Google+ Followers

Wednesday, 16 June 2010

The Fascist EDL Attacks Birmingham Palestine Solidarity Campaign Stall

Birds of a feather flock together I was taught and school. And we are having a good demonstration of this with the link-up between Zionist activists and the English Defence League.

Two weeks ago the EDL joined the Zionist Federation at a joint demonstration outside the Israeli Embassy in support of Israel’s murderous attack on the convoy of aid ships to Gaza and the Mavi Mamara.

Last weekend the fascist English Defence League attacked the stall of Birmingham Palestine Solidarity Campaign. The statement they issued described what happened thus:
15 EDL members attacked a Palestine Solidarity Campaign stall and peace vigil in solidarity with Palestine. The peace demonstration was made up of people of all backgrounds representing Birmingham's Diversity. It followed the Israeli attack and murder of peace activists on a convoy to Gaza. The EDL chanted racist and islamophobic abuse and attacked one of the stalls, physically assaulted protesters and threatened further violence. The Palestine demonstrators held their ground and forced the police to finally remove the EDL. The peace demonstration continued for another 45 minutes afterwards growing to 100 people having drawn the support of the wider public. The message is clear the EDL will not be divide or intimidate us in our city and Nazis are not welcome here.
According to the Jewish Chronicle, the Jewish EDL ‘has signed up hundreds of followers on Facebook since the launch last week. Supporters include an ex-Community Security Trust volunteer who claims "a lot of Jewish guys want to get stuck in". The ex-steward in question is a Mark Israel and he is recruiting apparently among his old mates in the CST!

And it is no surprise that activists in the CST, which has acted as the Zionist heavy squad against anti-Zionists in recent years, are now attracted to the open fascist of the EDL rather than the mealy mouthed racism of Mark Gardener and co.

To be sure, and I want to be fair to the Zionist, they ensured that there was a section reserved for EDL members. The only problem was that the EDL and the Zionists joined hands together and the EDL space was empty. And squirm as they might, the Zionists can’t avoid the fact that there is a Jewish English Defence League

To see more commentary on the Zionist-EDL link up see
‘Shema Israel!’: The EDL Jewish Division

and Jewish leaders condemn the English Defence League

Mark Gardner, the CST communications director, said:
“The EDL intimidate entire Muslim communities, causing tension and fear. Jews ought to remember that we have long experience of being on the receiving end of this kind of bigotry.”
Gardener is of course quite right, but who has been demonising the Muslim community if not the Israeli government and their British supporters? The CST is prime amongst the groups that have defamed Muslims and Arabs. Indeed it is the hatred from Zionists and their American backers that has enabled the EDL and like-minded groups to triumph in Europe, notably Gert Wilders ‘Freedom’ Party in the Netherlands as they clambered on board the anti-Muslim/Arab bandwagon.

And if a prize for vacuous idiocy was to be awarded it has to go to Jon Benjamin Board of Deputies chief executive, who said: “The EDL’s supposed ’support’ for Israel is empty and duplicitous. It is built on a foundation of Islamophobia and hatred which we reject entirely. “Sadly, we know only too well what hatred for hatred’s sake can cause. The overwhelming majority will not be drawn in by this transparent attempt to manipulate a tense political conflict.”

If the EDL’s support for Israel is ‘duplicitous and empty’ what then of his own? Israel has attracted support from fascists throughout Europe precisely because of its attacks on and hatred of Muslims. As I write the Israeli state is demonising the Turkish charity IHH which helped organise the Gaza Freedom Flotilla and is trying to have it banned as a terrorist organisation! They do this to justify their singling out and murder of 9 Turkish activists and aid workers. Of course it is true, as Benjamin says, that Jews know only too well where this type of racism leads but even his empty head might ask a simple question – why do the EDL and the British National Party support the Zionists?

But as we know, empty vessells make the loudest noise.

Perhaps the answer to Benjamin's statement about the emptiness of the EDL's support for Israel are marches by government supporters in Israel calling for ‘Death to the Arabs’ or laws in Israel. Laws which explicitly discriminate against non-Jews i.e. Arabs and organisations which do so too (Jewish National Fund, Histadrut etc.). Or maybe it was the tenacious defence that the Jewish National Fund, a body that owns and controls 93% of Israeli land, put up when an Arab, Adil Kadan wanted to rent a house in a community. Only for sale to Jews he was told. Ah this is the stuff of racist dreams in Britain but is a living reality in Israel and these buffoons wonder why the EDL is pro-Zionist!

Perhaps the worries over the ‘demographic threat’ of Arabs in Israel plays a part and possibly they admire Judaification in Israel and only wish they could have a little de-Islamicisation in Britain (as they had deJewification in Nazi Germany).

And what is the result of this? The attack of the fascist EDL on a Birmingham stall on Saturday. What is important is that anti-fascists and anti-racists recognise now that the EDL and similar fascist groups see Palestinian solidarity in much the same way as the fascists saw Irish solidarity in the 1970’s and 1980’s. It is time for the left to wake up and ensure that the fascists – be they draped in the flag of St. George or the pirates flag of Israel are defeated.

Tony Greenstein

59 comments:

Eleanor said...

The Fascist EDL of which many Jews are active participants!

Following Article by Marcus Dysch:

"The English Defence League, the extreme right-wing anti-Islamic-fundamentalism group, has launched a "Jewish division", encouraging members of the community to "lead the counter-Jihad fight in England".

It has signed up HUNDREDS of followers on Facebook since the launch last week. Supporters include an ex-Community Security Trust volunteer who claims "a lot of Jewish guys want to get stuck in".
One follower wrote on Facebook "we are all Shayetet 13", in support of the IDF naval special forces unit involved in the Gaza flotilla incident.

The former CST member, Mark Israel, claimed Jews should back the EDL as an alternative to existing community groups.
He said: "I've been involved with groups like CST and the 62 Group for 40 years.

"At first I thought the EDL was an off-shoot of the BNP but I have been investigating them. They are very pro-active, unlike the Board of Deputies. They are our allies. We have a common cause. These guys want to have dialogue with the Jewish community.
"I know a lot of Jewish guys who want to get stuck in and want to support a physical presence. It is not your typical thing people want to be associated with, but in this day and age we need something like this. Is the CST enough?"

The EDL mission statement says the new division is for "Jewish supporters of the EDL, and supporters of Jewish people everywhere. We are non-racist/fascist and anyone is welcome if they want to live under English values and fully integrate into our way of life".

Also see the following website link:
http://www.demotix.com/news/346651/zionists-support-flotilla-attack

Jews are actively engaged in the EDL. Please do not assert otherwise.

Tony Greenstein said...

Eleanor writes that '
Jews are actively engaged in the EDL. Please do not assert otherwise.' I haven't asserted anything about Jews. In fact what I have done is to write an article which specifically states that Zionists, who are Jews in this case, are joining & supporting the EDL and as I also pointed out, a Jewish i.e. Jewish Zionist division of the EDL has been set up.

Much of what you therefore write Eleanor, is what I also wrote for the blog but I detect from what you write that you don't differentiate between Jews and Zionists. Therein lies your mistake. Zionists are, by definition, racists and that includes non-Jewish Zionists.

Clearly being a racist and defending racism means you aren't that far away from fascist groups like the EDL.

joe90 kane said...

I don't suppose there would be any point trying to explain to the EDL/BNP that Palestinians are probably the oldest continuous extant Christian congragation in the world - with an unbroken continuity right back to the Christian Messiah.

Unfortunately, zionism and its supporters have done their best to ethnically cleanse these Palestine Christian communities.

I gather 90% of Palestine Christians have been driven from their own lands by zionists.

Te vast majority of zionists in the world, it needs saying, aren't Jewish - they include such Christian believers as Scottish Presbyterian Gordon Brown, Scottish Roman Catholic Tony Blair and millions of fundamentalist American Christian zionists.

The threat to Christians in The Holy Lands comes from western supporters of zionism such as the EDL/BNP - not native Islam and Muslims.

How ironic.

all the best TGB.

Tony Greenstein said...

No Joe, I don't think it would be worth explaining anything to the EDL numb skulls. In any case their concern is racial not religious. I doubt if most of them could tell the difference between a mosque, church and synagogue.

Hitler was happy to exterminate Christian Jews (Jews who had converted) as well as fully Jews. That most of them in Germany weren't murdered was because of the resistance to this e .g. the episode at Rosenstrasse which I've covered elsewhere on this blog I think.

joe90 kane said...

I doubt if most of them could tell the difference between a mosque, church and synagogue.
- Like most nazi-types, they know what a beer-keller and a pub looks like though.


Hitler was happy to exterminate Christian Jews (Jews who had converted) as well as fully Jews.
- The irony being that racist Nazism based their definitions on who counted as a Jew on religion not race. After all, they had to use some sort of criteria other than race as no such thing in reality exists.

Reading Victor Klemperer's diaries the cumulative effect of the nazi abuse he records, makes the reader assume unwittingly, and despite all they know about him, that he is Jewish - but it still comes as a bit of a shock reading the diary entry where a wee nazi nerd asks Viktor his religion and he replies "Protestant".

Tony Greenstein said...

I was unhappy about Eleanor's comments, because they had a whiff of anti-Semitism about them.

However she sent me an e-mail which is clearly and explicitly anti-semitic. Quoting at length from the Talmud, a book she's probably never actually read and whose context she doesn't therefore understand, she finished with this little gem:

'This is why I am extremely suspicious of people like you - so-called Marxist Jews. Jews are fundamentally incapable (I have noticed over the years) of accepting their flaws. You simply deny that you have any shortcomings, or seek justification for your any misdeeds. There are very few Jews who will admit that the contents of the Talmud are appalling. You are no different to the multiplicity of other Jews I have encountered who failt to speak out against the Tribe.'

It was from an e-mail account 'judenfreizone@googlemail.com' i.e. the Nazi term, Jew-free. The fact that Arabrein (Arab-free) is the policy of the Israeli government in respect of how they would like Israel to be constituted is not an excuse.

Her own blog makes it clear what her politics are.

However Eleanor is a product of and a reaction to Zionist racism. After some thought I've left her post up as it isn't anti-Semitic in itself and contains useful information and also provides a link to the woman herself.

bob said...

Tony, I missed this post until now, but it strikes me as dodgy in a number of ways.

(1) "Two weeks ago the EDL joined the Zionist Federation at a joint demonstration outside the Israeli Embassy in support of Israel’s murderous attack on the convoy of aid ships to Gaza and the Mavi Mamara."

You know that is not true. It was not a joint demonstration. There were between a couple and a dozen EDL people at the demo, and they were kept away from the main demo. It was not a "joint demonstration" any more than the EDL and the Whitechapel Anarchist Group in Tower Hamlets put on a "joint demonstration".

2. "The ex-steward in question is a Mark Israel and he is recruiting apparently among his old mates in the CST!" Do you have any evidence whatsoever that anyone connected to the CST has any connection to the EDL apart from Mark Israel, a single former CST volunteer? Up the road from me is someone who stood for the Green party a couple of elections ago whose name was on the BNP membership list, and ditto an old Labour Briefing activist in Devon - does that mean Labour Briefing and the Green Party are tarnished with the same brush?

3. "And squirm as they might, the Zionists can’t avoid the fact that there is a Jewish English Defence League." The Jewish Division of the EDL exists in no form other than a Facebook page. The only active posters, as far as I can see, are either non-Jews, or Americans or Israelis who, while right-wing, are probably in many cases completely ignorant of the fascist links of the EDL.

In short, you are making a connection where there is none, and an issue where there is none. There is almost no Jewish support for the EDL, and the EDL's apparent Zionism is skin-deep.

The Irish comparison is interesting to think about, but ultimately doesn't work. British fascism has long had links with Loyalism - and this makes complete sense, as both of them are essentially forms of British nationalism.

The EDL also have Loyalist links, but more than anything else they are motivated by Islamophobia. Their support for Israel is about winding up Muslims, their hatred for Palestinians part of their hatred of Islam.

bob said...

Just read Eleanor's racist comments and Tony's very sensible replies. This, however, is exactly why such caution is needed with this story. There is nothing in Peter Marshall's photos on Demotix that might be construed as showing that "many Jews are active participants" in the EDL or that "Jews are actively engaged in the EDL" - unless you look at them through sick antisemitic eyes. But exaggerating the more or less non-existent connection between the EDL and the CST feeds this fantasy.

Tony Greenstein said...

Bob, I was at the demonstration at the Israeli embassy and I took a close look at the pro-Israeli demonstration and it seemed pretty clear, not only to me but other experienced anti-fascists present that the demonstration included both naive Jewish kids waving stupid banners ('Peace activists don't carry weapons' - presumably the fact that Israeli hasbara accused them of this is therefore fact), various Zionist activists and a quite separate and discernible group of EDL.

It's clear to me that CST is having a problem living with its contradictions. It has never been part of the anti-fascist movement because it has one purpose - defence of Zionist meetings dressed up as Jewish meetings. In so doing it blatantly lies and when it lies about the fact that it targets anti-Zionists for removal from meetings, thereby equating anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism, denies factual situations such as its assault on 2 such people at the Bellamy meeting that never was, etc. then I am not incline to trust it the CST over anything it says.

There have been a number of instances where the CST has been involved in not so much stewarding as corralling and marshalling Zionist demonstrations, such as the The Skies are Weeping concert for Rachel Corrie, where the hard core the CST was working with were open racists. I had one activist who went over to talk to the Zionist demonstrators who was quite shocked at their blatant racism and talk of 'pakis', so the EDL thing has long been coming.

Both the Zionist Federation and EDL called for support for the demonstration in favour of the murder of the Mavi Marmara activists and the CST cannot now try to evade the consequences of this.

The Jewish EDL may indeed just be a facebook page, as is the one signed by thousands calling for the execution of Arab MK Haneen Zoabi, but EDL has organised primarily via facebook.

I haven't looked at Pete Marshall's photos but I think I take the gist of your comments without disagreement.

Tony Greenstein said...

The Loyalist Ulster connection is a different matter. Loyalism was and is the last real bastion of old British imperialist sentiment and organisation. It is natural that fascists of whatever hue join arms with them. The problem in the past has been that the Loyalists have been pro-Zionist/Israeli whereas on paper the British fascists were anti-Israeli/anti-Zionist. Of course this wasn't true, they were anti-Semitic and many harboured a secret support for Zionism which they couldn't openly proclaim for fear of being seen as 'soft' on the Jews.

That is no longer the case. One of Griffin's achievements has been to drag the BNP into something resembling the 21st century. Opposition to Israel made no sense when the main basis around which they were organising was anti-Muslim. Being anti-Jewish is not a great crowd puller in this country anymore. But where is the logic in being anti-Muslim and pro-Palestinians? Especially when Israel is doing to Muslims what the BNP can only have wet dreams about? Witness the comments of one of these creatures, Lee Barnes, their legal officer, who positively gloated about Israel's bombing of West Beirut and the large pools of greasy Arabs this had left. Disgusting racism now completely transferred to Arabs.

So is the EDL being opportunistic and transparent in its support of Israel? I don't think so at all. On the contrary it is not before time. They have fallen into line both with the BNP and nearly all Europe's fascist and semi-fascist parties. The Latvian Freedom & Fatherland Party which commemorates annually the Latvian Waffen SS is vehemently pro-Zionist as are the Tories friends in Poland, viz. Michal Kaminiski of the Freedom & Justice Party, whose history includes opposing any form of State apology for the massacre of Jews by Poles at Jewabdane.

Indeed over the years I have become used to a familiar argument used to defend anti-Semites from such a charge. 'But they can't be, they are strong supporters of Israel'. Which is precisely the point I'm making! See my article http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2009/11/israels-anti-semitic-friends.html

bob said...

It is true that the CST performs a complex dance in relation to Zionism, and that it has stewarded events which I find politically repugnant. And I am not in any way a supporter of the Zionist Federation. But I still think that the way you are presenting the Israeli embassy demo is fundamentally inaccurate, and this matters because of people like Eleanor.

This is the nub: "Both the Zionist Federation and EDL called for support for the demonstration in favour of the murder of the Mavi Marmara activists and the CST cannot now try to evade the consequences of this." No, the ZF called a demonstration, and the EDL said to support that, and claimed (apparently falsely) that the ZF was happy with this. The ZF disassociated itself from the EDL and made them stand separately. You are massively exaggerating the connection.

"I took a close look at the pro-Israeli demonstration and it seemed pretty clear, not only to me but other experienced anti-fascists present that the demonstration included both naive Jewish kids waving stupid banners[...], various Zionist activists and a quite separate and discernible group of EDL." Well, maybe. You were there and I wasn't. But having pored through the pics on the web, I can see no-one with any EDL insignia, and your own photos aren't very informative. I've read descriptions that talk of a dozen or so, and others that talk of one or two. In any case, if the EDL contingent was indeed separate and clearly discernible, that sort of proves my point: that they are a totally different kettle of fish.

Got to go to work, will try and squeeze another point in before I rush!

bob said...

I agree with you about the dodgy Euro-nationalist parties that pose as friends of Israel - a point I made repeatedly at the time. (In fact, the position taken by Zionists like Louise Ellman as well as by Engage was not so different.)

The EDL occupy a slightly different space from these groups. Freedom & Fatherland and Law & Justice are ex-fascist parties, whereas the EDL is certainly far right, but does not come out of the same background. The BNP are also in a slightly different space. They are not so much ex-fascists as re-branded fascists.

This is the key quote from Griffin: ""It stands to reason that adopting an 'Islamophobic' position that appeals to large numbers of ordinary people - including un-nudged journalists - is going to produce on average much better media coverage than siding with Iran and banging on about 'Jewish power', which is guaranteed to raise hackles of virtually every single journalist in the western world."

In other words, this is cynical and skin deep. We shouldn't take his word for it.

Tony Greenstein said...

I think we have significant differences. CST doesn't perform a 'complex dance' in relation to Zionism. If anything it occupies a position as the enforcer of Zionist meetings and demonstrations in Britain. It is wholly pro-Zionist, as is mark Gardener who cannot differentiate between Jew and Zionist. Many of its personnel were ex-IDF.

I don't accept that my reporting is fundamentally inaccurate and even were it so, which I don't accept, this has nothing to do with Eleanor.

Eleanor, whoever she is, has no status whatsoever in the wider Palestine solidarity movement and if she surfaced she would be expelled from any bona fide organisation.

But I'm more interested in why someone like Eleanor has become such a bitter and twisted individual that she has absorbed an anti-Semitic agenda and attitude. The answer is clear to me and in this sense it differs from the traditional anti-Semitic route of fascism.

She doesn't like anti-Islamic racism but she also attributes it to Jews. Unfortunately she, like Gilad Atzmon and one or two others accept the Zionist canard that all Jews are Zionists (except for the few 'self haters'!). In so far as they do they adopt Zionist positions and Atzmon is clear that he considers Zionists honest on this score where people like myself are dishonest Marxist tribalists etc.

So having accepted that it is Jews, not Zionism, that is responsible for the plight of the Palestinians she then blames Jews for Zionism. It is the complete opposite of an anti-Zionist position, is of no help to the Palestinians but flows from the Zionist portrayal of their role as a 'national' movement.

I don't see why it is incorrect to say that the EDL called for support for the Zionist Federation demonstration. This was a demonstration in favour of the murder of the human rights and aid activists.

I honestly don't think you understand the shock that has been felt throughout the PS movement. All of us know people who were on these ships. We happen to know that they are not bloodthirsty people looking for a lynching. It is clear from the fact that they treated the Israeli injured, who had as Kenneth O'Keefe points out already murdered 2 of their brothers for their wounds.

At least 3 of those killed bled to death as they were callously left untended on the decking. It is so obvious what happened, a deliberate decision by Netanyahu and some ministers to go in hard and teach the activists a lesson.

To the EDL these were Muslim loving, leftist scum and of course they applaud what Israel does. Likewise the BNP. That is the basis of the political alliance between Zionism and the EDL. No of course it is not consummated formally because the EDL is not a respectable organisation with a mass following.

However the lesson of Germany and Italy still holds. If the EDL and BNP were to gain a mass base then the ZF would be falling over themselves to shake their hands. Just as the German ZF (ZVfBD) took the initiative in establishing relations with the Nazi government. (see Edwin Black's book on Ha'avara for the details).

You said if the EDL and Zionist contingents were separate it proves your point. I'm not sure it does at all. It merely says that because of diplomacy they had to be seen apart, at least physically.

But in fact you are wrong. The space the police created for the EDL was unoccupied. The EDL were mixing with the Zionist contingent but not displaying their own symbols etc.

But in the attack on Birmingham PSC stall, which suggests some measure of enthusiasm for Israel & Zionism, they indeed showed their mettle, replete with Hitler salutes.

Tony Greenstein said...

I am not sure about the 'dodgy' Euro nationalist parties that 'pose as friends of Israel'. Certainly Israeli politicians and diplomats, like Ron Prosser, don't see it as posing. These people go to Israel where they are welcomed. The point is that you can still detest Jews in Europe but love Israel. After all Zionism did just that.

I don't know your politics but you should be aware of the 'negation of the diaspora' which is one of the most important components of Zionist ideology. Basically it means that the diaspora is as nothing. It has contributed nothing towards Jewish national history which can only take place in the holy land. It ends up with the same detestation of Jews as the fascists and if I read you some statements without revealing the author you'd be hard put to it to work out who was a fascist and who was a Zionist.

I don't know what Engage or Louise Ellman says but Engage are an extremely dishonest group which makes no real attempt, despite its pretensions at being leftist, to even begin to come to grips with the horrors that are now unfolding in Israel. It does this by ignoring the loyalty oaths, the overt hatred not only of arabs but a willingness to dispense with even the most marginal political rights they enjoy now.

I don't accept that the Polish L&J and Latvian F&F parties are 'ex-fascists'. It would take too long to explain why fascism as such is no longer an option in Europe but it would take a lot for the European bourgeoisie to move to supporting an openly fascist position. The lesson drawn from the Hitler period is not a positive one for them (even Thyssen ended up in a concentration camp).

What we are seeing is a situation where the bourgeois parties are happy to use the growth of semi-fascist and openly racist parties as a means of intimidating and battering the opposition. Italy is an obvious example with the Northern Leagues and The Netherlands is becoming another example.

The EDL is not a coherent organisation. That much is clear but its sympathies are certainly fascist. The BNP is and has been doing its best to junk nazism, I don't believe it is just a facade as the NF's was in the 1970's.

I therefore don't accept your take on Griffin's quote

‘When the overwhelming majority of the instinctively patriotic people of our nations feel threatened by an alien force which is self-evidently evil by Christian and democratic secular values alike, to place oneself in the position whereby our political opponents can portray you as an enemy sympathiser, a collaborator, a traitor, is political suicide.’
http://www.bnp.org.uk/2007/11/10/by-their-fruits-or-lack-of-them-shall-you-know-them

Griffin's position certainly isn't skin deep and I think you know it. The main basis of the BNP's politicl raison d'etre today is anti-Islamic racism. It feeds off western 'anti-terrorism' and state racism. What Griffin is doing is pointing out that to adopt the position that John Tyndall held, a pro-Nazi one was absurd and counter-productive as it would alienate the BNP's potential audience who hated Muslims above all.

Griffin and his aides have done their best to knock some sense into the numbskulls, and with some success too. British fascism's love affair with Nazism was always the exception in western europe. It makes sense therefore for it to be realigned when the overwhelming preponderance of far-right and not-so far right racism is anti-Islamic.

Tony Greenstein said...

Griffin is therefore merely speaking to his cadre in the language they best understand.

I don't take his word for it but I recognise that it makes sense for Griffin to adopt the positions he does. Racism may be irrational, but the choice of targets for racists is anything but irrational. Why, because of the legacy of European feudalism, which is what the Nazis fed off, should the BNP continue to plough this lonely furrow?

That is why Kaminiski and all the rest of them, who are anti-Semitic are also pro-Israeli. This is a long-standng phenomenon.

Bob said...

First, an afterthought on Loyalism. It seems to me that, although there are also ideological affinities between Loyalism and certain types of Zionism, Loyalism’s support for Israel was more closely related to the binary logic of sectarianism, and was a response to the Republican movement’s association with the PLO and other “national liberation” movements. Sectarianism’s binary logic is very much a part of the EDL worldview too.

On Eleanor, I know that she has nothing to do with the Palestinian solidarity movement, and am not trying to suggest that you are in some way responsible for her twisted thinking. I am also well aware of your consistent and admirable work challenging Gilad Atzmon and his supporters, although they continue to have a status in the wider Palestinian solidarity movement. What I am concerned about here is taking responsibility for the way we talk about incidents so as not to fuel the Eleanor/Atzmon worldview.

That is why I don’t want to argue with you about the flotilla in general, the Mavi Marmara in particular, or even the role of the CST (although that last is relevant).

I am not saying it is incorrect to say that the EDL called for support for the ZF demonstration. That is 100% correct. What is completely incorrect is to call it a “joint demonstration“. Eleanor’s intervention shows why it is important to correct this inaccuracy.

It is also inaccurate to talk about a “political alliance”, even an unconsummated one. To talk about a political alliance between the ZF (or, worse, “Zionism” in general) and the EDL and the BNP is as ridiculous as the notion of a “Red/Green alliance” from the right-wingers who claim that socialism and Islamism are in some sort of coalition because of a congruence between some of their views. For instance, on 20 June, a number of kids with UAF placards joined the Al-Mujiharoun pro-Sharia demonstration in Whitehall. Dos that mean this was a “joint demonstation” of the SWP and Al-Mujiharoun, or evidence of a “political alliance” between them (as the EDL suggest)? Of course not. But what you are proposing is just as ridiculous.

Back to the Israel embassy demo. You are saying that they mingled with the ZF people, not displaying their own symbols, yet they were also “a quite separate and discernible group”. I am interested in how they were so discernable, how you identified them as EDL, how you expected the ZF organisers or CST stewards to so identify them, and what you did to inform the CST stewards about them.

As for the attack on the stall in Brum. I don’t think we can say it suggests a measure of enthusiasm for Israel & Zionism, but simply a hatred of “commies”, Muslims and Arabs.

Bob said...

Finally on the BNP. I disagree, and all I can really do is repeat what I’ve already said about this, on the other comment thread, which is this.

After WWII, political antisemitism shifted from a fairly mainstream political position to an underground, marginal tradition. In Britain, antisemitism remained at the core of fascist ideological thinking, but was increasingly played down in public expressions of the far right. As a mass non-white presence in Britain grew from 1948, the far right increasingly tapped into growing racism against black Britons, and after the 1970s they increasingly tapped into the new forms of cultural racism against especially Asian Britons. This did not mean that the National Front or later BNP leadership actually hated Asians more than they hated Jews; they knew they could get more political mileage out of being seen as anti-Asian than as anti-Jewish.

The BNP in the current period has sought to feed on (and stoke up) anti-Muslim racism, just as the NF fed on (and stoked up) anti-black racism. For this reason, the BNP has publicly made some pro-Israel statements but the BNP leadership continues to hold steady to its old-fashioned Jew-hatred. I don’t think the BNP has ever said anything positive about ZIONISM. On the contrary, the BNP continues to use “Zionism” as a hate term; what the BNP thinks about Jews is clear from what it says about “Zionists”. In this sense, the BNP has been nourished by the anti-Zionist movement, and has adopted a number of its key phrases and arguments.

“What is different about this moment than earlier 20th century moments is that anti-Muslim racism by itself is now able to mobilise politically on a very large scale in a way that no other racism did before; the organised fascists are now completely marginalised vis a vis the EDL. Contrast this, say, to 1968, when thousands of dockers marched for Enoch Powell, but there was no organisational structure for them. In the absence of such, the NF were able to build on Powell’s momentum in their recruitment. If Powell had launched an independent national movement then, the NF would have had no space to grow. (Although the political leaders who articulated Powellite racism, such as those in the Freedom Association and Monday Club, were separated from the mass followers by a class divide that would have made such an organisation very unstable.) And, in fact, when Powell’s less extreme protégé Margaret Thatcher became prime minister in 1979, the NF’s space of recruitment shrunk considerably.”

I strongly recommend reading Mick Billig’s book about the National Front, where he talks about the difference between the “exoteric” and “esoteric” content of NF propaganda, which I think is just as relevant to the BNP today.

Bob said...

On the L&J/F&F issue. I agree that Zionist conservatives and Israeli diplomats were happy to accept their “friendship”. The point I was making about Louise Ellman and co is that this was hotly contested in the Zionist movement. The weight of opinion in the Jewish Chronicle for example was against L&j//F&F and I’d have to check but I’m fairly sure both Searchlight and the CST have been highly critical of them. That is, the generalisations you make about “Zionism” are over-generalisations. Just as left Zionists were involved in anti-Nazi activities while the ZVfBD was negotiating with the Nazis, Zionism is not a single homogeneous thing in the way you say.

Even the doctrine of the negation of the diaspora, which was of course part of mainstream Zionist orthodoxy for a particular period, is not a necessary feature of Zionism in general – it was not accepted by key Zionist thinkers like Nachman Syrkin or Israel Zangwill, it was rejected by the left Poale Zion, and in fact was formally abandoned by the mainstream of Zionism in 1997 when the 33rd Zionist Congress agreed the Brit Am declaration. For most British Jews, who are Zionist to the extent that they support the state of Israel, the idea of the negation of the diaspora is totally alien to their views; it is now just the province of a small number of people in the ZF.

Tony Greenstein said...

I'll comment on Bob's posts when I have time. At the moment we are waiting the verdicts in the EDO-MBM case in Brighton which are due anytime

Tony Greenstein said...

I’m not sure what the ‘binary logic’ of sectarianism is. The reason Loyalism like the Apartheid movement in South Africa was supportive of Zionism and Israel (Jan Smuts, John Vorster etc.) was because they were all settler colonial movements in antagonism with the indigenous population. Sectarianism is really another word for racism based on religion.

Atzmon and co. have very little support in the Palestine solidarity movement, certainly among those who count. There are a certain few backward elements who can’t make the distinctions between Zionism and Jews, of which Eleanor is clearly one. The problem with Atzmon is that his prose is so dense, purposely, that most people find it difficult to work out what he is actually saying. But it’s more his reputation as a jazz player than an original thinker that he attracts attention and support coupled with the fact that people see him as an ex-Israeli and Jewish, which he isn’t.

Well a joint demonstration is where more than one group organise for it, whether it is unofficially or otherwise. Clearly EDL or elements within did mobilise for the Embassy demo.

I think that where you have two groups – EDL and ZF - arguing much the same thing and with one of them, EDL, attending the demonstrations of the latter – then it is clear that there is an alliance politically and ideologically. If this were not so then how to explain, according to the report in the Jewish Chronicle of 3rd/4th June that ‘hundreds’ of people have joined the Jewish EDL facebook group.



Bob said...
First, an afterthought on Loyalism. It seems to me that, although there are also ideological affinities between Loyalism and certain types of Zionism, Loyalism’s support for Israel was more closely related to the binary logic of sectarianism, and was a response to the Republican movement’s association with the PLO and other “national liberation” movements. Sectarianism’s binary logic is very much a part of the EDL worldview too.

On Eleanor, I know that she has nothing to do with the Palestinian solidarity movement, and am not trying to suggest that you are in some way responsible for her twisted thinking. I am also well aware of your consistent and admirable work challenging Gilad Atzmon and his supporters, although they continue to have a status in the wider Palestinian solidarity movement. What I am concerned about here is taking responsibility for the way we talk about incidents so as not to fuel the Eleanor/Atzmon worldview.

That is why I don’t want to argue with you about the flotilla in general, the Mavi Marmara in particular, or even the role of the CST (although that last is relevant).

I am not saying it is incorrect to say that the EDL called for support for the ZF demonstration. That is 100% correct. What is completely incorrect is to call it a “joint demonstration“. Eleanor’s intervention shows why it is important to correct this inaccuracy.

Tony Greenstein said...

If SWP members and Al-Mujiharoun attended the same demonstration then that certainly testifies to the political stupidity of the former. However i’m not basing allegations of a de facto political alliance on merely attendance at a demonstration, important though that is, but the consistent political support EDL is giving to Zionism as evidenced by their flying the Zionist flag at their demonstrations and now attacks on Palestine stalls.
Re the demo I’m giving you my impressions, nothing more, of having witnessed the Zionist demonstration. Fascists don’t have to wear separate insignia to be identifiable, though that helps. It certainly wasn’t for me to inform the CST stewards about who was attending a Zionist demonstration, after all as far as I was concerned it was a case of birds of a feather!
My conclusion is that an attack on a Palestinian stall does indeed indicate an enthusiasm for Israel and Zionism. This enthusiasm and support is wide across the whole right and far-right spectrum. You say it’s merely dislike of ‘commies’. Well I’m glad that the fascists see us as left-wingers of whatever description and likewise don’t see the Zionists as being such, despite the pretensions of a few.
The CST and Searchlight are somewhat different animals. The CST is a vehemently anti-left and anti-socialist organisation which is a paid up supporter of the Zionist movement. Look at who backs it and the only figure identifiable from their accounts. Gerald Ronson of the Heron Group which was, and may still be, the largest private company in Britain. Ronson himself has always identified with the right, Herut/Likud, of the Zionist movement. The CST’s whole ‘strategy’ for dealing with ‘anti-Semitism’ is to work with the Police and State, the main agency of racism in this country.
Searchlight plays its cards close to its chest. It is without doubt extremely pro-Zionist and became so under Gerry Gable, whereas his predecessor Maurice Ludman was opposed to the raising of the question of Zionist or Palestine within the anti-fascist movement as it would be divisive. A point I agree with.
Louise Ellman whose constituency I once resided in, is a Labour Zionist. It is a dying breed and she carries little weight inside the Zionist movement in so far as she has much to say that is distinctive. Certainly most of the ZF would be opposed to joint work with the EDL, given their bourgeois politics, but I somehow doubt that they are opposed to EDL attacks on pro-Palestinian groups.
It is a long argument as to whether Zionism is a homogenous movement. Certainly in Israel its differences have only ever been tactical. From Mapam to Herut the most important thing was the achievement of and maintenance of a Jewish majority state. Mapam has of course paid the price for this agreement over aims, even where they disagreed tactically. From being the 2nd strongest Zionist party in the 1949 Knesset elections it has now all but disappeared.
Outside Israel/Palestine it was different. When there was a genuine mass Jewish working-class then Labour Zionism was forever swinging between Zionism and nationalism on the one hand and socialism and fighting anti-Semitism on the other. The World Union of PZ was always more left-wing and radical than its Palestinian counterpart, as you will read in Shabbtai Teveth’s biography of Ben Gurion. Left-PZ in Poland effectively abandoned Zionism in any event as the struggle against anti-Semitism increased and the Zionist strategy under Yitzhak Greenbaum was seen as an abject failure. It is no surprise that Left PZ rejected the negation of the diaspora because they saw their fate as being bound up with the Polish Jews.

Tony Greenstein said...

But the negation of the diaspora was integral to Zionist ideologically and politically. Jewish statehood was everything, the galut was ‘accursed’. Why else uproot oneself and go live in Palestine? Because diaspora life was unfitting and produced ‘abnormal’ ‘disfigured’ etc. Jews. This was why Zionist speakers could often be mistaken for anti-semites. It is well documented that anti-Semitic speakers – Fritsch, Rosenberg, Class to name but a few quoted from Zionist sources to bolster their own anti-Semitic credentials. ‘Look, even the Jews agree that they are a hideous parasitic formation’ And this was true. The whole concept of the inverted pyramid of Borochov was based on the idea that Jews were abnormal in their social structure. It was also wrong since in the Pale of Settlement the vast majority of Jews relied only on their labour power. Zionism started from the basis that Jews did not belong in any country other than Palestine. Negation of the diaspora was common to both left and right, indeed probably more left than right, Zionist. People like A B Yehoshua today. This is also what took even the most leftist Zionist out of the class struggle. Why fight to change a society one is not part of?
And so it continues apace. Time was when left Zionists used to promise that once t hey achieved their state they would immediately fight the class war. Until then... Problem was that, in the words of Judah Magnes, the will to good had long atrophied. If you collaborated with other classes to obtain a settler state then you were going to continue the collaboration to maintain it.
Re British fascists. The anti-Semitism effectively derived from the tradition of Arthur Leese and his Imperial British League as passed on by Colin Jordan and Tyndall. Moseley made an attempt to clean up his act and reorientate British fascism towards European unity but he failed and went into exile. Yes anti-Semitism formed the core of their conspiracy theory but like all clashes between ideology and material circumstances the latte prevails but not instantaneously.
Even at the height of the NF there were very few anti-Jewish actions or mobilisations because anti-Semitism simply didn’t have any social weight in this country. Not that it ever had a great deal. It’s also not a question of who hates Jews more. Most fascists I’ve met didn’t hate Jews particularly and I met a lot of them in Brighton, including some of their international guests. Even their rank and file used to display Nazi insignia more for effect than because they were so anti-Jewish. Sad to say the most anti-Semitic comments I ever experienced came from Zionists not fascists. ‘Jokes’ such as when they cut off your foreskin they threw away the wrong part or the even more direct, ‘it’s a pity you and your family weren’t gassed’ and other lovely pleasantries. You know from your own experience I’m sure that vehement Zionism and anti-Semitism goes hand in hand verbally.
One only has to look at the 2 gentlemen in the post I did ‘Hitler was right’ where they are shouting at Jewish demonstrators in Sheikh Jarrar in Jerusalem that they should have been exterminated. http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2010/02/hitler-was-right-say-zionists.html
You say that ‘The BNP in the current period has sought to feed on (and stoke up) anti-Muslim racism, just as the NF fed on (and stoked up) anti-black racism. For this reason, the BNP has publicly made some pro-Israel statements but the BNP leadership continues to hold steady to its old-fashioned Jew-hatred.’

Tony Greenstein said...

But if the BNP and NF were simply feeding on anti-Asian/Muslim and anti-Black racism and this is the reason for the BNP’s pro-Israel statements then the question is why the NF didn’t do likewise? After all their mates in the UDA/UVF were already vehemently pro-Zionist. I found this out when I visited the UDA’s HQ in Antrim Road and saw Andy Tyrie and John MacMichael. I think the reason is more substantive. The BNP has actually changed and is changing. It is important to understand that just as the contours of racism change so do the organisations that are most racist. Jews in Britain are white, they are not demonstrably distinctive from non-Jews. My (non-Jewish) wife says that she can tell someone who is Jewish but I’m sceptical. There are certain slight facial characteristics which, as Abram Leon explains in his wonderful book ‘The Jewish Question – A Marxist Interpretation’ come from different racial mixtures in Eastern Europe than any Jewish ‘type’ as Arthur Ruppin and others in the Zionist pantheon believed.
So I actually don’t think that most members of the BNP ‘hate’ Jews because what does that mean? In fact I don’t think that has ever been true since Moseley’s BUF at best. Even in the Nazi party you’d be surprised to find that most members didn’t hate Jews, for the majority hatred of Jews wasn’t particularly important. Hitler and Goebbels were part of a radical minority in an obvious fascist party. But it’s one thing not to be racist oneself, it’s an entirely different thing to promote racism to achieve other goals.
No of course the BNP will not say anything positive about Zionism per se. Ironically I can remember the NF saying that it was only the Jewish equivalent of British nationalism and in quite a positive light (in an attack on me and Jewish anti-Zionists who knew no nation or loyalty!).
I doubt that the BNP was been ‘nourished’ by anyone bar the Daily hate mail and its Jewish Chronicle columnist Melanie Phillips. The BNP doesn’t particularly use Zionist as a hate term but as a descriptor of sorts i.e. Jewish nationalism.
I think you are wrong re Enoch Powell. Yes many dockers, I’m not sure thousands but anyway, marched in his support. And a week later when a similar demonstration was threatened the shop stewards, mainly Communist Party, under Jack Dash if you remember him and also Bob Light, ex-IS, made it clear that anyone who went out the gate on the march would be going out permanently. In other words class loyalty prevailed over nationalism. The dockers don’t forget also joined in their thousands the Jewish workers of Cable Street in 1936, despite previous clashes, to oppose Moseley and the BUF at the same time as Groval Janner’s father Barnet Janner and the Board of Deputies was telling Jews to say indoors and keep their heads down and put their trust in the Met!
I’ve read Mick Billig’s writings on fascism and i agree that anti-Muslim racism is by far and away the most dangerous phenomenon there is. Not least because it chimes with western imperialism and what it portrays as its enemies in the Middle East. All this came together with 9/11 and it is in that strong current that the EDL and BNP swim. And it is precisely the conflation of ‘terrorism’ and ‘Muslim extremism’ that has become such a potent racist poison. And everything Israel and Zionism says feeds into that. Hamas is the epitome of the Muslim extremist, Who would guess that they came from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood who were considered collaborators with the British by many Egyptian nationalists? Even at their gestation Shin Bet and Israeli security did their best to give Hamas a helping hand vs their secular opponents. Support for Israel chimes with the most blatant and vehement racism against Muslims in the USA and amongst the Christian Zionists.

Tony Greenstein said...

Unfortunately the post has had to be split into 5!

There are incidentally very good reasons why anti-Semitism is today a marginal form of racism and that is because there is no specifically Jewish working-class. Jews are by and large invisible in a white society. There might be the odd bit of golf club anti-Semitism but it is very well hidden and when you have programmes on how it is prevalent and everywhere hosted by people like Richard Littlejohn then you know that what they say should be taken with a hefty pinch of salt.

bob said...

On the binary logic of sectarianism. I disagree that sectarianism is really another word for racism based on religion. Sectarianism or communalism is a very particular variant of racism, based on the playing up of very specific (usually denominational) differences between people that are essentially culturally and “racially” the same. I could say a lot more on this, but it is irrelevant to most of our debates. I also think that the “settler colonialism” model is incredibly simplistic and inadequate, but again that’s probably an argument for another occasion.

On Atzmon. He may have little support on those who count for you, but his texts are incredibly widely circulated in the wider “pro-Palestinian” milieu, including on websites that are widely read by Palestinian solidarity people. I heard him first as a superb jazz player long before I became aware of his politics, but it is his politics that are circulating now, among people who have absolutely no interest in jazz. I agree the density of his style can make it hard for people to understand how vile his views are and that his “righteous Jew” status gives his voice credibility among non-Jewish anti-Zionists.

bob said...

On the EDL and ZF. I think we are never going to agree. The notion that one group attending a demo that they have been specifically dis-invited to makes it a “joint demonstration” seems manifestly absurd to me and I can’t see how you can defend that idea.

I also disagree that the EDL has given any kind of “consistent support” for Zionism. It has occasionally waved Israeli flags, as indeed do fans of Tottenham Hotspurs and AFC Ajax – but that hardly qualifies as consistent support for Zionism as an ideology. You claim that negation of the diaspora is a core idea of Zionism, but I doubt if more than one or two EDL supporters would have a clue what you were talking about. (I’m interested to note that you see the British fascist rank & file displaying Nazi insignia “more for effect than because they were so anti-Jewish”, but can't see that the EDL display Israeli flags more for effect than because they are pro-Zionist.)

I wouldn’t be flattered by the fact that the EDL see PSC as the commies. Reading thru pro-EDL comments on a Harry’s Place post this week I was struck how ignorant they are of any differences between different left positions – everyone is just a commie or a red. For example, they went on and on about ANL/UAF violence, which any AFA member would find a source of comedy. (Seems to me they mirror the ANL/UAF in this respect: ANL/UAF calls anyone on the far right a “Nazi” regardless of the nuance. Seems to me also that you are following the ANL/UAF line in doing so too.)

As for the ZF demo itself. If one thing my years in AFA (admittedly rather less years than you put in) taught me, it is that it can be very hard to recognise fascists you don’t always know. I am even more doubtful that someone who has not been following the EDL pretty closely in their one year of existence (apologies if you have been) could confidently recognise EDL members. There is nothing in the photos you posted after the demo, or in other photos I’ve seen, which indicates a specific EDL presence. I admit you were there and I wasn’t, but I don't feel you have presented very strong evidence.

You also need to take the Jewish Division myth with a larger pinch of salt, and doubt you see the JC as a particularly reliable source on other issues. There may be hundreds of people in the Facebook group, but how many of them did more than click once, and how many of them are British Jews? If you follow the Contemporary Anarchist link in the post on my blog that links to this one, you will find a link to someone who has gone through almost all of the Facebook “members” and found almost all of them to be based outside the UK and practically none of them who are British Jews.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

I don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequenecs of 1948.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.


EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.


This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.


My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!


I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.


There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.


I don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.


I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequences of 1948.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.


EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.


This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.


My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!


I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.


There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.


I don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.


I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequences of 1948.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.


EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.


This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.


My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!


I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.


There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.


I don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.


I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequences of 1948.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.


EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.


This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.


My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!


I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.


There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept that the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

I don't accept that the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.


EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.


This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.


My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!


I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.


And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.


There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree. My own take is essentially this. The bourgeois leadership of the ZF don't welcome the EDL (whether that includes Jonathan Hoffman is a moot point) but that the 'rank and file' which is where some of the CST and Herut/Betar originate do support them.

EDL is not a worked out group with an ideological programme etc. So when they wave Israeli flags they are demonstrating their identification with what Israel does to the natives, not any understanding with the ideology of Zionism. The more clued up ones probably understand Zionism's claim to represent Jews wherever they are and no doubt ask themselves why they don't all bugger off to Israel.

This is not an isolated case. For a long time survivalists, who aren't all neo-Nazis but they tend that way, have been admirers of Israel's gung ho policies. Back in the 1970s, I've got the article somewhere, a neo-Nazi living in a settlement was killed by Palestinans and Christopher Hitchens wrote an article for the New Statesman.

My own view of EDL is that they are not specifically neo-Nazi though they include neo-Nazis within them. Their base is anti-Muslim racism, pure and simple Of course they were given a helping hand by Al Mahajaroun or whatever their latest name is, when they chose a march to welcome home the bodies of British soldiers to protest. Not the wisest of moves!

Tony Greenstein said...

I don't accept the EDL was 'disinvited' - and if you think about it that means they were invited in the first place! What interests me more is the growing convergence between British racism and fascism and support for Zionism.

And it's nothing new. John Hagee, the most ardent of Zionists and President of the Southern Baptist Convention can say and believe that Hitler was carrying out god's work when he exterminated the Jews because he was really driving them, like some latter day Moses, back to the Promised Land.

There are really so many examples I am spoilt for choice. But the convergence is between Zionist anti-Muslim racism and that generated by imperial adventures.

I don't accept that the concept of settler colonialism is 'simplistic and inadequate'. On the contrary it fits to a tee the Zionist and South African, Fijian and Algerian mode of colonisation, to name but a few. It is in contrast to the 'elite' form of colonialism whereby only a handful of settlers conquer a territory through the use of collaborators.

Tony Greenstein said...

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequences of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

I think communalism and sectarianism are also different. I specialised in India in my MA in Imperial History and one thing it taught me was just how much the British exerted themselves to create divisions between Hindu and Muslim, with all the tragic consequences of 1948.

Re EDL presence. I have not followed them closely and I don't think they will stabilise into a long-term goal. Some in the BNP will see them as their foot soldiers and long for the kind of punch ups we used to have in AFA! However Griffin was and is a clever cookie for understandign that in such a situation the fash will always come off worst, unless they have a very solid base to begin with.

I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything.

I don't know whether the Jewish Division of EDL is a 7 day wonder. I suspect that you are right re the hundreds of members but wrong to imply that it means nothing. There will undoubtedly be a Jewish presence within EDL now and that is nothing new. Revisionists weren't opposed to Moseley until be became overtly anti-Semitic. Indeed one of his bodyguards was the Jewish heavy weight champion Kid Lewis.

Tony Greenstein said...

On Atzmon I basically agree. He has relatively little influence. It is mainly the older more conservative supporter of Palestine who is taken with him. I can say this with some experience having had a number of run-ins with the ex PSC Chair who is in Brighton Frances Clarke Lowes who is a supporter of him and Paul Eisen (who seems to have disappeared!).

Atzmon's ideas aren't particularly dangerous for Jews but for Palestinians. There is no room in Britain for the leftovers of feudal anti-Semitism, even when warmed up into a more modern racist stew. I have absolutely no doubt about that. Again from personal experience. As my dad was a travelling rabbi I lived until 11 in non-Jewish working class communities and never ever experienced anti-semitism of any sort. As I think I've said my first experience was from Zionists and I can remember my shock when I heard a 'Jewish' joke at the Jewish Lads Brigade.

Atzmon is widely published on the net but you know every time I pick him up on his articles he has denied the meaning that I attributed to him. So there is no consistency in what he says other than it's the Jews wot are responsible for the Palestinian plight. Indeed his ideological positions are Zionist ones which is why he agreed essentially with Anthony Julius's long essay which attacks Jewish anti-Zionists.

I intend when I get some time to do a Dummies Guide to Atzmon!

bob said...

Blogger.com is obviously tired of this conversation, as it clearly gave you the sort of trouble it gave me when I tried to post my comments last night!

Actually, I don't radically disagree with very much you say in your comment that begins "Yes I think we will have to agree to disagree."

I'll paste below what I tried but obviously failed to post last night, then I'll read what you say about Atzmon.



I broadly agree with your analysis of PZ/left Zionism inside and outside of Israel – with a crucial difference. In your description they were being un-Zionist when they were being anti-antisemitic, whereas I see this simply as a different Zionism. Zionism historically has been incredibly diverse, apart from the core notions that Jews constitute a nation and that this nation has a right to national self-determination. Many Zionists historically didn’t even believe in a Jewish nation-state (e.g. Ahad Ha’am, the anarchists in the early kibbutz movement) and certainly many had no truck with the idea of the negation of the diaspora. Only some Zionists (yes, the mainstream over quite a long period) saw galut as “accursed” or “abnormal”, and only some (possibly not even the mainstream) saw Jews in the same racial terms as the scientific antisemites. (Yes, probably more on the left than on the right, and Borokhov is a good example.)

I think that you are wrong to see labour Zionism in the UK now as carrying little weight. People like Louise Ellman and Greville Janner have a significant platform in the Jewish community. (As you mention the Janners and Barnett calling for people to stay indoors in 1936, it is worth noting that Poale Zion played a major role in anti-fascist mobilisation in London and Manchester in the 1930s, and worked alongside the Communist Party in the Jewish People’s Council, an anti-racist tradition that, for all their flaws, Greville Janner and Louise Ellman were among the inheritors in the 1960s/70s round of struggle.)

In fact, if you look at the pages of the Jewish Chronicle, or look at what’s been going on for the last year in the Board of Deputies, you will see that Jonathan Hoffman is far more marginalised in the mainstream Zionist Jewish community than someone like Louise Ellman.

bob said...

[Not sure if I'm succeeding in posting comments or not - apologies if they are appearing more than once! This is my second and last comment relating to everything so far, but I've still not read your Atzmon comment. I think what I am saying in this comment would confirm your point that "I don't incidentally see the BNP as neo-Nazi today, although it clearly has some neo-Nazis in its ranks. I'd describe it as Euro-nationalist and fascist if anything."]


On British fascism and its relationship to Jews. I think we need to distinguish between several layers within the fascist movements – the inner core, the rank and file, the soft support, and the occasional voters. I strongly believe that the inner core of British fascism has always and continues to hate Jews as a really central feature of the ideology. I think there is enormous evidence for that. This a fairly unchanging feature, even as everyday racism within British society has changed over time. Antisemitism has little or no social weight now in the demographic where the BNP has its soft support and occasional voters – but it still had some social weight in the 1970s. The BNP has repackaged the message it gives to the soft support and occasional voters, depending on the changing contours of racism at large. It no longer talks explicitly about biological race either, but its inner core continue to believe in biological race as the key to everything.

If Griffin has really had such a significant road to Damascus moment about Jews and Zionism, then why can he not come out and say that the Holocaust did actually happen on more or less the scale historians say it did? Why does he talk about his party leadership rival being a dupe of a Zionist plot? Why does he say that the EDL is a Zionist plot? Why does the very concept of a Zionist plot resonate so strongly for him and his core audience? Why does he talk about the Zionist media trying to suppress the BNP?

[P.S. Have you seen Freedom is publishing the "official" history of AFA this month, a quarter century after it was founded?]

Tony Greenstein said...

Yes, as you surmise, I had difficulties with Blogger last night. I must change to something like Echo except I'm useless at these techie things.

I don't know or care particularly whether Griffin as an individual hates Jews or not. I agree he has had difficulties making the transition from neo-Nazi to plain Euro-racism and his answer on Question Time to whether he believes the holocaust occurred was strange and ill-thought out, even from his own perspective.
But there is no doubt whatsoever that Griffin has tried to drag the BNP from the Tyndall Hitler-loving coterie into more mainstream bigotry where he can join hands with right-wing Zionists.
You correctly divide the support of the BNP and British fascism into various groups, including its inner core but say you don’t think they have changed. I do not least because that inner core has changed. Tyndall was defeated in the BNP because Griffin’s promise of electability was attractive and seemed to work. Tyndall died very much alone politically as well as personally and I had the great satisfaction of organising to prevent his last public meeting taking place in Brighton!
Given the ageing and changing nature of the fascist inner core it makes sense that their view on Jews and anti-Semitism changes too. Indeed they have been the catalyst for such changes. Of course a small periphery will resist, the Eddy Morrisons and Sid Williamsons, but given the widespread anti-Muslim racism it is not surprising that attitudes to Israel have become wholly supportive. Israel represents everything they wish the British government would do. That of course is not incompatible with anti-Semitism, quite the contrary, but that would/could only come about if there was a serious breach between Israel and the West, which isn’t on the cards yet.
The BNP incidentally are still at the core biological racists, hence Griffin’s absurd attempt on QT to trace the British nation/race back 14,000 years to the ice age. Cultural racism and biological racism are but 2 variants of the changing contours of racism. Racism is an extremely flexible thing since it is based on irrationality.
Maybe the best example I can give of this differentiation I make between political and personal racism is this. Enoch Powell was undoubtedly the most significant bourgeois politician to give open support to explicit racism against Black immigrants and to support repatriation there has been. And yet, on an individual basis, Powell was not a racist. I'm not aware of a single instance where he was personally racist and from memory, because it's a long time since I read it, Paul Foot's book on Powell, about 40 years ago now, brings that out. It is therefore, for me, irrelevant whether Griffin is personally anti-Semitic but on a political plane it is not anti-Semitism but anti-Muslim racism that is his main basis for taking the BNP forward.
Ian Kershaw’s Hitler Myth amongst others shows how even within the Nazi party, anti-Semitism was a minority pasttime and obsession. Even the majority of the Nazi Party were opposed to Goebbel’s pogrom on Krystalnact (because Goebbels was the primary motivator behind it and people like Goering were furious at what he had done, not because of any concern for Jews of course).
I didn’t say that PZ/Left-Zionism was being un-Zionist when they opposed anti-Semitism. I don’t recognise that they ever did and don’t agree they played any significant part in the mobilisation against the BUC in the 1930’s. That was the Communist Party, or rather the activist layer of the CP active on the ground in Stepney .

Tony Greenstein said...

What I do say is that people swing between different political currents depending on the political situation. So in Poland the Zionists lost their mass base to the Bund in the 1930’s precisely because the Zionists had nothing to say about anti-Semitism and were indeed accommodating and worse to it. But of course individual Zionists did not necessarily go along with this and we know that a number of Zionists played a full part in the Warsaw Ghetto resistance (though many of the leaders played a completely different role, there and in other ghettos). But Mordechai Anielwicz made it clear that his Zionist work during the war had been a waste of time. When they engaged in anti-fascist work they weren’t doing it as Zionists but as Jews who were the victims of fascism.
Zionism itself made it clear, from its inception, that the fight against anti-Semitism was useless, like battling against the tides. I’m sure you are aware of Herzl’s parleys with all the best European anti-Semites or indeed the absurd conversation had had with the Grand Duke of Baden whereby the latter made clear his support for Zionism but worried that he would be accused of anti-Semitism for so doing!
I would say that the belief that the Jews constituted a separate nation amongst nations was integral to the whole Zionist movement. Ahad Ha'am may well have differed on this but he was not a political Zionist and his whole idea of Palestine as a cultural and spiritual centre rather than a political entity ran counter to the overwhelming majority of Zionist opinion. Whether even he could strictly be called a Zionist is open to question. Certainly those like Judah Magnes who shared these beliefs moved to a non-Zionist position.
Again I would say that among the Zionist leadership, especially in Palestine, the notion of the accursed Galut and much else was common property as it were. Indeed I would go further and say they imbibed virtually all the anti-Semitic characteristics as true. There is a story of Weizmann listening with Arthur Balfour to one of the speeches at a Zionist congress and turning to Balfour and saying that this brought out all his anti-Semitism. I’ll try and dig it up some time!
But the belief in Jews as a racial type as per scientific racism was certainly not confined to the margins. As pivotal figure as Arthur Ruppin, known as the father of land settlement in Palestine, was a devoted supporter and believer, even having a friendly conversation about the matter with Hans Gunther, the Professor of Racial Sciences at Jenna University in 1933. Ruppin specifically made the effort to see Gunther and they got on famously, as Ruppin made clear in his Diaries (though in the English version there was no mention of the meeting with Gunther). Nordau, Klatzkin, Buber, Pinhas Rosenberg were just some of the other mainstream figures who were believers.
I have more experience of Greville Janner, an extremely right-wing figure in the Labour Party of the 1980’s. His influence today is minimal. Louise Ellman doesn’t carry a great deal of clout in Zionist circles either.
Hoffman on the other hand has been criticised by people like Jerry Lewis but he won out over them for his activist approach. I have to say I think he is barking and is widely discredited, not least for making himself out a victim of anti-Semitism at SOAS last November when a video of the event where he was apparently Jew-baited shows no such thing.

Tony Greenstein said...

Re Griffin’s anti-Semitism which probably is little more than a residual hangover. He may have meant when he talks about Zionist plots the Israeli state as opposed to British Jews. It’s difficult to discern any meaning from throwaway comments. But even assuming you are correct it means very little since it is not part of any programme of action and with the EDL waving their Israeli flags, which the BNP will probably consider unpatriotic, in his own terms he may well see an Israeli state hand rather than a Jewish hand. But on the other hand you may be right. These people are racists and they have no principled political objection to any form of bigotry!
I shall look forward with interest to Freedom’s history of AFA, though they’re a bit academic on these things. Hope it’s better than Red Action’s rewriting of history. I assume you have read No Retreat by the late and great Dave Hann. His partner, Louise, is hoping to bring out a book on fascism he was in the middle of writing when cancer took him from us.

Anonymous said...

"It is time for the left to wake up and ensure that the fascists – be they draped in the flag of St. George or the pirates flag of Israel are defeated"... really? Surely the Palestine Solidarity Campaign would have no objection to the flag of St. George? Wouldn't pointing out the contradiction between this flag and the pirate flag of Israel be more effective than warm-n-fuzzy generic anti-racism? Just a thought... - Jedi

Tony Greenstein said...

I'm not sure what point anonymous is making. The Union Jack or its subcomponent, the flag of St. George are certainly pirate flags. They are the flags of British imperialism, which plundered, pillaged and raped the world over.

The Zionists, who don't forget were in alliance with British imperialism from 1917 until 1948, certainly learnt well from their masters but don't think that there is any difference between what they represent.

So no. Palestine Solidarity activists also reject the flag of St. George, based on the same kind of myths as Israel's pirate flag.

Time was when anti-fascists had to take on and confront the League of St George, an openly neo-Nazi group in Britain who paraded under that flag of St. George. Certainly there is no contradiction between it and the Zionist flag, although today it carries wider associations as with the pitiful England team.

Anonymous said...

Eleanor's blogger profile, cached version, as profile is now hidden

TG,check the profile of your first commentator 'Eleanor'.

Anonymous said...

<a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1frfvxDprmkJ:ashkenazijews.blogspot.com/+the+jewish+tribe+blog&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=safari>Eleanor's blog, cached version, as blog name changed to 'thejewishtribe' and now closed to caching</a>

TG,check the blog of your first commentator 'Eleanor'.

Anonymous said...

TG - now check the IP on the email you received from eleanor - does it match that on the ip's on the emails of 'roberta moore' ??

Tony Greenstein said...

Anonymous,

It might be better corresponding with me at my regular address, tonygreenstein@yahoo.com

How do I check Eleanor's IP address?

Below is what I get when I click 'details' on the Googlemail. You will have to instruct me but I didn't think it was possible.

As to whether Roberta Moore and Eleanor are one and the same, I must say I have never thought of that. It is of course entirely possible, since they are both bigots and neo-Nazi supporters



fromEleanor
toazvsas@googlemail.com

dateThu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:48 PM
subject[Tony Greenstein's Blog] New comment on The Fascist EDL Attacks Birmingham Palestine Solid....
mailed-byblogger.bounces.google.com

hide details Jun 17

Eleanor has left a new comment on your post "The Fascist EDL Attacks Birmingham Palestine Solid...":

The Fascist EDL of which many Jews are active participants!

Following Article by Marcus Dysch:

"The English Defence League, the extreme right-wing anti-Islamic-fundamentalism group, has launched a "Jewish division", encouraging members of the community to "lead the counter-Jihad fight in England".

It has signed up HUNDREDS of followers on Facebook since the launch last week. Supporters include an ex-Community Security Trust volunteer who claims "a lot of Jewish guys want to get stuck in".
One follower wrote on Facebook "we are all Shayetet 13", in support of the IDF naval special forces unit involved in the Gaza flotilla incident.

The former CST member, Mark Israel, claimed Jews should back the EDL as an alternative to existing community groups.
He said: "I've been involved with groups like CST and the 62 Group for 40 years.

"At first I thought the EDL was an off-shoot of the BNP but I have been investigating them. They are very pro-active, unlike the Board of Deputies. They are our allies. We have a common cause. These guys want to have dialogue with the Jewish community.
"I know a lot of Jewish guys who want to get stuck in and want to support a physical presence. It is not your typical thing people want to be associated with, but in this day and age we need something like this. Is the CST enough?"

The EDL mission statement says the new division is for "Jewish supporters of the EDL, and supporters of Jewish people everywhere. We are non-racist/fascist and anyone is welcome if they want to live under English values and fully integrate into our way of life".

Also see the following website link:
http://www.demotix.com/news/346651/zionists-support-flotilla-attack

Jews are actively engaged in the EDL. Please do not assert otherwise.

Posted by Eleanor to Tony Greenstein's Blog at 17 June 2010 19:15

Tony Greenstein said...

Anonymous,

It might be better corresponding with me at my regular address, tonygreenstein@yahoo.com

How do I check Eleanor's IP address?

Below is what I get when I click 'details' on the Googlemail. You will have to instruct me but I didn't think it was possible.

As to whether Roberta Moore and Eleanor are one and the same, I must say I have never thought of that. It is of course entirely possible, since they are both bigots and neo-Nazi supporters



fromEleanor
toazvsas@googlemail.com

dateThu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:48 PM
subject[Tony Greenstein's Blog] New comment on The Fascist EDL Attacks Birmingham Palestine Solid....
mailed-byblogger.bounces.google.com

hide details Jun 17

Eleanor has left a new comment on your post "The Fascist EDL Attacks Birmingham Palestine Solid...":

The Fascist EDL of which many Jews are active participants!

Following Article by Marcus Dysch:

"The English Defence League, the extreme right-wing anti-Islamic-fundamentalism group, has launched a "Jewish division", encouraging members of the community to "lead the counter-Jihad fight in England".

It has signed up HUNDREDS of followers on Facebook since the launch last week. Supporters include an ex-Community Security Trust volunteer who claims "a lot of Jewish guys want to get stuck in".
One follower wrote on Facebook "we are all Shayetet 13", in support of the IDF naval special forces unit involved in the Gaza flotilla incident.

The former CST member, Mark Israel, claimed Jews should back the EDL as an alternative to existing community groups.
He said: "I've been involved with groups like CST and the 62 Group for 40 years.

"At first I thought the EDL was an off-shoot of the BNP but I have been investigating them. They are very pro-active, unlike the Board of Deputies. They are our allies. We have a common cause. These guys want to have dialogue with the Jewish community.
"I know a lot of Jewish guys who want to get stuck in and want to support a physical presence. It is not your typical thing people want to be associated with, but in this day and age we need something like this. Is the CST enough?"

The EDL mission statement says the new division is for "Jewish supporters of the EDL, and supporters of Jewish people everywhere. We are non-racist/fascist and anyone is welcome if they want to live under English values and fully integrate into our way of life".

Also see the following website link:
http://www.demotix.com/news/346651/zionists-support-flotilla-attack

Jews are actively engaged in the EDL. Please do not assert otherwise.

Posted by Eleanor to Tony Greenstein's Blog at 17 June 2010 19:15

Bob said...

Thanks Anon/Luther for doing this digging about this bigot. It is one of the positive and negative things about Google's Blogger (versus Wordpress) that it does not give you access to IPs of commenters, which is good in that it protects commenters' privacy bad in that it protects trolls' privacy!