the election is in the other sector

Vice-President who is a member of the further education sector

Kathy Taylor (Newcastle College)

Geographically-elected members of the National Executive Committee (NEC)

North East, further education sector (two members to be elected)

David O’Toole (Newcastle College)

North East, higher education sector (three members to be elected)

Dr Joanna de Groot (University of York)

London and the East, higher education sector (four members to be elected)

Simon Renton (University College London)

Dr Steve Sangwine (University of Essex)

4 UK-elected members of the National Executive Committee (NEC)

John McCormack (Newcastle College)

UK-elected members, higher education (seven members to be elected)

Roger Brooks (University of Liverpool)

Dr Steve Clark (Nottingham Trent University)

Angi Lamb (University of Edinburgh)

Bob Langridge (Oxford Brookes University)

Bethan Norfor (Open University)

Gordon Watson (University of Strathclyde)

Representatives of women members from the further education sector (two members to
be elected)

Mrs B Monica Goligher (Belfast Metropolitan College) #1

Sheila Smith (Birmingham Metropolitan College) #2

We recommend giving first preferences to B Monica Goligher and second preferences to
Sheila Smith

Representatives of women members from the higher education sector (three members
to be elected)

Pauline Collins (Open University)

Ann Blair (University of Leeds)

Casual UK –Elected member of the NEC (Higher Education)

Dave Guppy (University College London)

The Past Didn’t Go Anywhere: Making Resistance to Antisemitism Part of All of Our Movements

Download the pamphlet by April Rosenblum Here.

Once you get past :

From one side, progressive and radical activists and scholars are being attacked
by organized campaigns to brand us antisemites. In particular, it’s virtually impossible
to speak out critically about Israel without being charged with antisemitism.

It’s worth reading.

Hat Tip to Gil.

T. West’s Youtube channel and Jenny Tonge

This is a guest post by Joseph Weissman

So Jenny Tonge has been sacked by Nick Clegg from her post as Liberal Democrat health spokesperson in the Lords, after she said that claims of Israeli organ harvesting in Haiti should be investigated. Nick Clegg claims that Tonge’s comments were not anti-Semitic. Yet the source of her claim, YouTube user T. West, gives one reason to think otherwise.

Tonge called for an investigation following this article published in the deeply-conspiratorial Palestine Telegraph, which claimed:

On January 20, Lebanon’s Al-Manar TV reported on the mission, citing a damning You Tube video posted by an American named T. West from a group called AfriSynergy Productions. “The video presents something to think about while exploiting the horrible tragedy that has befallen Haiti where Israeli occupation soldiers are engaged in organ trafficking.”

A ‘damning You Tube video’? This seems unlikely, given T. West’s track-record as a rather biased source. T. West is profiled in Heeb Magazine defending Jenny Tonge, asserting that “”Those who hold political office are especially vulnerable to the well funded and connected Zionist organizations.”

What else has T. West posted on Youtube?

Here is T. West on the Underpants Bomber Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab was doing the bidding of Israeli Mossad operating within Yemen agents pretending to be Al Qaeda.

“He also has no idea of who his handlers were. He was thinking that it was Al Qaeda. The Mossad operates within Yemen, and they pretend to be Al Qaeda, and they trick these young men into thinking they are Al Qaeda. They make them believe they are taking orders from Al Qaeda when in fact it is the Mossad and other Western intelligence, such as the CIA or the British in one. This is a situation that is happening. The American people have been deceived.”

T. West has also published this claim on YouTube:

In 1991, it was the ADL President Abraham Foxman who challenged me when I indicated it appears HIV/Aids is a race-specific weapon” targeted exclusively at African peoples. Later it emerged that up to 30 percent of Ashkenazim are immune to HIV/Aids. What was Foxman trying to hide by not wanting me to inform and educate people about this?

T. West on Jewish identity:

“Since the civil rights movement, African-Americans have often relied on relations with the Ashkenazim and the Sephardim popularly known as Jews.”

T. West has also posted a clip from CNN about Yousef al-Khatab and Younes Abdullah Mohammed: two Islamist hate preachers who consider Bin Laden as their role model. He labels his video with this question:

“Why Are They Encouraging Violence, Do They Serve Zionist Interests”

There are further examples of such rhetoric on T.West’s Youtube channel.

Before she called for an investigation into claims of Israeli organ harvesting in Haiti, why didn’t Tonge investigate the source of such claims herself for a couple of hours? She would have quickly discovered the anti-Semitic videos of the Youtube poster who began these postings. By Jenny Tonge’s logic, we would also have to investigate whether Mossad was controlling Al Qaeda on the basis of T. West’s allegations.

Tonge is no stranger to controversy on this issue, having previously said that she would consider becoming a suicide bomber herself if she were Palestinian, and has stated that Jewish people should be ashamed of themselves for not doing more to protest against Israel’s ‘not kosher’ behaviour.

You would have thought this latest episode would be the end of people taking her seriously on Israel/Palestine. Yet Tonge is still set appear in Parliament at a Labour Friends of Palestine event on March 1 alongside Lord Ahmed and MPs Gerald Kaufman and Jeremy Corbyn. Tonge is also a patron of the ecumenical Christian anti-Israel boycotters the Friends of Sabeel UK, alongside Ibrahim Hewitt, who is now arguing that Tonge’s sacking is down to ‘the Israeli lobby’. The antisemitism implicit in such a claim is chilling.

So despite Jenny Tonge’s track record, she is afforded legitimacy by political and religious groups with heavy biases against Israel.

At the very least, Friends of Sabeel UK and Labour Friends of Palestine should reconsider their alliance with Jenny Tonge.

Israel and Iran – How Will It End?

Politically they’re at daggers drawn, each declaring the other enemy number one. Could there be a diplomatic way out of a stand-off that threatens the entire Middle East? Is all-out war inevitable – or could these two ancient nations, and vibrant cultures, one day even find a way to make peace?

Opinion Soup will be joined by Emanuele Ottolenghi, author of Under a Mushroom Cloud: Europe, Iran and the Bomb, Professor Ali Ansari, director of the Institute for Iranian Studies at St. Andrews University, Hagai M Segal, award-winning lecturer and consultant on Middle Eastern affairs, and Azadeh Moaveni, author of Lipstick Jihad. Chaired by Jonathan Freedland.

Date Time Venue Price To book Monday 22nd February 8pm Hampstead Town Hall, 213 Haverstock Hill, London NW3 4QB £10 in advance, £12 on the door Click here to book online

The Abraham Fund responds to Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon

The Abraham Fund have issued a statement on Ayalon’s recent interview touting a population swap.

“Israel’s Arab citizens are an integral part of Israeli society. Their citizenship is unconditional.
The Abraham Fund is calling upon Israeli Jewish and Arab leaders to acknowledge this fact and dedicate their strength and skills to promote the objective of a shared society based on equality and mutual respect.

The Abraham Fund Initiatives works towards integration and equality among Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel.”

Stand up for NIF, stand up for Israeli democracy

A guest post by Progressive Zionist.

A smear campaign was launched last week against leading Israeli social justice organisation, the New Israel Fund. In what Meretz MK Haim Oron, described as a “show trial,” NIF has been blasted for apparently being the “life-force” behind the UN’s Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead and the delegitimisation of Israel in the international court of opinion.

But this campaign to discredit NIF and its grantee organisations amounts to nothing less than an attack on freedom of speech.

So what did NIF do wrong?

On 29 January 2010, Israeli tabloid Ma’ariv published the findings of a report by right-wing student group, Im Tirtzu, claiming that over 90% of allegations against the IDF in the Goldstone report came from 16 NIF-funded Israeli NGOs. The following day Im Tirtzu organised a demonstration outside the Jerusalem home of NIF president, Prof Naomi Hazan (pictured), with dozens of activists dressed as Hamas terrorists, as well as running an advert in the Jerusalem Post depicting a demonic Prof Hazan wearing a horn.

It didn’t take long for Im Tirtzu’s “research” to be debunked and dismembered. Anshel Pfeffer did a good job in Ha’aretz:

“What is being said here? Im Tirzu is not claiming that any of the information supplied by these organizations was false. It is simply questioning the very legitimacy of free speech in Israel.”

In support of Israeli democracy

NIF is a philanthropic organisation that funds over 300 organisations working to make Israel a better country, in line with the vision of its founding fathers. NIF grantees pursue social justice, civil and human rights, religious pluralism and safeguarding the environment.

One need not agree with every position of every organisation that NIF funds, which range from Breaking the Silence and B’tselem to Friends of the Earth Middle East and the Association of Rape Crisis Centers in Israel. But supporters of democracy should stand up for the New Israel Fund – and many already have, including journalists from Ma’ariv itself.

Ori Nir from Americans for Peace Now said it succinctly:

“The New Israel Fund is an asset to Israel’s democracy, as are its grantee organizations. Attempts to silence them should not be tolerated by the Israeli public and by friends of a free and democratic Israel worldwide.“

But this sorry episode has left me with a feeling of déjà vu.

One thing that struck me is how many NIF grantees would find themselves boycotted by anti-Israel activists here in the UK. For instance, Israeli groups that promote cooperation between Jews and Arabs.

There’s an uneasy parallel between the recent McCarthyist attacks on NIF and the British Left-Islamist coalition’s campaign to silence and boycott those who fail to tow their party line of an Israel-free Middle East. It seems that the two sides have more in common that they would like to admit.

• New Israel Fund UK on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/#!/newisraelfunduk?ref=ts
• New Israel Fund (Israel website) http://www.nif.org/
• coteret.com Hebrew news from the Israel media in English
• Prof Naomi Hazan sacked by Jerusalem Post. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147998.html

See also my Greens Engage post, New Israel Fund needs international solidarity; Jews outside Israel need theirs.

A smear campaign was launched last week against leading Israeli social justice organisation, the New Israel Fund. In what Meretz MK Haim Oron, described as a “show trial,” NIF has been blasted for apparently being the “life-force” behind the UN’s Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead and the delegitimisation of Israel in the international court of opinion.

But this campaign to discredit NIF and its grantee organisations amounts to nothing less than an attack on freedom of speech.

So what did NIF do wrong?

On 29 January 2010, Israeli tabloid Ma’ariv published the findings of a report by right-wing student group, Im Tirtzu, claiming that over 90% of allegations against the IDF in the Goldstone report came from 16 NIF-funded Israeli NGOs. The following day Im Tirtzu organised a demonstration outside the Jerusalem home of NIF president, Prof Naomi Hazan (pictured), with dozens of activists dressed as Hamas terrorists, as well as running an advert in the Jerusalem Post depicting a demonic Prof Hazan wearing a horn.

It didn’t take long for Im Tirtzu’s “research” to be debunked and dismembered. Anshel Pfeffer did a good job in Ha’aretz:

“What is being said here? Im Tirzu is not claiming that any of the information supplied by these organizations was false. It is simply questioning the very legitimacy of free speech in Israel.”

In support of Israeli democracy

NIF is a philanthropic organisation that funds over 300 organisations working to make Israel a better country, in line with the vision of its founding fathers. NIF grantees pursue social justice, civil and human rights, religious pluralism and safeguarding the environment.

One need not agree with every position of every organisation that NIF funds, which range from Breaking the Silence and B’tselem to Friends of the Earth Middle East and the Association of Rape Crisis Centers in Israel. But supporters of democracy should stand up for the New Israel Fund – and many already have, including journalists from Ma’ariv itself.

Ori Nir from Americans for Peace Now said it succintly:

“The New Israel Fund is an asset to Israel’s democracy, as are its grantee organizations. Attempts to silence them should not be tolerated by the Israeli public and by friends of a free and democratic Israel worldwide.“

But this sorry episode has left me with a feeling of déjà vu.

One thing that struck me is how many NIF grantees would find themselves boycotted by anti-Israel activists here in the UK. For instance, Israeli groups that promote cooperation between Jews and Arabs.

There’s an uneasy parallel between the recent McCarthyist attacks on NIF and the British Left-Islamist coalition’s campaign to silence and boycott those who fail to tow their party line of an Israel-free Middle East. It seems that the two sides have more in common that they would like to admit.

:: New Israel Fund UK on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/#!/newisraelfunduk?ref=ts

:: New Israel Fund (Israel website) http://www.nif.org/

:: coteret.com Hebrew news from the Israel media in English

:: Prof Naomi Hazan sacked by Jerusalem Post. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147998.html