!n London, Corbynista Types "Stand Up to Racism"

The antisemitic daubings in Belsize Park and South Hampstead that have marred thestart of the New Year brought out, last night, an assortment of protesting Lefties, including, it seems, members of that hardcore pro-Corbyn Israel-demonising rump calling itself Jewish Voice for Labour.

Here, in this Israel Advocacy Movement video narrated by the admirable Joseph Cohen, which claims that (mainstream) Jews were "ostracised" at the event, a familiar little woman cries "Go Away!" through clenched teeth several times at the young Jewish man interviewing attendees -- attendees such as a woman who implies that pro-Israel Jews are allies of the English Defence League (EDL) for instance, and a pompous Jewish guy with a posh accent.

The Lefties demonstrating included our old friend (we've often seen her on Alex Seymour's videos) the little woman of apparent Jewish parentage who sports a baseball cap and other accessories in the Palestinian colours outside football stadiums to demand that Israel is thrown out of FIFA, and who has become a staple at anti-Israel demos by the Inminds group (again, Alex Seymour regularly captures her on video).

But the "star" (so to speak) of the Lefty  brigade has to be the guy wearing a BDS sign in his beanie. What a gymnastic display of smirks his facial muscles pull, and what nauseating ripostes he gives when challenged by his young interlocutor. Watch, too, how the woman alongside him grins in seeming triumph at his remark regarding German opposition to the BDS movement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riDP1JUmCoc

Update: For more on the despicable antsemitic behaviour at this event see David Collier here

How to Find Favour With Antisemites

Judging by the number of plaudits and shares this sickening propaganda (by Na'amod: British Jews Against Occupation) has attracted from many of the usual suspects on social media, one way appears to be to invent alternate words to the Vidui (Confession) prayer, a key part of the liturgy of the holiest day of the Jewish calendar:

"ASHAMNU: We are guilty – There is a segregated justice system in the West Bank, with Palestinians tried in military courts which have a near-100% conviction rate.
BAGADNU: We have betrayed – The aspirations of freedom, equality and justice held by Palestinians and Israelis have been betrayed by those with the power to end the occupation.
GAZALNU: We have stolen – Land legally owned by Palestinians has been seized for the construction of settlements, and homes legally constructed by Palestinians have been demolished under the false pretense of security.
DIBARNU DOFI: We have slandered – Israelis who have the courage to speak out against the occupation, such as the veterans in Breaking the Silence, are falsely accused of lying by some of the most powerful voices in the land.
HE’EVINU: We have caused others to sin – Every day young Israelis are forced to spend their military service in the occupied territories, upholding a system of violence and discrimination against their neighbours.
VE-HIRSHANU: We have caused wickedness – By sustaining diaspora support for Israeli occupation and the consistent policies of division, dispossession and denial of basic rights.
ZADNU: We have sinned wilfully – The facts and reality of occupation are unequivocal, yet human rights activists like Omar Shakir have faced deportation from Israel instead of being listened to.
CHAMASNU: We have extorted – Those who uphold the occupation have made false promises and engaged in gross corruption in order to retain their positions of power.
TAFALNU SHEKER: We have become attached to lying – Falsely slurring members of our community, failing to address the concerns of countless British Jews, presenting arguments based on fear rather than justice.
YA’ATZNU RA: We have given harmful advice – Hasbara programmes enter schools, universities and synagogues around the world, presenting disingenuous arguments to justify continued military control of Palestinian lives.
KIZAVNU: We have deceived – Palestinians are constantly maligned as terrorists bent on the destruction of Israel, while the violent rhetoric of many Israeli leaders is overlooked.
LATZNU: We have mocked – The aspirations of Palestinians to live in freedom and dignity are heartlessly dismissed by the political leaders who would rather expand the occupation than bring it to an end.
MARADNU: We have rebelled - Against the universal principle of 'B'tselem Elokim' (divine likeness) by prioritising one narrative and rejecting another, yet so similar to our own.
NIATZNU: We have provoked – Israeli politicians outlined plans to annex the Jordan Valley, promising endless occupation to the Palestinians who live there.
SARARNU: We have turned away – Attempts to bring about a resolution to the occupation have been abandoned by Israeli political leaders, who have no concern for the Palestinians and Israelis who are harmed by it.
AVINU: We have been perverse – The romanticisation of military might and the use of the language of security in order to justify injustices has become a feature of dialogue around Israel.
PASHANU: We have been negligent – Children are regularly subjected to harsh and immoral conditions when processed through the military courts, being denied contact with their families and subjected to unnecessary practices such as blindfolding.
TZARARNU: We have caused grief – There have been over 3500 Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces in the past 10 years.
KISHINU OREF: We have been stubborn – Calls for peace and justice fall have been roundly ignored by those in power, and the occupation continues with no end in sight; this year we will let calls for change and transformation ring loud throughout our community.
RASHANU: We have been wicked – The occupation has raised immeasurable hands to strike and has caused division in our own community.
SHICHATNU: We have corrupted – By venerating nationalist passions we compromise our morality for the sake of upholding occupation; this year we will listen to the voices that have too long been trampled; we will hear the stories that must be told of racial profiling, of imprisonment, of nighttime break-ins.
TIAVNU: We have been despondent [literally, loathsome] – Yet we can be courageous and unafraid in the ways we create a movement for Jews who confront support for occupation, in the communal spaces closest to our heart.
TAINU: We have strayed – From our rich tradition of resistance to tyranny; this year we will return to our deepest commitment to freedom (cheirut) from slavery.
TITANU: You have let us go astray – We have grown up in the British Jewish community that is so dear to us. Yet we have not felt able to express ourselves and our commitments fully when it comes to fighting against the occupation."

Meanwhile, my spies tell me that some of our old friends in the anti-Israel movement are advocating the tactic of refuting (or trying to!) the points made in this important report pictured above, released last month.

In London, Noisome Noise Polluters Rant Against Germany and Israel (video)

On Saturday, outside the Goethe Institute in London, a small group of Israel-haters  representing the Islamic-run group Inminds express their hate for both Germany and the Jewish State.

With their ludicrous mind- and ear-assaulting delivery who do these fanatics expect to convert to their repellent cause?

Their warped arguments ate well-glimpsed in Alex Seymour/Seymour Alexander's  introduction to his footage:

'Germany has yet again been cowered by intense pressure from Tel-Aviv and Washington into joining the Zionist campaign against BDS and into believing (or pretending to believe)  the lie that it is somehow anti-Jewish to support the Palestinians' demand for freedom and the return of their land and resources, stolen by the fascist State of Israel. Germany's latest contemptible act of submission to the Zionist diktat is to withdraw the 'Nelly Sachs' literary prize, awarded  to the renowned Pakistani/British author Kamila Shamsie, on the grounds that she is a supporter of the BDS movement. Shame on Germany.  By sucking up to an evil Zionist regime in occupied Palestine today, Berlin thinks we will forget about what Germany did to the Jews between 1933 and 1945.'

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L31swTz-FJ0

"Antisemitism is not a Jewish Problem. It is a Problem for Jews"

Two letters: ratbags versus realists regarding Corbynista antisemitism.

But first, a not irrelevant archival find by University of Aberystwyth international politics academic Dr James Vaughan, regarding Labour Party policy in not-so-far-off days of yore:

Okay, then, this letter by as-a-Jew leftists to the Guardian, 21 February:

"You report (19 February) that a number of implacably anti-Corbyn MPs have left the Labour party alleging a failed “approach to dealing with antisemitism”, with Luciana Berger criticising Labour for becoming “sickeningly institutionally racist”.

We are Jewish members and supporters of the Labour party concerned about the current rise of reactionary ideologies, including antisemitism, in Britain and elsewhere across Europe.

We note the worrying growth of populist rightwing parties, encouraging racism, Islamophobia and antisemitism. In Britain the far right is whipping up these prejudices, a threat that requires a resolute and energetic response. But instead we have seen a disproportionate focus on antisemitism on the left, which is abhorrent but relatively rare.

We believe that the Labour party under the progressive leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a crucial ally in the fight against bigotry and reaction. His lifetime record of campaigning for equality and human rights, including consistent support for initiatives against antisemitism, is formidable. His involvement strengthens this struggle.

Labour governments introduced both the anti-racist and human rights legislation of the 20th century and the 2010 Equalities Act. A Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn will be a powerful force to fight against racism, Islamophobia and antisemitism.

It is in this context that we welcome the Labour party’s endorsement of freedom of expression on Israel and on the rights of Palestinians. Labour is correct to recognise that while prejudice against Jewish people is deplorable, criticism of Israel’s government and policies can and must be made.
We urge all who wish to see an end to bigotry and racism, and who seek a more just society, to give their support to the Labour party."

For signatories see here

A riposte in the Guardian, 25 February:

'We write in response to the letter you published on 21 February, asserting that Jeremy Corbyn was a crucial ally in the fight against bigotry and reaction and that a Labour government would be a powerful force against antisemitism.

The signatories to that letter plainly feel the need to rely on their Judaism to bolster its content. This may be because they consider it to be some protection from the view that many of your readers would otherwise take when reading their assertions, but it is essentially irrelevant. The vast majority of the UK Jewish community has made its view of Mr Corbyn clear. So too has the public in various opinion polls. He is not trusted on antisemitism, first because he has not acted against it and because his own actions are, at least, concerning. Second, because those claiming to speak about antisemitism in his name do so without reproach or disassociation.

The Labour party has, previously, been a force for good in promoting anti-racism, as the authors acknowledge. Sadly, that is no longer the case. It has never been the case, anywhere, that a party which could not root out antisemitism from its midst, tolerated those accusing Jews of manufacturing it, and lost the trust of the Jewish community, ever governed fairly, decently or competently. Antisemitism is corruption, and corruption spreads.

We also disagree with the authors’ apparent belief that the ability to criticise Israel is critical to the debate on antisemitism. The Labour party’s adoption of the IHRA definition marks its acceptance of the fact that criticism of Israel must not involve antisemitism, and that there is a wide range of acceptable criticism that does not. The discredited argument that antisemitism is invented by Jews to protect Israel is antisemitic. So is criticism of Israel outside the IHRA guidelines and definition. Both of these things should be outwith the scope of mainstream, tolerant debate.

Suggesting a permissible link between the Labour leadership’s attitude to British Jews and Israel is both wrong and shameful. There is no basis to refuse to reproach or reject the antisemites we refer to above. The leadership’s failure to do so makes Jews part of the “few”, who the Labour party expressly reject.

That Labour is so mistrusted on the issue is uncomfortable and sad. But it must be said. And in saying it, we do not speak as Jews, but as citizens of this country. Antisemitism is not a Jewish problem. It is a problem for Jews.'

For signatories see here

Danger Man Dissected

Unsurprisingly, the defection of principled men and women from the cesspool that is the Corbyn-led Labour Party continues.

Three years ago, during the furore surrounding despicable comments regarding Hitler and Zionism made by former London mayor Ken Livingstone, who quit the Labour Party in 2018,  Labour MP Ian Austin, whose Jewish adoptive father arrived in England from Czechoslovakia as a ten-year-old in 1939, made (top left) what many Twitter users consider his finest tweet.

A few days ago, disgusted by the antisemitism that lurks in Labour's ranks, resigned from the party, telling the BBC's Kirsty Wark in an interview that if he remained he would no longer be able to look his father (whose immediate family was murdered in Treblinka) and his Jewish friends in the eye.

"I was one of the first to raise concerns about antisemitism following events at the 2017 Conference in Brighton", wrote a Brighton and Hove Councillor Warren Morgan a couple of days ago, explaining his resignation from the Labour Party, which he joined in 1993.

"It was my duty as council leader, as a Labour councillor, to call out racism wherever and whenever it appeared, without fear or favour, in defence of the city's Jewish community. For that I was vilified by members locally and supporters of Jeremy Corbyn nationally.

Friends in the Jewish Labour Movement urged me not to resign my membership, as others have done, in response to the unchecked and rampant antisemitism amongst Party members, in order to fight back and clear the Party of those with racist antisemitic views. I have done so until now. The resignation of Luciana Berger from the Party is a clear sign that members of the Jewish community and those who support them have no place in Labour."

Investigative journalist Tom Bower's searing exposé of Jeremy Corbyn's problem with da Joos published last week in the Jewish Chronicle must be actingas a final straw for some Labour members, and it is only to be regretted that the revelations it contains, uncovered during Mr Bower's researches for his just-published biography of Corbyn, Dangerous Hero,were not known and publicised before Corbyn was elected party leader.

Here, by the way, is anti-Israel hard leftist John McDonnell's insolent tweet regarding the biography.

McDonnell, a handpicked member of Corbyn's team and Shadow Chancellor, no less, showed his vile hostility Jews and Israel again last week when he called for Britons who fought in the IDF to be deprived of their British citizenship.

Writes Mr Bower, the son of child refugees from Prague and Vienna respectively, iner alia:

'I am among the few living people who interviewed for TV serious Nazi war criminals....

Like those antisemitic Nazis, Mr Corbyn blames the malign power of Jews for orchestrating a global conspiracy to oppress the workers. “The power of the Israel lobby is truly phenomenal,” Mr Corbyn said in 2003 to Hamas supporters, referring to his conviction that rich Jewish bankers, especially in New York, are orchestrating Zionist influence.

Ever since Mr Corbyn was elected Labour’s leader in 2015, he has faced accusations about his antisemitism, which he has denied. However, while researching the book I came across an interview he gave in September 2015 which confirms Mr Corbyn’s antisemitism.

Unsuspecting, Mr Corbyn had settled down in front of a microphone to help a local historian compile eyewitness accounts for The Holloway Project. Mr Corbyn was asked to describe his attachment to the Holloway Road, an ugly highway running through Islington, his north London constituency. But before identifying his favourite places along that dust bowl, he described his early life and, most noteworthy, his first job in London in 1973 as an assistant researcher at the National Union of Tailor and Garment Workers.

In Mr Corbyn’s version, as the most junior employee he personally challenged the Jewish employers of his members — “scumbags” and “crooks”, as he would describe the tailors — to recover the members’ unpaid wages. Their bosses, explained Mr Corbyn, “had mysteriously gone bankrupt just before Christmas, owing their workers a lot of wages and not paying National Insurance and all this kind of thing. Scumbags actually. Crooks. My job was to try and chase these people through Companies House and so on.”

Mr Corbyn’s account is contradicted by Alec Smith, the union’s former leader and Mr Corbyn’s direct superior, now in his eighties, who I tracked down in Essex, and by the trade union’s well-catalogued records.

Pertinently, the union’s archives stored at universities in London and Manchester do not reveal any issues about “unscrupulous employers” and do not show that any member complained about being unpaid, especially before Christmas.

Mr Smith told me with certainty that Mr Corbyn “never had any contact with our members. He just sat in at meetings passing me information”. Mr Smith recalled: “The clothing industry is a tough business. If an employer went broke it was because of trading conditions — not to fiddle their employees.”

Not for the first time, Mr Corbyn had reshaped the truth to improve his self-image. He conjured the tale of a brave personal fight against exploitative Jewish employers of sweatshop labour and exposed his disdain towards those Jews seeking self-improvement to fulfil the dream of moving from the East End slums to North London’s suburbs.'

Bower, whose first wife is a source for some of his discoveries, goes on to state:

'Uneducated and uninterested in culture and anything spiritual, Mr Corbyn, as a committed communist, was unsympathetic towards a race complicated by its history of survival over 2,000 years of persecution....

[He} defined Zionism as racism and accused white Jews of acting as supremacists, oppressing coloured Arabs in what he called “Israel’s apartheid occupation” of Palestine. He condemned the Balfour Declaration... and dismissed the effect of the Holocaust to explain the Jewish people’s longing for a return to their own country after 1945 to avoid future persecution.

[He] preferred to ignore that Israel was created by the United Nations and fulfilled all the legal requirements for international recognition. Pertinently, he never complained about the simultaneous creation of Pakistan in 1948, where partition of the sub-continent had caused millions of deaths and led to the persecution of Hindus by the new Muslim state.

In Mr Corbyn’s hierarchy of oppression, the descendants of slaves were the most victimised, while Holocaust survivors were at the bottom of the list. He did not distinguish between Jews in London and Zionists in Tel Aviv. To him, they were all guilty.

An original source of Mr Corbyn’s antisemitism in the 1960s ... was Malcolm X ...

Mr Corbyn’s antisemitism simmered unseen, even after he was elected as an MP in 1983, until the Islamist attack on New York on September 11 2001. In the aftermath, he organised with fellow communists the Stop the War Coalition (SWC), ostensibly to protest against the American invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr Corbyn’s partner in SWC was the Muslim Association of Great Britain. This group was attached to the Muslim Brotherhood. Some on the left questioned the coalition of Marxists with political Islamists but Mr Corbyn successfully argued that the alliance was forged by a mutual opposition to Zionism.

Thereafter, during protest marches through London, banners against the war would be given equal billing to the Muslim Association’s placards urging the destruction of Israel. The two, said the Muslim organisers, were linked: Zionists were planning the imminent invasion of Iraq. Mr Corbyn agreed.

Thereafter, Mr Corbyn frequently associated with Muslim extremists who advocated in antisemitic language Israel’s destruction. Speaking on the same platforms with the extremists, he appeared to share his hosts’ refusal to distinguish between anti-Zionism and antisemitism...' 

Be sure to read the entire article dissecting Danger Man's antisemitism.  It pulls no punches.

The fact that in his biography of Corbyn Bower by an unfortunate slip refers to "Cat Stevens" when he means "Cat Smith" the female Labour MP, does not validate the disdainful dismissive review of the book undertaken by reviewer Stephen Bush (political editor of the New Statesman) in the Guardian, where the issue of antisemitism is not mentioned by Mr Bush.

More (out of numerous other) examples of Corbynista slime:

MP Chris Williamson:

As others have asked, recalling this, has Williamson no mirror?

There seems to be a great deal of "rich man antisemitism" at the base of Corbynista Jew-hatred, the perception of Jews as plutocrats, the manifestly unfounded belief that all Jews are wealthy.  Still, Corbyn continues to have his as-a-Jew toadies,  They surface every so aften in the correspondence colums of the Guardian ... as well as of the Islington Tribune.

"Extremist Hate Preachers, pro-Jihad Activists, and Avowed anti-Semites" Talk the Talk on British Campuses

On Holocaust Memorial Day, Facebook friends of Mick Napier, verbose chief of chieftain the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, share an obnoxious cartoon popular with the Israel-demonising crowd.

For his part, Napier (current Facebook profile avowing "Working to boycott and isolate the genocidal State of Israel") has used Holocaust Memorial Day to push his anti-Israel message in posts and a live broadcast to followers, including one invoking Raphael Lemkin's definition of Genocide.

A follower runs with the theme of Israelis as deliberate perpetrators of genocide, and another, reflecting what has become commonplace in the anti-Israel movement, especially since the rise of Corbyn, is not shy about making antisemitic tropes:

To which the chief's observation is hardly an outright condemnation:

Meanwhile, Tomas Rowan, described as "with UNRWA as a United Nations Refugee Affairs Officer in Gaza during the First Intifada" whose "novel of that period A Bar Mitzvah At Arafat’s will be published this summer", is advocating adoption of an "anti-Palestinianism" declaration analogous to definitions of antisemitism.

And the London-based Henry Jackson Society has published a very revealing, very disturbing analysis of extremist speakers on campuses in the UK during the academic year 2017-18.

Inter alia:

'Extremist hate preachers, pro-jihad activists, and avowed anti-Semites have “near-unfettered” access to students. It catalogues 435 events promoted to students held over the last three academic years featuring elements of extremism – 16% of which took place at just one university.  The nationwide league table identified events promoted by university groups that have included: extremist or extremist-linked speakers, those that fundraised for extremist organisations, or included extremist content.

In September 2015 at a speech in Birmingham, then Prime Minister David Cameron ordered universities to stop providing extremists with “the oxygen they need to flourish” by hosting extreme speakers.  He cited 70 events featuring extremist-linked speakers that had occurred on campuses the previous academic year.  In spite of his warning, the University Extreme Speakers League Table discloses that more than 100 such events have been targeted at students in each and every year since.  In the 2017-18 academic year, the number of publicly promoted events increased by 87%, with 200 such events. The report warns that the true figure could be much higher, given it lists only publicly promoted events. 

Over the last three academic years, SOAS is the university which has hosted the most events promoted to students which feature extremist groups or speakers.  The university has repeatedly disputed that it is in breach of its Prevent duties and has seen 70 events promoted by student groups that feature extremist groups or speakers – 43 of which took place in the last year alone.  In the 2017-18 academic year, over 20% of all events featuring elements of extremism took place under its auspices.  SOAS, hosted over four times as many events as its closest rivals; King’s College London, Birmingham, and Queen Mary University.

Among the extremist speakers identified by the Henry Jackson Society are:

35 events featuring speakers from the pro-Jihad lobby group CAGE.  CAGE speakers include: Moazzam Begg who has praised Al-Qaeda figures and encouraged Muslims to travel to Syria; Shaker Aamer considered an Osama Bin Laden affiliate by the US Government; and Asim Qureshi who has promoted violent jihad, called Jihadi John a “beautiful young man”, and refused to condemn female genital mutilation.

4 of the 6 extremist speakers David Cameron warned universities not to host in 2015 have continued to speak at student events collectively making appearances in 54 student events over the past three years.  They are Hamza Tzortzis, Uthman Lateef, Haitham al-Haddad and Alomgir Ali.

Other radical Islamists among the almost 100 speakers identified include: Yahya al-Raaby who has called Shia Muslims “devils” and “rafida”; Yusuf Chambers who has advocated death for homosexuals;and Muhammed Taqi Usmani who has claimed that Islam allows slavery under certain conditions.

140 events featuring representatives of organisations linked to Haitham al-Haddad.  Al-Haddad is one of Britain’s most notorious extremist hate preachers who has sanctioned forms of female genital mutilation, child marriage, death for apostates and adulterers, and said that men who beat their wives should not be questioned.

The rankings also include appearances by the far-right extremist Tommy Robinson and noted anti-Semites including Jackie Walker, the former Vice-Chair of Momentum.The report argues that universities’ protocols for upholding the Government’s prevent strategy are “not fit for purpose”.'

Warning of an “industrial-scale failure by universities to apply their Prevent duties”, the report’s author highlights the apparent disparities between universities’ obligations under the law and the reality on the ground.  Universities have an obligation under the ‘Prevent duty’ enacted by the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act (2015) to protect students from extremist speakers.  The rules were instituted by Theresa May during her tenure as Home Secretary. The Government’s guidance on the duty states:

“…when deciding whether or not to host a particular speaker, [universities] should consider carefully whether the views being expressed, or likely to be expressed, constitute extremist views that risk drawing people into terrorism or are shared by terrorist groups. In these circumstances the event should not be allowed to proceed except where [universities] are entirely convinced that such risk can be fully mitigated without cancellation of the event.” ....

(Emphasis added)

Read the entire article, with a list of the most affected campuses and accompanied by a video featuring the report's author Emma Fox, here.

"Truly Shameful": Stench from the pits

For the victims see here

The loathsome Jenny Tonge has since attempted to tone down her remarks, made in reaction to the Pittsburgh synagogue tragedy, but her stench remains:

Meanwhile:

And

If you haven't yet read the article, by Colin Appleby, recommended by J.K. Rowling, please do so! 

'I’ve fallen out of love with Labour.

I’ve been called a Zionazi.

I’ve been asked if I was a Zionist.

I’ve been called a Tory Jew.

I’ve been told I’m good with money.

I’ve been told that I’m “obviously” rich.

I’ve been accused of being more loyal to Israel than the U.K.

I’ve been called a child killer.

I’ve been barred from attending a JVL [Jewish Voice for Labour] meeting.

I’ve been told “to shut the fuck up Jew”.

I’ve been screamed at in the street because I wanted JLM [Jewish Labour Movement] to address a local party meeting.

I’ve been told I only ever care about Jewish stuff.

I’ve been called Zio scum.

I’ve been told I’m worthless.

I’ve been told I’m a disgrace.

I’ve been told Hitler was right.

I’ve been told “it’s a pity all of your lot weren’t gassed”.

I’ve been spat at.

I’ve been threatened with physical violence.

I’ve reported every single incident.

I’ve been told it’s all lies.

I’ve been told I’m part of a conspiracy to get Corbyn.

I’ve been told I don’t belong in Labour.

They’re right about that, I’m a Jew and I don’t belong in Labour. I’m done. I resign my membership.'

Oh Marr! "Jeremy Corbyn, are you an antisemite?"

Gorgeous George's tweet at left, retweeted by numerous Israel-hating Corbynistas and others,  is a reaction to the interview Jeremy Corbyn gave a couple of days ago to the BBC's Andrew Marr.

To quote the Jewish Chronicle inter alia here, accompanied by a still of the Labour leader addressing the Palestine Return Centre in London five years ago (see a video of that mischievous talk here or see it in the video below):

'Jeremy Corbyn ducked an invitation to express personal remorse over Labour’s antisemitism crisis in a TV appearance on the eve of the party’s conference.

Interviewed on BBC1’s The Andrew Marr Show on Sunday morning, he was asked by the presenter if he would look into the camera and apologise to Jewish viewers....'

See the interview below.  "Jeremy Corbyn, are you an antisemite?" asks Marr at 8:00, introducing a topic that occupied almost 50 per cent of his interview with Corbyn. 

Stiff but polite questioning by Marr, who drives home the point that Jews can best determine what is antisemitism, and plays back to Corbyn an interview Marr did with Lord Sachs, the former Chief Rabbi:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GHGV__mKq4

Among the Corbynistas who have got themselves into a twist over Marr's interview is a chap called Giles Leveson-Gower.  Now, the Leveson-Gowers are a patrician English family, not, one would have thought, the type to join the Labour Party in order to vote in Corbyn as leader.  Whether Giles is using a pseudonym I know not, but he's certainly no fan of the Zionist Entity, as his Twitter page and this too indicates.

With regard to the Marr interview, Giles in an exchange on Facebook:

 And

Upwards of 85 per cent of British Jews with two passports?  What's prompted that idea?

Aha!  Could this Jewish Chronicle article (read it in full here) have been misinterpreted by our double-barrelled friend?

'More than 85 per cent of British Jews think Jeremy Corbyn is antisemitic, according to polling carried out for the JC. A similar percentage believe there are significant levels of antisemitism at all levels of the Labour Party.

The survey, undertaken by polling company Survation between August 12 and September 4, shows that 85.9 per cent of British Jews regard the Labour leader as antisemitic, while just 8.3 per cent believe he is not.

In a recent Survation poll among the general public, 39 per cent said Mr Corbyn was antisemitic.... 

In a poll earlier this month among the general public, 43 per cent said there were “high” to “very high” levels of antisemitism within Labour.

The poll was conducted after the Labour leader was at the centre of further rows. In July, photos of Mr Corbyn surfaced from a 2014 event in Tunis, where he laid a wreath commemorating the terrorists behind the Munich massacre of the Israeli Olympic team in 1972. In August, a video emerged of him speaking at a 2013 event, during which he said of British “Zionists”.

“They clearly have two problems. One is they don’t want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either."'

Some Corbynistas' Petty Vengeance

A tweet by Wales-based international relations academic and UK-Israel relations specialist James Vaughan ("Would talk less about antisemitism if there were less of it about"):

At several London bus stops today:

Image: Evening Standard/Aine Lagan 

Inter alia:

',,,,The Met tweeted to say police in Lambeth were investigating reports of fly-posting and that "offensive material will be removed".
The posters shocked Londoners making their way home from work, with many describing them as “vile” and “terrifying”. Others claimed the adverts were a “hate crime”.
A TfL[Transport for London' spokesperson said: "These adverts are absolutely not authorised by TfL or our advertising partner JCDecaux.
“It is fly posting and therefore an act of vandalism which we take extremely seriously. We have instructed our contractors to remove any of these posters found on our network immediately.”....'

 

Back to Vaughan:

Corbynista Antisemitism: Ray's beams of light

Antisemitic trash spruiked on Facebook today by Tony Gratrex

Although I've always considered him to the political left of myself, I've a soft spot for British blogger Ray Cook.

Despite probably considering me to the political right of himself, Ray, who's Jewish,  was the person who, in 2010, suggested that I start a blog of my own, and persuaded my hesitant self to do so.

Ray's is a calm, rational voice in the pro-Israel blogosphere, and on the subject of Corbynista antisemitism he is all the more effective because of that.  His literary skills are evident in the following sardonic commentary, posted to Facebook last week, and reproduced here with his permission

The accompanying images have been gathered by me, and those from the 'secret' Facebook group known as 'Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party Forum' come from the collection of Gillian Lazarus, who explains, inter alia:

Well, with friends like Gratrex Sizer should be an expert!

 '.... There is an almost obsessive antagonism to Israel and to Jews, making an exception for Jews who actively denounce Israel; Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein and the late Hajo Meyer being much cited. 

These views do not usually get challenged by other members. 

They are permitted by the administrators. Calling the Talmud Satanic is not reasoned criticism of Israel. 

The administrators post articles and videos, usually from Mint Press, Russia Today, Palestinian news channels, Evolve, Mondoweiss and Skwawkbox which are universally hostile to Israel.

Within a short space of time, these posts attract comments denigrating Jews in general.

 If anyone disagrees, they are abused by other members of the group.

 On the few occasions when I have posted something questioning the totally negative coverage of Israel, my comments were deleted by administrators.

The Al-Jazeera film ‘the Lobby’ is posted most days as an educational resource.

The literacy of forum members is diverse. I find it hard to imagine that Tories and Zionists would infiltrate these forums and employ so many different levels of orthographic competence.

It is argued every day on the forums that Israel is murderous, sadistic, criminal and internationally puissant. The videos are not usually clear and one cannot see what is happening in them, so a member will insert a tagline, explaining that the video depicts some monstrous behaviour inflicted on Palestinians by Israelis. I’m not saying that this never happens but that, in the videos shown, anything could be happening. It is like looking at an abstract painting.  The explanatory text next to it tells you that the painting shows the artist’s inner turmoil when choosing between a tuna baguette and an avocado wrap. Without the text, one would not know....'

 Over to Ray Cook: 

'It seems the more we Jews complain about antisemitism the more people reveal their distaste for Jews and make every excuse to pooh-pooh, dismiss, ridicule and trash our fears.

If you are Muslim, gay, black, trans, disabled, the same people are tripping over themselves to stand with you to signal their virtue. All the more reason to cherish those who are not Jews yet stand with us in these troubled times.

Geoffrey Robertson, for the Palestine Return Centre!Click here

Of course, we must understand that were it not for the existence of Israel there would be no antisemitism. It's Israel's existence that is the problem because it has to compete for virtue with one of the groups so beloved by the not-antisemitic, anti-Zionists. Anyone who can claim to be a) a victim b) oppressed c) not white d) not colonialist e) not European f) all of the above but with a propensity for murder and/or religious/political fanaticism, misogyny, homophobia or Holocaust denial is embraced and welcomed to the fold of the International Socialist Solidarity Movement. But not ISIS - ooh no. They are too clearly worse even than the Zios - therefore they must be covert Zios!! So you mustn't like them, but it is also ok to explain their existence as a reaction to the imperialism of the West which was/is financed by Jews. Nothing to do with religion.

A reference to Margaret Hodge, MP

You cannot be an antisemite, anyway, because not all Semites are Jews. The word was coined to include the ancient Egyptians and Hittites, of course

To qualify as a full member of the Righteous against Zion you must also understand Jews better than Jews themselves. You understand their thinking and their psychosis. You understand their motivation. You are far better placed to define who is a Jew than Jews. Judaism is purely a religion, not a people or a nation. What do we know, eh?

And, if it happens, you can claim to be a Jew, even if you don't practise Judaism and, therefore, are not a Jew by your own definition, you are, however über-qualified to pontificate about Judaism, Zionism and Jewish history, even if you have not the slimmest connection to the Jewish community. And not only that, If you can claim to be an anti-Zionist Jew you are guaranteed a place in the pantheon of the Virtuous.

You have to support murder or, preferably, genocide to get full approval as a victim. Do not subscribe any moral agency to those you support - they are immune and have no responsibility for their actions. This is why Maoris, Aboriginals, Native Americans, Tibetans, Crimeans, Rohingya, Kurds are not on the radar. But above all, don't defend Israel - at all. Physically, in writing, politically.

You have to regularly compare Israel to Nazis and claim they are committing genocide against the 'Palestinians'. This reinforces your Group credentials. It's purely a coincidence that this is deliberately offensive to all Jews. These lies are necessary because facts are fluid when it comes to class war.

It has nothing to do with Jews. It's that terrible idea - Zionism - that is the problem. Zionism, the movement which became necessary due to unhinged, illogical hatred against Jews so that they sought to find peace and self-determination away from antisemites, is now used as an excuse to attempt to deprive them of the refuge which they made Jews need in the first place. After all, we were so safe in Europe, weren't we? We were so safe in the Arab world, weren't we?

So we should just shut up, leave the Middle East, stop being successful, stop being too clever for our own good, stop slaughtering animals, stop circumcision, stop wearing funny clothes, stop being too white and, well, stop being Jewish, I guess; then we'll be safe. Sounds like a good deal to me. Any takers?

Disclaimer: this post does not contain any irony because, as a British Zionist, I cannot fathom its intellectual nuances.'

 Futhermore:

'My response to a Times comment on an article about Corbyn's leading the party into a nightmare of its own making.

The comment in question ran as follows:

 "A balanced article, but with a flaw. It is rather dodgy about Hayo Meijer. It says that Meyer “likened the Israeli government to the Nazis” without further comment. The meeting where this picture was taking is one in the sequence of international meetings organised by IJAN (International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network). IJAN condemns the misuse of the Holocaust by the Israeli government to abstain the Palestinian population of its legal rights. Meyer always started his lectures by explicit pointing out that you can’t compare the fate of the Palestinians with the ‘endlösung’. A lot of Jews who survived the concentration camps have later declared that the period before the ‘kristallnacht’ was the most severe, because of the enormous uncertainty about what was going to happen. After the ‘kristallnacht’ everything was clear. The issue is loss of identity. Secular Jews saw themselves not as Jew, but as German. Suddenly this identity was taken away from them. Soon after that they even lost their human identity and they were classifies as ‘untermensch’. This process of dehumanisation was Hago Meijer’s subject. A famous quote of him is: “before you can dehumanise someone else, you first have to dehumanise yourself”. And it is exactly this process of dehumanising the Palestinians of which he was afraid would damage the Jewish community on the long term."

My response:

"The idea Israel 'dehumanises' Palestinians is at best an exaggeration, at worst a libel. The opposite is definitely true, in fact; you only have to pay close attention to the filth spewed out by the PA media and Hamas and the brainwashing of children to see it is the Jewish Israelis who are dehumanised and this aids the ease with which Palestinians can be persuaded to stab, run over, blow up and shoot Jews.

Whereas it is true that restrictions on movement, being at the mercy of soldiers etc. has a demoralising effect, the response is not a desperate push for negotiation about borders and settlements, but a murderous rampage.

Prior to the First Intifada there was no security fence, no checkpoints and free movement. That Intifada came after agreement on final borders and other issues was so close that Arafat had to do something to change the status quo or he would have to agree to a state. Since then, at least 3 more offers have been rejected because no offer would ever be enough for those who dehumanise Jews daily and seek their destruction.

The idea that the State of Israel uses the Holocaust to justify its 'treatment' of Palestinians is pure antisemitic hate. 20% of the population of Israel is Arab Muslim and they have the highest standard of living and the most freedom of any Arabs anywhere (and yes, there is prejudice and, yes, there are problems, but these can be politically resolved over time). The only reason the Arabs of the territories don't have the same freedom is because they refuse to accept the existence of a Jewish State and are brainwashed into believing such historically illiterate lies that the Israelis only arrived after '48 and that they are all Europeans or Khazars and they have no connection to the land etc. etc. and it's all the result of the Holocaust (Tel Aviv was founded in 1909, for example under the Muslim Ottoman Turks). A Holocaust many of them, including Abbas, either deny or belittle.

If you want to negotiate a State and you really want a 2 state solution then you don't go about it by seeking the destruction of the other side. Corbyn supports these views, whatever he says, and he is especially keen to embrace Jews who share these egregious views because it gives cover to his own prejudices. [Emphasis added]

This is not to say Israel is completely innocent, but the rhetoric against it from the Muslim world and the far Left in this country and outside is so shrill and disproportionate, not to say frequently mendacious, that reasoned and honest discussion of a very complex historical and legal problem is virtually impossible in the media and online.

Corbyn aligns himself with, and is the cheerleader for the politics of the bully and the antisemite who broach no discussion or questioning because they might be confronted with the truth. This is why so many of the meetings he has are behind closed doors or exclude 'Zionists' who might challenge lies and exaggeration or half-truths and conspiracy theories as well as blatant antisemitic tropes.

Former PM Gordon Brown attempts damage control

Corbyn is a vicarious 'insurgent'. He goes around appropriating international conflicts in Israel, Ireland, Iraq, Syria etc. and local politics to his own internationalist, anti-capitalist anti-colonialist, anti-West world view. He then tells us with delusional hubris he does it in the pursuit of peace without a scintilla of evidence to support that statement.

All that would be acceptable in terms of free speech, but the problem is that in so doing he befriends murderers and terrorists and enemies of this country and sanitises them.

He may soon be Prime Minister of this country. Alarmingly, there appear to be millions that don't see him for what he is, or worse, do see it and don't care or actually agree with him. For Jews, perhaps more than most people, that is a scenario that is burned into their psyche and that is why their response is so anguished."'

Toxic Tonge, Heinous Hain & Other Pains

On 7 June members of the House of Lords had four minutes each to address the chamber on the subject of Israel's response to outrages from Gaza on its border, although as Lord Steel's opening remarks (below) show, the sublect up for debate was not phrased that way.

The toxic Baroness Tonge was among the speakers, and the heinous Peter Hain was flexing his anti-Israel muscles again, while pretending to have that country's best interests in mind.

Even some of the more sensible speakers, apparently assuming that the Palestinians are genuine partners for peace, forgetting their history of rejectionism, and the malign influence of Iran's proxies, seemed to think that the fault for the violence lies with Netanyahu and Trump.

Take a look at my post here regarding Hain's history of anti-Israel activity, his espousal of a "secular democratic state" in the 1970s, and his recent return to that position, his chances of becoming Labour Party leader and subsequently prime minister having passed the former Young Liberal firebrand and general pain in the tuchus by.

And then take a look at Hansard for 7 June:

Lord Steel of Aikwood (LibDem; formerly Liberal party leader David Steel)

 My Lords, I put in for the ballot for today’s debate just after the terrible slaughter of 62 Palestinians inside the Gaza fence, which included eight children. I should at the outset ​declare a former interest. I served for seven years as president of the charity Medical Aid for Palestinians—and I am delighted to see that the current president, the noble Baroness, Lady Morris of Bolton, is to speak in this debate. During that time I visited Israel, the West Bank and Gaza several times, once touring Gaza just after the Cast Lead operation, when I saw for myself the wanton destruction of hospitals, schools and factories in what was described by David Cameron as one vast prison camp.

Before anyone accuses me of being one-sided, let me also say that I spent an afternoon with the local Israeli MP in the Ashkelon area in the south of that country and fully understand the intolerable life of citizens there threatened by rockets fired by Hamas from inside Gaza.

In fact, long before I got involved with MAP, back in 1981, I first met Yasser Arafat, leader of the PLO, at a time when our Government would not speak to him on the grounds that the PLO was a terrorist organisation refusing to recognise Israel, a mistake that we have repeated with Hamas. As I got to know Arafat over the years, I recognised that he was a brilliant liberation leader but a disappointing failure as head of the Palestinian Administration. Indeed, it was the incompetence and even corruption of that Administration which led to the success of Hamas in the election in Gaza. But those of us who pride ourselves in democracy cannot just give them the cold shoulder because we did not like the result, and yet that is what happened. The lesson of the successful peace process in Northern Ireland should surely have taught us that the only route to peace has to be through dialogue with those we may not like, rather than confrontation.

That brings me to the policy of the current Israeli Government, backed by the United States of America and, sadly, by our own Government. Israel’s great tragedy was the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin, who had been relentless in his pursuit of an agreement with the Palestinians. The current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is very different. I met him once at a breakfast meeting in Tel Aviv. I admired his obvious ability and indeed swagger. He could, had he so wished, have gone down in history by heading an Administration to pursue a legitimate settlement with the Palestinians based on the 2002 Arab peace initiative, when every member state of the Arab League had offered to recognise Israel and host her embassies in their countries in return for the establishment of a proper Palestinian state. Instead, he has allied himself to the most reactionary forces in the Knesset and come close to destroying any hopes of such an outcome with the growing illegal Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land, the construction of the wall, routed in places condemned even by the Israeli courts, and the encouragement of Donald Trump’s opening of the American embassy in Jerusalem.

It was that last event that provoked the mass demonstration at the Gaza fence, dealt with not by water cannon but with live ammunition from the Israel Defense Forces. That resulted not only in the deaths that I mentioned but in over 3,600 people being injured. One Israeli soldier was wounded. According ​to the World Health Organization, 245 health personnel were injured and 40 ambulances were hit. Last week, Razan al-Najjar, a 21 year-old female volunteer first responder, was killed while carrying out her work with the Palestinian Medical Relief Society. She was clearly wearing first-responder clothing at the time. In the meantime, the Israeli Defense Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, one of the reactionaries to whom I referred a moment ago, has declared that there are “no innocent people” in Gaza, while an UNRWA report declares that the blockade situation is so bad that Gaza is becoming unliveable in.

I do not know whether the Israeli Government know or care about how low they have sunk in world esteem. When I was a student in the 1950s, many of my friends, not just Jewish ones, spent their vacations doing voluntary work in a kibbutz, such was the idealism surrounding the birth of the Israeli state, but that is no longer the case.

The reason I joined the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel group was that I got fed up with being blamed, as Liberal leader, for the then Government’s Balfour Declaration encouraging the establishment of that state, people forgetting that the famous letter included the words,

“it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.

The conduct of its present Government is a clear betrayal of the basis on which the Lloyd George Government welcomed a state of Israel.

I spent some years active in the Anti-Apartheid Movement. Only much later did I realise one noted fact about those who had led the white population’s opposition to apartheid—my dear friend Helen Suzman, Zach de Beer, Harry Oppenheimer, Hilda Bernstein, Ronnie Kasrils, Helen Joseph, Joe Slovo and so many others were predominantly Jewish—which was that they knew where doctrines of racial superiority ultimately and tragically led. I rather hope that the recent slaughter in Gaza will awaken the international conscience to resolute action in the same way that the Sharpeville massacre led to the ultimately successful campaign by anti-apartheid forces worldwide.

The Israeli Government hate that comparison, pointing to the Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship or sit in the Knesset, but on visits to that beautiful and successful country one cannot help noticing not just the wall but the roads in the West Bank which are usable only by Israelis, just as facilities in the old South Africa were reserved for whites only.

Recently some of us met a couple of Israeli professors in one of our committee rooms. They stressed to us the urgency of staying with UN Security Council Resolution 2334, passed as recently as December 2016, which roundly condemns all the illegal activities of the current Administration. It is worth reminding the House of just three of its 13 clauses, beginning with this one:

“Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of ​Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law”.

A second clause reads:

“Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations”.

A third reads:

“Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the grounds that they are imperilling the two-State solution”.

Those are not my words: they are taken from the UN Security Council. My mind went back to 1967 when, as a young MP, I was present when our then UK representative at the United Nations, Lord Caradon, led the drafting of Resolution 242 which was supposed to be the building block for peace after the Arab/Israeli war. My complaint is that the international community, including successive British Governments, have paid only lip service to that and allowed Israel to defy the United Nations and trample on the rights of the Palestinians.

Soames

But there are signs of hope. The noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, knows how high he is held in the opinion of the House and we cannot expect him as the Minister of State to change United Kingdom policy, but when the Statement on Gaza was made in the other place, two senior and respected Conservative ex-Ministers gave strong voice objecting to our current stance. Sir Nicholas Soames (pictured, Sir Winston Churchill's grandson, pompous, pro-Arab, and notorious for sexist behaviour towards female MPs) hoped that our Foreign Office would,

“indulge in a little less limp response”,

to the,

“wholly unacceptable and excessive use of force”,

 while Sir Hugo Swire said that,

 “one reason it is a festering hellhole and a breeding ground for terrorists is that each and every time there has been an attempt to improve the livelihoods of the Gazans, by doing something about their water … or about their quality of life, Israel has blockaded it”.—[Official Report, Commons, 15/5/18; cols. 140-41.]

We are entitled to ask the Minister to convey to the Prime Minister that she needs to be more forceful, honest and frank when she next meets Mr Netanyahu. Yesterday’s Downing Street briefing said she had,

“been concerned about the loss of Palestinian lives”,

which surely falls into the description of a continuing limp response.

We cannot allow the Israeli Government to treat Palestinian lives as inferior to their own, which is what they consistently do. That is why our Government should not only support the two-state solution, but register our determination and disapproval of their conduct by accepting the decisions of both Houses of our Parliament and indeed the European Parliament and recognise the state of Palestine without further delay.

         ....

Lord Hain (Lab.  If you can't be bothered to click on that aforementioned post of mine, here's a summary: former Young Liberal anti-apartheid South Africa activist and rabid anti-Israel activist, who didn't even concede that persecuted Soviet Jews should have the opportunity to emigrate there.  He advocated the abolition of Israel into a "secular democratic state". Hain later aspired to lead the Labour Party, and was spoken of as a future British prime minister.  But with the scuppering of that chance he's come out again since 2014 in favour of the eradication of Israel.)

My Lords, I am both a long-standing supporter of the Palestinian cause and a friend of Israel. [Ahem!] As a British Minister for the Middle East from 1999 to 2001, I worked closely with both Israeli Government Ministers and Palestinian leaders. My background of fighting apartheid, racism, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism is recorded. For decades I have favoured the internationally supported two-state solution as the best plan for peace and the fairest outcome, but ​is this now in any way feasible? Prime Minister Netanyahu and other members of his Government and MPs have recently spoken out against it, endorsed by the renewed “Greater Israel” discourse of the growing Israeli right calling for the annexation of Palestinian territories. Negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders have failed, as has a reliance on the US to deliver Israeli co-operation. Europeans, meanwhile, have been unable to deliver the settlement freeze they advocate.

Today, the situation of Palestinians living on their own land resembles a harsh civil rights struggle. Gaza is under Israeli siege. Palestinian life in the West Bank and east Jerusalem is untenable because they have little or no say over the running of a land that has increasingly become an archipelago of isolated Palestinian territorial islands in a sea of Israeli-controlled land, checkpoints, bases and settlements. If Israel’s relentless expansion into Palestinian territories cannot be stopped, we face one of two possible outcomes. The first is that all Palestinian presence in the West Bank and east Jerusalem remains in a permanent and ever more formalised “Bantustan” status; islands of minimal self-governance with the continued denial of basic rights, facing perpetual insecurity and possible future physical removal, deprived of full access to water and subject to all manner of restrictions on land rights and free transport across their own territory. The second is that they are absorbed into a common Israeli-Palestinian state with the opportunity for pluralism and human rights advancement.

Tense and difficult though the current standoff may be for Israel, it is not going to be defeated and therefore holds the stronger hand. Would Palestinians, absorbed into their traditional homeland, albeit alongside Jewish citizens with a narrow majority over them, drop their historic grievance and quickly adjust to the new reality? That is optimistic to say the least. But if the window for the two-state solution has indeed closed, should the EU, the US and the UK make it plain to Israel that a one-state alternative may be the only one available to ensure its own security? If so, what guarantees might there be for Jewish citizens both within Israel and worldwide if they agree to this merger? Could the Arab nations join those in the West like the US and the UK to provide the post-World War Two guarantee of “never again”? Could a federal or confederal state provide a way forward, with common security, a unified economy, common civil rights and guarantees of religious freedom for Jews and Muslims, but considerable political autonomy for the territories within it of “Israel” and “Palestine”?

Is it not the blunt truth that we must either undertake a massive social and geographical reverse engineering to re-enable a genuine two-state outcome, with two sovereign independent states based on 1967 lines with equal land swaps—and without all the unreasonable Israeli caveats that drain the Palestinian state of any real meaning—or recognise a common-state reality and make it truly democratic, with enfranchisement and rights for all?

I am making a plea for honesty because it seems that the international community is publicly sheltering behind the policy of a two-state solution, while privately knowing that it has become a convenient mantra rather than a deliverable policy.​

....

Baroness Tonge (Independent Liberal Democrat; Independent because the Lib Dems expelled her for perceived antisemitism)

See here

My Lords I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Steel, on obtaining this debate, but sadly it gives me no pleasure to take part because this matter has gone on for far too long.

It is some 50 years since the Six Day War, when the intentions of the Zionist movement became clear: to carry on expelling and killing Palestinians, and grabbing their land and their homes until the ambition of a greater Israel is achieved from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. It is not fooling us any longer. Our Government have stood by feebly, often abstaining on UN resolutions while slaughter and dispossession continue, bleating about a two-state solution and refusing to recognise the state of Palestine. We recognise Israel, of course we do, but which Israel is that? Where are its borders? What are we recognising? If that is the excuse for not recognising the state of Palestine, it applies to both states, and both states should be recognised as soon as possible, as many noble Lords have said.

The most recent excuse given by the Government for abstaining from UN resolutions and taking no action against the Israeli Government is, of course, the activities of Hamas. Most recently, our Government would not condemn Israel for the killings during the “Great March of Return” in Gaza because Hamas might have had a hand in it. Slings and stones were used against one of the strongest armies in the world with a nuclear arsenal. The Israel Defense Forces were shooting indiscriminately at children and medical personnel, as well as other Gazan people. Shame on them and shame on us for not reacting.

What if Hamas did have a hand in it? What if it did? I would remind this House that the Government of Israel helped to create Hamas. It is the product of Israeli Government policies, not the cause of them. A legitimately elected Hamas Government were prevented from taking office in 2006—never forget that—and we are supposed to be democrats.

Gaza, as we have heard, is a toxic slum and will be uninhabitable by 2020, according to the United Nations. Nearly 2 million people, over half of them youngsters, are being slowly squeezed to death, with no prospects of a future. Of course they protest, and they do so as violently as they are able. Many of them would rather die than continue as they are.

But we say, “It’s not our fault. Balfour was a long time ago. We have to have the international community with us. We cannot do anything”. We listen to the Government of Israel trying to make Iran the object of our attention. We obey our masters in the United States of America, who obey the Israel lobby, as I suggest we do here. Of course, we must listen to the trade gods of Brexit.

For the sake of Jewish people who do not support the present Government in Israel, for the sake of the Palestinians, for the sake of the wider Middle East and for the conscience of our nation, I beg this Government of ours to take action, stop selling arms to Israel, impose sanctions and support justice for Palestine. 

More speeches at link.