Skip to main content


British politicians mull censorship of anti-Israel comments

The Community Security Trust has tried to smear activists urging a boycott of Israel. 
Following the Charlie Hebdo attack and related killings, we saw continental European law enforcement agencies confirming that “freedom of speech” is a white liberal privilege, not a universal right.
With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu brazenly claiming all Jewish victims as his own and cashing in on the attacks for blatant propaganda purposes, the French political elite signalled that the tragic events may be used as an excuse to crack downon criticism of Israel.
Now, it seems, British parliamentarians could go down the same road by considering bans on critical discourse while basing their criteria on extremely shaky definitions.
report from the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry Into Anti-Semitism — while representing only the views and research of an “informal” group in Westminster — builds on the British government’s earlier shoddy research and uncritical peddling of right-wing Zionist accounts of what constitutes anti-Semitism.

Laden with flaws

While there is no doubt that anti-Semitism is a real and revolting form of racism, and is sadly present in Britain as well as other European countries, the report is laden with flaws — both in its handling of the concept of anti-Semitism, and in its approach to researching the problem in the UK.
Firstly, the report relies far too heavily on the Community Security Trust and related organizations for its information, definitions and interpretation. This is conceptually problematic.
Although the CST is supposed to be focused on ensuring the safety of Jews, it is also involved in campaigning against the boycott of Israel. The CST has sought to portray the call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel as anti-Semitic, even though the Palestinian-led committee that coordinates BDS activities has explicitlycondemned anti-Semitism.
The Electronic Intifada has discussed and exposed the CST’s underhand collaborationwith the British authorities before, and this isn’t the place to recount that collaboration again. Suffice to say, the CST’s links to pro-Israel and anti-boycott campaigning do not make it a dependable or impartial source on these subjects and, indeed, other voicesfrom within the British Jewish community have criticized the CST for the dangers inherent in its uncritically pro-Israel stances.
Secondly, the report states that it works on the principle that “a racist act is defined by its victim.”
“We conclude that it is the Jewish community itself that is best qualified to determine what does and does not constitute anti-Semitism,” the report adds.
On its own, this is entirely laudable, and those who feel themselves to be victims of racism — in any form — should be heard and their experiences given full respect.

Manipulation of fear

What the report fails to do, though, is acknowledge or unpack the politics around the manipulation of the Jewish community’s legitimate fears of anti-Semitism by the likes of the CST. This has seen pro-Israel campaigners clearly and deliberately misrepresentingisolated, individual acts of anti-Semitism as instead being part of a wider pattern of behavior, which they claim is characteristic of Palestine solidarity and human rights activists.
The report’s failure to address issues in its data is also illustrated by other examples, such as the statement that research on student experiences of anti-Semitism “ found that the respondents who identified as ‘very positive’ about Israel were more likely to have experienced anti-Semitism than those who are ‘fairly positive’.”
It may well be that students who were “very positive” about Israel engaged in more encounters with people who had opposing views and thus experienced criticism of Israel.
Does this mean, however, that this criticism was inherently anti-Semitic, or that the “very positive” attitudes the respondents hold make them more likely to see disagreements about Israel as attacks on them as Jews, not as supporters of Israel?
This could be seen as a semantic argument — except that it is exactly these definitions which the “all-party inquiry” is suggesting as the basis of new legislation. The report’s authors advocate “exploration of the potential for using prevention orders to curb determined offenders” as part of its recommendations about how to tackle allegedly anti-Semitic comments on the Internet.

Who decides?

While this raise issues of freedom of speech in general, in this particular case it also needs to be asked who decides on the definitions?
Thirdly, the report claims to present an analysis of the relationship between Israel’sattack on Gaza during the summer of 2014 and an apparent rise in anti-Semitic incidents in the UK. The report’s credibility, however, has to be questioned when its version of these events is taken into account.
The outline account is as follows: “In early June, three Israeli boys were kidnapped and found dead nearly three weeks later. Following retaliatory Israeli attacks on Hamas and an escalation of rocket fire from Gaza, on 8 July Israel launched Operation Protective Edge. Notably in mid-July four Palestinian children were killed on a beach in Gaza and the fighting intensified exponentially throughout the following weeks.”
The problems with the account include but are not limited to:
•the absence of any mention of the brutal murder in Jerusalem of Muhammad Abu Khdeir, a Palestinian boy burned to death amid the anti-Arab hysteria which was whipped up by the Israeli government and media during the supposed “search” for the kidnapped youths;
•the fact that the Israeli government knew that the kidnapped youths were dead but failed to release the news, knowing that the tensions of the “search” offered them a better environment in which to arouse racist sentiment;
•the absence of any mention of the killing of more than 2,200 Palestinians, most of them civilians, during Operation Protective Edge. Even if one accepts the Israeli state’s own accounts of the situation, the disparity in numbers is extraordinary;
•the placing of all responsibility in the hands of Hamas, despite how Israeli police have acknowledged that Hamas was not responsible for the kidnapping of the Israeli youth;
•the omission of the larger issue of the Israeli siege on Gaza and the rights of Palestinians to resist this large-scale and illegal infringement of collective human rights.
Some members of the “all-party inquiry” are known to be sympathetic towards Israel. Hazel Blears, a former cabinet minister, is a declared supporter of the lobby groupLabour Friends of IsraelAlastair Burt and David Davies have both been active with Conservative Friends of Israel, a similar group in the main government party; and Ian Paisley Junior has been involved with Northern Ireland Friends of Israel.
If the “all-party” report is prepared to be so selective, one-sided and biased in its account of Israel’s attack on Gaza, can it really be trusted to make policy recommendations which involve criminalizing public criticism of the State of Israel?

To research similar stories, search from Google here, Google Search

Subscribe to BDTN BREAKING down the NEWS by Email
Site Disclaimer
“If I've left out any information out on this news story or made any mistakes please let us know what other Information you can provide and Please comment below”

Disqus for Ste Matthew Murray


Popular posts from this blog

UK Lord Justice wanted age of consent lowered to the age of 4

Lord Justice Fulford was named last year as an adviser to the QueenHe was a key backer of the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange Police suspect the group of abusing children on an ‘industrial scale’He is revealed as a founder member of campaign to defend PIEAt the time it was calling for the age of consent to be lowered to just fourI clashed with Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) global leaders at the Wales conference in Swansea in 1977. Tom O’Carroll is still accepted and active on a sexnet chat group of experts in “sexology” although he writes openly as a pedophile. And the scholarly organizers of the Swansea conference at the University were part of his efforts. Below a summary of my intro to him in my book, Stolen Honor, Stolen Innocence, 2013. This academic pedophile lobby has continued and grown, training second generation and third generation supporters as “scholars” for pedophile equality and “rights.” In 1981 I realized they were global. See the B4UAct conference wi…

Jews in Israel call for genocide of Palestinians in a massive rally ignored by the media

The West’s media—under orders to censor any news of Jewish supremacism—has refused to publicise this week’s massive hate rally attended by thousands of Jews in Tel Aviv which called for all Arabs to be killed. The Western media’s blackout is in marked contrast to their blanket coverage of the tiniest example of what it calls “white racism.” The Tel Aviv rally—organized to support an Israeli soldier who murdered a wounded Palestinian by shooting him in the head as the victim lay on his back—was marked by chants and banners calling for mass murder. The rally took place on Tuesday evening, April 19, in Tel Aviv’s Yitzhak Rabin Square, and the many thousands of Jews in the crowd were, according to reports in the Israeli media, baying for blood.
One Jewish reporter, Dan Cohen, tweeted that many in the crowd chanted, “Death to Arabs,” a frequently heard rallying cry at anti-Palestinian demonstrations. Ahmed Tibi, a Palestinian lawmaker in Israel’s parliament, posted an image of a sign displayed …

The elite's use young children's blood to live longer and so do I says Paypal Billionaire

Billionaire PayPal founder Peter Thiel said that he believes transfusions of blood from young people can reverse his ageing process and allow him to live a vastly extended lifespan.

In an interview with’s Jeff Bercovici, Thiel said that the practice — known as parabiosis — is the closest modern science has come to creating an anti-aging panacea.

Thiel — a hedge funder who acted as a delegate for Donald Trump and spoke at the 2016 Republican National Convention — is reportedly obsessed with defying death and extending the human lifespan. He has injected funds into startups that are experimenting with ways to forestall the body’s inevitable decline and death.

“I’m looking into parabiosis stuff,” Thiel told Bercovici, “where they [injected] the young blood into older mice and they found that had a massive rejuvenating effect. … I think there are a lot of these things that have been strangely underexplored.”

Parabiosis experiments began in the 1950s with crude exercises in which rats …