Tag Archives: Tony Greenstein

Keir Starmer has turned Labour into the party of hypocrisy – and racism

Diane Abbott: she has suffered more racist abuse than anybody you can name – and new Labour leader Keir Starmer has had the front to tell her off over a trumped-up accusation around a video discussion attended by expelled former party members.

Labour’s new leader, Keir Starmer, is working his fingers to the bone – turning Labour into the kind of racist cess-pit that no right-thinking person would want to join.

Consider the hypocrisy in the fact that he has “disciplined” Diane Abbott for taking part in a Zoom discussion attended by expelled former party members – but has done nothing to suspend members of the so-called right-wing “faction” who were accused of subjecting her to appalling racist bullying in the leaked Labour report on the party’s response to anti-Semitism accusations.

That alone marks out his leadership as hypocritical and racist.

Starmer’s decision also betrays a failure to understand how Zoom works. It’s an online discussion that anybody can join, simply by dialling in.

Furthermore – as This Site has mentioned before – neither Jackie Walker nor Tony Greenstein, the former Labour members whose attendance triggered the complaint against Ms Abbott and Bell Ribeiro-Addy by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, were expelled for anti-Semitism as claimed.

In any case, Labour’s investigations of anti-Semitism accusations – especially high-profile claims like those against Ms Walker and Mr Greenstein (yes, they were accused of it but they weren’t expelled for it) – are known to have been fatally flawed. Saying these people are anti-Semites because Labour said so carries less factual weight than gossip.

Finally: although Starmer had signed the controversial “10 Commandments” issued by the BoD, those pledges have no weight in the Labour Party. Any individual member can agree to sign and be bound by any document they like – but they can’t force it on the rest of the party undemocratically and Starmer has done nothing to seek its approval by the party as a whole.

So any disciplinary action against Diane Abbott and Bell Ribeiro-Addy is unwarranted, unfair and unconstitutional – as those of us who’ve suffered similar treatment are well aware:

https://twitter.com/abbyhoffmann/status/1256648746772938754

But the Labour leader is likely to be unconcerned. He’ll be moving on to his next designated victim – who is, apparently, Salma Yaqoob.

She is being attacked for something she hasn’t even done yet: another Zoom discussion in which she is set to appear as a speaker on May 12 – this time with Tony Greenstein billed as a speaker alongside her. So she would be sharing a platform with him.

Once again, for clarity: Mr Greenstein has been expelled from Labour – but not for anti-Semitism or any other kind of racism.

He does, however, provoke a certain response from excitable people – who may be considered to have a problem of their own, where it comes to hate:

The issue was picked up by former Labour MP Ian Austin, who left the party because the Jeremy Corbyn leadership had returned it to socialist ideals.

He betrayed his own leanings by demanding that Ms Yaqoob should be suspended – before she had even done anything. One finds Asa Winstanley’s comment persuasive:

So this is the Labour Party under Keir Starmer.

Racism is fine – if it’s done by right-wingers against people on the left.

Sexism is fine – if carried out in the same way.

But if he has a chance to accuse people on the left – male or female – of the same, then he will attack mercilessly.

It is as Kerry-Anne Mendoza states:

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Jonathan Freedland is my useful idiot

Useful idiot: Jonathan Freedland.

As propogandists for the pro-Israeli government, pro-Zionist, anti-Jew lobby go, Jonathan Freedland is actually quite handy.

His latest article certainly does its bit in trying to set British Jews apart from the rest of our society and increase hatred against them, under a headline that claims an attitude for all British Jews that they do not have, and a response from the Labour Party that it did not make.

But in fact all he really achieves is the provision of useful information for commentators like me.

He’s my useful idiot – a propagandist for my side of the anti-Semitism argument who doesn’t understand what he is doing.

I’m not going to go into all the reasons his article is wrong-headed. I’ve got what I wanted from it and don’t need to, because someone else has done it for me.

Here’s Tony Greenstein: Like me, he has been smeared as an anti-Semite – probably because he makes very good points about the people for whom Mr Freedland works.

Here, he makes very good points about Mr Freedland’s … claims:

  1. Yes Zion is an integral part of the Jewish religion. However it has never had, until the late colonial period, any political significance. That was why when Zionism arose in the late 19th Century its fiercest opponents were Orthodox Jews.
  2. If the idea of Israel/Zion had more than a spiritual significance why was it when the great emigration of two and a half million Jews from Czarist Russia occurred from the mid 19th century to 1914, barely one percent went to Palestine?  There were no borders stopping them. The religious significance of Zion is not and never has been a justification for the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.  Palestine was not a land without a people for a people without a land.  That is a colonial myth.
  3. Jews in Britain are not an ethnic minority, they are a religious minority and part of white British society.  They are not in any way an oppressed group.
  4. Nowhere does Freedland explain why the Oxford English Dictionary definition of anti-Semitism, ‘hostility to or prejudice against Jews’ is not sufficient to deal with genuine 24 carat anti-Semites. This six word definition is more than adequate to deal with those who talk about a ‘hook-nosed, bloodthirsty Jew’. There is also the definition drawn up by Brian Klug of Oxford University, in his lecture ‘What Do We Mean When We Say ‘Antisemitsm’? Echoes of shattering glass at the Jewish Museum in Berlin on the anniversary of Kristallnacht.  Klug’s defined anti-Semitism as ‘a form of hostility to Jews as Jews, where Jews are perceived as something other than what they are.’  Is 21 words.
  5. Nowhere does Freedland explain why the IHRA definition, 500+ words, including 11 ‘examples’ of anti-Semitism, 7 related to Israel, is necessary.
  6. Freedland says that the IHRA definition is near universally accepted’. This is untrue. The IHRA definition is rejected by anti-racist, Muslim, Palestinian and civil society groups such as Liberty and the University College Union. It is though universally accepted by state bodies and governments, including the anti-Semitic governments of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Austria. Yes, anti-Semites have no problems with a definition of anti-Semitism that is based on support for Israel. Today the favourite refrain of anti-Semites and neo-Nazis such as the founder of the Alt-Right Richard Spencer, who defines himself as a White Zionist, is that however much they dislike Jews they love Israel.
  7. Surely Freedland cannot be unaware that the Trump administration, which combines anti-Semitism and ultra-Zionism, also supports the IHRA?  An administration that contained anti-Semites such as Steve Bannon, who objected to his children attending school with whiny Jewish brats’ and Sebastian Gorka with his membership of the neo-Nazi Vitezi Rend?
  8. Even leaving the aforementioned aside, why does Freedland feels the need to insult the intelligence of Guardian’s readers?  Does Freedland really have such contempt for their intelligence that he treats them like the Daily Mail treats their readership? Leaving aside Freedland’s cheap reference to Thereisienstadt concentration camp or the gauche picture of the Warsaw Ghetto, although we know that comparisons with Nazi Germany, when made by Israel’s critics, even if they are Jewish, are ‘anti-Semitic’ according to the IHRA.
  9. Freedland states that ‘the IHRA text explicitly says that if you criticise Israel the way you criticise other countries, it “cannot be regarded as antisemitic”. Most readers will not check the IHRA’s wording and will trust that what Freedland says is accurate. After all senior editors of the Guardian don’t lie, or do they?
  10. In fact the IHRA contains two references to criticism of Israel. The first states that ‘criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic’. The only problem is that Israel is a unique ethno nationalist state which is a state of the ‘Jewish people’ wherever they may reside but not of its own citizens. This is entrenched in the Jewish Nation State Bill.
  11. The second reference states that anti-Semitism consists of ‘Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.’ I fail to understand why, even if someone did expect higher standards of Israel (e.g. because it claims the Holocaust as its moral legacy) that that would be anti-Semitic. Racism is about people not states.
  12. Israel is not a democratic nation, indeed it is not a nation. There is no Israeli nationality. It maintains a military dictatorship over 5+ million Palestinians and when they protest it guns them down. Israel is a state that uses torture, imprisons and abuses young children and locks people up without trial. Arabs are effectively tolerated guests not even second class citizens of Israel. A situation where Arab Israelis do not have access to 93% of the land, where Israeli Jews demonstrate against an Arab family moving into the Jewish city of Afula is not a democracy.
  13. The IHRA has, according to Hugh Tomlinson QC, a ‘potential chilling effect’ on freedom of speech . No less a person that Kenneth Stern, the author of the IHRA, in a written deposition to the House of Representatives in November 2017 described how the IHRA had been used to ‘restrict academic freedom and punish political speech’ and that it had‘chilled pro-Palestinian expression.’ How strange that Freedland omitted the above in is heart wrenching tale of Jewish suburbia.

If you really want to read some of Freedland’s screed, the link is below. Then, I expect, you’ll be able to think of your own objections to his claims.

Personally, I looked up The Guardian‘s page on Facebook and reported the article as fake news.

It’s also anti-Semitic – claiming that Jews as a people have responsibility for the offensive behaviour of a small group.

And it is offensive to try to force the rest of us into supporting a policy that forbids criticism of a foreign government’s homicidal – if not genocidal – activities. Just ask the United Nations.

Source: Yes, Jews are angry – because Labour hasn’t listened or shown any empathy | Jonathan Freedland | Opinion | The Guardian

Labour Jewish voters take down Tom Watson – and it’s a joy to read

Tom Watson.

If you’re fed up with Tom Watson and his silly campaigns, that aim to publicise divisions within the Labour Party and make it easier for the Conservatives to win again, read what follows and then visit Breaking Down The News for the rest of the open letter.

This Writer finds himself in agreement with much of what is written – although I would say Ken Livingstone wasn’t suspended solely for being supportive of the Palestineians but also for quoting historical fact correctly.

We read with interest your speech to guests at the Labour Friends of Israel luncheon recently and watched the video of you singing ‘Am Yisrael Chai’.  Perhaps you are not aware that this is the favourite chant of West Bank settlers and the fascist/neo-Nazi Jewish Defence League when attacking Palestinians and those they disagree with?

You began your speech by saying that you supported Israel because ‘our consciences dictate it’.  If you had a conscience you would not have spoken of your ‘special pleasure’ at the presence of Mark Regev, Israel’s Ambassador who, as-Chief Spokesman for Benjamin Netanyahu, defended Operation Protective Edge in Gaza in 2014 when 2,251 Palestinians were killed, including 551 children.

You said that you were ‘ashamed’ at the ‘anti-Semitism in our midst’.  Let us reassure you that although you have much to be ashamed of, anti-Semitism is not one of Labour’s sins.  Anti-Semitism does not exist as a political force in the Labour Party.  It never has and never will.  Those who have been suspended for ‘anti-Semitism’, in particular, Ken Livingstone, Jackie Walker, and Tony Greenstein, have been suspended for supporting the Palestinians, not because of anti-Semitism.  It is no coincidence that both the latter two are Jewish anti-Zionists.

You mentioned your recent, expenses paid trip to Israel recently, where you met the Chairman of the Israeli Labour Party Isaac Herzog. You spoke of his ‘determination to continue to push the path of peace’.  Is this the same Herzog who, Ha’aretz reports, pushed for ‘Separation From Palestinians as (the) Party Platform’?  In other words an apartheid solution with a Palestinian Bantustan?

I find it difficult to understand, in view of your purported opposition to anti-Jewish racism, why you turn a blind eye to Herzog’s virulent anti-Arab racism?  Herzog recently spoke of his fear of waking up to a Palestinian Prime Minister in Israel.  He said:

‘I want to separate from the Palestinians. I want to keep a Jewish state with a Jewish majority. I don’t want 61 Palestinian MKs in Israel’s Knesset. I don’t want a Palestinian prime minister in Israel.’

Source: Open letter to Tom Watson from Labour Jewish voters

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook