Boris “the clown” Johnson: Labour MPs Speaking to RT Is a ‘Scandal’ – But His Old Man Was on Only Last Month

Source

Apparently the buffoon did not even know his father (and six Conservative MPs) had been happy to speak to RT as well

While Boris Johnson claims it is a “scandal” that Labour MPs are willing to appear on RT, the Tory foreign secretary seems unaware his own father came on the channel just last month. In fact, a lot of Johnson’s Tory colleagues have.

Addressing MPs in the House of Commons on Tuesday, Johnson claimed RT’s news output is “propaganda” and admonished those who have appeared.

“If you study the output of Russia Today, and if you consider the state of the press in Russia at present, it is a scandal that members of the party opposite are continuing to validate and legitimate that kind of propaganda by going on those programs,” Johnson said.

“I’m assured by my ministerial team none of them do so.”

Advertisements

A man of principle, Corbyn refuses to attend Balfour centenary dinner

Corbyn refuses to attend Balfour centenary dinner

British Labour party leader and most probably the next prime minister of Britain, Jeremy Corbyn has declined an invitation from UK’s Jewish Lobby to attend Balfour centenary gala dinner to be held on November 2 in London.

On October 19, Jonathan Goldstein, chairman of country’s Jewish Leadership Council blasted Corbyn over declining an invitation to attend the notorious Balfour Declaration (1917) centenary event. However, he hoped that Jewish members of Corbyn’s shadow government would attend the dinner.

Last month, Corbyn skipped a reception at Labour Friends of Israel annual conference. Corbyn is the only opposition party leader who never visited the Zionist entity. Corbyn visited Iran as a member of all-party MPs war-crimes probe delegation during Saddam Hussein’s 8-year war against Islamic regime in Iran which was partially supported by both US and Britain. Iraq-Iran war ended after US missiles hit Iranian flight 655 – killing 290 passengers and crew in air on July 3, 1988. Listen to Corbyn’s statement on Islamic Republic below).

The dinner will be attended by British prime minister Theresa May and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the serial liar along with 150 carefully selected pro-Israel VIPs.

On November 7, the Zionist Jewish and Christian groups are going to celebrate 100th anniversary of Balfour Declaration at the Royal Albert Hall where British foreign minister Lord Arthur Balfour offered Palestine to the world Jewry on November 1917 to solve Europe’s ‘Jewish Problem’.

The Zionist criminals are planning to use the event as Israeli PR. Douglas Dalgleish’s documentary, A Letter From London, will also make its premier on that day.

The current Lord Roddy Balfour is reported very proud of his family’s services toward the organized Jewry.

Antisemitism Weaponised

Antisemitism Weaponised

Palestine with its wonderful rolling landscapes and venerable old olive trees, – some of them planted by Mary’s own hands, by the Virgin, Mother of Jesus Christ, the Palestinian peasant woman who owned a plot of olive orchard near present Cremisan Convent in Beit Jalla, still bearing Her name; Palestine with its sturdy mountain folk, lean, sun-tanned and blue-eyed, my second- or perhaps first homeland, where I write these lines, Palestine is also a rare place in the world, where people are not afraid to mouth the word “Jew”.

My Palestinian friend, a retired chemistry professor Ghassan Abdulla – we became friends years ago while trying to promote the idea of One State for all the inhabitants of the Holy Land of whatever faith, the idea universally accepted all over the world, certainly in your country be it the US, the UK, Russia or France, but still considered extremely radical here – Abdulla often receives visitors from Germany and Austria, as his wife hails from German-speaking part of Switzerland. These guests look shocked whenever they hear the word “Jew”, especially with a negative connotation, like “The Jews do not allow us to have water” or “The Jews do not allow us to use the airport”, “The Jews declared a siege and we can’t go to the church”, “Jews shot at the kids at the crossing”, and so many similar sentences all too frequent in the country where the Jews rule, and the Gentiles obey or die. The German guests are instinctively looking for a bed to crawl and hide under. If they find to escape route, they mumble “Surely not all the Jews”, or “We love Jews”, or something equally silly.

The US occupation army in Europe instilled terrible fear of Jews in European hearts and minds. This fear was known before: the Gospel is a witness that people were afraid to speak openly of Christ “for fear of the Jews”. Since then, the fear only grew and multiplied. And provided such fear exists, it would be strange if it weren’t used.

The Austrian elections of last Sunday are a prime exhibit. During the election campaign, the ruling Social Democratic Party of Austria (called SDO for short) imported an Israeli dirty-tricks master, a macher in Yiddish, Tal Silberstein, to besmirch its adversary Sebastian Kurz. Silberstein established a Facebook page in the name of Kurz and posted there strong anti-Jewish diatribes, he organised a FB group of Kurz fans and posted there hard-core Nazi slogans. The idea was that the Austrians will get cold feet and run away from Kurz.

Kurz figured this out and asked the Facebook moderators to stop it. Usually you do not have to ask FB twice to stop Nazi stuff. And a false identity claim usually gets sorted out in a reasonable time. Here, however, Mr Zuckerberg and his minions tarried a while, reluctant to undermine Silberstein’s outing of an antisemite. Kurz was lucky as Silberstein had been arrested in Israel for corruption-related offences. After that, the FB unplugged its ears and removed Silberstein’s created pages and groups. This was sheer luck: if he were arrested elsewhere, he would be considered a victim of antisemites, and his nasty web would remain intact.

This Silberstein has quite a name to fit the Hall of Shame: an expert in Black PR, he had been previously connected with bribery-related offences when he ran the campaign for Mrs Julia Timoshenko, a Ukrainian politician. She went to jail, and he went to Israel. In Austria, he had a go of misfortunes: hackers released his correspondence with the SDO, his plans became known to public, the SDO leaders had to stand down and SDO had lost the election.

So the attempt of Silberstein to frame Kurz as an antisemite had failed, up to a point. He anyway continued to smear another Austrian politician as a Jew-hater. That was the FPO leader Heinz-Christian Strache. The end of the story may comfort us: the Austrians preferred these two parties, Kurz List and FPO, despite the alleged antisemitism, and punished SDO, the kosher party.

However, before celebrating let us see the downside of this wonderful event. In order to extricate themselves and their parties from the Jewish smear, the two leaders swore loyalty to Israel. They went (separately) to Israel, took photo-op with PM Netanyahu and at the Holocaust memorial, they spoke endlessly how much they adore and appreciate Israel.

The antisemitism accusation is a win-win proposition for Jews. If a politician doesn’t do what the Jews want, they call him antisemite, and he (a) does what they want, and/or (b) swears fealty to Israel. In case (a) he is a liberal, in case (b) he is a nationalist. In both cases, Jews win.

And the Palestinians lose. They are locked up behind a high wall; they can’t leave, and the Jews drive in whenever they feel for it, to snatch a man and kill him, or drop him into their nameless gaols. From time to time, the Jews take over a hill or a valley and build there a gated community just for Jews. They take water, they take fields. If the Palestinians build themselves say, a power plant, Jews bomb it to smithereens. They say, otherwise the Palestinians will be able to use electricity to make weapons and kill Jews. It is better for Jews to sell them electricity: the EU pays for some of electricity, the PNA pays for the rest, the money goes to Jewish pockets, while the power switch remains in Jewish hands.

Can you read the previous paragraph without feeling acute discomfort? If not, you are also a victim of antisemitism hunters. I am not fond of Jew-haters, but these antisemitism hunters are worse, much worse – because they cause real, not imaginary damage.

ORDER IT NOW

Look at Weinstein, the Hollywood wanker – he is a typical antisemitism hunter, dreaming of killing goyim like in his Basterds, or screwing shiksas in real life. He called to “kick ass” of the enemies of Jews, to organize “like Mafia did”, though these guys could teach Mafia a lesson or two. He forced the Gentile girls to have sex with him because he was a simple Jewish boy from Bronx who dreamed of revenge, wrote the editor of the Jewish Tabletmag.com: “It goes without saying that nearly every one of these women — was a Gentile, all the better to feed Weinstein’s revenge-tinged fantasy of having risen above his outer-borough, bridge-and-tunnel Semitic origins.” At the Algemeiner‘s gala in New York City, Weinstein declared, “I love Israel, I love what it stands for, I am proud to be Jewish. I am an Israeli in my heart and mind.”

Whenever a Palestinian child is killed, whenever an olive tree is uprooted by Jewish bulldozers, Weinstein and Silberstein are accomplices of the crime.

Now in England, there is a terrible witch-hunt for antisemites in the Labour Party. The idea is to destroy Jeremy Corbyn, to return the party to the people of Blair and his Jewish paymaster Mandelson, who said, “I try to undermine Jeremy Corbyn ‘every single day” with their antisemitism allegations. Corbyn is doing everything to cover himself from this side. Good people, strong activists had been expelled for very little reason, if the Jews demanded their heads. Even an old Professor Moshe Machover, an academic and Israeli socialist, long resident in the UK had been expelled from Labour for this was the command of Israeli ambassador in the UK.

The US is the worst case of fear of the Jews. The Americans are so afraid of Jews that they express their servile love for Jews at every occasion. Not in private, no. I had met with some American dignitaries; whenever they thought they are not listened to and recorded by NSA, they spoke quite freely of being locked in the Jewish vice. But in public, they would never say anything against the Jewish will. I know only one congresswoman who dared, Cynthia McKinney. She lost her seat, but she won hearts. A person of colour, as you say in the US, she is the whitest one.

Now consider Donald Trump. From the very beginning of his political career, every day or twice a day he says he is not an antisemite. And he is getting more and more attached to Israel in order to prove it.

He is doing everything for Israel. He stormed out of UNESCO because they are not obedient enough to Israel – though they even broke their own rules to elect the French-Moroccan Jewish woman as their head in order to please Trump and Netanyahu. He destroyed the nuclear accord with Iran, because that was Netanyahu’s demand. And still, every day the Jews scream that he is an antisemite. (Today, as I write these lines, they call him ‘antisemite’ because he advised Senator Chuck Schumer to check with Israel on his attitude to the Iran nuclear accord.)

Together with Netanyahu, Trump prepares now an inter-Palestinian civil war, or at least he blocks the Palestinian way of democratically sorting out their internal problems. Since 2006, the Palestinians have been split between Fatah and Hamas. Now they want to form a coalition government and run proper democratic elections like they did in 2006. Israel is surely against it, as they are against every attempt to stop bloodshed in the area. The Jews want more war anytime – from the Iran-Iraq war to the War on Terror to the Syrian war, they are always for war, but especially the Jews want a Palestinian civil war. And here the US comes in, by saying that Hamas are terrorists and the US will block PNA in the US courts and banks if they accept Hamas.

So the Jews keep using this wonderful tool of attacking antisemites. Even if they do not destroy their enemy – Trump hasn’t been destroyed, Corbyn hasn’t been destroyed, Kurz hadn’t been destroyed – they force the attacked politicians to support Israel even more. Heads you lose, tails I win. And this is the road to perdition.

The only way out of it is to desensitize people to the antisemitism charge. That is why I welcome certain pugnacious publications on the Unz.com and elsewhere, for even if not perfectly fair, they still help to desensitize the reader.

Good Jewish activists suggest to move in an opposite way. – “Fight antisemitism, do not give it an inch, – they say, – Antisemitism is counterproductive”. There are good Jewish activists, for sure. For instance, Philip Weiss or Norman Finkelstein. And from time to time, they give a salvo on suspected antisemites, like the Israeli writer and musician Gilad Atzmon. I do not want to argue with them, for they are doing good work – until they join the fight with antisemitism hunters. It is perfectly ok to dislike this or other anti-Jewish sentence or slogan; moreover, it is unavoidable for critique of Jews has many faces. But there is a distance between disliking and actually joining with Netanyahu and Weinstein.

The souls of Gentile politicians are so fragile, they are so scared of Jews, that it is better not to traumatize them by suggesting that there are some evil antisemites to confront. Every lost Jewish vote will be well compensated by the votes gained. It is the right time to get rid of Jewish yoke, especially that this yoke is purely psychological block.

People may dislike Gypsies, they may dislike mass immigrants, they may dislike bankers, slick journalists, and machers. It is perfectly ok to dislike Jews. It is not against the law. You do not have to compensate that by kneeing to Israel.

If you remember that, we shall free Palestine; and if you won’t, the war is inevitable.

Israel Shamir can be reached at adam@israelshamir.net

This article was first published at The Unz Review.

Crimes Against Humanity: The British Empire

Source

By Paul Gregoire,

First published by Sydney Criminal Lawyers and Global Research in July 2017.

It was the largest empire ever to have existed. And as the saying used to go, the sun never sets on the British Empire. At its height in 1922, the colonial power was lording it over a fifth of the world’s population and for many of them, the sun never rose again.

Under the policies of British colonialism, people around the globe were subjected to mass famines, atrocious conditions in concentration camps, and brutal massacres at the hands of imperialist troops. The Brits also played an integral role in the transatlantic slave trade.

Although the atrocities of the British Empire are well documented, the myth of the noble colonising power continued into recent decades.

The Migrated Archives

During proceedings in the British High Court in 2010, University of Warwick historian David M Anderson submitted a statement referring to 1,500 files that went missing from Kenya as British rule in the region was coming to an end.

This led the British government to concede that they had hidden or disposed of those files, and many others at a high-security facility north of London. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office was hiding around 600,000 historical documents in breach of the 1958 UK Public Records Act.

The stash included around 20,000 undisclosed files from 37 former British colonies. Indeed, it’s common knowledge that as the British colonial edifice was disintegrating, administrators of the colonies were told to either burn their documents or try and smuggle them out.

The legal proceedings where Mr Anderson made his revelations related to a case brought against the British government by three elderly Kenyans who claimed they’d been tortured and abused by the colonial authorities during the British occupation of their country.

The British gulag in Kenya

The British first moved into East Africa in the late 19th century, and Kenya was declared a Crown colony in 1920. In the 1940s, after half a century of British occupation, a small group of Kikuyu people – the country’s largest ethnic group – formed the Mau Mau movement and vowed to oppose colonial rule.

As word spread, Mau Mau resistance grew and they began knocking off colonial officers and local loyalists. In October 1952, Governor Evelyn Baring declared a state of emergency, which held until 1960.

In 1964, the colonial army began erecting a network of concentration camps. Historians estimate that 150,000 to 1.5 million Kikuyu people were detained. Conditions within the camps were atrocious, and people were systematically beaten and sexually assaulted during questioning.

The grandfather of Barack Obama, Hussein Onyango Obama suffered severe mistreatment in the camp where he was held, which included having pins forced under his fingernails.

The British government, after being continually defeated in the High Court, agreed to settle the Mau Mau case in 2013.

On June 6 that year, then UK foreign secretary William Hague announced 5,000 survivors would each receive £3,800 payment, and he also expressed the nation’s sincere regrets to Kenyans who were subjected to “torture and other forms of ill-treatment at the hands of the colonial administration.”

The desecration in India

It’s said that India was the jewel in the crown of the British Empire. The British East India Company began making avenues into the subcontinent in the 17th century, and India was established as a Crown colony in 1858.

The British Raj systematically transferred the wealth of the region into their own coffers. In the north eastern region of Bengal, “the first great deindustrialisation of the modern world” occurred.

The prosperous two centuries-old weaving industry was shut down after the British flooded the local market with cheap fabric from northern England. India still grew the cotton, but the Bengali population no longer spun it, and the weavers became beggars.

India suffered around a dozen major famines under British rule, with an estimated 12 to 29 million Indians starving to death.

The Orissa famine occurred in north eastern India in 1866. Over one million – or one in three local people – perished. As the region’s textile industry was destroyed, more people were pushed into agriculture, and were dependent on the monsoon.

That year, the monsoon was weak. Crops didn’t grow and many starved to death. The colonial administration didn’t intervene as the popular economic theory of the time reasoned that the market would restore proper balance, and the famine was nature’s way of responding to overpopulation.

When the British finally got out of India, they simply drew a line down the map and partitioned the subcontinent into India and Pakistan. The move led to the mass migration of around 10 million people, and when it escalated into sectarian violence an estimated one million lost their lives.

A southern invasion

The British began invading Australia in 1788, under the pretext that it was terra nullis: a land with no owners. The High Court of Australia abolished the legal fiction of terra nullius in its 1992 Mabo versus Queensland (No 2) ruling.

It was a landmark decision, but not everyone was surprised that the court found that there were actually sovereign people living on the land prior to the arrival of the British. At that time, there were an estimated 750,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living across the continent.

The First Fleet arrived in the vicinity of what is now the city of Sydney in 1788. Around 15 months later, at least 50 percent of the local Aboriginal population was dying due to a smallpox epidemic.

Some historians put the outbreak down to contact with the Macassans from Sulawesi in the far north of the continent. However, others argue that bottles of smallpox were brought across on First Fleet ships, and the disease was then released, either accidentally or with clear intent.

Dozens of massacres of Indigenous people were carried out by the British right up until the 1920s. On June 10 1838, the Myall Creek massacre occurred near Inverell in NSW. This tragedy is well-known as it was the first time Europeans were brought to justice for such an atrocity in Australia.

At the time about 50 Aboriginal men were working for stockmen in the area. One evening the stockmen rode into the local people’s camp, tied up 29 men, women and children, and beheaded them. Seven of the perpetrators were eventually brought to trial and hanged.

Today, in Australia, the colonial legacy continues. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the most incarcerated population on earth.

As of March this year, there were 11,288 Indigenous adults detained in the Australian prison system. First Nations peoples account for only 2.5 percent of the overall Australian adult population, yet they represent 28 percent of the adult prisoner population.

A bloody trail

But these are only some of the crimes perpetrated by the British as they carried the greatest land grab the world has ever seen.

There were the concentration camps in South Africa, where tens of thousands of the Boer population were detained in the first years of the 20th century. The Irish potato famine occurred in the 1840s, leading to the deaths of well over a million people.

There were the torture centres in Aden in the 1960s, where nationalists were kept naked in refrigerated cells. When the Empire was facing communist insurgents during the Malaya Emergency of the 1950s, they simply decided to imprison the entire peasant population in detention camps.

And the list goes on…

Featured image from Sydney Criminal Lawyers

The racist worldview of Arthur Balfour

The racist worldview of Arthur Balfour

The Balfour Declaration led to the expulsion of Palestinians. Wikimedia Commons

 

Arthur James Balfour will, no doubt, be praised effusively by supporters of Israel in the coming weeks for a brief document he signed 100 years ago.

As Britain’s foreign secretary in November 1917, Balfour declared his backing to the Zionist colonization project. Through his declaration, Britain became the imperial sponsor of a Jewish state – euphemistically called a “Jewish national home” – that would be established in Palestine by expelling its indigenous people en masse.

An assurance in that document about protecting Palestinian rights proved worthless. Balfour himself was quite happy to negate that assurance.

In 1919, he argued that Zionist aspirations were “of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.”

Rather than being marked “with pride,” as Theresa May, the current British prime minister, has promised, the centenary of the Balfour Declaration ought to be a time for sober reflection. One useful exercise would be to examine Balfour’s wider record of violence and racism.

From 1887 to 1891, Balfour headed Britain’s administration in Ireland. On his appointment to that post, Balfour proposed to combine repression and reform.

The repression he advocated should be as “stern” – in his words – as that of Oliver Cromwell, the English leader who invaded Ireland in 1649. Cromwell’s troops are reviled in Ireland for the massacres they carried out in the towns of Wexford and Drogheda.

Siding with the gentry against what he called the “excitable peasantry,” Balfour prioritized repression over reform. When a rent strike was called in 1887, Balfour authorized the use of heavy-handed tactics against alleged agitators.

Three people died after police fired on a political protest in Mitchelstown, County Cork. The incident earned him the nickname of “Bloody Balfour.”

Blessings of civilization?

Balfour penalized dissent. Thousands were jailed under the Irish Crimes Act that he introduced.

John Mandeville, a nationalist campaigner, was one of the first to be imprisoned during Balfour’s stint in Ireland. Mandeville died soon after his release and a coroner’s inquest attributed his death to ill-treatment suffered while in detention.

Balfour tried to smear Mandeville by claiming he had taken part in a “drunken row” before suddenly falling ill. Mandeville, according to some accounts, was actually a teetotaler.

Balfour was a British and a white supremacist. “All the law and all the civilization in Ireland is the work of England,” he once said.

He used similar terms while defending the subjugation of other peoples. In 1893, he spoke in the British parliament of how Cecil Rhodes, an imperial marauder in Southern Africa, was “extending the blessings of civilization.”

While serving as prime minister from 1902 to 1905, Balfour insisted that Europeans must enjoy greater privileges than Black natives in South Africa. “Men are not born equal,” he said in 1904.

Two years later – then in opposition – he said that Black people were “less intellectually and morally capable” than whites.

Callous

There are strong reasons to suspect that Balfour was also anti-Semitic. In 1905, he pushed legislation aimed at preventing Jews fleeing persecution in Russia from entering Britain on the grounds they were “undesirable.”

One reason why Balfour may have been in favor of establishing a Jewish state in Palestine was that he disliked having Jews as neighbors. He once described Zionism as a “serious effort to mitigate the age-old miseries created for western civilization by the presence in its midst of a body which is too long regarded as alien and even hostile, but which it was equally unable to expel or absorb.”

Balfour was often callous. He tried to justify the use of Chinese slave labor in South Africa’s gold mines and atrocities committed by British forces in the Sudan. He opposed giving aid to people at risk of famine in India.

Despite his apparent commitment to law and order, Balfour encouraged illegal behavior when it suited him. He was a staunch supporter of militant loyalists who insisted that Ireland’s north-eastern counties should not become independent from Britain.

When the Ulster Volunteer Force managed to smuggle 30,000 rifles from Germany into the north of Ireland, Balfour effectively approved the 1914 gun-running operation by telling the British parliament: “I hold now, and I held 30 years ago that if home rule was forced upon Ulster, Ulster would fight and Ulster would be right.”

It was extraordinary that a former prime minister should voice approval for subversion. Yet that stance did no harm to Balfour’s political career.

Within a few years, he was back in government as foreign secretary – it was in that role that he issued his declaration on Palestine.

The effects of that declaration were swift and far-reaching. Through pressure exerted by Chaim Weizmann (later Israel’s first president) and other senior figures in the Zionist movement, it was enshrined in the League of Nations mandate through which Britain ruled Palestine between the two world wars.

Herbert Samuel, himself a staunch Zionist, introduced a system of racial and religious discrimination when he served as Britain’s first high commissioner for Palestine from 1920 to 1925. Those measures facilitated and financed the acquisition by European settlers of land on which Palestinians had lived and farmed for many generations. Mass evictions ensued: more than 8,700 Palestinians were expelled from villages in Marj Ibn Amer, an area in the Galilee, as they were bought up by Zionist colonizers during the 1920s.

Balfour was unperturbed by the upheaval that he set in motion. Worse, he denied that any problem existed.

In 1927, he wrote “nothing has occurred” that would cause him to question the “wisdom” of the declaration he signed a decade earlier.

The remark says much about Balfour’s hubris. He was prepared to trample on an entire people and to dismiss their grievances as irrelevant.

#BDS Misusing the term antisemitism for pro-israel political purposes deprives it of its charge

Protests as Israeli ambassador interferes to censor free speech

Censorship battle and an antisemitic charge cause anger

Dr David Alderson and 42 others want the University of Manchester to apologise to the students whose campaign it has maligned, and to the censored speaker whom it has defamed. Meanwhile Prof Avi Shlaim and six other signatories object to Moshe Machover’s expulsion from the Labour party

The University of Manchester should ‘make clear that it defends the principles of free speech’, say Dr David Alderson and his fellow signatories. 

Letters, The Guardian
October 15, 2017

We write to express our deep concern at the actions of senior figures within the University of Manchester in relation to an event organised by the student Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign earlier this year (UK university censors Holocaust survivor’s speech criticising Israel, theguardian.com, 29 September). While the event went ahead, the speech of a Jewish Holocaust survivor was arrogantly censored and labelled antisemitic, the right to superintend the meeting by university academic staff was usurped by institutional appointees, restrictions were placed on advertising the event, and the whole thing was filmed in what amounted to an implicit threat of potential further action.

As if such serious infringements of the right to freedom of speech on campus were not bad enough, it is now revealed by a student freedom of information request that the university’s actions were taken after representations from, and in deference to, the very regime whose lamentable human rights record was being condemned at the event. We are appalled that the university appeared to take instruction from Israel’s ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev, who, in his former capacity as spokesperson to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, justified to the world successive military assaults on Gaza that resulted in the indiscriminate killing of men, women and children in attacks on hospitals, homes and places of work using both high-precision weaponry and imprecise and indiscriminate materiel, including white phosphorous bombs.

We ask the university to apologise to the students whose campaign it has maligned, and to the censored speaker, Marika Sherwood, whom it has defamed. It should further make clear that it defends the principles of free speech and assembly against attempts to inhibit them by foreign states and other powerful external parties.

Dr David Alderson
Professor Mona Baker (Emerita)
Dr Lauren Banko
Dr Mark Brown
Professor Erica Burman
Professor Bridget Byrne
Alessandro Columbu
Professor Aneez Esmail
Emma Clarke

Professor Jeanette Edwards
Dr Douglas Field
Professor Hal Gladfelder
Dr Bethan Harries
Dr Jenny Hughes
Andrew Howes
Professor Tim Jacoby
Dr Stef Jansen
Dr Steven Jones
Dr Paul Kelemen (Honorary research fellow)
Dr Barbara Lebrun

Peter McMylor
Professor Rayaz A Malik
Professor David Matthews
Dr Vanessa May
Dr Dalia Mostafa
Dr Adel Nasser
Dr Richie Nimmo
Dr Michelle Obeid
Professor Luis Perez-Gonzalez
Dr Eithne Quinn

Dr Madeleine Reeves
Professor Dee Reynolds
Dr Myriam Salama-Carr
Dr Michael Sanders
Professor Ludi Simpson
Professor Zahia Smail Salhi
Dr Graham Smith
Dr Robert Spencer
Professor Jackie Stacey
David Swanson
Dr Petra Tjitske Kalshoven
Dr Nicholas Thoburn
Professor Julian Williams



A young Moshe Machover with friend and comrade Jabra Nicola (R), an anti-Stalinist member of the Palestine Communist party.

Letter

For George Monbiot, Labour could herald a new political movement, addressing the environmental challenge and inequality by “threatening established power in Britain”, creating space for a new politics (The Labour party could lead worldwide economic change, 11 October). We hope so. That is why we are members of the party. Not all members share this ambition. Some, it seems, would go to almost any lengths to thwart it.The latest such move is the exclusion of Professor Moshe Machover, an academic and Israeli socialist, long resident in the UK. His offence? Two infringements: his insistence that anti-Zionism and support for Palestinian rights are not antisemitic; and his willingness to write articles about this in any leftwing publication. For this, he has been expelled from the party.

Misusing the term antisemitism for pro-Israel political purposes deprives it of its charge

In this strange linguistic wonderland, it is antisemitic to argue that anti-Zionism is not antisemitic.The charge of antisemitism against Machover is personally offensive and politically dangerous. Misusing the term antisemitism for pro-Israel political purposes deprives it of its charge and its critical role in naming those who hate Jews because they are Jews. Real antisemitism is obscured by this self-serving redefinition of the term.

Expelling Machover because another organisation published his work is absurd. This could just as well be used against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell. Perhaps they are next in line. We are among 139 Labour party members, Jewish and non-Jewish, from many constituency organisations, who have written to our leadership demanding Professor Machover’s reinstatement, and an inquiry into how this has occurred.

Prof Avi Shlaim
Sir Geoffrey Bindman
Brian Eno
Ken Loach
Prof Haim Bresheeth
Prof Jonathan Rosenhead
Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi

 

Balfour 100: Celebrating 100 Years of Injustice and Oppression

Source

By Stuart Littlewood | American Herald Tribune | October 18, 2017

On 7 November, in London’s famous Royal Albert Hall, there’s to be “a unique event drawing Christians and Jews together in celebration of the centenary of the Balfour Declaration and all that it led to.”

Christians will be reaching out to support the Jewish community and the state of Israel, or so the organisers claim.

Our vision to stage such a big event at the Royal Albert Hall is ambitious and we recognise our reliance on God to enable every aspect of it.The evening’s programme will follow the history of God’s work through the Balfour Declaration that culminated in the independence of the modern state of Israel. We will use dance, film, song and drama sketches to illustrate how God used both Christians and Jews to fulfil the prophesied return of the Jewish people from exile to their ancient biblical homeland Israel,” says the blurb.

And it adds: “Christian leaders will read statements that will reflect Christians’ desire to…

  • Reconnect with the spiritual heritage of godly men who espoused the restoration of Israel to her Land;

  • Remember the Balfour Declaration and the Jewish-Christian partnerships that made it a reality;

  • Recognise the failure of Britain to fulfil the intent of the Balfour Declaration through the mandate for Palestine;
  • Rededicate ourselves as Christians to support Israel and the Jewish community.”

And the Royal Albert Hall, we are reminded, is where Lord Balfour celebrated with the Jewish community the granting to Britain of the Mandate for Palestine.

The rest of us of course remember Arthur Balfour as the Tory twit whose lamebrain ‘Declaration’ made it possible for Zionists who have no ancestral links to the Holy Land to dispossess, lock up and abuse Palestinians who do.

It was God’s work, we’re told. So that’s alright then And while we recover our composure we may well ask what kind of warped Christians dreamed up this Albert Hall caper, how the Balfour Declaration and its sickening legacy could possible have been “God’s work”, and how many “godly men” were among the perpetrators.

Then let’s cut to another declaration — The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism, a joint statement by the heads of Palestinian Christian churches, which

  • rejects Christian Zionist doctrines as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message;
  • rejects the alliance of Christian Zionist leaders with elements in the governments of Israel and the United States; and
  • rejects the teachings of Christian Zionism that advance racial exclusivity and perpetual war.

Thankfully, a sermon recently delivered in Westminster Abbey by Michael Doe, Preacher of Gray’s Inn, added some important context missing from the Royal Albert Hall‘s promo patter: “The Balfour Declaration made way for the creation of Israel. It also said that nothing should be done ‘which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. We British who made the Declaration have an unfinished responsibility to ensure its implementation.

To be precise Balfour’s pledge said it being clearly understood” that nothing should be done to prejudice the rights of non-Jews. What’s not to understand? But that bit was conveniently forgotten within 30 years and is shrugged off today.

Who is behind this cringe-making celebration? Balfour 100. Who is behind Balfour 100? It’s hard to know. The Jewish Leadership Council’s website says that the Balfour 100 steering committee is comprised of 23 British-Jewish communal and Israel advocacy organisations but doesn’t name them. Among those, however, will be a number of fake Christians who are happy to stooge for the Zionists’ vile ambitions.

These pseuds have apparently ignored the cry for help issued only months ago by the National Coalition of Christian Organizations in Palestine to the World Council of Churches and the entire ecumenical movement. It was signed by over 30 organisations in Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza and can be read in full here.

They say: “We are still suffering from 100 years of injustice and oppression that were inflicted on the Palestinian people beginning with the unlawful Balfour declaration…. A hundred years later and there is still no justice! Discrimination and inequality, military occupation and systematic oppression are the rule…. Despite all the promises, endless summits, UN resolutions, religious and lay leader’s callings – Palestinians are still yearning for their freedom and independence, and seeking justice and equality.”

The churches’ message ends with these ominous words: “Things are beyond urgent. We are on the verge of a catastrophic collapse…. This could be our last chance to achieve a just peace. As a Palestinian Christian community, this could be our last opportunity to save the Christian presence in this land.”

The Royal Albert Hall was built by Queen Victoria to commemorate her beloved husband and consort Prince Albert. I’ll wager the idea of the flag of a rogue foreign military power fluttering from this fine building, or displayed inside, would have both of them spinning in their marbled vault at Frogmore.

And if Theresa May accompanies her guest Bibi Netanyahu to the Albert Hall shindig she’ll hand him and his cruel regime a huge propaganda victory.

%d bloggers like this: