Libdem MP's antisemitic message re Holocaust


By Jonathan Hoffman
January 25, 2013
Share

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2567/british_member_of_parliament_...

http://blog.thecst.org.uk/?p=4068

David Ward MP (Bradford East, 24.3% of whose population is Muslim) gave the following message to the magazine "Asian Image" after signing the HET's Memorial Book in the House of Commons

http://www.asianimage.co.uk/news/10182527.MP_condemns_treatment_of_Pales...

I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.

This is a disgusting antisemitic comment (the EUMC Definition of Antisemitism says it's antisemitic to "Draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis").

http://www.european-forum-on-antisemitism.org/working-definition-of-anti...

I have written to Nick Clegg asking for the Whip to be withdrawn from Ward and asking for a public denunciation of Ward's antisemitic and highly insensitive statement.

UPDATE: The Liberal Democrat party has denounced Ward's statements. They told the Guido Fawkes blog: “This is a matter we take extremely seriously. The Liberal Democrats deeply regret and condemn the statement issued by David Ward and his use of language which is unacceptable.”

UPDATE 2: David Ward has removed the offending statement from his website

UPDATE 3: It's back with a defiant message ... surely he will lose the Whip when he sees the Whips' office on Monday!

http://davidward.org.uk/en/article/2013/654457/bradford-mp-condemns-isra...

EMAIL NICK CLEGG NOW!

https://www.facebook.com/SupportDavidWardForStandingUpForPalestine

Nick Clegg is getting lots of emails of support for Ward. Please email Nick Clegg to reinforce the message: WARD MUST LOSE THE LIBDEM WHIP JUST LIKE JENNY TONGE

https://www.libdems.org.uk/contact.aspx

Contact Nick Clegg here - select 'Nick Clegg' from the dropdown menu

UPDATE 4:

LibDem Chief Whip's letter of apology to Karen Pollock of HET (HT Matthew Harris):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/122300465/ChiefWhipLetter

UPDATE 5:

Superb piece by Melanie Phillips on why Ward is only a symptom of the UK's sickness:

http://www.melaniephillips.com/britains-national-sickness

The full, monstrous obscenity of both Ward’s remarks and the widespread British attitude to which he has given voice is no less than this: accusing the people who were the victims of genocide entirely falsely of committing crimes against humanity -- simply because they are trying to defend themselves from being wiped out again by those for whom the Holocaust is unfinished business. Self-defence against extermination is now considered a crime against humanity.

UPDATE 6:

He has been 'censured' and the offensive comment is still on his website

This is totally inadequate. He must lose the Whip and the comment must be removed.

Nick Clegg - Prove that you have Zero Tolerance for antisemitism in your Party!

UPDATE 7:

Statement from Board of Deputies:

Jonathan Arkush, the Board of Deputies’ Vice President and Chairman of the Defence Division, said: “We note that David Ward MP has been censured by the Liberal Democrats. However, the Board regards this as wholly inadequate. The whip should have been withdrawn and he should have been warned that he risked being expelled from the party. The Board further notes that Mr Ward’s offensive statement remains on his website, which hardly inspires confidence in the sincerity of his apology.”

Quite!

COMMENTS

joemillis1959

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:34

Rate this:

0 points

The LibDem MP's comments are a disgrace.

But what the working (that is unverified and unadopted in any legal system) definition says is:

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

There then follows a number of "could includes" - among them

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

It's also interesting to note the next "could include" -

Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

That is problematic for two reasons.
1. Israel defines itself as either the Jewish state or the national home of the Jewish people. That being the case, it is itself asking the world to see Jews through the prism of its policies, whether the Jews like it or not. On numerous occasions, Israeli leaders have thanked world leaders - the US Congress, Silvio Berlusconi etc - on behalf of the Jewish people. And with regard to British Jews, Israel has sold arms to Argentina during the Falklands war of 1982. That was hardly in this community's interests.

2. There are those in this community - a vociferous few, granted - who would like us all to unite around Israel's policies, whether we like them or not. By doing that, they are themselves in effect showing the world that we should be held responsible for Israel's actions. Ironic, innit?

So, basically, while the actual working definition isn't bad in and off itself, the later-added "could includes" are ill-thought-out and self-defeating.


Rich Armbach

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 13:55

Rate this:

-2 points

(the EUMC Definition of Antisemitism says it's antisemitic to "Draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis).

No it doesn't you are lying again


Harvey

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:44

Rate this:

1 point

I don't think this will help his cause http://order-order.com/2013/01/25/david-ward-mp-pictured-with-swastika-o...?

utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+guidofawkes+%28Guy+Fawkes%27+blog+of+parliamentary+plots%2C+rumours+and+conspiracy%29

Not even the wretched Jenny Tonge was up to swastikas on her website .
Clegg had better sort this out and quick .


StevenKalka

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:46

Rate this:

0 points

Judging from that photo, David Ward looks like a stern, sourpuss. Doesn't he?

What does he charge to haunt a house?


Mary in Brighton

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 14:55

Rate this:

0 points

And all before they even got your letter Jonathan


StevenKalka

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:01

Rate this:

0 points

Rather than accusing him of the EUMC definition of anti-semitism, he should be asked to substantiate his comments and cite his sources. That would more reveal his lack of judgement.


Harvey

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:20

Rate this:

1 point

His judgement was fine . He's defending a 200 majority . He needs all the votes he can get and he's playing to his constituency . In fact much the same as Galloway did .
Bradford really deserves better than these self serving politicians .


StevenKalka

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:36

Rate this:

-1 points

If that's his constituency, I sure wouldn't want to live amongst them.


happygoldfish

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 15:56

Rate this:

0 points
jonathan, why do you persist in calling it the "eumc" definition (which, as joe points out, was a self-declared "working" definition anyway)?

its proper name is the ottawa protocol definition (of the interparliamentary coalition against antisemitism, see http://www.antisem.org/archive/ottawa-protocol-on-combating-antisemitism...

moreover, you are rather missing the point: as steven says …

Steven Kalka: Rather than accusing him of the EUMC definition of anti-semitism, he should be asked to substantiate his comments and cite his sources. That would more reveal his lack of judgement.

… david ward's statement is expressly about "Jews", so the "israeli" issue needn't arise!

the real objection is to the inherent racism in liberal democrat mp david ward saying "Jews … inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza."

Rich Armbach: (the EUMC Definition of Antisemitism says it's antisemitic to "Draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis).
No it doesn't you are lying again

rich, "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" does occur, both in the eumc "working" definition and in the ottawa protocol definition

joemillis1959

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:11

Rate this:

0 points

Harvey, you are right on one thing; Bradford voters do deserve better, but as Gorgeous George will be hoofed out at the next election just like he was at Bow and Ward will disappear like so many other Lib Dem MPs, they will prove the old dictum: "All political careers end in failure". Yes, I know it's Enoch Powell, but the old bugger did have some bon mots


joemillis1959

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 16:45

Rate this:

0 points

Mr/Ms Goldfish, I've had a look at the Ottawa protocol, another worthy statement not endorsed or adopted by any legislature, and it does say:

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

So again, it has those pesky qualifying "could includes" with the added bonus of "taking into account the overall context". In other words, another watering down of a document not accepted into law by anyone.


Rich Armbach

Fri, 01/25/2013 - 17:09

Rate this:

-1 points

"Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" does occur,

THAT occurs in the muddled American add ons. The word " is " doesn't occur anywhere. Hoff perfectly well knows this. He is therefore lying AGAIN.


Mary in Brighton

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 10:16

Rate this:

0 points

Dear Mr Clegg

Did you not hear Mr Hoffman's command? I don't see you jumping yet. Please throw away the Bradford East seat IMMEDIATELY.

Yours in anticipation

Mary


zaheerayin

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 12:09

Rate this:

0 points

I assume that in the light of the rampant racism in the stadiums, Jonathan will be calling for UEFA to relocate the under 21 finals. Also, I am so waiting for Jonathan's outrage at the Israeli Government/Ethiopian Jewish women contraception scandal.


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 12:28

Rate this:

0 points

Speaking of antisemitic messages on Holocaust Memorial Day, here's Silvio Berlusconi, that great friend of Israel and the Jews (it must be so because Binyamin Netanyahu thanked him of our behalf), praising Mussolini on HMD

Also here's some race hate on HMD, brought to you by courtesy of Betar Jerusalem fans who don't want Muslim players on the team (or Afro-Caribbeans for that matter). The banner reads: "Betar: pure for ever". They mean racially pure and are known for their monkey chants towards black players and "death to the Arabs" songs. Millwall, Leeds and West Ham of the 1970s come to mind.

Not very nice on Holocaust Memorial Day in a country that was set up because of the persecution of Jews. Just think what would happen if a Ukrainian team's supporters praised the Nazis or a Polish team put up banners praising Hamas. We would justifiably asking UEFA to act. Oh... Wait.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 12:42

Rate this:

0 points

Oh great. Millis joins goldfish. Now we have two of them playing silly buggers.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 12:43

Rate this:

0 points

.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 12:43

Rate this:

0 points

oops


happygoldfish

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 13:17

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: … THAT occurs in the muddled American add ons. The word " is " doesn't occur anywhere.
Hoff perfectly well knows this. He is therefore lying AGAIN.

no, rich, you're lying … jonathan hoffman didn't use the word "is"!"

joemillis1959: … the Ottawa protocol, another worthy statement not endorsed or adopted by any legislature …
… a document not accepted into law by anyone.

joe, why do you disparage it as not being approved by a legislature?

will you only recognise antisemitism as approved by the general assembly of the united nations, which until recently resolved that "zionism is racism"?

or by its creature, the durban conferences (the "world conferences against racism", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Conference_against_Racism )

yes, joe, the ottawa protocol is not approved by either of those racist bodies

but it is approved by an international anti-racist body, the interparliamentary coalition against antisemitism

    "We, Representatives of our respective Parliaments from across the world, convening in Ottawa for the second Conference and Summit of the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism, note and reaffirm the London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism as a template document for the fight against antisemitism …"

joe, why are you so concerned to reject an internationally accepted statement on antisemitism, and so eager to accept only what you know perfectly well would be a travesty of anti-racism?"

joemillis1959: … it has those pesky qualifying "could includes" with the added bonus of "taking into account the overall context". In other words, another watering down …

nobody's suggesting it's a law

the ottawa protocol lists categories of antisemitism … things that are antisemitic unless the context shows otherwise

nazi comparisons are one such category

obviously, every such comparison must be considered individually, within its own context

neither jonathan nor i see anything remotely exonerating in the context in this case!

joe, are you saying that the context of liberal democarat mp david ward's words … which you call a disgrace … somehow take it out of this category of antisemitism?


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 13:37

Rate this:

0 points

No you are lying.

This is a disgusting antisemitic comment (the EUMC Definition of Antisemitism says it's antisemitic to "Draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis").

it's

It is

Geddit ?


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 13:38

Rate this:

0 points

Sorry about this every comment I make is appearing twice ......or was


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 13:39

Rate this:

0 points

N


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 13:44

Rate this:

0 points

Ms/Mr Goldfish. The EUMC working definition has no standing. Nor do the Ottawa protocols. They were never ratified by anyone, much less entered into legislation as part of a way to combat antisemitism. And I don't care about the UN, it's irrelevant for this matter, although its founding document was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was written mainly because of the Holcaust.

While the main body of the EUMC working definition is fine up to a point, it still doesn't cover the ground that some national governments, our own included, have introduced with the likes of the Race Relation and Public Order Acts. These are far more comprehensive and protect Jews - and other minorities - much better that any declarative statement, however well intentioned.

As for the "could include" add ons, they are just that - add ons which don't amount to a hill of beans and which are qualified up the wazoo.

The Ottawa protocol as you rightly point out, states:

We, Representatives of our respective Parliaments from across the world, convening in Ottawa for the second Conference and Summit of the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism, note and reaffirm the London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism as a template document for the fight against antisemitism

Very worthy. However, it confirms the London declaration as a "template document". And let's face it, it has as much standing as, say, the Tory chair of the Education Select Committee having a go at the Tory Education Secretary, Michael Gove. Great on paper, but meaningless in the great scheme of things.

Joe, are you saying that the context of liberal democarat mp david ward's words … which you call a disgrace … somehow take it out of this category of antisemitism?

Of course what he said was antisemitic. How can it not be? He may even be liable for prosecution under the aforementioned Acts.

But neither you nor I need an unratified and meaningless document like the "working" definition - which is used as WD40-style panacea for some people - to work that one out.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 13:56

Rate this:

-2 points

"will you only recognise antisemitism as approved by the general assembly of the united nations, which until recently resolved that "zionism is racism"?
or by its creature, the durban conferences (the "world conferences against racism", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Conference_against_Racism )
yes, joe, the ottawa protocol is not approved by either of those racist bodies
but it is approved by an international anti-racist body, the interparliamentary coalition against antisemitism …"

None of those. You can't legislate or decide for yourself the meaning of a word or expression (not even if you are the interparliamentary coalition against anti semitism),any more than you can legislate which way the wind should blow. To attempt to do so is an attempt at linguistic fascism.

The only " approval " that counts is the implicit approval of the great mass of the speakers of the language as evidenced by their use of the word/expression, and as noted and recorded by the dictionary compilers.

And if you stood on any random street and asked 100 random people what they understood by anti semitism I would bet Hull City's chances of winning the champions league that Israel wouldn't get a mention.


happygoldfish

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 14:21

Rate this:

1 point

joemillis1959: The EUMC working definition has no standing. Nor do the Ottawa protocols. They were never ratified by anyone, much less entered into legislation as part of a way to combat antisemitism..

… it has as much standing as, say, the Tory chair of the Education Select Committee having a go at the Tory Education Secretary, Michael Gove. Great on paper, but meaningless in the great scheme of things.

they do have standing …

they are the unanimous resolution of an international anti-racist body, the interparliamentary coalition against antisemitism

what other international body could possibly have standing (to use your word) on antisemitism?

why are you and your friends so keen to disparage this clear and fair description of antisemitism, produced by possibly the world's primary anti-racist body?


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 14:36

Rate this:

-1 points

"what other international body could possibly have standing (to use your word) on antisemitism?"

The international body of speakers of languages in which the expression occurs..


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 14:52

Rate this:

0 points

No the EUMC and Ottawa papers do not have any standing. If they were entered into legislation they would have standing. But as it stands now, they are declarative.

what other international body could possibly have standing (to use your word) on antisemitism

International bodies are irrelevant. They have no standing. At best, they can issue guidelines.

It's national parliaments that count when it comes to protecting their countries' citizens.

why are you and your friends so keen to disparage this clear and fair description of antisemitism, produced by possibly the world's primary anti-racist body

I don't know who you mean by friends, but I can speak only for myself.

It isn't the world's primary anti-racist body. I don't know if the world has such a body. The "world" is amorphous anyway.

There are organisations, such as Fifa, trades unions, national governments, that are meant to fight racism within their ranks and countries. But there's nothing world wide that can deal with racism.

I "disparage" - your word - the working definition because if anything it doesn't go anywhere near far enough by not suggesting penalties for those who transgress. That is supplied by the aforementioned Acts of Parliament which emphatically do not take the definition into account.

And it muddies the waters with qualified add ons, some of which are self-contradictory, such as the one that states:

That it could be deemed antisemitic if it holds Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel

.

The problem is that Israel defines itself as either the Jewish state or the national home of the Jewish people. That being the case, it is itself asking the world to see Jews through the prism of itself and its policies, whether the Jews like it or not. On numerous occasions, Israeli leaders have thanked world leaders - the US Congress, Silvio Berlusconi etc - on behalf of the Jewish people. And with regard to British Jews, Israel has sold arms to Argentina during the Falklands war of 1982. That was hardly in this community's interests.

And, to be honest, I'm much more concerned by Silvio Berlusconi, that great friend of Israel and the Jews, praising Mussolini on HMD. While Ward is an MP who will probably lose his seat at the next election, Mr Bunga-Bunga may well be Italy's next PM. And he controls Italy's media too.

Betar Jerusalem concerns me more, too, because their fans don't want Muslim players on the team (or Afro-Caribbeans for that matter). They displayed a banner which read: "Betar: pure for ever". They mean racially pure and are known for their monkey chants towards black players and "death to the Arabs" songs. Millwall, Leeds and West Ham of the 1970s come to mind.

Aren't you concerned by those last two points? I see the great anti-racism fighters here aren't.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 15:13

Rate this:

0 points

It makes no difference whether these muddled add ons are declaratory or legislative. Every government in the world could legislate that " morning " meant the time when the sun sinks below the horizon. That wouldn't make it mean that. The speakers of the language would still mean the time between sunrise and noon, and it would continue to mean that.

The definition, meaning , of anti semitism is " hatred of Jews,and/or a desire to discriminate against Jews, and/or a wish to persecute Jews, or something close,and no amount of trying, on the part of wannabe lingo fascists is going to change that.

The meanings of words can change over time but only slowly and organically. No person or body can effectively declare a change of meaning.

And yes the so called anti racists whose company we are used to are remarkably quiet on certain highly topical issues.


happygoldfish

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 15:27

Rate this:

0 points

joemillis1959: No the EUMC and Ottawa papers do not have any standing. If they were entered into legislation they would have standing. But as it stands now, they are declarative.

i'm perfectly happy with "declarative" … i suspect jonathan is, too

joemillis1959: I "disparage" - your word - the working definition because if anything it doesn't go anywhere near far enough by not suggesting penalties for those who transgress.

no! … you disparage it because it goes too far …

you don't like anybody mentioning it

joemillis1959: I'm much more concerned by Silvio Berlusconi, that great friend of Israel and the Jews, praising Mussolini on HMD.

i'm also concerned by those remarks, but you're misreading them if you think that (as reported) they concern racism

berlusconi (if correctly reported) clearly condemned all the racist aspects of italian fascism: "The racial laws were the worst fault of Mussolini as a leader, who in so many other ways did well"

but you can't resist bring israel and the jews into this, to imply guilt by association, can you?

joemillis1959: Betar Jerusalem …

now you're just dredging up football racism of a sort that occurs in most soccer-playing countries

while it should be criticised or condemned generally, singling out israeli fans for such criticism or condemnation is disgusting


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 15:36

Rate this:

0 points

"i'm perfectly happy with "declarative" … i suspect jonathan is, too"

Yes I am sure you both are. If you didn't hang on to this EUMC add ons nonsense you would be voluntarily giving up a nice little blunt instrument of intimidation and blackmail.

Then you would have to either hush or do some thinking before you threw around casual accusations.

I guess it was these muddled add ons you had in mind when you called Rabbi Goldstein a racist.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 15:46

Rate this:

0 points

And the view from the bottom of a goldfish bowl is rather bent, I mean curved.


happygoldfish

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 15:58

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: … this EUMC add ons nonsense… a nice little blunt instrument of intimidation and blackmail.

so now you're accusing the international mps of the interparliamentary coalition against antisemitism
of producing a "nice little blunt instrument of intimidation and blackmail? "

Rich Armbach: … before you threw around casual accusations.

i don't "throw around casual accusations" …

if i accuse someone, i quote the relevant passage, i provide a link so that it can be instantly checked, and i do a little research to check that my source appears reliable, and that the background makes my accusation not only true but fair

why don't you?

Rich Armbach: … when you called Rabbi Goldstein a racist.

now you're just lying

i didn't call him a racist


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 15:59

Rate this:

0 points

Mr/Ms Goldfish

i'm perfectly happy with "declarative" … i suspect jonathan is, too

Of that I have no doubt. But the declaration is still meaningless.

no! … you disparage it because it goes too far …
you don't like anybody mentioning it

Are you now telling me what I think? That's a little presumptuous, n'est pas? Anyway, it goes nowhere near far enough. What sanction does it impose?

now you're just dredging up football racism of a sort that occurs in most soccer-playing countries
while it should be criticised or condemned generally, singling out israeli fans for such criticism or condemnation is disgusting

For you, no doubt it is. However, Israel was set up specifically by and for an ethnic/religious group who had suffered hundreds of years of persecution because of their religion. Now the supporters of one of the country's main football teams have been getting away with years of racism, culminating in the "pure" banner. Now that's what I call disgusting.

Anyway, I used to have a goldfish, many years ago, and it - sorry to be impersonal but I'm not sure if goldfish are male, female or hermaphrodite - used to swim around its bowl in circles. That seems to be where we've got now, so rather than repeating the same arguments, let's agree to differ.


happygoldfish

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 16:14

Rate this:

2 points

joemillis1959: Betar Jerusalem …

happygoldfish: now you're just dredging up football racism of a sort that occurs in most soccer-playing countries

while it should be criticised or condemned generally, singling out israeli fans for such criticism or condemnation is disgusting

joemillis1959: … Israel was set up specifically by and for an ethnic/religious group who had suffered hundreds of years of persecution because of their religion. Now they have a supporters of one of the main football teams has been getting away with years of racism, culminating in the "pure" banner. Now that's what I call disgusting.

so you are singling out israeli fans for criticism or condemnation, as i said!

and (even in the context of this holocaust memorial day discussion) you are even justifying this by claiming that jews should be singled out to be judged by a higher standard than others!


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 16:30

Rate this:

-2 points

"so now you're accusing the international mps of the interparliamentary coalition against antisemitism
of producing a "nice little blunt instrument of intimidation and blackmail? "

Nice try. Generally axes are manufactured for chopping wood and stuff. Once in a while someone uses an innocently manufactured axe to chop up PEOPLE. Pretty stupid to ask are you accusing the manufacturer of producing an implement for chopping up people ?

Yawn

"I didn't call him a racist"

Yes that startled me when another blogger drew attention to it. But a close reading of what you said confirms that you did in fact do so.

" very close to racism...."

"...even closer..."

Very close and then even closer is just about there isn't it ? You see you throw these wild accusations around so frequently and so casually, much of the time you are not even aware that you are doing it.

"now you're just lying"

No it is you that is lying when you deny it.…


Advis3r

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 16:42

Rate this:

1 point

Millis you really are a piece of work. There is a small non-representative group of hooligans who call themselves Betar fans who are racist their racism is neither tolerated by the club of which they are purportedly fans and nor by Israelis in general. Unfortunately nearly every football club in the world suffers from this phenomenon you mentioned West Ham and Millwall I would also mention the Turkish fans who beat up Tottenham supporters. But in order to try and prove your false claim you label all Betar fans of which I am one as racist that is a lie and you are consistent with your lying in this respect – it’s not the first time I can recall you making this claim. By extension you label every Israeli as racist because you hold us to a standard to which no other country is held. As my late sainted father would have said you are a Yiddisher unter-semit of the worst kind. Action has been and will be taken against these thugs who are not football fans but racists of the worst kind – they have already been heavily fined and banned from attending any further matches this season. Now get back to the topic of the blog the inheritors of Goebbels and Himmler who now infest the British House of Commons.


Rich Armbach

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 17:19

Rate this:

-1 points

Jose you were doing very well, I was buying.

Until.....

" . Now get back to the topic of the blog the inheritors of Goebbels and Himmler who now infest the British House of Commons."


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 17:27

Rate this:

-1 points

"Infest the House of Commons", Norman? Let's not diminish the problem by getting carried away. How many MPs out of 650 have made antisemitic comments? Three? Four? Five? Ten?

Is their xenophobia/hatred for people who aren't like them any different from Miri Regev? Ofer Akounis? Danny Danon? The two Kahanite fascists from the sadly departed Otzma Le'Yisrael? Anastasia Michaeli? Nissim Zeev, Eli Yishai? Because of these rotten apples, has the Knesset been infested with "inheritors of Goebbels and Himmler"? No, they are a depraved minority. So again, there's no need to get carried away because of David Ward. Chances are he'll lose his seat anyway next time around.


Advis3r

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 17:51

Rate this:

2 points

Millis you just don't see it do you? I admit Xenophobia exists in this country - but this country is not in your neighbourhood where peace with England's neighbours has existed for generations including with the French who the British hate anyway. Unfortunately for us such is the make up of our neighbourhood that if we don't defend ourselves we will end up dead. The niceties which govern your particular part of the globe do not exist here but the honourable Members of the House of Commons talk about the Middle East but only when Israel is concerned as if it were part of Europe and accordingly insist that the same rules apply. One can see clearly that when Israel is not involved e.g. Syria they let them carry on regardless despite the fact that more people have been killed there in the past 15 months than have been killed throughout the 60+ years of conflict since Israel was founded as a modern state. That coupled with the persistent attempts by the Arabs to delegitimise our very existence may go some way to explaining but of course not excusing any xenophobia which may exist in the Knesset. What is the Brits excuse for following suit? And why except for the obvious reason that it is an easy target and keeps your Muslim constituents on board attack Israel at every opportunity even to the extent of outrageously claiming as he did that Jews commit attrocities against the Palestinians on a daily basis.


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 17:51

Rate this:

-2 points

Norman, there's no need to go on the offensive and attack. We aren't going to agree but let's try to be civil; there may be children watching.

Now, both you and Goldfish, let me make this absolutely clear.

I am not under any circumstances holding Betar fans or the Israeli FA to different or higher standards. I am holding them to exactly, but exactly, the same standard as I would hold the FA and any British/English team whose fans/players behaved in such a despicable manner. It's the same standard we hold Uefa to when the fans of teams in Europe display the same racist or antisemitic banners.

That's why John Terry and Suarez were banned from matches. That's why those on whichever terraces who monkey chant or sing racist and/or antisemitic songs are ejected and face life-time bans as well as prosecution.

That's why even Lazio fans who physically attacked Spurs fans in Rome are facing charges of alleged attempted murder. That's why Uefa, which has been pretty soft on racism up until now, has pulled its digit out and demanded heavier punishment for those FAs, such as Serbia, which have been repeat offenders.

The problem with Betar is that they are the team of the ruling party, the Likud, and the Israeli FA is, let's face it, scared of their fans. So nothing has been done about that team for years. Not even when a group of them ran amok attacking Arabs in the malcha mall.


joemillis1959

Mon, 01/28/2013 - 17:57

Rate this:

-2 points

Norman, I take it then that you are holding Israel to a different standard than Britain or any other democracy.

And isn't what you write about circumstances and context a little like Johann Hari who said something to the effect of: "I can understand why some people are antisemitic - even if I don't agree with them"?

And again, David Ward is a non-entity, a Lib Dem MP with a 200 majority who will lose his seat, if not his deposit, in the next election.


Rich Armbach

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 10:24

Rate this:

-1 points

"He has been 'censured' and the offensive comment is still on his website
This is totally inadequate. He must lose the Whip and the comment must be removed.
Nick Clegg - Prove that you have Zero Tolerance for antisemitism in your Party!"

Never mind Wimp tomorrow is another day and as they say, another day, another abject failure.


happygoldfish

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 10:29

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: … before you threw around casual accusations.

rich, i don't "throw around casual accusations" …

if i accuse someone, i quote the relevant passage, i provide a link so that it can be instantly checked, and i do a little research to check that my source appears reliable, and that the background makes my accusation not only true but fair

why don't you?

Rich Armbach: … when you called Rabbi Goldstein a racist.

Rich Armbach: "I didn't call him a racist"
Yes that startled me when another blogger drew attention to it. But a close reading of what you said confirms that you did in fact do so.
" very close to racism...."

rich, as usual, you evasively provide no quote and no link

what i actually said, as you well know, was …

happygoldfish: … suggesting that zionism or jewish nationalism doesn't care about (or is causing) human poverty is very close to racism

… a statement which
i] is obviously true (rich, do you disagree with it?), and
ii] does not specifically refer to goldstein anyway

i most certainly did not call goldstein a racist, and you were lying to say that i did

Rich Armbach: "...even closer..."

rich, you purport to quote me … as usual, with no link to check it …

you know perfectly well that i have never used that phrase (neither in the same post, nor anywhere else)

rich, again you're lying … this time, with a deliberately made-up "quote"


Rich Armbach

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 11:18

Rate this:

0 points

" ...........is very close to racism"

"........even further than your previous accusation."

" very close"

and " even further "

is just about there isn't it ?

You don't need a link, you found it.


happygoldfish

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 12:15

Rate this:

2 points

Rich Armbach: and "even further "

oh great, another quote (accurate this time, but only two words out of a longer sentence, and totally out of context, and with no link) to try to justify your original lie!

rich, my words "even further" have nothing to do with accusing goldstein of racism

(and nothing to do with my previous "very close" accusation, about racism, to which you are desperately trying to attach it)

they are about goldstein's criticism of certain deputies

happygoldfish:
Rabbi Aaron Goldstein: … a group of Deputies who I am sure do represent others within the Jewish Community, who are so obdurately sticking to the notion that one cannot work with anyone who speaks a word against actions of the Israeli Government.

hmm … even further than your previous accusation …

Rabbi Aaron Goldstein: … in dealing with other Faiths, those bodies that represent the Jewish Community, the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council, respond to issues by shouting accusations.

aaron, these deputies do not draw the line at "anyone who speaks a word against actions of the Israeli Government"!

… i am pointing out that goldstein has made untrue allegations against deputies twice, going "even further" the second time (than the first time)

that may be accusing him of lying, but certainly not of racism (and is unconnected with my "very close" accusation), as you well know

please stop making these contrived and lying accusations against me


Rich Armbach

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 12:26

Rate this:

-1 points

Rabbi Aaron Goldstein: Supporting a Zionism or nationalism that overrides the universal right of every human being to a meal

oxfam is not the only partner with whom british jews can operate their "tatzmiach" scheme …
and suggesting that zionism or jewish nationalism doesn't care about (or is causing) human poverty is very close to racism

Rabbi Aaron Goldstein: … a group of Deputies who I am sure do represent others within the Jewish Community, who are so obdurately sticking to the notion that one cannot work with anyone who speaks a word against actions of the Israeli Government.

hmm … even further than your previous accusation …

The first " accusation " you say is very close to racism and immediately say that the second accusation goes even further ( presumably along the road to racism.) Once you you are very close to racism there isn't much further to go, and if you go even further you are pretty much there aren't you ?


Rich Armbach

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 12:45

Rate this:

-1 points

But let's compromise and forget " even further" . You accussed the Rabbi of being very close to being a racist. That is odd, one would have thought someone either is or they aren't. But no matter. If you are being misrepresented it may because you allege racism at every possible opportunity, and what we have here is akin to Al Capone getting banged up for tax evasion. Maybe your addiction to American muddled add ons to alleged definitions adopted by self appointed agenda driven coalitions causes you to behave like this. Who can say for sure.


Advis3r

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 13:25

Rate this:

1 point

In answer to you Millis: British Muslim doctor of Pakistani heritage, Qanta Ahmed
wrote:

This is a bastardization of humanity and morality. Who are we to judge the Israelis and their policies, when the wider Muslim world tolerates a total departure of the most basic Islamic values: living a meaningful life in this world, sanctity of life above all other rights, subscription to ideologies meaningfully exchanged through suicide bombing into spiritual and material currency, fundamentally abandoning the protection and nurturing of society's weakest: the child. Conveniently, for our collective moral Muslim superiority, our moral compass is off line when considering ourselves. We do not reflect. We lack introspection. Indeed our own, increasingly grotesque reflection is too awful for ourselves to behold, because within it we recognize our complicity in immorality....
When will we understand that Israel's security problem is everyone's security problem, that a threatened Jew is a threatened Muslim, that suicide bombers can come to a neighborhood near you, that there is no morality in the destruction of life and that these problems are so big they require all of us to engage together and collaborate, not polarize around primal tropisms and alienate? When will that be? When?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/qanta-ahmed/israel-and-the-flotilla-o_b_61...
I am not holding Israel to another standard but pointing out that you cannot apply as Ward does higher standards to Jews because the Jews went through the Holocaust and should know what suffering means. But Ward seems not accept that unlike Israel's current position the Nazis never faced Jewish terrorism on every border. The Jews never pointed 30000 rockets at Germany on its northern border or shot thousands of rockets at its citizens and no maniacal Jewish terrorist leader hoped that one day all Germans would move to Germany so that it will be easier to wipe them all out. The Holocaust was therefore awful but the Jews should not act like the Germans and by saying that he completely disregards the realities of the Jews' situation in WW2 as compared to their present situation in the Middle East.


joemillis1959

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 13:32

Rate this:

-1 points

Sorry, Norman, but while I appreciate what you write, from my perspective it still seems as though you are holding israel to a different standard because of circumstance. Either countries, especially functioning democracies, are held to the same standard as Israel - the main message of the non-working definition - or they are not. Emotions and circumstances have no role to play as part of such a dispassionate and nebulous declaration


happygoldfish

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 13:56

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: … you allege racism at every possible opportunity …

again, you're lying

(this time without even an attempt to substantiate it)

Rich Armbach: hmm … even further than your previous accusation …

The first " accusation " you say is very close to racism and immediately say that the second accusation goes even further ( presumably along the road to racism.) …

you've deliberately quoted extensively from my post, but dishonestly stopped immediately before the third goldstein quote, which i was expressly referring to …

happygoldfish:

hmm … even further than your previous accusation …

Rabbi Aaron Goldstein: … in dealing with other Faiths, those bodies that represent the Jewish Community, the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council, respond to issues by shouting accusations.

i was saying that the second accusation goes even further than the third accusation (btw, both obviously on a different subject from the first), as you well knew when you deliberately left the third accusation out

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS