UK Labour Party reportedly suspends 50 members over anti-Semitic, racist comments

[Wiggen]

Being for a "one state solution" does not automatically make one an anti-semite

It is when the 'one state solution' involves incorporating non-jews into your country who's most fervent wish is that jews no longer remain once they arrive. Kind of like the supporters of anti-Semitism on this forum.

You know, the 'driving them into the sea' position so popular with arabs.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

It is when the 'one state solution' involves incorporating non-jews into your country who's most fervent wish is that jews no longer remain once they arrive. Kind of like the supporters of anti-Semitism on this forum.

You know, the 'driving them into the sea' position so popular with arabs.

Are you talking about the right of return? The right of return is not anti-semitic?

 

[Wiggen]

Ahh, the 'right of return'. Another buzz phrase from the anti-Israel crowd. No, I'm talking about the 'drive them into the sea' crowd that is so popular with you leftists. Does it comfort you to know that the Aryan Nations and other white supremacists share your position?

 

[Apocalypse]

Because the criticism you are pointing out is not anti-semitic.

I already understand that your position is that the skies aren't blue, no need to repeat it.

No its not. It simply does not fit the definition.

It is hatred of Jews. Hitler is the one responsible for the systematic murders of around six million Jews, deliberately attempting to twist and rewrite history so to present him as a supporter of the Jewish people is hateful and offensive towards Jews. Only basic logic and common sense here.

Wait, what!? The details, AKA the graphic itself, should not be discussed?

The part that is discussed should be discussed which is the part that says Israel should be moved to the US.
The way you choose to manipulate it and speak of the section that describes US aid to Israel and use it as an excuse to repeat the pathetic claim that the entire graphic is actually criticism of something is laughable. You were asked how on Earth is that graphic about criticism on Israeli actions and you've started mumbling about how one sentence criticizes the US government in some ironic manner, that's extremely idiotic.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Why no quote?

Ahh, the 'right of return'. Another buzz phrase from the anti-Israel crowd.

I wouldnt consider myself "anti-Israel" as a state. I would consider myself being against much of the Israeli policies towards the Palestinians, the amount of aid we give them, etc.

No, I'm talking about the 'drive them into the sea' crowd that is so popular with you leftists.

Its "popular among us leftists"?

Does it comfort you to know that the Aryan Nations and other white supremacists share your position?

"Share my position"? And what "position" is that?

 

[Apocalypse]

Are you kidding me. You are simply denying reality now.

Said the person that for the... what, fourth time now? Have not provided any actual reference to any actual criticism towards an Israeli policy. What does that tell you? Do you look at that fact and think "hey it shows I'm right that I was unable, for several times now, to base my argument"? Because that's ridiculous. Anyway, case closed, you know you're wrong yet continue to push the argument, same thing that happens in every one of your arguments, an awesome perfect record when it comes to being wrong.

Criticism is often based in a opposing position to some sort of variable...

So you admit that what you refer to as "criticism" is the opposition to Israel's existance. Israeli government actions cannot be criticized by criticizing the existance of the state that the government would not exist without, it's hysterical and stupid and makes it another closed case and discussion can end. It's amazing how the rules of logic never apply to your claims, simply never. Amazing.

Funny you called me a liar (without backing up such claim without any evidence), because this is a flat out lie. I never said such thing, I said "the majority of this is simply criticism of Israel". Evidence can be found here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/europ...semitic-racist-comments-3.html#post1065835007

First of all you admit that you said the majority of it is criticism which is enough to prove my earlier point. Secondly I recognized you've moved from claiming that all of it is criticism to "the majority of it is" a post after the one you're referring to here. Thirdly and most importantly the rules of logic and common sense dictate that when you enter a thread about all of the statements made and claim that "it's not antisemitism, it's criticism of Israel", it means you're referring to all of the statements made and not to just some of them, so I wasn't wrong by pointing that out. Unless you plead insanity and then the rules of logic do not apply to you. Because otherwise you can't claim you haven't referred to all statements, it simply makes zero sense and the only meaning granted to your words in your first post here is that you're referring to all of the statements. I do however recognize you're going to claim otherwise, probably going to claim that there is a place for that statement to be seen as a reference to only part of the statements made by the Labour members, but I'm informing you now already that I wouldn't care about it because as I already pointed out it makes no sense. End of discussion on that one.

 

[Apocalypse]

You mean Malia Bouattia's comments of "The University of Birmingham is something of a Zionist outpost in British Higher Education."?
1.)Not saying Zionists control Birmingham

Anyone can see you are wrong on these first two sentences, I'm really not going to engage in a new argument with you when you begin it with another "the skies aren't blue" staetment that your posting here has became known for. You first of all assume the position of complete nonsense and the absence of logic and you develop your arguments from that position, not worthy of anyone's time.

Ive explained this about 8 times. "Saying "Hitler supported Zionism" is not anti-semitic, thats simply being a moron and ignorant of history.".. Now saying something along the lines of "I agreed with Hitler in his final solution", now that is anti-semitic". Saying that Hitler embraced a political position he did not, in reference to the Haavara Agreement, is not anti-semitic. That is being ignorant of history. And yes, I would agree that anti-semitism is ignorant, but that does not mean all ignorant positions/statements are anti-semitic.

Any claim that reduces from Hitler's barbaric and hateful positions towards the Jewish people and attempts to rewrite history that way is antisemitic.

"People of Israel" does not exclusively contain Jews. Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, atheists, Druze populations, etc.

So now you've moved from "she didn't say the people should move" to "she didn't say only Jews should move".
I'm pointing that out so the next time you claim you do not change your words, as you've done three times so far in this thread, you won't get to claim that it doesn't happen.
Now about your claim clearly she doesn't refer to Israeli-Arabs, her comments are about Israeli Jews as she makes certain when she's referring to how in America the people transferred will be safer from their neighbors. End of dicussion.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

~ Malia Bouattia ~

She's certainly happy to repeat canards about Jews so I wouldn't go using her to defend any position you take.

 

[gunner]

She's certainly happy to repeat canards about Jews so I wouldn't go using her to defend any position you take.

She really is a piece of work!

 

[alexa]

This article sheds some light on the truth of what Bouattia did in fact say

On the author

Jamie Stern-Weiner is an independent researcher based in Cambridge. A dual British-Israeli national, he has written about the Israel-Palestine conflict for The Nation, Jadaliyya, MERIP and Le Monde diplomatique (English edition). He can be found on Twitter @jsternweiner. He is a JfJfP signatory.

Cynical charges of antisemitism against those who fight for justice | Jews for Justice for Palestinians

On a couple of other things, Livingstone very carefully clarified what he said about Hitler and Zioinism, making it clear that the reason why Nazi Germany was originally helping Zionists was not because Hitler loved Jews but because he hated them - I think that was the initial reference which for some reason our media fails to inform on.

People may not be aware but there was a case brought to court by a Jewish Professor against his academic Union saying that the union saying things about Israel hurt his feelings and hence was anti-Semitism. The case has been described as Antizionism is not anti-Semitism so as you can gather they lost. Oh surprise, surprise John Mann was involved in that too.This was in 2013 and I very much suspect all that is going on now is to try and get that by another means in particular due to the fear Israel has over the rise of support for BDS particularly in the US and particularly in US campuses which would account for them trying to make sure this is not so here. It is particularly scary because University's hold the policy makers of the future.
By the way with Zionist we should not forget that Christian Zionists were at it before Jewish ones and they abound among non Jew there today. It is an error to think of Zionism as something just or even primarily Jewish.

I have been following this thread and been absolutely disgusted at the way those questioning or providing alternative evidence have been subject to not debate but the most nasty personal attacks. But I imagine that is the future as the West moves ever to the right. JFJFP recognise what is happening to both Jews like themselves and to those on the left and askes them to hold strong while they are personally vilified for political reasons.

The battle against antisemitism and the campaign for Palestinian rights are both undermined whenever strong opposition to Israeli government policies is branded as antisemitic. It is clear to all of us who campaign for Palestinian rights, and who call Israel’s illegal policies of occupation, land theft and repression by their right names, that the more public opinion turns against those policies, the more our opponents resort to denigration in an attempt to discredit us.

Those who are not Jewish are called antisemites. Those of us who are Jewish are called “self-hating Jews”. It would be ludicrous if it were not so serious. We urge people of conscience not to succumb to the intimidation of being called antisemites and to continue to support Palestinian rights.

Against the resort to denigration of Israel?s critics | Jews for Justice for Palestinians

I am off for some light relief at the dentist

 

[Infinite Chaos]

This article sheds some light on the truth of what Bouattia did in fact say ~

I posted video of what Bouattia did say - there are other copies of other statements on youtube.

Why do we need someone else to read their leaning into what she said to help?

 

[alexa]

I posted video of what Bouattia did say - there are other copies of other statements on youtube.

Why do we need someone else to read their leaning into what she said to help?

I didn't watch your videos IC. Videos tend to be the most unreliable source there is given how they can be doctored to suit your angel. The article is written by an academic who clearly has a lot more knowledge on the subject that yourself or me and hence can clarify where the person is coming from by providing more information. Information which may have been well known to those to whom she was speaking but certainly information which deals with the allegations made against her. I do not have time to go into it now but it deals with issues which have been brought up in this thread and the other all on her and corrects them.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

I already understand that your position is that the skies aren't blue, no need to repeat it.

:lamo

It is hatred of Jews. Hitler is the one responsible for the systematic murders of around six million Jews, deliberately attempting to twist and rewrite history so to present him as a supporter of the Jewish people is hateful and offensive towards Jews. Only basic logic and common sense here.

So being ignorant of history is anti-semitic? How is being ignorant of history "hateful"? How is not understanding the Haavara Agreement anti-semitic (you have continually not answered this question)?

The part that is discussed should be discussed which is the part that says Israel should be moved to the US.

Do you not understand the meaning and concept of ironic criticism?! ITS NOT MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Its meant to make a point in an ironic context. The irony of the point is found in the substance of the graphic, AKA the bullet points laid on in the graphic

The way you choose to manipulate it and speak of the section that describes US aid to Israel and use it as an excuse to repeat the pathetic claim that the entire graphic is actually criticism of something is laughable. You were asked how on Earth is that graphic about criticism on Israeli actions and you've started mumbling about how one sentence criticizes the US government in some ironic manner, that's extremely idiotic.

:doh So in other words, you only wanna focus on one part of the graphic and ignore the rest.

Said the person that for the... what, fourth time now? Have not provided any actual reference to any actual criticism towards an Israeli policy.

Wow. I just did, but you said we cant focus on that because thats not the "general idea". So I guess Ill repeat myself again.
-The graphic itself is inherently critical of the Israeli govenrment and their policy and treatment towards the Palestinian populations.
-The state of modern day"Israel" (Palestine) was one of the several options for the establishment of a "homeland for the Jews", it was not the only option for this "homeland". There were several ideas for the location of the establishment of a "homeland for the Jews". Areas of Africa, Australia, parts of far east Russia, and various others. The location of the British Mandate of Palestine was the most popular. However, as we see the Israeli govenrment constantly claims they are under attack by Arab and/or Palestinian populations in the area. So the ironic criticism is, "Oh you are under attack, why not move this state to the US, where many people and the US govenrment upholds the state of Israel as a key ally, etc". And also the idea that Israel would be surrounded by a "friendly state", aka the USA.
-Another criticism, which is a criticism of both the American government and Israeli government is the $3 billion in aid that goes to the state of Israel from the USA.

So you admit that what you refer to as "criticism" is the opposition to Israel's existance.

Nope.

Israeli government actions cannot be criticized by criticizing the existance of the state that the government would not exist without, it's hysterical and stupid and makes it another closed case and discussion can end. It's amazing how the rules of logic never apply to your claims, simply never. Amazing.

Good god. Lets spin this even more shall we; "Criticism is only criticism when I say its criticism. But if its criticism that I do not find as criticism then its anti-semitism".
Also the graphic does not say Israel should not exist......

First of all you admit that you said the majority of it is criticism which is enough to prove my earlier point.

Ummm no. You said that I said, "all statements made by these people is all criticism of Israel". I did not say that. I said, "the majority of it is criticism of Israel". Majority does not equate all. Majority is 50+1% not 100%....

Secondly I recognized you've moved from claiming that all of it is criticism to "the majority of it is" a post after the one you're referring to here.

So why did you make the opposite claim then?

Thirdly and most importantly the rules of logic and common sense dictate that when you enter a thread about all of the statements made and claim that "it's not antisemitism, it's criticism of Israel", it means you're referring to all of the statements made and not to just some of them, so I wasn't wrong by pointing that out.

Except I literally clarified my point in the second post....

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Unless you plead insanity and then the rules of logic do not apply to you. Because otherwise you can't claim you haven't referred to all statements, it simply makes zero sense and the only meaning granted to your words in your first post here is that you're referring to all of the statements.

:lamo The master of spin.

I do however recognize you're going to claim otherwise, probably going to claim that there is a place for that statement to be seen as a reference to only part of the statements made by the Labour members, but I'm informing you now already that I wouldn't care about it because as I already pointed out it makes no sense. End of discussion on that one.

:lamo You are literally denying what she said.

Anyone can see you are wrong on these first two sentences, I'm really not going to engage in a new argument with you when you begin it with another "the skies aren't blue" staetment that your posting here has became known for. You first of all assume the position of complete nonsense and the absence of logic and you develop your arguments from that position, not worthy of anyone's time.

:lamo So we are going to go with, making ignorant statements about history is now "anti-semitism". :roll: You should really really watch that documentary.

Any claim that reduces from Hitler's barbaric and hateful positions towards the Jewish people and attempts to rewrite history that way is antisemitic.

No-one is reducing it. Ignorantly saying that Hitler at one time supported Zionism does not reduce the crimes he committed against the Jewish people and others.

So now you've moved from "she didn't say the people should move" to "she didn't say only Jews should move".

No im pointing out that People of Israel does not only mean Jews.....

I'm pointing that out so the next time you claim you do not change your words, as you've done three times so far in this thread, you won't get to claim that it doesn't happen.
Now about your claim clearly she doesn't refer to Israeli-Arabs, her comments are about Israeli Jews as she makes certain when she's referring to how in America the people transferred will be safer from their neighbors. End of dicussion.

:lamo

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Saying the words "Zionist led media outlets" is anti-semitic? Also being in support of armed resistance against occupation is not also inherently anti-semitic...



She's certainly happy to repeat canards about Jews so I wouldn't go using her to defend any position you take.[/QUOTE]
You mean Malia Bouattia's comments of "The University of Birmingham is something of a Zionist outpost in British Higher Education."?
1.)Not saying Zionists control Birmingham
2.)She responded to a letter signed by many Jewish students in regards to that comment saying, "“I do not now, nor did I five years ago when I contributed to the article cited in your letter, see a large Jewish Society on campus as a problem. “I celebrate the ability of people and students of all backgrounds to get together and express their backgrounds and faith openly and positively, and will continue to do so. “I want to be clear that for me to take issue with Zionist politics, is not me taking issue with being Jewish. “In fact, Zionist politics are held by people from a variety of different backgrounds and faiths as are anti-Zionist politics. “It is a political argument, not one of faith.“I am deeply concerned that my faith and political views are being misconstrued and used as an opportunity to falsely accuse me of antisemitism, despite my work and dedication to liberation, equality and inclusion saying otherwise... I am alarmed that you have drawn a link between criticism of Zionist ideologies and anti-Semitism. I am sure many would strongly agree that they are not one and the same and making correlations between faith and politics is both unfair and unrepresentative. These correlations are dangerous and have become the excuse for many racist and fascist attacks up and down the country and in the world, which I am sure we all want to end."https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...YX8iFJ5pg/edit

 

[Apocalypse]

So being ignorant of history is anti-semitic? How is being ignorant of history "hateful"? How is not understanding the Haavara Agreement anti-semitic (you have continually not answered this question)?

The question that should be asked is how is claiming that Hitler had supported the Jewish plight for a nation antisemitism, which was answered more than enough times, and is really a no-brainer to anyone who isn't apparently willing to jump through hoops (and fail) to defend such antisemitic statements.

Do you not understand the meaning and concept of ironic criticism?! ITS NOT MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.

Every form of criticisim is critical of something, what you had to show is how it's critical of any policy of the government(and any three years old can point and tell it isn't, hence another "the skies can't possibly be blue" argument), you failed to show so, mumbled something about how it's opposing Israel's creation and thus is critical, and that was it.

So in other words, you only wanna focus on one part of the graphic and ignore the rest.

The graphic caused uproar for calling for Israel to be dismantled and moved with its people to the USA, not for critcizing the US aid to Israel, what you laughably and hysterically claimed is that it's meant to criticize Israel, so I asked you to show how, and you pointed to the reference to the US aid to Israel as criticism of the US and thought to yourself that you've actually made your point, that's what I pointed as ridiculous and as a pathetic attempt to divert attention, you were required to show, in the call for Israel to be moved, a sign of criticism towards Israel. That's why, as I should have, I pointed the absurdity of that claim, an absurdity that surely you recognize yet continue to push mindlessly.

-The graphic itself is inherently critical of the Israeli govenrment and their policy and treatment towards the Palestinian populations.

You've shown no such criticism. That was what I labeled, rightfully, as a lie, and clearly it is, as there is no actual reference to any Israeli policy.

-The state of modern day"Israel"

Yeah I really don't intend to start reading this load of nonsense all over again, I get it you think that opposing Israel's creation is some form of criticism against Israel, it's not, move along from that subject since it's your fourth "the skies are most definitely not blue" argument.

Except I literally clarified my point in the second post....

Except logic dictates you don't get to "clarify" and claim you've meant something else when there was no such possibility. As I already pointed.

 

[Apocalypse]

No-one is reducing it. Ignorantly saying that Hitler at one time supported Zionism does not reduce the crimes he committed against the Jewish people and others.

Oh really, claiming he was a supporter of Zionism and then later on went mad and decided to kill all Jews is not a twisting of history and of his character that reduces from his relations with the Jewish population. "There is no way in hell that the skies are blue" argument #5.

 

[Wiggen]

Why no quote?

I wouldnt consider myself "anti-Israel" as a state. I would consider myself being against much of the Israeli policies towards the Palestinians, the amount of aid we give them, etc.


Its "popular among us leftists"?


"Share my position"? And what "position" is that?

Leftists, like those on the Far Right, loathe Israel. Just visit any college campus and ask around.

 

[Wiggen]

This article sheds some light on the truth of what Bouattia did in fact say

On the author



Cynical charges of antisemitism against those who fight for justice | Jews for Justice for Palestinians

On a couple of other things, Livingstone very carefully clarified what he said about Hitler and Zioinism, making it clear that the reason why Nazi Germany was originally helping Zionists was not because Hitler loved Jews but because he hated them - I think that was the initial reference which for some reason our media fails to inform on.

People may not be aware but there was a case brought to court by a Jewish Professor against his academic Union saying that the union saying things about Israel hurt his feelings and hence was anti-Semitism. The case has been described as Antizionism is not anti-Semitism so as you can gather they lost. Oh surprise, surprise John Mann was involved in that too.This was in 2013 and I very much suspect all that is going on now is to try and get that by another means in particular due to the fear Israel has over the rise of support for BDS particularly in the US and particularly in US campuses which would account for them trying to make sure this is not so here. It is particularly scary because University's hold the policy makers of the future.
By the way with Zionist we should not forget that Christian Zionists were at it before Jewish ones and they abound among non Jew there today. It is an error to think of Zionism as something just or even primarily Jewish.

I have been following this thread and been absolutely disgusted at the way those questioning or providing alternative evidence have been subject to not debate but the most nasty personal attacks. But I imagine that is the future as the West moves ever to the right. JFJFP recognise what is happening to both Jews like themselves and to those on the left and askes them to hold strong while they are personally vilified for political reasons.


Against the resort to denigration of Israel?s critics | Jews for Justice for Palestinians

I am off for some light relief at the dentist

Another confirmed leftist who never met an anti-Semite they didn't like.

Anytime anybody starts talking about the 'Zionist media' just consign them to the jew baiting world, which is where they belong.

 

[Wiggen]

Oh really, claiming he was a supporter of Zionism and then later on went mad and decided to kill all Jews is not a twisting of history and of his character that reduces from his relations with the Jewish population. "There is no way in hell that the skies are blue" argument #5.

It's one of the more despicable tactics of the anti-Semite - to lump Hitler and the Nazis in with Israel, as though there is some sort of connection. It's why they are such loathsome people.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I didn't watch your videos IC. Videos tend to be the most unreliable source there is given how they can be doctored to suit your angel.

Then there's no point denying them as you are not familiar with her words. Until then, we can go no further. Hope your dental appointment went well.

~ The article is written by an academic who clearly has a lot more knowledge on the subject that yourself or me ~

When Bouattia comes out and says those videos were doctored or edited then I will take your academic's reinterpretation seriously.

Saying the words "Zionist led media outlets" is anti-semitic?

I think you really should have stopped and thought about what you were typing once you got past the "Zionist led media outlets." And yes, it is a phrase that the anti-Semitic would use.

You mean Malia Bouattia's comments of "The University of Birmingham is something of a Zionist outpost in British Higher Education.

Such an innocent sounding statement until you ask yourself why make the point? University of Birmingham has a range of students so why pick out one group in particular? Why even comment on their views? Why even comment on their supposed leadership?

What do you honestly think is the reason for highlighting the Jewish Society as a "Zionist outpost?"

 

[Chagos]

Leftists, like those on the Far Right, loathe Israel. Just visit any college campus and ask around.

In fact, if you don't have enough time or inclination to visit campuses, wait for the next Gaza war and walk the streets of say Berlin or Paris. If things turn out the way they did last time, you can watch Leftists, People of Arab roots (Palestinian or not) and Swastika waving "bald-heads" happily march arm in arm to demonstrate their protests.

Saw it myself in Berlin when last I visited and saw it in Paris too.

 

[Chagos]

This

..........................I think you really should have stopped and thought about what you were typing once you got past the "Zionist led media outlets." And yes, it is a phrase that the anti-Semitic would use.

and this

Such an innocent sounding statement until you ask yourself why make the point? University of Birmingham has a range of students so why pick out one group in particular? Why even comment on their views? Why even comment on their supposed leadership?

:thumbs:

Not being aware of what one is actually saying can happen to any of us. It gets downright ridiculous though when the only response to somebody pointing out the sloppiness of both comprehension and subsequent speech is met with indignant denial that culminates in self-satisfied righteousness.

Whatever happened to resting the shovel when you're near dropping out and off the other side of the earth?

 

[alexa]

Part 1

Then there's no point denying them as you are not familiar with her words. Until then, we can go no further. Hope your dental appointment went well.

I just spent about an hour replying to you and then had to sign in and then the post did not come through. I obviously do not have the energy to put so much in again.

The first thing I want to say is that I did not put in my reply which included among many things this link Cynical charges of antisemitism against those who fight for justice | Jews for Justice for Palestinians in response to your videos. I did not watch your videos so obviously I could not reply to them. I have though looked at both this thread and the other concerning Bouattia and seeing that other thread did create some interest particularly as it appears to be part of the process which is going on at the moment to try and conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism which is being labelled at the Corbyn side of the Labour Party. Hence when I later came across articles which did not go with it I had a look at them. Now you do not need to reply to me because my reply was not to you but as you have brought up twice the link I left, I will speak more about what it is about.

The article recognises that there is a process which is going on to try to slur Corbyn supporters as anti-Semites. Indeed when he was standing for Labour Leadership it was he himself who was being accused of being such. However these accusations from the beginning depended on the political position of the accuser. Those Jews who are to the left and/or critical of Israel made their voice clear that they do not see Corbyn as anti-Semitic. I would point out that anti-Semitism to them being Jews is as important an issue as it is to any other Jew and some of them actively work on the issue.

Now to the NUS and first of all Oxford University Labour Club (OULC). The issue regarding the left and anti-Semitism began there in Feb with the resignation of the co chair saying ‘a large proportion of both OULC and the student left in Oxford more generally have some kind of problem with Jews’. Stern-Weiner goes on to say that a number of allegations were made anonymously the most gross that a student had organised a group of other students to shout 'Filthy Zionist' at a Jewish student - not 'filthy Jew' but 'filthy Zionist' suggesting the classical anti-Semitism being used with the term Zionist replacing Jew. As it happens this was the one accusation where there was sufficient information to investigate its truth as it was claimed this student was disciplined by the college for so doing. The Principle who he calls 'late', I do not know if he has recently died or left his job, responded to inquiries that the student in question had never been disciplined for anti-Semitism or for anything else. Stern-Weiner believes that these what he calls 'baseless' allegations of anti-Semitism were fabricated to smear the two left wing candidates who were trying to get elected to in the Young Labour elections and he believes that this unsupported smear campaign is what got the Labour Right candidate a 'wafer thin' victory.

What he is describing is misusing anti-Semitism in order to get the political outcome you want.

He then goes on to talk about the situation in Birmingham and the often reported here alleged quote by Bouattia. This is inflammatory and was an open letter signed by the 'presidents of more than 50 university Jewish Societies (J-Socs) '

You referred to the University of Birmingham as a ‘Zionist outpost’ and referenced that it has the ‘largest [Jewish Society] in the country’ when describing the challenges you were facing at the time . . . We are shocked that someone who is seeking to represent this organisation could possibly see a large Jewish student population as a challenge and not something to be welcomed.
Our question for you is clear: why do you see a large Jewish Society as a problem?

Yes, this has been spoken about here has it not as an indication of the anti-Semitism in the NUS and in particular Bouattia herself.

The problem is, according to Steern-Weiner, she never said this. What she did in fact say was that their leadership was dominated by Zionist Activists which he presents as being in fact the case.

 

[alexa]

Part 2

By eliminating crucial words from Bouattia’s article, the letter left open to readers the suspicion that Bouattia was using ‘Zionists’ as code for ‘Jews’. The irony is, whereas Bouattia did not do this, the University of Birmingham J-Soc itself encourages just this conflation, by campaigning for Israel under a ‘Jewish Society’ banner. In March 2011 – the month of Bouattia’s offending article – Birmingham J-Soc helped organise an ‘Israel Awareness Week’ on campus, and it has continued to mobilise against Palestinian solidarity campaigns since.

The lead signatory on the open letter to Bouattia was Daniel Clements, president of Birmingham J-Soc. In a subsequent missive to Bouattia, Clements cast doubt upon her claim to have ‘upheld a distinction between Jewish people and Zionist policies’. But Clements himself campaigned for J-Soc president on the promise to ‘ensure constant Israel education and advocacy’ and himself informed the Guardian that ‘when someone attacks Zionism they’re indirectly attacking Judaism as a religion, because the two go hand in hand’. In other words, the J-Soc itself conflates its Jewish and Zionist identities, and then condemns Bouattia for such conflation even as she explicitly avoided it.

Stern-Weiner then goes on to say that he believes it is 'politically imprudent' for Palestinian Solidarity Activists to use words like 'Zionist, Zionism' due to, as has been said in this thread, people not really knowing what that means. That results in it being able to be exploited by those who wish to associate it with anti-Semitism because those listening frequently do not know better.

But if ‘Zionism’ is unhelpful as a term of political rhetoric, that does not make its use as a pejorative antisemitic. Indeed, even where activists do confuse ‘Israel’ or ‘Zionism’ with ‘Jews’ – which Bouattia did not – the State of Israel and its supporters abroad must bear some responsibility.

He finishes talking about Muslims and antisemitsm

One of the most inspiring aspects of Bernie Sanders’s campaign for the Democratic Party nomination has been the level of support he has attracted from Arab and Muslim Americans. The New York primary may have ended his bid for the White House, but even in defeat, who could fail to be moved by the sight of Arabs and Muslims uniting overwhelmingly behind a man who would be the first Jewish president of the United States?

The way to combat antisemitism is by coming together in a common struggle for a fairer world. By contrast, if the authors of the unscrupulous letter attacking Bouattia had set out to poison Muslim-Jewish relations and ensure that charges of ‘antisemitism’ become synonymous with cynical attacks against individuals and movements struggling for justice, they could scarcely have done a better job.

Cynical charges of antisemitism against those who fight for justice | Jews for Justice for Palestinians

As I said before my reply was not a reply to your videos despite it coming under them. I did not watch your videos - in truth I did put one on but was unable to hear it. However my information from Jews who are critical of Israel and hence who are not trying to conflate criticism of Israel or support for the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign or BDS with anti-Semitism is that she is not an anti-Semite and they would say it loud and clear if she was.

I was just going to leave it with my first post but as you have come back twice I felt the need to give reference to the material in the post. It is untrue that a student was disciplined for organising a group of students to maliciously shout 'Filthy Zionist' at a Jewish student and Bouattia made no derogatory remarks about there being a large Jewish/Zionist community in Birmingham. Rather she, it would appear correctly ,said the Birmingham leadership was dominated by Zionist activists. As Stern-Weiner said by eliminating certain words in what Bouattia had actually said , the J-Soc open letter presented a letter where her use of the word Zionism would appear to be playing with words and mean Jew and mean she was antisemetic which she was not.

Thank you my appointment with the dentist went well and I am now out of pain. As I think you like to get to the truth I hope you can at least see that things are not as black and white as you appeared to believe.


(of course people can argue that Stern-Weiner, an Israeli/British citizen is lying. I do not buy that a young man researching at Cambridge would be so quick to throw his future down the drain.)