The Charity
Commission Refused to Deregister the CAA in 2017 for Political Campaigning - I
Have Resubmitted My Complaint Before Going to the Charity Tribunal
I have just submitted a renewed
complaint to the Charity Commission against the Campaign AgainstAnti-Semitism who, as people know, I have also sued
for libel. The outcome of the interim hearing to determine the meaning of anti-Semitism
(it didn’t determine any meaning!) is here.
I First Put a Link to this Video on my You Tube Channel - Glasman put in a Copyright Objection - a Strange Thing to Do For a Political Non-Commercial Video - Clearly He Feels Embarrassed by What He Said - However I also Saved the Video to Hard Disk and Google Drive
I First Put a Link to this Video on my You Tube Channel - Glasman put in a Copyright Objection - a Strange Thing to Do For a Political Non-Commercial Video - Clearly He Feels Embarrassed by What He Said - However I also Saved the Video to Hard Disk and Google Drive
I have also had a longstanding petition against the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism which has nearly 8,000 signatures. If you haven’t already sign please do.
According to the Charity Commission this type of abuse is perfectly charitable! |
I
have submitted my complaint in the wake of Joe Glasman, Head of Political and
Goverment Investigations at the so-called Campaign Against Antisemitism taking
credit for the defeat of Jeremy Corbyn at the hands of his 'Macabees'.
John Bercow, the former Speaker of the House of Commons, who is also Jewish, in an interview in GQ magazine stated that there wasn't a 'whiff' of antisemitism about Corbyn. |
Professor Geoffrey Alderman, a Jewish Chronicle columnist for 14 years and a right-wing Zionist wrote that there was no substance to the allegations of antisemitism against Corbyn |
Glasman believes that his vile gang of racists has something in common
with Hebrew tribesmen fighting their battles against the Assyrians 2,000+ year
ago. The reality is that if the Zionists came across these Hebrews toay they and their Israeli friends would be the first to shoot them as 'terrorists' and 'infiltrators'. Their claim to a direct biological lineage is the stuff of which racial myths are made.
Just what charitable purpose was served by calling a demonstration against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party? The Charity Commission doesn't say |
In February 2017 I submitted a
complaint to the Charity Commission, which was then chaired by the racist and
Islamaphobic bigot, William Shawcross.
Unsurprisingly the complaint did not get very far.
The Charity Commission was chaired from 2012-2018 by the racist bigot and Islamaphobe |
In the light of the CAA’s unremitting campaign
against Corbyn since then, a campaign about which they have
boasted, I have submitted a second complaint and if (when) it is rejected I
will take it to the First Tier Charity Tribunal.
This is the kind of vicious targeting of a vulnerable Palestinian student that the Charity Commission has endorsed as compatible with its charitable objectives |
Rather than rehearse the evidence
against the CAA please read my complaint and also previous blog posts, here
and here
as well as a report
on my libel action
The one thing that the Campaign
Against Anti-Semitism doesn’t do is to campaign against anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism
of the traditional kind is all but ignored by it but ‘anti-Semitism’ of the
anti-Zionist or pro-Palestinian variety
is very much its concern.
The CAA's pamphlet
The CAA says in its charitable objectives that its purpose is to create racial harmony yet in its pamphlet British Muslims and Antisemitism it accuses British Muslims of being 'more likely by far than the general British population to hold deeply anti-Semitic views. It is clear that many British Muslims reserve a special hatred for British Jews...'
The CAA's pamphlet
The CAA says in its charitable objectives that its purpose is to create racial harmony yet in its pamphlet British Muslims and Antisemitism it accuses British Muslims of being 'more likely by far than the general British population to hold deeply anti-Semitic views. It is clear that many British Muslims reserve a special hatred for British Jews...'
The photograph above, the cover of a CAA Report on Muslims and 'antisemitism' implies that Muslim supporters of the Palestinians are Hitler supporters on the basis of the actions of one idiot. It is an example of their idiot. Was the paedophile abuse of former President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Lord Janner, typical of Jews? Would that be antisemitic?
This full colour profile was taken down after protests to be replaced by the Black and White version below |
The full
report which included a racist full
colour profile of the ‘typical’ Muslim was taken down after
protests. It was replaced by a
black and white version. [1]
The image of a Muslim was accompanied by a strap line ‘More likely to be’ and then there were a series of bubbles:
Male,
In Social Housing,
Older than 35,
Working,
Living in Scotland
or in England South of the Midlands,
Sympathetic to Terrorism,
Extremism or violence,
First Generation Immigrant
It should
not be necessary to point out how racist and offensive this description of
Muslims by a ‘charity’ is. Just imagine that a Muslim charity posted a similar
image of the ‘typical Jew’. One suspects the Charity Commission would not take
more than 3 years to move into action given its previous record of action in
respect of Muslim charities.
On 20th
February 2017 there appeared an article CAA
exposes lecturer as author of sickening Holocaust article but University of
Bristol defends “academic freedom”.[1] Ms
Gould’s offence had been to publish an article ‘Beyond Anti-Semitism’ several years
before.[2]
There was nothing in the article, concerning the use to which the Holocaust has
been put, that Israeli historians have not said. For example Professor Ze’ev
Sternhell, a child survivor of a Polish ghetto wrote In Israel, Growing Fascism and a Racism Akin
to Early Nazism[3].
The CAA called for the University to dismiss
Dr Gould. As its scare quotes
demonstrate, it has complete contempt for academic freedom. Perhaps this is in
furtherance of their charitable objectives?
Kenneth
Stern, who drafted the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, in written testimony to the US House of
Representatives Committee on the Judiciary argued that “The definition was
not drafted, and was never intended, as a tool to target or chill speech on a
college campus.”[4] Stern cited the case of Professor Gould:
“Perhaps most
egregious, an off-campus group [CAA] citing the definition called on a university to
conduct an inquiry of a professor (who received her PhD from Columbia) for
antisemitism, based on an article she had written years before. The
university then conducted the inquiry. And while it ultimately found
no basis to discipline the professor, the exercise itself was chilling and
McCarthy-like.”
Mr Gideon Falter, Chief Executive of the CAA called on the university to dismiss
Dr Gould. The University concluded that “the article is not
anti-Semitic and does not breach the proper bounds of freedom of speech and
academic freedom.”
Perhaps
the Charity Commission would care to explain how targeting academics for
McCarthyite witchhunts is compatible with the CAA’s charitable objectives.
Jackie Walker – the CAA accuse the first Israeli
Prime Minister David Ben Gurion of Holocaust denial
Jackie was expelled from the
Labour Party for ‘“prejudicial
and grossly detrimental behaviour against the party” not anti-Semitism. However
the CAA has no less than 67 articles on its website attacking Jackie as an
‘anti-Semite’.
The most
egregious example of the CAA's dishonesty and systematic distortion occurred on 7th February 2017. The CAA put up ‘Jackie
Walker Posts Text Asking Whether Hitler Can Really Be Blamed for the Holocaust’.[3]
What Jackie actually said was:
‘If
I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is
normal. We have taken their country. It is true G-d promised it to us, but how
could that interest them? Our G-d is not theirs. There has been anti-Semitism,
the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz but was that their fault? They see but one thing:
we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?’
It is difficult to understand the psychopathology
and mental gymnastics by which the above statement could be read as a denial of
Hitler’s responsibility for the Holocaust. However the CAA managed it.
What the CAA did not realise that this
quote was taken from The Jewish Paradox, a book by Nahum Goldmann, the first President of
the World Jewish Congress and President of the World Zionist Organisation . The quotation came from David Ben
Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel. Ben Gurion was responsible for the
ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians but even he was capable of reflecting
reflecting on the situation of his victims. Ben Gurion understood that what
Hitler had done was not the Palestinians’ fault even though they had paid the
price. But to the CAA any attempt to
understand the Palestinian point of view, especially when the Holocaust is
mentioned, is tantamount to Holocaust denial.
When they realised their mistake the CAA
quickly removed the article and pretended nothing had happened. No apology was
ever offered for having all but accused Jackie Walker of being a holocaust
denier. Before this post had been taken down it was widely publicised on social
media and many people, including the idiot political correspondent of Jewish News,
Jack Mendel, commented on it.
To date there have been 535 hostile articles attacking Jeremy
Corbyn. Given that charities are
supposed to be non-party political this is outrageous and the fact that the Charity
Commission has done nothing to date about it is symptomatic of how all wings of
the State mobilised against a radical leader of the Labour Party. It is confirmation of the Marxist belief that
the bourgeois state is never neutral politically between capital and labour,
left and right.
Tony Greenstein
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please submit your comments below