Fraser versus UCU


By Jonathan Hoffman
April 26, 2013
Share

I sent the following letter to the JC earlier this week in response to Jonathan Goldberg's article last week:

http://www.thejc.com/lifestyle/ask-qc/106261/why-ronnie-fraser-case-agai...

I could not disagree more with Jonathan Goldberg. He clearly has not read the Equality Act. If he had, he would not suggest that it is as fanciful to argue that Zionism should be a protected characteristic as to argue that supporting Tottenham Hotspur should be a protected characteristic “because so many Jews do”. “Belief” is a protected characteristic in the Act independently of religion. So someone who discriminates against a Zionist is in breach of the Act regardless of the victim’s religion (or absence of a religion). It is up to the judiciary to decide what constitutes a ‘belief’. The fact that there are Christian Zionists and Jewish anti-Zionists is entirely irrelevant.

Mr Goldberg also disapproves of bringing the case because our enemies will say “rich Jews threw huge resources at a failed attempt to stifle free speech”. I am aghast. The day we let antisemites dictate our actions is the day we might just as well lay down and die.

We all (Mr Goldberg included) owe Ronnie an enormous debt of thanks for standing up to the harassment that he received within UCU simply because he had the audacity to challenge lies about Israel. Of course the JLC was right to back the case. Antisemitism must never go unchallenged. If more cases were challenged, then perhaps Judges would be better informed about the bond between Israel and Jews than this Tribunal. This judgment was shamefully ill-informed and I would gladly donate to a fund to challenge it.

COMMENTS

Harvey

Fri, 04/26/2013 - 13:41

Rate this:

0 points

OT
Something new for the haters to break their teeth on .

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/french-appeals-court-rules-is...


Mary in Brighton

Fri, 04/26/2013 - 15:31

Rate this:

0 points

Oh THERE'S Jonathan


Rich Armbach

Fri, 04/26/2013 - 16:17

Rate this:

0 points

I am sure Jonathan Goldberg QC would be greatly discomforted to learn that the finest legal mind in the lunatic fringe of the ZF disagrees with him.


happygoldfish

Fri, 04/26/2013 - 18:34

Rate this:

0 points

joemillis1959 : I too will continue to ignore him.

joe, do you actually read what you write?

ooh, wait … you're ignoring me some more!

joemillis1959 : …may I remind one and all to ignore his stuff.

it's a good job you're here to help them!

joemillis1959 : Another good tell that this Goldfish is none other the previously barred aforementioned is the fact that he will call everyone that disagrees with him a racist.

that's another lie (and a very obvious one)

joe millis, please stop ignoring my reply to your lie about me, and deleting it and reposting it later as if it was new
here's my reply again

joemillis1959 : The JC used to have a policy of banning Anthony Posner and his various aliases: Blacklisted Dictator/Jose/Mitnachel et al. Let's reinstate that policy for his current alias, Happy Goldfish.

joemillis1959: (Mon, 15:29) aka Anthony Posner/Jose/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc … Then he's like the Goldfish. And even less talented.

joemillis1959: (Thu, 16:52) Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc is the Goldfish …

joemillis1959 (Fri, 17:39, Fri 18:28): Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc - aka the Happy Goldfish …

i have no connection with those, or with any other present or former bloggers on this site

joemillis1959: He may claim he's not, but his modus operandi is far too similar for it to be a coincidence.

uhh??

did any of the others know how to produce background colours, or red or blue type?

did any of the others preface every quote with a clickable link so that it could be checked?

did any of the others repeatedly link to their own outside blog about oranges ducks and arch-rabbis?

were any of the others goldfish? (you haven't even got the right species! )

oh … and did any of the others use smilies?

joe miliis, please stop harrassing me, and propagating the lie that my behaviour has previously caused me to be banned


StevenKalka

Mon, 04/29/2013 - 13:46

Rate this:

0 points

Jonathan, I agree that “rich Jews threw huge resources at a failed attempt to stifle free speech” is an invalid reason to oppose Ronnie's lawsuit. If we have a valid case, we can't always worry about whow we look.

I still think the court room is not the right venue to oppose anti-semitism. If I were in Ronnie's shoes, I may have simply stood up at an UCU board meeting and said something like this:

"If you think BDS by the UCU is a good idea, why not introduce BDS USA? That's right. Let's demand that all immigrants to the USA from Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America, everyplace else return where they came from so the native americans can leave their reservations and go back to living they way they did 200 years ago. What's good for the goose is good for the gander".

My idea is to make them see for themselves just how stupid and intolerant they really are outside the courtroom.


joemillis1959

Mon, 04/29/2013 - 14:13

Rate this:

0 points

You are quite right, @Steven. That is exactly the right tactic/strategy that should be employed against boycotters of all sides. Clinging to some nonsensical, self-contradictory working definition or some equally invalid and unnecessarily confusing protocol concocted by a bunch of backbenchers ain't gonna get anyone anywhere.


StevenKalka

Mon, 04/29/2013 - 15:15

Rate this:

0 points

He could then have added this:

"We can go one step further and have BDS UK. We demand that Britain surrender the Falkland Islands to Argentina. By what right do we have introducing fish and chips in the southern latin continent? If they don't do so in 180 days, we should divest from our own country".


joemillis1959

Mon, 04/29/2013 - 17:06

Rate this:

0 points

Stop it, Steven, you are making me laugh


joemillis1959

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 09:40

Rate this:

0 points

Shame they didn't publish the letter, because it could have opened up an interesting debate.

Belief is defined as faith, as in religious belief and faith. If it were as Jonathan says, then dyed-in-the wool fascists or communists could claim their beliefs were "protected characteristics". Actually, so could Labour or Tory Party members. But not the Lib-Dems, because they appear not to believe in anything.

Therefore, Zionism is not yet defined as a religious belief, as it is political. A Zionist is one who supports/believes in a (very broad) political stance - not a religious one.

So, the good QC gets it right. It cannot be a protected characteristic since it is like supporting a political group or creed, or, for that matter, a football team (Spurs, *rs*n*l, Manure, Charlton Afletic or even Leyton Orient).

The day we let antisemites dictate our actions is the day we might just as well lay down and die.

Here, your words contradict your actions. If they didn't dictate your action, you'd have stayed away from every BDS anti-Israel demo going. They dictated your action.

Unfortunately, Ronnie was ill-advised and his legal team appeared not to listen to those cautioning that it would end in epic failure.


happygoldfish

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 09:42

Rate this:

0 points

joemillis1959 : I too will continue to ignore him.

joe, do you actually read what you write?

ooh, wait … you're ignoring me some more!

joemillis1959 : …may I remind one and all to ignore his stuff.

it's a good job you're here to help them!

joemillis1959 : Another good tell that this Goldfish is none other the previously barred aforementioned is the fact that he will call everyone that disagrees with him a racist.

that's another lie (and a very obvious one)

joe millis, please stop ignoring my reply to your lie about me, and deleting it and reposting it later as if it was new
here's my reply again

joemillis1959 : The JC used to have a policy of banning Anthony Posner and his various aliases: Blacklisted Dictator/Jose/Mitnachel et al. Let's reinstate that policy for his current alias, Happy Goldfish.

joemillis1959: (Mon, 15:29) aka Anthony Posner/Jose/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc … Then he's like the Goldfish. And even less talented.

joemillis1959: (Thu, 16:52) Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc is the Goldfish …

joemillis1959 (Fri, 17:39; Fri, 18:28; Tue, 09:41): Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc - aka the Happy Goldfish …

i have no connection with those, or with any other present or former bloggers on this site

joemillis1959: He may claim he's not, but his modus operandi is far too similar for it to be a coincidence.

uhh??

did any of the others know how to produce background colours, or red or blue type?

did any of the others preface every quote with a clickable link so that it could be checked?

did any of the others repeatedly link to their own outside blog about oranges ducks and arch-rabbis?

were any of the others goldfish? (you haven't even got the right species! )

oh … and did any of the others use smilies?

joe miliis, please stop harrassing me, and propagating the lie that my behaviour has previously caused me to be banned


happygoldfish

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 09:43

Rate this:

0 points
there are racists on this website who think there is nothing wrong with lying, so long as they are criticising israel, or criticising people who defend israel

they decide what they want to be true, and then say it anyway, in the absence of any evidence other than their own prejudice, and often contrary to the actual evidence

one reason why so few people defend israel on thejc.com … compared with other sites such as the guardian's "comment is free" … is the unchecked lying or bullying that they'll sooner or later be subjected to


happygoldfish

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 09:43

Rate this:

0 points

joemillis1959: (Mon, 10:53) He may claim he's not, he may introduce all sorts of snazzy colourful backgrounds and daft graphics - any one with a modicum of HTML coding knowledge can do that (and Jose claimed to be a computer whizz kid) - but his modus operandi is far too similar for it to be a coincidence. Just ignore him.

some historians are motivated by a desire to present events in a manner consistent with their own beliefs even if that involves distortion and manipulation of evidence

joe millis is the author of an illustrated history of jerusalem

if his approach to evidence as a historian is as reliable as in his accusation against me, then his book may be an excellent buy as a work of fiction, or as a children's picture book, but cannot seriously be considered as a reliable research resource


joemillis1959

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 10:00

Rate this:

0 points

All the Goldfish has to do is to reveal itself - not hide behind made up names - then we'd know if it was fish or fowl rather than someone foul. But it won't, because it can't, because it knows it would be banned. It protesteth too mucheth

As it appears that Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc - aka the Happy Goldfish - is going to piggyback on other mailings to repost and repost and repost ad nauseum, may I remind one and all to ignore his stuff. I too will continue to ignore him.

Another good tell that this Goldfish is none other the previously barred aforementioned is the fact that he will call everyone that disagrees with him a racist. A typical Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc ploy. When will the JC rid us of this "fish" in turbulent water?


happygoldfish

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 10:13

Rate this:

0 points
joe millis, please stop ignoring my reply to your lie about me, and deleting it and reposting it later as if it was new
here's my reply again

joemillis1959 : The JC used to have a policy of banning Anthony Posner and his various aliases: Blacklisted Dictator/Jose/Mitnachel et al. Let's reinstate that policy for his current alias, Happy Goldfish.

joemillis1959: (Mon, 15:29) aka Anthony Posner/Jose/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc … Then he's like the Goldfish. And even less talented.

joemillis1959: (Thu, 16:52) Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc is the Goldfish …

joemillis1959 (Fri, 17:39; Fri, 18:28; Tue, 09:41; Tue, 10:00): Jose/Anthony Posner/Blacklisted Dicktator/etc - aka the Happy Goldfish …

i have no connection with those, or with any other present or former bloggers on this site

joemillis1959: He may claim he's not, but his modus operandi is far too similar for it to be a coincidence.

uhh??

did any of the others know how to produce background colours, or red or blue type?

did any of the others preface every quote with a clickable link so that it could be checked?

did any of the others repeatedly link to their own outside blog about oranges ducks and arch-rabbis?

were any of the others goldfish? (you haven't even got the right species! )

oh … and did any of the others use smilies?

joe miliis, please stop harrassing me, and propagating the lie that my behaviour has previously caused me to be banned


StevenKalka

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 15:17

Rate this:

0 points

"one reason why so few people defend israel on thejc.com … compared with other sites such as the guardian's "comment is free" … is the unchecked lying or bullying that they'll sooner or later be subjected to?"

Maybe the reason is that they'd experience burnout if they responded to every accusation about the international legality of the settlements, the conditions in Gaza, the BDS movement, and boycotts of Israeli businesses. Why many times can you make the same arguments? I post when I have something new to add or a humorous digression.

"they decide what they want to be true, and then say it anyway, in the absence of any evidence other than their own prejudice, and often contrary to the actual evidence"

That's so true of western progressive politics in general. Adherents cherry pick the evidence, twist words and meanings, engage in Orwellian doublespeak and dramatic overkill. Nothing new here.

This entire business of the EUMC definition of anti-semitism looks like it was designed as makework for bureaucrats and lawyers. What's more interesting is the shifting personal Jewish idea of anti-semitism. I recently watched the documentary 'Philip Roth Unmasked'. The author said that he was accused of anti-semitism from rabbis after Portnoy's Complaint came out because of its depiction of adulterous Jews. Maybe at that time there was an unwritten rule that Jews shouldn't air their dirty laundry in public.


joemillis1959

Tue, 04/30/2013 - 17:29

Rate this:

0 points

Steven, what you said in your last paragraph is spot on target.

Also, staying on message when it comes to any issue on the Jewish world is stultifying and leads to weakness


StevenKalka

Tue, 05/07/2013 - 16:52

Rate this:

0 points

Does the following joke fit the EUMC definition of anti-semitism?:

Two beggars are sitting side by side on a street in Rome, Italy. One has a Cross in front of him; the other one is holding the Star of David. Many people go by, look at both beggars, but only put money into the hat of the beggar sitting behind the Cross. The Pope comes by. He stops to watch the throngs of people giving money to the beggar who holds the Cross while none give to the beggar holding the Star of David. Finally, the Pope approaches the beggar with the Star of David and says, "My poor fellow, don't you understand? This is a Catholic country; this city is the Seat of Catholicism. People aren't going to give you money if you sit there with a Star of David in front of you, especially when you're sitting beside a beggar who is holding a Cross. In fact, they would probably give more money to him just out of spite. The beggar with the Star of David listened to the Pope, smiled, and turned to the beggar with the Cross and said, "Moishe, look who's trying to teach the Goldstein brothers about marketing!"

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS