Archive | November 5th, 2018

Former head of BBC TV joins Zionist onslaught on Jeremy Corbyn

NOVAMNEWS
Nureddin Sabir, Editor, Redress Information & Analysis, writes:

Like the contents of a poorly flushed toilet, Danny Cohen, the former director of BBC Television, has resurfaced once again.

In his first interview since leaving the BBC under a dark cloud in November last year, Cohen told The Times that being Jewish and voting for the British Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership would be like being a Muslim and voting for Donald Trump.

If you are Jewish how can you vote for them? How could you? For me it would be like being a Muslim and voting for Donald Trump, how could you do it? You have to feel absolutely confident that it is totally unacceptable and it won’t be tolerated and I personally haven’t felt comfortable that it is happening yet in the Labour Party.

Cohen, a prominent figure in London’s Jewish community, joins a chorus of Zionist lobbyists within Labour who claim that the party is tolerating “anti-Semitic” behaviour.

On 21 March Michael Levy threatened to resign from Labour unless Corbyn makes a speech denouncing “anti-Semitism” immediately.

Levy is a staunch Zionist and was principal fundraiser for war crimes suspect Tony Blair’s New Labour Party.

In the Zionist lexicon, any criticism of Israel or of any public figure who happens to be Jewish is defined as “anti-Semitic”, irrespective of the merits of the criticism.

Jeremy Corbyn is a longstanding campaigner for justice for the Palestinian people. His landslide victory in the Labour Party’s leadership election in September 2015 was a humiliating defeat for the Zionist lobby, in the form of the Labour Friends of Israel group, which up to that moment had been in complete control of Labour’s leadership. It is this, rather than any “anti-Semitism” in Labour, that is rattling the likes of Cohen and Levy.

Responding to Levy’s scurrilous allegations, Corbyn told Sky News on 21 March:

Lord Levy clearly hasn’t been listening to the seven times since I became leader I’ve absolutely condemned anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, any form of racism. It is absolutely something I totally passionately believe in and I’m disappointed that Lord Levy has made these remarks…

He knows full well what my views are. He knows full well what the views of the Labour Party are. He knows full well the kind of decent inclusive society that we all want to live in… I look forward to having that discussion with him.

This is not the first time that BBC has-been Cohen had made ill-judged and thinly-veiled pro-Zionist comments.

In December 2014, in a thinly-veiled coming out as an advocate of Zionism and while still director of BBC TV, he claimed at a conference in occupied Jerusalem that “anti-Semitism” has become so bad that he had to question the long-term future for Jews in Britain.

A basic tenet of Zionism – and a key principle underlying the foundation of Israel – is that Jews and gentiles are incompatible, that whenever Jews and gentiles mix there will be “anti-Semitism” and that, therefore, the state of Israel exists as a safe haven for Jews escaping “anti-Semitism”.

In October last year, Cohen added his name to a letter opposing a cultural boycott of Israel, when he still worked at the BBC. This prompted BBC chief complaints adviser Dominic Groves to emphasise in January 2016, two months after Cohen had left the corporation, that the BBC “agrees that it was inadvisable for him to add his signature given his then seniority within the BBC as director of television”.

Thankfully, Cohen is no longer at the BBC. But how he – and others like him – ever got to work for Britain’s supposedly impartial public service broadcaster is a question which the BBC owes the public that finances it a full and honest answer.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Former head of BBC TV joins Zionist onslaught on Jeremy Corbyn

Is UK Labour now Zionist-occupied territory?

NOVANEWS
Israeli propagandist Mark Regev

Befuddled party waits to be gagged by ‘enemy within’

By Stuart Littlewood

The National Executive Committee of the Labour Party will vote on Tuesday 4 September on whether to bow to the bullies and adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism even though it has been roundly criticised by legal experts as unworkable. If they do, it will be hailed as a mighty victory for the dark forces behind the pro-Israel lobby in their bid to shut down criticisim of that racist state.

More than two years ago Gilad Atzmon was viewing the Labour Party’s crazed witch hunt for “anti-Semites” with misgiving. He declared, in his usual robust way, that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn was not so much a party as a piece of Zionist-occupied territory.

Writing in his blog about Corbyn and [Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer] John McDonnell’s servile commitment to expel anyone whose remarks might be interpreted by the Zionist tendency as hateful or simply upsetting to Jews, he concluded:

Corbyn’s Labour is now unequivocally a spineless club of Sabbos Goyim [which I take to mean non-Jewish dogsbodies]. The Labour Party’s policies are now compatible with Jewish culture: intolerant to the core and concerned primarily with the imaginary suffering of one people only. These people are not the working class, they are probably the most privileged ethnic group in Britain…. I did not anticipate that Corbyn would become a Zionist lapdog. Corbyn was a great hope to many of us. I guess that the time has come to accept that The left is a dead concept; it has nothing to offer.

Amen to that last bit.

And more recently Miko Peled, former Israeli soldier and the son of an Israeli general, warned that Israel was going to “pull all the stops, they are going to smear, they are going to try anything they can to stop Corbyn” and the reason anti-Semitism is used is because they have no other argument.

“Imprecise, confusing and open to misinterpretation and even manipulation”

Since then we’ve had a queue of high profile Labourites and others sticking the knife into Corbyn. Last week it was the former Chief Rabbi and Zionist extremist Jonathan Sacks. Then the much-respected MP Frank Field, a maverick who finally quit Labour in noisy fashion giving anti-Semitism as a reason but having grumbled for a long time about a culture of intolerance, nastiness and intimidation within the party. Yesterday we had to suffer ex-Prime Minister Gordon Brown mouthing off about how the IHRA definition “is something we should support unanimously, unequivocally and immediately”. He urged Corbyn to remove the “stain” of prejudice from Labour by writing the definition and all of its examples into the party’s new code of conduct.

That’s a particularly dumb thing to say considering the Home Office Select Committee urged two caveats be included and eminent legal minds Hugh Tomlinson QC and Sir Stephen Sedley pointed out how it is trumped by our right to free expression, which is part of UK domestic law by virtue of the Human Rights Act (something every Labour member ought to know and uphold), and by other conventions. Geoffrey Robertson QC also warns that it is “not fit for any purpose that seeks to use it as an adjudicative standard. It is imprecise, confusing and open to misinterpretation and even manipulation.”

Robertson adds:

The government’s “adoption” of the definition has no legal effect and does not oblige public bodies to take notice of it. The definition should not be adopted, and certainly should not be applied, by public bodies unless they are clear about Article 10 of the EHCR (European Convention on Human Rights) which is binding upon them, namely that they cannot ban speech or writing about Israel unless there is a real likelihood it will lead to violence or disorder or race hatred.

But Brown won’t be listening. He’s a dedicated pimp for Israel and a dyed-in-the-wool Zionist. In 2008, in the first speech by a British prime minister to the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, he told Israeli MPs:

Britain is your true friend. A friend in difficult times as well as in good times, a friend who will stand beside you whenever your peace, your stability and your existence are under threat.

Unlike Corbyn, Gordon Brown wouldn’t talk to Hamas because warmongers in the White House had branded them ‘terrorists’. But that’s their opinion. The state of Israel was founded by terror groups like the one that murdered 91 in an attack on the British mandate government in the King David Hotel and carried out the Deir Yassin massacre. Israel is the expert in terror. As Norman Finkelstein has remarked, “It is more than a rogue state. It is a lunatic state… The whole world is yearning for peace, and Israel is constantly yearning for war.”

The Israeli government itself was described by one of Brown’s own (Jewish) MPs, Sir Gerald Kaufman, as a “gang of amoral thugs”.

Brown, the son of a Church of Scotland minister, would have done well (as would all the other critics of Jeremy Corbyn and his ‘funny’ friends) to mull over the words of Gaza’s Catholic priest, Father Manuel Musallam, who told a journalist friend, Muhammad Omar: 

Palestinian Christians are not a religious community set apart in some corner. We are part of the Palestinian people. Our relationship with Hamas is as people of one nation. Hamas doesn’t fight religious groups. Its fight is against the Israeli occupation.

When asked about Western media reports that Islamic oppression was forcing Gaza’s Christians to consider emigrating, Father Manuel said that if Christians emigrate it’s because of the Israeli siege, not the Muslims. “We seek a life of freedom – a life different from the life of dogs we are currently forced to live.”

Turning the tables

Corbyn isn’t the problem. Zionists are. They are the enemy within. Corbyn’s election to party leader was a surprise brought about by a sudden influx of new supporters weary of sterile and corrupt politics. They had no time to groom him, not that he’s capable of being tamed like previous leaders. Corbyn has a long record of support for the Palestinians and other justice causes and that doesn’t sit well with the ’emininence grise’ pulling the strings. As a loose cannon in a carefully controlled political battlefield, he had to be disabled. One way to do that was to pick off his allies one by one and, with the help of a compliant media, and derail his party’s election prospects. That is what they’ve been doing with considerable success by weaponising so-called ‘anti-Semitism’ against Labour’s naive and easily scared troops.

The best way to deal with professional moaners like the Board of Deputies of British Jews is to politely give them the BDS treatment – ignore and refuse to engage until they change their intimidating tone. And tell them this is the British Labour Party, not a flagpole of the Knesset.

But why take allegations of anti-Semitism seriously from bully-boys who themselves practise or support racism? There’s a simple two-word response to such hypocrites. Admittedly, there are within Labour’s ranks too many who say idiotic things about Jews to the detriment of the campaign for justice in the Holy Land. I’ve heard remarks that are so stupidly provocative that one suspects the people responsible are Zionist plants. What is the point of bringing up Hitler and the holocaust when there are more Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity than you can shake a stick at?

Corbyn should have acted swiftly on genuine complaints and rejected the trumped up ones. He didn’t. Outside interference should never have been tolerated. It has been and still is. The best way to deal with professional moaners like the Board of Deputies of British Jews is to politely give them the BDS treatment – ignore and refuse to engage until they change their intimidating tone. And tell them this is the British Labour Party, not a flagpole of the Knesset.

Furthermore, it is long past time to question Labour’s Friends of Israel about their shameless support for the criminal state and its racist leaders and the land-grabbing Zionist Project. There is no place in a socialist organisation, or in British public life at all, for people who cannot bring themselves to condemn a regime that behaves so viciously towards its neighbours, defies international law, thinks it’s exempt from the norms of decent behaviour and shows no remorse. What does aligning with apartheid Israel really say about them? And, by the way, who gave permission to use the party as a platform to promote the interests of a foreign military power?

If people holding public office put themselves in a position where they are influenced by a foreign power, they flagrantly breach the Principles of Public Life. There are far too many Labour and Conservative MPs and MEPs who fall into that category.

Strange how the upsurge in carefully orchestrated allegations of anti-Semitism coincided with the arrival of Mark Regev, former chief of Israel’s propaganda machine, spokesman for Israel’s extremist prime minister and a shameless liar, as Israel’s new ambassador in London.

Corbyn’s other option is to leave Labour, take his supporters with him and let the party stew in its own juice. Let’s face it, the party as it stood then and stands today is dysfunctional, a thing of the past and quite unsuited to the 21st century. There may still be time to build a new, clean, fit-for-purpose political party and get it established before the next general election. In it, though probably not leading it, Corbyn could at least be true to himself.

The Labour Party has repeatedly promised to review its rules to send a clear message of zero-tolerance on anti-Semitism, assuming it knows what that means and who the genuine Semites are. For balance, of course, it should match this with zero-tolerance of those who use the party as a platform for promoting the criminal Israeli regime and its obscene territorial ambitions.

And remember, in 1949 the UN took Israel to its bosom on condition that it accepted the Right of Return of the Palestinian refugees and complied with General Assembly Resolution 194. Noting the declaration by the new state of Israel that it “unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a Member”, the General Assembly admitted Israel as “a peace-loving state which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations”.

Has Israel ever honoured its membership obligations or acted as a peace-loving state?

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Is UK Labour now Zionist-occupied territory?

Britain’s Ed “Zigzag” Miliband is losing his Jewish donors

Gilad Atzmon writes:

The Times of Israel reported on 9 November that British Labour Party leader Ed Miliband is losing the support of Jewish donors due to his party’s pro-Palestine stance.

The spineless Labour leader has been zigzagging for a while. He criticises Israel when he believes that such a “principled” move would be popular among Labour supporters. Yet, the same Ed too often describes himself as “the son of Jewish refugees from the holocaust”. He then changes his spots and becomes the mouthpiece of the Israeli lobby. He would swear alliance to Israel’s security but also to the Jews and the primacy of their suffering.

Binyamin Netanyahu and Ed Miliband

Ed Miliband relaxing with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu

Last June, “principled” Ed announced at a Jewish lobby gathering:

I want you to know that if I become prime minister in less than a year’s time, I will be proud to do so as a friend of Israel, a Jew and, most of all, someone who feels so proud to be part of the community gathered here today.

Britain doesn’t need a “Friend of Israel” in Number 10 Downing Street. It needs a friend of the British people, an ally of truth and justice, not a Zionist merchant.

One would believe that Jewish donors shunning the Labour party may lead to a consciousness shift among the leaders of “red” Britain. They may grasp that for too long they were held hostage by a Jewish Zionist oligarchy.

Don’t hold your breath because this isn’t going to happen. A senior Labour party member told the UK’s Independent newspaper on 9 November that Ed Miliband now has a “huge if not insurmountable challenge to maintain support from part of the Jewish community that had both backed and helped fund Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s election campaigns.”

Our Labour leadership is clearly addicted to shekels. Evidently, the penny didn’t drop. Rather than British interests, it is Jewish interests the Labour party is seeking to be in tune with. The meaning of it is devastatingly simple: the British left is an occupied Zionist territory and voting labour means many more Zionist interventionist wars in the future.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Britain’s Ed “Zigzag” Miliband is losing his Jewish donors

UK Labour Party in grip of Zionist inquisition 

Misuse of anti-Semitism

By Stuart Littlewood

The orchestrated smear campaign against pro-Palestine sympathisers sent me reaching for my pen. But Gilad Atzmon too was eyeing the Labour Party’s crazed witch hunt for “anti-Semites” with misgiving and had already declared, in his usual robust way, that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn was not so much a party as a piece of Zionist-occupied territory.

Writing in his blog about Corbyn’s and McDonnell’s servile commitment to expel anyone whose remarks might be interpreted by Zionist mafioso as hateful or simply upsetting to Jews, Atzmon concludes: “Corbyn’s Labour is now unequivocally a spineless club of sabots goyim [which I take to mean non-Jewish dogsbodies who do menial jobs that Jews are forbidden to do for religious reasons].

“The Labour Party’s policies,” says Atzmon,

are now compatible with Jewish culture: intolerant to the core and concerned primarily with the imaginary suffering of one people only. These people are not the working class, they are probably the most privileged ethnic group in Britain. Corbyn’s Labour is a Zionist occupied territory… It proves my theses that the left is not a friend to Palestine, the oppressed or the workless people.

I would have never believed that Jeremy Corbyn would engage in such colossally treacherous politics. I did not anticipate that Corbyn would become a Zionist lapdog. Corbyn was a great hope to many of us. I guess that the time has come to accept that the left is a dead concept, it has nothing to offer.

This writer too is shocked after signing up as a supporter (though not a member) of the Labour Party with the express purpose of voting in the leadership election for that beacon of common sense, that staunch champion of high ideals, that great white hope who would start a revolution in British politics and sweep away the crap and corruption left behind by Blair and Brown.

Boy, was I in for a disappointment!

Zionist inquisitors

The latest casualty in this ugly Zionist power-play is former mayor of London Ken Livingstone. In a heated public spat with one of the party’s chief inquisitors, John Mann MP, he had the temerity to defend a female member of parliament, Naz Shah, who had fallen foul of the party’s anti-Semitism police for comments made on Facebook before becoming an MP.

She had suggested that Israel be transferred to the United States. She apologised profusely, but Labour’s Israel lobby went ballistic after raking up this old remark.

It scarcely needs saying that Zionism may mean self-determination for the Jewish people but it has cruelly denied the Palestinians their right to self-determination for decades.

Had they forgotten that their hero, David Ben-Gurion himself, was mad-keen on population transfer – of Palestinian Arabs, that is? So what’s to get excited about?

Mann happens to be chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Anti-Semitism. One-sidedness is the name of his game.

What seems to have generated greatest sound and fury is this observation by Livingstone:

When Hitler won his election in 1932 his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.

Joan Ryan MP, Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, said:

To speak of Zionism – the right of the Jewish people to self-determination – and Hitler in the same sentence is quite breathtaking. I am appalled that Ken Livingstone has chosen to do so… He should be suspended from the Labour Party immediately.

It scarcely needs saying that Zionism may mean self-determination for the Jewish people but it has cruelly denied the Palestinians their right to self-determination for decades. Nevertheless Livingstone is suspended from the party after 47 years.

The president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Jonathan Arkush, can be relied on to put in his two-pennyworth on these occasions, and he didn’t disappoint:

Ken Livingston’s comments were abhorrent and beyond disgraceful. His latest comments combine holocaust revisionism with anti-Semitism denial, when the evidence is there for all to see. He lacks any sense of decency. He must now be expelled from the Labour Party.

On the suspension of Naz Shah, Arkush was in overdrive:

If the Labour Party is to re-establish its credibility on this issue, it needs to take four important steps forward:

First, there must be a credible inquiry into the entire Naz Shah episode. Secondly, the party has to take effective measures to eradicate anti-Semitism wherever it occurs within its membership.  Thirdly, the leader must make it clear that allegations of anti-Semitism are not to be dismissed as arguments about Israel. Fourthly, Jeremy Corbyn must now respond to our repeated calls for him to accept that his meetings with rank anti-Semites before he became leader were not appropriate and will not be repeated.

Witch hunters’ balloon pricked

Whether Livingstone’s claim that Hitler was a Zionist is correct, I know not and care not. He presumably checked his facts and was itching to score with this mischievous titbit. Whether that was a wise thing to do is a matter for idle chatter, not expulsion. Meanwhile Zionist hotheads inside and outside the party would do well to pay attention to the The Jewish Socialists’ Group, which has some sound advice for them and sticks a pin in their not-so-pretty balloon with this measured statement:

Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are not the same. Zionism is a political ideology which has always been contested within Jewish life since it emerged in 1897, and it is entirely legitimate for non-Jews as well as Jews to express opinions about it, whether positive or negative. Not all Jews are Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews.

Criticism of Israeli government policy and Israeli state actions against the Palestinians is not anti-Semitism. Those who conflate criticism of Israeli policy with anti-Semitism, whether they are supporters or opponents of Israeli policy, are actually helping the anti-Semites. We reject any attempt, from whichever quarter, to place legitimate criticism of Israeli policy out of bounds.

Accusations of anti-Semitism are currently being weaponised to attack the Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party with claims that Labour has a “problem” of anti-Semitism. This is despite Corbyn’s longstanding record of actively opposing fascism and all forms of racism, and being a firm a supporter of the rights of refugees and of human rights globally.

A very small number of such cases seem to be real instances of anti-Semitism. Others represent genuine criticism of Israeli policy and support for Palestinian rights, but expressed in clumsy and ambiguous language, which may unknowingly cross a line into anti-Semitism. Further cases are simply forthright expressions of support for Palestinian rights, which condemn Israeli government policy and aspects of Zionist ideology, and have nothing whatsoever to do with anti-Semitism.

The Jewish Socialists’ Group goes further and suggests that the attacks come from four main sources: the Conservative Party, Conservative-supporting media and pro-Zionist Israeli media sources, right-wing and pro-Zionist elements claiming to speak on behalf of the Jewish community, and opponents of Jeremy Corbyn within the Labour Party. These groups make common cause to wreck the Corbyn leadership, divert attention from Israeli government crimes and discredit those who dare to criticise Israeli policy or the Zionist enterprise.

In short, the Jewish Socialists’ Group says what needs to be said and puts the witch hunter generals firmly in their place.

Of course, if Labour – or the Conservatives – truly wished to be squeaky-clean in matters of racism they would disband their Israel fan clubs (i.e. Friends of Israel) and suspend all who refuse to condemn Israel’s brutal acts of ethnic cleansing and other war crimes. If people holding public office put themselves in a position where they are influenced by a foreign military power, they flagrantly breach the Principles of Public Life. There are far too many Labour and Conservative MPs and MEPs who fall into that category.

The Labour Party announced today it is considering reviewing its rules to send a clear message of zero-tolerance on anti-Semitism. For balance, why not match this with zero-tolerance of those who use the party as a platform for promoting the criminal Israeli regime and its continuing territorial ambitions? Go on, Labour, prove Atzmon wrong – prove the party is not Zionist occupied territory.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on UK Labour Party in grip of Zionist inquisition 

Corbyn: the antidote to the Blairite “virus” and Zionist snake-bite

Jeremy Corbyn

By Stuart Littlewood

Some polls are showing Jeremy Corbyn forging ahead in the Labour Party leadership race by as much as 20 points. The political Establishment is shaken and quite definitely stirred.

Dave Ward, general secretary of the 200,000-strong Communication Workers Union, is reported saying:

There is a virus within the Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn is the antidote.

The grip of the Blairites and individuals like Peter Mandelson must now be loosened once and for all.

This has ruffled a good many feathers among Labour diehards.

Meanwhile, the four Labour leadership contenders recently attended a public meeting populated largely by members of the Jewish community and co-hosted by the Jewish Chronicle.

Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, in supercharged suck-up mode, expressed avid support for Israel, leaving Jeremy Corbyn as the only critic.

Andy Burnham

Andy Burnham

The Balfour Declaration represented “an example of British values in action”

“I’ve always been a friend of Israel and the Jewish community – that will never change.” If he becomes Labour leader his first overseas trip will be to Israel. He’s opposed to the “spiteful” boycott movement. He praises Israel as a “democracy that has a long history of protecting minorities and promoting civil rights” and says the Balfour Declaration, which is coming up for its centenary, represented “an example of British values in action”. He wants centenary celebrations in every school to show how the UK “played a role in the establishment of a democracy in the region”.

Yvette Cooper

Yvette Cooper

Says the Balfour Declaration, which ethnically cleansed and dispossessed the Palestinian people, must be celebrated to “mark the pioneering role Britain played in [promoting] the rights of Jewish people to a homeland”

“It’s hugely important that Labour continues to be a friend of Israel.” She says Labour must oppose the “counterproductive” BDS [the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement]. As for the Balfour Declaration, its 100th anniversary must be celebrated to “mark the pioneering role Britain played in [promoting] the rights of Jewish people to a homeland”.

Liz Kendall

Liz Kendall

Pledges to “always be a friend of Israel” and says the recent resolution passed in the Commons to recognise the state of Palestine on 1967 borders was irresponsible

She pledges to “always be a friend of Israel” and says the recent resolution passed in the Commons to recognise the state of Palestine on 1967 borders was irresponsible. She feels BDS is an initiative to “delegitimise Israel” and she’ll fight it with “every fibre of [her] being”. She ‘s proud of the role played by the UK in the establishment of Israel and believes it is a country which “respects gay rights, has a free media, and possesses a strong tradition of social democracy”.

Jeremy Corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn

Says he’ll support an arms embargo on Israel and a ban on produce from West Bank settlements viewed as illegal under international law

Jeremy Corbyn, who has visited Israel, the West Bank and Gaza nine times, calls for “robust discussion” on Israel’s siege of Gaza, the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the mistreatment of Palestinian child detainees in Israeli prisons. He says he’ll support an arms embargo on Israel and a ban on produce from West Bank settlements viewed as illegal under international law. As for the Balfour Declaration, it was “an extremely confused document which did not enjoy universal support in the cabinet of the time…”

Actually, the Balfour Declaration of 2 November 1917 was merely a letter to Lord Rothschild from Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour expressing sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations:

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….

There was no promise of a Jewish state.

Later, Lord Sydenham famously remarked in a debate in the House of Lords:

The harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country… may never be remedied… What we have done is, by concessions, not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, to start a running sore in the East, and no one can tell how far that sore will extend.

Balfour was one of history’s greatest chumps. The idea that his fatal blunder should be celebrated – in schools – is preposterous. It should not even be mentioned without including a full history of the Holy Land since the mid-1800s.

Back to the meeting.

The candidates were then asked whether it was appropriate for parliamentarians to host members of groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. This was designed to embarrass Corbyn, who had referred to the resistance groups as “friends” when he hosted them in Parliament some years ago.

Burnham said that he would “sanction” any member hosting meetings that included Hamas and Hezbollah. “No MP in my Labour Party would do that.” However Burnham, in his haste to appease Israel, might find it hard to make such sanctions stick. Neither Hamas’s nor Hezbollah’s political wings are proscribed in the UK.

Corbyn defended his position by saying: “You don’t achieve progress by only talking to those who you agree with,” and that all parties must be engaged in the search for peace.

Corbyn is nothing like the Establishment-preferred smoothy from Eton and delinquent from the Bullingdon Club – the disconnected upper-class leadership formula that has driven Britain into deep debt and rendered it  unpopular throughout the world.

Critics in the Labour Party have slurred Jeremy Corbyn with claims that he’s not prime ministerial material and therefore not electable in a situation where winning power is all that matters. Others disagree. Labour must prove first itself an effective opposition if it is to win back public respect, as well as its own self-respect, and be considered fit for purpose. That is not likely to happen while the Blairite/Brownite rump continues to clog the upper echelons of the party. The unwelcome blockage includes stooges like Cooper and Burnham.

Corbyn is nothing like the Establishment-preferred smoothy from Eton and delinquent from the Bullingdon Club – the disconnected upper-class leadership formula that has driven Britain into deep debt and rendered it  unpopular throughout the world. He’s an ordinary product of Adams Grammar School in Shropshire, North London Polytechnic and the excellent VSO (Volunteer Services Overseas). He’s astute and has a track record of honesty and openness, laced with a burning sense of justice. Therefore, he’s much more representative of the people and much more their “cuppa tea”. Furthermore, he’s a trusted parliamentarian of 32 years’ standing.

Many certainly can see Corbyn as prime minister – a very different and totally new style of prime minister, to be sure – with open-neck shirt, a cloth cap on occasion and sleeves rolled up ready for grass-roots action. At least he’s a man to look up to and identify with – and a man who is not tempted by the Israeli shekel.

If any of Corbyn’s opponents lands the leadership Labour will remain under the yoke of Zionist ambitions and enslaved by the gangster regime in Tel Aviv. It’ll be looking for any excuse to gang up in death-dealing raids into countries the US and Israel don’t like. And it’ll continue to provide a safe haven to Israel’s war criminals.

Make a difference

UK readers can help spoil the warmongers’ evil schemes and take a bold step down the path to peace. They can apply to become supporters of the Labour Party and qualify for a vote in the leadership election. But they must do it before 12 August.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Corbyn: the antidote to the Blairite “virus” and Zionist snake-bite

The Balfour Declaration: Time to say sorry. Time we made amends.

UK must apologise for Balfour Declaration

By Stuart Littlewood

In a letter to a local newspaper about Brexit and the way Prime Minister Theresa May is handling it, I happened to mention in passing the Balfour Declaration, criticising her plans to celebrate the centenary “with pride” and invite Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, to the fun. This drew a sharp response from someone spouting the usual Israeli propaganda “facts” and saying my attitude harmed the Jewish community worldwide.

The Balfour Declaration is a deadly serious subject. It is a cause of great horror and grief, of justifiable international anger, and a matter for profound regret. This is a right time and proper time for debate. Let’s focus on it for the next few months because justice groups are urging the British government to mark the Balfour Declaration centenary by saying sorry.

An opportunity that will be missed

Mrs May could do some real good here. She could, at a stroke, help quell the destructive turmoil in the Middle East and begin repair to Britain’s tattered prestige. She could even open new trade routes into Islamic markets, vitally important as we leave the European Union.

By eating a little humble pie and apologising on our behalf for 100 years of agony inflicted on lovely people in a lovely part of the world, Mrs May could take a giant step for mankind on the world stage. She has between now and November to do it. Will she?

No, she’ll be celebrating Balfour in style with the Israeli prime minister and not giving a toss about the people Britain wronged.

Which is shocking when a UN report recently branded Israel an apartheid regime. It’s even more regrettable considering the desperate cry for help from the National Coalition of Christian Organisations in Palestine in an open letter to the World Council of Churches and the ecumenical movement, signed by over 30 organisations in Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

Here’s an extract:

We are still suffering from 100 years of injustice and oppression that were inflicted on the Palestinian people beginning with the unlawful Balfour Declaration… followed by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza, and the fragmentation of our people and our land through policies of isolation and confiscation, and the building of Jewish-only settlements and the Apartheid Wall…

Mrs May needs a jolt.

When I enquired whether the Balfour Declaration is taught in our schools I was told “no”. So, what exactly is it?

Arthur Balfour, British foreign secretary in 1917, penned a letter to the most senior Jew in England, Lord Rothschild, pledging the government’s “best endeavours” to facilitate the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. Balfour also wrote: “We do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country.”

It amounted to a betrayal of our Arab allies in World War I. Many in Parliament objected, including Lord Sydenham who remarked: “What we have done, by concessions not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, is to start a running sore in the East, and no-one can tell how far that sore will extend.”

At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, when the Great Powers carved up the territorial spoils of war, a Zionist delegation produced Balfour’s promissory note. It planted a powder-keg in the Middle East and the fuse was now lit. Britain accepted the mandate responsibility for Palestine and eventually in 1947 the Great Powers pushed the United Nations into partitioning the territory, again without consulting those who lived there.

Sordid deal

So what made Balfour do it? The more you delve, the more incredible the answers to those unaware of the growing influence of worldwide Zionism. Support for the movement and its ambition to create a “New Israel” was quite fashionable in the corridors of power around the time of World War I. The story I find compelling is that, while Britain struggled desperately against German U-boat successes and ammunition shortages, the Zionist power-brokers of Germany and Eastern Europe consulted with their opposite numbers in America and decided, given their grip on money and media, they could bring the US into the war against Germany and its Ottoman ally if Britain were to promise them Palestine for a Jewish homeland afterwards.

Balfour was a Zionist convert (as were many others, including Prime Minister David Lloyd-George) and in the right position. The proposition was put to Britain in 1916. The Zionists delivered. The US entered the war. In the meantime, immigrant Polish-Zionist chemist Chaim Weizmann offered a solution to the production of enough acetone, a critical ingredient in cordite for artillery shells, to satisfy the war effort. He demanded the same promise. Balfour handed them their “receipt” in November 1917 even though Palestine was not, and never could be, Britain’s to give away.

“Name of the game: erasing Palestine”

Balfour had inserted into his “declaration” that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing and non-Jewish communities…” on the insistence of the only Jew in the British Cabinet, Lord Montague, who was anti-Zionist and opposed the deal. But this safeguard was jettisoned as soon as Britain lost control of events.

Not content with the territory allocated to them under the UN Partition Plan, the Israelis declared statehood, ignoring all boundaries. Their “Plan Dalet” offensive, begun beforehand, had seized much Arab-designated land at gunpoint. Jewish militias – the Irgun, Haganah, Palmach and Lehi – raided towns and villages, forcing inhabitants to flee. Numerous atrocities were committed, including the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem (headquarters of the British administration) in 1946, murdering 91, and the massacres at Deir Yassin and Lydda in 1948.

Today Israel illegally occupies the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including the Old City, and has Gaza in a stranglehold so pitiless as to have caused a long-term humanitarian crisis and irreparable environmental damage. For nearly 70 years millions of dispossessed Palestinians and their families have languished in refugee camps, and those who remain in their homeland – Christian and Muslim alike – live a miserable life under brutal military occupation.

The situation stands as a monumental stain on the flag of the United Nations, which hasn’t the backbone to take action. And the continuing repercussions throughout the Holy Land should concern all true Christians and Muslims, especially regular churchgoers like Mrs May.

Miko Peled, the son of an Israeli general and a former soldier in the Israeli army – and now an important figure in the struggle for justice – confirms what many have been saying for years:

The name of the game: erasing Palestine, getting rid of the people and de-Arabising the country… By 1993 the Israelis had achieved their mission to make the conquest of the West Bank irreversible… That is when Israel said, OK, we’ll begin negotiations…

My critic in the local newspaper called Hamas terrorists. Peled describes the Israeli army, in which he served, as “one of the best trained and best equipped and best fed terrorist organisations in the world”. Take your pick. But Hamas’s political wing is not proscribed as a terrorist organisation in the UK.

The accusation that criticising the Israeli regime harms Jewish communities is unacceptable. There are many admirable Jewish groups vehemently campaigning against Israel’s crimes. One-time Israeli military intelligence chief Yehoshafat Harkabi warned that Jews throughout the world would pay the price of Israel’s misconduct. So, the problem appears to be a “family” matter between Jews everywhere.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on The Balfour Declaration: Time to say sorry. Time we made amends.

”Israel’s” chief stooge at Westminster shames us again

Binyamin Netanyahu and Theresa May

By Stuart Littlewood

“As prime minister, I am proud to say that I support Israel. And it is absolutely right that we should mark the vital role that Britain played a century ago in helping to create a homeland for the Jewish people.” 

Thus spake Theresa May the other day as she welcomed members of the Jewish community to 10 Downing Street. But by focusing on creating a homeland for the Jewish people she’s also celebrating the hell that Balfour’s Declaration created for the gentle Palestinians and for the rest of the region. “Born of that letter, the pen of Balfour, and of the efforts of so many people, is a remarkable country,” said May, apparently blind to the reality.

Proud of “unspeakable misery, dispossession and displacement”

Right now we’re on the run-up to the centenary of what is arguably the biggest foreign policy blunder in British history: the Balfour Declaration. In 1917 Arthur Balfour, Foreign Secretary, bowed to Zionist demands for a homeland for the Jews in Palestine and gave an undertaking that set the world on course for long-term turmoil and, for the native Palestinians, unspeakable misery, dispossession and displacement. It was a criminal conspiracy. And Balfour was an A-list idiot who bragged that he wasn’t even going to consult the local Arab population about this theft of their homes and lands.

Yet he remains a hero of the Conservative Party which, led by Theresa May, plans to celebrate this hundred-year “running sore” – as Lord Sydenham called it – in great style, inviting Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu to the festivities. That’s if the mad-dog warmonger isn’t under arrest by then on imminent charges of corruption back home.

“I will always do whatever it takes to keep our Jewish community safe,” May added. “Through our new definition of anti-Semitism we will call out anyone guilty of any language or behaviour that displays hatred towards Jews because they are Jews. We will actively encourage the use of this definition by the police, the legal profession, universities and other public bodies.”

She was referring to the  International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism.

BDS “unsucessful”? Really?

One of May’s Cabinet minsiters, Sajid Javid, told the World Jewish Congress that the UK would celebrate the upcoming anniversary with pride. “Someone said we should apologise for the declaration, to say it was an error of judgment. Of course that’s not going to happen.” To apologise, he said, would be to apologise for the existence of Israel and to question its right to exist.

Israel stooge Sajid Javid

Israel stooge Sajid Javid

Instead, he emphasised the UK government’s intolerance towards any kind of boycott of Israel. He said:

I’ll be 100 per cent clear. I do not support calls for a boycott, my party does not support calls for a boycott. For all its bluster, the BDS [Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions] campaign is most notable I think, for its lack of success… As long as I’m in government, as long as I’m in politics, I will do everything in my power to fight back against those who seek to undermine Israel.

The UK, Javid said, has maintained close diplomatic, trade and security ties with Israel since its inception, and is counted upon by Israel to vote in its favour at the UN and other international institutions.

As Noam Chomsky has aptly observed: “People who call themselves supporters of Israel are actually supporters of its moral degeneration and ultimate destruction.”

Israel lobby stooges like May and Javid continue trying to ram their pro-Zionist nonsense down out throats despite the fact that last time they attacked the successful BDS movement, warning that her government would “have no truck with those who subscribe to it”, they came spectacularly unstuck. Two hundred legal scholars and practising lawyers from all over Europe put May in her place by pointing out that BDS is a lawful exercise of freedom of expression and outlawing it undermines a basic human right protected by international convention. Her efforts to repress it amounted to support for Israel’s violations of international law and failure to honour the solemn pledge by states to “strictly respect the aims and principles of the Charter of the United Nations”.

May needs a crash course in human rights

Top legal experts were recently asked for their views by Free Speech on Israel, Independent Jewish Voices, Jews for Justice for Palestinians and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. Their verdict was that those in public life cannot behave in a manner inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for freedom of expression and applies not only to information or ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that “offend, shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population”.

What’s more, there is an obligation to allow all concerned in public debate “to express their opinions and ideas without fear, even if these opinions and ideas are contrary to those defended by the official authorities or by a large part of public opinion, or even if those opinions and ideas are irritating or offensive to the public”. Article 10 says that everyone has the right to freedom of expression including “freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers”. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says the same sort of thing, subject of course to the usual limitations required by law and respect for the rights of others.

Eminent human rights lawyer Hugh Tomlinson QC has sharply criticised the anti-Semitism definition touted by May. Firstly, it isn’t a legally binding definition so doesn’t have the force of a statutory one. And it cannot be considered a legal definition as it lacks clarity. Therefore, any conduct contrary to the IHRA definition couldn’t necessarily be ruled illegal.

He says it was “most unsatisfactory for the government to adopt a definition which lacks clarity and comprehensiveness” and suggests the government’s decision to adopt the IHRA definition was simply a freestanding statement of policy – a mere suggestion as to a definition of anti-Semitism that public bodies might wish to use. But no public body was under an obligation to adopt or use it, or should be criticised for refusing to. He warned that if a public authority did decide to adopt the definition then it must interpret it in a way that’s consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights mentioned above.

Legally invalid definition of anti-Semitism

According to Tomlinson, then, the IHRA definition doesn’t mean that calling Israel an apartheid state that practises settler colonialism, or urging BDS against Israel, can properly be characterised as anti-Semitic. Furthermore, a public authority seeking to apply the IHRA definition in order to prohibit or punish such activities “would be acting unlawfully”.

Retired Lord Justice of Appeal Sir Stephen Sedley has weighed in by criticising the IHRA definition for lack of legal force. “It is not neutral: it may well influence policy both domestically and internationally.” He added that the right of free expression, now part of our domestic law by virtue of the Human Rights Act, “places both negative and positive obligations on the state which may be put at risk if the IHRA definition is unthinkingly followed”. Moreover, the 1986 Education Act established an individual right of free expression in all higher education institutions “which cannot be cut back by governmental policies”.

Sedley felt the IHRA definition was open to manipulation. “What is needed now is a principled retreat on the part of government from a stance which it has naively adopted.”

As for Javid’s crack about not having to apologise for Israel’s existence, he must have forgotten that in the wake of the 1947 UN Partition Plan, which granted the Jews territory within defined borders, they declared statehood in 1948 without borders, grabbing as much extra land as they could by armed terror and ethnic cleansing. The new state of Israel’s admission to the UN in 1949 was conditional upon honouring the UN Charter and implementing UN General Assembly Resolutions 181 and 194. It has failed to do so and to this day repeatedly violates provisions and principles of the Charter.

When the UK Conservative government makes pronouncements on foreign affairs it pays to consider that 80 per cent of its MPS are claimed to be signed-up members of the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) lobby group and this is a stepping-stone to higher office. CFI, according to its website, is active at every level of the party.

It is sad that so many of our politicians are so spineless and so insecure that they feel the need to herd together under the flag of what the UN has called a racist state.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on ”Israel’s” chief stooge at Westminster shames us again

Balfour merrymaking a potential PR disaster for the British government

 NOVANEWS
Theresa May propagandising for Israel

By Stuart Littlewood

The extraordinary programme of centenary celebrations in the UK to honour Lord Balfour and his lunatic Declaration – and the British government’s continuing part in it – is an affront to citizens here and to countless millions abroad. And many a sharp pin is waiting to burst the pretty Balfour balloon being desperately inflated by Israel-firsters at Westminster.

Balfour’s 1917 pledge and its consequences, played out over the last 70 years, ride roughshod over Christian values and humanitarian law. Rothschild replied to Balfour’s letter saying that “the British government has opened up, by their message, a prospect of safety and comfort to large masses of people who are in need of it”. Well, it also opened up the prospect – and the reality – of a lifetime of abject misery for millions of Palestinians who had no need of it and certainly didn’t deserve it. It also helped to plant in the most sacred part of the Middle East an evil regime that shows contempt for human rights and international law and is bent on creating instability all around and confiscating every acre of land and every natural resource to aid its expansion.

There may be free speech in Britain on every issue under the sun but not on Palestine. (Manuel Hassassian, Palestinian ambassador to UK)

The daft thing is, Balfour didn’t even write the Declaration. He was simply the upper-class twit who signed it and did so without even bothering to consult the people whose homeland he intended giving away. The carefully worded letter to Rothschild (the so-called Declaration) was the work of Leopold Amery, political secretary to the War Cabinet at the time, who cleverly kept hidden his Jewish ancestry throughout his quite impressive career. He was also largely responsible for forming the Jewish Legion battalions which were the forerunners of the hated Israel Defence Forces, which Israeli Miko Peled describes as “one of the best trained and best equipped and best fed terrorist organisations in the world”.

Amery was an eager Zionist and had a supervisory role in the British mandate government in Palestine during the 1920s, actively preparing it for eventual Jewish takeover. He operated within a government the upper echelons of which were stuffed with Zionist sympathisers such as Winston Churchill and Lloyd George.

In response to the avalanche of pro-Balfour celebratory tosh, the Palestine Mission to the UK commissioned a “Make It Right” campaign featuring contrasting images of Palestinian life before and after 1948, when Israel declared statehood on land it had overrun and ethnically cleansed. The campaign message, of course, objects to the Balfour Declaration, which promised a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Posters were supposed to appear on buses and in Underground rail stations, but London’s transport authority, Transport for London (TfL), has banned the advertisements on the grounds that they “did not comply fully with our guidelines”. It seems TfL doesn’t like  “images or messages which relate to matters of public controversy or sensitivity” or causes that are “party political”.

The Palestinian ambassador, Manuel Hassassian, accused TfL of censorship, saying:

Palestinian history is a censored history. There has been a 100-year-long cover-up of the British government’s broken promise, in the Balfour Declaration, to safeguard the rights of the Palestinians when it gave away their country to another people. TfL’s decision is not surprising as it is, at best, susceptible to or, at worst, complicit with, all the institutional forces and active lobby groups which continuously work to silence the Palestinian narrative. There may be free speech in Britain on every issue under the sun but not on Palestine.

Prime Minister Theresa May has invited her Israeli counterpart, “Bibi” Netanyahu, to the London celebrations. It is unthinkable in government circles for an honoured guest to be confronted with a London plastered with such inconvenient messages. Nevertheless, they’ll appear on 52  London black cabs, which aren’t under TfL’s control, so our prime minister’s loathsome visitor may not entirely escape embarrassment, assuming he’s capable of feeling it.

Conflating justice and tolerance with anti-Semitism

Speaking of declarations, I’m reminded of a far more sensible one by Shimon Tzabar, who had been a member of Jewish terrorist organisations in Palestine during the British mandate, including the Stern Gang, Irgun and Haganah. After 1948 and the establishment of the Israeli state, he fought in its 1948-50, 1956 and 1967 wars but spoke out against the annexation of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, and the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. He even began calling  himself a “Hebrew-speaking Palestinian”. Tzabar and others eventually felt moved to publish the following declaration:

Occupation entails foreign rule. Foreign rule entails resistance. Resistance entails repression. Repression entails terror and counter-terror. The victims of terror are mostly innocent people. Holding on to the occupied territories will turn us into a nation of murderers and murder victims. Let us get out of the occupied territories immediately.

Wouldn’t Mrs May prefer to celebrate Tzabar’s Declaration? He moved to England where he famously published the MUCH BETTER THAN THE OFFICIAL MICHELIN Guide to Israeli prisons, Jails, Concentration Camps and Torture Chambers. The best and safest way to begin a tour of these horrible establishments, it said, was to look like a Palestinian Arab and get yourself arrested .”Once you look like a Palestinian you have a good chance of being arrested. Your chance is actually so good, that you don’t have to do anything in particular.”

That other Israeli straight-talker, Miko Peled, mentioned above, put the cat among the pigeons at the Labour Party conference last month when he told activists that Israel is “terrified” of Jeremy Corbyn becoming British prime minister and will do everything it can to stop him. He said:

They are going to pull all the stops, they are going to smear, they are going to try anything they can to stop Corbyn from being prime minister. It’s up to Labour, it’s up to you [to ensure] that they don’t have the ability to do that… Jeremy Corbyn is an opportunity for Britain that, if it gets lost, won’t come back for a very long time.

The reason anti-Semitism is used is because they [the Israelis] have no argument, there is nothing to say… How can a call for justice and tolerance be conflated with anti-Semitism? I don’t know if they realise this but they are pitting Judaism against everything good and just.

Peled is an Israeli Jew, the son of an Israeli general, and a former soldier in the Israeli army. You couldn’t find a more authentic insider source. Here’s a flavour of his message:

The name of the game: erasing Palestine, getting rid of the people and de-Arabizing the country…

  • By 1993 the Israelis had achieved their mission to make the conquest of the West Bank irreversible. By 1993 the Israeli government knew for certain that a Palestinian state could not be established in the West Bank – the settlements were there, billions of dollars were invested, the entire Jordan River valley was settled… there was no place any more for a Palestinian state to be established. That is when Israel said, OK, we’ll begin negotiations…
  • When people talk about the possibility of Israel somehow giving up the West Bank for a Palestinian state, if it wasn’t so sad it would be funny. It shows a complete misunderstanding of the objective of Zionism and the Zionist state.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu has just announced a temporary easing of the fishing limits imposed on Gaza’s fishermen. For two months, in the southern half of Gaza, they will be able to sail out nine miles after which the limit reverts back to six. iles. Sounds generous? No, it’s ridiculously cruel. And restrictions remain even tighter in the northern half. Under the Oslo agreements (1993) Israel is supposed to allow the Palestinians to fish up to 12 miles out, in line with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea but, as with so many other agreements, the Zionist regime has never honoured its obligation. Furthermore, Israel’s 10-year blockade on Gaza has made it impossible for many fishermen to buy parts to maintain their vessels, so the once flourishing fishing industry has been crippled.

And Netanyahu recently locked up the Palestinians for 11 days while Israelis enjoyed festive holidays. Marilyn Garson, writing in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, reported: “Netanyahu seals the gates of the West Bank and Gaza for 11 days, to enjoy Sukkot. How flagrant, to confine millions of people in the name of a holiday that celebrates the flimsy, temporary nature of our walls. If Jews were herded behind concrete walls and locked away for 11 days, so that someone else might enjoy a Jew-free holiday, would we shrug that off?” Haaretz is a relatively honest source and to print such a thing in Israel is quite daring.

On the same subject the Jewish Chronicle had this to say: “Border closures over the High Holidays and other Jewish festivals are routine, but are usually much shorter. The original decision stoked complaints within the Israeli security establishment that it was principally ‘grandstanding’ by ministers eager to burnish their right-wing credentials.” The Jewish Chronicle went on to explain that the 11-day closure had been demanded by Israeli police and the Internal Security minister, and was initially opposed by the Israeli military and senior Defence Ministry officials who said that it would be an unnecessary punishment to tens of thousands of law-abiding Palestinian workers.

However, both Israeli papers omitted to say that, thanks to Balfour’s legacy, there has been no freedom of movement for Palestinians since the closure of Gaza and the West Bank by Israel 26 years ago. Closure is the normal state of affairs and not to be confused with foolish ideas that crossings are usually open.

Contradictory promises

The Balfour Project, which promotes justice, security and peace for both Jews and Arabs, has made available a wealth of information. One of its publications sums up the problem very neatly:

The Declaration pledges Britain’s support for a “national home” in Palestine for the Jewish people on the understanding that the rights of “existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” would not be prejudiced. The failure to uphold this second clause, for which Britain bears much responsibility, has caused conflict between Palestinians and Israelis ever since.

This was just one of Britain’s contradictory promises during the First World War. After the war we secured a mandate from the League of Nations which included a “sacred trust” to prepare the people of Palestine for independence. But in the end Britain walked away.

Yes, in 1948 we abandoned the mess we had created. As the last British soldiers marched away, Jewish leaders declared statehood without borders, pushing far beyond the boundaries set out in the UN Partition Plan the year before, their terror militia putting to flight hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, massacring many more and stealing their homes and farms.

What Britain caused to happen in the Holy Land was contrary to all decency and justice. History will not judge kindly the British government’s decision to celebrate Balfour “with pride” while refusing to apologise and make amends. There’s a fair chance the whole sorry spectacle will backfire on Theresa May and teach her unpleasant associates a sharp lesson.

A colleague wrote only yesterday to one of our government ministers and what she said is worth repeating here:

Ministers, from the prime minister down, should reflect with humility that but for that disastrous decision by their predecessors 100 years ago, the Holy Land might still be a land of peace where all the faiths lived in harmony together.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Balfour merrymaking a potential PR disaster for the British government

Will the British royal family celebrate 100 years of shame by endorsing ”Israel”?

Prince Charles wearing a Jewish kippah

An official visit during the centenary year of the Balfour Declaration could be another nail in the coffin of the British Monarchy

By Stuart Littlewood

You know that awful feeling of doom when bad news makes your blood run cold? It’s happened to me at least four times already this year:

  • when Theresa May invited Trump on a state visit to the UK when he’d been in office only five minutes and clearly ought to be on probation for at least two years;
  • when the British government announced it was going to whoop it up for the centenary of the Balfour Declaration;
  • when the British government announced it had invited Israel’s chief criminal, Binyamin Netanyahu, to those Balfour celebrations; and
  • when news came the other day that a member of the British royal family might break precedent and formally visit Israel later this year.

That fourth one had the Times of Israel crowing with delight. Its report succeeds in portraying Prince Charles as the perfect stooge while Boris Johnson is having a bad hair day as usual. Such a visit would, of course, legitimise Israel as an illegal occupying power and destroy the last shred of British credibility in the Middle East and indeed the rest of the civilised world. But that counts for nothing among the bird-brains that run our country.

Let’s remember how this Balfour lunacy began, Arthur Balfour (later Lord Balfour) being British foreign secretary at the time and a Zionist convert.

His Declaration of 1917 – actually a letter to the most senior Jew in England, Lord Rothschild – pledged assistance for the Zionist cause with total disregard for the consequences to the native majority in the land the Zionists had targeted: Palestine.

Calling itself a declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations, it said:

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing and non-Jewish communities…

Balfour also wrote:

In Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country. The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now occupy that land.

The “running sore in the East” and how it turned septic

Obviously, there was opposition. Lord Sydenham warned:

The harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country may never be remedied. What we have done, by concessions not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, is to start a running sore in the East, and no-one can tell how far that sore will extend.

Well, we know now, a hundred years on.

So what was behind it? I like the account of Jewish businessman Benjamin Freedman who gave a speech at the Willard Hotel, Washington, in 1961. He told his audience that Britain, in World War I, was in dire straits thanks to the success of the German U-boats. It was alone, almost out of ammunition and on the edge of starvation. Germany offered peace terms, and while Britain chewed it over the Zionists of Germany (representing the Zionists of Eastern Europe who wanted an end to the Czar) came to London and said: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.” And that was the bargain Britain struck, in October 1916, overturning earlier pledges to the Arabs for their help.

And having done their bit, the Zionists wanted a “receipt” – written confirmation of Britain’s pledge. Hence Balfour’s infamous “Declaration” in November the following year, a grubby note addressed to Lord Rothschild promising to pay off the Zionists with land that wasn’t Britain’s to give.

When the war was over a large delegation of Jews attended the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. According to Freedman, who was there, when the Great Powers carved up the losers’ territories – German and Ottoman – the Jewish delegation claimed Palestine, producing Balfour’s promissory note.

In August 1917, while the Palestine deal was still being discussed but before Balfour issued his Declaration, Lord Montague penned an important memorandum to the British cabinet. Montague, only the second Jew to serve in a British cabinet, was minister of munitions in 1916 when, said Freedman, Britain was running out of ammunition. He wanted to place on record that in his opinion the policy of the British government was anti-Semitic because it would provide a rallying ground for anti-Semites in every country in the world. “Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous political creed, untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom,” he said. He assumed that Zionism meant that Muslims and Christians were to make way for the Jews and that Jews would be put in all positions of preference.

No such a thing as a Jewish nation

Montague argued that there was no such thing as a Jewish nation, and he was well aware of the unpopularity of the Jewish community. “We have obtained a far greater share of this country’s goods and opportunities than we are numerically entitled to… Many of us have been exclusive in our friendships and intolerant in our attitude…”

As for the Balfour Declaration itself, he felt the government was carrying out the wishes of a Zionist organisation “largely run by men of enemy descent or birth”. Furthermore, he said, “I would be almost tempted to proscribe the Zionist organisation as illegal and against the national interest.” His message to Lord Rothschild was that the government should help Jews in Palestine enjoy liberty of settlement and life on equal terms with inhabitants who hold other religious beliefs, but go no further.

The insane Declaration was followed 30 years later by another monstrous betrayal when the Great Powers pushed the United Nations into cruelly partitioning Palestine, again without consulting those who lived there. Worse still, the UN did nothing to halt the Jewish terror spree and land grab that followed.

Celebrating Balfour amounts to praising the thieves for keeping what they stole

Justice groups are now saying it’s time the British government, which accepted the mandated responsibility for the Holy Land up to 1948, had the good manners to admit its part in the catastrophe and say sorry for the needless damage and suffering caused to Palestinian Arabs who once considered themselves Britain’s allies. That would be a reasonable starting point for dealing with the horrendous situation today.

Celebrating Balfour amounts to praising the thieves for keeping what they stole. Those who cannot stomach such a cowardly betrayal of Christian and Muslim communities in the Holy Land may consider signing a petition addressed the the Queen’s private secretary asking that she does not travel to Israel at this time. It points out that the situation vis-à-vis Palestine is regarded by the Foreign Office as “unfinished business” and a royal visit would not only add insult to injury to the Palestinians but embroil Her Majesty in a controversy that could damage the international standing of the British monarchy.

The time for the royal family to start being nice to Israel is when Israel starts being nice to its Palestinian neighbours, honours its obligations under the UN Charter, ends its illegal occupation and shows proper regard for international and humanitarian law.

And not before.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Will the British royal family celebrate 100 years of shame by endorsing ”Israel”?

Balfour Centenary: Celebrating 100 years of injustice and oppression

Ungodly Balfour

“It’s God’s work…”

By Stuart Littlewood

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 pedge 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 pseudos have apparently ignored the cry for help issued only months ago by the National Coalition of Christian Organisations 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.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Balfour Centenary: Celebrating 100 years of injustice and oppression

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING

November 2018
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930