ANOTHER Labour Racist Anti-Semite is ousted

Sab · Apr 26, 2016

'Nash' Shah, Labour MP has been forced to resign her position as PPS to McDonnel after espousing the usual antisemtism one expects from the labour left

http://order-order.com/2016/04/26/nash-shah-resigns-as-mcdonnells-pps/

alexa · Apr 28, 2016

Sab said: ↑

I'm openly anti Islam. But Islam is just a belief system. Jews are a race
Click to expand...

I replied to this earlier but it does not seem to have worked. Jews being a race was of course a 1930's idea but if you want to go by that you very much must have most of the Palestinians as Jews due to the fact genetic research suggests they are right in the middle of the Jews gene pole having a relationship with all the diverse groups and having in general the closest.

Judaism is a religion, Islam is a religion. In both people who no longer practice the religion call themselves Muslim or Jews. Both have an ethnic dimension of sorts. Prejudicial stereotyping of both is as bad.

However I came on just now to say I have found the antisemetic scoundrel who sent this map on its journey. None other than the good Norman Finkelstein

The offending map with its accompanying proposal of mass transfer of Israelis was first posted by Prof. Norman Finkelstein and quickly reposted by many others, including Naz Shah. See Notes and Links below
-snip-

NOTES AND LINKS

The map was posted in Norman Finkelstein Solution for for Israel-Palestine Conflict‏, On Monday, August 4th, 2014 in his blog.
Reposted or linked to in 2014 by politics i.e. and Democratic Underground (Are you caught in social media crossfire over Gaza) among many others (mostly American).

Note to Naz Shah and other posters: always give your sources. It’s respectful and allows the trail of transmission of authority to be known.
Click to expand...

http://jfjfp.com/?p=82502

Baff · Apr 28, 2016

Finklestein.

Hmmm is that an ethnic English name?

alexa · May 4, 2016

At last Norman Finklestein has got off his arse and responded to the witch hunt going on in the UK trying to pretend there is gross antismeitism in the UK - something which as well as being a frequent ploy was tried as a deliberate tactic to aid Israel after her 2014 attack on Gaza. He also rightly says that Labour ought not to have risen to it and illustrates the true level of antisemitism in the UK as recognised by Pew Research which is 7%. He does though point out that unlike the report I read and posted he himself did not create it but like myself and as I put in post 2 he found it funny - that this image itself is spoken of as an intent to move Israel to the US would of course itself be amusing if it were not describing the insanity/corruption going on at the moment in the UK.

I will leave it to him and one of the few bastions of democracy left - open democracy to answer the case more fully.

Last month, Naz Shah MP became one of the most high-profile cases to date in the antisemitism scandal still shaking the Labour leadership. Shah was suspended from the Labour party for, among other things, reposting an image on Facebook that was alleged to be antisemitic. The image depicted a map of the United States with Israel superimposed, and suggested resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict by relocating Israel into the United States. It has been reported that Shah got the image from Finkelsteins website. I spoke with Finkelstein about why he posted the image, and what he thinks of allegations that the Labour party has a Jewish problem.

Did you create the controversial image that Naz Shah reposted?

Im not adept enough with computers to compose any image. But I did post the map on my website in 2014. An email correspondent must have sent it. It was, and still is, funny. Were it not for the current political context, nobody would have noticed Shahs reposting of it either. Otherwise, youd have to be humourless. These sorts of jokes are a commonplace in the U.S. So, we have this joke: Why doesnt Israel become the 51st state? Answer: Because then, it would only have two senators. As crazy as the discourse on Israel is in America, at least we still have a sense of humour. Its inconceivable that any politician in the U.S. would be crucified for posting such a map.

Shahs posting of that image has been presented as an endorsement by her of a chilling transportation policy, while John Mann MP has compared her to Eichmann.

Frankly, I find that obscene. Its doubtful these Holocaust-mongers have a clue what the deportations were, or of the horrors that attended them. I remember my late mother describing her deportation. She was in the Warsaw Ghetto. The survivors of the Ghetto Uprising, about 30,000 Jews, were deported to Maijdanek concentration camp. They were herded into railroad cars. My mother was sitting in the railroad car next to a woman who had her child. And the woman I know it will shock you the woman suffocated her infant child to death in front of my mother. She suffocated her child, rather than take her to where they were going. Thats what it meant to be deported. To compare that to someone posting a light-hearted, innocuous cartoon making a little joke about how Israel is in thrall to the U.S., or vice versaits sick. What are they doing? Dont they have any respect for the dead? All these desiccated Labour apparatchiks, dragging the Nazi holocaust through the mud for the sake of their petty jostling for power and position. Have they no shame?

What about when people use Nazi analogies to criticise the policies of the State of Israel? Isnt that also a political abuse of the Nazi holocaust?

Its not a simple question. First, if youre Jewish, the instinctive analogy to reach for, when it comes to hate or hunger, war or genocide, is the Nazi holocaust, because we see it as the ultimate horror. In my home growing up, whenever an incident involving racial discrimination or bigotry was in the news, my mother would compare it to her experience before or during the Nazi holocaust.

-snip-

For my mother, the Nazi holocaust was a chapter in the long history of the horror of war. It was not itself a war she was emphatic that it was an extermination, not a war but it was a unique chapter within the war. So for her, war was the ultimate horror. When she saw Vietnamese being bombed during the Vietnam War, it was the Nazi holocaust. It was the bombing, the death, the horror, the terror, that she herself had passed through. When she saw the distended bellies of starving children in Biafra, it was also the Nazi holocaust, because she remembered her own pangs of hunger in the Warsaw Ghetto.

If youre Jewish, its just normal that the Nazi holocaust is a ubiquitous, instinctual touchstone. Some Jews say this or that horror is not the Nazi holocaust, others say it is. But the reference point of the Nazi holocaust is a constant.

What about when people who arent Jewish invoke the analogy?

Once the Nazi holocaust became the cultural referent, then, if you wanted to touch a nerve regarding Palestinian suffering, you had to make the analogy with the Nazis, because that was the only thing that resonated for Jews. If you compared the Palestinians to Native Americans, nobody would give a darn. In 1982, when I and a handful of other Jews took to the streets of New York to protest Israels invasion of Lebanon (up to 18,000 Lebanese and Palestinians were killed, overwhelmingly civilians), I held a sign saying, This son of survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Auschwitz, Maijdenek will not be silent: Israeli Nazis Stop the Holocaust in Lebanon!. (After my mother died, I found a picture of me holding that sign in a drawer among her keepsakes). I remember, as the cars drove past, one of the guys protesting with me kept saying, hold the sign higher! (And I kept replying, easy for you to say!).

If you invoked that analogy, it shook Jews, it jolted them enough, that at least you got their attention. I dont think its necessary anymore, because Israels crimes against the Palestinians now have an integrity of their own. They no longer have to be juxtaposed to, or against, the Nazi holocaust. Today, the Nazi analogy is gratuitous and a distraction.

Is it antisemitic?

No, its just a weak historical analogy but, if coming from a Jew, a generous moral one.

Last week, Ken Livingstone took to the airwaves to defend Naz Shah, but what he said wound up getting him suspended from the Labour party. His most incendiary remark contended that Hitler at one point supported Zionism. This was condemned as antisemitic, and Labour MP John Mann accused Livingstone of being a Nazi apologist. What do you make of these accusations?

Livingstone maybe wasnt precise enough, and lacked nuance. But he does know something about that dark chapter in history. It has been speculated that Hitlers thinking on how to solve the Jewish Question (as it was called back then) evolved, as circumstances changed and new possibilities opened up. Hitler wasnt wholly hostile to the Zionist project at the outset. Thats why so many German Jews managed to survive after Hitler came to power by emigrating to Palestine.

-snip-

On one critical question, which raged in the U.K. during the period when the Balfour Declaration (1917) was being cobbled together, antisemites and Zionists agreed: could a Jew be an Englishman? Ironically, in light of the current hysteria in the UK, the most vociferous and vehement opponents of the Balfour Declaration were not the Arabs, about whom almost nobody gave a darn, but the upper reaches of British Jewry.

Eminent British Jews published open letters to newspapers like the Times opposing British backing for a Jewish home in Palestine. They understood such a declaration and Zionism as implying that a Jew belonged to a distinct nation, and that the Jewish nation should have its own separate state, which they feared would effectively disqualify Jews from bona fide membership in the British nation. What distinguished the Zionists from the liberal Jewish aristocracy was their point of departure: as Theodor Herzl put it at the beginning of The Jewish State, the Jewish question is no more a social than a religious one . . . It is a national question. Whereas the Anglo-Jewish aristocracy insisted Judaism was merely a religion, the Zionists were emphatic that the Jews constituted a nation. And on this back then, salient point, the Zionists and Nazis agreed.

John Mann, when he accosted Livingstone in front of the cameras, asked rhetorically whether Livingstone had read Mein Kampf.

If you do read Mein Kampf, which I suspect none of the interlocutors in this debate has done (I used to teach it, before the Zionists drove me out of academia joke!), you see that Hitler is emphatic that Jews are not a religion, but a nation. He says that the big Jewish lie is that they claim to be a religion; whereas in fact, he says, theyre a race (at that time, race was used interchangeably with nation). And on page 56 of the standard English edition of Mein Kampf, he says that the only Jews honest enough to acknowledge this reality are the Zionists. Now, to be clear, Hitler didnt just think that Jews were a distinct race. He also thought that they were a Satanic race, and ultimately, that they were a Satanic race that had to be exterminated. Still, on the first, not trivial, premise, he and the Zionists were in agreement.

-snip-

Even if there was a factual basis for Livingstones remarks, to bring the issue up at that moment wasnt he just baiting Jews?

I can understand his motivation, because Im of roughly his generation. If he was baiting, it was a reflexive throwback to the factional polemics in the 1970s-80s. Israel marketed Zionists as the only Jews who had resisted the Nazis. The propaganda image projected back then was, the only resistance to the Nazis came from the Zionists, and the natural corollary was, the only force protecting Jews now is Israel. Every other Jew was either a coward, going like sheep to slaughter, or a collaborator. Those who dissented from Israeli policy back then, in order to undercut this Zionist propaganda, and to strike a nerve with them, would recall this unsavoury chapter in Zionisms history. Some pamphlets and books appeared such as Lenni Brenners Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (1983) to document this perfidious Zionist-Nazi collaboration. Livingstones recent comments were born of the same reflex that motivated us back then. These certifiable creeps who went after Naz Shah got under his skin, and so he wanted to get under their skin. Thats how we used to fight this political battle: by dredging up those sordid chapters in Zionist history.

Livingstone based himself on Brenners book. Lets say, for arguments sake, that perhaps Brenners book contains factual errors, its more of a party pamphlet than a scholarly tome, and its not exactly weighed down with copious documentation. Still, the fact of the matter is, when Brenners book was published, it garnered positive reviews in the respectable British press. The Times, which is today leading the charge against Livingstone and the elected Labour leadership, back then published a review praising Brenners book as crisp and carefully documented.

-snip-

Lets zoom out a bit. Youve written a great deal about how antisemitism accusations have been used to discredit and distract from criticism of Israel. Should we see the current campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Left more generally as the latest episode in that history?

These campaigns occur at regular intervals, correlating with Israels periodic massacres and consequent political isolation. If you search your nearest library catalogue for new antisemitism, youll come up with titles from the 1970s proclaiming a new antisemitism, titles from the 1980s proclaiming a new antisemitism, titles from the 1990s proclaiming a new antisemitism, and then a huge uptick, including from British writers, during the so-called Second Intifada from 2001. Lets not forget, just last year there was a hysteria in the UK over antisemitism. A couple of ridiculous polls purported to find that nearly half of Britons held an antisemitic belief and that most British Jews feared for their future in the UK. Although these polls were dismissed by specialists, they triggered the usual media feeding frenzy, as the Telegraph, the Guardian and the Independent hyperventilated about this rampant new antisemitism. It was exposed as complete nonsense when, in April 2015, a reputable poll by Pew found that the level of antisemitism in the UK had remained stable, at an underwhelming seven percent.

This farce happened only last year. One would have imagined that its mongers would be hiding in shame, and that we would enjoy at least a brief respite from the theatrics. But lo and behold, in the blink of an eye, right in the wake of the Pew poll showing that antisemitism in the UK is marginal, the hysteria has started up all over again. The reality is, there is probably more prejudice in the UK against fat people than there is prejudice against Jews.

Many of those involved in last years antisemitism hysterics are also participants in the current campaign against Corbyn.

-snip-

its political.It has nothing whatsoever to do with the factual situation;

-snip-

The antisemitism accusations are being driven by the Conservatives ahead of the local and Mayoral elections. But theyre also being exploited by the Labour Right to undermine Corbyns leadership, and by pro-Israel groups to discredit the Palestine solidarity movement.

You can see this overlap between the Labour Right and pro-Israel groups personified in individuals like Jonathan Freedland, a Blairite hack who also regularly plays the antisemitism card. Hes combined these two hobbies to attack Corbyn. Incidentally, when my book, The Holocaust Industry, came out in 2000, Freedland wrote that I was 'closer to the people who created the Holocaust than to those who suffered in it'. Although he appears to be, oh, so politically correct now, he didnt find it inappropriate to suggest that I resembled the Nazis who gassed my family.

-snip

Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? Theyre fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. Theyre making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website. And its not yet over!

-snip-

Here is this Muslim woman MP who is trying to integrate Muslims into British political life, and to set by her own person an example both to British society at large and to the Muslim community writ small. She is, by all accounts from her constituents, a respected and honourable person. You can only imagine how proud her parents, her siblings, must be. How proud the Muslim community must be. Were always told how Muslim women are oppressed, repressed and depressed, and now you have this Muslim woman who has attained office. But now shes being crucified, her career wrecked, her life ruined, her future in tatters, branded an antisemite and a closet Nazi, and inflicted with these rituals of self-abasement. Its not hard to imagine what her Muslim constituents must think now about Jews. These power hungry creeps are creating new hate by their petty machinations. As Donald Trump likes to say its disgusting.

Labour has now set up an inquiry that is supposed to produce a workable definition of antisemitism which is to say, to achieve the impossible. Its been tried countless times before, and its always proven futile. The only beneficiaries of such a mandate will be academic specialists on antisemitism, who will receive hefty consultancy fees (I can already see Richard Evans at the head of the queue), and Israel, which will no longer be in the spotlight. I understand the short-term political rationale. But at some point, you have to say, enough already. Jews are prospering as never before in the UK. The polls show that the number of, so to speak, hard-core antisemites is miniscule. Its time to put a stop to this periodic charade, because it ends up besmirching the victims of the Nazi holocaust, diverting from the real suffering of the Palestinian people, and poisoning relations between the Jewish and Muslim communities. You just had an antisemitism hysteria last year, and it was a farce. And now again? Another inquiry? Another investigation? No.

In order to put an end to this, there has to be a decisive repudiation of this political blackmail. Bernie Sanders was brutally pressured to back down on his claim that Israel had used disproportionate force during its 2014 assault on Gaza. He wouldnt budge, he wouldnt retreat. He showed real backbone. Corbyn should take heart and inspiration from Bernies example. He has to say: no more reports, no more investigations, were not going there any more. The game is up. Its long past time that these antisemitism-mongers crawled back into their sewer but not before humbly apologising to Naz Shah, and begging her forgiveness.
Click to expand...

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/ja...h-scholar-behind-labour-s-antisemitism-scanda

Sixteen String Jack · May 5, 2016

Thanks to the anti-semitism from Red Ken, Nazi Shah and those four or five other Muslim Labour politicians, I reckon Islamist Sadiq Khan can wave goodbye to his chances of becoming mayor of the world's greatest city.

Sixteen String Jack · May 5, 2016

alexa said: ↑

I replied to this earlier but it does not seem to have worked. Jews being a race was of course a 1930's idea but if you want to go by that you very much must have most of the Palestinians as Jews due to the fact genetic research suggests they are right in the middle of the Jews gene pole having a relationship with all the diverse groups and having in general the closest.

Judaism is a religion, Islam is a religion. In both people who no longer practice the religion call themselves Muslim or Jews. Both have an ethnic dimension of sorts. Prejudicial stereotyping of both is as bad.

However I came on just now to say I have found the antisemetic scoundrel who sent this map on its journey. None other than the good Norman Finkelstein

http://jfjfp.com/?p=82502
Click to expand...

Jews are a race.

alexa · May 5, 2016

Sixteen String Jack said: ↑

Jews are a race.
Click to expand...

The concept of 'race' has been shown to be a farce. We are all a bit of this and a bit of that. Check out Ronstar who has recently had his DNA studied http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=454465&p=1066133993#post1066133993

I think Ronstar's illustrates that this is not so though that he does as he thought have genetic connections to Jews - just like it would be extremely unlikely that I would not have some genetic connection to both Ireland and Scotland - but there again Scotland has been found to have DNA from all over the world with 1% of our men descendants of the Berber and a significant influx of South Asian DNA!

Anyway if you want Jews to be a race then as I said the Palestinians are in general the most Jewish by current DNA understanding fitting into the centre of all the different Jewish groups and having the closest connection to them.

http://readersupportednews.org/pm-s...-hope-for-peace-between-jews-and-palestinians

This is also interesting http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Features/The-lost-Palestinian-Jews

Now some people like to argue that due to being kept in ghettos, European Jews are a 'race' through interbreeding. However until, I cannot remember but Jews originally did go around trying to get other people to become Jews and were extremely successful before it was banned by Rome so no, in no way are all Jews from one man and woman or whatever idea you have for this conception of race. Of course even today although it is not easy some people do convert.
BTW, genetics or beliefs in race is not the subject of this thread so lets leave it there.

alexa · May 5, 2016

I forgot to put this into that post

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/over-simulated/201008/confusing-race-and-religion-is-dangerous

Fugazi · May 7, 2016

Sixteen String Jack said: ↑

Jews are a race.
Click to expand...

No they are not. Race is a genetic distinction, and refers to people with shared ancestry and shared genetic traits. You can't change your race; it's in your DNA.
Common ancestry is not required to be a Jew. Many Jews worldwide share common ancestry, as shown by genetic research; however, you can be a Jew without sharing this common ancestry, for example, by converting. Thus, although I could never become black or Asian, blacks and Asians have become Jews.

trumpsupporter · May 7, 2016

I don't think Naz Shah was anti semitic

Log in or Sign up

ANOTHER Labour Racist Anti-Semite is ousted

Sab Active Member

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

Baff Well-Known Member

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

Sixteen String Jack New Member

Sixteen String Jack New Member

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

Fugazi New Member Past Donor

trumpsupporter Banned

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

ANOTHER Labour Racist Anti-Semite is ousted

Sab Active Member

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

Baff Well-Known Member

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

Sixteen String Jack New Member

Sixteen String Jack New Member

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

Fugazi New Member Past Donor

trumpsupporter Banned

Share This Page

Useful Searches