Writes Jonathan Hoffman:
'Ben Cohen has it right, here
Paragraph 156 of the Judgment:
"When a rugby player takes the field, he must accept his fair share of minor injuries. Similarly a political activist accepts the risk of being offended or hurt on occasions by things said or done by his opponents (who themselves take on a corresponding risk)."
Jaw-dropping. The Tribunal sees fighting antisemitism as akin to participating in a sport with the 'teams' evenly balanced and the contest played according to some kind of rulebook!
What planet do they live on?
Would they dismiss black or Muslim victims of racism – or female victims of sex discrimination – as mere players in a game?
Paragraph 150:
"Belief in the Zionist project or an attachment to Israel ... is not intrinsically part of Jewishness ..."
Is it really possible that Judge A M Snelson, Mr A Grant and Lady Sedley could have sat through 20 days of the hearing, done their post-hearing due diligence and STILL failed to appreciate how Israel came into being and the centrality of Israel to the Jewish people?'
I would add that there is already plenty of evidence, on social media and elsewhere, that the heinous judgment is giving that aid and comfort to the enemy that Ben Cohen in his must-read article identifies as the inevitable outcome:
"The lesson of the Fraser debacle is simply this: a single employment tribunal in the United Kingdom has created a precedent which will be invoked by every Jew-baiter around the globe; namely, that when Jews raise the question of anti-Semitism in the context of visceral hostility toward Israel, they do so in bad faith. That such a bigoted principle can be established in a democracy famed for its enlightened judicial methods is, perhaps, the most shocking realization of all."Read Ronnie Fraser's personal statement regarding the hearing and the judgment here
Some spiteful hateful comments from certain academics who should know better here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/tribunal-slams-academic-for-bringing-anti-semitism-case/2002841.article
But also support for Ronnie Fraser
It's not necessarily all over. If the money can be found to appeal to the High Court on a "point of law', then the fight will continue. And the items that Jonathan pulls out would be part of that: failure of due diligence. Plus, I understand from a link to Commentary via the elder of ziyon blog (which will appear with commentary (no pun intended) from me in a day or two over on Anne's opinions (http://anneinpt.wordpress.com/) also takes up other items in the judgement.
ReplyDeleteAnd there's always the European Court of Human Rights. The Tribunal is along way down the pecking order. Any Philanthropists out there wanting to see justice done?
La lutta continua! No pasaran!
Thanks for that link, Brian.
DeleteI should certainly love to see the European Court stand this verdict on its head!