Stop Arming Israel

It isn't up to the "Jewish community" to change the universal jurisdiction law. To suggest otherwise hints at some major conspiracy. Jews are allowed to oppose Israeli policies.

Wrong!
It is up to the Jewish Community to do what it can to change the Universal Jurisdiction Law as this law directly affects the Jewish Community, and influence will be brought to bear on the new Governnment to change the law as quickly as possible.
And, wrong again!
- Let's not beat about the bush here, those Jews who vociferously oppose Israeli policy are nothing better than "Quislings".
With Israel being attacked from all sides of the political and media spectrum, the "Quislings" add fuel to the fire and give credence to our enemies.
In the traditional "some my best friends are Jews" type of antisemitism, the "Quislings" are without doubt exacerbating the current situation in the media.

Jeff Halper is at the Montagu Centre. He talks 'apartheid' and 'one state. Both are antisemitic.

If JFJFP want to host him that's their right but I don't see how he is consistent with their charter.

It is however clearly not appropriate for the Liberals to allow their venue to be used.

You are always wrong and now is no exception.

The Definition says that using Nazi terms about Israel is antisemitic. Not about Jews.

You are a time-waster.

Jonathan, much as you would like to stretch the definition of anti-Semitism to include looking askance at an Israeli or disagreeing with the Israeli far right government, calling Israel apartheid is not anti-Semitism. And a one-state solution is precisely what Israel will get if it doesn't extract its digits on the peace process pronto. That's not anti-Semitism, that's chavivat Zion.

Quislings, eh? According to the much-vaunted but never adopted Working Definition of anti-Semitism, the use of Nazi terminology to describe Jews was anti-Semitic, John. And the Universal Jurisdiction actually protects Jews, since those wishing to commit war crimes against minorites (such as Jews) can be tried in the UK under its provisions.
And speaking of being wrong, I suppose you have heard that Petraeus's remarks about Israel are correct.

Jonathan, according to your favourite document, "Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion." That would be Quislings, then

As you well know the name Quisling has become an accepted term to mean: traitor or collaborator.
This is exactly what the JJFP and all the other trendy-lefty groups supporting their anti Israel stance are acting like, - they are traitors to the Jewish people.
We expect good old political banter with Galloway, Jackson, Booth, Corbyn and their ilk and we can deal with them - no problem, but when it's Jews or those purporting to be Jews who are at the vanguard of the Israel bashing movement having swallowed some twisted, distorted, moral high-ground purporting, 2-digit IQ left-wing propoganda it is upsetting.

No, they are not "traitors to the Jewish people", John. They disagree with Israel's policies. Strongly. And they don't care for Israel or parrot its far right government's views.

MT2
Exactly what I said they are "traitors to the Jewish people"; by following the bash Israel, anti Israel line they are giving untold moral support to our enemies, and the goyim fall in with a chorus of - "oh it must be right so and so is Jewish afterall". a la Goldstone.

No, JIC, they disagree with Israel's actions. Israel does not equal Jews and Jews do not equal Israel. It's as simple as that.

I agree, it is that simple; No Jews=No Israel; No Israel=No Jews.
If you know any Jewish history or liturgy the entire raison d'etre of the Jewish people is the yearning for and the return to Zion, ie the return to Israel.
Israel exists as a State and thanks to the IDF & IAF will continue to exist and develop Jewish residential areas in Judea, Samaria and the whole of Jerusalem, East & West.
This will happen regardless of all the "trendy-lefty" inefectual blogging on the JC web site. Or, any cow- towing to the incumbent US President B. "Hussein" Obama who will be a "one term wonder", once he is out of office we can get back to normal relations with the US, when the Republicans are back in control.

Jews existed before Israel and will continue to do so if Israel, heaven forbid, ceases to exist because of its expansionist policies in the occupied territories or brutality towards the subjugated Palestinians. Israel's policies will be those which determined whether it will continue to exist as a Jewish democracy. And as it is conducting itself now, it won't.
It's an interesting debate about the meaning of Zion. Is it a concrete entity or something spiritual to which we must aspire?
And what is this "we"? You are in the UK, not Israel.

Jon, if you really think that "the entire raison d'etre of the Jewish people is the yearning for and the return to Zion", I suggest you try reading some basic books on Judaism.

Maybe go to a synagogue (that's the place where, among other things, Jews go to pray and study), and get some suggestions from the rabbi (that's a Hebrew word, literally meaning something like "my teacher" or "my master", used for the spiritual leader of a Jewish community).

Quite extraordinary entry LJ. Half truths, full lies and a very nasty undercurrent of censorship.

To wit:

"They have boycott, divestment and sanctions campaigns against Israel."

No, we don't. We support boycott, divestment and sanctions against the occupation. Not the same thing, unless you are suggesting that the land of the putative Palestinian state is Israel, in which case you have a whole different set of problems, and not just with JfJfP, but with most of the world. We have consistently rejected blanket boycotts against Israel.

"Stop Arming Israel, that is one of the campaigns by Jews for Justice for Palestinians."

Well, yes, we do campaign for the UK to comply with its obligations under treaties and agreements it has made not to export UK produced military products to conflict zones, and we're obviously quite pleased that the UK govt has revoked a small number of export licences because the weaponry was used in Lebanon 2006 and Gaza 2008-9.

"They are also trying to block the Jewish community from changing the universal jurisdiction law which currently allows Israeli politicians and military officials to be arrested."

Well now, the clue there is in the world 'universal'. It allows people against whom there is a prima facie case to be arrested, be they Israeli, Chilean, or Bosnian, to name but three. It would allow Hamas officials suspected of war crimes to be arrested too. Are you suggesting that ONLY Israelis should be exempt? If so why? And you'll find it is a large number of lawyers and other organisations as well as JfJfP who feel the law should not be changed - at least, not changed so as to give a political appointee (the Attorney-General) the right to interfere with the judicial process. I think that's something worth preserving, not having the law politicised unduly.

There's probably a case to expect a greater burden of proof to bring the chance of getting an arrest warrant sworn out into line with the chance of a prosecution being made, but that's not the same thing. And in case you missed it, the clue is in the word 'universal'. Did you even think about this issue before the Almog and Livni visits were affected?

"It appears that Liberal Judaism is giving them a platform by allowing them to use their Montagu Centre for one of their meetings. Should this be happening at the Montagu Centre?"

Of all the dumbfool questions I have seen, this takes the biscuit. For a start you are a bit slow off the mark, as we have been holding meetings at the Montagu Centre on and off for some time. Mike Gapes MP (he chairs the Foreign Affairs Select Committee) was the speaker at one of them. Rabbi Elizabeth Tikvah Sarah was another.

But even if we had not had these meetings already it's an insulting question. Not insulting to JfJfP, but insulting to the very idea of discussion. We've been down this road before, when a synagogue meeting booking was cancelled because it was claimed we supported an academic boycott. We don't. We never have. We rejected it as an option at our most recent AGM, following an extensive survey. (The one that the JC featured in a front page so-called "expose", but the decline of the JC's journalism is a very different blog post.) The synagogue admitted they were wrong, but refused to honour the booking and instead spent a large amount of money - because they agreed they were wrong - on booking a meeting room at a nearby hotel. What an idiotic waste of money, twice over.

Why on earth should the Montagu Centre NOT use their venue for discussion? The meeting is a public one (hint: that's why we advertised it) and unlike other groups, some members of whom are blogging here, we welcome diverse discussion and invite people with a variety of views onto our platforms. We Jews are very fond of aphorisms along the lines of "ask two Jews, get three opinions" but some of us are less keen on seeing that applied in reality. Or when we do, people who know no better chuck revolting WW2 terms like Quisling around. Mind you, watching JiC then try to wriggle out of the apt accusation that they are being anti semitic is quite amusing. 2 digits indeed. (That's a pun, Jon_i, can ya tell what it is yet?)

Actually, LJ, the Universal Jurisdiction has been used to arrest Serb, Croat and other suspected war criminals. Perhaps Israel can start using its brains rather than its brawn.

The fate of Quislings -- like all traitors -- is death. That's what led to Yigal Amir murdering Yitzhak Rabin.

LJ, I do tend to get angry when people lie about me, or about organisations I belong to, tritely accuse me of being a traitor or of suggesting I have an agenda other than the one I and JfJfP openly promote. But your right, I should not have responded in kind, the web is too full already of bilious comments masquerading as debate.

JfJfP doesn't delegitimise the Jewish state (not according to the recent Reut Institute report on delegitimisation, anyway). We campaign against the occupation. We are Zionists, non Zionists, anti Zionists and post Zionists.

With regard to arms, surely we can agree that one of the things Israel has been able to do is defend itself. Originally sourcing arms from Czechoslovakia, as it then was, from France and subsequently (after 1956) from the USA? Now, of course, Israel is a major manufacturer, innovator and exporter of arms and military training. Israel does not depend on UK arms exports.

More importantly - for the long term, that is - Israel's best defence must be a political one. I'm not just thinking of the two-state solution in respect of the Palestinians, but of a comprehensive regional agreement such as has been expressed in the Arab League's plan for proper diplomatic and political normalisation of relations between all its 22 members and Israel. That's something that Israel has always sought.

The points about UJ have already been dealt with I think - Israel is far from being singled out, as recent arrests show.

I'm not going to respond to JiC's attempt to delegitimise my Jewishness or Judaism.

LJ, the sort of thing I was referring to in regard to Israel's long term security is summed up in a section of the just issued Quartet Statement:

"Recognizing the significance of the Arab Peace Initiative, the Quartet looks forward to closer
cooperation with the parties and the Arab League and urges regional governments to support publicly the resumption of bilateral negotiations, enter into a structured regional dialogue on issues of common concern, and take steps to foster positive relations throughout the region in the context of progress towards comprehensive peace on the basis of UN Security Council Resolutions 242,
338, 1397, 1515, and 1850 and the Madrid principles, including through the conclusion of peace agreements between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon."

There's a NPR report here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124883829 but I don't have a URL for the statement yet. (You can sign up to receive them from the EU portal.)