Zionist False Victimhood, The Hypocrisy of Adam Langleben and his silence over Israeli Child Abuse

Its fine 4 JLM President Louise Ellman MP to Defend the Abuse of Palestinian Children but Criticism of Young Zionists is a Child Protection Issue!

 

My question to Adam Langleben - why is the JLM silent about abuse of Palestinian children but concerned about publicising the names of JLM's young activists?  Racism? 

These two children were murdered yesterday by Israeli bombers in Gaza

I seem to have stirred up a veritable Zionist hornet's nest! 

Last Saturday, before going off to the anti-fascist demonstration in London, I posted a blog concerning an Open Letter by 18 young Zionists, mainly members of the Jewish Labour Movement, criticising Labour’s new Anti-Semitism Code of Conduct.  Their letter repeated the criticism of other Zionist organisations. It is clear that their elders (though not betters) including JLM’s Campaigns Officer Adam Langleben inspired them.

This Open Letter was widely distributed on the net but it is a threat to under the 18s who signed it if I publicise it - 

I have previously posted about Langleben’s political dishonesty in The Chutzpah of Adam Langleben & the Jewish Labour Movement.  Langleben was a Councillor in Barnet and one of the instigators of the false anti-Semitism campaign before the last local elections. So successful was he in convincing his electorate that the Labour Party was anti-Semitic that they decided not to vote for him! Of the 3 Labour candidates Langleben came bottom which may speak volumes about his laziness as a Councillor.

The young Jews who said Kaddish for the victims of Israeli terrorism and mass murder in Gaza were the ones who were subject to intimidation and threats of violence - the JLM of course was not involved in this protest

The 18 young Zionists who signed the Open Letter spoke of ‘the NEC’s incomprehensible decision to abandon the IHRA definition of antisemitism’   The letter urged support for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism. [IHRA] which conflates anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. They falsely alleged that Labour’s Anti-Semitism Code deemed acceptable ‘the antisemitic trope of alleging that Jews, by virtue of their identity, have their loyalties primarily to the State of Israel.’

As I explained in my article the exact reverse is the case. Although one of the IHRA’s 11 illustrations says that ‘Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel’ might be anti-Semitic, another illustration states that ‘Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.’ Leaving aside that claiming Israel is racist has no relevance to the question of self-determination.

The child abuse that the JLM justifies

The latter illustration, which our young Zionists ‘forgot’ to mention, is deeply anti-Semitic. It talks about the right of self-determination of the Jewish people. Only nations have the right to self-determination which is the right to form a state.  Jews live in many different countries, they speak many different languages, they are clearly not a nation.  What this is about is race not nationality. The idea that Jews have anything more in common than their religion is the foundation for the Nazi and anti-Semitic world Jewish conspiracy theory.  According to the latter Jews are not loyal citizens of the countries where they live but form a common international bond in which they are loyal only to themselves.  This is the theme of the famous Czarist forgery the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Works for Andrew Dismore, former Labour MP and GLA member - a collaborator who goes out on a limb to support Israel's apartheid state

What this provision is saying is that the State of Israel is national state of Jews world wide, which it does claim and therefore all Jews owe it loyalty. If this is true then of course it is not anti-Semitic to blame Jews for what Israel does because it is their Jewish, state.  Just as it isn’t racist to blame British people for what the British state does on their behalf, unless they disavow its actions.

It's a strange logic which says you can't quote people who openly post because they are under 18 - Zionist victimhood knows no limits

Langleben's concern about 'under 18s' doesn't extend to Palestinian victims of his favourite state

In other words the IHRA is, according to its own definition, anti-Semitic!  However I wouldn’t expect our young Zionists, who are not known for their critical faculties, to challenge the Zionist nostrums they were reared on.

What is remarkable is that I was immediately subject to a fierce counter attack, not about the content of my blog but because some of the authors of the Open Letter were under 18!  Langleben tweeted at 9.00, although I didn’t see it until I got back in the evening from the anti-fascist  demonstration in London which his friends in the Campaign 4 Truth attended (on the fascist side!).  Langleben wrote:

I strongly recommend you remove all images of these young people from your blog of hate immediately. Many are under 18.

My response was:

all these images r in the public domain - if people choose 2 put them up they cant complain if others use them - ur being your usual dishonest self since you have nothing to say about the message which is stop justifying Israeli apartheid thru false accusations of antisemitism

All the images I used on the blog were taken from the signatories own twitter feeds.  In other words they were all public.  Nonetheless I tweeted Langleben back that I would remove any images. A day later Langleben put out another tweet.

You have written nasty libellous stuff about me and many people but you are too insignificant to pursue. I personally don't care what you say. I do care about under 18s. I have sent you the names.

Ahed Tamimi - Israeli army video of her early morning arrest

Langleben said he was concerned about under- 18s. Which under-18s I wondered?  Was he concerned about Ahed Tamimi, a 16 year old girl who was put in military detention in Israel at the end of last year for slapping a heavily armed soldier who had nearly killed her cousin by shooting him in the head?  Ahed received an 8 month prison sentence, without remission.  An Israeli soldier, Elor Azaria, a Kahanist who murdered an injured Palestinian lying unconscious on the ground, firing directly at him, received served just 9 months.  In other words the penalty for killing a Palestinian was one month more than slapping a soldier.

Ahed was also subject to threats of rape and ‘unspeakable acts’ by Israeli journalist Ben Caspit. Adam Langleben might protest that he is not responsible for what Israel does.  However the organisation of which he is a senior officer, the JLM, is affiliated to the World Zionist Organisation which is responsible for settlement in the West Bank. The JLM is by its own admission the ‘sister’ party of the Israeli Labour Party, which supports the settlements.  But even worse its own President, Louise Ellman MP has gone out on a limb to defend the practice of the Israeli military in raiding homes at night to seize children as young as 12, the practice of blindfolding them, beating, torturing (according to Amnesty International, 60% of children are tortured on arrest), sexually abusing them, shackling them and not allowing them access to parents or lawyers. All small beer compared to publicising peoples’ names.

On the 6^th January 2016 the House of Commons held a debate on Child Prisoners and Detainees: Occupied Palestinian Territories. Three times Ellman intervene to support Israel’s abuse of Palestinian children. My criticism of Ellman was held by Labour’s National Constitutional Committee to have ‘shamed’ her and was one of the reasons for my expulsion.  Ellman placed the blame for Israel’s child abuse on the Palestinians.  Not once has the JLM dissociated itself from the words of their President. According to this wretch, Palestinians would love their occupiers but for ‘incitement’.

‘the context in which these situations occur is an organised campaign conducted by the Palestinian authorities of incitement, to try to provoke young Palestinians to carry out acts of violence towards other civilians, some of which result in death, including the death of young children?’ 

‘I note my hon. Friend’s comments that a child should not be detained, and I assume that she means in any circumstances. Suppose a child was involved in an act of violence that resulted in the deaths of other human beings. That is what has happened with young Palestinians throwing stones—people have been killed. In those circumstances, surely she thinks that there should be detention.’ 

‘Does my hon. Friend really believe that the solution to this horrendous conflict between two peoples—the Israeli and the Palestinian people—can be found by encouraging individual child Palestinians to commit acts of violence against other human beings?’ 

Sara Conway is not above using child protection issues to clamp down on free speech as she appeals to the Metropolitan Police

The best one can say about Conway is that she is an airhead who has nothing to say about anything - full of the usual trite cliches about young people

And where Langleben led, others followed.  Councillor Sara Conway was most concerned at my post but apparently not at the fact that everything in my post was online and public. She even appealed for help to the Metropolitan Police! So was Councillor Arjun Mittra who was anxious to demonstrate how even Black and Asian councillors can stand up for Israeli Apartheid in the best traditions of Raj collaboration.

If you want to find out what Jack looks like you'll have to go to his  Twitter feed

Adam messaged me with just 3 names out of the 18 who were under 18 – Jack Lubner, Sadiyah Akther and Josh Newmark.  My only mention of Sadiya was to reprint the Open Letter to which her name was attached.  Apparently it is a child protection issue if I reprint an Open Letter which she has signed!

I republished the twitter exchanges of Josh Newmark, viz. that Jeremy Corbyn was a ‘dick’.

I also republished the image of Jack Lubner which is available on his Twitter feed. For the sake of argument I blacked out his face, although anyone who is really interested in what he looks like can find it by going to his Twitter feed.

So what is all this about?  It is another exercise in Zionist False Victimhood.  It is about making out that those who support Zionism and Israeli Apartheid are the Victims, whereas the real victims, the Palestinian are the oppressor.  This is the logic of the old Westerns when John Wayne and co. were always under attack, for no obvious reason, by the native Indians.

Despite the RMT Assistant General Secretary Steve Hedley being glassed in the face, according to these fascist Zionists it was 'peaceful'

It is touching to see how the open fascists Campaign for Truth backs up Adam Langleben and the JLM

Support for the JLM from the Zionists' fascist wing - the C4T was there yesterday supporting Tommy Robinson who combines neo-Nazism with ardent support for Israel, not the copy to Katie Hopkins

The C4T just loves Katie Hopkins, who believes refugees are vermin - however they leap in to support Langleben and the JLM - as we've always said the differences between different Zionists are no more than tactical

What is sad is that the Labour Party tolerates those who justify racism like Councillors Conway, Mittra and of course the JLM leadership. What is interesting is that also joining in the attack was none other than the Zionist  Campaign for Truth.  The CfT is an open supporter of Tommy Robinson and his fascist friends.

Whilst Langleben was tweeting yesterday and the CtF was backing him up, I was joining an anti-fascist demonstration in London.  Of one thing you can be sure, those who oppose ‘anti-Semitism’ in the Labour Party are not interesting in opposing the real anti-Semites.

Tony Greenstein